NewzIntel.com

Category: Politics

  • MIL-OSI Global: ‘For You’: What to know about news on TikTok

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Anne Oeldorf-Hirsch, Associate Professor of Communication Technology, University of Connecticut

    People work inside the TikTok building in Culver City, Calif., in March 2024. AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes

    Last time you scrolled the “For You” page on TikTok, did you get a video about current events? Politics? Breaking news?

    If you’re one of the 63% of teens or 33% of adults in the U.S. who uses TikTok, you probably have. But where did it come from? Who created it? And should you believe what it told you?

    As a communication researcher who has studied news content on social media for over a decade, I can share three crucial things to know about news you get on TikTok: What videos count as news, how they got to you, and what you should do when you see them.

    These are three of what media researchers know as the “5 C’s” of news literacy: content, circulation and consumption. While they can be applied to any kind of news use, they are especially important for TikTok, where anyone can create content, and the algorithm decides what we see.

    First C: Content

    TikTok is full of user-generated content – content that is created by other users on the app rather than official news organizations – so it’s important to think about what is in your feed. This means knowing what is actually news and what is something else, like opinion or advertising.

    Any user can post their opinion, whether or not it’s backed up by any proof. TikTok has some rules about what cannot be posted, such as content that is considered inappropriate for minors or harmful content like harassment or hate speech. Still, anyone can post their own ideas about anything, including current events. This means that just because a video is on the app doesn’t make it true.

    TikTok has become a major player in advertising, with ad revenues in the U.S. alone expected to reach over US$13 billion in 2026. TikTok does its best to make videos that have been boosted with paid advertising look like any other content. You may have seen videos that seem like “real” content – uncompensated thoughts from an individual user – only to discover that they’re part of a paid brand partnership.

    However, the platform does have rules about ads and gives some clues for identifying paid posts. Look for a “sponsored” or “ad” label near the video’s caption or username. Another thing to look for is what’s called a “call-to-action” in the caption, like “tap the link to learn more!”

    TikTok doesn’t have specific rules for sharing news, and it doesn’t separate news from other categories of information, like opinion, comedy or video blogs. Journalists at reputable news outlets, on the other hand, must follow certain standards.

    For one, journalists will vet and cite their sources. That means they will share who they interviewed or what expert gave them their information, and that they’ve done research to make sure it’s a trustworthy source in the first place. They and their publication’s editors will also verify or fact-check content to make sure it’s true. So a video that shares news content should state where the information is from and link to that source.

    Second C: Circulation

    If you didn’t search for a TikTok video, it probably found you. By now, regular social media users know that TikTok has an algorithm that decides what content to show them. Algorithms are equations that learn what you like and decide how to recommend more of the same content to you.

    On TikTok, you can click on “Share” and then “Why this video” to learn more about why a video was recommended for you. Usually, it’s because you’ve watched, liked or commented on similar content, searched for related topics or followed similar accounts. Recommendations also include videos that were posted recently near you and topics that are popular where you live.

    The most important thing to remember is that each TikTok user is getting their own customized feed of content based on their behavior. Unlike in the past, when more of our news came from mainstream media – such as reading the same city newspaper or watching the same local news – now we may not know what news someone else is getting. If you see a lot of content about the same topic, that’s likely because of the algorithm customizing your feed, not necessarily because it’s the most important topic in the news.

    A little skepticism pays off.
    Philippe TURPIN/Photononstop via Getty Images

    Third C: Consumption

    You probably know about “fake news” – what researchers usually call misinformation – and that there is a lot of it online. Social media apps know it too, and have tried different ways to keep it from spreading, like using fact-checkers to flag problematic content.

    However, my team’s own research shows that these fact-checking programs may not be very successful. Some apps, like Facebook and Instagram, are even stopping fact-checking programs altogether. While TikTok doesn’t allow disinformation campaigns that are intended to deceive people, the app doesn’t prohibit people from sharing information that is simply inaccurate.

    That means, beyond the clues you already read about above, you will need to develop your own skills in judging what’s real on TikTok.

    First, think about your own opinions and biases. We all have them! Even news organizations can have biases, meaning some of them tend to report news from a certain political viewpoint.

    The more you engage with content you already agree with, the more you will get of it, and the stronger your opinions can become about it. Instead, think about what other viewpoints exist and search for content from their side. One way to do this is to seek out content from reputable news organizations across the political spectrum.

    Second, pay attention to where you get information. Is all your news coming from social media? Research shows that Americans who rely on social media as their main source of news are less knowledgeable than those who get news from almost any other news source. In a 2020 study, they couldn’t answer as many questions about current events like Donald Trump’s impeachment and the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, and were more likely to come across conspiracy theories. Pick a news website or two and sign up for their alerts instead.

    Finally, continue to evaluate the content on your “For You” page. You don’t need to stop using TikTok, but do keep looking for those clues about whether information is credible: Who is it from? Is it a journalist, a news organization? Or maybe it was a news influencer, someone who has a large following on social media for sharing current events but who is not necessarily a journalist. Do they cite and link to sources?

    If you can’t find this information, you should search about the topic online. If you don’t find any reputable news organizations reporting on it, you may want to think again about trusting it and sharing it.

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

    – ref. ‘For You’: What to know about news on TikTok – https://theconversation.com/for-you-what-to-know-about-news-on-tiktok-247975

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How to find climate data and science the Trump administration doesn’t want you to see

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Eric Nost, Associate Professor of Geography, University of Guelph

    Government scientists at NOAA collect and provide crucial public information about coastal conditions that businesses, individuals and other scientists rely on. NOAA’s National Ocean Service

    Information on the internet might seem like it’s there forever, but it’s only as permanent as people choose to make it.

    That’s apparent as the second Trump administration “floods the zone” with efforts to dismantle science agencies and the data and websites they use to communicate with the public. The targets range from public health and demographics to climate science.

    We are a research librarian and policy scholar who belong to a network called the Public Environmental Data Partners, a coalition of nonprofits, archivists and researchers who rely on federal data in our analysis, advocacy and litigation and are working to ensure that data remains available to the public.

    In just the first three weeks of Trump’s term, we saw agencies remove access to at least a dozen climate and environmental justice analysis tools. The new administration also scrubbed the phrase “climate change” from government websites, as well as terms like “resilience.”

    Here’s why and how Public Environmental Data Partners and others are making sure that the climate science the public depends on is available forever:

    Why government websites and data matter

    The internet and the availability of data are necessary for innovation, research and daily life.

    Climate scientists analyze NASA satellite observations and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration weather records to understand changes underway in the Earth system, what’s causing them and how to protect the climates that economies were built on. Other researchers use these sources alongside Census Bureau data to understand who is most affected by climate change. And every day, people around the world log onto the Environmental Protection Agency’s website to learn how to protect themselves from hazards — and to find out what the government is or isn’t doing to help.

    If the data and tools used to understand complex data are abruptly taken off the internet, the work of scientists, civil society organizations and government officials themselves can grind to a halt. The generation of scientific data and analysis by government scientists is also crucial. Many state governments run environmental protection and public health programs that depend on science and data collected by federal agencies.

    Removing information from government websites also makes it harder for the public to effectively participate in key processes of democracy, including changes to regulations. When an agency proposes to repeal a rule, for example, it is required to solicit comments from the public, who often depend on government websites to find information relevant to the rule.

    And when web resources are altered or taken offline, it breeds mistrust in both government and science. Government agencies have collected climate data, conducted complex analyses, provided funding and hosted data in a publicly accessible manner for years. People around the word understand climate change in large part because of U.S. federal data. Removing it deprives everyone of important information about their world.

    Bye-bye data?

    The first Trump administration removed discussions of climate change and climate policies widely across government websites. However, in our research with the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative over those first four years, we didn’t find evidence that datasets had been permanently deleted.

    The second Trump administration seems different, with more rapid and pervasive removal of information.

    In response, groups involved in Public Environmental Data Partners have been archiving climate datasets our community has prioritized, uploading copies to public repositories and cataloging where and how to find them if they go missing from government websites.

    Most federal agencies decreased their use of the phrase ‘climate change’ on websites during the first Trump administration, 2017-2020.
    Eric Nost, et al., 2021, CC BY

    As of Feb. 13, 2025, we hadn’t seen the destruction of climate science records. Many of these data collection programs, such as those at NOAA or EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, are required by Congress. However, the administration had limited or eliminated access to a lot of data.

    Maintaining tools for understanding climate change

    We’ve seen a targeted effort to systematically remove tools like dashboards that summarize and visualize the social dimensions of climate change. For instance, the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool mapped low-income and other marginalized communities that are expected to experience severe climate changes, such as crop losses and wildfires. The mapping tool was taken offline shortly after Trump’s first set of executive orders.

    Most of the original data behind the mapping tool, like the wildfire risk predictions, is still available, but is now harder to find and access. But because the mapping tool was developed as an open-source project, we were able to recreate it.

    Preserving websites for the future

    In some cases, entire webpages are offline. For instance, the page for the 25-year-old Climate Change Center at the Department of Transportation doesn’t exist anymore. The link just sends visitors back to the department’s homepage.

    Other pages have limited access. For instance, EPA hasn’t yet removed its climate change pages, but it has removed “climate change” from its navigation menu, making it harder to find those pages.

    During Donald Trump’s first week back in office, the Department of Transportation removed its Climate Change Center webpage.
    Internet Archive Wayback Machine

    Fortunately, our partners at the End of Term Web Archive have captured snapshots of millions of government webpages and made them accessible through the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. The group has done this after each administration since 2008.

    If you’re looking at a webpage and you think it should include a discussion of climate change, use the “changes” tool“ in the Wayback Machine to check if the language has been altered over time, or navigate to the site’s snapshots of the page before Trump’s inauguration.

    What you can do

    You can also find archived climate and environmental justice datasets and tools on the Public Environmental Data Partners website. Other groups are archiving datasets linked in the Data.gov data portal and making them findable in other locations.

    Individual researchers are also uploading datasets in searchable repositories like OSF, run by the Center for Open Science.

    If you are worried that certain data currently still available might disappear, consult this checklist from MIT Libraries. It provides steps for how you can help safeguard federal data.

    Narrowing the knowledge sphere

    What’s unclear is how far the administration will push its attempts to remove, block or hide climate data and science, and how successful it will be.

    Already, a federal district court judge has ruled that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s removal of access to public health resources that doctors rely on was harmful and arbitrary. These were put back online thanks to that ruling.

    We worry that more data and information removals will narrow public understanding of climate change, leaving people, communities and economies unprepared and at greater risk. While data archiving efforts can stem the tide of removals to some extent, there is no replacement for the government research infrastructures that produce and share climate data.

    Eric Nost is affiliated with the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative and the Public Environmental Data Partners, which have received funding for some of the work reviewed in this piece from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Sustainable Cities Fund, and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation.

    Alejandro Paz is affiliated with the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative.

    – ref. How to find climate data and science the Trump administration doesn’t want you to see – https://theconversation.com/how-to-find-climate-data-and-science-the-trump-administration-doesnt-want-you-to-see-249321

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Parents can soon use QR codes to reveal heavy metal content in baby food

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By C. Michael White, Distinguished Professor of Pharmacy Practice, University of Connecticut

    It’s impossible to eliminate heavy metals from baby food entirely, but testing can help consumers make informed decisions. Jeff Greenberg via Getty Images

    Parents across the U.S. should soon be able to determine how much lead, arsenic, cadmium and mercury are in the food they feed their babies, thanks to a California law, the first of its kind, that took effect this year.

    As of Jan. 1, 2025, every company that sells baby food products in California is required to test for these four heavy metals every month. That comes five years after a congressional report warned about the presence of dangerously high levels of lead and other heavy metals in baby food.

    Every baby food product packaged in jars, pouches, tubs and boxes sold in California must carry a QR code on its label that consumers can scan to check the most recent heavy metal readings, although many are not yet complying.

    Because companies seldom package products for a single state, parents and caregivers across the country will be able to scan these QR codes or go online to the companies’ websites and see the results.

    I am a pharmacist researcher who has studied heavy metals in mineral supplements, dietary supplements and baby food for several years. My research highlights how prevalent these toxic agents are in everyday products such as baby food. I believe the new California law offers a solid first step in giving people the ability to limit the intake of these substances.

    How do heavy metals get into foods?

    Soil naturally contains heavy metals. The earth formed as a hot molten mass. As it cooled, heavier elements settled into its center regions, called the mantle and core. Volcanic eruptions in certain areas have brought these heavy metals to the surface over time. The volcanic rock erodes to form heavy metal-laden soil, contaminating nearby water supplies.

    Another major source of soil contamination is the exhaust from fossil fuels, and in particular leaded gasoline. Some synthetic fertilizers contribute, too.

    Heavy metals in the soil can pass into foods via several routes. Plants that yield foods such as sweet potatoes and carrots, apples, cinnamon, rice and plant-based protein powder are especially good at extracting them from contaminated soil.

    Sometimes the contamination happens after harvesting. For example, local water that contains heavy metals is often used to rinse debris and bugs off natural products, such as leaves used to make a widely used supplement called kratom. When the water evaporates, the heavy metals are retained on the surface. Sometimes drying products in the open air, such as cacao beans for dark chocolate, allows dust laden with heavy metals to stick to their surface.

    Producers can reduce heavy metal contamination in food in several ways, which range from modestly to very effectively. First, they can reserve more contaminated areas for growing crops that are less prone to taking in heavy metals from the soil, such as peppers, beans, squash, melons and cucumbers, and conversely grow more susceptible crops in less-contaminated areas. They can also dry plants on uncontaminated soil and filter heavy metals out of water before washing produce.

    Producers are starting to use genetic engineering and crossbreeding to create susceptible plants that take up fewer heavy metals through their roots, but this approach is still in its early stages.

    Sweet potatoes and other root vegetables are especially susceptible to absorbing heavy metals from soil.
    skaman306 via Getty Images

    How much is too much?

    Although there is no entirely safe level of chronic heavy metal ingestion, heavy metals are all around us and are impossible to avoid entirely.

    In January 2025, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration released its first-ever guidance for manufacturers that sets limits on the amount of lead that baby food can contain. But the FDA guidance does not require companies to adhere to the limits.

    In that guidance, the FDA suggested a limit of 10 parts per billion of lead for baby foods that contain fruits, vegetables, meats or combinations of those items, with or without grains. Yogurts, custards and puddings should have the same cutoff, according to the agency. Root vegetables and dry infant cereals, meanwhile, should contain less than 20 parts per billion of lead. The FDA regulations don’t apply to some products babies frequently consume, such as formula, teething crackers and other snacks.

    The agency has not defined firm limits for the consumption of other heavy metals, but its campaign against heavy metals in baby food, called Closer to Zero, reflects that a lower dose is better.

    That campaign also laid out plans to propose limits for other heavy metals such as arsenic and mercury.

    Modestly exceeding the agency’s recommended dosage for lead or arsenic a few times a month is unlikely to have noticeable negative health effects. However, chronically ingesting too much lead or inorganic arsenic can negatively affect childhood health, including cognitive development, and can cause softening of bones.

    How California’s QR codes can help parents and other caregivers

    It’s unclear how many products consistently exceed these recommendations.

    A study by Consumer Reports in 2018
    found that 33 of 50 products had concerning levels of at least one heavy metal. In 2023, researchers repeated testing on seven of the failing products and found that heavy metal levels were now lower in three, the same in one, and slightly higher in three.

    Because these tests assess products bought and tested at one specific time, they may not reflect the average heavy metal content in the same product over the entire year. These levels can vary over time if the manufacturer sources ingredients from different parts of the country or the world at different times of the year.

    Consumers can call up heavy metal testing results with their smartphones at the grocery store.

    That’s where California’s new law can help. The law requires manufacturers to gather and divulge real-time information on heavy metal contamination monthly. By scanning a QR code on a box of Gerber Teether Snacks or a jar of Beech Nut Naturals sweet potato puree, parents and caregivers can call up test results on a smartphone and learn how much lead, arsenic, cadmium and mercury were found in those specific products manufactured recently. These test results can also be accessed by entering a product’s name or batch number on the manufacturer’s website.

    Slow rollout

    In an investigation by Consumer Reports and a child advocacy group called Unleaded Kids, only four companies out of 28 were fully in compliance with the California law as of early this year. Some noncompliant companies had developed no infrastructure, some had developed websites but no heavy metal information was logged in, and some had information but required consumers to enter batch numbers to access results, without the required QR codes on the product packaging.

    The law requires companies to provide this information for foods produced after Jan. 1, 2025, with no provisions for extensions, and the major producers agreed to comply not only for California residents but to provide the results nationwide. California enforces noncompliance by embargoing misbranded baby food products, issuing penalties, and suspending or revoking registrations and licenses.

    When companies’ testing and reporting systems are fully up and running, a quick scan at the grocery store will allow consumers to adapt their purchases to minimize infants’ exposures to heavy metals. Initially, parents and caregivers may find it overwhelming to decide between one chicken and rice product that is higher in lead but lower in arsenic than a competitor’s product, for example.

    However, they may also encounter instances where one baby food product clearly contains less of three heavy metals and only slightly more for the fourth heavy metal than a comparable product from a different manufacturer. That information can more clearly inform their choice.

    Regardless of the readings, health experts advise parents and caregivers not to eliminate all root vegetables, apples and rice but instead to feed babies a wide variety of foods.

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

    – ref. Parents can soon use QR codes to reveal heavy metal content in baby food – https://theconversation.com/parents-can-soon-use-qr-codes-to-reveal-heavy-metal-content-in-baby-food-247579

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How Americans really feel about deporting immigrants – 3 charts explain the conflicting headlines from recent polls

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Leo Gugerty, Professor Emeritus in Psychology, Clemson University

    A protest in San Diego against the Trump administration’s mass deportation plan, Jan. 31, 2025. Carlos Moreno/NurPhoto via Getty Images

    President Donald Trump’s signature promise during his campaign was to carry out the “largest deportation” operation in U.S. history, targeting all migrants “who violated the law coming into this country.”

    Since anyone living in the U.S. without legal permission has broken civil immigration law, Trump would have to deport all of the 11 million to 12 million immigrants living without legal authorization in the U.S., not just people who have committed serious crimes. Most immigrants living in the country illegally have been here longer than 10 years, so many longer-term residents would be deported.

    Trump has claimed that his election victory gives him a “powerful mandate” for such actions. But what do the American people really think about mass deportation?

    News outlets like CBS and Scripps News have been reporting since mid-2024 that a majority of Americans support Trump’s plans to deport most or all undocumented immigrants.

    These stories rely on some polls during 2024 that showed majority support for mass deportation. Meanwhile, other polls in 2024 found public support for deportation below 40%.

    I am a psychologist with expertise in survey research and the influence of political ideology on people’s beliefs about news events. And I believe the key to making sense of these conflicting polls lies in understanding the psychological principles that underlie opinion polling.

    Conflicting polls

    Extensive psychological research research demonstrates that people make better decisions about complex, high-stakes problems when they think about and compare multiple courses of action, instead of narrowing in on one option.

    When it comes to deportation, the main policy alternative offered by presidents as far back as George W. Bush has been allowing immigrants to become legal permanent residents if certain conditions are met, like passing a background check.

    Because of this, Pew Research, a prominent pollster, suggests that the best way to determine how people feel about issues like mass deportation is to give them a question that forces them to choose between deportation and something else – in this case, legalization.

    For example, one July 2024 poll using a “forced-choice” question asked people whether they’d rather see “a way for undocumented immigrants who meet certain requirements … to stay here legally” or “a national effort to deport and remove all illegal immigrants” from the U.S.

    Another type of question used by pollsters focuses people’s attention on only one choice by asking them how much they support a policy like deportation, but without mentioning alternatives. Polls that follow this approach ask people’s opinion of deportation in one question, and their opinion of legalization in another.

    This is not ideal because research shows it can lead people to exaggerate their support for the named policy.

    What the polls say

    In total, I found 14 polls conducted during the past eight years that measured Americans’ opinions on both mass deportation and legalizing status. I dropped two from my analysis because they had questions worded in biased language.

    The findings from the remaining 12 polls are representative of the diverse demographics of the U.S.

    Graph 1 present the results from the eight polls that used a single forced-choice question. I believe these polls give the best picture of how Americans as a group feel about the two immigration policies.

    These polls suggest that over the past eight years, Americans’ overall support for mass deportation has increased from around 22% to around 44%. Meanwhile, support for legalizing immigrants’ status has decreased from about 77% to 55%.

    However, all four polls conducted in 2024 find support for legalizing status to be above 54% and support for deportation below 45%.

    Graph 2 shows the results of the four polls that used separate questions to assess opinions about deportation and legalization.

    This chart clearly demonstrates the problem with asking people to rate their support for deportation and legalization in separate questions. Two polls, both taken in the past year – one by Gallup, the other by Times/Siena – found that a majority of respondents supported deportation and that the same group of respondents supported legalization in equal or even greater numbers.

    Consider the October 2024 poll where 57% of respondents supported deportation and 57% supported legalization. These percentages add up to more than 100% because many people in the group said they supported both policies. Since mass deportation and general legalization are polar opposites, people who support both policies should not be considered to strongly support either policy.

    For this reason, the separate questions technique does not yield good absolute information about the percentage of people who support either deportation or legalization. However, it does give useful relative information like which policy a group supports more and how opinions change over time.

    Keeping this in mind, the results of the 12 polls I analyzed indicate that people favored legalizing immigrants’ status over deportation. Eleven polls, including five taken since 2024, showed this pattern. Overall public support for deportation has actually increased since 2016, while support for legalization has decreased.

    However, these changes in opinion over time do not hold true for all Americans.

    Americans are polarized about immigration

    The poll results I’ve discussed so far are averages calculated based on the responses of everyone who responded to the poll. But group averages don’t tell the whole story on any issue – especially when opinions differ widely within a group, as they do with immigration. So let’s look at the results for Republicans and Democrats separately.

    Graph 3 breaks down the results by party for the eight polls that used the best practice: forced choice question.

    During Trump’s first term, from 2017 to 2020, just over half of Republicans supported legalization; just under half supported deportation. Only within the past year has Republican opinion shifted, with about 70% now supporting deportation.

    In contrast, Democrats’ opinions have remained steady for eight years, with about 90% supporting legalization and 10% favoring deportation.

    In other words, the apparent shift toward greater support for deportation shown in Graphs 1 and 2 occurred only among Republicans – not for Americans as a whole.

    A mandate to legalize

    Despite the recent uptick in Republican support for mass deportation, a clear majority of people in the U.S. would rather give undocumented immigrants a path to legal status than have them deported. This has remained true for eight years.

    Polls that seem to contradict this conclusion by showing majority support for mass deportation have used the less reliable separate-questions technique. These results are questionable because these poll respondents voiced equal or stronger support for legalizing immigrants’ status.

    If Trump has a “powerful mandate” on immigration, my research shows, it’s for getting legal authorization for immigrants who’ve lived in the U.S. a long time without it – not deporting them.

    Leo Gugerty is affiliated with the Democratic Party of Pickens County, SC, as a volunteer.

    – ref. How Americans really feel about deporting immigrants – 3 charts explain the conflicting headlines from recent polls – https://theconversation.com/how-americans-really-feel-about-deporting-immigrants-3-charts-explain-the-conflicting-headlines-from-recent-polls-248838

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Probate waiting times halved thanks to Government push

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Families, individuals, and charities will receive funds left to them in wills twice as quickly as they did last year, with probate applications now being granted in less than half the time.

    • Outstanding caseload hits lowest level since early 2023
    • Overall wait times cut to just over four weeks, as around eight out of ten of applications go digital
    • Additional staff trained as part of Government’s Plan for Change to restore public services

    The data published yesterday shows that HMCTS has slashed average wait times in December 2024 to just over four weeks. This compares to twelve weeks at the end of 2023 and over eight weeks at the end of June 2024. The improvement is a result of decisive Government action to reduce the backlog of cases which built up because of the Covid-19 pandemic.

    Around 80 per cent of grant applications are now completed online, with digital applications taking on average just over two weeks to complete – improving support for those who need it and easing the burden on people who are navigating what is often a challenging time. For those who complete the application online and submit their documents without any issues probate is granted in less than a week on average.

    Minister for Courts and Legal Services, Sarah Sackman KC MP, said: 

    We know that handling probate can be tough for families at a difficult period in their lives. That is why so we’ve worked hard to reduce delays and make the process easier. 

    By cutting wait times and going digital, we’re ensuring people receive the support they need quickly at what can be a challenging time.

    We’re getting public services back on their feet again as part of this Government’s Plan for Change.

    The change comes after action was taken to recruit extra staff who have been trained to handle applications quickly and ensure fair and efficient processing, preventing delays. 

    In 2024, the average number of monthly grants issued was 27,400, marking a 20 per cent increase compared to the previous year. As a result, the number of outstanding cases is at its lowest point since early 2023 when data was first published.  

    The probate system has achieved a remarkable turnaround, reducing its backlog by over 50,000 cases since August 2023 and ensuring faster estate settlements for families.

    Charities also benefit from a more efficient probate system because they now have quicker access to funds which have been entrusted to them – easing financial pressure on the third sector.

    Even paper applications, which historically take longer to process than the digital system, have seen significant improvements in timeliness with waiting times reducing from just over 22 weeks to under 15 weeks.

    James Stebbings, Chair of the Institute of Legacy Management, said:

    We are delighted to see that HMCTS have reduced probate application processing times to where they were 5 years ago.

    Each year the public leave charities £4bn of gifts in their wills and the relief in the charity sector that this income is flowing again is huge.

    On behalf of the charity sector and all who benefit from it we would like to say a huge thank you.

    Alex McDowell, Vice Chair of Remember A Charity and Director of Fundraising at the Duke of Edinburgh Award, said: 

    With more and more people across the UK choosing to support good causes through their Wills each year, an efficient and effective probate service is vital for sustaining charitable services and charities’ financial planning.

    It ensures charitable gifts in wills can be put to good use swiftly, in line with supporters’ wishes.

    We are hugely grateful to HMCTS for the improvements they have made and their ongoing engagement with the charity sector.

    Updates to this page

    Published 14 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI China: China, Mongolia eye synergy of development strategies

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

    HARBIN, Feb. 14 — Chinese Premier Li Qiang on Friday met with Mongolian Prime Minister Luvsannamsrai Oyun-Erdene in Harbin, capital city of northeast China’s Heilongjiang Province.

    Oyun-Erdene is here for the closing ceremony of the 9th Asian Winter Games.

    China and Mongolia are friendly neighbors connected by mountains and rivers, said Li, noting that close cooperation and joint development are in the common interests of both sides.

    China is willing to work with Mongolia to further implement the important consensus reached by the two heads of state, firmly grasp the right direction for the development of bilateral ties, consolidate political mutual trust, carry forward the traditional friendship, deepen mutually beneficial cooperation and bring more benefits to the two peoples, Li said.

    Li added that China is ready to strengthen the synergy of development strategies and policy coordination with Mongolia, maintain the positive momentum of bilateral cooperation, and boost cooperation in traditional fields such as mineral, energy, connectivity and infrastructure, as well as expand cooperation in emerging areas such as artificial intelligence and green development.

    Li called on both sides to deepen cooperation in fields such as culture, education and tourism, support youth exchanges, and consolidate public support for friendship between the two countries.

    China is ready to work with Mongolia and other Asian countries to uphold the common values of peace, unity and cooperation, closely coordinate and cooperate with each other, practice genuine multilateralism, jointly safeguard regional peace, stability and development, and better safeguard common interests, the premier noted.

    Oyun-Erdene extended his warm congratulations to China for successfully hosting the 9th Asian Winter Games, emphasizing that the event would further promote Asian values and amplify Asian voices.

    Noting that Mongolia and China are eternal neighbors, he said developing long-term, stable and friendly relations with China is Mongolia’s primary foreign policy focus.

    Oyun-Erdene said Mongolia firmly adheres to the one-China policy and looks forward to making joint efforts with China to strengthen high-level exchanges and strengthen the connection between Mongolia’s development strategy and the Belt and Road Initiative.

    Mongolia is ready to deepen practical cooperation with China in fields such as economy and trade, connectivity, energy, resources and infrastructure, and push comprehensive strategic partnership to a higher level, Oyun-Erdene added.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Could Elon Musk’s government takeover happen in the UK? A constitutional law expert’s view

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stephen Clear, Lecturer in Constitutional and Administrative Law, and Public Procurement, Bangor University

    It has been less than a month since Donald Trump retook the Oval Office. But with dozens of executive orders, every day has brought substantial change.

    While Trump claims he has a democratic mandate to cut government waste, it is the unelected Elon Musk who has been behind the most radical changes. Musk, the world’s richest man, joined the US government as head of the new Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), which Trump established by executive order.

    Trump and Doge have begun dismantling government agencies, introduced widespread recruitment freezes, and withheld billions of dollars in federal funds – including freezing foreign aid and dismantling USAid. Through Doge, Musk has also gained access to IT and payment systems in the US Treasury and other major departments.

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

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

    Their actions have not been without legal challenge. A judge issued a temporary order restricting Musk from accessing the Treasury’s files due to the risk of exposing sensitive data. In response, Trump has expanded Musk’s power further, instructing government officials to cooperate with Doge.

    It already appears that Trump is prepared to defy court orders related to these changes. The US is on the cusp of a constitutional showdown.

    A key question for the UK is whether something similar could happen here. In theory, the answer is yes – but it would be difficult for anybody to enact.

    There have been ongoing concerns, including some raised by the current government, around the size of the UK government and the budget deficit. Politicians from the Reform party are already saying that Britain needs to adopt a Musk-style approach to cut government waste.

    Compared to other systems of government, UK prime ministers have almost unparalleled power to change existing, and establish new, government departments as they see fit. So it would be well within the gift of the prime minister to establish a new department like Doge – though there could be limits to its power to change things like national spending, given the need for budgetary approval by parliament.

    There is also plenty of precedent for private citizens like Musk to work in the UK government. This could be as a special adviser: a temporary “political” civil servant who advises the government and is appointed under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010. Previous examples include Alastair Campbell (Tony Blair’s spokesman) and Dominic Cummings (Boris Johnson’s senior adviser). While cabinet ministers hire their special advisers, the prime minister approves all appointments.

    Alternatively, civilians can be brought more directly into government as ministers. Under constitutional convention, a member of the UK government is a member of either the Commons or Lords. Someone who is not an elected politician can be appointed to the Lords (and a ministerial role) by the prime minister. Rishi Sunak did this when he made David Cameron foreign secretary, as did Keir Starmer with businessman-turned-minister for prisons James Timpson.

    There have even been debates in recent years over whether this convention of government ministers needing to be members of parliament can be dispensed with, given it lacks legal enforcement. But this raises questions about how you afford parliament opportunities to scrutinise the work of such ministers, if they are not even in the Lords.



    Read more:
    Plans for ministers who aren’t in parliament raise concerns for UK democracy – constitutional expert

    Constitutional limits

    However, the kind of actions that Trump and Musk are currently undertaking could not strictly pan out the same way under the UK’s constitutional arrangements.

    While it does not have executive orders in the same way as the US, there are means for the UK government to administratively act without passing legislation through parliament.

    The government’s power can be exercised through orders in council via the monarch. These can either be via statutory orders (where the power has been granted through an act of parliament) or prerogative powers.

    The prerogative refers to powers that government ministers have, which do not require the consent of parliament. For example, to enter international treaties or wars, or the ability to call an election.

    The monarch also retains some prerogative powers – for example, to appoint or dismiss a prime minister, and to summon or prorogue (end a session of) parliament. But by convention, the monarch fulfils these functions in a ceremonial and symbolic capacity – without input in the decisions. In reality, they merely follow the advice of the prime minister on these matters.

    Importantly, prerogative powers can only be used when legislation does not exist to the contrary – and the UK government cannot arbitrarily change prerogative powers or create new ones.

    President Trump signals that there is more to come from Doge.

    One way a Musk-style takeover would struggle in the UK is if a proposed change affected primary legislation and left it redundant. It has been established since 1610 that prerogative powers cannot be used to change or make law without parliament.

    To give hypothetical examples: if the UK government tried to exercise its powers in a way which ran contrary to the International Development Act, failed to fulfil a legally promised government function, or went against human rights obligations, they would be doing so contrary to UK constitutional principles – not least parliamentary sovereignty, separation of powers, and the rule of law.

    Should this happen, the courts can intervene. This was tested in Miller 1, the legal case over whether the prime minister alone had the power to leave the EU, or whether parliamentary approval was needed. It was decided that the government could not rely on its prerogative powers to trigger Brexit without parliament’s approval, as this would change primary law.

    And, as was clear when it came to Boris Johnson’s decision to prorogue parliament, the Supreme Court will nullify government action which it deems unconstitutional.



    Read more:
    Q+A: Supreme Court rules Boris Johnson’s prorogation of UK parliament was unlawful – so what happens now?

    In this sense, it is a well-established common law principle that judges will rely on the rule of law to check what the government is doing, and would view parliament as never truly intending to pass any law which would exclude that oversight. Any attempt to legislate to block courts from having that check would be an unconstitutional violation.

    Here, the UK has the advantage of a strong independence of the courts. Since 2006, judicial appointments have been the responsibility of an independent commission. There is also a separate, independent selection process for the Supreme Court. This effectively bars the prime minister from changing the composition of the courts in the same way the US president can.

    What if parliament went rogue?

    Some may be minded that, if a reformist government had a majority in parliament and existing laws were preventing change in the UK, then it could easily change the law through an act of parliament. This was the risk of the now-defunct Rwanda plan, where the government effectively tried, through legislation, to overrule the Supreme Court and send asylum seekers to Rwanda.

    Should this have continued, it would probably have faced legal challenges at the European court of human rights. Here is where efforts to remove the UK from the European convention on human rights, or to repeal the Human Rights Act, would have become consequential.



    Read more:
    How the bill to declare Rwanda a ‘safe’ country for refugees could lead to a constitutional crisis

    Of course, even with the strongest majorities, backbench MPs do not always vote with their government, and would be less likely to do so if the leader was attempting to do something extreme, unprincipled and unconscionable.

    We would be in relatively uncharted constitutional waters if the prime minister then ignored a Supreme Court ruling. But while rarely used, there are mechanisms available to parliament in such cases to use motions of no confidence in the government to instigate change to the executive.

    Unless the law is radically changed, the machinery of parliament, with the checks and balances of the Supreme Court, would make a US-style overhaul challenging – if not, theoretically, impossible. But while it is not codified into one text, the UK does still have a constitution and the safeguards that come with it – as well as hundreds of years of convention to back it up.

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

    – ref. Could Elon Musk’s government takeover happen in the UK? A constitutional law expert’s view – https://theconversation.com/could-elon-musks-government-takeover-happen-in-the-uk-a-constitutional-law-experts-view-249544

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What does Platonic love really mean?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Armand D’Angour, Professor of Classics, University of Oxford

    If the object of your affection were to suggest that a “platonic” relationship might be of more interest to them, your heart might sink a little. The common understanding of Platonic love, so called after the ancient Greek philosopher Plato, is that it indicates a relationship of strong affection from which sex is excluded. But there’s potentially much more to the concept of Platonic love than the absence of romantic or physical passion.

    The term is derived from Plato’s writing on the topic of love in the Symposium, a work composed in the early fourth century BC. It’s set at a dinner party in Athens that supposedly took place much earlier in 416 BC, when a playwright called Agathon won first prize for his tragic drama.

    Agathon threw a party – symposium in Greek means “drinking together” – where everyone over-indulged. So the following night the partygoers, including the philosopher Socrates, decided that instead of drinking they would give speeches in praise of the god of love, Eros (whence comes the word “erotic”).

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

    In the course of the party, the comic poet Aristophanes offers a humorously extravagant story about the origins of love:

    Once upon a time human beings were duplicates of what we are today, with four arms, four legs, and two faces. These double-humans came in three types, male-male, female-female, and male-female. They were over-powerful beings who threatened the gods – so Zeus decided to split them in half. Now we’re just halves of a whole, and each half desperately seeks its matching half in a quest for completion. This is what we mean by love.

    Humour aside, Aristophanes’ tale accounts for both sexual orientation and why human beings may feel incomplete alone.

    There’s great thoughtfulness and variety in the Symposium. In addition to this comic representation of love as literally “seeking our other half”, Plato reports four speeches given by participants, followed by a presentation by Socrates, and finally an extended contribution by the flamboyant Alcibiades, who bursts in late on the gathering.

    For ancient Greeks, love was literally divine. The notion that love is a god (Eros) or goddess (Aphrodite) distinguishes many of the speeches in the Symposium. Another culturally distinctive feature is that the party consists entirely of men, who tacitly acknowledge that love is to be thought of as homoerotic.

    In ancient Athens, heterosexual relations were rarely seen to involve an intellectual dimension. Women and girls were generally not educated, so the notion of intellectual engagement as a component of a relationship was something reserved for love between men, although Plato’s propositions about love don’t exclude (as Aristophanes’ tale shows) love between the sexes or between women.

    In Plato’s day, Athens’ rival city Thebes had established a unit of warriors, the Sacred Band, consisting of 150 pairs of male lovers. The first speaker, the young aristocrat Phaedrus, argues that an army of this kind will be invincible, because men will always strive to show courage in front of the partner they love.

    He takes sexual love for granted in arguing that love “inspires lovers to act nobly in matters of life and death”. The following speaker, Pausanias, makes a distinction between true love and sex, insisting that the latter should be reserved for committed relationships.

    Other speakers offer more abstract views of love – as a force of universal harmony, or (as Agathon argues) a stimulus to artistic creativity. Socrates then offers to “tell the truth about love”, recounting how Diotima (a fiction evidently based on a real woman, Aspasia of Miletus) had taught him that love begins with physical desire but leads on to “higher” forms such as love of knowledge, beauty, and truth.

    The final speech is given by the drunken latecomer to the party, the playboy politician Alcibiades, famously beloved of Socrates. The most handsome youth of his day, he describes how he once tried in vain to seduce the older man. Socrates was not interested because – as he argued a true lover should be – he was keener on improving the young man’s soul through philosophy than being gratified by his body.

    Properly understood, then, Platonic love is not about the negation of passion but about its elevation and transformation. This means it cannot be simply narcissistic. Aristophanes’ myth of the original human beings seeking a similar matching half is challenged by Socrates’ doctrine.

    Love’s aim, we eventually learn, is not to complete us, but to inspire us to grow creatively in relation to another person. Not to guide us to love our mirror image, but to lead us to educate and be educated by another person to become the highest version of ourselves.

    This invites us to think about relationships in terms of shared aspirations. From this point of view, Platonic love means focusing on what lies beyond the relationship itself, on the ideals that connect those who truly love each other.

    In practice, one might conclude, the highest form of love is a partnership in which two people are united by a common creative quest. Such love is not passionless, but a powerful force that begins with physical desire but ends with its transcendence.

    To love Platonically is to see in another person not just what they are, but what they may be inspired to become, and to climb together toward something greater than one might attain alone.

    Seen in this light, the quest for our “matching half” proposed by Aristophanes, if only in jest, cannot be the answer. And though we may not be wholly satisfied with any of the views expressed in the dialogue, the aim of the Symposium is surely to invite us to continue the conversation.

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

    – ref. What does Platonic love really mean? – https://theconversation.com/what-does-platonic-love-really-mean-249625

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: In the struggle to get Britain working, the long shadow of austerity could be part of the problem

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Guilherme Klein Martins, Lecturer in Economics, University of Leeds

    pxl.store/Shutterstock

    Austerity is an unusual economic concept. While it is one of the economic terms that attracts the most interest from the public, it remains controversial in policy debates. Advocates argue that reducing government deficits through spending cuts and tax increases restores confidence and stabilises economies. Critics, however, warn that these policies just deepen downturns.

    My recent research, using data from 16 countries over several decades, provides new evidence supporting the second view. That is, austerity has significant and persistent negative effects on employment and the size of an economy (measured by GDP), with the damage lasting more than 15 years.

    A common defence of austerity is that while it may slow growth in the short term, it ultimately strengthens economies by reducing debt and making room for private-sector expansion. But my findings challenge this assumption.

    I analysed episodes of austerity, defined as large fiscal contractions (reduced state spending or large tax increases) across a variety of advanced economies. What I found was the negative impact on GDP remains substantial even after a decade and a half. On average, GDP is more than 5.5% lower 15 years after a large austerity shock than would have been expected if there had been no austerity, based on statistical estimates.

    Beyond GDP, austerity has a lasting impact on labour markets (the number of jobs on offer and people available to do them). My research shows that large fiscal contractions lead to a significant drop in the total number of hours worked, which is a key indicator of labour market health.

    This is a crucial finding, as policymakers often assume that labour markets will adjust quickly after an economic shock. Instead, results suggest employment levels (which is best measured by the total number of hours worked by everyone in the labour force) remain depressed for more than a decade after major austerity measures.

    One reason for this is the connection between investment and employment. When governments cut spending, firms delay investments. This, in turn, lowers productivity growth and reduces job creation.

    If businesses anticipate that the economy will remain weak for a long time, they adjust their hiring and investment strategies. This can reinforce a cycle of stagnation. My results suggest that, on average, an austerity shock generates a reduction of 4% in the total worked hours and 6% in the capital stock (the value of physical assets like buildings and machines used to produce goods and services) after 15 years.

    The effects of an austerity shock on countries’ GDP:

    UK: A case study

    Perhaps one of the most striking real-world examples of the long-term effects of austerity is the UK. Following the 2008 global financial crisis, the UK government implemented sweeping austerity measures starting in 2010. These policies were framed as necessary to reduce the budget deficit and restore investor confidence. Spending cuts affected key areas, including welfare, healthcare, education and local government services like social housing, roads and leisure facilities.

    The 2010 coalition government brought in more than £80 billion of cuts to public spending.

    But here’s a conundrum. The UK’s fiscal deficit (the difference between what it spent and what it raised in taxes) after the implementation of these policies was greater than before the austerity cuts. The deficit in 2023/2024 was 5.7% of GDP, while in 2007/2008, it was 2.9%.

    What is evident is that these measures are associated with stagnant wages, weakened public services and sluggish GDP growth. Productivity growth has remained weak, and long-term economic damage is evident in underfunded infrastructure and an increasingly fragile NHS.

    More than a decade later, real earnings have barely recovered to pre-crisis levels. The past 15 years have been the worst for income growth in generations, with working-age incomes growing by only 6% in real terms from 2007 to 2019, compared to higher growth rates in countries including the US, Germany and Ireland.



    Read more:
    How the UK’s austerity policies caused life expectancy to fall

    My findings contribute to a growing body of research challenging the longstanding view that shocks like austerity have only short-run effects. Traditionally, models assume that economies return to their long-run growth paths after temporary disruptions. But recent evidence, including my research, suggests that demand shocks can have persistent effects on supply by reducing investment and participation in the labour force.

    In the wake of the COVID pandemic, many governments responded with generous financial support, temporarily reversing the austerity-driven policies of the previous decade. The strong recovery in some economies suggests that government spending can play a crucial role in sustaining long-run growth. On the other hand, a return to austerity measures could once again lead to prolonged stagnation.

    What should policymakers take away from this? First, the assumption that austerity is a path to long-term prosperity needs to be re-evaluated. While reducing excessive public debt might be important, the economic costs of large and rapid cuts to spending can far outweigh the benefits.

    Second, policymakers should recognise that timing matters. Gradual adjustments to spending, when really necessary, should be accompanied by measures to support investment and employment in order to reduce the likelihood of causing long-term harm.

    Finally, economic policy should prioritise long-term growth over short-term deficit reduction. Governments facing tough spending choices should explore alternative approaches – things like progressive taxation and targeted public investment. And when cuts are needed, they should avoid implementing them during periods of economic recession.

    Austerity is often framed as a necessary sacrifice for future prosperity. As governments consider fiscal strategies in an era of rising debt and economic uncertainty, they should take heed of austerity’s long-run costs. The evidence suggests that a more balanced approach – one that prioritises investment and economic stability – may be the wiser path forward.

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

    – ref. In the struggle to get Britain working, the long shadow of austerity could be part of the problem – https://theconversation.com/in-the-struggle-to-get-britain-working-the-long-shadow-of-austerity-could-be-part-of-the-problem-249888

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: ASIA/INDIA – Prime Minister of Manipur resigns: Archbishop Neli wants “a clear orientation towards peace”

    Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

    Archdiocese of Imphal

    Imphal (Agenzia Fides) – “With the resignation of the Prime Minister, we find ourselves in a political stalemate and we must wait and see. The situation in which Manipur finds itself today is very complex and it is not easy to find a solution. It is necessary to continue efforts to activate a path of dialogue that involves all possible actors, at the local level, at the level of the central government, at the level of the representation of civil society and the communities in conflict”, said Archbishop Linus Neli of Imphal, capital of the Indian state of Manipur, on the situation in the north-eastern Indian state, which is in a state of polarization between the two communities of the Meitei and Kuki-zo, who started an inter-ethnic conflict in May 2023. While on the ground the provisional solution was to divide the conflicting parties into isolated and strictly separate areas, “efforts to activate dialogue with a negotiating table and mediators,” explains the Archbishop. Now the political earthquake is leading to a situation of uncertainty and stalemate: “The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which governs Manipur, will have to find another politician to appoint as Prime Minister. In the meantime, the administration is temporarily subordinate to the central government in Delhi. Now we have to wait and see, and the situation will become even more complicated,” notes Archbishop Neli. If the BJP fails to appoint a new Prime Minister due to internal disputes, the state parliament could be dissolved and new elections held. Biren Singh, a member of the BJP and Prime Minister of Manipur for two terms, resigned due to growing disagreements within his own party, mainly related to the handling of the ethnic conflict between the Meitei and Kuki communities. The political crisis in Manipur is unfolding against a backdrop of ongoing ethnic violence, which continues to displace thousands of people in precarious conditions. After months of clashes, sporadic outbreaks of violence involving armed groups in both factions continue to occur despite the massive deployment of security forces sent by the central government.The local Catholic community, which has believers in both the Meitei and Kuki communities, is calling for “a clear orientation towards peace,” said Archbishop Neli, who, along with other religious leaders, is personally involved in organizations and forums ready to participate in any initiative for dialogue and mediation. “We are in the Jubilee Holy Year and the theme is hope: our hope is that a concrete step of reconciliation can take place this year,” he concludes. “The most important thing is a common will. Let us pray and hope that the Lord will accompany us on this path of rapprochement and pacification.” (PA) (Agenzia Fides, 14/2/2025)
    Share:

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: ASIA/SYRIA – Christian Professor in the Preparatory Committee for the National Conference

    Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

    by Gianni ValenteDamascus (Agenzia Fides) – Her name is Hind Aboud Kabawat, she teaches at American universities and is the only Christian in the seven-member committee (five men and two women) tasked with preparing the announced “National Conference of Syria”, which will begin the process of drafting a new constitution and defining the new institutional structure of the Middle Eastern country.The seven members of the committee were chosen by the self-proclaimed “interim” president Ahmad al-Sharaa. Under the name Abu Muhammad Jolani, al-Sharaa led for years “Hayat Tahrir al Sham”, an Islamist group that played a leading role in the group of armed militias that joined forces to fight the Assad regime, which collapsed in December last year.By including Hind Kabawat in the committee that is supposed to help pave the political path to a constitution and elections, the current rulers in Syria want to send a signal that concretely confirms their declared open and inclusive attitude towards the local Christian communities. And a look at the professional profile of the Syrian-Canadian professor reveals details about the criteria of the geopolitical strategies of the new Syrian leadership. Hind Kabawat, a Catholic, has two children – a boy and a girl – and comes from an interdenominational Christian family: a Greek Catholic father, a Greek Orthodox mother. Her CV is full of outstanding references, which also attest to her constant commitment to initiatives and institutions supporting interreligious dialogue and strategies for mediation, pacification and the promotion of women in Syria, which has been torn apart by conflict and atrocities in recent years.Hind Kabawat studied economics at the University of Damascus and obtained a second degree in law from the Arab University of Beirut. She continued her academic training with a master’s degree in international relations from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University (near Boston, Massachusetts) and certificates in conflict resolution and negotiation strategies from the universities of Toronto and Harvard.The Syrian-born professor heads the Interfaith Peacebuilding program at the Center for World Religions, Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution (CRDC) at George Mason University (Virginia) and was deputy head of the Geneva office of the Syrian Negotiations Commission, formerly known as the High Negotiations Committee (HNC).In her role at the then HNC, Hind Kabawat had already participated in the eight rounds of Geneva peace talks on Syria in 2017. Her skills were therefore known in networks and bodies outside Syria that dealt with the situation in Syria. Hind Kabawat was also involved in the creation of the “Tastakel” center, an educational center for women dedicated to promoting non-violence and dialogue to resolve conflict situations.The spokesman for the preparatory committee for the conference on national dialogue, Hassan Dagheim, said in an interview with the official Syrian news agency “SANA” that the committee would work to ensure that all social, ethnic, cultural and religious realities in Syria are represented and that the diversity of the various Syrian provinces is respected. At the same time, with regard to the appointment of Hind Kabawat, local analysts are wondering what significance the contribution of a Christian woman has in a committee in which the radical Islamist component seems to be predominant.As in Aleppo, many local councils of professional associations (doctors, lawyers, etc.) have recently been reorganized, and the new organizational charts are predominantly made up of people linked to “Hayat Tahrir al Sham” and other influential groups in post-Assad Syria.As early as the end of August 2022, the Islamist militiamen of “Hayat Tahrir al Sham” had again allowed the celebration of a mass in a church that had been closed for ten years in the area of Idlib province under their control (see Fides, 6/9/2022). The leader of the jihadist group al-Jolani himself had “guaranteed” the celebration of the mass in the Armenian Apostolic Church “Saint Anne” near the village of Yacoubia in the northwest of Idlib. Dozens of Christians of various denominations took part in the liturgical celebration in the holy site, which previously served as a refuge for refugees. Pictures of the celebration were distributed by the Islamist militias themselves. In the previous weeks, Muhammad al-Jolani had told representatives of the Christian communities who were still in then villages of Qunaya, Yacoubia and al-Jadida, announced his intention to “protect” their liturgical celebrations and to guarantee them the gradual return of the land previously confiscated from the Christian owners. Even then, al-Jolani’s move had provoked mixed reactions. Other Salafist groups such as “Hurras al Din” had accused al-Jolani of making the province of Idlib “less Muslim”. Other analysts saw the initiative as part of a strategy by this Islamist group to make its declared “moderate turn” known internationally. Militiamen of the “Hayat Tahrir al Sham” emphasized the need to “open a new chapter” and reaffirm that Islam does not prohibit non-Muslims – including Christians – from practicing their faith freely.In 2013, al-Jolani himself was still classified as a “global terrorist” by the US State Department. In 2022, Aaron Y. Zelin wrote in an analysis of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, published at the time on the website of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, that al-Jolani was “no longer just the leader of a terrorist group or a rebel group” but should be seen as a representative of a change that also includes a change in attitude towards the United States. Zelin also reported that Hayat Tahrir al-Sham allegedly used secret channels to convey the following message to US officials: “We want to be your friends. We are not terrorists. We are only fighting against Assad. We are not a threat to you”. (GV) (Agenzia Fides, 14/2/2025)
    Share:

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: International trade mission to Ukraine deepens industry ties and boosts growth

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3

    First-of-its-kind international defence trade mission to Kyiv deepens industry ties between Ukraine and its allies

    The UK and allies have deepened industry ties with Ukraine by leading a first-of-its-kind international defence trade mission to Kyiv this week.

    Led by the Minister for the Armed Forces, the trade delegation, which included Norway and The Netherlands, met with Ukrainian ministers, officials, and industry partners to strengthen strategic partnerships and enhance defence cooperation in support of Ukraine.  

    This was the fifth trade mission to Ukraine by Britain’s Task Force HIRST, but the first in conjunction with allies, setting a blueprint for future trade missions to be international as the norm.

    Following the visit, UK companies have agreed to work more closely with Ukrainian partners, agreeing to new commitments that will build on previous agreements and boost their capabilities.

    Despite a significant Russian airstrike targeting Kyiv on Wednesday morning this week, which killed one innocent civilian, the trade mission went ahead successfully, highlighting that the UK and our Allies will not be intimidated by Putin’s brutal tactics.

    With firms across the UK ramping up defence production to meet Ukraine’s requirements, support for Ukraine will directly boost the UK defence sector, create UK jobs, and deliver on this Government’s growth agenda and Plan for Change.

    Minister for the Armed Forces, Luke Pollard MP said:

    The UK is continuing to lead the way on global support for Ukraine. By strengthening defence industry ties with allies, we are providing Ukraine with the firepower it needs on the battlefield, whilst bolstering our own defence industrial base —creating jobs and driving investment.

    Our partnerships with The Netherlands, Norway, and Ukraine will help build resilient supply chains to ensure we put Ukraine in the strongest possible position to achieve a just and lasting peace through strength.

    We will stand with our allies to support Ukraine for as long as it takes.

    The Minister, along with officials from the Ministry of Defence and Department for Business and Trade, attended meetings focused on continuing to develop the industrial relationship with Ukraine, boosting their capabilities on the battlefield, whilst supporting growth back in the UK.

    The Ministry of Defence set up Task Force HIRST to drive increases in UK, Ukrainian and allies’ industrial capacity to support the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as well as national military resilience.

    Kevin Craven, CEO of ADS said:

    Our continued industrial partnership with the Ukraine will be pivotal if we are to strengthen our collective security. It is an honour for ADS and our members to work in such close collaboration with Ukraine.

    UK support to Ukraine has, at its heart, the knowledge that helping Ukraine is protecting our values and way of life.

    The visit coincided with the NATO meeting of defence ministers, where the Defence Secretary announced a new £150 million package of military aid to Ukraine. 

    The £150 million package includes thousands of drones, dozens of battle tanks and more than 50 armoured and protective vehicles to be deployed to Ukraine by the end of spring, building on the thousands of pieces of equipment the UK has already given to Ukraine. 

    In a boost to the UK’s economy, the package also includes a multi-million-pound contract with UK defence firm Babcock, who will train Ukrainian personnel to maintain and repair crucial equipment such as Challenger 2 tanks, self-propelled artillery, and combat reconnaissance vehicles inside Ukraine. Through this agreement, equipment can be serviced and returned to the frontline quicker. 

    This is part of the UK’s unprecedented £4.5 billion pledge for Ukraine this year, its highest-ever level.

    The Government is clear that the security of the UK starts in Ukraine and is therefore committed to Ukraine’s long-term security as a foundation for the government’s Plan for Change.

    Updates to this page

    Published 14 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI: Franklin Electric Announces Execution of Definitive Agreement for the Acquisition of Barnes de Colombia

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    FORT WAYNE, Ind., Feb. 14, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Franklin Electric Co., Inc. (NASDAQ: FELE) Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA-based Franklin has signed a definitive agreement to acquire Barnes de Colombia S.A., a leading manufacturer and distributor of industrial and commercial pumps based in Cota, Cundinamarca, Colombia. This acquisition aligns with Franklin Electric’s long-term growth and diversification goals, providing significant opportunities for expansion in Latin America.

    Barnes de Colombia, also operating under the WDM brand in certain countries including the US, is headquartered near Bogotá, Colombia. It has two manufacturing facilities and over eight stocking locations in Colombia, as well as assembly facilities in Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina, and local warehouses in Guatemala, Panama, Ecuador, Peru, and Chile.

    The acquisition enhances Franklin Electric’s product portfolio and market presence in key Latin American regions. Barnes de Colombia’s strong market position in Colombia and established operations in Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, and other Latin American countries is expected to help accelerate Franklin´s growth in the region. This acquisition supports Franklin Electric’s strategic goals of diversifying its product line and enhancing supply chain resilience while leveraging Barnes de Colombia’s robust distribution network and customer relationships.

    “We are thrilled to welcome Barnes de Colombia to the Franklin Electric family,” said Joe Ruzynski, CEO of Franklin Electric. “This acquisition not only strengthens our presence in the high-growth Latin American markets but also enhances our ability to serve our customers with an expanded portfolio of innovative and high-quality products. Barnes’ approximately 400 team members and manufacturing and foundry capabilities will enhance our operating footprint materially and we are excited for these new team members and operations to contribute meaningfully to our growth and success. Together, we will continue to rely on our Key Factors for Success – quality, availability, service, innovation and cost – to deliver outstanding value to our customers.”

    The acquisition is subject to customary closing conditions, including Colombian antitrust clearance. Franklin Electric expects the acquisition to close on or about March 1, 2025.

    Seale & Associates provided investment banking services to Barnes de Colombia and its owners in connection with the acquisition. Garrigues (Colombia and Mexico) provided legal counsel to Franklin Electric, and Brigard Urrutia provided legal counsel to Barnes de Colombia.

    About Franklin Electric
    Franklin Electric is a global leader in the production and marketing of systems and components for the movement of water and energy. Recognized as a technical leader in its products and services, Franklin Electric serves customers worldwide in residential, commercial, agricultural, industrial, municipal, and fueling applications. Franklin Electric is proud to be recognized in Newsweek’s lists of America’s Most Responsible Companies 2024, Most Trustworthy Companies 2024, and Greenest Companies 2025; Best Places to Work in Indiana 2024; and America’s Climate Leaders 2024 by USA Today.

    “Safe Harbor” Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any forward-looking statements contained herein, including those relating to market conditions or the Company’s financial results, costs, expenses or expense reductions, profit margins, inventory levels, foreign currency translation rates, liquidity expectations, business goals and sales growth, involve risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to, risks and uncertainties with respect to general economic and currency conditions, various conditions specific to the Company’s business and industry, weather conditions, new housing starts, market demand, competitive factors, changes in distribution channels, supply constraints, effect of price increases, raw material costs, technology factors, integration of acquisitions, litigation, government and regulatory actions, the Company’s accounting policies, future trends, epidemics and pandemics, and other risks which are detailed in the Company’s Securities and Exchange Commission filings, included in Item 1A of Part I of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2023, Exhibit 99.1 attached thereto and in Item 1A of Part II of the Company’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. These risks and uncertainties may cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by the forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements made herein are based on information currently available, and the Company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

    Contact:        
    Jeff Taylor        
    Franklin Electric Co., Inc.
    260.824.2900

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Magical Thinking in Whitehall and Brussels

    Source: Traditional Unionist Voice – Northern Ireland

    The following article by TUV leader and North Antrim MP Jim Allister recently appeared in the News Letter.

    Magical Thinking in Whitehall and Brussels

    Newsletter readers may well recall my article of 14thJanuary in which I explained why I would force a vote on the Official Control Amendment Regulations later that day. A debate in the House of Lords on 29thJanuary has since shed further light on the innovative aspect of these regulations, which should be understood by all unionists as we approach 24 February when the Government will begin to apply new aspects of the Irish Sea Border on goods moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain.

    On the one hand, in accommodating the GB side of the Irish Sea border, these regulations are implicated in giving effect to all the border difficulties with which we are increasingly familiar, the disenfranchisement of 1.9 million UK citizens, not just in relation to one law, or 300 laws, but 300 areas of law, and all the attendant economic disruption and disinheritance that arises from the EU disrespecting the territorial integrity of the UK.

    On the other hand, however, the regulations present a new difficulty for the Government. The justification for the construction of the Irish Sea Border was the need to avoid having Border Control Posts on the UK-ROI land border. Its champions claimed that this was required by the Belfast Agreement notwithstanding the fact that the text of the Agreement says no such thing, and notwithstanding the fact that insisting on their alternative Irish Sea border solution has made them the instigators of the biggest reversal of democracy in the history of the western world, violating three central provisions of the Belfast Agreement. The Regulations, however, make provision for the border to be moved to the Irish Sea, while dispensing with infrastructure on the border by means of allowing checks to take place away from Border Control Posts and making provision for inland Border Control Posts located away from the border, (see regulations 14, 7, 11, 16 and 17).

    In doing so, they remove the justification for moving the customs and phytosanitary (SPS) border from the international border. Speaking in the Lords on 29 January, Baroness Hayman confirmed: 

    ‘The instrument (the Regulations) also provides the power to allow for inland border control posts …’

    She further stated, in an attempt to placate concerns about this move: 

    ‘…this instrument only provides provision to be made for documentary, identity and physical controls to be undertaken at places other than border control posts or control points, and that we have robust, evidence-based risk modelling that can place SPS into categories based on the inherent risk that the product poses to animal, food, biosecurity and public health.’

    The use of the word ‘only’ in this instance is interesting because the checks that take place at border control posts are documentary, identity and physical checks!

    The political implications of, first, moving the border to the Irish Sea, supposedly on the basis that we could not have a hard border across the island of Ireland, only to then make provision for that border without infrastructure, were then spelt out very clearly by Baroness Hoey and Lord Morrow but the minister did not respond.

    Had the Minister attempted to defend this arrangement she might have said that while the UK is content to have a border with no hard infrastructure for goods moving from the Republic and wider EU into the UK, the EU is not prepared to have such a border with respect to goods moving the from Northern Ireland into the Republic. Now that the new regulations are in place, though, demonstrating the option of a better way, this is an increasingly weak defence.

    Going forward the Government has to explain why, knowing: i) that such a solution is workable, and ii) that the proportion of goods entering the Republic from Northern Ireland in 2020 was tiny (only worth 0.003% of EU GDP in 2020), they agree with a border ‘solution’ that is giving the EU the right to both make Northern Ireland an EU colony in 300 areas of laws and then imposing a hard border interrupting a far greater flow of goods from one part of the UK, GB, to another, NI. This is not only absurdly disproportionate but also deeply dishonourable, sacrificing key aspects of the citizenship of its own people and disrespecting the territorial integrity of the UK.

    In this the EU also faces real difficulties. Given its stated commitment to democracy in both its accession criteria, requiring that candidate countries demonstrate the ‘stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities’, and in its aid policy, why is the EU needlessly threatening the stability of our democratic institutions? Its intervention is both instigating the most pompous act of colonial disenfranchisement since democracy became a norm of western society and the removal of cross community consent, the most important political protection for minorities – in certain critical contexts.

    Quite apart from demonstrating that far from representing ‘magical thinking’, running a border, while removing hard infrastructure from that border, constitutes government policy, the Official Controls Amendment Regulations remind us that the first such solution was advanced to give effect to Brexit by the EU itself. Mutual Enforcement was developed by Sir Jonathan Faull who served as EU Commission ‘Director General of the Task Force for Strategic Issues related to the UK Referendum’, together with Prof JH Weiler and Prof Daniel Sarmiento. Providing a means of delivering Brexit that protects the integrity of both the UK and the EU Single Markets without a hard border, Mutual Enforcement presents the solution proposed by my EU Withdrawal Bill currently before Parliament.

    Instead of pressing ahead with the further needless division of our country into two with the arrival of the red lane parcels border on 31st March, the Government should adopt my Bill.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI: 180 Degree Capital Corp. Issues Q4 2024 Shareholder Letter

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Montclair, NJ, Feb. 14, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — 180 Degree Capital Corp. (NASDAQ:TURN) today issued the following Q4 2024 Shareholder Letter:

    Fellow Shareholders,

    We are incredibly proud of our recent announcement of the signing of a definitive agreement for 180 Degree Capital Corp. (“180 Degree Capital”) to enter into a business combination (the “Business Combination”) with Mount Logan Capital Inc. (“Mount Logan”). For those of you who have not had a chance to listen to our joint call with the team from Mount Logan or review the presentation deck that summarizes the proposed transaction, both can be found at https://ir.180degreecapital.com/ir-calendar/detail/2908/180-degree-capital-and-mount-logan-capital-proposed-merger. We expect to file a registration statement and joint proxy statement/prospectus with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) soon. This document will give us the opportunity to speak with our shareholders more extensively about the proposed Business Combination and the process that led to our Board’s unanimous approval of this strategically important transaction.

    This proposed transaction is not the end of 180 Degree Capital. We believe it is the logical next step in our evolution. It is also an opportunity that is not afforded commonly to closed-end funds, particularly since we believe most have limited differentiation. We believe there are clear reasons why 180 Degree Capital has this truly unique opportunity to combine with an asset manager and to transition to an operating company. We will get to those below, but first, I want to touch on why we believe Mount Logan is a proverbial “diamond in the rough.”

    Mount Logan has the following attributes that we believe will provide value to 180 Degree Capital shareholders:

    • Mount Logan has what we believe to be an outstanding management team comprised of its CEO, Ted Goldthorpe, its Co-Presidents, Matthias Ederer and Henry Wang, and its CFO, Nikita Klassen;
    • Mount Logan’s asset management platform has approximately $2.4+ billion of assets under management (as of September 30, 2024) that we believe generates predictable fee revenue that can be used to benefit the growth of the combined company and its shareholders;
    • Mount Logan has operational leverage and unique investment access through its association with BC Partners, a leading global private equity and credit firm;
    • Mount Logan is focused on what we believe is the fast-growing market of private credit;
    • We believe that Mount Logan remains undiscovered by the majority of investors due to it being listed on the Cboe Canada exchange rather than a US national exchange; and
    • We believe Mount Logan is significantly undervalued by public market investors.

    For 35 years, I have been a value investor attempting to uncover great companies that I believe are trading below their intrinsic value. As we spent more time with Ted and his colleagues over the past six months, it became abundantly clear to us that 1) we believe Mount Logan is one of these great undiscovered and undervalued companies and 2) the combination of our two companies has the potential to unlock substantial value for 180 Degree Capital shareholders by:

    1. Shifting the valuation of our business from one based on net asset value to a valuation based on operating metrics with a foundation of what we believe will be more predictable fee-related revenues attributed to earnings from the management of permanent and semi-permanent capital vehicles. Other similar businesses commonly trade based on multiples of operating metrics rather than discounts to net asset value.
    2. Changing to an asset-light operating company that leverages an association with BC Partners enables economies of scale that are not possible at 180 Degree Capital’s current size; and
    3. Substantially increasing the available capital for us to be able to leverage our relationships with small and microcapitalization public companies, to develop capital structure solutions that seek to unlock value and generate favorable risk-adjusted returns.

    I, as the largest individual shareholder of 180 Degree Capital, and Daniel as a top-ten shareholder, could not be more excited about the future of the combined entity. We believe the proposed Business Combination to be the best opportunity to build value for all shareholders of 180 Degree Capital. We believe strongly in 180 Degree Capital’s future under the leadership of Ted and his colleagues. I have been an investor in the public markets for 35 years, during which investors entrusted me with billions of dollars of capital. We are interested in building true value for shareholders over the short and long term. We believe this combination achieves both of these objectives.

    We are not the only ones who understand the potential for value creation from this Business Combination. Some of our largest shareholders have signed either voting agreements or non-binding indications of support, that when combined with ownership of management and the board, account for approximately 27% of our outstanding shares in the aggregate. We appreciate the time and consideration these shareholders spent to understand the merits of this proposed Business Combination and their support for it.

    While we work toward filing the registration statement and joint proxy statement/prospectus for the proposed Business Combination with the SEC, we thought this would be a good time to reflect on our successes since the start of 180 Degree Capital in 2017. We believe that these successes have enabled us to enter at this next phase of 180 Degree Capital’s evolution and value creation for our fellow shareholders. Here are some of the data points we are proud of and show our contributions since I joined 180 Degree Capital’s predecessor company board of directors in June 2016, when we started 180 Degree Capital at the end of 2016, and the end of last year:

      June 30, 2016 December 31, 2016 December 31, 2024 Change from December 31, 2016
    Day-to-Day Operating Expenses ~$6.0 million ~$6.3 million ~$3.5 million -44%
    % Private Investments 86% 92% <1% -91%
    % Public Investments 14% 8% >99% +91%
    % Cash + Public Securities of NAV 21%1 27% 102% +75%
    Insider Ownership 2.1%2 2.6%2 12.7% +10.1%

    1. Net of $5,000,000 in debt on balance sheet as of June 30, 2016.
    2. Excludes restricted stock subject to forfeiture provisions. The equity compensation program was terminated in March 2017 in conjunction with 180 Degree Capital’s transition from a business development company to a registered closed-end fund.

    We slashed expenses, in part by transitioning from a business development company to a registered closed-end fund structure. A collateral impact of this transition was the elimination of our ability to compensate employees through the issuance of options or restricted stock. We didn’t care. It was the right decision for our shareholders. We transitioned the balance sheet. We substantially increased insider ownership through solely open market purchases. As noted previously, no equity was given to the management team or other employees as compensation. No one has bought and held more stock in the open market than me during that time period.

    As the table below shows, we believe our shareholders have benefited from our ability to generate positive returns on our investments since we took over management of 180 Degree Capital. These returns were offset by material declines in the legacy private portfolio that we inherited.

    Public Portfolio
    Contribution to Change in NAV
    (2017-2024)    		 Legacy Private Portfolio
    Contribution to Change in NAV
    (2017-2024)
    +$3.13/share -$2.41/share
      TURN Public Portfolio Gross Total (Excluding SMA Carried Interest) TURN Public Portfolio Gross Total (Including SMA Carried Interest) Change in NAV Change in Stock Price Russell Microcap Index Lipper Peer Group Average
    Inception to Date
    Q4 2016 – Q4 2024    		 +185.7% +204.5% -33.9% -11.4% +68.5% +81.8%

    Math is math. Our public market investment strategy over the history of 180 Degree Capital outperformed our comparable peers and indices. It is fair to ask why our stock price has not followed. We believe it is largely because of the significant negative impact of the private portfolio that we inherited, and the discounts disproportionately applied to closed-end funds of our size. Hence, I come back to our proposed Business Combination with Mount Logan, and what we believe it can do to potentially unlock value for 180 Degree Capital shareholders when we are no longer constrained by the market dynamics ascribed to closed-end funds.

    We will let our upcoming registration statement and included joint proxy statement/prospectus provide the truth to our shareholders regarding how and why our Board unanimously approved this proposed Business Combination. In the meantime, our work over the prior eight years set up 180 Degree Capital for this next phase of what we believe will be long-term shareholder value creation. We realize our lack of scale has caused our expense ratio to be too high. We believe we have uncovered a unique solution for that and other growth-limiting issues with our proposed Business Combination. Our Board and management team firmly believe that this Business Combination is in the best interest of all of our shareholders. We could not be more excited about the potential for future value creation as a result of combining with Mount Logan, and we look forward to discussing this proposed combination with all of you and prospective future shareholders of the combined entity.

    All the best,

    Kevin M. Rendino
    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

    About 180 Degree Capital Corp.

    180 Degree Capital Corp. is a publicly traded registered closed-end fund focused on investing in and providing value-added assistance through constructive activism to what we believe are substantially undervalued small, publicly traded companies that have potential for significant turnarounds. Our goal is that the result of our constructive activism leads to a reversal in direction for the share price of these investee companies, i.e., a 180-degree turn. Detailed information about 180 Degree Capital and its holdings can be found on its website at www.180degreecapital.com.

    Press Contact:
    Daniel B. Wolfe
    Robert E. Bigelow
    180 Degree Capital Corp.
    973-746-4500
    ir@180degreecapital.com

    Additional Information and Where to Find It

    In connection with the proposed Business Combination, 180 Degree Capital intends to file with the SEC and mail to its shareholders a proxy statement on Schedule 14A (the “Proxy Statement”), containing a form of WHITE proxy card. In addition, the surviving Delaware corporation, Mount Logan Capital Inc. (“New Mount Logan”) plans to file with the SEC a registration statement on Form S-4 (the “Registration Statement”) that will register the exchange of New Mount Logan shares in the Business Combination and include the Proxy Statement and a prospectus of New Mount Logan (the “Prospectus”). The Proxy Statement and the Registration Statement (including the Prospectus) will each contain important information about 180 Degree Capital, Mount Logan, New Mount Logan, the Business Combination and related matters. SHAREHOLDERS OF 180 DEGREE CAPITAL AND MOUNT LOGAN ARE URGED TO READ THE PROXY STATEMENT AND PROSPECTUS CONTAINED IN THE REGISTRATION STATEMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS THAT ARE FILED OR WILL BE FILED WITH THE APPLICABLE SECURITIES REGULATORY AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS ANY AMENDMENTS OR SUPPLEMENTS TO THESE DOCUMENTS CAREFULLY AND IN THEIR ENTIRETY WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT 180 DEGREE CAPITAL, MOUNT LOGAN, NEW MOUNT LOGAN, THE BUSINESS COMBINATION AND RELATED MATTERS. Investors and security holders may obtain copies of these documents and other documents filed with the applicable securities regulatory authorities free of charge through the website maintained by the SEC at https://www.sec.gov and the website maintained by the Canadian securities regulators at www.sedarplus.ca. Copies of the documents filed by 180 Degree Capital are also available free of charge by accessing 180 Degree Capital’s investor relations website at https://ir.180degreecapital.com.

    Certain Information Concerning the Participants

    180 Degree Capital, its directors and executive officers and other members of management and employees may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies in connection with the Business Combination. Information about 180 Degree Capital’s executive officers and directors is available in 180 Degree Capital’s Annual Report filed on Form N-CSR for the year ended December 31, 2024, which was filed with the SEC on February 13, 2025, and in its proxy statement for the 2024 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (“2024 Annual Meeting”), which was filed with the SEC on March 1, 2024. To the extent holdings by the directors and executive officers of 180 Degree Capital securities reported in the proxy statement for the 2024 Annual Meeting have changed, such changes have been or will be reflected on Statements of Change in Ownership on Forms 3, 4 or 5 filed with the SEC. These documents are or will be available free of charge at the SEC’s website at https://www.sec.gov. Additional information regarding the persons who may, under the rules of the SEC, be considered participants in the solicitation of the 180 Degree Capital shareholders in connection with the Business Combination will be contained in the Proxy Statement when such document becomes available.

    Mount Logan, its directors and executive officers and other members of management and employees may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from the shareholders of Mount Logan in favor of the approval of the Business Combination. Information about Mount Logan’s executive officers and directors is available in Mount Logan’s annual information form dated March 14, 2024, available on its website at https://mountlogancapital.ca/investor-relations and on SEDAR+ at https://sedarplus.ca. To the extent holdings by the directors and executive officers of Mount Logan securities reported in Mount Logan’s annual information form have changed, such changes have been or will be reflected on insider reports filed on SEDI at https://www.sedi.ca/sedi/. Additional information regarding the persons who may, under the rules of the SEC, be considered participants in the solicitation of the Mount Logan shareholders in connection with the Business Combination will be contained in the Prospectus included in the Registration Statement when such document becomes available.

    Non-Solicitation

    This letter and the materials accompanying it are not intended to be, and shall not constitute, an offer to buy or sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any securities, or a solicitation of any vote or approval, nor shall there be any sale of securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such jurisdiction. No offering of securities shall be made, except by means of a prospectus meeting the requirements of Section 10 of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This letter and the materials accompanying it, and oral statements made from time to time by representatives of 180 Degree Capital and Mount Logan, may contain statements of a forward-looking nature relating to future events within the meaning of federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements may be identified by words such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “could,” “continue,” “estimate,” “expects,” “intends,” “will,” “should,” “may,” “plan,” “predict,” “project,” “would,” “forecasts,” “seeks,” “future,” “proposes,” “target,” “goal,” “objective,” “outlook” and variations of these words or similar expressions (or the negative versions of such words or expressions). Forward-looking statements are not statements of historical fact and reflect Mount Logan’s and 180 Degree Capital’s current views about future events. Such forward-looking statements include, without limitation, statements about the benefits of the Business Combination involving Mount Logan and 180 Degree Capital, including future financial and operating results, Mount Logan’s and 180 Degree Capital’s plans, objectives, expectations and intentions, the expected timing and likelihood of completion of the Business Combination, and other statements that are not historical facts, including but not limited to future results of operations, projected cash flow and liquidity, business strategy, payment of dividends to shareholders of New Mount Logan, and other plans and objectives for future operations. No assurances can be given that the forward-looking statements contained in this press release will occur as projected, and actual results may differ materially from those projected. Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates and assumptions that involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. These risks and uncertainties include, without limitation, the ability to obtain the requisite Mount Logan and 180 Degree Capital shareholder approvals; the risk that Mount Logan or 180 Degree Capital may be unable to obtain governmental and regulatory approvals required for the Business Combination (and the risk that such approvals may result in the imposition of conditions that could adversely affect New Mount Logan or the expected benefits of the Business Combination); the risk that an event, change or other circumstance could give rise to the termination of the Business Combination; the risk that a condition to closing of the Business Combination may not be satisfied; the risk of delays in completing the Business Combination; the risk that the businesses will not be integrated successfully; the risk that the cost savings and any other synergies from the Business Combination may not be fully realized or may take longer to realize than expected; the risk that any announcement relating to the Business Combination could have adverse effects on the market price of Mount Logan’s common stock or 180 Degree Capital’s common stock; unexpected costs resulting from the Business Combination; the possibility that competing offers or acquisition proposals will be made; the risk of litigation related to the Business Combination; the risk that the credit ratings of New Mount Logan or its subsidiaries may be different from what the companies expect; the diversion of management time from ongoing business operations and opportunities as a result of the Business Combination; the risk of adverse reactions or changes to business or employee relationships, including those resulting from the announcement or completion of the Business Combination; competition, government regulation or other actions; the ability of management to execute its plans to meet its goals; risks associated with the evolving legal, regulatory and tax regimes; changes in economic, financial, political and regulatory conditions; natural and man-made disasters; civil unrest, pandemics, and conditions that may result from legislative, regulatory, trade and policy changes; and other risks inherent in Mount Logan’s and 180 Degree Capital’s businesses. Forward-looking statements are based on the estimates and opinions of management at the time the statements are made. Readers should carefully review the statements set forth in the reports, which 180 Degree Capital has filed or will file from time to time with the SEC and Mount Logan has filed or will file from time to time on SEDAR+.

    Neither Mount Logan nor 180 Degree Capital undertakes any obligation, and expressly disclaims any obligation, to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law. Any discussion of past performance is not an indication of future results. Investing in financial markets involves a substantial degree of risk. Investors must be able to withstand a total loss of their investment. The information herein is believed to be reliable and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but no representation or warranty is made, expressed or implied, with respect to the fairness, correctness, accuracy, reasonableness or completeness of the information and opinions. The references and link to the website www.180degreecapital.com and mountlogancapital.ca have been provided as a convenience, and the information contained on such websites are not incorporated by reference into this press release. Neither 180 Degree Capital nor Mount Logan is responsible for the contents of third-party websites.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Vitaly Savelyev held a weekly meeting of the Government Commission for the Elimination of the Consequences of the Oil Spill in the Kerch Strait

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    Vitaly Savelyev held a weekly meeting of the Government Commission for the Elimination of the Consequences of the Oil Spill in the Kerch Strait

    February 14, 2025

    Vitaly Savelyev held a weekly meeting of the Government Commission for the Elimination of the Consequences of the Oil Spill in the Kerch Strait

    February 14, 2025

    Vitaly Savelyev held a weekly meeting of the Government Commission for the Elimination of the Consequences of the Oil Spill in the Kerch Strait

    February 14, 2025

    Vitaly Savelyev held a weekly meeting of the Government Commission for the Elimination of the Consequences of the Oil Spill in the Kerch Strait

    February 14, 2025

    Previous news Next news

    Vitaly Savelyev held a weekly meeting of the Government Commission for the Elimination of the Consequences of the Oil Spill in the Kerch Strait

    A meeting of the government commission to coordinate work to eliminate the consequences of the emergency caused by the sinking of tankers in the Kerch Strait in December 2024 was held in Moscow under the chairmanship of Deputy Prime Minister Vitaly Savelyev.

    Work continues to remove the stern section of the Volgoneft-239 tanker. In total, more than 240 tons of metal structures have been removed for disposal, which is almost 35% of the total volume. The work is scheduled to be completed by March 31 of this year.

    357 km of coastline have been cleared, more than 186 thousand tons of contaminated sand and soil have been collected. About 144 thousand tons have been removed to temporary storage sites, and more than 48 thousand tons have been removed for disposal to specialized organizations.

    The data from air, drinking water, and bioresources samples taken by Rospotrebnadzor laboratories remain normal.

    The Ministry of Science and Higher Education is actively working to collect and analyze promising scientific and technological solutions for eliminating the consequences of an emergency. A special interdepartmental working group has been formed to analyze the existing scientific and scientific and technical potential, which includes leading scientists, representatives of business and interested government institutions and departments. The group has organized the collection and analysis of technological proposals for eliminating the consequences of an emergency on land and in water areas, which, if assessed positively, are tested in Krasnodar Krai.

    A total of 223 proposals were submitted to the group for consideration. A positive conclusion was received for 115 submitted technologies and technical solutions from 71 organizations, including 84 projects (57 organizations declared their readiness to test the submitted technologies in the emergency zone). Of the 115 submitted technologies, 36 solutions are in industrial and pilot-industrial readiness: 23 proposals for the elimination of emergency consequences on land, 13 proposals for the elimination of emergency consequences in the marine area.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Belt-Road professional forum held

    Source: Hong Kong Information Services

    The Belt & Road Cross-Professional Forum took place today to promote Hong Kong’s professional services with the goal of deepening the sector’s collaboration with business communities of Belt & Road countries and the Mainland.

    Secretary for Commerce & Economic Development Algernon Yau emphasised Hong Kong’s role as a super connector as he highlighted the Belt & Road Initiative as being a key pillar in stabilising global economic development amid uncertainties.

    Mr Yau said: “The US government announced plans to impose various kinds of tariffs on its imports, affecting a great many economies, including ours.

    “It is of critical importance for both businesses and governments to adapt and face the challenges.

    “From 2013 to 2022, Hong Kong’s direct investment position in Belt & Road countries tripled to nearly US$120 billion. In around the same period, our merchandise trade with Belt & Road countries surged by about 60%. Hong Kong’s business appeal has been growing, as both a super connector and a super value-adder.”

    Mr Yau encouraged enterprises from the Mainland and Belt & Road countries to set up operations in Hong Kong, leveraging its world-class quality services and complementary support to expand into target markets effectively.

    He also urged Hong Kong enterprises and professional services to partner with Mainland and Belt & Road enterprises to jointly explore new business opportunities through “bringing in and going global” – on one hand partnering with Mainland enterprises to jointly venture into new markets along the Belt & Road, and on the other hand assisting enterprises from Belt & Road countries in tapping the vast Mainland market to promote the prosperous growth of the Belt & Road.

    The forum attracted over 250 participants, with over 30 business leaders sharing the latest business opportunities under the Belt & Road Initiative and showcasing dozens of business cases and potential projects in areas such as finance, law, and innovation and technology.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What does the Bible say about who belongs in the ‘promised land’? A biblical scholar explains

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Joan Taylor, Professor Emerita of Christian Origins and Second Temple Judaism, King’s College London

    In current US politics, a “biblical” view of the Middle East informs foreign policy – perhaps more than it has for decades. This makes it very important to understand what the Bible actually says, particularly about the idea of a “promised land”.

    Biblical scholars and historians like me often observe that the Bible does not provide a full, holistic history. It shines the torch on certain events and memories, for particular purposes. It tells of origins, laws, ethics, divine revelations and a nation’s relationship with God.

    It does not speak with one voice, but with many voices from different times and places in a collection of books. The Hebrew Bible, or Old Testament, was finalised largely from the eighth century BC to the second century BC, and the Christian Bible added literature of the 1st century AD in the form of the New Testament.

    The Bible doesn’t always speak plainly, either, and has been translated and interpreted in different ways. The Bible has a lot to say about land, but there isn’t a single clear message throughout. Instead, there are various agreements made between God and different men (it’s a patriarchal world) about where certain people should live.

    In the Book of Genesis, God promises a wandering herder named Abraham that he will be “the father of many nations” stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, as long as these different Abrahamic nations keep a covenant of faithfulness (symbolised by male circumcision).

    God sends Abraham to the Land of Canaan: ‘In you all the families of the earth will be blessed’ (Gen. 12:3).
    Rijksmuseum

    To a herder, this is about the right to move around with flocks. Nothing is said of Abraham destroying existing cities or evicting people, though he might form alliances and fight if his close family is attacked. He also makes agreements with rulers. On this biblical view, there is room for different people to live together in the same region. It is a patchwork.

    Abraham’s sons Ishmael and Isaac go on to inherit key promises (as herders). This breaks down as follows: Isaac’s portion is the “Land of Canaan”, and Ishmael’s “east of Egypt as one goes to Assyria”. Canaan roughly corresponds to the area of modern-day Israel, northwestern Jordan and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The area was also known as “Palestine” from at least the fifth century BC.

    Isaac has two sons, Esau and Jacob. Jacob is promised Canaan, while Esau goes to Edom, a region spanning present-day southwestern Jordan and (in due course) southern Israel.

    Jacob, renamed Israel, has 12 sons – the founders of the 12 tribes of Israel, or Israelites. They then also inherit the promise to settle (with families and herds) in Canaan. Among these tribes is the tribe of Judah – the Judahites (Jews).

    From the books of Exodus to Deuteronomy, however, the Israelites are no longer herders. Enslaved in Egypt, they escape, under the leadership of the prophet Moses. In Deuteronomy, God promises the Israelites possession of land on condition of obedience to his commandments: “But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient … I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land.” It is an ominous note.

    Moses receives the law from God.
    Carolingian book illuminator circa 840

    On this biblical view, holding land is correlated with the Israelites’ obedience to the laws. To give a pertinent example – Leviticus 19:33-34: “When a foreigner lives among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner living among you must be treated as your home-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt.”

    In the Book of Joshua, the Israelites take possession of parts of Canaan by means of conquest, mass slaughter and destruction common in ancient warfare, but totally at variance with today’s laws of war. The 12 tribes of Israel then notionally divide the territory (conquered and unconquered) between them. Judah’s territory is around Jerusalem and to the south.

    However, already in the next book, Judges, the Israelites are actually only one of several peoples living in the area, and are not even entirely united. On this biblical view, the land is still a patchwork.

    In the books of the prophets (Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and others), Israelites are continually berated for failing in ethical matters, and warned of dire consequences. The theme remains that the promise is conditional, and Israel is failing to keep the law.

    The biblical story arc

    The Book of Joshua is actually the starting point of a story that tells of continual wars and – apart from some grand successes – a downhill slide into territorial loss. There is a slow, painful working out of God’s disappointment, as God allows other local peoples and foreign nations to take back territory the Israelites seized, until it is nearly all gone. The Jews are taken into exile in Babylon.

    In the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, the Jews retake possession of their former temple city of Jerusalem and its surrounding region. A biblical view based on those accounts would be that Judah restores and settles peaceably in that area, but claims nowhere else.

    Other Israelite tribes were largely gone, apart from a pocket in Samaria. There was yet hope for tribal restoration. In Ezekiel, it is predicted that God would eventually see off oppressive empires and re-enliven the 12 tribes of Israel in a region the prophet called “the land of Israel”, under the rule of a Jewish king: the Messiah (Ezekiel 37:22 and 24). On this biblical view, only the Messiah can lead a miraculously reconstituted Israel to the land.

    And a big question is, on this view of restoration: who even represents Israel? This takes us beyond the Hebrew Bible to later times.

    Adding to the story

    In the 2nd century BC, Jewish priest-kings in Judah, which had become known as Judaea, started to conquer neighbours, including other remaining Israelites. Jews settled in conquered territories and some other inhabitants – the now culturally Greek Palestinians – converted.

    For the priest-kings, Jews were the only true representatives of all the tribes of Israel, exclusively inheriting the promise. Their rule lasted just over a century. But that story is not in the Bible.

    Then came Christianity. In the fourth century AD, Christianity became the religion of Roman emperors, and they took a special interest in Palestine. For Christians, following Jesus as the Messiah, they had become the heirs of God’s promise. Jewish claims were superseded.

    Thus we later get the Byzantine empire’s provinces of Palestine, the concept of the Holy Land and the Crusades. All this was justified by interpretations of certain passages of the Bible.

    Despite the varied and nuanced concepts of how to settle in “the promised land” found throughout the Bible, it is the Book of Joshua’s divisions that provide some people today with a model for a “biblical” territorial claim. But this is combined with the non-biblical assertion that Jews alone have inherited the promise.

    Joshua has become a paradigm for extremist Zionist settler claims and even aspects of the Israeli army, as American Bible scholar Rachel Havrelock has explored. The Book of Joshua is lifted out of the total story arc of the Bible.

    And if we move beyond the Bible there is so much other history in this region to remember. People converted and married as well as fought each other. Later on, Jews could become Christians, Christians could become Muslims – and all peoples could become Arabs (with Arabisation and cultural transition in the 7th-9th centuries).

    People could flee or be evicted, but keep their identities and traditions and return. The return of Jewish people to the land has been momentous in terms of Jewish national life. But the Palestinians, too, are the descendants of the people of old, from the places of old.

    The Bible’s narrative concerns God’s love for Israel, but the land is a patchwork. After all, as Abraham was told, through him “all the families of the earth will be blessed”.

    Joan Taylor has received funding from the Commonwealth scholarships and Fulbright schemes, the Wellcome Trust, Leverhulme and various academic societies. In terms of religious faith she is a Quaker.

    – ref. What does the Bible say about who belongs in the ‘promised land’? A biblical scholar explains – https://theconversation.com/what-does-the-bible-say-about-who-belongs-in-the-promised-land-a-biblical-scholar-explains-249555

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Serbia is facing its largest-ever protest movement – why is Europe looking away?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Andi Hoxhaj, Lecturer in Law, King’s College London

    On November 1 2024, the roof of a newly €55 million renovated railway station in Novi Sad, Serbia’s second biggest city, collapsed and killed 15 people. The deaths sparked Serbia’s largest wave of student-led anti-government protests since Yugoslavia’s disintegration in 2000.

    The protests pose the most serious threat to Serbian president Aleksandar Vučić’s power since he became prime minister in 2014, and president in 2017. The protest movement has highlighted Vučić’s growing authoritarian rule and widespread corruption in Serbia.

    Serbians believe that the deadly roof collapse was caused by government corruption. The station was renovated by a Chinese-led consortium as part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative investments and growing political ties with Serbia. The Chinese consortium and Vučić refused to publish the railway station restoration procurement contract after protesters demanded it.

    The protesters have four demands: the publication of all procurement documents concerning the renovation of the station, a stop to the prosecution of students arrested during the protests, the prosecution of police and security forces involved in attacking students during the protests and a 20% increase in the budget for higher education.

    However, the Serbian government and media — most of which Vučić controls through a network of political patronage and cronyism – are downplaying the protests and threatening students.

    Vučić claims that foreign powers are behind the protests to topple him and destabilise Serbia. Russia and China have fully supported Vučić’s claims that Serbia is the target of a western plot to orchestrate the protesters and overthrow Vučić.

    Serbia’s history of corruption

    In the decade after former president Slobodan Milošević was overthrown, Serbia implemented a number of democratic and anti-corruption reforms. As a result, the country climbed to 72nd place out of 180 countries in Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index in 2013. Serbia opened EU membership negotiations the following year.

    However, since Vučić took office, Serbia has become more authoritarian. Corruption is widespread, and the government has exploited tensions and instability with most of its western Balkans neighbours, primarily Kosovo, for political gain.

    Serbia was downgraded to partly free by Freedom House in 2019, and the V-Dem Institute (Varieties of Democracy) labelled it as as an “electoral autocracy”. Serbia dropped to 105th place in Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index in 2024.

    Many international organisations monitoring anti-corruption, human rights and democracy have reported Vučić’s authoritarian tendencies and corruption in Serbia.

    A report from Amnesty International published in December 2024 describes Serbia as a “digital prison”. It has been reported that Serbian authorities are using surveillance technology to monitor and suppress the protesters and other political opponents.

    International response

    The EU has mostly stayed silent since the protests began. After receiving letters from NGOs and activists, EU Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos stated that the EU is following the protests in Serbia, and backed the rule of law and freedom of assembly.

    This is a far cry from the EU’s response to protests in Georgia last year. EU commission president Ursula von der Leyen said “the Georgian people are fighting for democracy” – yet has stayed silent on the protests in Serbia.

    Some argue this (lack of) response is because in August 2024, Vučić made a deal with the EU to provide lithium to the bloc – a boon to the EU’s electric vehicle production. There were also widespread protests against the lithium deal over its transparency and concerns that the mine would cause irreversible environmental destruction to Serbia’s Jadar Valley.

    The US has also stayed quiet. President Donald Trump’s associates were recently granted permission to build a Trump hotel in Belgrade. Further, Rod Blagojevich, the former governor of Illinois who served eight years in prison for corruption, is being considered as the new US ambassador to Serbia. Blagojevich, whose father is from Serbia, expressed support for Vučić and visited the country.

    What is next for Serbia?

    Serbia’s prime minister, Miloš Vučević, and Novi Sad’s mayor, Milan Đurić, both resigned in an effort to de-escalate the protests. Following the resignation of the PM, Vučić has said that he is open to the new government making the documents about the station collapse public.

    While this may be a sign that the protests are loosening Vučić’s grip, the movement has only intensified, spreading to more than 200 towns on February 1.

    Vučić has pledged to either form a new government within one month, or organise a new parliamentary election in the spring to address the protesters’ demands. However, this would barely paper over the cracks of systemic corruption in Serbia.

    The student movement has revealed how democracy and the rule of law have eroded since Vučić came to power in 2014.

    The protests have also exposed the international community’s complicity in supporting Vučić under the premise that he is a constructive partner for regional cooperation and stability in the western Balkans.

    But to have a lasting impact in Serbia, the protesters should also demand a transitional government to undertake anti-corruption and democratic reforms to strengthen the rule of law, and to organise the next elections.

    At the heart of these reforms must be constitutional changes, such as term limits on elected public office. Research shows stricter term limits can reduce the costs of corruption, abuse of power and attacks on the rule of law and democracy.

    Term limits would also prevent figures with authoritarian tendencies, like Vučić, from becoming the state themselves with unlimited and unaccountable power.

    The EU also has a role to play here. By not putting pressure on Vučić, the EU is empowering his authoritarian tendencies. Second, in EU membership negotiations, it should introduce electoral reform as a new requirement for all EU candidate countries.

    Other leaders in the western Balkans have adopted similar authoritarian government models and patronage systems as Serbia to maintain power. These would undermine and threaten the EU rule of law, if they were to join the bloc today.

    The EU must also publicly support student protesters who want Serbia to become more democratic and accountable. After all, the students are fighting for the very ideals on which the EU was founded.

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

    – ref. Serbia is facing its largest-ever protest movement – why is Europe looking away? – https://theconversation.com/serbia-is-facing-its-largest-ever-protest-movement-why-is-europe-looking-away-249388

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI China: Philippines’ introduction of Typhon missile system is like giving open invitation to burglar and assisting evildoer 2025-02-14 Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for China’s Ministry of National Defense, said on Friday that China has made clear multiple times its firm opposition against the US deployment of the mid-range missile system in the Philippines.

    Source: People’s Republic of China – Ministry of National Defense 2

    BEIJING, Feb. 14 — “China requires the Philippine side to recognize the high sensitivity and severe consequences of the deployment of Typhon missile system, remove the system as soon as possible to honor its previous open promises, and return to the right track of dialogue and consultations at an early date,” said a Chinese defense spokesperson at a press briefing on Friday.

    The US Indo-Pacific Command recently said that the Typhon strategic mid-range missile system had been relocated from the Laoag airfield to another location on the island of Luzon, and that the relocation, however, was not an indication that the system would be permanently deployed in the Philippines. The Philippine side said that it would return the Typhon system to the US so long as China stops claiming Philippine territory, harassing Philippine fishermen and attacking Philippine ships.

    In response, Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for China’s Ministry of National Defense, said that China has made clear multiple times its firm opposition against the US deployment of the mid-range missile system in the Philippines.

    “The Typhon missile system is a strategic asset and an offensive weapon. The Philippine side has repeatedly gone back on its words and brought in the system to cater to the US,” said the spokesperson, pointing out that such decision would only place the Philippines’ own security and national defense in the hands of others, and lead to geopolitical confrontation and risks of arms race in the region. It’s like giving an open invitation to the burglar and assisting the evildoer.

    The spokesperson mentioned that the territory of the Philippines is defined by a series of international treaties, including the 1898 Treaty of Peace between the United States of America and the Kingdom of Spain, the 1900 Treaty between the United States of America and the Kingdom of Spain for Cession of Outlying Islands of the Philippines, and the 1930 Convention between His Majesty in Respect of the United Kingdom and the President of the United States regarding the Boundary between the State of North Borneo and the Philippine Archipelago.

    “China’s Nansha Qundao and Huangyan Dao fall outside the Philippine territory defined by these treaties,” said the spokesperson, adding that China’s law-enforcement activities in relevant waters are reasonable, lawful and beyond reproach.

    “By using the deployment of Typhon as a bargaining chip on the South China Sea issue, the Philippine side is selling out its own national security, putting the well-being of its people and regional peace and stability at grave risks. Such behavior is ridiculous and very dangerous,” said the spokesperson.

    The spokesperson urged the Philippine side to recognize the high sensitivity and severe consequences of this issue, remove the Typhon missile system as soon as possible to honor its previous open promises, and return to the right track of dialogue and consultations at an early date.

    The spokesperson stressed that China will continue to take necessary measures to resolutely counter provocations and infringements and safeguard China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Call for industry experts to join key PackUK advisory groups

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    PackUK invites industry experts to join key advisory groups.

    PackUK, the newly appointed administrator for the pEPR scheme, is committed to working with experts from across the packaging value chain to guide it in its work.

    This close working relationship will be supported by expert advice from the following four advisory boards:

    • Scheme Administrator Steering Group
    • Recyclability Assessment Methodology Technical Advisory Committee
    • Effectiveness and Efficiency Technical Advisory Committee
    • Communications and Behaviour Change Advisory Group

    The recommendations from these groups will play a central role in guiding PackUK as it grows and develops.

    These four voluntary advisory groups will provide expert advice and recommendations to the PackUK leadership team. The groups will not be decision-making, but a trusted source of knowledge and experience comprising members who will have a wealth of operational and policy expertise from a variety of both public and private sector organisations.

    Expression of interest to join PackUK’s Advisory Committees now open

    We are excited to announce that we are now welcoming expressions of interest to join the following three advisory groups:

    • Recyclability Assessment Methodology Technical Advisory Committee
    • Effectiveness and Efficiency Technical Advisory Committee
    • Communications and Behaviour Change Advisory Group

    Fifteen positions will be available on each on these advisory groups, subject to a fair and open competitive application process.

    Applications will close 10 March 2025. Demonstrable experience in the sector will be essential. Further information on how to apply can be found below.

    Details on each advisory group

    Recycling Assessment Methodology Technical Advisory Committee (RAM TAC)

    The RAM TAC will provide technical advice on packaging sustainability and supporting PackUK to deliver iterations of the RAM which reflect both recyclability and consider different bases of assessment. They will ensure that the advice that the PackUK Scheme Administrator (SA) receives regarding packaging recyclability and other environmental characteristics is up to date and reflects trends and innovations.

    The SA RAM TAC will also assess selected technical queries and issues relating to packaging materials and advise the SA of the outcome of their technical assessment.

    The RAM TAC will meet quarterly.

    Efficient and Effective Technical Advisory Committee (E&E TAC)

    The E&E TAC will be an independent technical committee who understand local authority and waste management best practice from across the UK and using their expertise they will make recommendations to PackUK on how to support LAs who operate in a range of different scenarios.

    The committee will provide well evidenced, expert advice, guidance and recommendations to the SA Executive Committee (SA ExCo), but is not a decision-making body.

    The E&E TAC will meet quarterly.

    Communications and Behaviour Change Advisory Group (CBCAG)

    The CBCAG will bring together value chain expertise, four nation representation and behavioural change knowledge to guide and provide expert advice to the PackUK Executive Committee on impactful communications and behaviour change strategies.

    The CBCAG will meet quarterly.

    We will share opportunities to join the Scheme Administrator Steering Group (SASG) later in spring 2025.

    How to apply

    More information can be found in the candidate packs:

    To apply for any of these voluntary positions, your CV and supporting statement should be returned to packuk.governance@defra.gov.uk by mid-day on 10 March 2025, marking which advisory group you would like to join in the subject field.

    All candidates are also required to submit the following:

    • diversity information and conflicts of interest form
    • CV of no more than two sides of A4 outlining professional qualifications
    • a supporting statement demonstrating how you meet the essential criteria, providing specific examples (500 words maximum)

    Please submit any queries to packuk.governance@defra.gov.uk.

    Updates to this page

    Published 14 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Partnership can transform education for Met Police

    Source: Anglia Ruskin University

    A major new partnership, Policing Futures London, has been announced with the potential to transform the delivery of police degree apprenticeships in the capital.

    The collaboration brings together Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) and the University of West London (UWL) – two universities that are at the forefront of police education in the UK – with the aim of leading the Metropolitan Police’s initial recruit training from 2026, in line with the Mayor’s Police and Crime Plan 2025-2029.

    Policing Futures London’s mission closely aligns with the A New Met for London strategy, ensuring that officers are not only highly skilled but are deeply connected to the city’s communities and its policing priorities.

    With world-class facilities in east London, near Canary Wharf, and west London, the two universities have already been providing policing education at scale since 2021, all within 60 minutes travel of the Metropolitan Police’s 12 Basic Command Units.

    Anglia Ruskin University and the University of West London have a track record for delivering quality, integrated Police Constable Entry Route (PCER) programmes and could accommodate the full cohort of Metropolitan Police’s recruits at any one time.

    Anglia Ruskin University has successfully co-delivered PCER programmes alongside the seven forces in the South East and East of England to over 2,600 student police officers since 2021, while together Anglia Ruskin and the University of West London have four years’ experience of working with the Metropolitan Police, training more than 3,870 Met officers.

    Building on the delivery over the last four years, with the rich knowledge and experience of the collective academic staff, new programmes would be co-designed with the police service and led by teams who live and work in London, ensuring that officers are fully equipped to police the communities they serve.

    Policing Futures London would prioritise support for widening access and inclusive outreach recruitment programmes, would embed community engagement models to build trust between new officers and the diverse communities of London, and would be delivered by both police professionals and academic experts.

    Policing Futures London is backed up by world-class research, with Anglia Ruskin University home to both the International Policing and Public Protection Research Institute and the Centre of Excellence for Equity in Uniformed Public Services.

    In the last 18 months, Anglia Ruskin University has been named University of the Year at the UK Social Mobility Awards, the Times Higher Education University of the Year, and is in the top 20% of universities in the country for teaching quality, having been awarded a Gold rating in the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF).

    University of West London was the number one London university for overall student satisfaction in the National Student Survey 2024* and was named best university for Student Experience and Teaching Quality in the UK in The Times and Sunday Times Good University Guide 2024.

    “This partnership is about more than just delivering quality education – it’s about shaping the future of policing in London. By bringing together two institutions with deep experience in police education, we are ensuring that London’s officers receive the highest quality training, close to the communities they serve, and preparing them for the challenges of 21st-century law enforcement.”

    Sara Archer, Head of Police Education at Anglia Ruskin University

    “This exciting partnership brings together two powerhouses in policing education, not only in London but nationally, ready to deliver police training programmes that London deserves: resilient, innovative, and reflective of its communities. Policing Futures London is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build that.”

    Adrian Ellison, Pro Vice-Chancellor and executive lead for policing education at the University of West London

    “As a London university we understand London and its unique policing needs. We have directly influenced the design of the new PCDA standard, based on our extensive experience working with the MPS, to place practice-based learning and assessment at its heart. Understanding the need for everyone to work to ever tightening budgets, we will never sacrifice quality for cost.

    “This exciting new partnership combines a wealth of knowledge, experience and expertise with the aim of giving Londoners the continued quality of policing they deserve.”

    Andy Rose, Head of the Institute for Policing Studies at the University of West London

    *calculated as the average of all questions by registered populations. Excludes specialist providers, National Student Survey 2024.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Metis Institute for Strategy and Foresight

    Source: UNISDR Disaster Risk Reduction

    Mission

    Named after the Greek goddess of prudence and wise counsel, the Metis Institute for Strategy and Foresight brings academic knowledge to bear on today’s and tomorrow’s strategically relevant challenges of international politics.

    At home at University of the Bundeswehr Munich , Metis connects academic inquiry with policy practice. It combines continuous and scientifically rigorous research with problem-oriented, interdisciplinary counsel to the Policy Department at the Federal Ministry of Defence.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Press release: PM meeting with President Trump’s Special Envoy to the UK Mark Burnett: 13 February 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Prime Minister’s Office 10 Downing Street

    The Prime Minister was pleased to host President Trump’s Special Envoy to the United Kingdom, Mark Burnett, at Downing Street last night.

    The Prime Minister was pleased to host President Trump’s Special Envoy to the United Kingdom, Mark Burnett, at Downing Street last night, during which he took a call from President Trump and discussed his forthcoming visit to the US.

    Mr Burnett and the Prime Minister agreed on the unique and special nature of the UK-US relationship, the strength of our alliance and the warmth of the connection between the two countries. 

    Mr Burnett reflected on his personal connections to the UK, and his mother’s experience working part time in Downing Street as a waitress over 30 years ago.  

    They emphasised the huge potential for even stronger collaboration on trade, tech and cultural matters between the US and the UK and looked forward to working together.

    Updates to this page

    Published 14 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI USA: How NASA’s Lunar Trailblazer Will Make a Looping Voyage to the Moon

    Source: NASA

    Before arriving at the Moon, the small satellite mission will use the gravity of the Sun, Earth, and Moon over several months to gradually line up for capture into lunar orbit.
    NASA’s Lunar Trailblazer arrived in Florida recently in advance of its launch later this month and has been integrated with a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. Shipped from Lockheed Martin Space in Littleton, Colorado, the small satellite is riding along on Intuitive Machines’ IM-2 launch — part of NASA’s CLPS (Commercial Lunar Payload Services) initiative — which is slated for no earlier than Thursday, Feb. 26, from Launch Complex 39A at the agency’s Kennedy Space Center.
    Approximately 48 minutes after launch, Lunar Trailblazer will separate from the rocket and begin its independent flight to the Moon. The small satellite will discover where the Moon’s water is, what form it is in, and how it changes over time, producing the best-yet maps of water on the lunar surface. Observations gathered during its two-year prime mission will contribute to the understanding of water cycles on airless bodies throughout the solar system while also supporting future human and robotic missions to the Moon by identifying where water is located.
    Key to achieving these goals are the spacecraft’s two state-of-the-art science instruments: the High-resolution Volatiles and Minerals Moon Mapper (HVM3) infrared spectrometer and the Lunar Thermal Mapper (LTM) infrared multispectral imager. The HVM3 instrument was provided by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California and LTM was built by the University of Oxford and funded by the UK Space Agency.

    “The small team is international in scope, which is more typical of larger projects,” said Andy Klesh, Lunar Trailblazer’s project systems engineer at JPL. “And unlike the norm for small missions that may only have a very focused, singular purpose, Lunar Trailblazer has two high-fidelity instruments onboard. We are really punching above our weight.”
    Intricate Navigation
    Before it can use these instruments to collect science data, Lunar Trailblazer will for several months perform a series of Moon flybys, thruster bursts, and looping orbits. These highly choreographed maneuvers will eventually position the spacecraft so it can map the surface in great detail.
    Weighing only 440 pounds (200 kilograms) and measuring 11.5 feet (3.5 meters) wide when its solar panels are fully deployed, Lunar Trailblazer is about the size of a dishwasher and has a relatively small engine. To make its four-to-seven-month trip to the Moon (depending on the launch date) as efficient as possible, the mission’s design and navigation team has planned a trajectory that will use the gravity of the Sun, Earth, and Moon to guide the spacecraft — a technique called low-energy transfer.
    “The initial boost provided by the rocket will send the spacecraft past the Moon and into deep space, and its trajectory will then be naturally reshaped by gravity after several lunar flybys and loops around Earth. This will allow it to be captured into lunar orbit with minimal propulsion needs,” said Gregory Lantoine, Lunar Trailblazer’s mission design and navigation lead at JPL. “It’s the most fuel-efficient way to get to where we need to go.”
    As it flies past the Moon several times, the spacecraft will use small thruster bursts — aka trajectory correction maneuvers — to slowly change its orbit from highly elliptical to circular, bringing the satellite down to an altitude of about 60 miles (100 kilometers) above the Moon’s surface.
    Arriving at the Moon
    Once in its science orbit, Lunar Trailblazer will glide over the Moon’s surface, making 12 orbits a day and observing the surface at a variety of different times of day over the course of the mission. The satellite will also be perfectly placed to peer into the permanently shadowed craters at the Moon’s South Pole, which harbor cold traps that never see direct sunlight. If Lunar Trailblazer finds significant quantities of ice at the base of the craters, those locations could be pinpointed as a resource for future lunar explorers.
    The data the mission collects will be transmitted to NASA’s Deep Space Network and delivered to Lunar Trailblazer’s new operations center at Caltech’s IPAC in Pasadena, California. Working alongside the mission’s experienced team will be students from Caltech and nearby Pasadena City College who are involved in all aspects of the mission, from operations and communications to developing software.
    Lunar Trailblazer was a selection of NASA’s SIMPLEx (Small Innovative Missions for Planetary Exploration), which provides opportunities for low-cost science spacecraft to ride-share with selected primary missions. To maintain the lower overall cost, SIMPLEx missions have a higher risk posture and lighter requirements for oversight and management. This higher risk acceptance allows NASA to test pioneering technologies, and the definition of success for these missions includes the lessons learned from more experimental endeavors.
    “We are a small mission with groundbreaking science goals, so we will succeed by embracing the flexibility that’s built into our organization,” said Lee Bennett, Lunar Trailblazer operations lead with IPAC. “Our international team consists of seasoned engineers, science team members from several institutions, and local students who are being given the opportunity to work on a NASA mission for the first time.”
    More About Lunar Trailblazer
    Lunar Trailblazer is led by Principal Investigator Bethany Ehlmann of Caltech in Pasadena, California. Caltech also leads the mission’s science investigation and mission operations. This includes planning, scheduling, and sequencing of all science, instrument, and spacecraft activities during the nominal mission. Science data processing will be done in the Bruce Murray Laboratory for Planetary Visualization at Caltech. NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California manages Lunar Trailblazer and provides system engineering, mission assurance, the HVM3 instrument, and mission design and navigation. Lockheed Martin Space provides the spacecraft, integrates the flight system, and supports operations under contract with Caltech. University of Oxford developed and provided the LTM instrument. Part of NASA’s Lunar Discovery Exploration Program, the mission is managed by NASA’s Planetary Mission Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, for the agency’s Science Mission Directorate in Washington.
    For more information about Lunar Trailblazer, visit:
    https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/lunar-trailblazer

    News Media Contacts
    Karen Fox / Molly WasserNASA Headquarters, Washington202-358-1600karen.c.fox@nasa.gov / molly.l.wasser@nasa.gov
    Ian J. O’NeillJet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.818-354-2649ian.j.oneill@jpl.nasa.gov
    Isabel SwaffordCaltech IPAC626-216-4257iswafford@ipac.caltech.edu
    2025-021

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cocke County Awarded $7.89 Million to Replace Conway Bridge

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency 2

    he State of Tennessee and FEMA have approved $7.89 million to replace Cocke County’s Conway Bridge, which crosses the Nolichuky River and was destroyed when floodwaters from Tropical Storm Helene swept across Eastern Tennessee in late September.
    Funding from FEMA’s Public Assistance program covers eligible costs to replace the 414 foot-long concrete bridge built in 1924, using best construction practices and codes and standards set by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
    FEMA’s share for this project is $5,919,427; the nonfederal share is $1,973,142.
    Federal funding for the one-lane bridge is based on estimates from FEMA’s Rapid Assessment of Public Infrastructure Data. That process uses geospatial and aerial imagery as well as assessor information to develop an estimated cost for public infrastructure that was destroyed or damaged in a disaster. The final scope of work will reflect the reconciled actual costs and capture any additional changes.
    Because Public Assistance is a cost-sharing program, FEMA reimburses state applicants 75% of the eligible costs of repairs to existing structures. The federal share is paid directly to the state to disburse to agencies, local governments and certain private nonprofit organizations that incurred those costs. The remaining 25% represents nonfederal funds. 
    The Public Assistance program is FEMA’s largest grant program, providing funding to help communities responding to and recovering from major presidentially declared disasters or emergencies. Tropical Storm Helene swept across Tennessee Sept. 26-30 and the president approved a major disaster declaration on Oct. 2, allowing FEMA to pay for disaster-damaged infrastructure.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 2025-26 ATTORNEY GENERAL LOPEZ FILES MULTISTATE LAWSUIT TO STOP ELON MUSK’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL POWER GRAB

    Source: US State of Hawaii

    2025-26 ATTORNEY GENERAL LOPEZ FILES MULTISTATE LAWSUIT TO STOP ELON MUSK’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL POWER GRAB

    Posted on Feb 13, 2025 in Latest Department News, Newsroom

    STATE OF HAWAIʻI

    KA MOKU ʻĀINA O HAWAIʻI

     

    DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

    KA ʻOIHANA O KA LOIO KUHINA

     

    JOSH GREEN, M.D.
     GOVERNOR

    KE KIAʻĀINA

     

    ANNE LOPEZ

    ATTORNEY GENERAL

    LOIO KUHINA

     

    ATTORNEY GENERAL LOPEZ FILES MULTISTATE LAWSUIT TO STOP ELON MUSK’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL POWER GRAB

    News Release 2025-26

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                               

    February 13, 2025 

    HONOLULU – Attorney General Anne Lopez, along with 13 other attorneys general, announced the filing of a lawsuit challenging the unlawful delegation of executive power to Elon Musk. The lawsuit argues that President Trump has violated the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution, which ensures that executive appointments are subject to congressional oversight and Senate confirmation.  

    “The Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution is an important safeguard in our system of government,” said Attorney General Lopez. “Granting Musk sweeping powers over the entire federal government without seeking the advice and consent of the Senate is unconstitutional. I joined this lawsuit with my fellow attorneys general because we are the last line of defense to uphold the Constitution and enforce the rule of law.”

    This lawsuit highlights how, with the president’s approval, Musk has unraveled federal agencies, accessed sensitive data, and caused widespread disruption for state and local governments, federal employees, and the American people. 

    “Musk’s seemingly limitless and unchecked power to strip the government of its workforce and eliminate entire departments with the stroke of a pen, or click of a mouse, is unprecedented,” the lawsuit states. “The sweeping authority now vested in a single unelected and unconfirmed individual is antithetical to the nation’s entire constitutional structure.”  

    Defendants’ actions threaten the financial and operational stability of the states by disrupting billions of dollars in federal funding essential for law enforcement, healthcare, education, and other critical services. State agencies depend on federal funds and cooperative agreements, and the termination of these partnerships will result in severe budget shortfalls, staffing crises, and the potential loss of key programs. Similarly, the proposed elimination of the U.S. Department of Education would strip away federal civil rights oversight in schools, leaving states with uncertain legal authority to address discrimination cases involving students with disabilities and enforce Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and disability protections.  

    Beyond financial and regulatory harms, the reckless expansion of DOGE’s authority endangers cybersecurity and erodes public trust. DOGE operatives have reportedly accessed federal financial databases containing sensitive state tax records and banking information without proper oversight, increasing the risk of cyberattacks, data breaches, and foreign exploitation.  

    The manipulation of federal IT infrastructure by unauthorized individuals threatens not only state financial security but also the integrity of critical national systems. As reports of unauthorized access to Treasury databases emerge, citizens have expressed growing fear that their private financial data is at risk, leading to a chilling effect on participation in state-administered federal programs. The Plaintiff States are now forced to contend with both immediately. 

    Attorney General Lopez seeks a court ruling declaring Musk’s actions unconstitutional as well as an injunction barring him from issuing orders to any person in the Executive Branch outside of DOGE, as well as invalidating his previous actions.  

    Attorney General Lopez is joined in this lawsuit by the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington and Vermont.

    The filing can be found here.

    # # # 

    Media contacts:

    Dave Day

    Special Assistant to the Attorney General

    Office: 808-586-1284                                                  

    Email: [email protected]        

    Web: http://ag.hawaii.gov

    Toni Schwartz

    Public Information Officer

    Hawai‘i Department of the Attorney General

    Office: 808-586-1252

    Cell: 808-379-9249

    Email: [email protected] 

    Web: http://ag.hawaii.gov

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 2025-24 ATTORNEY GENERAL LOPEZ ISSUES MULTISTATE GUIDANCE FOR BUSINESSES ON DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY EMPLOYMENT INITIATIVES

    Source: US State of Hawaii

    2025-24 ATTORNEY GENERAL LOPEZ ISSUES MULTISTATE GUIDANCE FOR BUSINESSES ON DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY EMPLOYMENT INITIATIVES

    Posted on Feb 13, 2025 in Latest Department News, Newsroom

    STATE OF HAWAIʻI

    KA MOKU ʻĀINA O HAWAIʻI

     

    DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

    KA ʻOIHANA O KA LOIO KUHINA

     

    JOSH GREEN, M.D.
     GOVERNOR

    KE KIAʻĀINA

     

    ANNE LOPEZ

    ATTORNEY GENERAL

    LOIO KUHINA

     

    ATTORNEY GENERAL LOPEZ ISSUES MULTISTATE GUIDANCE FOR BUSINESSES ON DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY EMPLOYMENT INITIATIVES IN THE WORKPLACE

    News Release 2025-24

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                               

    February 13, 2025

    HONOLULU – Attorney General Anne Lopez has joined a coalition of 16 attorneys general in issuing guidance to help businesses, nonprofits, and other organizations understand the viability and importance of diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility policies and practices in creating and maintaining legally compliant and thriving workplaces. 

    The guidance comes in response to concerns from employers following a Trump Administration Executive Order that purportedly targets “illegal DEI and DEIA policies.”

    “Contrary to what the Trump administration is telling people, efforts to seek out and support diversity, equity, inclusivity and accessibility in the workplace are not illegal and the federal government cannot prohibit these efforts in the private sector through an executive order. I will continue to stand alongside other attorneys general to fight for inclusive policies,” said Attorney General Lopez. 

    The federal government has recently targeted private sector diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility policies and practices through an Executive Order directing agencies to “combat illegal private-sector DEIA preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities.” The coalition’s guidance reminds organizations that these initiatives are not the same as illegal hiring or promotional preferences to individuals based on protected characteristics. For decades, state and federal courts have consistently recognized that diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility policies do not amount to unlawful discrimination.

    Instead, diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility practices focus on ensuring that businesses can recruit, hire, and retain qualified employees, and that workplaces provide support needed for all employees to develop their skills and contribute to the success of the business. 

    Joining Attorney General Lopez in issuing this guidance are the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Oregon and Vermont.  

    The diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility guidance document is here.

     

    # # #

     

    Media contacts:

    Dave Day

    Special Assistant to the Attorney General

    Office: 808-586-1284                                                  

    Email: [email protected]        

    Web: http://ag.hawaii.gov

    Toni Schwartz

    Public Information Officer

    Hawai‘i Department of the Attorney General

    Office: 808-586-1252

    Cell: 808-379-9249

    Email: [email protected] 

    Web: http://ag.hawaii.gov

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: RSF demands White House restores AP’s access — and let press do its job

    Pacific Media Watch

    Trump administration officials barred two Associated Press (AP) reporters from covering White House events this week because the US-based independent news agency did not change its style guide to align with the president’s political agenda.

    The AP is being punished for using the term “Gulf of Mexico,” which the president renamed “Gulf of America” in a recent executive order, reports the global media freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF).

    The watchdog RSF condemned this “flagrant violation of the First Amendment” and demanded the AP be given back its full ability to cover the White House.

    “The level of pettiness displayed by the White House is so incredible that it almost hides the gravity of the situation,” said RSF’s USA executive director Clayton Weimers.

    “A sitting president is punishing a major news outlet for its constitutionally protected choice of words. Donald Trump has been trampling over press freedom since his first day in office.”

    News from the AP wire service is widely used by Pacific media.

    First AP reporter barred
    AP was informed by the White House on Tuesday, February 11, that its organisation would be barred from accessing an event if it did not align with the executive order, a statement from executive editor Julie Pace said.

    The news organisation reported that a first AP reporter was turned away Tuesday afternoon as they tried to enter a White House event.

    Later that day, a second AP reporter was barred from a separate event in the White House Diplomatic Room.

    “Limiting our access to the Oval Office based on the content of AP’s speech not only severely impedes the public’s access to independent news, it plainly violates the First Amendment,” the AP statement said.

    Unrelenting attacks on the press
     Shortly after he was inaugurated on January 20, President Trump signed an executive order “restoring freedom of speech,” which proclaimed: “It is the policy of the United States to ensure that no Federal government officer, employee, or agent engages in or facilitates any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.”

    Yet the president’s subsequent actions have continually proved that this statement is hollow when it comes to freedom of the press.

    The White House . . . clamp down on US government transparency and against the media. Image: RSF

    Prior to barring an AP reporter, the Trump administration launched Federal Communications Commission (FCC) investigations into public broadcasters NPR and PBS as well as the private television network CBS.

    It has restricted press access to the Pentagon and arbitrarily removed freelance journalists from White House press pool briefings.

    In a startling withdrawal of transparency, it removed scores of government webpages and datasets and barred many agency press teams from speaking publicly.

    Also the president is personally suing multiple news organisations over their constitutionally protected editorial decisions.

    The United States is ranked 55th out of 180 countries and territories, according to the 2024 RSF World Press Freedom Index.

    Republished from Reporters Without Borders (RSF).

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Egypt: Authorities must immediately reveal whereabouts of Egyptian-Libyan activist Nasser al-Hawari

    Source: Amnesty International –

    Egyptian authorities must immediately reveal the whereabouts of Egyptian-Libyan activist and TV anchor Nasser al-Hawari, who was forcibly disappeared after being seized by plainclothes security officers outside his family home in Alexandria on 9 February, escorted into an unmarked van, and driven away, Amnesty International said today.

    He was arrested on the same day his TV show addressed violations against prisoners held in eastern Libya, an area under de facto control by the self-proclaimed Libyan Arab Armed Forces (LAAF) armed group, under the command of Khalifa Heftar. During the show, aired on the Libyan channel Al-Jamahiriya and broadcast from Egypt, Nasser al-Hawari promised to reveal further evidence of these violations.

    “Nasser al-Hawari’s distressed family have not heard from him since he was seized without explanation or an arrest warrant and subjected to enforced disappearance. Egyptian authorities must immediately reveal Nasser al-Hawari’s whereabouts and allow him to contact his family and lawyers,” said Amnesty International Researcher Mahmoud Shalaby.

    Egyptian authorities must immediately reveal Nasser al-Hawari’s whereabouts and allow him to contact his family and lawyers

    Mahmoud Shalaby, Amnesty International

    “They must also drop any investigations and charges solely related to his legitimate media work or for exercising his right to freedom of expression. The close relationship between the Egyptian government and Khalifa Heftar should never justify retaliating against Nasser al-Hawari for exposing human rights violations committed by forces under Khalifa Heftar’s command.”

    Nasser al-Hawari’s younger brother, who was with him at the time, was also arrested, briefly blindfolded and handcuffed in a van before being released and threatened with arrest if he reported his brother’s arrest. Security forces also confiscated his mobile phone.

    Since then, the family’s attempts to get information about Nasser al-Hawari’s whereabouts from the authorities have gone unanswered. Amnesty International reviewed copies of complaints sent by the family to Public Prosecution on 10 February to inquire about al-Hawari’s whereabouts. The family have yet to receive a response.

    Nasser al-Hawari, who established and headed the Libyan organization, Victims for Human Rights, fled Libya for Tunisia in January 2024, and reported being briefly detained by the Deterrence Apparatus for Combatting Terrorism and Organized Crime (DACTO) militia in Tripoli on 29 January 2024. He travelled to Egypt in June 2024.

    After videos appeared online in January 2025 showing detainees in Libya being subjected to torture and other ill-treatment, including beatings and flogging, in Gernada prison, under the control LAAF, Nasser al-Hawari made a number of public statements and TV appearances highlighting impunity for such crimes in eastern Libya, and calling for independent and impartial investigations. Amnesty International has long documented crimes under international law and other serious human rights violations committed by LAAF and allied armed groups, amid a climate of impunity and a brutal crackdown on all forms of dissent.

    MIL OSI NGO –