A coalition of mostly Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging a move by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to withhold about $6.8 billion in congressionally approved federal funding for K-12 schools.
Attorneys general or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island, arguing that the U.S. Department of Education and the Office of Management and Budget threw schools nationwide into chaos by unconstitutionally freezing funding for six programs approved by Congress.
The freeze extended to funding used to support the education of migrant farm workers and their children; recruitment and training of teachers; English proficiency learning; academic enrichment; and after-school and summer programs.
The administration also froze funding used to support adult literacy and job-readiness skills.
The government was legally required to release the money to the states by July 1, the lawsuit said. Instead, the Education Department notified states on June 30 that it would not be issuing grant awards under those programs by that deadline. It cited the change in administration as its reason.
An OMB spokesperson at the time cited an “ongoing programmatic review” of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to “subsidize a radical leftwing agenda.”
OMB also raised objections to the use of the grant money to support scholarships for immigrant students and lessons that involved LGBTQ themes.
The Democratic-led states said the sweeping funding freeze has disrupted school systems, resulting in summer school and after-school programs being canceled or put at risk and the halting of other initiatives with little time for school districts to fill in the holes left in their budgets.
The states say the administration violated the U.S. Constitution by disregarding Congress’ sole authority over spending and ran afoul of federal administrative law by freezing the funds without any reasoned explanation.
The states also say the administration failed to abide by procedures of the Impoundment Control Act, which bars the executive branch from unilaterally refusing to spend funds appropriated by Congress unless certain steps are followed.
The lawsuit follows a series of other cases Democratic-led states and others have filed challenging the administration’s sweeping efforts to freeze or terminate federal funding for programs out of line with Trump’s agenda.
A coalition of mostly Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging a move by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to withhold about $6.8 billion in congressionally approved federal funding for K-12 schools.
Attorneys general or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island, arguing that the U.S. Department of Education and the Office of Management and Budget threw schools nationwide into chaos by unconstitutionally freezing funding for six programs approved by Congress.
The freeze extended to funding used to support the education of migrant farm workers and their children; recruitment and training of teachers; English proficiency learning; academic enrichment; and after-school and summer programs.
The administration also froze funding used to support adult literacy and job-readiness skills.
The government was legally required to release the money to the states by July 1, the lawsuit said. Instead, the Education Department notified states on June 30 that it would not be issuing grant awards under those programs by that deadline. It cited the change in administration as its reason.
An OMB spokesperson at the time cited an “ongoing programmatic review” of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to “subsidize a radical leftwing agenda.”
OMB also raised objections to the use of the grant money to support scholarships for immigrant students and lessons that involved LGBTQ themes.
The Democratic-led states said the sweeping funding freeze has disrupted school systems, resulting in summer school and after-school programs being canceled or put at risk and the halting of other initiatives with little time for school districts to fill in the holes left in their budgets.
The states say the administration violated the U.S. Constitution by disregarding Congress’ sole authority over spending and ran afoul of federal administrative law by freezing the funds without any reasoned explanation.
The states also say the administration failed to abide by procedures of the Impoundment Control Act, which bars the executive branch from unilaterally refusing to spend funds appropriated by Congress unless certain steps are followed.
The lawsuit follows a series of other cases Democratic-led states and others have filed challenging the administration’s sweeping efforts to freeze or terminate federal funding for programs out of line with Trump’s agenda.
A coalition of mostly Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging a move by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to withhold about $6.8 billion in congressionally approved federal funding for K-12 schools.
Attorneys general or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island, arguing that the U.S. Department of Education and the Office of Management and Budget threw schools nationwide into chaos by unconstitutionally freezing funding for six programs approved by Congress.
The freeze extended to funding used to support the education of migrant farm workers and their children; recruitment and training of teachers; English proficiency learning; academic enrichment; and after-school and summer programs.
The administration also froze funding used to support adult literacy and job-readiness skills.
The government was legally required to release the money to the states by July 1, the lawsuit said. Instead, the Education Department notified states on June 30 that it would not be issuing grant awards under those programs by that deadline. It cited the change in administration as its reason.
An OMB spokesperson at the time cited an “ongoing programmatic review” of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to “subsidize a radical leftwing agenda.”
OMB also raised objections to the use of the grant money to support scholarships for immigrant students and lessons that involved LGBTQ themes.
The Democratic-led states said the sweeping funding freeze has disrupted school systems, resulting in summer school and after-school programs being canceled or put at risk and the halting of other initiatives with little time for school districts to fill in the holes left in their budgets.
The states say the administration violated the U.S. Constitution by disregarding Congress’ sole authority over spending and ran afoul of federal administrative law by freezing the funds without any reasoned explanation.
The states also say the administration failed to abide by procedures of the Impoundment Control Act, which bars the executive branch from unilaterally refusing to spend funds appropriated by Congress unless certain steps are followed.
The lawsuit follows a series of other cases Democratic-led states and others have filed challenging the administration’s sweeping efforts to freeze or terminate federal funding for programs out of line with Trump’s agenda.
A coalition of mostly Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging a move by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to withhold about $6.8 billion in congressionally approved federal funding for K-12 schools.
Attorneys general or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island, arguing that the U.S. Department of Education and the Office of Management and Budget threw schools nationwide into chaos by unconstitutionally freezing funding for six programs approved by Congress.
The freeze extended to funding used to support the education of migrant farm workers and their children; recruitment and training of teachers; English proficiency learning; academic enrichment; and after-school and summer programs.
The administration also froze funding used to support adult literacy and job-readiness skills.
The government was legally required to release the money to the states by July 1, the lawsuit said. Instead, the Education Department notified states on June 30 that it would not be issuing grant awards under those programs by that deadline. It cited the change in administration as its reason.
An OMB spokesperson at the time cited an “ongoing programmatic review” of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to “subsidize a radical leftwing agenda.”
OMB also raised objections to the use of the grant money to support scholarships for immigrant students and lessons that involved LGBTQ themes.
The Democratic-led states said the sweeping funding freeze has disrupted school systems, resulting in summer school and after-school programs being canceled or put at risk and the halting of other initiatives with little time for school districts to fill in the holes left in their budgets.
The states say the administration violated the U.S. Constitution by disregarding Congress’ sole authority over spending and ran afoul of federal administrative law by freezing the funds without any reasoned explanation.
The states also say the administration failed to abide by procedures of the Impoundment Control Act, which bars the executive branch from unilaterally refusing to spend funds appropriated by Congress unless certain steps are followed.
The lawsuit follows a series of other cases Democratic-led states and others have filed challenging the administration’s sweeping efforts to freeze or terminate federal funding for programs out of line with Trump’s agenda.
A coalition of mostly Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging a move by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to withhold about $6.8 billion in congressionally approved federal funding for K-12 schools.
Attorneys general or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island, arguing that the U.S. Department of Education and the Office of Management and Budget threw schools nationwide into chaos by unconstitutionally freezing funding for six programs approved by Congress.
The freeze extended to funding used to support the education of migrant farm workers and their children; recruitment and training of teachers; English proficiency learning; academic enrichment; and after-school and summer programs.
The administration also froze funding used to support adult literacy and job-readiness skills.
The government was legally required to release the money to the states by July 1, the lawsuit said. Instead, the Education Department notified states on June 30 that it would not be issuing grant awards under those programs by that deadline. It cited the change in administration as its reason.
An OMB spokesperson at the time cited an “ongoing programmatic review” of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to “subsidize a radical leftwing agenda.”
OMB also raised objections to the use of the grant money to support scholarships for immigrant students and lessons that involved LGBTQ themes.
The Democratic-led states said the sweeping funding freeze has disrupted school systems, resulting in summer school and after-school programs being canceled or put at risk and the halting of other initiatives with little time for school districts to fill in the holes left in their budgets.
The states say the administration violated the U.S. Constitution by disregarding Congress’ sole authority over spending and ran afoul of federal administrative law by freezing the funds without any reasoned explanation.
The states also say the administration failed to abide by procedures of the Impoundment Control Act, which bars the executive branch from unilaterally refusing to spend funds appropriated by Congress unless certain steps are followed.
The lawsuit follows a series of other cases Democratic-led states and others have filed challenging the administration’s sweeping efforts to freeze or terminate federal funding for programs out of line with Trump’s agenda.
A coalition of mostly Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging a move by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to withhold about $6.8 billion in congressionally approved federal funding for K-12 schools.
Attorneys general or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island, arguing that the U.S. Department of Education and the Office of Management and Budget threw schools nationwide into chaos by unconstitutionally freezing funding for six programs approved by Congress.
The freeze extended to funding used to support the education of migrant farm workers and their children; recruitment and training of teachers; English proficiency learning; academic enrichment; and after-school and summer programs.
The administration also froze funding used to support adult literacy and job-readiness skills.
The government was legally required to release the money to the states by July 1, the lawsuit said. Instead, the Education Department notified states on June 30 that it would not be issuing grant awards under those programs by that deadline. It cited the change in administration as its reason.
An OMB spokesperson at the time cited an “ongoing programmatic review” of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to “subsidize a radical leftwing agenda.”
OMB also raised objections to the use of the grant money to support scholarships for immigrant students and lessons that involved LGBTQ themes.
The Democratic-led states said the sweeping funding freeze has disrupted school systems, resulting in summer school and after-school programs being canceled or put at risk and the halting of other initiatives with little time for school districts to fill in the holes left in their budgets.
The states say the administration violated the U.S. Constitution by disregarding Congress’ sole authority over spending and ran afoul of federal administrative law by freezing the funds without any reasoned explanation.
The states also say the administration failed to abide by procedures of the Impoundment Control Act, which bars the executive branch from unilaterally refusing to spend funds appropriated by Congress unless certain steps are followed.
The lawsuit follows a series of other cases Democratic-led states and others have filed challenging the administration’s sweeping efforts to freeze or terminate federal funding for programs out of line with Trump’s agenda.
A coalition of mostly Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging a move by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to withhold about $6.8 billion in congressionally approved federal funding for K-12 schools.
Attorneys general or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island, arguing that the U.S. Department of Education and the Office of Management and Budget threw schools nationwide into chaos by unconstitutionally freezing funding for six programs approved by Congress.
The freeze extended to funding used to support the education of migrant farm workers and their children; recruitment and training of teachers; English proficiency learning; academic enrichment; and after-school and summer programs.
The administration also froze funding used to support adult literacy and job-readiness skills.
The government was legally required to release the money to the states by July 1, the lawsuit said. Instead, the Education Department notified states on June 30 that it would not be issuing grant awards under those programs by that deadline. It cited the change in administration as its reason.
An OMB spokesperson at the time cited an “ongoing programmatic review” of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to “subsidize a radical leftwing agenda.”
OMB also raised objections to the use of the grant money to support scholarships for immigrant students and lessons that involved LGBTQ themes.
The Democratic-led states said the sweeping funding freeze has disrupted school systems, resulting in summer school and after-school programs being canceled or put at risk and the halting of other initiatives with little time for school districts to fill in the holes left in their budgets.
The states say the administration violated the U.S. Constitution by disregarding Congress’ sole authority over spending and ran afoul of federal administrative law by freezing the funds without any reasoned explanation.
The states also say the administration failed to abide by procedures of the Impoundment Control Act, which bars the executive branch from unilaterally refusing to spend funds appropriated by Congress unless certain steps are followed.
The lawsuit follows a series of other cases Democratic-led states and others have filed challenging the administration’s sweeping efforts to freeze or terminate federal funding for programs out of line with Trump’s agenda.
Indonesian rescuers were searching for 11 people missing after a boat capsized in bad weather off the Mentawai Islands in West Sumatra province, the local search and rescue agency said on Tuesday.
Seven people had been rescued after the incident, which happened on Monday at around 11 a.m. (0400 GMT), the rescue agency said in a statement.
Of 18 people on board, 10 were local government officials. The boat had departed Sikakap, a small town in the Mentawai Islands, and was heading to another small town, Tuapejat.
Two boats and dozens of rescuers were deployed to find the missing people on Tuesday.
Boats and ferries are a regular mode of transport in Indonesia, an archipelago of more than 17,000 islands, and accidents are relatively common due to bad weather as well as lax safety standards that often allow vessels to be overloaded.
A ferry sank earlier this month near the island of Bali. Of the 65 people on board, 18 died, 30 survived and 17 remain missing.
Following legislation passed by Nauru’s parliament last month to establish an authority to regulate virtual assets including cryptocurrency, the government has appointed highly respected Australian banking and financial markets executive Brian Phelps as its inaugural CEO.
In announcing the appointment, President of Nauru David Adeang said Mr Phelps’ vast experience will ensure the Command Ridge Virtual Asset Authority (CRVAA) will have a foundation of integrity and impact, champion innovation, and promote Nauru as a trusted digital jurisdiction.
He reinforced the government’s goal of attracting businesses that bring investment, job creation, and financial innovation to the nation.
“We must be innovative in our quest for economic resilience and a higher standard of living for our people, while prioritising international best practices and the highest levels of governance and compliance,” Mr Adeang said.
“This ensures investors and foreign platforms can have great trust in Nauru.
Mr Phelps has worked extensively with regulators, industry bodies and government, and served for 21 years as General Manager, Broking and Markets at CommSec, Australia’s largest online stockbroking firm and subsidiary of the Commonwealth Bank.
He has also been a committee member of the Australian Financial Markets Association.
The CRVAA will provide a licencing scheme to allow virtual asset service providers to register and offer their services using Nauru as a base.
It is tasked with ensuring cybersecurity standards, monitoring financial transactions and enforcing compliance with international anti-money laundering and financial transparency protocols.
Mr Phelps said he was attracted to the role because the regulatory authority would be transformational to Nauru.
“This can reshape and strengthen Nauru’s economy over the long term, and create sustainability for future generations of Nauruans.”
He said the benefits to Nauru will go far beyond cryptocurrency and virtual assets.
“I see us attracting international companies to invest in Nauru and opening up new employment pathways as Nauruans build new skill sets.
“It’s a very exciting initiative.”
Mr Phelps said the opportunities were endless and include potentially transforming Nauru into a hub for AI and other leading technology.
Chief Secretary Chan Kwok-ki began his visit to Hainan Province by meeting officials there and touring the Hainan Chronicles Museum along with the Wenchang Yaoguang Rocket Viewing Platform.
Mr Chan first met Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Hainan Provincial Committee Party Secretary and Chairman Li Rongcan in Haikou to exchange views on the latest developments in the two places, and discuss promoting and deepening the partnership between Hong Kong and Hainan Province.
Mr Chan said that there is a frequent flow of people, logistics and capital between the two places, and with the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the two governments in March this year, the exchanges between Hong Kong and Hainan Province will be closer in future.
He stressed that Hong Kong will fully leverage its unique advantage of being backed by the motherland and connected to the world under the “one country, two systems” principle, and will work with Hainan Province to achieve results attributable to the two places’ advantages, deepen economic, trade and cultural exchanges, and make greater contributions to the country’s high-quality development and high-level opening up.
Mr Chan then visited the Hainan Chronicles Museum to learn about the patriotic and revolutionary tradition education work there as well as the construction and development progress of the Hainan Special Economic Zone and Hainan as an international tourism island.
Afterwards, he departed for Wenchang to meet CPC Wenchang Municipal Committee Secretary Wang Peng.
Mr Chan introduced the latest situation of Hong Kong, and exchanged views with Mr Wang on further promoting exchanges between the two places and exploring more co-operation and development opportunities.
The Chief Secretary visited the Wenchang Yaoguang Rocket Viewing Platform to join a science exploration activity of the Hainan Aerospace Science & Research Study Tour under the Strive & Rise Programme.
While there, he engaged with the participants and encouraged them to grasp this valuable learning opportunity to learn and understand the country’s robust developments and significant achievements in the field of aerospace.
He also encouraged the participants to continue to work hard in the future to cultivate a sense of contributing to the country and serving the society, and become a new generation with a sense of social responsibility and contributions.
Mr Chan added that he believes the experience of joining the meaningful aerospace science and research study tour will boost the participants’ sense of patriotism and national pride.
MOFA extends sympathies following severe flooding in central Texas
Date：2025-07-07 Data Source：Department of North American Affairs
July 7, 2025 No. 231
The central region of the US state of Texas was recently hit by catastrophic flooding, causing major devastation. More than 80 people are confirmed to have died, including dozens of children, while an unknown number of people remain missing. Flood warnings currently remain in place across certain parts of the region.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) promptly instructed the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office (TECO) in Houston to ascertain whether any Taiwanese nationals had been affected. It also instructed the office to convey condolences and sympathies to the government of Texas on behalf of the government of Taiwan and emphasize that Taiwan would be glad to offer assistance.
According to information currently available to TECO Houston, no Taiwanese nationals have been identified among the dead, injured, or stranded as a result of the flooding. MOFA and TECO Houston will closely follow developments, maintain contact with the relevant Texan agencies, and provide assistance if needed. (E)
Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung on July 7 attended the opening of the 2025 International Law Association-American Society of International Law Asia-Pacific Research Forum, where he addressed more than 50 noted international scholars from over 20 nations.
In his remarks, Minister Lin said that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had been promoting the policy of integrated diplomacy, which aimed to deepen partnerships with like-minded countries based on the values of freedom, democracy, and human rights. He explained that Taiwan had proactively leveraged its diplomatic strengths—consolidating diplomatic ties, expanding its alliance of friendly nations, and integrating the resources of the public and private sectors with the goal of having Taiwan continue to be a Taiwan of the world.
Noting the extreme turbulence of international relations and the severe geopolitical challenges facing the Indo-Pacific region, Minister Lin said that in recent years, China had repeatedly challenged the rules-based international order, gravely undermining democracy, the rule of law, human rights, freedom, and even fair trade. He observed that the world’s leading states had gone on alert and that an increasing number of countries had acted by sending warships through the Taiwan Strait, underscoring that the Taiwan Strait constituted international waters and demonstrating the great importance that they attached to the security of the Indo-Pacific region.
Minister Lin also pointed out that China had long sought to pressure Taiwan in the international arena, enacting the Anti-Secession Law in 2005 and 22 guidelines on punishing independence in 2024, among other legal warfare tools. He said that China had inappropriately distorted UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 2758, seeking to weaponize the text and transform it into a tool to suppress Taiwan’s international participation and provide cover for an armed invasion. He stated that China had used the resolution as justification for its false claims that Taiwan was a part of China and that the Taiwan Strait was China’s internal waters, adding that such claims were clearly contrary to the facts and to democratic values.
Minister Lin noted that in response to China’s efforts to distort UNGA Resolution 2758, last year the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, the European Parliament, and the parliaments of Australia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the Czech Republic passed resolutions clearly opposing China’s misrepresentations. He said that senior US officials had also publicly expressed a similar position and that the international community had gradually gained an accurate understanding of Resolution 2758—that it neither mentioned Taiwan nor precluded Taiwan’s international participation.
Looking back on history, Minister Lin remarked that following the Second World War, the signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, which was binding under international law, had supplanted the political statements contained in the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation. He also pointed out that the People’s Republic of China had never governed Taiwan. He said that since the mid-1980s, Taiwan had experienced political liberalization and democratization, leading to the completion of its first direct presidential election in 1996. At that point, he said, the central executive and legislative representatives of government of the Republic of China were all elected by the people of Taiwan—and since then, the Republic of China government had been the sole legitimate government exercising effective rule over Taiwan and representing Taiwan internationally. He added that this underscored the cross-strait status quo that the Republic of China (Taiwan) and the People’s Republic of China existed as equals, with neither being subordinate to the other. He said that the Republic of China (Taiwan) had experienced three changes of governing party—in 2000, 2008, and 2016—that had consolidated the democratic system and helped create a clearer sense of national identity, reflecting the Taiwanese people’s pursuit of and desire for freedom and democracy.
Minister Lin went on to explain that, in response to dramatic changes in the international geopolitical landscape and the threat of authoritarian expansion, President Lai Ching-te had issued 17 national security measures. He said that China’s vaulting ambition had alerted the international community to the fact that Taiwan was not subordinate to the PRC. He observed that this had upended China’s cross-strait framework, making the issue of democratic Taiwan and authoritarian China not merely a regional matter, but a question the countries of the world must address together.
Minister Lin emphasized that the more secure Taiwan was, the more secure the world would be, and that the stronger Taiwan grew, the more secure the world’s democracies would be. He reiterated that Taiwan was a Taiwan of the world and said that the Republic of China (Taiwan), as a democratic nation and a force for good in the world, had demonstrated that it was part of the global village through the continued application of democratic processes and through its international participation.
Concluding his remarks, Minister Lin said that Taiwan would continue to be at the forefront of the global battle against authoritarian expansionism, adding that Taiwan would work with like-minded countries to defend the values of freedom and democracy and ensure regional peace, security, and prosperity. (E)
Foreign Minister Lin hosts welcome luncheon for Haitian Foreign Minister Jean-Baptiste
Date：2025-07-09 Data Source：Department of Latin American and Caribbean Affairs
July 9, 2025 No. 234
Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung hosted a luncheon on July 7 for a delegation from the Republic of Haiti led by Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean-Victor Harvel Jean-Baptiste and his wife. Minister Lin welcomed the delegation on behalf of the Taiwan government and expressed his anticipation that, based on the deep friendship between the two nations, bilateral exchanges and cooperation would continue to expand.
Minister Lin noted that Taiwan and Haiti had maintained diplomatic relations for 69 years and that the two sides had enjoyed fruitful collaboration in a wide range of areas, including food security, medical care, public health, and education. He added that such cooperation had benefited the people of Haiti and earned considerable recognition from the international community.
Furthermore, Minister Lin thanked the Haitian government for voicing support for Taiwan on the international stage, such as at the World Health Assembly and the Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. He said that the people and government of Taiwan deeply appreciated Haiti’s long-term and staunch backing of Taiwan’s participation in international organizations.
In his remarks, Minister Jean-Baptiste thanked Minister Lin for his warm hospitality. He also took the opportunity to express, on behalf of the people and government of Haiti, gratitude to all sectors of Taiwan for providing humanitarian and food assistance over the years and participating in projects that benefited women, children, and other disadvantaged groups in Haiti. Minister Jean-Baptiste said that he looked forward to gaining a better understanding of Taiwan’s political, economic, and social development during his visit so as to further deepen the close collaborative relations between the two countries.
Minister Lin, Minister Jean-Baptiste, and the other guests at the luncheon exchanged views on Haiti’s current political and social situation, as well as bilateral cooperation. Minister Lin expressed Taiwan’s willingness to continue to work with the Haitian government to help Haiti restore social stability, advance economic prosperity, and bolster national development. (E)
Australians have long been some of the highest users of herbal and nutritional supplements that claim to boost mood or ease depression. These include omega-3s (found in fish oil), St John’s wort, probiotics and vitamin D.
In fact, among Australians with depression, these supplements are more popular than prescription medicines.
But do they actually work? And how do they compare to other treatments? A new review has assessed the evidence from 209 studies – here’s what it found.
Do these supplements work?
The new study aimed to assess the international evidence available for common over-the-counter products for depression in adults aged 18–60.
Despite their widespread popularity and availability, the study found there is surprisingly little research on these therapies, compared with psychological therapies and prescription antidepressants.
Only a few products had a relatively large body of evidence suggesting they were effective at treating symptoms. These were omega-3 supplements, St John’s wort, saffron, probiotics and vitamin D.
However, most products had only a single trial examining their use.
The researchers noted there was promising evidence for some herbal and nutritional supplements, where multiple studies did exist. These included folic acid, zinc, Rhodiola, lavender and lemon balm. But there is not enough evidence yet to recommend them, so more studies would be needed.
What does other research say?
These findings appear to support previous research assessing supplements for depression.
In 2024, the Australian government’s review of natural therapies also found moderate evidence that several herbal medicines can relieve symptoms in mild to moderate depression. These include curcumin (from turmeric), saffron and St John’s wort.
It also found moderate evidence St John’s wort was as effective as conventional antidepressants.
However, the major caveat is that much of the existing evidence relates to mild to moderate depression.
Mild to moderate depression usually means few symptoms beyond the minimum required for diagnosis (such as loss of pleasure and depressed mood). Major depression involves five or more symptoms along with significant distress and impact on day-to-day function.
While some products were found to have some effect in major depressive disorders – probiotics, for example – there is little evidence to suggest they’re effective where a large number of symptoms exist.
Dose and quality varies
The dose and quality of over-the-counter products can also vary significantly, which can make it difficult to identify appropriate products or assess which ones work.
In the United Kingdom, official advice for health-care practitioners acknowledges there is evidence St John’s wort can help with less severe forms of depression. But it also advises caution in recommending it, given how much the dose, preparation and quality can vary between different herbal products.
In Australia, guidelines for psychiatrists treating mood disorders such as depression note that good evidence exists for using omega-3 fatty acids (fish oils). But they highlight that there only seems to be a benefit when the product has 60% or more eicosapentaenoic acid (one of the main types of omega-3).
Whether folate supplements are effective for depression can depend on their form, which active ingredient is used, and how well the body can absorb it.
There may be other nuances in other supplements that we need more research to understand.
Are there any risks or downsides?
The study also concluded these products present few safety issues, whether used alone or in combination with other treatments. This is the reason most remain available over the counter.
However, herbal medicines and dietary supplements also contain chemicals that can work like drugs and interact with other medications.
For example, the way St John’s wort works on neurotransmitters (the body’s chemical messengers) is similar to many prescription antidepressants.
So taking it alongside antidepressants can lead to serotonin syndrome, a condition which can lead to fever and seizures in extreme instances. In rare cases, you may experience similar side effects to taking antidepressants.
For instance, some studies suggest omega-3 supplements used in addition to standard antidepressant therapy resulted in the best outcomes. But more research is needed to explore this link.
How do they stack up against other therapies?
Pharmaceutical medications, such as antidepressants, and talk therapies remain the gold standard in Australian guidelines for mood disorders. They are the most studied interventions for these disorders, which means we have the most evidence for how well they work.
However, emerging evidence is developing for other therapies too.
Lifestyle interventions to improve diet and exercise have been shown to be as effective in addressing symptoms of depression as receiving psychological treatment alone.
Nutrients are the building blocks of many body processes, and some nutrient deficiencies themselves (such as iron and B12) can cause depressive symptoms. So their potential role of nutritional supplements is perhaps unsurprising.
However, research – including our own – increasingly demonstrates eating nutrient-rich foods (rather than taking supplements) can be enough to improve symptoms in mood disorders such as depression.
The Australian government’s review of natural therapies also found the evidence for non-pharmacological treatments, such as yoga, was more certain than for herbal medicines and nutritional supplements in treating depression.
It’s also important to note that depressive symptoms rarely present alone. They can be secondary to other underlying health conditions (such as hypothyroidism) or present with other conditions.
Investigating and addressing these potential root causes and improving general health is essential in managing symptoms.
What are the key takeaways?
Some herbal and nutritional supplements do appear to have a potentially beneficial effect for less severe forms of depression. But for many of these therapies there is still not enough evidence to offer definitive recommendations.
While the Therapeutic Goods Administration regulates the safety and quality of supplements, there is still variation in product quality, dose and how well the body can absorb it.
If you’re thinking of using herbal or nutritional supplements, it’s important to consult a health professional, such as a GP, naturopath or even a psychologist.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.
Jon Wardle is Foundation Director of the National Centre for Naturopathic Medicine and the Maurice Blackmore Chair of Naturopathic Medicine at Southern Cross University, which undertakes training and research in nutritional and herbal therapies. He has received funding from multiple foundations and agencies to conduct research on nutritional and herbal medicines, including the National Health and Medical Research Council and Medical Research Future Fund. He was part of the both the National Health and Medical Research Council Natural Therapies Working Committee and the Department of Health Natural Therapies Review Expert Advisory Panel which supported Professor Kidd in conducting the reviews mentioned in this article. However, this article represents his personal academic opinion and does not represent the opinions of either of these organisations.
Carrie Thomson-Casey is affiliated with both major psychology professional associations the Australian Psychological Society (APS) and the Australian Association of Psychologists Inc (AAPi). Carrie is also the past convenor and now treasurer of an APS interest group Psychology and Integrative Mental Health.
Carrie is an author of one of the papers Jon has cited.
Jessica Bayes has received funding from several organisations to conduct research exploring diet and mental wellbeing, in addition to research investigating nutritional supplements. Jessica has also authored some of the articles referenced here.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shannon Brincat, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, University of the Sunshine Coast
We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedlycompared to tyranny.
This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.
We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.
Where does tyranny come from?
The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.
A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.
Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.
These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.
Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.
According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.
He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.
Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.
Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.
The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.
For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.
It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.
Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.
Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.
Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.
Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.
Protecting democracy from tyranny
Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.
For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.
It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.
This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.
The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.
Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.
Tyranny in classical China
In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.
During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.
These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.
Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.
There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.
Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.
Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.
To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.
Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.
Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.
According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.
Tyranny today
Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.
Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.
Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.
Shannon Brincat 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.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs representing the Government of Liberia signed the African Union Convention on Ending Violence Against Women and Girls (AUCEVAWG) The signing ceremony took place on the sidelines of the 47th Ordinary Session of the Executive Council of the African Union in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea.
Speaking on behalf of the Government of Liberia, Assistant Minister for Afro-Asian Affairs, Honorable Charlyne A. Taylor, who signed the Convention, reaffirmed Liberia’s commitment to advancing the women, peace and security agenda in Africa.
She noted that Liberia will continue to work with the African Union and all partners in implementing the Convention to protect and empower women and girl’s rights.
Minister Taylor praised the African Union and affiliated organizations for their work in protecting women and girls, and promised that Liberia will accelerate the process of ratifying the convention given that Convention aligns well with the agenda of President Joseph Nyuma Boakai, Sr. who has made women empowerment and protection of women and girls a key program of his government.
The Vice Chairperson of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Honorable Janet Ramatoulie Sallah-Njie, commended Liberia for the bold step and praised Liberia for its impressive record in promoting and protecting women’s rights, well as enhancing women’s participation in government and the economy.
She noted that Liberia is the fifth African country to sign the convention but encouraged Liberia to lead in the ratification process.
Also attending the ceremony were Dr. Ibrahim Nyei, Deputy Minister for International Cooperation and Economic Integration; Ambassador Liberata Mulamula, the African Union Special Envoy on Women, Peace and Security; and Her Excellency Doris Mpoumou, UNWOMEN Special Representative to the African Union Commission and the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa.
– on behalf of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Liberia.
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
The Russian Academy of Sciences has announced the winners of the 2024 competition for medals with prizes for the best scientific works of young scientists and students. One of the laureates was a postgraduate student Faculty of Geology and Geophysics (FGG) of NSU Alexey Tarasov. He received the award in geology, geophysics, geochemistry and mining sciences for his research on melt inclusions in minerals of mantle peridotite xenoliths.
We talked to Alexey about his scientific path, research topic, participation in the competition and plans for the future.
— How did you end up at NSU?
— I entered NSU in 2018 after finishing school in Barnaul, based on the results of the Unified State Exam. I studied for a bachelor’s degree at the Faculty of Geography and Geography, then entered the master’s program. Now I continue my studies in graduate school.
— Why did you choose the Faculty of Geology and Geophysics?
— I have been interested in minerals since childhood, I had a small collection at home. I attended the “Young Geologist” club — there was one in Barnaul. Gradually, my hobby turned into a professional interest. I knew that Novosibirsk had a strong school in geochemistry, and this played a decisive role. There was no doubt where to go.
— Tell us about your scientific work for which you received the Russian Academy of Sciences medal.
— The overall goal of all our work is to understand how diamond deposits are formed. Diamond is a form of carbon that is stable only under very high pressure, so it forms deep in the mantle, at depths of 150–160 kilometers and more. Most diamonds formed more than 2.5 billion years ago and are still in the mantle because it is too deep to mine them.
But there are kimberlite magmas. They form in the mantle and, unlike most other magmas, rise to the surface very quickly. In doing so, they take with them fragments of mantle rocks – so-called xenoliths, and minerals – xenocrysts. Sometimes – with diamonds.
When magma reaches the surface, it forms kimberlite pipes, which are the main source of diamonds in nature. But what is kimberlite magma? What it consists of, where it comes from, and under what conditions it originates – is still not exactly known. This is a key scientific question, and I am working on solving it.
– How do you research this?
— I study melt inclusions in xenolith minerals. These are tiny drops of magma that were “sealed” in crystals during their growth and preserved in their original form. These inclusions provide a unique opportunity to reconstruct the composition of kimberlite melts at the moment of their origin — before all the changes and contaminations that occur during their ascent to the surface.
The composition of these inclusions can tell us about the temperature and pressure of formation, and the type of rock from which they formed. This helps us get closer to understanding where and how new kimberlite pipes can form, and therefore potentially predict where diamonds can be found.
— What, in your opinion, helped you receive the RAS medal?
— It’s hard to say how exactly the selection took place. But I think several factors played a role. I tried to show that my work was not just fundamental, but also had potential applied significance. In addition, at the time of application, I had six published articles in which I was the author or co-author.
But, to be honest, the main thing is not “what”, but “who”. My scientific supervisor Alexander Viktorovich Golovin. He insisted that I participate in conferences, helped with writing articles, tolerated my mistakes, demanded high quality. It was he who convinced me to apply for the RAS competition. In addition to him, other colleagues at the institute and teachers at the faculty supported me. Without them, nothing would have happened.
— How did the competition itself go?
— It was quite simple: you had to prepare an application, attach a research paper (in my case, it was a master’s thesis), provide a list of publications, and sign documents. There were no in-person stages — everything was done in writing.
— What are your plans next?
— I am continuing my postgraduate studies and working at the Institute of Geology and Mineralogy of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. I plan to defend my PhD thesis in 2027. I am currently finishing my first article, where I am the first author, and I want to publish it in a foreign journal of the 1st–2nd quartile. I already sent it six months ago, but was rejected. The reviewers pointed out the weak discussion and insufficient English.
Now I am rewriting the text, looking for a translator and funding for professional translation. In parallel, I am working on the following articles. My supervisor has set a task – five articles by the end of my postgraduate studies. To be honest, I am not sure that I will cope, but I will make every effort.
The Russian Academy of Sciences holds an annual competition for medals and prizes for young scientists and students. In 2024, 21 young scientists and 21 students received awards. Each laureate receives a medal, a diploma, a badge, and a cash prize of 100,000 rubles for young scientists and 50,000 rubles for students.
The competition covers key areas of natural, technical and human sciences and is held with the aim of encouraging young scientists, supporting professional growth and enhancing the prestige of research activities.
We congratulate Alexey Tarasov on his well-deserved award and wish him success in his future scientific research!
Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
The Russian Academy of Sciences has announced the winners of the 2024 competition for medals with prizes for the best scientific works of young scientists and students. One of the laureates was a postgraduate student Faculty of Geology and Geophysics (FGG) of NSU Alexey Tarasov. He received the award in geology, geophysics, geochemistry and mining sciences for his research on melt inclusions in minerals of mantle peridotite xenoliths.
We talked to Alexey about his scientific path, research topic, participation in the competition and plans for the future.
— How did you end up at NSU?
— I entered NSU in 2018 after finishing school in Barnaul, based on the results of the Unified State Exam. I studied for a bachelor’s degree at the Faculty of Geography and Geography, then entered the master’s program. Now I continue my studies in graduate school.
— Why did you choose the Faculty of Geology and Geophysics?
— I have been interested in minerals since childhood, I had a small collection at home. I attended the “Young Geologist” club — there was one in Barnaul. Gradually, my hobby turned into a professional interest. I knew that Novosibirsk had a strong school in geochemistry, and this played a decisive role. There was no doubt where to go.
— Tell us about your scientific work for which you received the Russian Academy of Sciences medal.
— The overall goal of all our work is to understand how diamond deposits are formed. Diamond is a form of carbon that is stable only under very high pressure, so it forms deep in the mantle, at depths of 150–160 kilometers and more. Most diamonds formed more than 2.5 billion years ago and are still in the mantle because it is too deep to mine them.
But there are kimberlite magmas. They form in the mantle and, unlike most other magmas, rise to the surface very quickly. In doing so, they take with them fragments of mantle rocks – so-called xenoliths, and minerals – xenocrysts. Sometimes – with diamonds.
When magma reaches the surface, it forms kimberlite pipes, which are the main source of diamonds in nature. But what is kimberlite magma? What it consists of, where it comes from, and under what conditions it originates – is still not exactly known. This is a key scientific question, and I am working on solving it.
– How do you research this?
— I study melt inclusions in xenolith minerals. These are tiny drops of magma that were “sealed” in crystals during their growth and preserved in their original form. These inclusions provide a unique opportunity to reconstruct the composition of kimberlite melts at the moment of their origin — before all the changes and contaminations that occur during their ascent to the surface.
The composition of these inclusions can tell us about the temperature and pressure of formation, and the type of rock from which they formed. This helps us get closer to understanding where and how new kimberlite pipes can form, and therefore potentially predict where diamonds can be found.
— What, in your opinion, helped you receive the RAS medal?
— It’s hard to say how exactly the selection took place. But I think several factors played a role. I tried to show that my work was not just fundamental, but also had potential applied significance. In addition, at the time of application, I had six published articles in which I was the author or co-author.
But, to be honest, the main thing is not “what”, but “who”. My scientific supervisor Alexander Viktorovich Golovin. He insisted that I participate in conferences, helped with writing articles, tolerated my mistakes, demanded high quality. It was he who convinced me to apply for the RAS competition. In addition to him, other colleagues at the institute and teachers at the faculty supported me. Without them, nothing would have happened.
— How did the competition itself go?
— It was quite simple: you had to prepare an application, attach a research paper (in my case, it was a master’s thesis), provide a list of publications, and sign documents. There were no in-person stages — everything was done in writing.
— What are your plans next?
— I am continuing my postgraduate studies and working at the Institute of Geology and Mineralogy of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. I plan to defend my PhD thesis in 2027. I am currently finishing my first article, where I am the first author, and I want to publish it in a foreign journal of the 1st–2nd quartile. I already sent it six months ago, but was rejected. The reviewers pointed out the weak discussion and insufficient English.
Now I am rewriting the text, looking for a translator and funding for professional translation. In parallel, I am working on the following articles. My supervisor has set a task – five articles by the end of my postgraduate studies. To be honest, I am not sure that I will cope, but I will make every effort.
The Russian Academy of Sciences holds an annual competition for medals and prizes for young scientists and students. In 2024, 21 young scientists and 21 students received awards. Each laureate receives a medal, a diploma, a badge, and a cash prize of 100,000 rubles for young scientists and 50,000 rubles for students.
The competition covers key areas of natural, technical and human sciences and is held with the aim of encouraging young scientists, supporting professional growth and enhancing the prestige of research activities.
We congratulate Alexey Tarasov on his well-deserved award and wish him success in his future scientific research!
Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Most main applicants travelling to the UK on study or work-related visas will no longer need a physical sticker visa in passports from today (15 July).
The UK Government is replacing physical immigration documents for most student and worker visas with a digital proof of immigration status, an eVisa. An eVisa is an online record of a person’s immigration permission in the UK, and any conditions which apply, which can be viewed by creating and accessing an online UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) account.
eVisas are part of an enhanced border and immigration system that will not only make the visa process easier, but is more secure, digital and streamlined. eVisas are tried and tested, with millions of people already using them on select immigration routes.
British High Commissioner, Jane Marriott CMG OBE, said:
These changes to the UK visa system will make it much simpler for students and workers to prove their identity and visa status. It also means applicants can hold onto their passports, saving them time.
Updating from a physical document to an eVisa does not affect anyone’s immigration status or the conditions of their permission to enter or stay in the UK.
E-visas are being rolled out for the main applicants for:
Students, including short term study for 11 months
Global Business Mobility routes (specifically, Senior or Specialist Worker, Graduate Trainee, UK Expansion Worker, Service Supplier, Secondment Worker)
Global Talent
International Sportsperson
Skilled Worker (including Health and Care)
Temporary Work routes (specifically, Charity Worker, Creative Worker, Government Authorised Exchange, International Agreement, and Religious work routes)
Youth Mobility Scheme
Holders can link their travel document (such as passport) to their UKVI account to facilitate straightforward international travel. People who have created a UKVI account will be able to use the view and prove service to prove their status securely with third parties, such as employers or landlords (in England).
Applicants applying as a dependant, or as a main applicant for visas other than study or work, e.g. general visitor visas, will still need a physical sticker visa. Anyone with existing, in date, physical visa stickers do not need to take any action.
This will eventually be rolled out to all visa routes meaning a more secure and streamlined process for all UK visa customers.
For updates on the British High Commission, please follow our social media channels:
We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedlycompared to tyranny.
This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.
We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.
Where does tyranny come from?
The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.
A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.
Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.
These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.
Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.
According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.
He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.
Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.
Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.
The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.
For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.
It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.
Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.
Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.
Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.
Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.
Protecting democracy from tyranny
Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.
For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.
It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.
This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.
The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.
Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.
Tyranny in classical China
In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.
During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.
These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.
Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.
There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.
Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.
Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.
To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.
Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.
Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.
According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.
Tyranny today
Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.
Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.
Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.
Shannon Brincat 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.
We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedlycompared to tyranny.
This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.
We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.
Where does tyranny come from?
The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.
A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.
Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.
These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.
Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.
According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.
He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.
Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.
Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.
The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.
For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.
It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.
Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.
Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.
Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.
Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.
Protecting democracy from tyranny
Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.
For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.
It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.
This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.
The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.
Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.
Tyranny in classical China
In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.
During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.
These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.
Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.
There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.
Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.
Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.
To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.
Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.
Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.
According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.
Tyranny today
Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.
Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.
Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.
Shannon Brincat 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.
We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedlycompared to tyranny.
This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.
We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.
Where does tyranny come from?
The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.
A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.
Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.
These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.
Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.
According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.
He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.
Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.
Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.
The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.
For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.
It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.
Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.
Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.
Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.
Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.
Protecting democracy from tyranny
Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.
For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.
It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.
This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.
The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.
Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.
Tyranny in classical China
In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.
During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.
These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.
Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.
There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.
Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.
Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.
To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.
Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.
Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.
According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.
Tyranny today
Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.
Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.
Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.
Shannon Brincat 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.
We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedlycompared to tyranny.
This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.
We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.
Where does tyranny come from?
The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.
A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.
Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.
These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.
Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.
According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.
He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.
Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.
Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.
The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.
For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.
It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.
Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.
Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.
Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.
Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.
Protecting democracy from tyranny
Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.
For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.
It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.
This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.
The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.
Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.
Tyranny in classical China
In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.
During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.
These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.
Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.
There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.
Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.
Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.
To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.
Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.
Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.
According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.
Tyranny today
Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.
Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.
Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.
Shannon Brincat 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.
We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedlycompared to tyranny.
This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.
We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.
Where does tyranny come from?
The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.
A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.
Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.
These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.
Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.
According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.
He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.
Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.
Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.
The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.
For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.
It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.
Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.
Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.
Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.
Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.
Protecting democracy from tyranny
Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.
For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.
It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.
This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.
The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.
Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.
Tyranny in classical China
In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.
During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.
These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.
Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.
There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.
Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.
Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.
To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.
Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.
Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.
According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.
Tyranny today
Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.
Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.
Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.
Shannon Brincat 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.
External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar on Tuesday met Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing as part of a delegation of foreign ministers attending the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meeting.
In a post on X, Jaishankar said, “Called on President Xi Jinping this morning in Beijing along with my fellow SCO Foreign Ministers. Conveyed the greetings of President Droupadi Murmu & Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Apprised President Xi of the recent development of our bilateral ties. Value the guidance of our leaders in that regard.”
This marks Jaishankar’s first visit to China since the Galwan Valley clash between Indian and Chinese troops in June 2020. He is in the country to participate in the SCO Council of Foreign Ministers’ Meeting (CFM), being held in Tianjin.
On Monday, Jaishankar held a series of high-level meetings on the sidelines of the CFM.
According to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), Jaishankar met Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi for bilateral talks.
The two leaders reviewed the current state of India-China ties, acknowledging recent progress in stabilizing and rebuilding relations. Both sides emphasized the importance of people-centric engagement and agreed to enhance cooperation to mark the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations.
Jaishankar expressed appreciation for China’s support in resuming the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra and discussed expanding people-to-people exchanges, including improved travel access and direct flight connectivity.
Stressing the need for peace and tranquility along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), Jaishankar reiterated India’s commitment to de-escalation and effective border management.
“He underlined the need for cooperation on trans-border rivers, including resumption of provision of hydrological data by the Chinese side. He also took up restrictive trade measures and roadblocks to economic cooperation,” the MEA said in a statement.
The two ministers also exchanged views on regional and global developments, with Jaishankar affirming India’s support for China’s current SCO presidency.
“The discussions were constructive and forward-looking. The Ministers agreed to remain in touch, including through bilateral visits and meetings,” the MEA said.
Earlier in the day, Jaishankar called on Chinese Vice President Han Zheng and met Liu Jianchao, Minister of the International Department of the Communist Party of China.
“Good to meet IDCPC Minister Liu Jianchao in Beijing. Discussed the changing global order and the emergence of multipolarity. Spoke about a constructive India-China relationship in that context,” Jaishankar said on X.
Founded as a regional security bloc, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation is a permanent intergovernmental organisation comprising India, China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Iran and Belarus. The SCO’s agenda spans counterterrorism, security, economic cooperation, and regional connectivity.
External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar on Tuesday met Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing as part of a delegation of foreign ministers attending the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meeting.
In a post on X, Jaishankar said, “Called on President Xi Jinping this morning in Beijing along with my fellow SCO Foreign Ministers. Conveyed the greetings of President Droupadi Murmu & Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Apprised President Xi of the recent development of our bilateral ties. Value the guidance of our leaders in that regard.”
This marks Jaishankar’s first visit to China since the Galwan Valley clash between Indian and Chinese troops in June 2020. He is in the country to participate in the SCO Council of Foreign Ministers’ Meeting (CFM), being held in Tianjin.
On Monday, Jaishankar held a series of high-level meetings on the sidelines of the CFM.
According to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), Jaishankar met Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi for bilateral talks.
The two leaders reviewed the current state of India-China ties, acknowledging recent progress in stabilizing and rebuilding relations. Both sides emphasized the importance of people-centric engagement and agreed to enhance cooperation to mark the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations.
Jaishankar expressed appreciation for China’s support in resuming the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra and discussed expanding people-to-people exchanges, including improved travel access and direct flight connectivity.
Stressing the need for peace and tranquility along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), Jaishankar reiterated India’s commitment to de-escalation and effective border management.
“He underlined the need for cooperation on trans-border rivers, including resumption of provision of hydrological data by the Chinese side. He also took up restrictive trade measures and roadblocks to economic cooperation,” the MEA said in a statement.
The two ministers also exchanged views on regional and global developments, with Jaishankar affirming India’s support for China’s current SCO presidency.
“The discussions were constructive and forward-looking. The Ministers agreed to remain in touch, including through bilateral visits and meetings,” the MEA said.
Earlier in the day, Jaishankar called on Chinese Vice President Han Zheng and met Liu Jianchao, Minister of the International Department of the Communist Party of China.
“Good to meet IDCPC Minister Liu Jianchao in Beijing. Discussed the changing global order and the emergence of multipolarity. Spoke about a constructive India-China relationship in that context,” Jaishankar said on X.
Founded as a regional security bloc, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation is a permanent intergovernmental organisation comprising India, China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Iran and Belarus. The SCO’s agenda spans counterterrorism, security, economic cooperation, and regional connectivity.
External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar on Tuesday met Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing as part of a delegation of foreign ministers attending the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meeting.
In a post on X, Jaishankar said, “Called on President Xi Jinping this morning in Beijing along with my fellow SCO Foreign Ministers. Conveyed the greetings of President Droupadi Murmu & Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Apprised President Xi of the recent development of our bilateral ties. Value the guidance of our leaders in that regard.”
This marks Jaishankar’s first visit to China since the Galwan Valley clash between Indian and Chinese troops in June 2020. He is in the country to participate in the SCO Council of Foreign Ministers’ Meeting (CFM), being held in Tianjin.
On Monday, Jaishankar held a series of high-level meetings on the sidelines of the CFM.
According to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), Jaishankar met Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi for bilateral talks.
The two leaders reviewed the current state of India-China ties, acknowledging recent progress in stabilizing and rebuilding relations. Both sides emphasized the importance of people-centric engagement and agreed to enhance cooperation to mark the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations.
Jaishankar expressed appreciation for China’s support in resuming the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra and discussed expanding people-to-people exchanges, including improved travel access and direct flight connectivity.
Stressing the need for peace and tranquility along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), Jaishankar reiterated India’s commitment to de-escalation and effective border management.
“He underlined the need for cooperation on trans-border rivers, including resumption of provision of hydrological data by the Chinese side. He also took up restrictive trade measures and roadblocks to economic cooperation,” the MEA said in a statement.
The two ministers also exchanged views on regional and global developments, with Jaishankar affirming India’s support for China’s current SCO presidency.
“The discussions were constructive and forward-looking. The Ministers agreed to remain in touch, including through bilateral visits and meetings,” the MEA said.
Earlier in the day, Jaishankar called on Chinese Vice President Han Zheng and met Liu Jianchao, Minister of the International Department of the Communist Party of China.
“Good to meet IDCPC Minister Liu Jianchao in Beijing. Discussed the changing global order and the emergence of multipolarity. Spoke about a constructive India-China relationship in that context,” Jaishankar said on X.
Founded as a regional security bloc, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation is a permanent intergovernmental organisation comprising India, China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Iran and Belarus. The SCO’s agenda spans counterterrorism, security, economic cooperation, and regional connectivity.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Chinese archaeologists inspired by Xixia Imperial Tombs’ World Heritage inscription
Tourists visit the Xixia Imperial Tombs archaeological site park in Yinchuan, northwest China’s Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, July 13, 2025. China’s Xixia Imperial Tombs were officially added to the UNESCO World Heritage List on Friday during the 47th session of the World Heritage Committee held in Paris, France. (Photo by Yuan Hongyan/Xinhua)
Upon receiving the news that the Xixia Imperial Tombs have been inscribed on the World Heritage List, archaeological workers at the historical site of Yinxu in central China’s Henan Province were overjoyed.
“We’ve always had high hopes for the Xixia Imperial Tombs’ successful inscription on the list,” said Yang Liying, deputy head of the Anyang Yinxu world cultural heritage protection and management committee in the city of Anyang, where Yinxu, or the Yin Ruins, are located.
She added that the Xixia Imperial Tombs’ inscription on the list will help elevate China’s status and influence in the realm of world cultural heritage preservation, and hoped that the two sites can engage in broader cooperation and exchange.
The 3,300-year-old Yin Ruins, confirmed as the capital site of the late Shang (Yin) Dynasty (1600 B.C.-1046 B.C.), was added to the World Heritage List in 2006 by UNESCO.
Now, nearly two decades later, the Xixia Imperial Tombs were inscribed on the list during UNESCO’s 47th session of the World Heritage Committee held in Paris, France, on July 11. This has brought the total number of World Heritage sites in China to 60, nearly doubling the figure from 2006, when there were 33.
Located at the foot of Helan Mountain in Yinchuan, capital of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, the tombs were built by the Tangut, an ethnic group that thrived in northwest China between the 11th and 13th centuries. In 1038, the Tangut people founded the Xixia Dynasty, establishing its capital in what is now Yinchuan.
By analyzing the tombs’ location, layout, architecture and artifacts, historians were able to see how the Xixia Dynasty adapted Han models during the Tang (618-907) and Song (960-1279) dynasties while infusing distinct ethnic features.
This evidence of ethnic integration is not unique to the Xixia tombs. It can be found in many of China’s historical sites. According to Ji Tao, head of the Hailongtun cultural heritage management bureau in Zunyi, Guizhou Province, the tombs and the ancient ruins of Hailongtun Fortress share similarities in this regard.
“Both are important physical evidence of the development of a pluralistic yet integrated ethnic pattern in Chinese history, and both manifest the political wisdom of ‘harmony without uniformity,’” said Ji.
In 2015, Hailongtun Fortress was added to the World Heritage List, along with two other historical sites. The three were jointly referred to as “Tusi Sites”. They were deemed to “bear exceptional testimony” to the Tusi system, a chieftain system adopted by ancient Chinese central governments to unify national administration, while allowing ethnic minorities to retain their customs and way of life.
Apart from its historic and cultural value, the Xixia Imperial Tombs also illustrate China’s multifaceted preservation of cultural heritage sites, said Liu Xiangyu, head of the cultural relics protection and management institute of Ji’an, northeast China’s Jilin Province.
The protection work of the tombs is overseen by the cultural relics administration department of Yinchuan Municipal People’s Government. Meanwhile, departments of city planning, land and resources, as well as housing and urban-rural development all work in coordination within their respective duties, forming a joint force for protection.
According to Liu, this tiered and coordinated system of historical site preservation was also adopted in the protection of the Capital Cities and Tombs of the Ancient Koguryo Kingdom in Jilin, which was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 2004. “As heritages of the same type, the two sites share many similarities in terms of protection methods,” Liu said.
With its World Heritage inscription, the Xixia Imperial Tombs have now gained a new opportunity to inspire archaeological workers in China and the Chinese people as a whole. The head of the Xixia tomb area management office has vowed to take the inscription as an opportunity to comprehensively and continuously explore the cultural value of the site, and spare no effort in advancing its systematic protection, utilization and research.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Chinese archaeologists inspired by Xixia Imperial Tombs’ World Heritage inscription
Tourists visit the Xixia Imperial Tombs archaeological site park in Yinchuan, northwest China’s Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, July 13, 2025. China’s Xixia Imperial Tombs were officially added to the UNESCO World Heritage List on Friday during the 47th session of the World Heritage Committee held in Paris, France. (Photo by Yuan Hongyan/Xinhua)
Upon receiving the news that the Xixia Imperial Tombs have been inscribed on the World Heritage List, archaeological workers at the historical site of Yinxu in central China’s Henan Province were overjoyed.
“We’ve always had high hopes for the Xixia Imperial Tombs’ successful inscription on the list,” said Yang Liying, deputy head of the Anyang Yinxu world cultural heritage protection and management committee in the city of Anyang, where Yinxu, or the Yin Ruins, are located.
She added that the Xixia Imperial Tombs’ inscription on the list will help elevate China’s status and influence in the realm of world cultural heritage preservation, and hoped that the two sites can engage in broader cooperation and exchange.
The 3,300-year-old Yin Ruins, confirmed as the capital site of the late Shang (Yin) Dynasty (1600 B.C.-1046 B.C.), was added to the World Heritage List in 2006 by UNESCO.
Now, nearly two decades later, the Xixia Imperial Tombs were inscribed on the list during UNESCO’s 47th session of the World Heritage Committee held in Paris, France, on July 11. This has brought the total number of World Heritage sites in China to 60, nearly doubling the figure from 2006, when there were 33.
Located at the foot of Helan Mountain in Yinchuan, capital of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, the tombs were built by the Tangut, an ethnic group that thrived in northwest China between the 11th and 13th centuries. In 1038, the Tangut people founded the Xixia Dynasty, establishing its capital in what is now Yinchuan.
By analyzing the tombs’ location, layout, architecture and artifacts, historians were able to see how the Xixia Dynasty adapted Han models during the Tang (618-907) and Song (960-1279) dynasties while infusing distinct ethnic features.
This evidence of ethnic integration is not unique to the Xixia tombs. It can be found in many of China’s historical sites. According to Ji Tao, head of the Hailongtun cultural heritage management bureau in Zunyi, Guizhou Province, the tombs and the ancient ruins of Hailongtun Fortress share similarities in this regard.
“Both are important physical evidence of the development of a pluralistic yet integrated ethnic pattern in Chinese history, and both manifest the political wisdom of ‘harmony without uniformity,’” said Ji.
In 2015, Hailongtun Fortress was added to the World Heritage List, along with two other historical sites. The three were jointly referred to as “Tusi Sites”. They were deemed to “bear exceptional testimony” to the Tusi system, a chieftain system adopted by ancient Chinese central governments to unify national administration, while allowing ethnic minorities to retain their customs and way of life.
Apart from its historic and cultural value, the Xixia Imperial Tombs also illustrate China’s multifaceted preservation of cultural heritage sites, said Liu Xiangyu, head of the cultural relics protection and management institute of Ji’an, northeast China’s Jilin Province.
The protection work of the tombs is overseen by the cultural relics administration department of Yinchuan Municipal People’s Government. Meanwhile, departments of city planning, land and resources, as well as housing and urban-rural development all work in coordination within their respective duties, forming a joint force for protection.
According to Liu, this tiered and coordinated system of historical site preservation was also adopted in the protection of the Capital Cities and Tombs of the Ancient Koguryo Kingdom in Jilin, which was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 2004. “As heritages of the same type, the two sites share many similarities in terms of protection methods,” Liu said.
With its World Heritage inscription, the Xixia Imperial Tombs have now gained a new opportunity to inspire archaeological workers in China and the Chinese people as a whole. The head of the Xixia tomb area management office has vowed to take the inscription as an opportunity to comprehensively and continuously explore the cultural value of the site, and spare no effort in advancing its systematic protection, utilization and research.
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Yerevan, July 15 (Xinhua) — The European Union (EU) has reaffirmed its strong commitment to supporting Armenia’s resilience and long-term development through substantial financial and technical assistance, according to a joint communiqué issued following a trilateral meeting in Brussels on Monday between European Council President António Costa, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. The text of the document was cited by the press service of the head of the Armenian government.
EU investments in Armenia under the Global Gateway strategy are planned to reach 2.5 billion euros with the aim of stimulating inclusive growth and developing connectivity.
The €270 million EU Resilience and Growth Facility announced in April 2024 increased funding for Armenia by 50%. With €270 million in various forms, the EU continued to support Armenia’s socio-economic reform agenda, closer cooperation across sectors, and investments in energy, transport, and the private sector, the document notes.
It was also stressed that A. Costa and U. von der Leyen welcomed Armenia’s ambitious reform agenda and expressed support for Armenia’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and democratic transformation in the country. They welcomed the recently adopted political agreement on the text of the new EU-Armenia partnership agenda, noted with satisfaction the progress in the visa liberalization process and the adoption by Armenia of the law on the start of the EU accession process. –0–
Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
