Category: Natural Disasters

MIL-OSI Security: Federal Grand Jury in Louisville Returns Four Indictments Charging 22 Defendants with Drug Trafficking, Firearms, and Money Laundering Offenses
Source: US FBI

Louisville, KY – On May 6, 2025, a federal grand jury in Louisville charged a total of 20 defendants from across Kentucky and California in 3 separate indictments involving methamphetamine and fentanyl trafficking offenses and firearms offenses. On May 21, 2025, a federal grand jury charged 4 defendants, 2 of whom were previously charged, in an indictment involving methamphetamine and fentanyl trafficking and money laundering offenses. The indictments charging all 22 defendants were the result of a lengthy investigation conducted by multiple law enforcement agencies.

U.S. Attorney Kyle G. Bumgarner of the Western District of Kentucky, Acting Special Agent in Charge Olivia Olson of the FBI Louisville Field Office, Special Agent in Charge Rana Saoud of the Homeland Security Investigations Nashville, Special Agent in Charge John Nokes of the ATF Louisville Field Division, Special Agent in Charge Jim Scott of the DEA Louisville Field Division, Special Agent in Charge Karen Wingerd of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigations, Cincinnati Field Office, U.S. Postal Inspector in Charge Lesley Allison of the Pittsburgh Division, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Chicago Director of Field Operations Lafonda Sutton-Burke, Commissioner Phillip Burnett, Jr. of the Kentucky State Police, and Chief Paul Humphrey of the Louisville Metro Police Department made the announcement.

The following 9 defendants were charged in the first indictment on May 6, 2025:
- James Havlicheck, 34, of California
- Rodney Hollie, 38, of California
- Joseph Nguyen, 38, of California
- Minh Ngo, 40, of California
- Kevin Nguyen, 30, of California
- Johnathan Nguyen, 35, of California
- Ordell Smith, Jr., 38, of Louisville
- Vanray O’Neal, 38, of Louisville
- Darren Render, 33, of Louisville
According to the first indictment, Havlicheck, Hollie, Joseph Nguyen, Ngo, Kevin Nguyen, and Johnathan Nguyen were charged with conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute 50 grams or more of a methamphetamine for a conspiracy beginning as early as April 2024 and continuing through July 19, 2024. Havlicheck and Ngo were also charged with one count of distribution of methamphetamine 50 grams or more.

Smith, Jr. was charged with four counts of distribution of methamphetamine 50 grams or more.

O’Neal was charged with three counts of distribution of methamphetamine 50 grams or more and two counts of firearms trafficking.

Render was charged with four counts of firearms trafficking, four counts of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, three counts of distribution of fentanyl, one count of distribution of heroin, and two counts of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. Render was prohibited from possessing a firearm because he had previously been convicted of the following felony offense.

On April 2, 2020, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, Render was convicted of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person.

If convicted, Havlicheck, Hollie, Joseph Nguyen, Ngo, Kevin Nguyen, Johnathan Nguyen, Smith, Jr., and O’Neal face a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in prison. Render faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 5 years in prison. All the defendants face a maximum sentence of life in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors.

The following 9 defendants were charged in the second indictment on May 6, 2025:
- Antonio Taylor, 39, of Louisville
- Terry Matthews, 44, of Louisville
- Dylan Bradley, 21, of Louisville
- Demetrius Brown, 42, of Louisville
- Dominic McCray, 30, of Louisville
- Joshua James, 42, of Louisville
- Gregory Jackson, 34, of Louisville
- Thai Quoc Tran, 24, of Louisville
- Devon Wilson, 43, of Louisville
According to the second indictment, Taylor, Matthews, Bradley, Brown, McCray, James, and Jackson were charged with one count of conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute 400 grams or more of fentanyl for a conspiracy beginning as early as August 21, 2024, and continuing through October 23, 2024.

Taylor was also charged with one count of distribution of 400 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture, eight counts of distribution of 40 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture, one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and one count of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person. Taylor was prohibited from possessing a firearm because he had previously been convicted of the following felony offenses.

On or about May 21, 2018, in Jefferson Circuit Court, Taylor was convicted of possession of a handgun by a convicted felon and trafficking in a controlled substance first degree unspecified less than ten dosage units (two counts).

Matthews was also charged with one count of distribution of 400 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture, three counts of distribution of 40 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture, two counts of distribution of fentanyl, one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, one count firearms trafficking, one count of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, and one count of distribution of a controlled substance. Matthews was prohibited from possessing a firearm because he had previously been convicted of the following felony offense.

On March 9, 2018, in Jefferson Circuit Court, Matthews was convicted of flagrant non-support.

Bradley was also charged with three counts of distribution of 40 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture, one count of distribution of 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, and one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime.

Brown was also charged with one count of distribution of 40 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture, one count of distribution of a fentanyl mixture, and one count of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person. Brown was prohibited from possessing a firearm because he had previously been convicted of the following felony offenses.

On or about July 17, 2017, in Jefferson Circuit Court, Brown was convicted of assault in the second degree, criminal mischief in the first degree, receiving stolen firearm, and wanton endangerment in the first degree.

McCray was also charged with one count of possession of an unregistered firearm.

James was also charged with one count of distribution of 40 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture.

Jackson was also charged with one count of distribution of 40 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture.

Tran was also charged with one count of distribution of 50 grams or more of methamphetamine.

Wilson was also charged with one count of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person. Wilson was prohibited from possessing a firearm because he had previously been convicted of the following felony offenses.

On July 16, 2024, in Jefferson Circuit Court, Wilson was convicted of flagrant non-support.

On January 9, 2017, in Jefferson Circuit Court, Wilson was convicted of trafficking in a controlled substance in the first degree, schedule I heroin less than two grams.

If convicted, Taylor, Matthews, Bradley, Brown, James, Jackson, and Tran face a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in prison and a maximum sentence of life in prison. McCray faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. Wilson faces a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors.

Matthews and McCray have not been federally arrested and are not yet before the Court.

The following 2 defendants were charged in the third indictment on May 6, 2025:
- Mark Foster, Jr., 33, of Louisville
- Devante Rice, 30, of Louisville
Foster was charged with two counts of distribution of controlled substances, nine counts of distribution of fentanyl, ten counts of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, seven counts of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, one count of illegal possession of a machine gun, and one count of firearms trafficking. Foster was prohibited from possessing a firearm because he had previously been convicted of the following felony offenses.

On or about March 30, 2018, in Jefferson Circuit Court, Foster was convicted of receiving stolen property (firearm) and illegal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, heroin.

On or about June 15, 2021, in Jefferson Circuit Court, Foster was convicted of complicity to trafficking in a controlled substance in the first degree, opioids, complicity to trafficking in a controlled substance in the first degree, methamphetamine, possession of a handgun by a convicted felon, and tampering with physical evidence.

Rice was charged with eleven counts of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, one count of firearms trafficking, and two counts of possession of an unregistered firearm. Rice was prohibited from possessing a firearm because he had previously been convicted of the following felony offenses.

On January 10, 2014, in Jefferson Circuit Court, Rice was convicted of burglary in the second degree and receiving stolen property over $500.

On April 30, 2019, in Jefferson Circuit Court, Rice was convicted of possession of a handgun by a convicted felon.

On August 8, 2023, in Jefferson Circuit Court, Rice was convicted of complicity to possession of a handgun by a convicted felon, theft by unlawful taking – firearm (two counts), and theft by unlawful taking over $500 but under $10,000.

If convicted, Foster faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 70 years in prison and a maximum sentence of life in prison. Rice faces a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison on each count of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person and the single count of firearms trafficking and a 10-year maximum sentence for the two counts of possession of an unregistered firearm. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors.

The following 4 defendants were charged in the fourth indictment on May 21, 2025:
- Antonio Taylor
- Joshua James
- Celotia Evans, 39, of Louisville
- Jaremei Hinkle, 24, of Louisville
According to the fourth indictment, Taylor, James, Evans, and Hinkle were charged with one count of conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute 400 grams or more of fentanyl for a conspiracy beginning as early as June 2024 and continuing through July 11, 2024.

Hinkle was also charged with one count of possession with intent to distribute of 400 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture.

James was also charged with one count of conspiracy to distribute 500 grams or more of a methamphetamine mixture.

Taylor is also charged with engaging in monetary transactions derived from specific unlawful activities and laundering of a money instrument during his purchase of a vehicle.

If convicted, Taylor, James, Evans, and Hinkle face a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in prison. All the defendants face a maximum sentence of life in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors.

There is no parole in the federal system.

Evans and Hinkle have not been federally arrested and are not yet before the Court.

The cases are being investigated by the FBI, HSI, ATF, DEA, IRS-CI, CBP, USPIS, KSP, and LMPD.

These cases were investigated and prosecuted by the Kentucky Homeland Security Task Force (HSTF) as part of Operation Take Back America. HSTFs, which were established by President Trump in Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion, are joint operations led by the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security. Operation Take Back America is a nationwide federal initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).

An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

###

MIL Security OSI –
July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Armed Mexican National Federally Indicted in the Eastern District of Texas

Source: US FBI

TYLER, Texas – A Mexican national, illegally living in Rains County, has been charged with federal violations in the Eastern District of Texas, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Jay R. Combs.

Rigoberto Herrera-Rodriguez, 59, was named in a two-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury last week in the Eastern District of Texas charging him with illegally reentering the United States after previously being deported and being an illegal alien in possession of a firearm.

The indictment alleges that on June 4, 2025, Herrera-Rodriguez was found illegally in the United States and in possession of a firearm. Herrera-Rodriguez had been previously deported to Mexico from the United States in December 2024.

This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).

If convicted, Herrera-Rodriguez faces up to 15 years in federal prison and deportation.

This case is being investigated by the FBI and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Dustin Farahnak.

A federal indictment is not evidence of guilt. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

###

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Wyoming Man Sentenced to Three Years in Prison for Attempted Robbery on Fort Peck Indian Reservation

Source: US FBI

GREAT FALLS – A Wyoming man who attempted a robbery on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation was sentenced yesterday to 36 months in prison to be followed by 3 years supervised release, U.S. Attorney Kurt Alme said.

Jesse Alex Sutherland, 37, pleaded guilty in December 2024 to one count of attempted robbery.

Chief U.S. District Judge Brian M. Morris presided.

The government alleged in court documents that on the evening of November 21, 2023, the defendant, Jesse Alex Sutherland, went with a co-defendant to a remote residence on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation. The co-defendant was armed with an AR-15 style rifle. The two men met with a third person outside the home. While still outside the residence the co-defendant fired one round into the ground and six into the air. He and the defendant then broke into the residence. The two men assaulted the two occupants of the home, and the co-defendant struck them with the rifle while demanding access to a safe.

Sutherland was seen on surveillance video before and after the attempted robbery. He was arrested shortly thereafter wearing the same hoodie he wore during the attempted robbery.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Kalah Paisley prosecuted the case. The investigation was conducted by the FBI, BIA and Fort Peck Tribes Department of Law & Justice.

This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results. For more information about Project Safe Neighborhoods, please visit Justice.gov/PSN.

XXX

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI NGOs: Nobel Peace Prize Forum: our perilous path and how we change course

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi’s keynote address at the Nobel Peace Prize Forum 2024.

I want to start by congratulating Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha for their Nobel Peace Prize.

As a young diplomat almost 40 years ago, I was fortunate to be part of a UN disarmament fellowship programme and to visit Hiroshima. There, fellows had an opportunity to meet the hibakusha and I had a conversation with an ailing victim. I have carried to every meeting, to every negotiation, and to every posting, the memory this woman’s silent testimony. When I asked her about that morning in 1945, she struggled to express the horror in words. She tried to articulate some words but stayed silent. Looking at me, right into my eyes. The look in her eyes has stayed with me ever since, like a powerful reminder, a secret mandate, to work so that her suffering is never repeated.

For decades after the Second World War, the international community has been dealing with this unique dilemma: we built robust norms and passed nonproliferation and disarmament treaties. Instead of dozens of countries armed with nuclear weapons, as was the concern in the 1960s, there are less than ten. Stockpiles of nuclear weapons have shrunk from tens of thousands to thousands.

But on its journey through the perils of the atomic age, the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Our deep psychological connection caused by collectively seeing the horror of the consequences of nuclear war seems to be evaporating, taking with it our joint resolve to do everything possible to prevent a repetition.

Like a giant spotlight, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize has lit up our path ahead. It has done it, by reminding us of the past, and of the consequences of ignoring the perils of nuclear weapons use.

[embedded content]

Context of conflicts

To understand the important challenges we face, we must look at the global context, at what is happening around the world.

War has returned to Europe, and it directly involves a nuclear weapon state. The conflict in Ukraine is also an indirect confrontation between the world’s biggest nuclear weapon states, the first since the end of the Cold War. But nuclear exercises and open references to the use of nuclear weapons in the theatre of this war are increasing the risks and can not be ignored.

In the Middle East, the conflict of the past year has ignited smoldering tensions between Israel and Iran and led to the unprecedented step of direct exchanges and attacks between the two. Here there is also a nuclear weapons dimension. On one side, the assumed presence of nuclear weapons looms in the background. On the other, the very real potential of nuclear proliferation is raising the stakes.

We find ourselves in a harmful loop: the erosion of the restraints around nuclear weapons is making these conflicts more dangerous. Meanwhile, these conflicts are contributing to the erosion of the restraints. The vicious circle dynamic is in motion.

An unfortunate change of direction

Doctrines regarding the use of nuclear weapons are being revised or reinterpreted. The quantity and quality of nuclear weapon stockpiles are being increased.

And in some non-nuclear weapon states – states that are important in their region – leaders are asking “why not us?”. And they are asking this openly!

At the start of the nuclear arms race, J Robert Oppenheimer described the USSR and the US as “two scorpions in a bottle” each capable of killing the other, but only by risking their own life.

Oppenheimer’s blunt statement would later be developed and elaborated under the roof of deterrence and the more sophisticated concept of “Mutual Assured Destruction,” or MAD.

Today, independent of the vantage point of the observer, there is widespread concern that the risk of mutual destruction through nuclear war is higher than it has been for more than a generation.

Lessons from history

But it does not have to be this way. We can do better. History has shown that effective dialogue among superpowers has, more often than not, led to confidence and, as a result, also to arms limitation and even disarmament. At certain moments in history, world leaders took the right decisions, to tone down, or, to use today’s parlance, to de-escalate. Let’s see:

The end of the Cuban Missile Crisis happened thanks to the direct engagement of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and US President John F Kennedy. Decades later, at the Geneva Summit of 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan agreed a crucial axiom: “Nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.” They met again the next year in Reykjavik and significant reductions in nuclear arsenals followed. Nuclear weapon reductions and the elimination of a whole category of weapon, through the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, or INF, Treaty, were agreed. These steps towards rapprochement took leadership and courage. They often happened despite skepticism and voices against them.

Diplomacy and dialogue (and the duty of nuclear weapon states)

A return to diplomacy and dialogue is urgently needed, and this, not only in things nuclear. Shutting the other side out has never solved a problem and almost certainly aggravates it. Top leadership involvement is simply indispensable when nuclear weapons are involved. President Trump took the initiative and talked to Kim Jong Un. More of this is needed. Some have said these talks were ill prepared. I say, this is important. Nuclear weapon policy and limitations does not work bottom up. It is of course the other way around.

We must be proactive in building the trust and protections that lower the risk of close calls and of brinkmanship, especially during today’s tensions. Not taking active steps means we rely on luck – or the assumption that the other side will show restraint – to save us from nuclear war. The longer you rely on luck, the more likely it is to run out.

Conflict and tensions compel nations to arm themselves. Diplomacy and compromise create conditions in which they can disarm.

The road to a nuclear weapon-free world is long and winding. The disarmament landscape is complex, and it’s worth acknowledging that. This does not diminish the responsibility nuclear weapons states have to make progress. After all, they committed themselves to this goal back in 1968, through the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Steps can be taken to decrease the reliance on nuclear weapons, both in their production and the scenarios for their use.

Nuclear weapon states, through their actions at home and on the world stage, have a responsibility to avoid a scenario in which more countries seek nuclear weapons. Pushing ahead with increases in arsenals leads to despair, cynicism, and a growing skepticism about the value of past commitments. Disengagement and unilateralism fuel sentiments of vulnerability in other countries, and with that, the notion nuclear weapons could be the ultimate protection against outside threats.

Engagement among the five permanent members of the Security Council is indispensable. Such engagement can take many different shapes, starting with direct contact among themselves, bilaterally or as a group. This dialogue, which still exists, has been reduced to a very low level, virtually without real impact. Perhaps its revival could be assisted by an international organization, or facilitated with the support of a respected, impartial leader. Therefore, it’s essential that the United Nations, other international organizations, and their leaders work effectively to ensure their continued relevance amid the changing needs of their stakeholders.

Do not make things worse (by falling for the siren call of proliferation)

The IAEA has played its indispensable technical role during past attempts of nuclear proliferation, particularly in the Middle East. As the difficult experiences in Iraq, Libya and Syria remind us, the draw of nuclear weapons is real and so is the geopolitical and military response.

Today’s tensions are prompting even leaders of important counties that, so far, are in good standing with the NPT to ask: “Why shouldn’t we have a nuclear weapon too?”

To this, I would say, “Do not make things worse.” Acquiring a nuclear weapon will not increase national security, it will do the opposite. Other countries will follow. And this will contribute to the unravelling of a nonproliferation regime that has had its ups and downs – and it still has its limitations – but none-the-less it has served humanity extraordinarily well. The problem and challenge to the NPT regime may come from those nuclear armed but also those who, while not having nuclear weapons, may feel the NPT has failed as a catalyst to disarmament.

Weakening the non-proliferation treaty under the argument that progress on nuclear disarmament has been slow and more drastic approaches are required, would be totally misguided and may make us throw away existing international measures committing nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states in this field.

I come from a non-nuclear weapon state. I understand the frustration that some people feel about the “haves” and “have-nots” of nuclear weapons. But I have also seen the legacy of peace and prosperity left by leaders who resisted that siren call. In the 1980s, vision, resolve and dialogue meant Brazil and Argentina changed course and did not go down the path to nuclear arms. Today, Latin America is a nuclear weapon free zone.

Multilateral leaders: step up by stepping in

Many wonder whether there’s still a role for multilateralism in guiding us through this maze of conflicting interests. Yes, there is. During difficult times in the past, international organizations have had a big impact on peace and security. But it only happens when leaders of these organizations get off the side lines and use their mandate and their own good offices effectively.

We prove our relevance in extraordinary times.

Each organization has different tools, a different mandate, a different membership, and each of their leaders will determine how to act. I can speak for the IAEA. We have nuclear science at our core, and we are the world’s nuclear weapons watchdog. Let me give you an example:

For almost three years, Ukraine, the world and the IAEA have been confronted with a completely unprecedented situation – never before has a military conflict involved the seizure of a nuclear power plant and been fought among the facilities of a major nuclear power programme.

At the beginning of the war, Ukraine’s biggest nuclear power plant – the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, with nearly 6 gigawatts of installed capacity – was taken by Russia. This established a hotspot in the middle of a combat zone. The chance of an incident – or accident – causing terrible radiological consequences became real.

Observing this from the outside was never, in my mind, an option. Staying on the sidelines and later reflecting on “lessons learned” may have been the more traditional – or expected – path for an international organization. But to me this would have been a dereliction of duty. So, we leaned into our core mission, crossed the front lines of war, and established a permanent presence of IAEA experts at all Ukraine’s nuclear power plants. That makes us the only international organization operating independently in occupied territory. We are informing the world of what’s going on and reducing the chance that a radiological incident enflames the conflict and causes even more devastation.

We did the same by going to Kursk when a Russian nuclear reactor was at risk of coming into the line of fire. I am in constant communication with both sides.

I have been meeting with President Zelenskyy, and President Putin regularly. Nuclear safety and security during this conflict must have the buy-in and continued involvement of both leaders. Talking to only one of them would not achieve this important goal. At the same time, I am keeping an open dialogue with leaders on all continents and briefing the UN Security Council. When it comes to nuclear safety in Ukraine it has been possible to build a level of agreement that is rare during the divisions of this conflict. Where there is agreement, there is hope for more agreement.

Ukraine is not our only hotspot.

In Iran, the IAEA’s job is to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of a growing nuclear programme. Iran has now enriched uranium to a level that is hard to justify. It has not yet answered the IAEA’s questions completely and it has made our work more difficult by taking away some of our cameras and blocking some of our most experienced safeguards inspectors from going into the country. This has caused concern and led to a pattern of mistrust and recriminations. In diplomacy, progress often requires prompting, catalyzing, and suggesting ways forward. This presents a role for an impartial, honest and effective broker. It is a role I, in my capacity as the IAEA’s Director General, have been playing. In fact, I returned from my latest visit to Tehran just a few weeks ago where I presented alternatives and ideas to reduce the growing tensions, and hopefully to retain Iran within the NPT and the non-proliferation norms.

The danger of playing it safe

When it comes to working on behalf of peace and security, playing it safe is dangerous.

Silence and indifference can be deadly.

Dag Hammerskjold, the second Secretary General of the United Nations, said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”

A new path

This week, the Norwegian Nobel Committee looked beyond today’s conflicts. In its own way, it did not play it safe. Instead, it shined a light on the horrors of nuclear war and the people who have been warning us about them for many decades.

In doing that, the Nobel Committee, Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha have illuminated the danger of the path we are now on.

We have to make a new path.

First, the leaders of the nuclear weapon states must recognize the need for a responsible management of their nuclear arsenals. Experiences from the past confirm that even at times of crisis and conflict it has been possible to recognize the unique terminal power of these weapons and the responsibility that comes with it. What Kennedy, Khrushchev, Reagan, Gorbachev, or Trump did by reaching out to a nuclear-armed adversary, sets a precedent, a useful one. Such contacts, either bilateral or at the P5 level could possibly be facilitated by a competent broker. These are the first steps to bringing down the tone so that nuclear sabre rattling recedes and the commitments to the unequivocal undertakings to move towards a nuclear free world can be fulfilled.

Secondly, an iron-clad resolve to observe and strengthen the global non-proliferation regime needs to be adopted. Nuclear weapon and nuclear non-weapon states must work together to ensure the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We need to walk through perilous times by recognizing limitations and keeping our eyes on our common objectives.

Nuclear disarmament cannot be imposed on the nuclear armed.

Realism is not defeatism. Diplomacy is not weakness.

Difficult times call for enlightened leadership, at the national level, and at the international level as well.

Putting the international system back on track is within our reach. World leaders, including those at the top of the multilateral system, have a duty and an irrevocable responsibility to work towards this.

Personally, I am convinced. Perhaps, because the secret mandate I received that day in Hiroshima from a hibakusha burns in me, stronger than ever. Thank you.

MIL OSI NGO –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI NGOs: Nobel Peace Prize Forum: our perilous path and how we change course

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi’s keynote address at the Nobel Peace Prize Forum 2024.

I want to start by congratulating Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha for their Nobel Peace Prize.

As a young diplomat almost 40 years ago, I was fortunate to be part of a UN disarmament fellowship programme and to visit Hiroshima. There, fellows had an opportunity to meet the hibakusha and I had a conversation with an ailing victim. I have carried to every meeting, to every negotiation, and to every posting, the memory this woman’s silent testimony. When I asked her about that morning in 1945, she struggled to express the horror in words. She tried to articulate some words but stayed silent. Looking at me, right into my eyes. The look in her eyes has stayed with me ever since, like a powerful reminder, a secret mandate, to work so that her suffering is never repeated.

For decades after the Second World War, the international community has been dealing with this unique dilemma: we built robust norms and passed nonproliferation and disarmament treaties. Instead of dozens of countries armed with nuclear weapons, as was the concern in the 1960s, there are less than ten. Stockpiles of nuclear weapons have shrunk from tens of thousands to thousands.

But on its journey through the perils of the atomic age, the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Our deep psychological connection caused by collectively seeing the horror of the consequences of nuclear war seems to be evaporating, taking with it our joint resolve to do everything possible to prevent a repetition.

Like a giant spotlight, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize has lit up our path ahead. It has done it, by reminding us of the past, and of the consequences of ignoring the perils of nuclear weapons use.

[embedded content]

Context of conflicts

To understand the important challenges we face, we must look at the global context, at what is happening around the world.

War has returned to Europe, and it directly involves a nuclear weapon state. The conflict in Ukraine is also an indirect confrontation between the world’s biggest nuclear weapon states, the first since the end of the Cold War. But nuclear exercises and open references to the use of nuclear weapons in the theatre of this war are increasing the risks and can not be ignored.

In the Middle East, the conflict of the past year has ignited smoldering tensions between Israel and Iran and led to the unprecedented step of direct exchanges and attacks between the two. Here there is also a nuclear weapons dimension. On one side, the assumed presence of nuclear weapons looms in the background. On the other, the very real potential of nuclear proliferation is raising the stakes.

We find ourselves in a harmful loop: the erosion of the restraints around nuclear weapons is making these conflicts more dangerous. Meanwhile, these conflicts are contributing to the erosion of the restraints. The vicious circle dynamic is in motion.

An unfortunate change of direction

Doctrines regarding the use of nuclear weapons are being revised or reinterpreted. The quantity and quality of nuclear weapon stockpiles are being increased.

And in some non-nuclear weapon states – states that are important in their region – leaders are asking “why not us?”. And they are asking this openly!

At the start of the nuclear arms race, J Robert Oppenheimer described the USSR and the US as “two scorpions in a bottle” each capable of killing the other, but only by risking their own life.

Oppenheimer’s blunt statement would later be developed and elaborated under the roof of deterrence and the more sophisticated concept of “Mutual Assured Destruction,” or MAD.

Today, independent of the vantage point of the observer, there is widespread concern that the risk of mutual destruction through nuclear war is higher than it has been for more than a generation.

Lessons from history

But it does not have to be this way. We can do better. History has shown that effective dialogue among superpowers has, more often than not, led to confidence and, as a result, also to arms limitation and even disarmament. At certain moments in history, world leaders took the right decisions, to tone down, or, to use today’s parlance, to de-escalate. Let’s see:

The end of the Cuban Missile Crisis happened thanks to the direct engagement of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and US President John F Kennedy. Decades later, at the Geneva Summit of 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan agreed a crucial axiom: “Nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.” They met again the next year in Reykjavik and significant reductions in nuclear arsenals followed. Nuclear weapon reductions and the elimination of a whole category of weapon, through the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, or INF, Treaty, were agreed. These steps towards rapprochement took leadership and courage. They often happened despite skepticism and voices against them.

Diplomacy and dialogue (and the duty of nuclear weapon states)

A return to diplomacy and dialogue is urgently needed, and this, not only in things nuclear. Shutting the other side out has never solved a problem and almost certainly aggravates it. Top leadership involvement is simply indispensable when nuclear weapons are involved. President Trump took the initiative and talked to Kim Jong Un. More of this is needed. Some have said these talks were ill prepared. I say, this is important. Nuclear weapon policy and limitations does not work bottom up. It is of course the other way around.

We must be proactive in building the trust and protections that lower the risk of close calls and of brinkmanship, especially during today’s tensions. Not taking active steps means we rely on luck – or the assumption that the other side will show restraint – to save us from nuclear war. The longer you rely on luck, the more likely it is to run out.

Conflict and tensions compel nations to arm themselves. Diplomacy and compromise create conditions in which they can disarm.

The road to a nuclear weapon-free world is long and winding. The disarmament landscape is complex, and it’s worth acknowledging that. This does not diminish the responsibility nuclear weapons states have to make progress. After all, they committed themselves to this goal back in 1968, through the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Steps can be taken to decrease the reliance on nuclear weapons, both in their production and the scenarios for their use.

Nuclear weapon states, through their actions at home and on the world stage, have a responsibility to avoid a scenario in which more countries seek nuclear weapons. Pushing ahead with increases in arsenals leads to despair, cynicism, and a growing skepticism about the value of past commitments. Disengagement and unilateralism fuel sentiments of vulnerability in other countries, and with that, the notion nuclear weapons could be the ultimate protection against outside threats.

Engagement among the five permanent members of the Security Council is indispensable. Such engagement can take many different shapes, starting with direct contact among themselves, bilaterally or as a group. This dialogue, which still exists, has been reduced to a very low level, virtually without real impact. Perhaps its revival could be assisted by an international organization, or facilitated with the support of a respected, impartial leader. Therefore, it’s essential that the United Nations, other international organizations, and their leaders work effectively to ensure their continued relevance amid the changing needs of their stakeholders.

Do not make things worse (by falling for the siren call of proliferation)

The IAEA has played its indispensable technical role during past attempts of nuclear proliferation, particularly in the Middle East. As the difficult experiences in Iraq, Libya and Syria remind us, the draw of nuclear weapons is real and so is the geopolitical and military response.

Today’s tensions are prompting even leaders of important counties that, so far, are in good standing with the NPT to ask: “Why shouldn’t we have a nuclear weapon too?”

To this, I would say, “Do not make things worse.” Acquiring a nuclear weapon will not increase national security, it will do the opposite. Other countries will follow. And this will contribute to the unravelling of a nonproliferation regime that has had its ups and downs – and it still has its limitations – but none-the-less it has served humanity extraordinarily well. The problem and challenge to the NPT regime may come from those nuclear armed but also those who, while not having nuclear weapons, may feel the NPT has failed as a catalyst to disarmament.

Weakening the non-proliferation treaty under the argument that progress on nuclear disarmament has been slow and more drastic approaches are required, would be totally misguided and may make us throw away existing international measures committing nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states in this field.

I come from a non-nuclear weapon state. I understand the frustration that some people feel about the “haves” and “have-nots” of nuclear weapons. But I have also seen the legacy of peace and prosperity left by leaders who resisted that siren call. In the 1980s, vision, resolve and dialogue meant Brazil and Argentina changed course and did not go down the path to nuclear arms. Today, Latin America is a nuclear weapon free zone.

Multilateral leaders: step up by stepping in

Many wonder whether there’s still a role for multilateralism in guiding us through this maze of conflicting interests. Yes, there is. During difficult times in the past, international organizations have had a big impact on peace and security. But it only happens when leaders of these organizations get off the side lines and use their mandate and their own good offices effectively.

We prove our relevance in extraordinary times.

Each organization has different tools, a different mandate, a different membership, and each of their leaders will determine how to act. I can speak for the IAEA. We have nuclear science at our core, and we are the world’s nuclear weapons watchdog. Let me give you an example:

For almost three years, Ukraine, the world and the IAEA have been confronted with a completely unprecedented situation – never before has a military conflict involved the seizure of a nuclear power plant and been fought among the facilities of a major nuclear power programme.

At the beginning of the war, Ukraine’s biggest nuclear power plant – the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, with nearly 6 gigawatts of installed capacity – was taken by Russia. This established a hotspot in the middle of a combat zone. The chance of an incident – or accident – causing terrible radiological consequences became real.

Observing this from the outside was never, in my mind, an option. Staying on the sidelines and later reflecting on “lessons learned” may have been the more traditional – or expected – path for an international organization. But to me this would have been a dereliction of duty. So, we leaned into our core mission, crossed the front lines of war, and established a permanent presence of IAEA experts at all Ukraine’s nuclear power plants. That makes us the only international organization operating independently in occupied territory. We are informing the world of what’s going on and reducing the chance that a radiological incident enflames the conflict and causes even more devastation.

We did the same by going to Kursk when a Russian nuclear reactor was at risk of coming into the line of fire. I am in constant communication with both sides.

I have been meeting with President Zelenskyy, and President Putin regularly. Nuclear safety and security during this conflict must have the buy-in and continued involvement of both leaders. Talking to only one of them would not achieve this important goal. At the same time, I am keeping an open dialogue with leaders on all continents and briefing the UN Security Council. When it comes to nuclear safety in Ukraine it has been possible to build a level of agreement that is rare during the divisions of this conflict. Where there is agreement, there is hope for more agreement.

Ukraine is not our only hotspot.

In Iran, the IAEA’s job is to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of a growing nuclear programme. Iran has now enriched uranium to a level that is hard to justify. It has not yet answered the IAEA’s questions completely and it has made our work more difficult by taking away some of our cameras and blocking some of our most experienced safeguards inspectors from going into the country. This has caused concern and led to a pattern of mistrust and recriminations. In diplomacy, progress often requires prompting, catalyzing, and suggesting ways forward. This presents a role for an impartial, honest and effective broker. It is a role I, in my capacity as the IAEA’s Director General, have been playing. In fact, I returned from my latest visit to Tehran just a few weeks ago where I presented alternatives and ideas to reduce the growing tensions, and hopefully to retain Iran within the NPT and the non-proliferation norms.

The danger of playing it safe

When it comes to working on behalf of peace and security, playing it safe is dangerous.

Silence and indifference can be deadly.

Dag Hammerskjold, the second Secretary General of the United Nations, said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”

A new path

This week, the Norwegian Nobel Committee looked beyond today’s conflicts. In its own way, it did not play it safe. Instead, it shined a light on the horrors of nuclear war and the people who have been warning us about them for many decades.

In doing that, the Nobel Committee, Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha have illuminated the danger of the path we are now on.

We have to make a new path.

First, the leaders of the nuclear weapon states must recognize the need for a responsible management of their nuclear arsenals. Experiences from the past confirm that even at times of crisis and conflict it has been possible to recognize the unique terminal power of these weapons and the responsibility that comes with it. What Kennedy, Khrushchev, Reagan, Gorbachev, or Trump did by reaching out to a nuclear-armed adversary, sets a precedent, a useful one. Such contacts, either bilateral or at the P5 level could possibly be facilitated by a competent broker. These are the first steps to bringing down the tone so that nuclear sabre rattling recedes and the commitments to the unequivocal undertakings to move towards a nuclear free world can be fulfilled.

Secondly, an iron-clad resolve to observe and strengthen the global non-proliferation regime needs to be adopted. Nuclear weapon and nuclear non-weapon states must work together to ensure the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We need to walk through perilous times by recognizing limitations and keeping our eyes on our common objectives.

Nuclear disarmament cannot be imposed on the nuclear armed.

Realism is not defeatism. Diplomacy is not weakness.

Difficult times call for enlightened leadership, at the national level, and at the international level as well.

Putting the international system back on track is within our reach. World leaders, including those at the top of the multilateral system, have a duty and an irrevocable responsibility to work towards this.

Personally, I am convinced. Perhaps, because the secret mandate I received that day in Hiroshima from a hibakusha burns in me, stronger than ever. Thank you.

MIL OSI NGO –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI NGOs: Nobel Peace Prize Forum: our perilous path and how we change course

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi’s keynote address at the Nobel Peace Prize Forum 2024.

I want to start by congratulating Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha for their Nobel Peace Prize.

As a young diplomat almost 40 years ago, I was fortunate to be part of a UN disarmament fellowship programme and to visit Hiroshima. There, fellows had an opportunity to meet the hibakusha and I had a conversation with an ailing victim. I have carried to every meeting, to every negotiation, and to every posting, the memory this woman’s silent testimony. When I asked her about that morning in 1945, she struggled to express the horror in words. She tried to articulate some words but stayed silent. Looking at me, right into my eyes. The look in her eyes has stayed with me ever since, like a powerful reminder, a secret mandate, to work so that her suffering is never repeated.

For decades after the Second World War, the international community has been dealing with this unique dilemma: we built robust norms and passed nonproliferation and disarmament treaties. Instead of dozens of countries armed with nuclear weapons, as was the concern in the 1960s, there are less than ten. Stockpiles of nuclear weapons have shrunk from tens of thousands to thousands.

But on its journey through the perils of the atomic age, the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Our deep psychological connection caused by collectively seeing the horror of the consequences of nuclear war seems to be evaporating, taking with it our joint resolve to do everything possible to prevent a repetition.

Like a giant spotlight, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize has lit up our path ahead. It has done it, by reminding us of the past, and of the consequences of ignoring the perils of nuclear weapons use.

[embedded content]

Context of conflicts

To understand the important challenges we face, we must look at the global context, at what is happening around the world.

War has returned to Europe, and it directly involves a nuclear weapon state. The conflict in Ukraine is also an indirect confrontation between the world’s biggest nuclear weapon states, the first since the end of the Cold War. But nuclear exercises and open references to the use of nuclear weapons in the theatre of this war are increasing the risks and can not be ignored.

In the Middle East, the conflict of the past year has ignited smoldering tensions between Israel and Iran and led to the unprecedented step of direct exchanges and attacks between the two. Here there is also a nuclear weapons dimension. On one side, the assumed presence of nuclear weapons looms in the background. On the other, the very real potential of nuclear proliferation is raising the stakes.

We find ourselves in a harmful loop: the erosion of the restraints around nuclear weapons is making these conflicts more dangerous. Meanwhile, these conflicts are contributing to the erosion of the restraints. The vicious circle dynamic is in motion.

An unfortunate change of direction

Doctrines regarding the use of nuclear weapons are being revised or reinterpreted. The quantity and quality of nuclear weapon stockpiles are being increased.

And in some non-nuclear weapon states – states that are important in their region – leaders are asking “why not us?”. And they are asking this openly!

At the start of the nuclear arms race, J Robert Oppenheimer described the USSR and the US as “two scorpions in a bottle” each capable of killing the other, but only by risking their own life.

Oppenheimer’s blunt statement would later be developed and elaborated under the roof of deterrence and the more sophisticated concept of “Mutual Assured Destruction,” or MAD.

Today, independent of the vantage point of the observer, there is widespread concern that the risk of mutual destruction through nuclear war is higher than it has been for more than a generation.

Lessons from history

But it does not have to be this way. We can do better. History has shown that effective dialogue among superpowers has, more often than not, led to confidence and, as a result, also to arms limitation and even disarmament. At certain moments in history, world leaders took the right decisions, to tone down, or, to use today’s parlance, to de-escalate. Let’s see:

The end of the Cuban Missile Crisis happened thanks to the direct engagement of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and US President John F Kennedy. Decades later, at the Geneva Summit of 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan agreed a crucial axiom: “Nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.” They met again the next year in Reykjavik and significant reductions in nuclear arsenals followed. Nuclear weapon reductions and the elimination of a whole category of weapon, through the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, or INF, Treaty, were agreed. These steps towards rapprochement took leadership and courage. They often happened despite skepticism and voices against them.

Diplomacy and dialogue (and the duty of nuclear weapon states)

A return to diplomacy and dialogue is urgently needed, and this, not only in things nuclear. Shutting the other side out has never solved a problem and almost certainly aggravates it. Top leadership involvement is simply indispensable when nuclear weapons are involved. President Trump took the initiative and talked to Kim Jong Un. More of this is needed. Some have said these talks were ill prepared. I say, this is important. Nuclear weapon policy and limitations does not work bottom up. It is of course the other way around.

We must be proactive in building the trust and protections that lower the risk of close calls and of brinkmanship, especially during today’s tensions. Not taking active steps means we rely on luck – or the assumption that the other side will show restraint – to save us from nuclear war. The longer you rely on luck, the more likely it is to run out.

Conflict and tensions compel nations to arm themselves. Diplomacy and compromise create conditions in which they can disarm.

The road to a nuclear weapon-free world is long and winding. The disarmament landscape is complex, and it’s worth acknowledging that. This does not diminish the responsibility nuclear weapons states have to make progress. After all, they committed themselves to this goal back in 1968, through the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Steps can be taken to decrease the reliance on nuclear weapons, both in their production and the scenarios for their use.

Nuclear weapon states, through their actions at home and on the world stage, have a responsibility to avoid a scenario in which more countries seek nuclear weapons. Pushing ahead with increases in arsenals leads to despair, cynicism, and a growing skepticism about the value of past commitments. Disengagement and unilateralism fuel sentiments of vulnerability in other countries, and with that, the notion nuclear weapons could be the ultimate protection against outside threats.

Engagement among the five permanent members of the Security Council is indispensable. Such engagement can take many different shapes, starting with direct contact among themselves, bilaterally or as a group. This dialogue, which still exists, has been reduced to a very low level, virtually without real impact. Perhaps its revival could be assisted by an international organization, or facilitated with the support of a respected, impartial leader. Therefore, it’s essential that the United Nations, other international organizations, and their leaders work effectively to ensure their continued relevance amid the changing needs of their stakeholders.

Do not make things worse (by falling for the siren call of proliferation)

The IAEA has played its indispensable technical role during past attempts of nuclear proliferation, particularly in the Middle East. As the difficult experiences in Iraq, Libya and Syria remind us, the draw of nuclear weapons is real and so is the geopolitical and military response.

Today’s tensions are prompting even leaders of important counties that, so far, are in good standing with the NPT to ask: “Why shouldn’t we have a nuclear weapon too?”

To this, I would say, “Do not make things worse.” Acquiring a nuclear weapon will not increase national security, it will do the opposite. Other countries will follow. And this will contribute to the unravelling of a nonproliferation regime that has had its ups and downs – and it still has its limitations – but none-the-less it has served humanity extraordinarily well. The problem and challenge to the NPT regime may come from those nuclear armed but also those who, while not having nuclear weapons, may feel the NPT has failed as a catalyst to disarmament.

Weakening the non-proliferation treaty under the argument that progress on nuclear disarmament has been slow and more drastic approaches are required, would be totally misguided and may make us throw away existing international measures committing nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states in this field.

I come from a non-nuclear weapon state. I understand the frustration that some people feel about the “haves” and “have-nots” of nuclear weapons. But I have also seen the legacy of peace and prosperity left by leaders who resisted that siren call. In the 1980s, vision, resolve and dialogue meant Brazil and Argentina changed course and did not go down the path to nuclear arms. Today, Latin America is a nuclear weapon free zone.

Multilateral leaders: step up by stepping in

Many wonder whether there’s still a role for multilateralism in guiding us through this maze of conflicting interests. Yes, there is. During difficult times in the past, international organizations have had a big impact on peace and security. But it only happens when leaders of these organizations get off the side lines and use their mandate and their own good offices effectively.

We prove our relevance in extraordinary times.

Each organization has different tools, a different mandate, a different membership, and each of their leaders will determine how to act. I can speak for the IAEA. We have nuclear science at our core, and we are the world’s nuclear weapons watchdog. Let me give you an example:

For almost three years, Ukraine, the world and the IAEA have been confronted with a completely unprecedented situation – never before has a military conflict involved the seizure of a nuclear power plant and been fought among the facilities of a major nuclear power programme.

At the beginning of the war, Ukraine’s biggest nuclear power plant – the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, with nearly 6 gigawatts of installed capacity – was taken by Russia. This established a hotspot in the middle of a combat zone. The chance of an incident – or accident – causing terrible radiological consequences became real.

Observing this from the outside was never, in my mind, an option. Staying on the sidelines and later reflecting on “lessons learned” may have been the more traditional – or expected – path for an international organization. But to me this would have been a dereliction of duty. So, we leaned into our core mission, crossed the front lines of war, and established a permanent presence of IAEA experts at all Ukraine’s nuclear power plants. That makes us the only international organization operating independently in occupied territory. We are informing the world of what’s going on and reducing the chance that a radiological incident enflames the conflict and causes even more devastation.

We did the same by going to Kursk when a Russian nuclear reactor was at risk of coming into the line of fire. I am in constant communication with both sides.

I have been meeting with President Zelenskyy, and President Putin regularly. Nuclear safety and security during this conflict must have the buy-in and continued involvement of both leaders. Talking to only one of them would not achieve this important goal. At the same time, I am keeping an open dialogue with leaders on all continents and briefing the UN Security Council. When it comes to nuclear safety in Ukraine it has been possible to build a level of agreement that is rare during the divisions of this conflict. Where there is agreement, there is hope for more agreement.

Ukraine is not our only hotspot.

In Iran, the IAEA’s job is to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of a growing nuclear programme. Iran has now enriched uranium to a level that is hard to justify. It has not yet answered the IAEA’s questions completely and it has made our work more difficult by taking away some of our cameras and blocking some of our most experienced safeguards inspectors from going into the country. This has caused concern and led to a pattern of mistrust and recriminations. In diplomacy, progress often requires prompting, catalyzing, and suggesting ways forward. This presents a role for an impartial, honest and effective broker. It is a role I, in my capacity as the IAEA’s Director General, have been playing. In fact, I returned from my latest visit to Tehran just a few weeks ago where I presented alternatives and ideas to reduce the growing tensions, and hopefully to retain Iran within the NPT and the non-proliferation norms.

The danger of playing it safe

When it comes to working on behalf of peace and security, playing it safe is dangerous.

Silence and indifference can be deadly.

Dag Hammerskjold, the second Secretary General of the United Nations, said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”

A new path

This week, the Norwegian Nobel Committee looked beyond today’s conflicts. In its own way, it did not play it safe. Instead, it shined a light on the horrors of nuclear war and the people who have been warning us about them for many decades.

In doing that, the Nobel Committee, Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha have illuminated the danger of the path we are now on.

We have to make a new path.

First, the leaders of the nuclear weapon states must recognize the need for a responsible management of their nuclear arsenals. Experiences from the past confirm that even at times of crisis and conflict it has been possible to recognize the unique terminal power of these weapons and the responsibility that comes with it. What Kennedy, Khrushchev, Reagan, Gorbachev, or Trump did by reaching out to a nuclear-armed adversary, sets a precedent, a useful one. Such contacts, either bilateral or at the P5 level could possibly be facilitated by a competent broker. These are the first steps to bringing down the tone so that nuclear sabre rattling recedes and the commitments to the unequivocal undertakings to move towards a nuclear free world can be fulfilled.

Secondly, an iron-clad resolve to observe and strengthen the global non-proliferation regime needs to be adopted. Nuclear weapon and nuclear non-weapon states must work together to ensure the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We need to walk through perilous times by recognizing limitations and keeping our eyes on our common objectives.

Nuclear disarmament cannot be imposed on the nuclear armed.

Realism is not defeatism. Diplomacy is not weakness.

Difficult times call for enlightened leadership, at the national level, and at the international level as well.

Putting the international system back on track is within our reach. World leaders, including those at the top of the multilateral system, have a duty and an irrevocable responsibility to work towards this.

Personally, I am convinced. Perhaps, because the secret mandate I received that day in Hiroshima from a hibakusha burns in me, stronger than ever. Thank you.

MIL OSI NGO –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI United Nations: Nobel Peace Prize Forum: our perilous path and how we change course

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)

IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi’s keynote address at the Nobel Peace Prize Forum 2024.

I want to start by congratulating Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha for their Nobel Peace Prize.

As a young diplomat almost 40 years ago, I was fortunate to be part of a UN disarmament fellowship programme and to visit Hiroshima. There, fellows had an opportunity to meet the hibakusha and I had a conversation with an ailing victim. I have carried to every meeting, to every negotiation, and to every posting, the memory this woman’s silent testimony. When I asked her about that morning in 1945, she struggled to express the horror in words. She tried to articulate some words but stayed silent. Looking at me, right into my eyes. The look in her eyes has stayed with me ever since, like a powerful reminder, a secret mandate, to work so that her suffering is never repeated.

For decades after the Second World War, the international community has been dealing with this unique dilemma: we built robust norms and passed nonproliferation and disarmament treaties. Instead of dozens of countries armed with nuclear weapons, as was the concern in the 1960s, there are less than ten. Stockpiles of nuclear weapons have shrunk from tens of thousands to thousands.

But on its journey through the perils of the atomic age, the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Our deep psychological connection caused by collectively seeing the horror of the consequences of nuclear war seems to be evaporating, taking with it our joint resolve to do everything possible to prevent a repetition.

Like a giant spotlight, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize has lit up our path ahead. It has done it, by reminding us of the past, and of the consequences of ignoring the perils of nuclear weapons use.

[embedded content]

Context of conflicts

To understand the important challenges we face, we must look at the global context, at what is happening around the world.

War has returned to Europe, and it directly involves a nuclear weapon state. The conflict in Ukraine is also an indirect confrontation between the world’s biggest nuclear weapon states, the first since the end of the Cold War. But nuclear exercises and open references to the use of nuclear weapons in the theatre of this war are increasing the risks and can not be ignored.

In the Middle East, the conflict of the past year has ignited smoldering tensions between Israel and Iran and led to the unprecedented step of direct exchanges and attacks between the two. Here there is also a nuclear weapons dimension. On one side, the assumed presence of nuclear weapons looms in the background. On the other, the very real potential of nuclear proliferation is raising the stakes.

We find ourselves in a harmful loop: the erosion of the restraints around nuclear weapons is making these conflicts more dangerous. Meanwhile, these conflicts are contributing to the erosion of the restraints. The vicious circle dynamic is in motion.

An unfortunate change of direction

Doctrines regarding the use of nuclear weapons are being revised or reinterpreted. The quantity and quality of nuclear weapon stockpiles are being increased.

And in some non-nuclear weapon states – states that are important in their region – leaders are asking “why not us?”. And they are asking this openly!

At the start of the nuclear arms race, J Robert Oppenheimer described the USSR and the US as “two scorpions in a bottle” each capable of killing the other, but only by risking their own life.

Oppenheimer’s blunt statement would later be developed and elaborated under the roof of deterrence and the more sophisticated concept of “Mutual Assured Destruction,” or MAD.

Today, independent of the vantage point of the observer, there is widespread concern that the risk of mutual destruction through nuclear war is higher than it has been for more than a generation.

Lessons from history

But it does not have to be this way. We can do better. History has shown that effective dialogue among superpowers has, more often than not, led to confidence and, as a result, also to arms limitation and even disarmament. At certain moments in history, world leaders took the right decisions, to tone down, or, to use today’s parlance, to de-escalate. Let’s see:

The end of the Cuban Missile Crisis happened thanks to the direct engagement of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and US President John F Kennedy. Decades later, at the Geneva Summit of 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan agreed a crucial axiom: “Nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.” They met again the next year in Reykjavik and significant reductions in nuclear arsenals followed. Nuclear weapon reductions and the elimination of a whole category of weapon, through the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces, or INF, Treaty, were agreed. These steps towards rapprochement took leadership and courage. They often happened despite skepticism and voices against them.

Diplomacy and dialogue (and the duty of nuclear weapon states)

A return to diplomacy and dialogue is urgently needed, and this, not only in things nuclear. Shutting the other side out has never solved a problem and almost certainly aggravates it. Top leadership involvement is simply indispensable when nuclear weapons are involved. President Trump took the initiative and talked to Kim Jong Un. More of this is needed. Some have said these talks were ill prepared. I say, this is important. Nuclear weapon policy and limitations does not work bottom up. It is of course the other way around.

We must be proactive in building the trust and protections that lower the risk of close calls and of brinkmanship, especially during today’s tensions. Not taking active steps means we rely on luck – or the assumption that the other side will show restraint – to save us from nuclear war. The longer you rely on luck, the more likely it is to run out.

Conflict and tensions compel nations to arm themselves. Diplomacy and compromise create conditions in which they can disarm.

The road to a nuclear weapon-free world is long and winding. The disarmament landscape is complex, and it’s worth acknowledging that. This does not diminish the responsibility nuclear weapons states have to make progress. After all, they committed themselves to this goal back in 1968, through the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Steps can be taken to decrease the reliance on nuclear weapons, both in their production and the scenarios for their use.

Nuclear weapon states, through their actions at home and on the world stage, have a responsibility to avoid a scenario in which more countries seek nuclear weapons. Pushing ahead with increases in arsenals leads to despair, cynicism, and a growing skepticism about the value of past commitments. Disengagement and unilateralism fuel sentiments of vulnerability in other countries, and with that, the notion nuclear weapons could be the ultimate protection against outside threats.

Engagement among the five permanent members of the Security Council is indispensable. Such engagement can take many different shapes, starting with direct contact among themselves, bilaterally or as a group. This dialogue, which still exists, has been reduced to a very low level, virtually without real impact. Perhaps its revival could be assisted by an international organization, or facilitated with the support of a respected, impartial leader. Therefore, it’s essential that the United Nations, other international organizations, and their leaders work effectively to ensure their continued relevance amid the changing needs of their stakeholders.

Do not make things worse (by falling for the siren call of proliferation)

The IAEA has played its indispensable technical role during past attempts of nuclear proliferation, particularly in the Middle East. As the difficult experiences in Iraq, Libya and Syria remind us, the draw of nuclear weapons is real and so is the geopolitical and military response.

Today’s tensions are prompting even leaders of important counties that, so far, are in good standing with the NPT to ask: “Why shouldn’t we have a nuclear weapon too?”

To this, I would say, “Do not make things worse.” Acquiring a nuclear weapon will not increase national security, it will do the opposite. Other countries will follow. And this will contribute to the unravelling of a nonproliferation regime that has had its ups and downs – and it still has its limitations – but none-the-less it has served humanity extraordinarily well. The problem and challenge to the NPT regime may come from those nuclear armed but also those who, while not having nuclear weapons, may feel the NPT has failed as a catalyst to disarmament.

Weakening the non-proliferation treaty under the argument that progress on nuclear disarmament has been slow and more drastic approaches are required, would be totally misguided and may make us throw away existing international measures committing nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states in this field.

I come from a non-nuclear weapon state. I understand the frustration that some people feel about the “haves” and “have-nots” of nuclear weapons. But I have also seen the legacy of peace and prosperity left by leaders who resisted that siren call. In the 1980s, vision, resolve and dialogue meant Brazil and Argentina changed course and did not go down the path to nuclear arms. Today, Latin America is a nuclear weapon free zone.

Multilateral leaders: step up by stepping in

Many wonder whether there’s still a role for multilateralism in guiding us through this maze of conflicting interests. Yes, there is. During difficult times in the past, international organizations have had a big impact on peace and security. But it only happens when leaders of these organizations get off the side lines and use their mandate and their own good offices effectively.

We prove our relevance in extraordinary times.

Each organization has different tools, a different mandate, a different membership, and each of their leaders will determine how to act. I can speak for the IAEA. We have nuclear science at our core, and we are the world’s nuclear weapons watchdog. Let me give you an example:

For almost three years, Ukraine, the world and the IAEA have been confronted with a completely unprecedented situation – never before has a military conflict involved the seizure of a nuclear power plant and been fought among the facilities of a major nuclear power programme.

At the beginning of the war, Ukraine’s biggest nuclear power plant – the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe, with nearly 6 gigawatts of installed capacity – was taken by Russia. This established a hotspot in the middle of a combat zone. The chance of an incident – or accident – causing terrible radiological consequences became real.

Observing this from the outside was never, in my mind, an option. Staying on the sidelines and later reflecting on “lessons learned” may have been the more traditional – or expected – path for an international organization. But to me this would have been a dereliction of duty. So, we leaned into our core mission, crossed the front lines of war, and established a permanent presence of IAEA experts at all Ukraine’s nuclear power plants. That makes us the only international organization operating independently in occupied territory. We are informing the world of what’s going on and reducing the chance that a radiological incident enflames the conflict and causes even more devastation.

We did the same by going to Kursk when a Russian nuclear reactor was at risk of coming into the line of fire. I am in constant communication with both sides.

I have been meeting with President Zelenskyy, and President Putin regularly. Nuclear safety and security during this conflict must have the buy-in and continued involvement of both leaders. Talking to only one of them would not achieve this important goal. At the same time, I am keeping an open dialogue with leaders on all continents and briefing the UN Security Council. When it comes to nuclear safety in Ukraine it has been possible to build a level of agreement that is rare during the divisions of this conflict. Where there is agreement, there is hope for more agreement.

Ukraine is not our only hotspot.

In Iran, the IAEA’s job is to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of a growing nuclear programme. Iran has now enriched uranium to a level that is hard to justify. It has not yet answered the IAEA’s questions completely and it has made our work more difficult by taking away some of our cameras and blocking some of our most experienced safeguards inspectors from going into the country. This has caused concern and led to a pattern of mistrust and recriminations. In diplomacy, progress often requires prompting, catalyzing, and suggesting ways forward. This presents a role for an impartial, honest and effective broker. It is a role I, in my capacity as the IAEA’s Director General, have been playing. In fact, I returned from my latest visit to Tehran just a few weeks ago where I presented alternatives and ideas to reduce the growing tensions, and hopefully to retain Iran within the NPT and the non-proliferation norms.

The danger of playing it safe

When it comes to working on behalf of peace and security, playing it safe is dangerous.

Silence and indifference can be deadly.

Dag Hammerskjold, the second Secretary General of the United Nations, said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”

A new path

This week, the Norwegian Nobel Committee looked beyond today’s conflicts. In its own way, it did not play it safe. Instead, it shined a light on the horrors of nuclear war and the people who have been warning us about them for many decades.

In doing that, the Nobel Committee, Nihon Hidankyō and the hibakusha have illuminated the danger of the path we are now on.

We have to make a new path.

First, the leaders of the nuclear weapon states must recognize the need for a responsible management of their nuclear arsenals. Experiences from the past confirm that even at times of crisis and conflict it has been possible to recognize the unique terminal power of these weapons and the responsibility that comes with it. What Kennedy, Khrushchev, Reagan, Gorbachev, or Trump did by reaching out to a nuclear-armed adversary, sets a precedent, a useful one. Such contacts, either bilateral or at the P5 level could possibly be facilitated by a competent broker. These are the first steps to bringing down the tone so that nuclear sabre rattling recedes and the commitments to the unequivocal undertakings to move towards a nuclear free world can be fulfilled.

Secondly, an iron-clad resolve to observe and strengthen the global non-proliferation regime needs to be adopted. Nuclear weapon and nuclear non-weapon states must work together to ensure the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We need to walk through perilous times by recognizing limitations and keeping our eyes on our common objectives.

Nuclear disarmament cannot be imposed on the nuclear armed.

Realism is not defeatism. Diplomacy is not weakness.

Difficult times call for enlightened leadership, at the national level, and at the international level as well.

Putting the international system back on track is within our reach. World leaders, including those at the top of the multilateral system, have a duty and an irrevocable responsibility to work towards this.

Personally, I am convinced. Perhaps, because the secret mandate I received that day in Hiroshima from a hibakusha burns in me, stronger than ever. Thank you.

MIL OSI United Nations News –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Africa: Ruth First and activist research: the legacy of a South African freedom fighter

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Saleem Badat, Research Professor, UFS History Department, University of the Free State

Ruth First, born 100 years ago, was a South African freedom fighter, journalist and scholar who worked against the racist system of apartheid during white minority rule. She was assassinated by apartheid forces in her office at the Eduardo Mondlane University in Mozambique in 1982.

Her ideas, work and legacy live on. Sociologists Saleem Badat and Vasu Reddy have edited a new book called Research and Activism: Ruth First & Activist Research. We asked them about her and their project.

Who was Ruth First?

Heloise Ruth First was born on 4 May 1925 in Johannesburg to Jewish parents who had migrated from eastern Europe to South Africa in the early 1900s. Her parents were founder members of the South African Communist Party.

She joined the Young Communist League and the Federation of Progressive Students and graduated from the University of the Witwatersrand in 1946 with a Bachelor of Arts degree.

At 21, First joined the left-wing South African newspaper The Guardian. When it was banned, the New Age took its place until it too was banned in 1962. She served as the newspaper’s Johannesburg editor for 17 years.

In 1963, First was arrested at the University of the Witwatersrand library and held in solitary confinement for 117 days, during which time she was ruthlessly interrogated. The following year she and her three children left South Africa for England on an exit permit, where they joined her partner, the activist and politician Joe Slovo. She would not set foot again in South Africa. Continuing with her activist research in England, she taught at Durham University and then joined Eduardo Mondlane University until hear death.

Ruth First. Courtesy the Slovo family

The mid-1940s to early 1960s were tumultuous years in South Africa. With the rise of formal apartheid in 1948, racial segregation was intensified.

First’s intrepid and penetrating journalistic research exposed her to the brutality of labour exploitation and control on the mines and the farms. It reinforced her understanding of South Africa in Marxist terms.

She wrote:

Silence in the face of injustice is complicity.

For her:

The will to fight is born out of the desire for freedom.

She was confident that:

The power of the people is greater than the power of any government.

First believed that ignorance is “the enemy of progress and justice” and that knowledge and education are “key to empowering individuals and challenging oppressive systems”. These words ring true in today’s global events driven by right-wing authoritarianism, US imperialism and acts of genocide.

On learning of her death, former South African President Nelson Mandela recalled:

I was in prison when Ruth First was assassinated, felt almost alone. Lost a sister in arms … It is no consolation to know that she lives beyond her grave.

What is activist research and how is it applied in the book?

As authors, we revisit Ruth First’s life, work and ideas and its relevance for the current context. We focus especially on the nature of her scholarship and how she navigated the tensions between her activism and her research – whether journalistic or for her books on South West Africa (today’s Namibia), Libya or western investment in apartheid. Other of her acclaimed books included The Barrel of a Gun: Political Power in Africa and the Coup d’etat and, during her Mozambican sojourn, Black Gold: The Mozambican Miner, Proletarian and Peasant.

In the process we invite renewed critical reflection about her life and work. Inspired by First’s contributions, the book considers how universities and scholars engage with institutions and social movements beyond the university.

ESI Press

For example, in the book a research group from Durham University in the UK considers how to balance objectivity (showing no bias) with more politically participatory research methods and how objectivity can be enhanced despite the difficulties faced by activist research.

Other scholars reflect on the work of the assassinated South African anti-apartheid activist scholar and lecturer Rick Turner on climate change. And on the complexities of undertaking activist research in Marikana with a women’s organisation, Sikhala Sonke. Marikana was the site where South African police opened fire on and killed 34 striking mineworkers in 2012.

There is examination of a research partnership between University of Cape Town activist scholars and some Khoi-San communities, reflection on the challenges of legal practice and education, and critical analysis of the decolonisation challenges of the KwaZulu-Natal Society of the Arts.

How do you frame activist research in your book?

The book shows that there is a difference between engaged research, critical research and activist research.

Engaged research tries to connect knowledge produced by academics with institutions, movements and experts outside the university to collaboratively address issues and promote cooperation.

Critical research uses radical critical theory to critique oppression and injustice, to show the gap between what exists today and more just ways of living. However, it does not necessarily connect with political and social movements.

Ruth First addresses a rally in Trafalgar Square, London in 1960. Courtesy the Slovo family

First’s research was not only engaged, but also critical in orientation and activist in nature. As activist research it challenged oppression and inequality.

It both critiqued the status quo in South Africa and elsewhere and tried to change it. It was linked with movements and connected to political activism that was anti-colonial, anti-imperialist, and committed to socialism.

Read more: Lessons learnt from taking sides as a sociologist in unjust times

First’s activist research did not confine itself to the academic arena but engaged with larger, wider and more diverse publics. It used this experience to critique dominant and often limited thinking at universities and promoted other ways of producing knowledge. The expertise developed was used to improve scholarship in various ways.

What do you want readers to take away?

There is much talk about the “engaged university” and engaged research. However, only certain connections and engagements seem to be valued.

Prior to democracy in 1994, South African researchers connected with social movements for change. Now this is seldom the case. Universities and scholars largely engage with those with money – the state, business, elites and donors.

Read more: Regina Twala was a towering intellectual and activist in Eswatini – but she was erased from history

This raises questions about the roles of researchers in South Africa, whose interests are prioritised and the place of critical and activist research in the engaged university.

How should Ruth First be remembered?

We must honour her for her intellectual and practical activism. What matters is not just her knowledge archive, but also her example as both an outstanding interpreter of the world and an activist scholar committed to changing society in the interests of the downtrodden, marginalised and voiceless.

First was a critical and independent thinker who refused to accept anything as settled and beyond questioning. But that intellect was committed to loyalty to the national liberation movement of which she was an invaluable cadre.

The views expressed in this piece do not reflect or represent the position of the university to which Badat and Reddy are affiliated.

– Ruth First and activist research: the legacy of a South African freedom fighter
– https://theconversation.com/ruth-first-and-activist-research-the-legacy-of-a-south-african-freedom-fighter-257687

MIL OSI Africa –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Alabama Man with Gun who Fled and Crashed into Police Car Sentenced to Federal Prison

Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

A man who possessed a firearm as a felon was sentenced today to two years in federal prison.

Chrishawn Lloyd Stuckey, age 43, from Birmingham, Alabama, received the prison term after a February 7, 2025 guilty plea to one count of possession of a firearm by a felon.

Evidence at the sentencing hearing showed that Stuckey was intoxicated while at a Wal-Mart in Waterloo, Iowa. He left the store and drove erratically. When a law enforcement officer attempted to stop his car, Stuckey refused to pull over. Stuckey instead got onto an on-ramp to the highway. Officers used a car maneuver to force Stuckey to stop. Stuckey then put his car in reverse and backed up into a squad car, damaging it. Officers found a loaded stolen firearm in Stuckey’s car. Stuckey has felony convictions for trafficking in stolen weapons and possession of a firearm by a felon.

Stuckey was sentenced in Cedar Rapids by United States District Court Chief Judge C.J. Williams. Stuckey was sentenced to 24 months’ imprisonment and must also serve a 3-year term of supervised release after the prison term. There is no parole in the federal system.

This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.

Stuckey is being held in the United States Marshal’s custody until he can be transported to a federal prison.

The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Devra T. Hake and investigated by the Waterloo Police Department, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Court file information at https://ecf.iand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/login.pl.

The case file number is 24-CR-2017.

Follow us on X @USAO_NDIA.

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Associates of Bounty Hunter Bloods Gang Indicted for Racketeering Conspiracy

Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

NEWARK, N.J. – Five New Jersey men, including associates of a New Jersey gang associated with the Bounty Hunter Bloods criminal street gang were charged by a superseding indictment with Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) conspiracy, drug trafficking, and firearms offenses, U.S. Attorney Alina Habba announced.

The Indictment charges Carl Napier, a/k/a “Smash” (“Napier”), Hamir Wright, a/k/a “Lil Smash” (“Wright”), Alexis Tejada (“Tejada”), Jihad Bibbs, Sr. (“Bibbs”), and Jamie Archer-Monroe, a/k/a “Raziq” (“Archer-Monroe”), all of Somerset County and Middlesex County, New Jersey, with a racketeering conspiracy that included multiple murders, fraud schemes, and narcotics distribution. Napier and Bibbs are in federal custody on previously filed related federal charges. Tejada and Archer-Monroe were arrested and appeared in federal court in Newark before the Hon. Stacy Adams, U.SM.J. for initial appearances. Wright is in state custody on previously filed unrelated charges and will appear in federal court at a later date.

The charges are the result of a long-running investigation, coordinated between the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office, the Somerset County Prosecutor’s Office, the New Brunswick Police Department, and the Franklin Township Police Department.

“There will be zero tolerance for violent crime and gang activity in the state of New Jersey. My office will continue to use all resources to find and prosecute those who instill fear in our citizens and undermine the safety of our communities. These criminals do not run our streets — the law does, and my office will enforce it without hesitation.”

– U.S. Attorney Alina Habba

“The apprehension of these individuals is a momentous step towards making New Jersey safer, one day at a time. By freeing these communities from those who allegedly distribute drugs, firearms, and use violence as a means of coercion, the FBI continues its mission to combat violent crime,” said Acting Special Agent in Charge Stefanie Roddy.

According to documents filed in this case and statements made in court:

Napier and Wright, each were allegedly associates of the Bounty Hunter Bloods, who operated under the umbrella of the neighborhood street gangs known as “Parkside” in Somerset and “The Ville” in New Brunswick. Some of the charged defendants are alleged to have also engaged in numerous violent acts on behalf of and for the benefit of the gang, including assaults, shootings, and murders, some of which targeted rival gang members. For example, on or about March 12, 2024, Napier and Wright, while with other gang members in New Brunswick, got into a confrontation regarding narcotics distribution with purported rival gang members and shot at them, killing Victim 1 and resulting in injury to Victim 2.

In addition to this violent act, the defendants, are alleged to have routinely distributed narcotics and trafficked firearms in and around the gang’s territory in both New Brunswick and Somerset.

This investigation is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).

U.S. Attorney Habba credited special agents of the FBI, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge (SAC) Stefanie Roddy, investigators of the Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office, under the direction of Prosecutor Yolanda Ciccone, investigators of the Somerset County Prosecutor’s Office, under the direction of Prosecutor John McDonald, the New Brunswick Police Department, under the direction of Chief Vincent Sabo and the Franklin Township Police Department, under the direction of Director of Public Safety Quovella Mayweather, for the investigation leading to the charges. U.S. Attorney Habba and SAC Roddy would also like to thank the Central New Jersey Safe Streets Task Force, Woodbridge Police Department, Raritan Township Police Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives.

The government is represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Kendall Randolph, Deputy Chief of the District of New Jersey’s Organized Crime and Gangs Unit in Newark, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Sean Nadel of the Office’s Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force Unit in Newark.

###

Defense counsel:

Carl Napier- Steve Altman

Jihad Bibb, Sr.- Michael Policastro

Alexis Tejada- Joseph R. Rubino

Jamie Archer-Monroe- Stephen Dratch

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Nashville Felon on Bond for Drug and Firearms Offenses Federally Charged with Firearm and Drug Crimes

Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

NASHVILLE – Darryl Deshaun Humphrey, 49, of Nashville, has been charged by criminal complaint with being a felon in possession of a firearm, possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and cocaine, and possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking crime, announced Acting United States Attorney Robert E. McGuire for the Middle District of Tennessee.

“Our Bond Watch program prioritizes keeping felons who are on bond for serious offenses but get caught with guns and deadly drugs like fentanyl off the streets of our community,” said Acting United States Attorney Robert E. McGuire. “Those on bond awaiting trial need to know that if they continue to violate the law we will hold them accountable for their crimes and keep our citizens safe from their dangerous and illegal activity.”

According to court documents, on June 19, 2025, Metro Nashville Police Department (MNPD) officers conducted a traffic stop, which resulted in Humphrey’s arrest. Uniformed patrol officers were conducting routine patrol and enforcement operations in the area of Whites Creek Pike and W. Trinity Lane in Nashville. The officers saw Humphrey standing outside the driver side door of a Cadillac Escalade in a gas station parking lot, ran the Escalade’s license plate tag through law enforcement databases and learned that Humphrey, the registered owner, had a suspended driver’s license. The officers saw Humphrey drive the Escalade out of the parking lot traveling north on Whites Creek Pike and initiated a traffic stop on the Escalade based on the driver’s license violation. The Escalade came to a stop, and officers saw Humphrey move from the driver’s seat to the passenger seat. Humphrey got out of the Escalade on the passenger side, walked around the Escalade, and told the officers that he was not driving. Officers advised Humphrey of the violation and why they stopped him and told him to stop walking. Humphrey ignored the officers’ commands and took a fighting stance at which time an officer utilized his department-issued taser to subdue and arrest Humphrey.

From outside of the Escalade, officers observed on the driver seat floorboard a large plastic bag that contained a white rocky substance that the officer immediately recognized to be consistent with controlled substances. Additionally, there was a firearm on the driver’s seat. A query of law enforcement databases showed Humphrey was a previously convicted felon. Officers conducted a search of the Escalade and located two large plastic bags containing a controlled substance that field tested positive for fentanyl: the first bag contained approximately 257 grams and the second contained approximately 378.9 grams. Officers recovered another second plastic bag with approximately 1.27 pounds of suspected cocaine which field tested positive, a box of empty plastic baggies, five digital scales, and approximately $18,600 in U.S. Currency. Additionally, multiple tablets and/or pills were located which were identified as various controlled substances. Officers also seized a Ruger, Caliber: 9x19mm pistol and a Caspian, Caliber: .45 ACP pistol.

Humphrey has multiple prior felony convictions in state and federal courts. His felony convictions in Davidson County Criminal Court include Possession with Intent to Distribute Marijuana, for which he received a two-year sentence, and two convictions for Possession with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substance – Cocaine .5grams or more, for which he received an eight-year sentence and a six-year sentence. Humphrey also was convicted of Possession with Intent to Distribute Cocaine in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, for which he received a 10-year sentence. At the time of his arrest, Humphrey was on bond for Possession with Intent to Distribute more than 26 grams of cocaine, Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Dangerous Felony, Possession with Intent to Distribute Marijuana, Felon in Possession of a Firearm, Evading Arrest, and Resisting Arrest, from a June 2023 arrest in Davidson County.

If convicted, Humphrey faces a maximum of 15 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine on the possession of a firearm by a convicted felon charge, up to 20 years in federal prison and a $1 million fine on the drug charge, and 5 years to life in prison and a $250,000 fine on the possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking crime charge.

This case is being investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department. Assistant U.S. Attorney Rachel M. Stephens is prosecuting the case.

This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.

A complaint is merely an allegation. The defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

# # # # #

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Nashville Felon on Bond for Drug and Firearms Offenses Federally Charged with Firearm and Drug Crimes

Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

NASHVILLE – Darryl Deshaun Humphrey, 49, of Nashville, has been charged by criminal complaint with being a felon in possession of a firearm, possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and cocaine, and possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking crime, announced Acting United States Attorney Robert E. McGuire for the Middle District of Tennessee.

“Our Bond Watch program prioritizes keeping felons who are on bond for serious offenses but get caught with guns and deadly drugs like fentanyl off the streets of our community,” said Acting United States Attorney Robert E. McGuire. “Those on bond awaiting trial need to know that if they continue to violate the law we will hold them accountable for their crimes and keep our citizens safe from their dangerous and illegal activity.”

According to court documents, on June 19, 2025, Metro Nashville Police Department (MNPD) officers conducted a traffic stop, which resulted in Humphrey’s arrest. Uniformed patrol officers were conducting routine patrol and enforcement operations in the area of Whites Creek Pike and W. Trinity Lane in Nashville. The officers saw Humphrey standing outside the driver side door of a Cadillac Escalade in a gas station parking lot, ran the Escalade’s license plate tag through law enforcement databases and learned that Humphrey, the registered owner, had a suspended driver’s license. The officers saw Humphrey drive the Escalade out of the parking lot traveling north on Whites Creek Pike and initiated a traffic stop on the Escalade based on the driver’s license violation. The Escalade came to a stop, and officers saw Humphrey move from the driver’s seat to the passenger seat. Humphrey got out of the Escalade on the passenger side, walked around the Escalade, and told the officers that he was not driving. Officers advised Humphrey of the violation and why they stopped him and told him to stop walking. Humphrey ignored the officers’ commands and took a fighting stance at which time an officer utilized his department-issued taser to subdue and arrest Humphrey.

From outside of the Escalade, officers observed on the driver seat floorboard a large plastic bag that contained a white rocky substance that the officer immediately recognized to be consistent with controlled substances. Additionally, there was a firearm on the driver’s seat. A query of law enforcement databases showed Humphrey was a previously convicted felon. Officers conducted a search of the Escalade and located two large plastic bags containing a controlled substance that field tested positive for fentanyl: the first bag contained approximately 257 grams and the second contained approximately 378.9 grams. Officers recovered another second plastic bag with approximately 1.27 pounds of suspected cocaine which field tested positive, a box of empty plastic baggies, five digital scales, and approximately $18,600 in U.S. Currency. Additionally, multiple tablets and/or pills were located which were identified as various controlled substances. Officers also seized a Ruger, Caliber: 9x19mm pistol and a Caspian, Caliber: .45 ACP pistol.

Humphrey has multiple prior felony convictions in state and federal courts. His felony convictions in Davidson County Criminal Court include Possession with Intent to Distribute Marijuana, for which he received a two-year sentence, and two convictions for Possession with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substance – Cocaine .5grams or more, for which he received an eight-year sentence and a six-year sentence. Humphrey also was convicted of Possession with Intent to Distribute Cocaine in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, for which he received a 10-year sentence. At the time of his arrest, Humphrey was on bond for Possession with Intent to Distribute more than 26 grams of cocaine, Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Dangerous Felony, Possession with Intent to Distribute Marijuana, Felon in Possession of a Firearm, Evading Arrest, and Resisting Arrest, from a June 2023 arrest in Davidson County.

If convicted, Humphrey faces a maximum of 15 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine on the possession of a firearm by a convicted felon charge, up to 20 years in federal prison and a $1 million fine on the drug charge, and 5 years to life in prison and a $250,000 fine on the possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking crime charge.

This case is being investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department. Assistant U.S. Attorney Rachel M. Stephens is prosecuting the case.

This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.

A complaint is merely an allegation. The defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

# # # # #

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: East Conemaugh Man Sentenced to 11.5 Years in Prison for Methamphetamine Trafficking and Unlawfully Possessing a Firearm

Source: US FBI

JOHNSTOWN, Pa. – A resident of East Conemaugh, Pennsylvania, was sentenced in federal court to 138 months in prison, to be followed by five years of supervised release, on his convictions of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and unlawful possession of a firearm, Acting United States Attorney Troy Rivetti announced today.

United States District Judge Stephanie L. Haines imposed the sentence on Kari Ameen Wheeler, 38.

According to information presented to the Court, on or about August 21, 2024, in the Western District of Pennsylvania, Wheeler distributed and possessed with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine. Further, on or about August 23, 2024, Wheeler possessed two firearms and ammunition after previously having been convicted of a felony. Federal law prohibits possession of a firearm or ammunition by a convicted felon.

Assistant United States Attorney Arnold P. Bernard Jr. prosecuted this case on behalf of the government.

Acting United States Attorney Rivetti commended the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Safe Streets Task Force and Cambria County Drug Task Force for the investigation leading to the successful prosecution of Wheeler.

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Serial Bank Robber Sentenced to Over 10 Years in Prison
Source: US FBI

ATLANTA – Khyri Deandre Brown, 28, of Dallas, Ga., has been sentenced for robbing a bank, attempting to rob three additional banks, and brandishing a firearm during a November 2023 crime spree.

“Brown repeatedly threatened the lives of bank employees and customers by robbing or attempting to rob banks at gunpoint,” said U.S. Attorney Theodore S. Hertzberg. “This case exemplifies how law enforcement partnerships facilitate the successful prosecutions of dangerous offenders like Brown, whose crimes spanned multiple jurisdictions. Seamless coordination by our federal and local law enforcement partners brought Brown to justice and ended his reign of terror.”

“This case highlights the FBI’s commitment to working closely with our local partners to identify and arrest violent offenders who threaten public safety,” said Paul Brown, Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta. “Brown’s armed crime spree endangered innocent lives across multiple communities. Thanks to the swift collaboration between law enforcement agencies, he was brought to justice before he could inflict real harm.”

According to U.S. Attorney Hertzberg, the charges, and other information presented in court, Brown committed the following armed robberies and attempted armed robberies.
- On November 17, 2023, Brown approached a teller window at a Wells Fargo Bank branch in Hampton, Georgia with a Pringles potato chip can in hand and demanded money. Brown then reached into his waistband as if he were retrieving a weapon. Before the employee complied with Brown’s request, Brown fled the bank without receiving any money.
- On November 18, 2023, Brown entered a Truist Bank branch in Atlanta with a Pringles can in one hand and retrieved a gun from his waistband. Brown walked up to a teller, pointed the gun at her, and demanded money. After the teller struggled to open her drawer for a few seconds, Brown fled the bank without receiving any money.
- On November 22, 2023, Brown entered a Truist Bank branch in Marietta, Georgia, approached the teller counter, stated that he was robbing the bank, and demanded money. After a few moments, Brown quickly exited the bank without receiving anything.
- On November 27, 2023, Brown entered a Fifth Third Bank branch carrying a green Pringles chip can. Brown walked up to a bank employee, lifted his shirt to display a gun tucked in his waistband, and demanded money. Brown then walked around the counter, grabbed money from the employee’s drawer, and placed the cash inside the Pringles can. He then fled the bank.
On November 29, 2023, officers from the Dallas Police Department arrested Brown after pulling over his vehicle in Paulding County, Georgia. Brown was the sole occupant of the vehicle. During the arrest, officers found, among other items, a large amount of cash in Brown’s pocket, a green Pringles chip can on the front passenger floorboard, and a gun on the rear floorboard.

On June 30, 2025, U.S. District Judge Sarah E. Geraghty sentenced Brown to ten years, five months in prison followed by three years of supervised release. Brown was convicted on March 20, 2025, after he pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted bank robbery, one count of armed bank robbery, one count of attempted armed bank robbery, and one count of brandishing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence.

This case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with valuable assistance from the Atlanta Police Department, Cobb County Police Department, Dallas Police Department, Lovejoy Police Department, and Marietta Police Department.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wylly, and former Special Assistant U.S. Attorney McClellon D. Cox, III, prosecuted the case.

For further information please contact the U.S. Attorney’s Public Affairs Office at USAGAN.PressEmails@usdoj.gov or (404) 581-6185. The Internet address for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia is http://www.justice.gov/usao-ndga.

MIL Security OSI –
July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI: Bitget Wallet Celebrates the Launch of Zero-Fee Crypto Card during EthCC

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

SAN SALVADOR, El Salvador, July 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bitget Wallet, the leading non-custodial crypto wallet, celebrated their new crypto-linked card, launched in in partnership with Mastercard and infrastructure provider Immersve, during Ethereum Community Conference (EthCC) in Cannes. The product allows users to make payments directly from their digital wallets at more than 150 million merchants that accept Mastercard worldwide.

The launch was unveiled during a joint keynote followed by an exclusive side event co-hosted by the partners. The keynote, titled “Making Crypto Spendable” featured Jamie Elkaleh, CMO of Bitget Wallet and Christian Rau, SVP of Digital Assets, Blockchain and Fintech Enablement at Mastercard, who outlined how self-custodial crypto assets can now integrate seamlessly with traditional financial infrastructure. Rau emphasized the importance of interoperability, rigorous compliance, and user protection in enabling mass adoption. Elkaleh pointed to wallets becoming full financial interfaces and stressed that real-world usability is key to unlocking the next phase of crypto growth.

Following the keynote, the companies co-hosted “PayFi Rising: Building the Rails,” a curated networking event spotlighting crypto payments innovation and showcasing the new product. The evening featured a fireside chat with Jerome Faury, CEO of Immersve, the Mastercard-licensed issuer powering the product’s backend infrastructure. Faury emphasized that the collaboration enables users to spend crypto as easily as fiat, while retaining control of their digital assets until the point of settlement.

The card, available through the Bitget Wallet app, supports real-time funding via onchain swaps and deposits. Leveraging Mastercard Digital First technology, users can apply for the card digitally and within minutes add it to their mobile wallets for use at both physical and online merchants. Transactions are settled onchain through crypto-to-fiat conversion, while adhering to Mastercard’s regulatory framework, including full KYC and AML compliance. The initial rollout covers the United Kingdom and European Union, with plans to expand to Latin America, Australia, and New Zealand in the coming months.

The launch forms part of Bitget Wallet’s broader PayFi strategy, followed by the company’s recent rebrand and renewed focus on “Crypto for Everyone” vision, which aims to turn self-custodied assets into everyday utility through integrated payment experiences. In addition to the card, Bitget Wallet enables users to pay with crypto via Scan-to-Pay using Solana Pay and national QR payment systems, as well as through the in-app Shop tab, which offers direct purchases of gift cards, mobile credits, and gaming top-ups from thousands of merchants.

Elkaleh concluded by stating that “crypto adoption hinges on giving people real choice — tools that feel familiar but offer the freedom and composability only crypto enables,” Rau added that true innovation lies in fusing trusted infrastructure with emerging asset models, noting that partnerships like this are critical to moving digital assets into the financial mainstream.

For more information, visit the Bitget Wallet blog.

About Bitget Wallet
Bitget Wallet is a non-custodial crypto wallet designed to make crypto simple, seamless and secure for everyone. With over 80 million users, it brings together a full suite of crypto services, including swaps, market insights, staking, rewards, a DApp browser, and crypto payment solutions. Supporting 130+ blockchains, 20,000+ DApps, and a million tokens, Bitget Wallet enables seamless multi-chain trading across hundreds of DEXs and cross-chain bridges. Backed by a $300+ million user protection fund, it ensures the highest level of security for users’ assets. Its vision is Crypto for Everyone — to make crypto simpler, safer, and part of everyday life for a billion people.

For more information, visit: X | Telegram | Instagram | YouTube | LinkedIn | TikTok | Discord | Facebook

For media inquiries, please contact: media@bitget.com

A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/8043d940-8453-486c-8f01-dcd6664a2d5e

The MIL Network –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Ukraine Destroys Russian Ammunition Depots — SBU

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

KYIV, July 3 (Xinhua) — The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) struck Russian military ammunition depots in the village of Velyke Orekhovo near Khartsyzsk in Donetsk region on Wednesday evening, the SBU reported on its Telegram page on Thursday.

It is specified that the operation was carried out with the help of drones. From 22:00 on Wednesday, explosions were heard at the arsenals, and then secondary detonation of shells began and a fire broke out.

The SBU added that the main goal of the strike was to weaken the rear bases of the Russian army. In Khartsyzsk, located near Donetsk, the Russian Federation has placed its command posts, logistics centers and ammunition depots. –0–

MIL OSI Russia News –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Steilacoom, Washington, Couple Sentenced to Prison Terms for Leadership of Drug Trafficking Ring Tied to Aryan Prison Gangs

Source: US FBI

Wife was former prison guard who became key participant in drug distribution and money laundering activity

Tacoma – Key members of a drug trafficking organization connected to the Aryan Family prison gang were sentenced today in U.S. District Court in Tacoma to prison terms, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller. Jesse James Bailey, 40, was sentenced to 210 months (17.5 years) in prison. His wife, Candace Bailey, 43, was sentenced to 5 years in prison. At Jesse Bailey’s sentencing hearing Chief U.S. District Judge David G. Estudillo said, “It is unimaginable how many drugs were being distributed.” Noting that Bailey grew up with drug addicted parents, the Chief Judge said, “You know the damage it creates, and you are now the one creating that for so many people.”

“Jesse Bailey and his wife Candace worked hand in hand to distribute devastating and dangerous drugs in our community,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Miller. “The Baileys were at the top of the drug conspiracy pyramid, selling multi-pound quantities of meth and fentanyl to heavily armed members of their drug ring. And they too increased the danger by stockpiling firearms, including a fully automatic M4 machine gun.”

“The Baileys oversaw a multi-state conspiracy to traffic vast amounts of dangerous drugs into Washington state, as seen by the two dozen arrests we made in 2023, and seizure of hundreds of firearms,” said W. Mike Herrington, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Seattle field office. “While even small quantities of drugs such as fentanyl can be lethal, this group was poisoning our communities by trafficking in kilogram quantities that could fill up suitcases. To all those who might consider following in the Baileys’ footsteps, the consequences imposed today send a clear message: the only thing to be gained from these crimes is time behind bars. I am grateful to our investigators and local law enforcement partners for their steadfast efforts to make our home a safer place.”

In November 2024, Jesse Bailey pleaded guilty to possession of controlled substances with intent to distribute, possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Candace Bailey pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, illegally transferring a firearm to a prohibited person, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

On Wednesday March 22, 2023, the FBI led a coordinated takedown of this criminal drug trafficking organization. They arrested two dozen

people, including the Baileys, and seized 177 firearms, over ten kilograms of methamphetamine, 11 kilos of fentanyl pills, more than a kilo of fentanyl powder, three kilos of heroin, and more than $330,000 in cash from eighteen locations in Washington and Arizona.

The Baileys are forfeiting $699,268 and dozens of expensive pieces of jewelry that agents seized as proceeds of their criminal activity as well as 42 firearms, multiple silencers, body armor, ammunition, scopes, and tripods seized from their residence and a storage unit they used to store and distribute controlled substances.

Court records describe how the couple discussed various suppliers of illegal narcotics, the drug redistributors they sold to, and the pricing of their controlled substances. As part of the conspiracy, Candace Bailey bought firearms and firearm parts, which she provided to Jesse Bailey knowing that he was he was a previously convicted felon who was prohibited from possessing firearms. Together, the Baileys attempted to launder their drug proceeds through various casinos and bank accounts.

Describing Candace Bailey’s central role in the drug ring, prosecutors wrote in their sentencing memo, “Candace Bailey stayed fully informed on her and Jesse Bailey’s joint drug trafficking business, was knowledgeable of Jesse Bailey’s violent tendencies, and was engaged in their negotiations with their partner in drug trafficking…. Candace Bailey made it clear to co-conspirators that she was an equal partner in the venture as well… She initially met Jesse Bailey while serving as a guard at the prison where he was incarcerated on charges of Assault in the First Degree for shooting at police officers during a high-speed chase.”

“The Baileys ran a drug enterprise that poisoned the community with both dangerous drugs and hate,” said David F. Reames, Special Agent in Charge, DEA Seattle Field Division. “The amount of money and the sheer volume of weapons seized in this case shows how dangerous this group was to the whole Puget Sound region, and I am proud of the work of our team to stop this hate-fueled, violent drug ring.”

“HSI stands with our law enforcement partners to ensure that those who bring violence to our communities are brought to justice,” said ICE Homeland Security Investigations Seattle Acting Special Agent in Charge Colin Jackson. “The lengthy sentence handed down today reflects this criminal organization’s propensity for violence and disregard for human life.”

This case is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) investigation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.

This investigation was led by the FBI with critical investigative teamwork from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the Washington State Department of Corrections and significant local assistance from the Tacoma Police Department, Pierce County Sheriff’s Office, and the Thurston County Narcotics Task Force, led by the Thurston County Sheriff’s Office. Throughout this investigation the following agencies assisted the primary investigators: Washington State Patrol, Customs and Border Protection Air and Marine, Lewis County Sheriff’s Office, Lakewood Police Department, and U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS).

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Zach Dillon, Max Shiner and Jehiel Baer.

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Steilacoom, Washington, Couple Sentenced to Prison Terms for Leadership of Drug Trafficking Ring Tied to Aryan Prison Gangs

Source: US FBI

Wife was former prison guard who became key participant in drug distribution and money laundering activity

Tacoma – Key members of a drug trafficking organization connected to the Aryan Family prison gang were sentenced today in U.S. District Court in Tacoma to prison terms, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller. Jesse James Bailey, 40, was sentenced to 210 months (17.5 years) in prison. His wife, Candace Bailey, 43, was sentenced to 5 years in prison. At Jesse Bailey’s sentencing hearing Chief U.S. District Judge David G. Estudillo said, “It is unimaginable how many drugs were being distributed.” Noting that Bailey grew up with drug addicted parents, the Chief Judge said, “You know the damage it creates, and you are now the one creating that for so many people.”

“Jesse Bailey and his wife Candace worked hand in hand to distribute devastating and dangerous drugs in our community,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Miller. “The Baileys were at the top of the drug conspiracy pyramid, selling multi-pound quantities of meth and fentanyl to heavily armed members of their drug ring. And they too increased the danger by stockpiling firearms, including a fully automatic M4 machine gun.”

“The Baileys oversaw a multi-state conspiracy to traffic vast amounts of dangerous drugs into Washington state, as seen by the two dozen arrests we made in 2023, and seizure of hundreds of firearms,” said W. Mike Herrington, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Seattle field office. “While even small quantities of drugs such as fentanyl can be lethal, this group was poisoning our communities by trafficking in kilogram quantities that could fill up suitcases. To all those who might consider following in the Baileys’ footsteps, the consequences imposed today send a clear message: the only thing to be gained from these crimes is time behind bars. I am grateful to our investigators and local law enforcement partners for their steadfast efforts to make our home a safer place.”

In November 2024, Jesse Bailey pleaded guilty to possession of controlled substances with intent to distribute, possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Candace Bailey pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, illegally transferring a firearm to a prohibited person, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

On Wednesday March 22, 2023, the FBI led a coordinated takedown of this criminal drug trafficking organization. They arrested two dozen

people, including the Baileys, and seized 177 firearms, over ten kilograms of methamphetamine, 11 kilos of fentanyl pills, more than a kilo of fentanyl powder, three kilos of heroin, and more than $330,000 in cash from eighteen locations in Washington and Arizona.

The Baileys are forfeiting $699,268 and dozens of expensive pieces of jewelry that agents seized as proceeds of their criminal activity as well as 42 firearms, multiple silencers, body armor, ammunition, scopes, and tripods seized from their residence and a storage unit they used to store and distribute controlled substances.

Court records describe how the couple discussed various suppliers of illegal narcotics, the drug redistributors they sold to, and the pricing of their controlled substances. As part of the conspiracy, Candace Bailey bought firearms and firearm parts, which she provided to Jesse Bailey knowing that he was he was a previously convicted felon who was prohibited from possessing firearms. Together, the Baileys attempted to launder their drug proceeds through various casinos and bank accounts.

Describing Candace Bailey’s central role in the drug ring, prosecutors wrote in their sentencing memo, “Candace Bailey stayed fully informed on her and Jesse Bailey’s joint drug trafficking business, was knowledgeable of Jesse Bailey’s violent tendencies, and was engaged in their negotiations with their partner in drug trafficking…. Candace Bailey made it clear to co-conspirators that she was an equal partner in the venture as well… She initially met Jesse Bailey while serving as a guard at the prison where he was incarcerated on charges of Assault in the First Degree for shooting at police officers during a high-speed chase.”

“The Baileys ran a drug enterprise that poisoned the community with both dangerous drugs and hate,” said David F. Reames, Special Agent in Charge, DEA Seattle Field Division. “The amount of money and the sheer volume of weapons seized in this case shows how dangerous this group was to the whole Puget Sound region, and I am proud of the work of our team to stop this hate-fueled, violent drug ring.”

“HSI stands with our law enforcement partners to ensure that those who bring violence to our communities are brought to justice,” said ICE Homeland Security Investigations Seattle Acting Special Agent in Charge Colin Jackson. “The lengthy sentence handed down today reflects this criminal organization’s propensity for violence and disregard for human life.”

This case is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) investigation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.

This investigation was led by the FBI with critical investigative teamwork from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the Washington State Department of Corrections and significant local assistance from the Tacoma Police Department, Pierce County Sheriff’s Office, and the Thurston County Narcotics Task Force, led by the Thurston County Sheriff’s Office. Throughout this investigation the following agencies assisted the primary investigators: Washington State Patrol, Customs and Border Protection Air and Marine, Lewis County Sheriff’s Office, Lakewood Police Department, and U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS).

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Zach Dillon, Max Shiner and Jehiel Baer.

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Steilacoom, Washington, Couple Sentenced to Prison Terms for Leadership of Drug Trafficking Ring Tied to Aryan Prison Gangs

Source: US FBI

Wife was former prison guard who became key participant in drug distribution and money laundering activity

Tacoma – Key members of a drug trafficking organization connected to the Aryan Family prison gang were sentenced today in U.S. District Court in Tacoma to prison terms, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller. Jesse James Bailey, 40, was sentenced to 210 months (17.5 years) in prison. His wife, Candace Bailey, 43, was sentenced to 5 years in prison. At Jesse Bailey’s sentencing hearing Chief U.S. District Judge David G. Estudillo said, “It is unimaginable how many drugs were being distributed.” Noting that Bailey grew up with drug addicted parents, the Chief Judge said, “You know the damage it creates, and you are now the one creating that for so many people.”

“Jesse Bailey and his wife Candace worked hand in hand to distribute devastating and dangerous drugs in our community,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Miller. “The Baileys were at the top of the drug conspiracy pyramid, selling multi-pound quantities of meth and fentanyl to heavily armed members of their drug ring. And they too increased the danger by stockpiling firearms, including a fully automatic M4 machine gun.”

“The Baileys oversaw a multi-state conspiracy to traffic vast amounts of dangerous drugs into Washington state, as seen by the two dozen arrests we made in 2023, and seizure of hundreds of firearms,” said W. Mike Herrington, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Seattle field office. “While even small quantities of drugs such as fentanyl can be lethal, this group was poisoning our communities by trafficking in kilogram quantities that could fill up suitcases. To all those who might consider following in the Baileys’ footsteps, the consequences imposed today send a clear message: the only thing to be gained from these crimes is time behind bars. I am grateful to our investigators and local law enforcement partners for their steadfast efforts to make our home a safer place.”

In November 2024, Jesse Bailey pleaded guilty to possession of controlled substances with intent to distribute, possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Candace Bailey pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, illegally transferring a firearm to a prohibited person, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

On Wednesday March 22, 2023, the FBI led a coordinated takedown of this criminal drug trafficking organization. They arrested two dozen

people, including the Baileys, and seized 177 firearms, over ten kilograms of methamphetamine, 11 kilos of fentanyl pills, more than a kilo of fentanyl powder, three kilos of heroin, and more than $330,000 in cash from eighteen locations in Washington and Arizona.

The Baileys are forfeiting $699,268 and dozens of expensive pieces of jewelry that agents seized as proceeds of their criminal activity as well as 42 firearms, multiple silencers, body armor, ammunition, scopes, and tripods seized from their residence and a storage unit they used to store and distribute controlled substances.

Court records describe how the couple discussed various suppliers of illegal narcotics, the drug redistributors they sold to, and the pricing of their controlled substances. As part of the conspiracy, Candace Bailey bought firearms and firearm parts, which she provided to Jesse Bailey knowing that he was he was a previously convicted felon who was prohibited from possessing firearms. Together, the Baileys attempted to launder their drug proceeds through various casinos and bank accounts.

Describing Candace Bailey’s central role in the drug ring, prosecutors wrote in their sentencing memo, “Candace Bailey stayed fully informed on her and Jesse Bailey’s joint drug trafficking business, was knowledgeable of Jesse Bailey’s violent tendencies, and was engaged in their negotiations with their partner in drug trafficking…. Candace Bailey made it clear to co-conspirators that she was an equal partner in the venture as well… She initially met Jesse Bailey while serving as a guard at the prison where he was incarcerated on charges of Assault in the First Degree for shooting at police officers during a high-speed chase.”

“The Baileys ran a drug enterprise that poisoned the community with both dangerous drugs and hate,” said David F. Reames, Special Agent in Charge, DEA Seattle Field Division. “The amount of money and the sheer volume of weapons seized in this case shows how dangerous this group was to the whole Puget Sound region, and I am proud of the work of our team to stop this hate-fueled, violent drug ring.”

“HSI stands with our law enforcement partners to ensure that those who bring violence to our communities are brought to justice,” said ICE Homeland Security Investigations Seattle Acting Special Agent in Charge Colin Jackson. “The lengthy sentence handed down today reflects this criminal organization’s propensity for violence and disregard for human life.”

This case is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) investigation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.

This investigation was led by the FBI with critical investigative teamwork from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the Washington State Department of Corrections and significant local assistance from the Tacoma Police Department, Pierce County Sheriff’s Office, and the Thurston County Narcotics Task Force, led by the Thurston County Sheriff’s Office. Throughout this investigation the following agencies assisted the primary investigators: Washington State Patrol, Customs and Border Protection Air and Marine, Lewis County Sheriff’s Office, Lakewood Police Department, and U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS).

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Zach Dillon, Max Shiner and Jehiel Baer.

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Steilacoom, Washington, Couple Sentenced to Prison Terms for Leadership of Drug Trafficking Ring Tied to Aryan Prison Gangs

Source: US FBI

Wife was former prison guard who became key participant in drug distribution and money laundering activity

Tacoma – Key members of a drug trafficking organization connected to the Aryan Family prison gang were sentenced today in U.S. District Court in Tacoma to prison terms, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller. Jesse James Bailey, 40, was sentenced to 210 months (17.5 years) in prison. His wife, Candace Bailey, 43, was sentenced to 5 years in prison. At Jesse Bailey’s sentencing hearing Chief U.S. District Judge David G. Estudillo said, “It is unimaginable how many drugs were being distributed.” Noting that Bailey grew up with drug addicted parents, the Chief Judge said, “You know the damage it creates, and you are now the one creating that for so many people.”

“Jesse Bailey and his wife Candace worked hand in hand to distribute devastating and dangerous drugs in our community,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Miller. “The Baileys were at the top of the drug conspiracy pyramid, selling multi-pound quantities of meth and fentanyl to heavily armed members of their drug ring. And they too increased the danger by stockpiling firearms, including a fully automatic M4 machine gun.”

“The Baileys oversaw a multi-state conspiracy to traffic vast amounts of dangerous drugs into Washington state, as seen by the two dozen arrests we made in 2023, and seizure of hundreds of firearms,” said W. Mike Herrington, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Seattle field office. “While even small quantities of drugs such as fentanyl can be lethal, this group was poisoning our communities by trafficking in kilogram quantities that could fill up suitcases. To all those who might consider following in the Baileys’ footsteps, the consequences imposed today send a clear message: the only thing to be gained from these crimes is time behind bars. I am grateful to our investigators and local law enforcement partners for their steadfast efforts to make our home a safer place.”

In November 2024, Jesse Bailey pleaded guilty to possession of controlled substances with intent to distribute, possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Candace Bailey pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, illegally transferring a firearm to a prohibited person, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

On Wednesday March 22, 2023, the FBI led a coordinated takedown of this criminal drug trafficking organization. They arrested two dozen

people, including the Baileys, and seized 177 firearms, over ten kilograms of methamphetamine, 11 kilos of fentanyl pills, more than a kilo of fentanyl powder, three kilos of heroin, and more than $330,000 in cash from eighteen locations in Washington and Arizona.

The Baileys are forfeiting $699,268 and dozens of expensive pieces of jewelry that agents seized as proceeds of their criminal activity as well as 42 firearms, multiple silencers, body armor, ammunition, scopes, and tripods seized from their residence and a storage unit they used to store and distribute controlled substances.

Court records describe how the couple discussed various suppliers of illegal narcotics, the drug redistributors they sold to, and the pricing of their controlled substances. As part of the conspiracy, Candace Bailey bought firearms and firearm parts, which she provided to Jesse Bailey knowing that he was he was a previously convicted felon who was prohibited from possessing firearms. Together, the Baileys attempted to launder their drug proceeds through various casinos and bank accounts.

Describing Candace Bailey’s central role in the drug ring, prosecutors wrote in their sentencing memo, “Candace Bailey stayed fully informed on her and Jesse Bailey’s joint drug trafficking business, was knowledgeable of Jesse Bailey’s violent tendencies, and was engaged in their negotiations with their partner in drug trafficking…. Candace Bailey made it clear to co-conspirators that she was an equal partner in the venture as well… She initially met Jesse Bailey while serving as a guard at the prison where he was incarcerated on charges of Assault in the First Degree for shooting at police officers during a high-speed chase.”

“The Baileys ran a drug enterprise that poisoned the community with both dangerous drugs and hate,” said David F. Reames, Special Agent in Charge, DEA Seattle Field Division. “The amount of money and the sheer volume of weapons seized in this case shows how dangerous this group was to the whole Puget Sound region, and I am proud of the work of our team to stop this hate-fueled, violent drug ring.”

“HSI stands with our law enforcement partners to ensure that those who bring violence to our communities are brought to justice,” said ICE Homeland Security Investigations Seattle Acting Special Agent in Charge Colin Jackson. “The lengthy sentence handed down today reflects this criminal organization’s propensity for violence and disregard for human life.”

This case is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) investigation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.

This investigation was led by the FBI with critical investigative teamwork from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the Washington State Department of Corrections and significant local assistance from the Tacoma Police Department, Pierce County Sheriff’s Office, and the Thurston County Narcotics Task Force, led by the Thurston County Sheriff’s Office. Throughout this investigation the following agencies assisted the primary investigators: Washington State Patrol, Customs and Border Protection Air and Marine, Lewis County Sheriff’s Office, Lakewood Police Department, and U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS).

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Zach Dillon, Max Shiner and Jehiel Baer.

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
Hamas seeks ceasefire guarantees as scores more are killed in Gaza

Source: Government of India

Source: Government of India (4)

Hamas is seeking guarantees that a new U.S. ceasefire proposal for Gaza would lead to the war’s end, a source close to the militant group said on Thursday, as medics said Israeli strikes across the territory had killed scores more people.

Israeli officials said prospects for reaching a ceasefire deal and hostage deal appeared high, nearly 21 months since the war between Israel and Hamas began.

Efforts for a Gaza truce have gathered steam after the U.S. secured a ceasefire to end a 12-day aerial conflict between Israel and Iran, but on the ground in Gaza intensified Israeli strikes continued unabated, killing at least 59 people on Thursday, according to health authorities in the territory.

On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties will work to end the war.

Hamas is seeking clear guarantees that the ceasefire will eventually lead to the war’s end, the source close to the group said. Two Israeli officials said that those details were still being worked out.

Ending the war has been the main sticking point in repeated rounds of failed negotiations.

Egyptian security sources said Egyptian and Qatari mediators were working to secure U.S. and international guarantees that talks on ending the war would continue as a way of convincing Hamas to accept the two-month truce proposal.

A separate source familiar with the matter said that Israel was expecting Hamas’ response by Friday and that if it was positive, an Israeli delegation would join indirect talks to cement the deal.

The proposal includes the staggered release of 10 living Israeli hostages and the return of the bodies of 18 more in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, sources say. Of the 50 remaining hostages in Gaza, 20 are believed to still be alive.

A senior Israeli official close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said preparations were in place to approve a ceasefire deal even as the premier heads to Washington to meet Trump on Monday.

‘READINESS TO ADVANCE’

Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, who sits on Netanyahu’s security cabinet, told news website Ynet that there was “definitely readiness to advance a deal.”

In Gaza, however, there was little sign of relief. At least 17 people were killed in an Israeli strike that hit a school in Gaza City where displaced families were sheltering, according to medics.

“Suddenly, we found the tent collapsing over us and a fire burning. We don’t know what happened,” one witness, Wafaa Al-Arqan, told Reuters. “What can we do? Is it fair that all these children burned?”

According to medics at Nasser hospital farther south, at least 20 people were killed by Israeli fire en route to an aid distribution site.

The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports and that its forces were taking precautions to mitigate harm to civilians as it battled Palestinian militants throughout Gaza.

The war began when Hamas fighters stormed into Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages back to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies.

Israel’s subsequent military assault has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza health ministry, while displacing most of the population of more than 2 million, triggering widespread hunger and leaving much of the territory in ruins.

Israel says it won’t end the war while Hamas is still armed and ruling Gaza. Hamas, severely weakened, says it won’t lay down its weapons but is willing to release all the hostages still in Gaza if Israel ends the war.

-Reuters

July 4, 2025
Hamas seeks ceasefire guarantees as scores more are killed in Gaza

Source: Government of India

Source: Government of India (4)

Hamas is seeking guarantees that a new U.S. ceasefire proposal for Gaza would lead to the war’s end, a source close to the militant group said on Thursday, as medics said Israeli strikes across the territory had killed scores more people.

Israeli officials said prospects for reaching a ceasefire deal and hostage deal appeared high, nearly 21 months since the war between Israel and Hamas began.

Efforts for a Gaza truce have gathered steam after the U.S. secured a ceasefire to end a 12-day aerial conflict between Israel and Iran, but on the ground in Gaza intensified Israeli strikes continued unabated, killing at least 59 people on Thursday, according to health authorities in the territory.

On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties will work to end the war.

Hamas is seeking clear guarantees that the ceasefire will eventually lead to the war’s end, the source close to the group said. Two Israeli officials said that those details were still being worked out.

Ending the war has been the main sticking point in repeated rounds of failed negotiations.

Egyptian security sources said Egyptian and Qatari mediators were working to secure U.S. and international guarantees that talks on ending the war would continue as a way of convincing Hamas to accept the two-month truce proposal.

A separate source familiar with the matter said that Israel was expecting Hamas’ response by Friday and that if it was positive, an Israeli delegation would join indirect talks to cement the deal.

The proposal includes the staggered release of 10 living Israeli hostages and the return of the bodies of 18 more in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, sources say. Of the 50 remaining hostages in Gaza, 20 are believed to still be alive.

A senior Israeli official close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said preparations were in place to approve a ceasefire deal even as the premier heads to Washington to meet Trump on Monday.

‘READINESS TO ADVANCE’

Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, who sits on Netanyahu’s security cabinet, told news website Ynet that there was “definitely readiness to advance a deal.”

In Gaza, however, there was little sign of relief. At least 17 people were killed in an Israeli strike that hit a school in Gaza City where displaced families were sheltering, according to medics.

“Suddenly, we found the tent collapsing over us and a fire burning. We don’t know what happened,” one witness, Wafaa Al-Arqan, told Reuters. “What can we do? Is it fair that all these children burned?”

According to medics at Nasser hospital farther south, at least 20 people were killed by Israeli fire en route to an aid distribution site.

The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports and that its forces were taking precautions to mitigate harm to civilians as it battled Palestinian militants throughout Gaza.

The war began when Hamas fighters stormed into Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages back to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies.

Israel’s subsequent military assault has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza health ministry, while displacing most of the population of more than 2 million, triggering widespread hunger and leaving much of the territory in ruins.

Israel says it won’t end the war while Hamas is still armed and ruling Gaza. Hamas, severely weakened, says it won’t lay down its weapons but is willing to release all the hostages still in Gaza if Israel ends the war.

-Reuters

July 4, 2025
Hamas seeks ceasefire guarantees as scores more are killed in Gaza

Source: Government of India

Source: Government of India (4)

Hamas is seeking guarantees that a new U.S. ceasefire proposal for Gaza would lead to the war’s end, a source close to the militant group said on Thursday, as medics said Israeli strikes across the territory had killed scores more people.

Israeli officials said prospects for reaching a ceasefire deal and hostage deal appeared high, nearly 21 months since the war between Israel and Hamas began.

Efforts for a Gaza truce have gathered steam after the U.S. secured a ceasefire to end a 12-day aerial conflict between Israel and Iran, but on the ground in Gaza intensified Israeli strikes continued unabated, killing at least 59 people on Thursday, according to health authorities in the territory.

On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties will work to end the war.

Hamas is seeking clear guarantees that the ceasefire will eventually lead to the war’s end, the source close to the group said. Two Israeli officials said that those details were still being worked out.

Ending the war has been the main sticking point in repeated rounds of failed negotiations.

Egyptian security sources said Egyptian and Qatari mediators were working to secure U.S. and international guarantees that talks on ending the war would continue as a way of convincing Hamas to accept the two-month truce proposal.

A separate source familiar with the matter said that Israel was expecting Hamas’ response by Friday and that if it was positive, an Israeli delegation would join indirect talks to cement the deal.

The proposal includes the staggered release of 10 living Israeli hostages and the return of the bodies of 18 more in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, sources say. Of the 50 remaining hostages in Gaza, 20 are believed to still be alive.

A senior Israeli official close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said preparations were in place to approve a ceasefire deal even as the premier heads to Washington to meet Trump on Monday.

‘READINESS TO ADVANCE’

Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, who sits on Netanyahu’s security cabinet, told news website Ynet that there was “definitely readiness to advance a deal.”

In Gaza, however, there was little sign of relief. At least 17 people were killed in an Israeli strike that hit a school in Gaza City where displaced families were sheltering, according to medics.

“Suddenly, we found the tent collapsing over us and a fire burning. We don’t know what happened,” one witness, Wafaa Al-Arqan, told Reuters. “What can we do? Is it fair that all these children burned?”

According to medics at Nasser hospital farther south, at least 20 people were killed by Israeli fire en route to an aid distribution site.

The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports and that its forces were taking precautions to mitigate harm to civilians as it battled Palestinian militants throughout Gaza.

The war began when Hamas fighters stormed into Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages back to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies.

Israel’s subsequent military assault has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza health ministry, while displacing most of the population of more than 2 million, triggering widespread hunger and leaving much of the territory in ruins.

Israel says it won’t end the war while Hamas is still armed and ruling Gaza. Hamas, severely weakened, says it won’t lay down its weapons but is willing to release all the hostages still in Gaza if Israel ends the war.

-Reuters

July 4, 2025
Hamas seeks ceasefire guarantees as scores more are killed in Gaza

Source: Government of India

Source: Government of India (4)

Hamas is seeking guarantees that a new U.S. ceasefire proposal for Gaza would lead to the war’s end, a source close to the militant group said on Thursday, as medics said Israeli strikes across the territory had killed scores more people.

Israeli officials said prospects for reaching a ceasefire deal and hostage deal appeared high, nearly 21 months since the war between Israel and Hamas began.

Efforts for a Gaza truce have gathered steam after the U.S. secured a ceasefire to end a 12-day aerial conflict between Israel and Iran, but on the ground in Gaza intensified Israeli strikes continued unabated, killing at least 59 people on Thursday, according to health authorities in the territory.

On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump said that Israel had accepted the conditions needed to finalise a 60-day ceasefire with Hamas, during which the parties will work to end the war.

Hamas is seeking clear guarantees that the ceasefire will eventually lead to the war’s end, the source close to the group said. Two Israeli officials said that those details were still being worked out.

Ending the war has been the main sticking point in repeated rounds of failed negotiations.

Egyptian security sources said Egyptian and Qatari mediators were working to secure U.S. and international guarantees that talks on ending the war would continue as a way of convincing Hamas to accept the two-month truce proposal.

A separate source familiar with the matter said that Israel was expecting Hamas’ response by Friday and that if it was positive, an Israeli delegation would join indirect talks to cement the deal.

The proposal includes the staggered release of 10 living Israeli hostages and the return of the bodies of 18 more in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, sources say. Of the 50 remaining hostages in Gaza, 20 are believed to still be alive.

A senior Israeli official close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said preparations were in place to approve a ceasefire deal even as the premier heads to Washington to meet Trump on Monday.

‘READINESS TO ADVANCE’

Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, who sits on Netanyahu’s security cabinet, told news website Ynet that there was “definitely readiness to advance a deal.”

In Gaza, however, there was little sign of relief. At least 17 people were killed in an Israeli strike that hit a school in Gaza City where displaced families were sheltering, according to medics.

“Suddenly, we found the tent collapsing over us and a fire burning. We don’t know what happened,” one witness, Wafaa Al-Arqan, told Reuters. “What can we do? Is it fair that all these children burned?”

According to medics at Nasser hospital farther south, at least 20 people were killed by Israeli fire en route to an aid distribution site.

The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports and that its forces were taking precautions to mitigate harm to civilians as it battled Palestinian militants throughout Gaza.

The war began when Hamas fighters stormed into Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages back to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies.

Israel’s subsequent military assault has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza health ministry, while displacing most of the population of more than 2 million, triggering widespread hunger and leaving much of the territory in ruins.

Israel says it won’t end the war while Hamas is still armed and ruling Gaza. Hamas, severely weakened, says it won’t lay down its weapons but is willing to release all the hostages still in Gaza if Israel ends the war.

-Reuters

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Convicted Felon Sentenced To More Than 12 Years For Possession With Intent To Distribute Fentanyl And Cocaine And Possession Of A Firearm

Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

Tampa, FL – U.S. District Judge William F. Jung has sentenced Yaphet Martin (38, New Port Richey) to 12 years and 7 months in federal prison for possessing with intent to distribute controlled substances and possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. Martin pleaded guilty in August 2024.

According to court documents, on July 7, 2023, officers with the Clearwater Police Department pulled over a vehicle being driven by Martin. When the officers approached the vehicle, they smelled marijuana emanating from the vehicle. Officers searched the vehicle and located a small green camouflage bag behind the center console containing what laboratory testing would later confirm to be 3 grams of fentanyl, 7.66 grams of MDMA, and 3.48 grams of cocaine. The bag also contained a digital scale, glass pipe, and $3,182 in cash. Officers also recovered a firearm loaded with four rounds of ammunition from the vehicle.

At the time, Martin had four prior felony convictions including forgery, robbery in the first degree, delivering an imitation controlled substance, and felonious possession of a firearm. He is therefore prohibited from possessing a firearm or ammunition under federal law. In addition, his prior drug and crime of violence convictions subjected him to an enhanced penalty.

This case was investigated by the Clearwater Police Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. It was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Samantha Newman. The forfeiture is being handled by Assistant United States Attorney Suzanne Nebesky.

This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Convicted Felon Sentenced To More Than 12 Years For Possession With Intent To Distribute Fentanyl And Cocaine And Possession Of A Firearm

Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

Tampa, FL – U.S. District Judge William F. Jung has sentenced Yaphet Martin (38, New Port Richey) to 12 years and 7 months in federal prison for possessing with intent to distribute controlled substances and possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. Martin pleaded guilty in August 2024.

According to court documents, on July 7, 2023, officers with the Clearwater Police Department pulled over a vehicle being driven by Martin. When the officers approached the vehicle, they smelled marijuana emanating from the vehicle. Officers searched the vehicle and located a small green camouflage bag behind the center console containing what laboratory testing would later confirm to be 3 grams of fentanyl, 7.66 grams of MDMA, and 3.48 grams of cocaine. The bag also contained a digital scale, glass pipe, and $3,182 in cash. Officers also recovered a firearm loaded with four rounds of ammunition from the vehicle.

At the time, Martin had four prior felony convictions including forgery, robbery in the first degree, delivering an imitation controlled substance, and felonious possession of a firearm. He is therefore prohibited from possessing a firearm or ammunition under federal law. In addition, his prior drug and crime of violence convictions subjected him to an enhanced penalty.

This case was investigated by the Clearwater Police Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. It was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Samantha Newman. The forfeiture is being handled by Assistant United States Attorney Suzanne Nebesky.

This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.

MIL Security OSI –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Africa: Speech by HE the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs upon acceptance Tipperary International Peace Award

Source: Government of Qatar

[embedded content]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Esteemed Members of the Tipperary Peace Convention,

Distinguished Guests,

It is with deep humility and immense gratitude that I accept the Tipperary International Peace Award, not as a personal honor, but on behalf of the State of Qatar—its people, its principles, and its leadership. It is a recognition of what Qatar represents in the world today: a steady voice for peace, a defender of dialogue, and a nation that does not waver in the face of hardship.

To stand here in Ireland—a country whose peace was earned through reconciliation and moral courage—is profoundly meaningful. Your journey affirms what we in Qatar have always believed: peace is not given, it is built.

I am reminded of the late John Hume, who said: “The basis of peace and stability, in any society, has to be the fullest respect for the human rights of all its people.”

However, today, I speak to you not about my story, but the story of the proud people of Qatar.

I am often asked, What guides Qatar’s efforts, from Gaza to Afghanistan, from Lebanon to Ukraine, Some have claimed that Qatar does this for its own gain. This cannot be further from the truth.

Our work is not transactional; it is transformational. It is not a tactic; it is a national identity shaped by culture, driven by faith, enshrined in the constitution, and inspired by leadership.

His Highness the Amir is a model of leadership rare in today’s world. He does not simply govern—he feels, putting his heart and soul in every duty, from the needs of his citizens, to regional and international peace. He sees the people of the region, and innocent people around the world, as his own, grieves for every life lost, and envisions peace as his legacy.

Words cannot express my pride in His Highness. I had the honor to serve my country under his leadership for over ten years, and will be honored to do so for as long as I am able to. It is his wisdom, passion, and determination that I personally draw from the inspiration to propel me forward.

This award comes at a moment of great significance.

Just a week ago, our country came under direct missile attack, a direct result of recklessness concerning the peace and stability of our region. But even as our air defences were falling, our diplomats were doing theirs, securing a ceasefire by dawn. Most importantly, dawn broke with no lives lost and no human cost. That realization led to the choice of restraint rather than retaliation. At that difficult moment, while we were discussing with the Emir options of what our next move will be, he decided that as long as thankfully no lives were lost in the attack, none shall be lost. The choice was restraint.
And I must be clear: Qatar chose restraint from a position of strength, not weakness, because we prioritized regional stability and the well-being of all in our region, over rhetoric and pity show of force.

And frankly speaking, we do not want to be among the countries who are in the club preaching something and doing something else. So we are trying to at least practice what we preach.

We have long warned of the dangers of regional spillover and of how the reckless behavior of Israel risked widening the conflict beyond repair. The price of ignoring those warnings is being paid not only in Gaza but across the region.

The ever-expanding conflicts in our world today have put to the test the ideals and principles that are supposed to secure international peace, the blatant violations of international law, and especially international humanitarian law that are ongoing, with very little accountability and complete impunity perpetrated by members of the United Nations are increasing every day. The erosion of trust in the international order and norms. Nowhere is it safe.

Nowhere is that tragedy more visible than in Gaza. The images from there are unbearable. The loss is unspeakable. Yet in the face of devastation, His Highness the Amir has remained unwavering in his commitment to the people of Gaza, whether it be through continuous aid, actively working towards peace, or defending their dignity in the international arena.

In the international arena, not only the people of Gaza, but we remain committed to freeing the remaining Israeli hostages despite the Israeli government’s apathy towards a peaceful outcome. A human life to us is sacred, regardless of political or any other identity.

Their suffering weighs heavily on our conscience and strengthens our resolve.

Even when provoked, even when attacked, we remain committed to peace—not as a slogan, but as a duty. Our armed forces protect our sovereignty with courage. Our diplomats build bridges in silence. And through it all, our people stand united.

As our beloved Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said:

“Shall I not tell you what is better than the rank of prayer, fasting, and charity? It is reconciling people.”

To the next generation—those watching from afar: do not believe that peace is naïve. It is harder than war. But it is worth every effort. It is stronger than cynicism and louder than violence.

On behalf of the people of Qatar, I thank the Tipperary Peace Convention for this recognition. And on their behalf, I accept it with humility and with renewed commitment—that Qatar will remain a voice of calm, a partner in peace, and a friend to all who believe that dialogue must triumph over destruction.

May we remain faithful to that cause.

Thank you.

MIL OSI Africa –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI Canada: smartEarth: Satellite data to protect our planet
Source: Government of Canada News (2)

July 3, 2025 – Longueuil, Quebec

Satellite data is increasingly being used for a wide range of applications, from helping farmers monitor crop health, to supporting wildfire managers and tracking environmental change. When combined with artificial intelligence and powerful computing, satellite data promises to unlock the potential for a multitude of new cutting-edge applications to meet today’s and tomorrow’s challenges on Earth.

The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that our country remains a world leader in acquiring and harnessing Earth observation data to grow Canadian businesses and solve important challenges on Earth. The Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Industry and Minister responsible for Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions, announced an investment of $3.9 million to support five Canadian companies to develop and test innovative solutions that use satellite data to address pressing environmental challenges.

This investment focuses on advancing projects that monitor the Arctic, improve wildfire response, and protect marine life and sensitive coastal ecosystems.
- Mitigating Arctic challenges through the use of multi-mission satellite data and artificial intelligence – C-CORE (Newfoundland and Labrador)
- Demonstrating a machine learning application for use onboard satellites to deliver wildfire detection products for wildfire managers in near real time – Mission Control (Ontario)
- Developing an eelgrass mapping system to support aquatic biodiversity – Hatfield Consultants LLP (British Columbia)
- Leveraging generative artificial intelligence to improve systems that detect and protect North Atlantic right whales – AltaML (Alberta)
- Detecting and monitoring North Atlantic right whales through satellite data to inform and strengthen protection measures – Fluvial Systems Research (British Columbia)
By supporting these projects, the Government of Canada reaffirms its commitment to fostering the long-term growth of the Canadian space sector while upholding Canada’s world-leading environmental standards; protecting more of our nature, which is at the heart of Canada’s identity; and supporting an economy that will create high-paying jobs for generations.

MIL OSI Canada News –
July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI: Brookfield Business Partners Announces Sale of Assets to Seed New Evergreen Private Equity Strategy

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

• Transaction enables Brookfield Business Partners to monetize a partial interest in three businesses at a value accretive to the trading price of its units and shares

• Provides new evergreen private equity strategy with an immediate, diversified portfolio

• The Transaction was subject to a rigorous, independent review process which included a fairness opinion provided by an independent third-party financial advisor

BROOKFIELD, NEWS, July 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Brookfield Business Partners (NYSE: BBU, BBUC; TSX: BBU.UN, BBUC), today announced that it has reached an agreement to sell a portion of its interest in three businesses (the “Transaction”) to a new evergreen private equity strategy (the “New Fund”) targeting high-net-worth investors, managed by Brookfield Asset Management.

Under the terms of the Transaction, Brookfield Business Partners will sell an approximate 12% interest in its engineered components manufacturing operation (“DexKo”), an approximate 7% interest in its dealer software and technology services operation (“CDK Global”) and an approximate 5% interest in its work access services operation (“BrandSafway”) to the New Fund.

Brookfield Business Partners will receive units of the New Fund (the “Units”) with an initial redemption value of approximately $690 million, representing an aggregate 8.6% discount to the net asset value (“NAV”) of the interests sold. In the 18-month period following the initial closing of the New Fund, expected later this year, the Units are expected to be redeemed for cash at an 8.6% discount to NAV at the time of redemption. Any remaining Units still outstanding after this 18-month period will be redeemable at NAV.

A joint independent committee comprising independent directors of Brookfield Business Partners retained an independent financial advisor and external legal counsel to assist with their review of the Transaction. The joint independent committee received a fairness opinion from their independent financial advisor, and following consultation with their advisors determined that the Transaction is fair and in the best interests of Brookfield Business Partners.

Anuj Ranjan, CEO of Brookfield Business Partners said, “The Transaction provides a strong outcome for Brookfield Business Partners’ unitholders and shareholders and provides the new evergreen private equity strategy with an immediate diversified seed portfolio prior to its launch. The realization of these partial interests, at a value that is accretive to the trading price of our units and shares, enables Brookfield Business Partners to continue to accelerate the return of capital under current and future buyback programs, reinvest in the growth of its business and reduce corporate leverage.”

The sale is expected to be completed on July 4, 2025.

Independent Review Process

The Transaction was reviewed by independent committees (the “Independent Committees”) formed by the boards of directors of the general partner of Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and of Brookfield Business Corporation (collectively, the “Boards”), which are comprised of independent directors. The Independent Committees retained Stikeman Elliott LLP as their external counsel and Origin Merchant Partners as their independent financial advisor to assist in their review of the Transaction.

The Independent Committees received an opinion from Origin Merchant Partners that, subject to various assumptions, qualifications and limitations to be set forth in its opinion letter, the consideration to be received by Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and Brookfield Business Corporation pursuant to the Transaction is fair, from a financial point of view, to Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and Brookfield Business Corporation.

After consultation with their independent financial and legal advisors, the Independent Committees unanimously determined that the Transaction is fair to and in the best interests of Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and Brookfield Business Corporation, and unanimously recommended to the Boards that Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and Brookfield Business Corporation approve the Transaction. The Boards have unanimously (excluding conflicted directors, who did not participate in deliberations) determined that the Transaction is in the best interests of Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and Brookfield Business Corporation and approved the Transaction.

As the value of the Transaction is less than 25% of the consolidated market capitalization of Brookfield Business Partners L.P., the Transaction is exempt from the formal valuation and minority shareholder approval requirements under applicable securities laws.

Brookfield Business Partners is a global business services and industrials company focused on owning and operating high-quality businesses that provide essential products and services and benefit from a strong competitive position. Investors have flexibility to invest in our company either through Brookfield Business Partners L.P. (NYSE: BBU; TSX: BBU.UN), a limited partnership or Brookfield Business Corporation (NYSE, TSX: BBUC), a corporation. For more information, please visit https://bbu.brookfield.com.

Brookfield Business Partners is the flagship listed vehicle of Brookfield Asset Management’s Private Equity Group. Brookfield Asset Management is a leading global alternative asset manager with over $1 trillion of assets under management.

For more information, please contact:

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-looking Statements and Information

Note: This news release contains “forward-looking information” within the meaning of Canadian provincial securities laws and “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of applicable Canadian and U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, include statements with respect to the CDK Global, BrandSafway and DexKo businesses, their growth and leadership prospects and the Transaction described in this news release, including the expected redemption value of the Units, the timeline for redemption and the use of the proceeds therefrom, and include words such as “expects”, “anticipates”, “plans”, “believes”, “estimates”, “seeks”, “intends”, “targets”, “projects”, “forecasts”, “views”, “potential”, “likely” or negative versions thereof and other similar expressions, or future or conditional verbs such as “may”, “will”, “should”, “would” and “could”.

Although we believe that such forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions and expectations, investors and other readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements and information because they involve assumptions, known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond our control, which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of Brookfield Business Partners, CDK Global, BrandSafway and/or DexKo to differ materially from anticipated future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements and information. These beliefs, assumptions and expectations can change as a result of many possible events or factors, not all of which are known to us or are within our control. If a change occurs, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations and our plans and strategies may vary materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements and forward-looking information herein.

Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated or implied by forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the following: the cyclical nature of our operating businesses and general economic conditions and risks relating to the economy, including unfavorable changes in interest rates, foreign exchange rates, inflation, commodity prices and volatility in the financial markets; the ability to complete and effectively integrate acquisitions into existing operations and the ability to attain expected benefits; business competition, including competition for acquisition opportunities; strategic actions including our ability to complete dispositions and achieve the anticipated benefits therefrom; global equity and capital markets and the availability of equity and debt financing and refinancing within these markets; changes to U.S. laws or policies, including changes in U.S. domestic and economic policies as well as foreign trade policies and tariffs; technological change; litigation; cybersecurity incidents; the possible impact of international conflicts, wars and related developments including terrorist acts and cyber terrorism; operational, or business risks that are specific to any of our business services operations, infrastructure services operations or industrials operations; changes in government policy and legislation; catastrophic events, such as earthquakes, hurricanes and pandemics/epidemics; changes in tax law and practice; and other risks and factors detailed from time to time in our documents filed with the securities regulators in Canada and the United States including those set forth in the “Risk Factors” section in our annual report for the year ended December 31, 2024 filed on Form 20-F.

We caution that the foregoing list of important factors that may affect future results is not exhaustive. When relying on our forward-looking statements and information, investors and others should carefully consider the foregoing factors and other uncertainties and potential events. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements or information, whether written or oral, that may be as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

The MIL Network –

July 4, 2025
MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Martyn Oliver’s speech at the Festival of Education

Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

Speech

Martyn Oliver’s speech at the Festival of Education

Sir Martyn Oliver, Ofsted’s Chief Inspector, spoke at the 2025 Festival of Education.

Optimism, inclusion and Ian Dury

Good morning, everybody. I’m delighted to be here at the festival of education; to be here in the beautiful grounds of Wellington school; here in the sunshine.

And that’s apt because I’m hoping in the time we have together this morning we can let a little sunshine in. We can talk a bit about optimism. I want us to think about why we do what we do as educators, as people who work in this field: in many cases, as people who have dedicated their working lives to improving the life chances and prospects of a younger generation.

I thought I’d open my speech this morning with a cliché. And I thought I’d try and find out who coined that cliché and how far back it goes. But there is no clarity about who first said, ‘school days are the best days of your life’. So, as we all do, I asked AI for the answer – and I know a lot of the discussions over the next couple of days are going to be dominated by the march of AI.

The AI summary told me that ‘the phrase doesn’t have a clear single origin or a specific person who first said it’. It went on: “one early reference comes from a 1910 song titled School Days by Will D. Cobb and Gus Edwards which includes the line school days, school days, dear old golden rule days. While not an exact match it captures the nostalgic view of school days as a cherished time.”

So, no answer then.

Like all cliches, this one has survived because it works – because it’s true, at least for many of us (though not all, and I’ll return to this later). It alludes to the idea of a more carefree time, of friendships built in the playground, of growing confidence, moments of satisfaction, of joy – reasons to be cheerful to quote Ian Dury. That’s why we say it.

I’m starting with that cliché because I want to strike an optimistic note this morning – which is not always a natural position for people in our profession to adopt. Things are always tough in education; there are always challenges to overcome. There are new expectations put on all of us – and it’s not lost on me that you’re waiting to read about Ofsted’s revised inspection model in September. There’s never enough money to go around. Doing ‘more with less’ is another cliché – as old as it is tiresome – but still a reality that we need to accommodate.

But even so, I still believe there are plenty of reasons to be cheerful and reasons to be optimistic. And those reasons are rooted in schools. These transformative institutions that have shaped lives for centuries and will, I hope, shape them for centuries to come.

However hard bitten and cynical we may have become over the years, most of us can look back to our school days and agree that they were, at least some of the happiest days of our lives.

Schooling shapes lives

I want to talk a little bit about what school meant for me.

I’ll do my best to do this without the aid of rose-tinted spectacles. I shan’t be skipping through the daisies of my mind as it were. There’s a lot that wasn’t great about my school days. The quality of teaching and the quality of the curriculum I was taught was not good enough – and I think that was something that an awful lot of schools in the 1970s and 80s had in common. Standards were not high, and aspiration was not always encouraged.

But, as with many of us, I had stand-out, individual teachers – people who I really connected with and who helped shape my life. People like my art teacher, Mrs Scarsbrick – she had a wonderful skill for painting and drawing landscapes. I remember that watercolour paintings of trees was her particular talent, whilst I was already increasingly focusing on portraiture, which I later went on to study.

Then Mr Senior, the English teacher who inspired me from the first lesson at the beginning of secondary school. That very first lesson in September started with a brand new, hardback book: Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men. We spent the first 10 minutes being instructed on how to loosen the binding and prevent cracking the spine. I also remember being devastated when he took a secondment to the USA when I was in Year 4/5 (Year 10/11 now): I took GCSEs in their first year of use and can recall even now that some teachers were totally lost in the new specification – so losing my trusted English tutor at this crucial time was especially difficult.

And there was Mr Ashton, the PE teacher who arranged for me to go training 3 lunchtimes a week – running the well-known, and often well-hated, cross-country course with his staff, as I was a budding cross-country runner.

Each of these experiences recall relationships. Relationships with teachers – teachers who went above and beyond, teachers who I placed trust in and who I knew had my best interests at heart. They didn’t just inspire in art, English and PE, they inspired my interest in education, in teaching itself.

And school had another function for me. It was the place I built friendships.

I was extremely ill from the age of 2 to 12 (the crucial years to get the best start in life) and whilst my school attendance was good, the powerful drug I was on had clear side effects for me which affected my concentration. The drug relied on sedation – ideal in helping me be well, but not at all good for educational purposes!

I undoubtedly would have had an EHCP had such things existed then. Instead, I had a few stand-out teachers who cared for me as an individual and I had an army of excellent friends. The benefit of living on a new housing estate meant that many families moved onto the estate at the same time and I had dozens of peers who lived on the same street, let alone the same estate, who I could rely upon to help me.

Generational shifts

A lot has changed over the years in our schools. The quality of education has most definitely changed for the better. There are lots of reasons for that – including better training and development for teachers – the greater professionalisation of the sector in general. And you would expect me to make an argument that the introduction of Ofsted 30-odd years ago had a real impact in improving consistency in education and driving improvements.

But alongside rising standards, schools have also changed to fit the needs and expectations of each generation. They’ve evolved alongside society. They have adapted to new qualifications, crafted new curriculums, embraced new subjects. Perhaps more than anything else, schools have responded to the advance of new technology.

In my school days technology in the classroom was generally limited to that moment when the teacher would wheel out the big telly to play us a video – hugely exciting at the time of course. (The debate then was Betamax or VHS, what’s the equivalent debate now? Is it perhaps, generative or predictive AI?)

But as computers made their way into schools, there was a more profound change. And that became seismic when the computers were no longer confined to the corners of classrooms and moved into our pockets. Their influence is everywhere and drives the debates and disagreements over the place of technology in learning.

Artificial intelligence

Right now, that debate is focused on artificial intelligence. It dominates the discourse in the media, and at events like this one. It’s a big topic of conversation at Ofsted and within government more widely.

We’ve recently published a piece of research commissioned by the DfE which looks at early AI adopters in education. The research found that AI is beginning to have real benefits in terms of staff workload – particularly in areas like lesson planning; and that leaders are clear that they are prioritising safe, ethical and responsible uses of AI. So no robot teachers yet!

It seems that there is always a commentator keen to tell us how AI will either transform learning or destroy it; how it presents an existential challenge to the traditional approach to education that we’ve all grown up with.

But I would mount a defence of the traditional approach. Right now, many children live much of their lives online. Socially, they are never ‘off’ and always in touch with their friends. And they increasingly receive life lessons from influencers or AI– generated summaries. I would argue that the place of learning, real learning, classroom learning – with human interactions – has never been more important.

Young people are growing up in an increasingly curated world in which their favoured influencers or corporate algorithms can have a disproportionate impression on their views and opinions. It’s more important than ever that young people are able to lift their eyes from the screen and connect with their teachers, in person.

They need broad, balanced, considered and above all challenging information to help them learn and to help them grow. Being an art teacher, it was never lost on me that drawing makes you look harder at the world around you, it greatly increases your attention. It seems to me that many technologies now do the exact opposite and actively seek to give short-term, instant gratification.

Not far short of 4 hundred years ago, John Milton wrote that he couldn’t ‘praise a cloistered and fugitive virtue, unexercised and unbreathed, that never sallies out and sees her adversary.’ He was arguing in favour of freedom of speech – ironically one of the great supposed touchstones for today’s keyboard warriors. Except, of course, they generally mean freedom of speech only for those that agree with them. In fact, in Areopagitica, Milton highlights the idea that true virtue is developed through experience and engagement with challenges, not through avoidance or seclusion.

In a way there’s something cloistered about living one’s life in a curated online environment. You may be able to find ‘the best that has been thought or said’ if you go looking for it. But who’s guiding you through it? Where’s the human connection? And of course, where’s the protection?

Community, relationships and learning

Schools have never just been places of learning. They were, and are places of safety, even refuge. Places of community and connection. Places of friendship and humanity. They are citadels of childhood: communities within communities looking after their own and helping children develop into well-rounded adults – capable of looking after others in turn.

Human relationships lie at the heart of every school’s success. And I’ve said ‘schools’ today, as they are the great universal service. But of course, those relationships begin for many in nurseries and continue on into further or higher education. Human connection is what makes education tick. And that is particularly true for more vulnerable children – those who need a little more attention paid to their wellbeing, alongside their education.

Of course, schools have statutory roles to play. Safeguarding is an absolutely fundamental part of what we look at on inspection. Its principles are described over nearly 200 pages of guidance in Keeping Children Safe in Education. Safeguarding is something that all of us involved in education prioritise perhaps above everything else – and it’s a human process, not paperwork. People working together to safeguard children. Nothing infuriates me more than glib commentary about schools falling short on inspection because of duff paperwork – or schools pulling the wool over inspectors’ eyes because their paperwork is on point.

Any of us here who have worked in schools understand that safeguarding starts with relationships. Good teachers, good head teachers know their pupils. They know which children are having a tough time in their life. They know which children are experiencing vulnerability for one reason or another. Perhaps it’s part of their life story – they are a child in care, or a child with special educational needs, or a child growing up in poverty. But really great teachers understand too that children will experience short-term difficulties – because childhood is full of challenges. Well-being issues, mental health issues, family issues, financial issues. It’s the ebb and flow of growing up for so many children and the really great schools get that.

When I was head teacher of a secondary school with 2,200 pupils, those personal relationships were clearly difficult, but I always made it my priority to support those who needed us most, no matter how busy I might be – and that always involved working with parents and carers, as well as the pupil. I also understood, from my own personal experience, that children form relationships with those they trust – their art, English or PE teacher, in my case.

Schools provide a safe, protective environment. To continue with my ‘citadels of childhood’ metaphor: they have walls, and they have watchers on those walls. But it’s within the walls where lives are changed. Where sparks of interest are fanned into flames and children can discover talents, they weren’t aware of, and passions that take them by surprise. They are taught the knowledge and skills that they need for life – but also the subjects that bring them joy.

Cynics sometimes decry the norms of education. Exams are ‘gradgrindian’ in their eyes, the 3 R’s are no longer preparing children for the ‘jobs of tomorrow’. And Ofsted are accused of being enforcers for this ‘out-of-date’, ‘joyless’ system – forcing schools to jump through these hoops.

Well let me tell you how it looks from where I’m standing. For Ofsted, teaching a full, rich range of subjects isn’t just a nice to have, it’s fundamental to a great education. Music and art and sports aren’t add-ons to the core curriculum, they are some of the most important subjects to study, in terms of developing a child’s awareness of the world around them. And in a more macro sense, feeding into the cultural evolution of our country and pushing civilization on.

It often surprises people when I say that I started out as an art teacher, in 1995. Art was my passion then and it’s still my passion now. When I have the time I love to paint. I find that it forces me to slow down and deeply observe the world around me. But I too feel that temptation to pick up my smartphone and check my emails far too often, breaking the observational trance-like state. I can only imagine how difficult and tempting this is for children.

Opening doors

Of course, learning about art means learning about perspective.

That’s a good thing in the context of mental health and well-being – such hot topics, sadly, at the moment. But if you think about the influence of art on human history – its central role in the Renaissance, or the influence of perspective on the Age of Discovery – art has been a driver of exploration, of invention and pushing back the frontiers of human knowledge.

It is also no surprise to an art historian that there is expression in breaking the established rules – that’s the essence of original creativity. So 500 years after the rules of perspective were established, the Cubists proved this point. Life evolves as we move with the times. Another favourite quote of mine is from Lampedusa’s, Il Gattopardo, “if we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change”. It’s quite a common refrain that children should be taught ‘creativity’ – but creativity relies upon a deep understanding of knowledge and facts; it comes from pushing at the limits of knowledge, and first you need to be taught where those limits are.

Every subject we teach our children opens doors for them. So, the rounded classroom experience: a broad and rich curriculum, structured carefully by expert teachers and taught within a safe and welcoming environment, is fundamental to the intellectual growth of individuals and the development of society. Matthew Arnold’s quote still holds. ‘The best that has been thought and said’ still matters. And while an AI-enabled search engine can find the raw material, I wouldn’t want to entrust the teaching to the same machine – at least not without the art and skill of the teacher as a guide and storyteller.

The classroom experience is based on human relationships and a sense of belonging. I spoke about the first priority for schools being the safety of children. Well, children feel safe when they know somebody cares. When they know that their teachers will show up and keep showing up day after day to make sure they’ve learned what they were taught yesterday and are ready to learn something new today. We can’t outsource human contact. Teachers are, and must always remain, the heart of education.

And education is an exercise of the heart as much as it is of the head. It’s about support and care, as well as instruction. They go hand in hand. Which brings me on to inclusion.

Inclusion

As you’ll all be aware Ofsted will publish the full details of our revised education inspection framework in early September. We’re taking time to analyse and consider all of the feedback we were given in the public consultation this spring. There will be some changes from the proposals we published back in February. But I don’t think I’m jumping the gun to say that inclusion will remain a central tenet – perhaps the central tenet in our new approach.

And I hope the reason for that is obvious. It’s my north star. Inclusion is both my guiding principle and the fire in my belly. That was true as a teacher, as a head of sixth form, as a head teacher, as a multi-academy trust leader. It’s true now for me as His Majesty’s Chief Inspector.

Those of you who have spent far more time than is healthy listening to or reading about the things that I’ve said since taking on the job, will have heard me talk about vulnerable and disadvantaged children. Asserting repeatedly that if schools get it right for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged among their pupils, they will get it right for all of their pupils.

I use that phrase time and time again because I happen to believe that it’s true. And I have been challenged on my assertion now and then. But I have never seen or heard of a school that looks after the interests of disadvantaged and vulnerable children perfectly well but lets down those pupils who aren’t grappling with some of life’s more obvious challenges.

That’s because those schools get it. They know their children and they understand that the secret of success lies in the relationships that bind the school community together.

A school that truly understands the needs of its pupils will do right by its most vulnerable children, by its most gifted students and by all those children in-between.

As always when we at Ofsted talk about a concept – like inclusion – it sparks debate and it energises the commentators and consultants to try and unpick what we mean.

It’s really about relationships. It’s about belonging and thriving. It doesn’t mean being soft on behaviour or attendance. It doesn’t mean taking a dim view of head teachers who find the need to suspend or exclude a child, either in the pupil’s best interests or the interests of their classmates.

When we talk about schools as places where children can feel safe, to grow, develop and express themselves we mustn’t forget how stabilising it is to understand the rules and to know they will be applied consistently and fairly. In the words of that 1910 song again: “School days – dear old golden rule days.”

No – inclusion is about making sure that all pupils feel that they belong – no matter their personal talents or aptitudes, or the barriers and obstacles they need to overcome to feel that sense of belonging.

And it is about putting disadvantaged and vulnerable children at the heart of what you do – as they will be at the heart of what we do as an inspectorate.

And just as the term ‘inclusion’ can be a little hard to pin down, it’s also not easy to define what we mean by vulnerable. I think we all instinctively have a better understanding of disadvantage. There are clearer definitions. I’m sure everybody here who works in a school will be aware of how many of their children attract pupil premium for example. I’m sure many of you could reel off names.

The concept of vulnerability is a little looser. Statutory responsibilities point us to formal designations: children with SEND, children who are looked after by the state. It’s absolutely right that we all maintain a laser-like focus on those children. But what about others who are experiencing vulnerability?

I recently met with groups of young carers. Listening to their experiences and perspectives was both interesting and humbling. They feel a bit forgotten. All too often they are not included in our headline definitions of vulnerable children. And yet they are vulnerable. They don’t have the care structures that so many of us took for granted during our own childhoods. Instead, they themselves are the care structures for the adults in their lives. That has a huge impact on the way they view themselves, the way they view their potential and the way they think about their future.

This week we published a piece of work that we commissioned from the National Children’s Bureau. We asked the NCB to consider how we might better define vulnerability in the context of our work.

Their report is entitled ‘from trait to state’ and the definition of vulnerability that it puts forward leans into the idea that children move into and out of various degrees of vulnerability throughout their childhood.

This describes vulnerability less as an immutable trait and more of a fluid state. It’s an interesting, and a logical concept, speaking to the importance of relationships that I’ve addressed in my comments today. Of course, it doesn’t detract from the responsibility that we all have to the children with SEND, those in care and children supported through pupil premium funding.

But I think this definition gives us more latitude to think about how life impacts on the well-being of children in different ways, at different times. And how we best address vulnerability within the safe and nurturing communities that we create.

I remember a particularly vulnerable cohort of SEND students who my SENDCO was desperately worried about leaving school at 16. So, she worked with their families and offered a uniquely bespoke post-16 course which gave this group the time and support that they needed to prepare for the transition to further education and employment. My wonderful SENDCO knew the children and worked to influence the entire school’s post-16 provision to meet their needs…it wasn’t a case of insisting that those children meet the needs of the school!

Aspiration and optimism

Education should be aspirational. And it should be aspirational for every child. Not everyone can ace their exams and get into Oxbridge. Not everyone will want to. Not everyone will turn a passion for music into a career as a concert pianist. But everyone can aim to learn a little more, develop a new skill and improve themselves one step at a time.

That is as true for children with SEND as it is for those without; it’s as true for the poorest children as it is for the wealthiest. That’s not to deny the existence of barriers, but rather to flag a determination to overcome them.

And if we are aspirational for all children, it stands to reason that we should be aspirational for all schools. I nodded earlier to the influence of Ofsted over the last 3 decades. I do believe that inspection helps schools look at where and how they can improve. It doesn’t make the improvement happen – that’s down to brilliant teachers and brilliant leaders working within their school community. But done right inspection can provide some pointers in the right direction.

I’ve repeatedly said that I want inspection to feel done with not done to. That’s not just a nice touchy-feely sentiment. I want inspection to mirror what goes on in the places we inspect. Education at its best is done with, not done to. The best schools – the citadels of childhood – are places of belonging, rooted in human relationships and a sense of shared endeavour. They are optimistic places.

Optimism isn’t easy. Particularly at our age…and especially if we read the papers!

But children are optimistic. It’s a natural state of mind when you’re young, with your life stretching ahead of you, enjoying the best years of your life.

It’s so much easier to be pessimistic and cynical as you get older. Because they are learned behaviours. But they should never be taught ones.

That’s on all of us.

Thank you for all you do for children and learners – and thank you for listening.

Updates to this page

Published 3 July 2025

MIL OSI United Kingdom –

July 4, 2025