CHICAGO — A federal judge has sentenced an Ohio man to 30 years in prison for sexually exploiting a Chicago-area girl with whom he communicated on social media.
ANDREW BOLTZ began communicating with the then-16-year-old girl in 2020 on the social media application Omegle. Boltz continued communicating with the girl via text messaging and the social media application Snapchat. During these communications, Boltz enticed the victim into sending him sexually explicit images of herself. Boltz instructed the girl on what type of sexually explicit conduct should be portrayed in the images.
A federal jury in 2023 convicted Boltz, 27, of Kenton, Ohio, on exploitation and child pornography charges. The victim bravely testified at trial about being manipulated and degraded by Boltz.
U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey imposed the 30-year prison sentence during a hearing on Friday in federal court in Chicago.
The sentence was announced by Andrew S. Boutros, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, and Douglas S. DePodesta, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago Field Office of the FBI. Valuable assistance was provided by the Peru, Ill. Police Department, LaSalle County, Ill. State’s Attorney’s Office, Wilmington, Ill. Police Department, Will County, Ill. State’s Attorney’s Office, Will County, Ill. Child Advocacy Center, DuPage County Sheriff’s Office, Norwalk, Ohio Police Department, and the Cleveland, Ohio Field Office of the FBI. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Edward A. Liva, Jr., Elly Moheb, and Kavitha Babu represented the government.
This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood(PSC), a nationwide initiative to combat child sexual exploitation and abuse. PSC marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children, while also providing critical services to victims.
If you believe you are a victim of sexual exploitation, you are encouraged to contact the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children by logging on to https://www.missingkids.org/ or calling 1-800-843-5678. The service is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Rhun ap Iorwerth says there is a ‘pro-European government in waiting’ in Wales
Plaid Cymru Leader Rhun ap Iorwerth has today met with the European Union’s Ambassador to the UK, Pedro Serrano, at Europe House in London to discuss strengthening Wales’s relationship with Europe and deepening cooperation in key areas.
The meeting followed the recent EU-UK summit, where Prime Minister Keir Starmer and EU leaders agreed to ease some post-Brexit trade and travel frictions. While welcoming the progress, Mr ap Iorwerth said the deal did not go far enough and called on the UK Government to pursue a more ambitious reset of relations, including moving towards rejoining the Single Market and Customs Union.
Since leaving the EU, Wales has suffered disproportionately, with losses estimated at £4 billion to the economy, a £1.1 billion reduction in exports, and the disappearance of £1 billion in former EU structural and rural funding. Post-Brexit trade deals have also weakened the position of Welsh agriculture and manufacturing.
Plaid Cymru is pressing the UK Government to do more than tinker at the edges and instead restore meaningful economic and political ties with the EU.
The meeting also turned to foreign affairs issues, with Mr ap Iorwerth also raising concerns over Israel’s actions in Gaza and reiterating his party’s support for Ukraine.
Speaking after the meeting, Rhun ap Iorwerth said:
“I thank the Ambassador for a constructive meeting on the important relationship between Wales and the EU. Ahead of next year’s Senedd election, I wanted to make clear to our EU partners that with Plaid Cymru, there is a pro-European government in waiting in Wales that is serious and honest about the importance of improving our cooperation with our neighbours.
“The recent summit must be seen as a beginning, not an endpoint. Brexit has caused deep damage to Wales’s economy, and unless the structural barriers to trade and investment are removed, the UK Government’s growth ambitions will remain unrealised. Rejoining the Single Market and Customs Union is the most effective way to reverse this damage. This is about giving Welsh businesses, farmers and young people the opportunities they deserve.
“I reiterated Plaid Cymru’s proposal for a Welsh European Alignment Act – to reclaim powers we should never have lost and realign Welsh law with essential EU standards when in Wales’s best interest.
The meeting also touched on a number of other foreign affairs issues, including Gaza and Ukraine. Mr ap Iorwerth said:
“Plaid Cymru has consistently spoken out against Israel’s use of disproportionate force, and I welcome the EU’s decision to initiate a review of Israel’s compliance with its obligations under international law under the EU-Israel Association Agreement. I voiced my horror at Israel’s crimes in Gaza. I also reiterated that any future Plaid Cymru-led government would be committed to European cooperation in support of Ukraine.
“Plaid Cymru offers a vision of hope – of a Wales that works with our neighbours, stands up for human rights, and gives our young people a future to believe in.”
Greens call on UK Government to stop supporting Israel’s genocide
More in Peace
The Scottish Greens co-leader, Patrick Harvie has called on the Labour Government to take immediate and decisive action to end its complicity in what legal experts and international observers increasingly describe as a genocide in Gaza.
Mr Harvie responded to the powerful statement in a letter signed by more than 800 lawyers, including former Supreme Court justices, which condemns the UK’s failure to uphold international humanitarian law and urges Prime Minister Keir Starmer to impose sanctions on Israeli ministers and consider suspending Israel from the United Nations.
The letter from legal experts outlines growing evidence of grave breaches of international law, asserting that the UK’s continued inaction places it in clear violation of its own legal obligations under the Genocide Convention and other international frameworks.
MrHavie,said:
“When atrocities are being inflicted on this scale, it doesn’t just warrant condemnation – it demands real, urgent action. Keir Starmer’s recent lukewarm comments about the Netanyahu regime, which even Labour and Tory backbenchers have criticised as inadequate, amount to little more than empty words.
“Sadly there is a gulf between rhetoric and reality. The Prime Minister claimed to have suspended trade talks with Israel, yet just days later the UK Trade Envoy, Lord Ian Austin, was in Israel as a guest of its government. Even as the UK, France, and Canada issued a joint statement expressing concern, the RAF was deploying surveillance aircraft to assist the Israeli military. This is complicity.
“The people of Palestine need urgent help, they need strong action from the international community in the face of this genocide. We have consistently called on the UK Government to impose targeted sanctions on the Israeli political and military leaders responsible for these war crimes. They must immediately end all arms exports and military cooperation with Israel, demand an immediate and unconditional ceasefire, recognise the State of Palestine, and advocate for Israel’s suspension from international bodies, including the United Nations, until compliance with international law is resrestored.
“In Scotland we must act as well. It is not good enough for the Scottish Government to call for an immediate ceasefire and continue to line the pockets of war profiteers. The SNP Government’s business unit, Scottish Enterprise, has poured public money into companies that are arming Israel and profiting from the destruction.
“The UK cannot continue to provide political cover, arms, and intelligence to a regime that stands accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity. History will remember those who stayed silent and those who took a stand. The time for action is now.”
Source: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
As countries across the UNECE region move towards cleaner and more efficient transport systems, UNECE energy and transport experts have been working to advance electric mobility through the implementation of a regional project that has delivered tangible results, including a comprehensive regional study and subsequent national-level activities.
UNECE continues to provide countries with the tools and insights needed to accelerate the decarbonization of inland transport, as well as with technical and policy support through the development of targeted knowledge resources. At a recent national workshop in Minsk, dedicated to assessing the readiness of the energy sector to implement smart digital energy-efficient technologies in Belarus in view of climate change mitigation, UNECE experts presented two recent publications, aimed at supporting the informed decision-making on electric mobility.
The workshop was co-organized by UNECE, UNDP Belarus, and the Department for Energy Efficiency of the State Committee for Standardization of the Republic of Belarus. The event brought together government officials at the national and local levels, and other national stakeholders to explore strategic options for advancing e-mobility in Belarus, drawing on lessons from the UNECE region.
Advancing e-mobility through regional experience
The “Electrification of Mobility” publication, developed under the UNECE Working Party on Transport Trends and Economics (WP.5), provides a consolidated overview of regional trends and practical policy insights for the electrification of road, rail, and inland waterway transport. It examines:
Common challenges such as infrastructure readiness, vehicle affordability, and supply chain resilience
The publication was developed with extrabudgetary support from the Netherlands, contributing both funding and technical input to UNECE’s broader work on sustainable transport.
Compendium on charging infrastructure and energy integration
The compendium showcases diverse examples, including:
Strategic placement of charging infrastructure in urban and rural areas
Governance, financing, and public-private collaboration models
Although regional in scope, the compendium is designed to be adaptable to national contexts, including that of Belarus, offering valuable guidance to countries that are shaping their own e-mobility frameworks.
Strengthening the knowledge base through UNECE E-Mobility Task Force
Recognizing the need for continued knowledge exchange and coordination across transport and energy systems, the UNECE E-Mobility Task Force was launched in 2024. It is mandated by the UNECE Inland Transport Committee (ITC) and the Committee on Sustainable Energy (CSE), and co-chaired by the Chairs of WP.5 and the Group of Experts on Cleaner Electricity Systems.
Organized into thematic workstreams, the initiative supports the advancement of EV technology, charging infrastructure, and clean energy integration. It facilitates the exchange of best practices and coordinates efforts to guide long-term planning and Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) deployment. Key areas of focus include smart and bidirectional charging, regulatory frameworks that ensure affordability and transparency, harmonized technical standards, and enhanced cybersecurity. The initiative also promotes user-friendly payment systems, accessible grid connections, and effective communication of charging capabilities.
In addition, it provides guidance for national infrastructure planning, supports the convergence of existing protocols into de jure standards to enable international interoperability of charging systems, and explores how land use strategies can improve accessibility and reduce mobility needs. With broad engagement from governments, industry, academia, and civil society, the initiative ensures inclusive and actionable progress toward a sustainable e-mobility future.
This informal Task Force serves as a collaborative platform to:
Support the development and sharing of policy-relevant knowledge to guide national efforts in the transition to electric mobility
Promote regulatory and technical coherence across the UNECE region to enhance interoperability, standardization, and cross-border coordination
The UNECE E-Mobility Task Force will continue to play a central role in enriching the E-Mobility Compendium with new case studies and practical examples. These will be incorporated into an upcoming online quick-start guide designed to support policymakers and practitioners with accessible, actionable insights adaptable to national contexts in specific countries.
The World Health Organization (WHO) is calling for urgent, coordinated action to tackle the dual threats of tuberculosis (TB) and climate change. In a newly released framework, WHO highlights how climate change is creating conditions that could intensify the global TB epidemic.
The framework outlines how rising temperatures, extreme weather events and environmental degradation are intensifying key TB risk factors. Populations already grappling with poverty, malnutrition, displacement and limited access to health care are expected to be hit hardest, as TB – one of the world’s deadliest infectious diseases – gains ground in a changing climate.
The report highlights three key pathways through which climate change exacerbates TB risk:
Migration and displacement: Climate-related disasters and slow-onset environmental degradation are forcing millions to relocate, often into overcrowded and poorly ventilated environments that facilitate TB transmission and situations that reduce their access to care. In 2023, 20.3 million people were displaced by weather-related hazards, with projections estimating up to 216 million climate-displaced persons by 2050.
Food and water insecurity: Increasing frequency of droughts, floods and extreme heat is intensifying malnutrition – an established risk factor for TB contributing to nearly 10% of TB cases globally.
Health system disruptions: Climate-induced disasters are undermining health infrastructure and disrupting essential TB services, including diagnosis, treatment and continuity of care. Natural hazard-related events affected an estimated 93.1 million people in 2023. Without treatment, TB has a mortality rate of up to 50%.
“Climate change is not only a planetary crisis – it’s a major health threat,” said Dr Tereza Kasaeva, Director of WHO’s Global Programme on TB and Lung Health. “TB remains the world’s top infectious killer, and climate change threatens to reverse decades of progress in fighting this disease. We must integrate the TB response into climate adaptation efforts to protect the most vulnerable.”
The report urges governments to:
integrate TB services into climate and health strategies
strengthen health systems to withstand climate shocks
secure sustainable financing for TB, including through climate and health funds.
It also stresses the need for cross-sector collaboration across health, agriculture, migration, social protection and disaster preparedness to confront the shared drivers of TB and climate vulnerability.
With the UN Climate Change Conference on the horizon, WHO emphasizes that building climate-resilient health systems and including TB in universal health coverage and social protection plans will be essential to safeguarding global health gains and minimizing emerging risks.
WHO’s Global Tuberculosis Programme (GTB) is collaborating with Member States and key stakeholders to advance a TB response that is resilient in the face of climate change. In partnership with the Pan American Health Organization and Brazil’s Ministry of Health, WHO’s GTB co-hosted a side event on “Climate Change and TB” alongside the G20 Health Working Group meeting in Natal, Brazil, on 2–3 September 2024. The event aimed to raise awareness among G20 members, donors and technical partners about the current and projected impacts of climate change on the TB epidemic and emphasized the importance of coordinated action across and beyond the health sector. WHO and the Government of Brazil also co-organized a high-level side event on TB and climate change during the 79th Session of the United Nations General Assembly. Held on 23 September 2024, the event focused on the urgent need to combat climate change and its severe consequences on global efforts to end TB.
NEWARK, N.J. – A Sussex County, New Jersey woman and a Texas man admitted to exploiting a child and producing child pornography, as well as to other child pornography offenses, U.S. Attorney Alina Habba announced.
Dominique Saczawa, 34, of Sparta, New Jersey, and Russell Lynn Davis, Jr., 47, of Heller, Texas, pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Edward S. Kiel in Camden federal court. Saczawa pleaded guilty to production of child pornography, distribution of child pornography, advertisement of child pornography, and possession of child pornography. Davis pleaded guilty to conspiracy to produce child pornography, production of child pornography, and receipt of child pornography.
According to documents filed in these cases and statements made in Court:
Saczawa admitted to sexually exploiting a then-four-year-old by engaging in sexual contact and then producing images and videos of that sexual contact. Saczawa also admitted to sharing these videos and/or images with others, including Davis. Davis admitted to conspiring with Saczawa to sexually exploit the victim, including instructing Saczawa in a video message to perform oral sex on the victim.
Saczawa also admitted to running a group chat within an online messaging application in which participants discussed and shared content and/or images of child pornography. As an administrator of this group, Saczawa solicited participants to share such content. The images Saczawa shared included images of toddlers potentially as young as one year old being sexually assaulted.
Davis had previously been convicted in Texas of indecent contact with a child.
“Protecting small children, the most vulnerable of our community, is among the most important work that we can do. Every child deserves to be in a home free of sexual exploitation, and we will prosecute those that threaten this right. When predators target children, we are committed to unmasking and holding them accountable.”
– U.S. Attorney Alina Habba
“There are truly no words to describe how grotesque the behavior in this case is. A woman admitting to using a prepubescent child to create child sexual assault material is beyond the bounds of any acceptable human behavior – and it always will be. Our FBI Newark Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force, alongside our partner agencies, do the work of superheroes each and every day, saving children from monsters and preventing evil from harming more victims,” said Acting Special Agent in Charge Terence G. Reilly.
U.S. Attorney Habba credited FBI Newark’s Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force, under the direction of Acting Special Agent in Charge Terence G. Reilly, with the investigation.
The charge of production of child pornography carries a mandatory minimum penalty of 15 years in prison and a maximum potential penalty of 30 years in prison, or in the case of a defendant who has previously been convicted of a sex offense, a mandatory minimum penalty of 25 years and a maximum potential penalty of 50 years in prison, and a $250,000 fine. The charge of receipt of child pornography carries a mandatory minimum penalty of 5 years in prison and a maximum potential penalty of 20 years in prison, or in the case of a defendant who has previously been convicted of a sex offense, a mandatory minimum penalty of 15 years and a maximum potential penalty of 40 years in prison, and a $250,000 fine. The charge of possession of child pornography carries a maximum potential penalty of 20 years in prison, and a $250,000 fine. The charge of advertisement of child pornography carries a mandatory minimum penalty of 15 years in prison and a maximum potential penalty of 30 years in prison, and a $250,000 fine.
Saczawa and Davis are both scheduled for sentencing on September 22, 2025.
This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) in the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit: https://www.justice.gov/psc.
The government is represented by Assistant United States Attorney Rachelle M. Navarro of the Bank Integrity, Money Laundering, and Recovery Unit in Newark.
Today, MLA for Kindersley-Biggar Kim Gartner, on behalf of Social Services Minister Terry Jenson, joined representatives from Prairie Branches Enterprises Inc. to celebrate the grand opening of a group home in Kerrobert. The Ministry of Social Services is providing approximately $500,000 in annual operating funding for the home.
“Fostering strong, inclusive communities for individuals with disabilities remains a priority for our government,” Social Services Minister Terry Jenson said. “We are proud to partner with Prairie Branches Enterprises to support the operation of this group home. Through collaboration and dedicated support, we aim to enhance the quality of life for individuals with disabilities and ensure they have access to the necessary resources to thrive in our communities.”
The group home will offer 24-hour supervision and assistance with daily living tasks to four residents and is designed to grow with the residents as their needs change over time.
“This house has become a home for several local individuals, and we are very proud to be able to provide supports so these folks can remain in their hometown, close to their family and friends,” Prairie Branches Enterprise Inc. Executive Director Marissa Merkel said. “We have worked alongside the Ministry of Social Services Community Living Service Delivery to ensure we are setting people up for success and appreciate their continued support of our agency on this new venture.”
Prairie Branches Enterprises Inc. is a community-based organization enriching the lives of individuals with intellectual disabilities. They provide opportunities for personal growth in social, vocational, residential, spiritual and recreational areas across Wilkie, Biggar, Unity and nearby communities. Currently, they support 38 individuals in eight group homes, 12 through a supportive living program, and 55 in day programs in Wilkie, Biggar, Kerrobert and Unity.
“As an agency, we are very excited about expanding our residential services into the community of Kerrobert. We have been operating a Vocational Program here since 2020 and have experienced a ton of positive support from the community,” Merkel said. “We are hopeful that the positive momentum will continue and are grateful to be a part of Kerrobert.”
For information on how to access supports for intellectual disabilities, please contact the Ministry of Social Services office nearest you, or email clsd.info@gov.sk.ca.
Source: United States Senator for Utah Mike Lee
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Mike Lee (R-UT), Chris Coons (D-DE), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Roger Wicker (R-MS), and Kevin Cramer (R-ND), along with Rep. Barry Moore (R-AL), released the following statement to applaud the United States Sentencing Commission’s unanimously finalized recent amendment to the United States Sentencing Guidelines regarding federal supervised release:
“This is an important step by the U.S. Sentencing Commission. This amendment regarding federal supervised release better aligns our system with parts of our Safer Supervision Act. It is a meaningful move to restore federal supervision to the system that Congress originally intended and focus supervision on those who need it most. This is an illustration of how we can work together to improve our justice system by promoting rehabilitation, fairness, and public safety. We look forward to continuing this effort and ensuring that the entire Safer Supervision Act becomes law.”
Federal supervised release is a form of supervision after incarceration that was originally designed to be used “for those, and only those, who [need] it,” according to the U.S. Supreme Court. Currently, however, supervised release is imposed in nearly every case, resulting in an overburdened system with more than 110,000 people in supervision at any moment, and nearly 50,000 people cycling into it each year. The result is a system that does not provide appropriate supervision to the high-risk individuals who most need it while creating counterproductive burdens on low-risk individuals that inhibit their ability to reintegrate.
On April 30, 2025, the United States Sentencing Commission transmitted to Congress an amendment to the Guidelines that encourages courts to impose supervised release on the basis of individualized circumstances, provides courts with factors to consider in assessing potential early termination, and increases courts’ discretion on how to address supervised release violations. These changes are aligned with certain portions of the Safer Supervision Act, a bipartisan, bicameral bill that will ensure that supervision resources are directed in a way that best promotes rehabilitation and public safety. The Commission initially proposed this amendment in January, and the aforementioned members of Congress filed a comment in March in support of the Sentencing Commission’s proposal. The proposal received favorable comments at a public hearing in March from law enforcement and advocates across the political spectrum. The finalized amendment will go into effect on November 1, 2025.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Daniel O’Brien, Lecturer, Department of Literature Film and Theatre Studies, University of Essex
As someone attuned to the distinct styles of auteur filmmakers, I came to Wes Anderson’s latest offering The Phoenician Scheme intrigued, feeling a mix of distance and familiarity.
My appreciation for other auteur directors like Stanley Kubrick, Spike Lee and Alfred Hitchcock may have sometimes inadvertently pushed Anderson’s work to the periphery of my viewing habits, but The Phoenician Scheme (his 13th directorial film) provides an opportunity to reassess that omission.
The cinematic trademarks were all there: deadpan performances, meticulous symmetry, whip-pan camera work (when the camera whips round so fast, everything blurs), ice-cream colour palettes and trains, frequently present in some form throughout Anderson’s
filmography.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
And a Bill Murray cameo? Of course – along with other minor roles from Tom Hanks, Bryan Cranston, Scarlett Johansson, Richard Ayoade, Riz Ahmed and Benedict Cumberbatch (as well as many others), all appearing briefly across the film’s brisk 90-minute runtime – a fairly typical length for an Anderson feature.
Although I found The Phoenician Scheme a fairly enjoyable film and one that ardent fans will surely embrace, my issue was perhaps precisely within the formulaic nature of this work. This sense of familiarity makes the viewing simultaneously comfortable, but also a little predictable.
Aside from a genuinely unexpected explosion in the film’s opening moments, there was little that caught me off guard, making it difficult to gauge just how memorable The Phoenician Scheme will be in the long run. It entertains but rarely surprises and despite the litany of cameos, each one is fairly unmemorable. In fact, while writing this, I’ve only just remembered that Willem Dafoe is in a scene or two as well.
It’s not that anyone is necessarily giving a bad performance but rather each iteration of wry whimsy results in a kind of stylistic uniformity that renders them indistinct from one another. By contrast, the film’s three leading roles benefit from sustained screen time, allowing for a little more nuance.
Benicio del Toro leads the cast as Zsa-Zsa Korda, a rich and morally ambiguous industrialist, set within the fictional Middle Eastern nation of Phoenicia during the 1950s. Korda is on the point of political and personal ruin. His life is constantly in danger with ongoing visual and verbal gags from the beginning about his nonchalance towards assassination.
Korda faces execution threats from shadowy agencies and members of his own board to the extent that his suspiciousness has become a comfortable characteristic. Newcomer Mia Threapleton (daughter of Kate Winslet) stars as Liesl Korda, his estranged daughter who has spent years in quiet devotion as a nun in a remote convent.
Her sudden appointment as her father’s heir thrusts her back into a world she had long abandoned, continuing Anderson’s other fascination with fractured, complex familial dynamics, as the rest of her siblings look on. Michael Cera portrays Bjorn Lund, a docile yet quietly astute tutor with a fascination for insects, who is brought in to help Liesl adjust to her new responsibilities.
Without revealing too much, Lund turns out to be more than he initially seems, giving Cera the chance to slip back into that awkward, mock-cool persona –reminiscent of his Twin Peaks: The Return role, in which he channels a Marlon Brando–style rebel straight out of The Wild One.
In typical Anderson style, visual gags (here in the form of props) propel the film along, from Lund’s bugs to Liesl’s jewel-encrusted rosary and Korda’s weapons, which include grenades that he politely offers to other diplomats as a formal greeting.
The visually rich and symmetrical arrangement of characters, against a static or sideways moving camera reminded me of how much Anderson is inspired by Peter Greenaway’s work, particularly The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover (1989).
Anderson draws on this auteur aesthetically and thematically but also through absurdity. While Greenaway’s films take inspiration from canvas painting, the closing credit sequence of The Phoenician Scheme also features well known artworks, serving as inspiration for the content.
The visuals, which are rich throughout, are also interestingly compacted to a 1.50 aspect ratio, making the frame of the screen quite box like. This is perhaps also relevant to the structure of the film in which most of the events and visitations of external characters are pre-organised into a range of numbered shoeboxes, which is afforded a lengthy sequence, with plenty of overview shots of the boxes neatly arranged.
Each section of the film that follows pertains to a certain box. Viewers are reminded as to which box they are in through a range of title cards which divides the film into a series of vignettes, not unlike Anderson’s chapter structure in The Royal Tenenbaums.
This earlier film is perhaps his better-known one about the estrangement and reconnection of dysfunctional family members. This trait can also be found in The Darjeeling Limited aboard a train, or in a submarine in The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. The Phoenician Scheme echoes these familiar tropes (domestic dysfunction wrapped in whimsical packaging) aboard a number of private plane journeys (with a token train scene in the middle).
While it may feel like a familiar journey aboard a new vessel, that familiarity will probably be either the reason you enjoy the ride – or the very thing that makes it feel like an exhausting commute, one where you’re tempted to pull the emergency cord.
While there is much to enjoy, I doubt The Phoenician Scheme will be remembered as one of Anderson’s most essential works. At times, it teeters on the edge of parodying its own auteur style. Despite this I found it compelling enough to spark a renewed interest in his earlier films.
And any work that can reignite curiosity, even while treading familiar ground, is worth your time, even if it’s only for a chance to play cameo bingo.
Daniel O’Brien 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.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By John Luiz, Professor of International Management and Strategy, University of Sussex
There are no longer any golden arches logos in Russia, but is the firm hoping for a return?forden/Shutterstock
Even as the war in Ukraine grinds on, some multinational companies are quietly positioning themselves for a thaw in relations with Russia.
Many of those who rushed to divest from the country, selling off assets after the full-scale invasion in 2022, may now be reassessing their options. It’s also becoming clear that some of these companies never completely left to begin with.
What is apparent is that divestment was, in many cases, provisional rather than permanent – with firms embedding “buy-back” clauses in their sales contracts, or structuring their exits in ways that would make future re-entry simple.
This should not come as a surprise. Our research into foreign divestment from apartheid-era South Africa shows this is a well-trodden business path.
In South Africa, sanctions inadvertently strengthened local white business elites aligned with the ruling regime. Multinationals sold their assets under pressure – often at discounts, often to the local companies of politically connected elites – and later bought them back at a premium.
Today, the same dynamic could be playing out in Russia.
When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, more than 1,600 multinational enterprises announced they were pulling out of the country. However, reports last year suggested that 2,175 foreign companies, including some who had announced they were pulling out, remained in Russia – and were becoming increasingly open about their operations.
One CEO stated that investors did not “morally care” about doing business in Russia, and that if they pulled out, rivals would simply take their place.
Even for those companies that did leave, many of these exits were more symbolic than substantial. Research has shown that even companies that claimed to have fully divested left behind options to return.
Carmaker Nissan, for example, appears to have sold its Russian subsidiary to state-owned NAMI in 2022 with a six-year buy-back clause. In a statement at the time, the company said the terms allowed it “the option to buy back the entity and its operations within the next six years”.
And fast-food giant McDonald’s can reportedly reacquire its Russian business within 15 years. A statement from McDonald’s in 2022 said that, for the first time in its history, it was “de-Arching” a major market – but suggested it hoped to return eventually.
Such arrangements, often quietly written into exit contracts, allow multinationals to comply with sanctions in the short term – while keeping the door open for a future comeback.
In many cases, the operations have continued seamlessly under new ownership. While the brand names may have changed in Russia, the staff and product designs remain almost identical. And sometimes, the foreign supply chains and intellectual property are still in play too.
Who profits?
The South African precedent is instructive. During the 1980s, foreign companies divested under pressure from shareholders, activists and governments over apartheid. But very few truly left. Most sold their operations to local elites – powerful business groups aligned with the ruling regime. They then continued to supply products, license trademarks and support operations through quiet back channels.
The intention of sanctions is to weaken the sanctioned state. However, our study shows that the economic value created by foreign multinationals in South Africa did not disappear.
The aim of sanctions against Russia is to weaken the economic position of the Kremlin. E.O./Shutterstock
In Russia, foreign companies have sold assets at big discounts to Russian oligarchs and state-linked entities since 2022. In some cases, the buyers were longstanding local partners or franchisees. In others, they were entities unknown to consumers but which were thought to have close ties to the Kremlin.
The consequences are predictable. Rather than weakening the regime’s economic base, sanctions may have consolidated it. As in South Africa, the departure of foreign firms appears to have strengthened domestic elites and allowed them to accumulate new assets and market power.
Some companies that left Russia are reported to be reconsidering their decisions. Negotiations are taking place behind the scenes about how to ree-stablish operations should conditions shift. Their re-entry may be smoothed by structures – buy-back clauses, licensing deals or local partnerships – that firms put in place on their way out.
This strategy mirrors what we found in South Africa. In the 1990s, once apartheid ended, foreign multinationals returned in large numbers. But they didn’t start from scratch. They repurchased their former assets, often at a much higher price, from the local elites.
In short, in the case of South Africa at least, the period of supposed withdrawal was often one of careful preparation for re-entry. Meanwhile, our study also found that South African conglomerates used their windfalls to fund international expansion and entrench their power in the new economy.
Unintended results
Sanctions remain a key tool of international diplomacy. But our research shows their effectiveness depends heavily on how firms implement them – and who ends up with the assets that are divested. If those assets are consistently transferred to politically connected insiders, the long-term outcome may be to reinforce the very regimes the sanctions were intended to pressure.
Sanctions policy should not just consider whether firms have divested, but how and to whom. Without that, even the most well-intentioned measures may end up producing unintended results.
This means that governments should go beyond imposing sanctions and develop mechanisms to ensure transparency, monitoring and accountability in how corporate exits are structured.
South African sanctions are generally seen as having played a useful role in ending apartheid. But as unemployment and inequality continue to plague the country along old institutional lines, the South African experience offers a clear historical warning. If sanctions are meant to promote accountability and change, it’s vital to pay close attention to what happens after the headlines fade.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
In May 2025, a post asking “[Am I the asshole] for telling my husband’s affair partner’s fiancé about their relationship?” quickly received 6,200 upvotes and more than 900 comments on Reddit. This popularity earned the post a spot on Reddit’s front page of trending posts. The problem? It was (very likely) written by artificial intelligence (AI).
The post contained some telltale signs of AI, such as using stock phrases (“[my husband’s] family is furious”) and excessive quotation marks, and sketching an unrealistic scenario designed to generate outrage rather than reflect a genuine dilemma.
While this post has since been removed by the forum’s moderators, Reddit users have repeatedly expressed their frustration with the proliferation of this kind of content.
High-engagement, AI-generated posts on Reddit are an example of what is known as “AI slop” – cheap, low-quality AI-generated content, created and shared by anyone from low-level influencers to coordinated political influence operations.
Estimates suggest that over half of longer English-language posts on LinkedIn are written by AI. In response to that report, Adam Walkiewicz, a director of product at LinkedIn, told Wired it has “robust defenses in place to proactively identify low-quality and exact or near-exact duplicate content. When we detect such content, we take action to ensure it is not broadly promoted.”
But AI-generated low-quality news sites are popping up all over the place, and AI images are also flooding social media platforms such as Facebook. You may have come across images like “shrimp Jesus” in your own feeds.
Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.
AI-generated content is cheap. A report by the Nato StratCom Center of Excellence from 2023 found that for a mere €10 (about £8), you can buy tens of thousands of fake views and likes, and hundreds of AI-generated comments, on almost all major social media platforms.
While much of it is seemingly innocent entertainment, one study from 2024 found that about a quarter of all internet traffic is made up of “bad bots”. These bots, which seek to spread disinformation, scalp event tickets or steal personal data, are also becoming much better at masking as humans.
In short, the world is dealing with the “enshittification” of the web: online services have become gradually worse over time as tech companies prioritise profits over user experience. AI-generated content is just one aspect of this.
From Reddit posts that enrage readers to tearjerking cat videos, this content is extremely attention-grabbing and thus lucrative for both slop-creators and platforms.
This is known as engagement bait – a tactic to get people to like, comment and share, regardless of the quality of the post. And you don’t need to seek out the content to be exposed to it.
One study explored how engagement bait, such as images of cute babies wrapped in cabbage, is recommended to social media users even when they do not follow any AI-slop pages or accounts. These pages, which often link to low-quality sources and promote real or made-up products, may be designed to boost their follower base in order to sell the account later for profit.
Meta (Facebook’s parent company) said in April that it is cracking down on “spammy” content that tries to “game the Facebook algorithm to increase views”, but did not specify AI-generated content. Meta has used its own AI-generated profiles on Facebook, but has since removed some of these accounts.
What the risks are
This may all have serious consequences for democracy and political communication. AI can cheaply and efficiently create misinformation about elections that is indiscernible from human-generated content. Ahead of the 2024 US presidential elections, researchers identified a large influence campaign designed to advocate for Republican issues and attack political adversaries.
And before you think it’s only Republicans doing it, think again: these bots are as biased as humans of all perspectives. A report by Rutgers University found that Americans on all sides of the political spectrum rely on bots to promote their preferred candidates.
Researchers aren’t innocent either: scientists at the University of Zurich were recently caught using AI-powered bots to post on Reddit as part of a research project on whether inauthentic comments can change people’s minds. But they failed to disclose that these comments were fake to Reddit moderators.
Reddit is now considering taking legal action against the university. The company’s chief legal officer said: “What this University of Zurich team did is deeply wrong on both a moral and legal level.”
Political operatives, including from authoritarian countries such as Russia, China and Iran, invest considerable sums in AI-driven operations to influence elections around the democratic world.
How effective these operations are is up for debate. One study found that Russia’s attempts to interfere in the 2016 US elections through social media were a dud, while another found it predicted polling figures for Trump. Regardless, these campaigns are becoming much more sophisticated and well-organised.
And even seemingly apolitical AI-generated content can have consequences. The sheer volume of it makes accessing real news and human-generated content difficult.
What’s to be done?
Malign AI content is proving to be extremely hard to spot by humans and computers alike. Computer scientists recently identified a bot network of about 1,100 fake X accounts posting machine-generated content (mostly about cryptocurrency) and interacting with each other through likes and retweets. Problematically, the Botometer (a tool they developed to detect bots) failed to identify these accounts as fake.
The use of AI is relatively easy to spot if you know what to look for, particularly when content is formulaic or unapologetically fake. But it’s much harder when it comes to short-form content (for example, Instagram comments) or high-quality fake images. And the technology used to create AI slop is quickly improving.
As close observers of AI trends and the spread of misinformation, we would love to end on a positive note and offer practical remedies to spot AI slop or reduce its potency. But in reality, many people are simply jumping ship.
Dissatisfied with the amount of AI slop, social media users are escaping traditional platforms and joining invite-only online communities. This may lead to further fracturing of our public sphere and exacerbate polarisation, as the communities we seek out are often comprised of like-minded individuals.
As this sorting intensifies, social media risks devolving into mindless entertainment, produced and consumed mostly by bots who interact with other bots while us humans spectate. Of course, platforms don’t want to lose users, but they might push as much AI slop as the public can tolerate.
Some research also shows promise in helping people to better identify deepfakes, but research is in its early stages.
Overall, we are just starting to realise the scale of the problem. Soberingly, if humans drown in AI slop, so does AI: AI models trained on the “enshittified” internet are likely to produce garbage.
Jon Roozenbeek has received funding from the UK Cabinet Office, the US State Department, the ESRC, Google, the American Psychological Association, the US Centers for Disease Control, EU Horizon 2020, the Templeton World Charity Foundation, and the Alfred Landecker Foundation.
Sander van der Linden has received funding from the UK Cabinet Office, Google, the American Psychological Association, the US Centers for Disease Control, EU Horizon 2020, the Templeton World Charity Foundation, and the Alfred Landecker Foundation.
Yara Kyrychenko receives funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and is supported by the Alan Turing Institute’s Enrichment Scheme.
PALO ALTO, Calif., May 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — NEC X, the Silicon Valley venture studio backed by NEC’s advanced technologies and global businesses, is now accepting applications for Batch 14 of its flagship startup program, Elev X! Ignite. Designed to help early-stage entrepreneurs turn bold ideas into seed-ready startups, Elev X! Ignite offers access to expert mentorship, tech R&D support, startup-building resources and up to $250K in equity funding.
The program’s accelerating growth, including a 35% increase in applications from Batch 12 to Batch 13 and over 20% from Batch 11 to Batch 12, underscores the increasing demand for NEC X’s unique value proposition: direct collaboration with NEC’s world-class innovation network, access to unparalleled resources and a clear pathway to global markets.
Startups have until June 30, 2025, to apply for the upcoming cohort, with the first phase of the program beginning in August 2025, following a multi-phase selection process.
“The rapid growth of Elev X! proves that visionary founders need more than just capital,” said Shintaro Matsumoto, President and CEO of NEC X. “With Batch 14, we’re not just continuing a trajectory; we’re amplifying our commitment to provide unparalleled access to both NEC’s R&D and business prowess and growing global ecosystem, empowering innovators to build truly transformative and scalable enterprises.”
Why Join Elev X! Ignite
Unlike traditional venture studios and accelerators, Elev X! Ignite is a hands-on twelve-month venture studio program tailored for entrepreneurs in the problem discovery and validation phase. Startups work closely with NEC X’s multidisciplinary team including engineers, researchers, business coaches and advisors to accelerate product development, validate market fit and prepare for seed-stage investment.
NEC is a global AI leader in visual recognition, generative tech and real-world applications such as security, agriculture, logistics and public services. Ideal candidates are building B2B software and SaaS businesses that enhance business processes, decision-making or operational efficiency.
NEC X is especially interested in startups leveraging cutting-edge technologies such as Generative AI, Computer Vision and Predictive Analytics. While NEC X has deep experience in sectors like climate research, AgTech, digital health and public safety, it remains sector-agnostic—as long as participants’ innovations align with NEC X’s mission to create meaningful social impact through technology, particularly in areas connected to NEC’s proprietary capabilities.
Startup Success Stories
More than 150 startups have launched or grown through NEC X’s Elev X! venture programs. These alumni illustrate the program’s impact:
SeafoodAI, featured in Business Insider, uses AI biometrics to promote seafood sustainability via its CrabScan360 technology. “NEC X’s expertise in image recognition and AI was instrumental in accelerating our core technology,” noted Rob Terry, CEO of SeafoodAI. “Their backing has been invaluable to our growth and success.“
Qualitative Intelligence (QI), utilizes NEC’s Semantic Model Technology to transform advertising with predictive analytics for real-time message testing. “Elev X! has been the most transformative experience in our startup journey,” said JD Rico, CEO of QI. “The level of resources, insights and hands-on support simply cannot be found elsewhere.“
LandWise Analytica uses AI and sustainability maps to drive smarter land use in agriculture and has seen considerable interest from real estate groups, farmers, crop insurance companies, agricultural mortgage providers and land investors. “With the help of NEC X, we’ve been able to accelerate the launch of our pilot program and streamline the process of identifying and acquiring new users,” said Patrick McMillan, Co-founder of LandWise Analytica. “Their capabilities and results have been beyond our expectations.“
Selection Process Approximately 30 startups will be invited to participate in the initial “Business Model Design” phase—a no-cost, equity-free pre-program of workshops and mentorship. A select group of ten teams will then advance to the full Elev X! Ignite program.
Program Highlights:
Up to $250K in equity funding
Access to NEC’s global R&D ecosystem and business units
Strategic partnerships and customer development
Proven track record: over 150 startups participated since 2018
For application information, materials and deadlines, click here.
All essential details needed to successfully apply for the program will be covered in upcoming webinars scheduled for June 11, June 18 and June 25.
About NEC X NEC X is an innovation powerhouse and curator of disruptive startups backed by the global technology leadership of NEC. Leveraging 125 years of IT and network technologies expertise, NEC X’s startup-focused approach transforms visionary ideas into commercial successes that revolutionize how we work and live. Since its inception in 2018, NEC X has helped launch and grow more than 150 startups.
Their Silicon Valley programs – Elev X! Ignite and Elev X! Boost – equip early-stage startup founders with the tools to fast-track their tech development and adoption. Elev X! fuels startup success from inception to launch, connecting innovators with NEC’s 45,000 patents; global network of partners, mentors and advisors; reach into 55+ international markets; and $8 billion R&D ecosystem.
About NEC Corporation NEC Corporation has established itself as a leader in the integration of IT and network technologies while promoting the brand statement of “Orchestrating a brighter world.” NEC enables businesses and communities to adapt to rapid changes taking place in both society and the market as it provides for the social values of safety, security, fairness and efficiency to promote a more sustainable world where everyone has the chance to reach their full potential.
Dallas, Texas, May 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Digital Ascension Group has officially announced the deployment of its validator node on Constellation Network ($DAG), a highly scalable Layer 0 protocol built to enable secure, efficient, and interoperable data exchange across platforms.
Digital Ascension Group Launches Validator Node on Constellation Network
By operating a validator, the firm is stepping into a key role within the network’s ecosystem, helping secure the protocol and support the integrity of its core infrastructure. This move reflects Digital Ascension Group’s continued focus on contributing to practical blockchain solutions that are ready for large-scale, real-world use.
“We see Constellation’s Metagraph architecture as a foundational piece of the next digital infrastructure. Running a validator aligns with our long-term strategy of supporting real-world adoption of decentralized technology,” said Max Avery, Chief Business Development Officer at Digital Ascension Group.
“We’re here to help bring credibility, transparency, and community-driven governance to networks that actually scale.”
Metagraphs, specialized, application-focused blockchains within Constellation, are at the center of this strategy. Digital Ascension Group plans to play an active part in the growth of these Metagraphs, which are engineered to serve specific enterprise and public sector needs.
Alongside its validator work, the firm is now exploring the creation of a Metagraph aimed at family offices. The concept is to build a secure and compliant decentralized framework that handles sensitive tasks across global jurisdictions.
Digital Ascension Group sees Constellation’s Layer 0 framework as uniquely positioned to support these needs, with its modular structure allowing each Metagraph to operate independently while still contributing to a larger, interoperable system. Use cases already range from IoT data validation and supply chain integrity to decentralized identity and secure government infrastructure.
Through initiatives like validator deployment and Metagraph development, Digital Ascension Group continues to develop a growing role as a connector between traditional finance and decentralized technologies, laying the groundwork for secure, high-functioning digital asset systems built to solve real market challenges.
About Digital Ascension Group
Digital Ascension Group is a forward-thinking multi-family office specializing in digital assets (crypto / blockchain). Our mission is to empower High-Net-Worth (HNW) and Ultra-High-Net-Worth (UHNW) individuals, as well as Family Offices, to confidently navigate the rapidly evolving digital asset landscape. We provide a comprehensive suite of services designed to address the unique needs and opportunities in this dynamic sector. From investment strategy and risk management to regulatory compliance and custody solutions, Digital Ascension Group delivers tailored strategies that prioritize sustainable wealth protection and growth. With a deep understanding of blockchain technology, cryptocurrency markets, and tokenized assets, we bridge the gap between traditional wealth management and the cutting-edge world of digital finance. Our expert team ensures that our clients remain at the forefront of innovation while maintaining the security and stability their wealth demands.
Press inquiries
Digital Ascension Group https://www.digitalfamilyoffice.io Max Avery max@digitalfamilyoffice.io 307-243-3711 9100 John W Carpenter Fwy Dallas, Texas 75247
Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Johann Kirsten, Director of the Bureau for Economic Research, Stellenbosch University
When world leaders engage, the assumption is always that they engage on issues based on verified facts, which their administrative staff are supposed to prepare. Under this assumption, we thought the meeting at the White House on 21 May between South Africa’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa, and US president Donald Trump would follow this pattern.
Issues of agriculture, farming and land (and rural crime) were central to the discussions. What is clear to us as agricultural economists is that the skewed views expressed by Trump about these issues originate in South Africa. This includes Trump’s statement: “But Blacks are not farmers.”
In our work as agricultural economists, we have, in many pieces and books (our latest titled The Uncomfortable Truth about South Africa’s Agriculture), tried to present South Africans with the real facts about the political economy policy reforms and structural dimensions of South African agriculture.
Writing on these matters was necessary given that official data – agricultural census 2017, as well as the official land audit of 2017 – all provide an incomplete picture of the real state and structure of South African agriculture. The reason is that the agricultural census, which is supposed to provide a comprehensive and inclusive assessment of the size and structure of the primary agricultural sector, and the land audit, which was supposed to record the ownership of all land in South Africa, are incomplete in their coverage.
The incomplete and inaccurate official data provides fertile ground for radical statements by the left and the right – and novices on social media. This is why South Africa has to deal with falsehoods coming from the US. These include Trump’s statement that black people are not farmers in South Africa.
South Africa is to blame for providing inaccurate data to feed these false narratives.
The facts presented here should allow a more nuanced interpretation of South Africa’s farm structure. Firstly, there are more black farmers in South Africa than white farmers. And not all white commercial farm operations are “large-scale”, and not all black farmers are “small-scale”, “subsistence” or “emerging”. Most farm operations can be classified as micro, or small in scale.
This is important so that one doesn’t view South Africa’s agriculture as mainly white farmers. Indeed, we are a country of two agricultures with black farmers mainly at small scale and accounting for roughly 10% of the commercial agricultural output. Still, this doesn’t mean they are not active in the sector. They mainly still require support to expand and increase output, but they are active.
The facts
In the wake of the circus in the Oval Office, we were amazed by the total silence of the many farmers’ organisations in South Africa. We have not seen one coming out to reject all of Trump’s claims. The only thing we can deduce from this is that these falsehoods suit the political position of some farmer organisations. But at what cost? Will many of their members be harmed by trade sanctions or tariffs against South Africa? The US is an important market for South Africa’s agriculture, accounting for 4% of the US$13.7 billion exports in 2024.
When Ramaphosa highlighted the fact that crime, and rural crime in particular, has an impact on all South Africans and that more black people than white people are being killed, Trump’s response was disturbing, to say the least: “But Blacks are not farmers”. This requires an immediate fact check.
We returned to the text from our chapter in the Handbook on the South African Economy we jointly prepared in 2021. In the extract below, we discuss the real numbers of farmers in South Africa and try to provide a sensible racial classification of farmers to denounce Trump’s silly statement.
As highlighted earlier, the two latest agricultural censuses (2007 and 2017) are incomplete as they restricted the sample frame to farm businesses registered to pay value added tax. Only firms with a turnover of one million rands (US$55,500) qualify for VAT registration.
We were able to expand the findings from the censuses with numbers from the 2011 population census and the 2016 community survey to better understand the total number of commercial farming units in South Africa. The Community Survey 2016 is a large-scale survey that happened between Censuses 2011 and 2021. The main objective was to provide population and household statistics at municipal level to government and the private sector, to support planning and decision-making.
Data from the 2011 population census (extracted from three agricultural questions included in the census) shows that 2,879,638 households out of South Africa’s total population, or 19.9% of all households, were active in agriculture for subsistence or commercial purposes.
Only 2% of these active households reported an annual income derived from agriculture above R307,000 (US$17,000). This translates into 57,592 households that can be considered commercial farmers, with agriculture as the main or only source of household income. This corresponds in some way with the 40,122 farming businesses that are registered for VAT as noted in the 2017 agricultural census report.
If we use the numbers from the agricultural census it is evident almost 90% of all VAT-registered commercial farming businesses could be classified as micro or small-scale enterprises. If the farm businesses excluded from the census are accounted for under the assumption that they are too small for VAT registration, then the fact still stands that the vast majority of all farm enterprises in South Africa are small family farms.
There are, however, 2,610 large farms (with turnover exceeding R22.5 million (US$1.2 million per annum) which are responsible for 67% of farm income and employed more than half the agricultural labour force of 757,000 farm workers in 2017.
Another way to get to farm numbers is to use the 2016 Community Survey. Using the shares as shown in Table 2, we estimate there are 242,221 commercial farming households in South Africa, of which only 43,891 (18%) are white commercial farmers. (This is very much in line with the VAT registered farmers but also acknowledging the fact that many white farm businesses are not necessarily registered for VAT.)
Let’s consider only the agricultural households with agriculture as their main source of income, surveyed in the 2016 community survey. We end up with a total of 132,700 households, of whom 93,000 (70%) are black farmers. This reality is something that policy makers and farm organisations find very difficult to deal with and it seems that Trump also found this too good to be true.
We have tried here in a long winded way to deal with farm numbers and how to get to a race classification of farmers in South Africa. In the end we trust that we have managed to show that there are more black farmers in South Africa than white farmers. Their share in total output is smaller than that of their white counterparts. The National Agricultural Marketing Council puts black farmers’ share of agricultural production as roughly 10%. But these numbers are also incomplete and largely an undercount.
It will always be challenging to get to the real number of black farmers’ share of agricultural output as nobody would ever know whether the potato or the cabbage on the shelf came from a farm owned by a black farmer or a white person but operated by a black farmer, for example. As South Africans know, the labour on farms, in pack houses, distribution systems and retail are all black. So, the sweat and hard work of black South African workers are integral to the food supply chain in South Africa.
Let’s get these facts straight and promote them honestly.
– Most South African farmers are black: why Trump got it so wrong – https://theconversation.com/most-south-african-farmers-are-black-why-trump-got-it-so-wrong-257668
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Johnson (LA-04)
WASHINGTON — This morning, Speaker Johnson joined CNN’s State of the Union, Fox News’ Fox News Sunday, and CBS News’ Face the Nation to discuss the historic, House-passed One Big Beautiful Bill Act and outlined the necessity of sending the final bill to President Trump’s desk by July 4.
Watch Speaker Johnson on CNNhere, Fox Newshere, and CBShere.
On working with the Senate:
I’ve been very consistent with our colleagues in the Senate. We worked hand in glove with them all through this process, remembering that the House began this more than a year ago, it was March of last year when we got our committee chairs together and told them to begin to prepare for this massive reconciliation package. We believed at that time, more than a year ago, that we would win the White House and Senate and the House and have unified government and have this, really once in a generation opportunity to do so much in one piece of legislation.
I met with the Senate Republicans, all my colleagues over there last week on Tuesday at their weekly luncheon. And I encouraged them to do their work, of course as we all anticipate, but to make as few modifications to this package as possible, remembering that we’ve got to pass it one more time to ratify their changes in the House. And I have a very delicate balance here, a very delicate equilibrium that we’ve reached over a long period of time, and it’s best not to meddle with it too much.
On getting the One Big Beautiful Bill passed by July 4:
The reason I tried to get this done, and we did get it done, before Memorial Day and send it to the Senate is so the President can be signing this into law by Independence Day on July 4th. Why is that so important? Because we’ve got to get relief to the American people and that we also need to, for political purposes, give a lot of time, enough time for everyone to see that this package actually is what we say. It’s going to help the country, it’s going help the economy, it’s going to help all boats to rise, just as we did after the first two years of the first Trump administration. And so we’re anxious to get this signed into law so people feel it and see it before that midterm election, and they understand it is the Republicans who are doing the best for hardworking Americans, low-income families, and everyone who deserves a better shot.
On Democrat falsehoods around Republican efforts to strengthen Medicaid:
We have not cut Medicaid, and we have not cut SNAP. What we’re doing, Margaret, is working on fraud, waste, and abuse. And everyone in Louisiana and around the country understands that that’s a responsibility of Congress. Just in Medicaid, for example, you’ve got 1.4 million illegal aliens receiving those benefits. That is not what Medicaid is intended for. It’s intended for vulnerable populations, for young single pregnant women and, and the elderly and the disabled and people who desperately need those resources. Right now, they’re being drained by fraud, waste, and abuse.
You got about 4.8 million people on Medicaid right now nationwide, who are able-bodied workers, young men, for example, who are not working, who are taking advantage of the system. If you are able to work and you refuse to do so, you are defrauding the system, you’re cheating the system, and no one in the country believes that that’s right. So, there’s a moral component to what we’re doing. And when you make young men work, it’s good for them. It’s good for their dignity, it’s good for their self-worth and it’s good for the community that they live in.
On criticism of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act:
Well, I agree wholeheartedly with what my dear friend Rand Paul said. I love his conviction, and I share it. The national debt is the greatest threat to our national security and deficits are a serious problem. What I think Rand is missing on this one is the fact that we are quite serious about this. This is the biggest spending cut, Shannon, in more than 30 years. We’re going to cut one over $1.5 trillion in spending, it’s a big leap forward. The last time we had a spending cut was three decades ago, and it was only $800 billion even adjusted for inflation. This is the biggest spending cut, I think, in the history of government, on planet Earth. Now, is it enough? Of course not. But we have a very delicate balance, and we have to start the process.
I liken this to an aircraft carrier. You don’t turn an aircraft carrier on a dime. It takes a mile of open ocean. And so, it took us decades to get into this situation. This is a big step to begin to turn that aircraft carrier. One important point about what he said, it sounds like his biggest objection is the fact that we are extending the debt ceiling. That’s a critically important thing to do. We have to do it. We’re not going to get any Democrats to assist on that. So, to get it through the Senate and make sure we don’t crash the US economy and default on our debts for the first time in history, it has to be part of the reconciliation package. And that’s why the President Trump and all the other Republicans in Congress, House and Senate understand the necessity of this.
Important point here. It does not mean that we’re going to spend more money. We’re extending the debt ceiling to show to creditors, the bond markets, the stock market, that the Congress is serious about this. President Trump is dialed in 100%. He is a visionary leader. He does not want to spend more money… Russ Vought is the director of the Office of Management and Budget, long seen as a strict fiscal hawk, as I liken myself to be as well. And Rand Paul is one who has applauded and said great things about Russ Vought’s perspective. Russ said about two weeks ago that the criticism on fiscal grounds about this bill is profoundly inaccurate.
Laos’ Ministry of Energy and Mines (MEM) has set a goal to reach hydropower capacity of 12GW by 2025 and 20GW by 2030, with the objective of facilitating regional exports. The nation is poised to export renewable electricity to Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam, and to a lesser extent, to Myanmar and Malaysia. Against this backdrop, large hydropower capacity in the country is expected to reach 16GW in 2035, registering a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4.8% during 2024-35, according to GlobalData, a leading data and analytics company.
GlobalData’s latest report, “Laos Power Market Outlook to 2035, Update 2025 – Market Trends, Regulations, and Competitive Landscape,” reveals that annual large hydropower generation in Laos is expected to increase at a CAGR of 4.6% between 2024-35 to reach 63.5TWh. Although at the current pace, the country is expected to fall short of its 2030 target, proper policy enforcement and time-bound targets will enable it to bridge this gap.
In 2011, the country released Renewable Energy Development Strategy, setting a target to achieve 30% of energy consumption to be sourced from renewables by 2025. The government has primarily focused on hydropower along with biomass energy.
Attaurrahman Ojindaram Saibasan, Senior Power Analyst at GlobalData, comments: “Laos has established itself as a net exporter of electricity, earning the moniker “Battery of Southeast Asia.” The nation produces an excess of electricity beyond its domestic needs, facilitating the export of this surplus to neighboring countries, with Thailand, Vietnam, China, and Cambodia being the primary beneficiaries. The country engages in the exportation of electricity through long-term Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) with these adjacent nations. Laos is planning to export 9GW of electricity to Thailand by 2025 and 5GW to Vietnam by 2030.”
Thailand stands as the foremost recipient of Laotian electricity, utilizing both 500kV and 230kV transmission lines for this purpose. Vietnam ranks next, receiving electricity via 220kV and 500kV transmission lines.
Saibasan concludes: “Laos relies significantly on export revenue, which renders its economy susceptible to fluctuations in external markets. To manage the increasing cross-border electricity flows, there is a pressing need for infrastructure enhancements. Moreover, as prices are frequently determined by purchasers such as Thailand and Vietnam, Laos finds its bargaining power constrained. The country should look to invest in energy storage systems and upgrading its grid to overcome these challenges.”
Employers and workers are reminded that on Sunday, June 1, 2025, B.C.’s general minimum wage increases from $17.40 to $17.85 an hour.
The 2.6% increase on June 1 also applies to minimum-wage rates for resident caretakers, live-in home-support workers, live-in camp leaders and app-based delivery and ride-hail services workers.
The minimum agricultural piece rates for hand harvesters will increase by 2.6% on Dec. 31, 2025. The Dec. 31 annual increase to the minimum piece rates ensures crop producers will not need to adjust wages in the middle of the harvesting season.
Government has made regular, gradual increases to the minimum wage to provide certainty for workers and predictability for businesses. This is the fourth year of the government’s ongoing commitment to tie annual minimum-wage increases to inflation.
In February 2024, government amended the Employment Standards Act so annual increases to minimum rates happen automatically, based on the previous year’s average inflation rate for B.C.
In 2024, approximately 130,000 employees in B.C. earned minimum wage or less, according to labour-force data from Statistics Canada.
Learn More:
To read the news release on this year’s minimum wage increase, visit: https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2025LBR0001-000113
For more information about B.C.’s minimum wages, visit: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/employment-business/employment-standards-advice/employment-standards/wages/minimum-wage
For more information about TogetherBC, B.C.’s poverty reduction strategy, visit: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/british-columbians-our-governments/initiatives-plans-strategies/poverty-reduction-strategy/togetherbc.pdf
Source: United States Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock – Georgia
ICYMI From the Albany Herald: Dougherty County, Rural Georgia Would be Hard-hit by SNAP Cuts in Proposed Budget
Senator Reverend Warnock spoke to the Albany Herald about the social and economic impact that GOP cuts to federal nutrition programs would have on rural Georgians as a result of their new spending bill
The SNAP program helps millions of working families across the country with their grocery bill each month. Every dollar in federal investment generates $1.79 in economic activity. In 2023, stores and retailers in Georgia saw revenues of over $3.6 billion from SNAP benefits
Senator Reverend Warnock: “It makes no sense to take the food out of the mouths of poor, rural children to give tax cuts to rich folks. It’s people in the middle…it’s hard-working people who will feel the impact”
Washington, D.C. – In an interview with the Albany Herald, U.S. Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) warned rural Georgians that the elderly, people with disabilities, children, farmers, and small business owners will be those most impacted by cuts to key nutrition programs in Washington Republicans’ new spending bill. Senator Warnock stressed that cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which helps millions of working families afford groceries, would hit rural Georgians hardest because the majority of Georgia counties with the highest rates of families who rely on SNAP are rural. As a result, rural economies receive a larger lift from the program than many of their counterparts in metro-Atlanta.
“There are people who work every single day and are still food-insecure,” said Senator Reverend Warnock. “Poor people don’t have lobbyists. Billionaires and corporations do. You are seeing in this request the outsize impact of money and power in our politics.”
On May 22, 2025, Senator Warnock published a white paper exposing the hidden harm of Washington Republicans’ plan to pay for their tax cut to billionaires by shifting the cost of nutrition assistance to the states, ultimately making it harder for Georgia families to cover their grocery bill. The report finds that Georgia families would suffer the most under the GOP spending bill with a projected loss of over $860 million, disproportionately affecting Georgia’s rural communities.
SNAP helps vulnerable families supplement their budget by just $6.16 per day and lifts millions of Americans out of poverty each year. In 2023, stores and retailers in Georgia saw over $3.6 billion in revenue thanks to SNAP, helping local grocery stores keep their doors open.
“The thing I want to emphasize is it will be rural Georgians impacted,” said Sen. Warnock. “What we will see is huge cuts in benefits. Small communities will be particularly hard hit. In Dougherty County, more than a third (of residents) are on SNAP. It will be a great impact to the local economy.”
Hours after Senator Warnock published his report, Washington Republicans passed their $4.5 trillion spending bill through the House of Representatives. According to the House Republicans’ bill provisions advanced by the House Agriculture Committee on May 14, 2025, beginning in 2028, Washington Republicans would require all states to pay a 5% cost-share, shifting the burden from the federal government to the states. However, most states have higher payment error rates, like Georgia, and would have to pay even more.
Georgia could be on the hook for $867 million in new costs on the state budget, leaving children, seniors, and disabled people more likely to be unable to afford groceries.
The full article can be found HEREand below:
ALBANY – Georgia’s elderly, disabled and children, as well as farmers, would be the casualties of a congressional spending bill that made its way through the House early Thursday morning.
That’s the assessment of U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock concerning the “big beautiful bill” backed by President Trump that will now advance to the Senate. Georgia’s potential loss would be $860 million in food assistance.
“Small communities will be particularly hard hit,” Georgia’s junior senator said of the legislation, which also contains reductions in Medicaid spending. “It’s an unfunded mandate that shifts the cut to the state. What we will see is huge cuts in benefits.”
On Thursday, the senator released an analysis of the potential impact on residents of the Peach State. Among his takeaways are that 1.4 million Georgians rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), with more than 69% of participants in 694,000 households being families with children. More than 28% of SNAP recipients were in households with family members who are elderly or disabled.
In addition, state residents in rural areas are disproportionately likely to benefit from SNAP, with more than 77% of counties with the highest SNAP participation being rural. Between 2015 and 2019 SNAP lifted 250,000 Georgians, including 112,000 children, out of poverty each year, according to Warnock’s analysis.
“The thing I want to emphasize is it will be rural Georgians impacted,” he said. “In Dougherty County, more than a third (of residents) are on SNAP. It will be a great impact to the local economy.”
Nationally in 2024, of the 42 million Americans who received SNAP benefits, two out of three were either a child, senior citizen or adult with a disability, according to Warnock, and 96% of households of two or more contained at least one child, senior citizen or person with a disability.
In addition to the moral argument, there is also an economic one in that each federal dollar spent on the SNAP program generated $1.79 in economic activity in 2023, accounting for $3.6 billion in revenue at Georgia businesses, according to the senator’s analysis.
“Poor people don’t have lobbyists,” Warnock said. “Billionaires and corporations do. You are seeing in this request the outsize impact of money and power in our politics.
“It makes no sense to take the food out of the mouths of poor, rural children to give tax cuts to rich folks. It’s people in the middle … it’s hard-working people who will feel the impact. There are people who work every single day and are still food-insecure. As a pastor, I will continue to make the moral argument.”
President Donald Trump delivers the commencement address at West Point on May 24, 2025.AP Photo/Adam Gray
President Donald Trump’s speech at the graduation of the class of 2025 from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point included segments that were clearly scripted and portions that were obviously not.
During the unscripted portions, Trump, who wore a bright red “Make America Great Again” campaign hat during his entire appearance on May 24, 2025, delivered remarks that hit many of his frequent partisan political talking points. That included attacking presidential predecessors Barack Obama and Joe Biden, describing immigrants to the U.S. as “criminals” and trumpeting other policy accomplishments in his first and second terms.
That level of partisanship in a military setting – on the campus of the nation’s first military academy, and before an audience of cadets and their families, many of whom are veterans – is unusual in the United States.
The Conversation U.S. has published several articles discussing the importance to democracy of keeping the military and partisan politics separate. Here are two highlights from that coverage.
1. Cadets focus on the Constitution
During the West Point ceremony, the graduates themselves took an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” And all of them had studied the significance of that oath, including in classes like those taught by Joseph G. Amoroso and Lee Robinson, active-duty Army officers who graduated from West Point and later served as professors there.
As Amoroso and Robinson wrote, those classes teach cadets that, like all military personnel, they serve the Constitution and the American people, not a particular person or political party:
“(O)ur oath forms the basis of a nonpartisan ethic. In the U.S., unlike in many other countries, the oath implies military leaders should be trusted for their expertise and judgment, not for their loyalty to an individual or political party. We emphasize to cadets the rules and professional expectations associated with this profound responsibility.”
Retired U.S. Air Force Maj. Gen. Samuel C. Mahaney, who teaches history, national security and constitutional law at Missouri University of Science and Technology, observed:
“(S)ince the days of George Washington, the military has been dedicated to serving the nation, not a specific person or political agenda. … (N)onpartisanship is central to the military’s primary mission of defending the country.”
Mahaney wrote that if Trump’s actions during his second term meant a change from the centuries of precedent, “military personnel at all levels would face a crucial question: Would they stand up for the military’s independent role in maintaining the integrity and stability of American democracy or follow the president’s orders – even if those orders crossed a line that made them illegal or unconstitutional?”
PORTLAND, Ore.—A known leader of Portland’s 18th Street Gang was sentenced to 12 years in federal prison Friday for his leadership role in a local drug trafficking conspiracy and for possessing a weapon while in federal prison.
Noah Herrera, 26, was sentenced to 144 months in federal prison and five years’ supervised release.
According to court documents, Herrera was a second-in-command leader of the 18th Street Gang in Portland, working regularly with the gang’s local leader, Gustavo Torres-Mendez, who was sentenced in May 2024 to 164 months in federal prison. Together, the two men led various gang-driven activities including trafficking large quantities of methamphetamine, cocaine, and fentanyl in the Portland area. During this time, the 18th Street Gang was heavily armed and sold drugs acquired near the Mexico border in California to local buyers in and around Portland.
The government’s investigation exposed several major episodes in the gang’s activities. In August 2022, agents seized nearly nine pounds of methamphetamine after Herrera organized a transaction in Portland. Only weeks later, in early September 2022, federal agents monitoring the two leaders’ activities learned they and subordinate 18th Street Gang members had collected over $126,000 in cash after which Herrera and Torres-Mendez dispatched two members to California to purchase and pick up drugs. Agents monitored the return of the load vehicle, which was stopped near Grants Pass, Oregon, and over 104 pounds of methamphetamine and a smaller quantity of cocaine were seized. The methamphetamine was packaged in 56 separate plastic food containers.
On November 17, 2022, agents arrested Herrera and executed a search warrant at his Vancouver, Washington, home, where they found two loaded Glock pistols, ammunition, additional quantities of drugs, two scales with drug residue, a drug ledger, over $5000 in cash and several cell phones.
Agents also executed a search warrant at a residence in North Portland which had been used by the 18th Street Gang throughout the investigation as a meeting place and stash house. There, agents found and seized ten handguns in locations throughout the main rooms, a short-barreled shotgun, extended magazines, ammunition, body armor as well as additional drug evidence, packaging equipment and scales.
On September 25, 2023, while housed at FCI Sheridan pending trial, prison guards found Herrera in possession of a shiv (a six-inch sharpened piece of metal) prohibited by federal law.
On January 10, 2025, Herrera pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, heroin, and cocaine, and possessing a dangerous weapon in a federal facility.
This case was investigated by the FBI and was prosecuted by Thomas H. Edmonds and Nicole M. Bockelman, Assistant United States Attorneys for the District of Oregon.
The case was investigated under the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF). OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach. For more information about Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces, please visit www.justice.gov/ocdetf.
Foreign trade is the cornerstone of the Dutch economy. The Netherlands earns roughly a third of its total income abroad. Foreign trade also provides some 2.6 million full-time jobs – about a third of all jobs in the Netherlands. But an open economy also makes the Netherlands vulnerable to turmoil in global markets.
The government has therefore decided to implement an assertive trade policy. Priority will be given to what is good for the country’s economy (prosperity) and what is important for its security (resilience).
Speaking today, Ms Klever said, ‘This government will pursue a robust trade policy, focused on prosperity and a strong, resilient economy. We will continue to support our entrepreneurs abroad and invest in promising markets and high-potential sectors. The Netherlands is a trade champion and together we’ll make sure it stays that way, even in a turbulent world.’
Promising markets and high-potential sectors
The Netherlands will continue to invest in trusted partners and established markets where its businesses have long been successful. At the same time, the country is seeking new strategic partners, and the government is focusing on the promising markets of the future. These are countries that are expected to see strong economic growth in the coming decades, for example due to rapid population growth or major investment in education and research and development.
The government is also explicitly targeting high-potential sectors and essential key technologies, such as semiconductors (microchips), quantum technology and photonics. These technologies are important not only for the Dutch economy, but also for our national security and technological leadership.
Agreements within the EU
Within the European Union, the government aims to advocate more explicitly for Dutch trade interests, for example during talks on trade agreements. The government will work to ensure a level playing field internationally, so that Dutch entrepreneurs have a fair chance to compete.
In addition, it is committed to a well-functioning single European market, free from unnecessary rules. The Netherlands will also press for a constructive dialogue between the EU and the United States on import tariffs. At the same time, the government is ready to defend Dutch economic interests with countermeasures if dialogue does not lead to a positive outcome.
Protecting sensitive technologies
The government is also working to protect Dutch technologies, together with the EU and international partners. For example, the export of sensitive goods and technologies is being monitored to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands. The government is also actively implementing policy on knowledge security and overseeing the implementation of and compliance with sanctions.
Support for Dutch businesses
Supporting Dutch entrepreneurs remains a key part of the minister’s trade policy, for example through economic missions and assistance with international contract award procedures. The Netherlands has several grant and financing opportunities available for companies that want to do business internationally. Invest International and Atradius Dutch State Business also give entrepreneurs extra support to get high-risk projects abroad off the ground.
Linking aid, trade and investment
Finally, the government wants to link aid, trade and investment more firmly, as laid down in the policy letter on international development. The government is committed to working with Dutch companies in stable low- and middle-income countries. The focus is on areas where the Netherlands excels: food security, water management and health.
Source: Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe – OSCE
Headline: OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media concludes first official visit to Bosnia and Herzegovina
SARAJEVO, 28 May 2025 — The OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Jan Braathu, concluded today his first official visit to in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) where he held three-days of bilateral meetings.
Representative Braathu met with the Speaker of the BiH House of Representatives Denis Zvizdić; the Speaker of the BiH House of Peoples Nikola Špirić and the Deputy Speaker Dragan Čović, the Minister of Communications and Transport of BiH Edin Forto, Deputy Minister of Human Rights and Refugees of BiH Duška Jurišić and Acting Secretary of the BiH Ministry of Foreign Affairs Edin Dilberović. Braathu also met with representatives of the BiH’s entity of Republika Srpska Minister of Transport and Communications Nedeljko Čubrilović, Member of the House of Peoples and the Chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights Radovan Kovačević, and several Republika Srpska opposition politicians.
Key topics on the agenda included concerns about safety of journalists and authorities’ responsibility to ensure that journalists can work freely and safely. Representative Braathu addressed the escalating threats, legal harassment and violence targeting individual journalists and media outlets, along with the growing anti-media rhetoric. “No journalist should face intimidation or violence simply for doing their job,” Braathu said. “The 2018 OSCE Ministerial Council Decision on Safety of Journalists clearly sets out participating States’ commitment to ensure a safe, enabling environment for journalists. Upholding these commitments is not just a matter of priority — it is a necessary step to preserve democratic governance and safeguard the public’s right to information.”
Representative Braathu welcomed ongoing State-level reform efforts, including on media ownership transparency, but raised serious concerns about recent legislative developments at the entity level that risk undermining independent journalism and the free flow of information. These include the “foreign agent” law adopted in Republika Srpska, and draft laws in several cantons of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina focused on public peace and order as well as public information. Braathu urged authorities to align these laws with OSCE commitments through inclusive, transparent legislative processes.
The Representative also addressed the role and functionality of the public service broadcasting system and the regulatory authority as well as the issue of access to public information. He emphasized that these institutions must operate independently, professionally, and in the public interest to build a pluralistic and resilient media environment.
Braathu met with the Director of the Communications Regulatory Agency, the management of Radio and Television of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as several journalists and civil society representatives from across the country. He also held a meeting with numerous representatives from local Embassies belonging to the informal OSCE Group of Friends on Safety of Journalists.
“I am encouraged by the constructive engagement of many stakeholders during our meetings over the past three days,” said Braathu. “What is now needed is the political will to translate dialogue into action through inclusive, rights-based reforms that uphold free, independent, and safe journalism as a public good and a central pillar of the OSCE’s comprehensive security framework.”
Braathu reaffirmed his readiness to provide assistance to authorities at all levels of government to advance media freedom reforms, in line with his mandate and OSCE commitments.
The Representative will remain in the country to participate in the 10th regional South East Europe Media Conference, “Actioning media viability for informed, resilient societies”, organized by the Office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media in collaboration with OSCE field operations from South-Eastern Europe in Sarajevo from 29 to 30 May. There, he will continue to engage with regional and national stakeholders to further promote a safe and an enabling environment for media freedom.
The OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media observes media developments in all 57 OSCE participating States. He provides early warning on violations of freedom of expression and media freedom and promotes full compliance with OSCE media freedom commitments. Learn more at www.osce.org/fom, Twitter: @OSCE_RFoM and on www.facebook.com/osce.rfom
NASHVILLE –After a three-week trial,former Tennessee Speaker of the House Glen Casada, 64, and his former Chief of Staff Cade Cothren, 38, of Nashville, were found guilty today by a federal jury of conspiracy to commit theft from programs receiving federal funds; bribery and kickbacks concerning programs receiving federal funds; honest services wire fraud; conspiracy to commit money laundering; using a fictitious name to carry out a fraud; theft concerning programs receiving federal funds; eight counts of money laundering; and two counts of bribery and kickbacks, announced Robert E. McGuire, Acting United States Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee. Cothren was also found guilty on six counts of honest services wire fraud, and Casada was found guilty on four counts of honest services wire fraud and acquitted on two counts.
“Tennesseans have a right to expect honest services from their elected leaders and their staffs,” said McGuire. “Our office will continue to pursue justice on behalf of our community in cases involving public corruption and fraud committed by elected officials or their staffs. We believe that Tennesseans deserve no less.”
“Elected officials and their staff members have a duty to act honestly and ethically when serving the public,” said Joseph E. Carrico of the FBI Nashville Field Office. “Using public office for personal gain is a crime and the FBI is committed to holding those who abuse power accountable and protecting public resources.”
According to evidence presented at trial, beginning in late 2019, Casada, while representing Tennessee House District 63, Cothren, and former Tennessee State Representative Robin Smith, 61, of Hixson, Tennessee, engaged in a fraudulent scheme to enrich themselves by exploiting Casada and Smith’s official positions as legislators to obtain funds from the State of Tennessee. Specifically, the conspirators deceived their former colleagues and officials at the State of Tennessee in an effort to obtain State funds for Phoenix Solutions, Cothren’s political consulting business. In exchange for recruiting legislators and securing the approval of Phoenix Solutions’ invoices by the State, Cothren paid kickbacks to Casada and Smith.
Smith pleaded guilty to one count of honest services wire fraud in 2022 and testified at trial.
The evidence showed that Cothren pretended to be “Matthew Phoenix,” supposedly an experienced political consultant who had previously worked for a Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm. In fact, Cothren operated Phoenix Solutions, and Casada, Cothren, and Smith knew that “Matthew Phoenix” was a fictitious person. Casada, Cothren, and Smith concealed their involvement in Phoenix Solutions by submitting invoices to the State of Tennessee in the names of political consulting companies owned by Casada and Smith, for the purpose of secretly funneling money from the State to Phoenix Solutions through the bank accounts of these companies. In 2020, these companies and Phoenix Solutions received approximately $51,947 from the State in payments associated with the mailer program. Phoenix Solutions also obtained more than $170,000 in payments from political organizations, campaigns, and candidates.
Casada and Cothren will be sentenced later this year, and each face up to 20 years in prison. Smith is scheduled to be sentenced on June 9, 2025, and faces up to 20 years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. Casada, Cothren, and Smith may also be ordered to forfeit any property which represents or is traceable to receipts obtained as a result of the offenses.
This case was investigated by the FBI, Nashville Field Office. Assistant U.S. Attorney Taylor J. Phillips and Trial Attorneys John P. Taddei and Blake J. Ellison of the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section are prosecuting the case.
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Moscow, May 28 /Xinhua/ — Under the state program “Scientific and Technological Development of the Russian Federation,” 14 percent more funds have been allocated from the Russian federal budget for science in 2025 than a year earlier, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Chernyshenko said at a general meeting of members of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS).
The increase amounts to 83.3 billion rubles. Of these, 50.1 billion rubles are allocated for additional funding of fundamental scientific research.
According to D. Chernyshenko, the Russian government will continue to support the initiatives of the Russian Academy of Sciences, including in terms of developing fundamental research in Russia. According to him, it is important to ensure the continuity of fundamental science and applied solutions necessary for the creation of the most important science-intensive technologies. –0–
ARU Peterborough has played a key role in a landmark report that outlines strategies to better support disabled entrepreneurs across the UK, potentially driving significant economic growth.
The Lilac Review, an independent, Government-backed review to address the inequality disabled entrepreneurs face, has concluded that significant financial, operational, and accessibility barriers are holding back the nation’s disabled-led businesses.
Disabled entrepreneurs represent 25% of the UK’s 5.45 million small businesses, but just 8.6% of business turnover. The Lilac Review estimates that removing these obstacles could unlock an additional £230 billion in UK business revenue.
The research for The Lilac Review report was supported by Professor Tom Williamson and Dr Cheryl Greyson from ARU Peterborough in collaboration with Small Business Britain, with support from Lloyds.
The ARU Peterborough academics analysed survey data from 750 disabled entrepreneurs and found that despite their resilience, disabled founders face additional and complex barriers to growth and funding. Over half (57%) of respondents identified financial support as their critical need for the coming year.
Alongside a range of targeted support and tailored solutions, a key recommendation from The Lilac Review is to enhance the reach and impact of the new Disability Finance Code launched last December.
The Lilac Review also highlights the importance of greater access to peer-led business networks and mentorship, with 51% of respondents indicating that bridging this gap would benefit them.
The need to embed inclusivity at the heart of all future business support to build equity and opportunity was emphasised, with data showing 35% of disabled entrepreneurs find current programmes inaccessible.
The Lilac Review also advocates for greater investment and innovation in inclusive AI training and skills development and AI-powered assistive technology, as well as placing accessibility and inclusion at the heart of AI policy and product development. This recognises the transformative potential of AI to level the business playing field.
Professor Williamson of ARU Peterborough took part in the review’s Steering Board, alongside a number of prominent disabled founders and representatives from the wider business community including: Small Business Britain, Lloyds, eBay, BT, Federation of Small Businesses (FSB), British Chambers of Commerce (BCC), The Entrepreneurs Network, and the Business Disability Forum.
“We’re proud that ARU Peterborough has played a key role in this important new report. The recommendations could help empower millions of disabled entrepreneurs across the country, combat inequality and drive business growth, which could significantly benefit the UK economy.
“The next phase of The Lilac Review will see us working closely with Small Business Britain over the next 12 months to develop the concept for The LILAC Centre for Disabled Entrepreneurship. This would be the UK’s first business incubator and research centre dedicated to advancing the success of disabled entrepreneurs, and our aim is for this to be hosted at ARU Peterborough.”
Professor Williamson, Assistant Principal of ARU Peterborough and head of the Faculty of Business, Innovation and Entrepreneurship
“I’m proud to have co-chaired The Lilac Review and welcome its valuable insights and recommendations to help empower disabled entrepreneurship, tackle inequality, and unlock growth opportunities.
“Through our Plan for Change, this government is committed to delivering further and faster economic growth. A key part of this is ensuring that those with the ambition to start and scale up a business have the right support to do so, no matter their background or circumstances.”
Gareth Thomas, Minister for Small Businesses and co-chair of The Lilac Review
“Disabled entrepreneurs are innovative, impactful, and growing. Yet we remain underrepresented, underfunded, and underestimated.
“The Lilac Review is a bold and necessary step toward recognising the unique challenges that disabled entrepreneurs face – and more importantly, toward removing them. The findings of this report are clear: change is needed – not later, but now. That means inclusive finance, accessible business support, and communities that empower rather than exclude.
“It has been an honour to co-chair this review, and I hope the voices within it spark action, partnership, and a fundamental rethinking of what opportunity should look like – for everyone.”
Victoria Jenkins, co-chair of The Lilac Review and founder of Unhidden
“Our university is driving forward real change in the workforce not only in Peterborough, but across the whole of the UK. The Lilac Review represents a real opportunity to level the playing field for disabled entrepreneurs and to remove some of the unique challenges they face.
“The whole city is really proud of those who have been involved in this pioneering project and are now re-shaping the future of business in the UK.”
Councillor Nick Thulbourn, cabinet member for growth and regeneration at Peterborough City Council
ARU Peterborough is a partnership between Anglia Ruskin University, Peterborough City Council and the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Michael McCaul (10th District of Texas)
WASHINGTON – U.S. Congressman Michael McCaul (R-Texas), chairman emeritus and current vice chair of the House Committee on Homeland Security, announced the House passage of a provision reimbursing border states — primarily Texas — with $12 billion for costs incurred to secure the border under the Biden administration. McCaul has championed the provision and advocated for its passage for months, working hand-in-hand with House GOP leadership and Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green (R-Tenn.).
“It’s the federal government’s job to secure the homeland, yet the Biden/Harris administration abdicated its duty and abandoned our states on the frontlines of the border crisis. As Texans know, our state bore the brunt of that abject failure, both societally and financially,” said Vice Chairman McCaul. “Four years of chaos and suffering later, Congress is doing the right thing: paying Texas back. I’m extremely proud to have helped secure this provision, which sends a strong message to our border states that America has not forgotten the sacrifices they made. With these funds, Congress says ‘thank you’ — both to Texas’ leadership, who stood up Operation Lone Star to fill in the gap, and to Texas’ taxpayers, who should never have been on the hook for President Biden’s dereliction of duty.”
“Thanks to Rep. McCaul, states that stepped up to protect Americans in the face of Biden’s border catastrophe will be reimbursed for doing the work the Biden Administration refused to do,” said Speaker Mike Johnson. “Had those patriotic governors not taken action and used the resources of their state, the devastation from Biden’s wide-open border would have been significantly worse. Our nation is safer because of these states, and it’s only right for the federal government to share in the costs states incurred while protecting America.”
“Texas thanks the U.S. House and the Texas Congressional Delegation for including $12 billion in the reconciliation package that will help Texas in its response to the unprecedented illegal immigration in Texas,” said Governor Greg Abbott. “This is a national issue that Texas was proud to address, and we are grateful for the allocation that reduces the financial burden that Texas incurred.”
“Lurking behind the staggering number of illegal encounters of the last four years is the immeasurable toll a wide-open border has exacted on communities across the country,” said Chairman Mark Green. “Every state became a border state under the Biden-Harris administration’s open-borders policies, but in many ways, the communities along the Southwest border have been hit the hardest and have incurred tremendous law enforcement costs. In the absence of help from the Biden-Harris administration, states were forced to take extraordinary measures to mitigate the crisis and protect their communities by building barrier systems and increasing law enforcement activity. I applaud the inclusion of this funding and the House’s passage of the ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’ to put Americans first and keep our sovereign borders secure for years to come.”
Background:
The provision, which was added to House Republican’s reconciliation package through a manager’s amendment, sets aside $12 billion in grants for states’ “costs associated with actions taken after January 21, 2021, to assist the federal border security missions.”
Most of these funds are expected to reimburse Texas, as no state did more to secure the border over the past four years. Operation Lone Star spent $11.1 billion on border security, including $5.87 billion on personnel costs associated with border security and $4.75 billion on border wall barriers.
Click herefor full text of the provision on page 15.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Michael McCaul (10th District of Texas)
WASHINGTON– Today, U.S. Congressman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) — chairman emeritus of the House Foreign Affairs Committee — questioned Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the committee’s hearing, titled “FY26 State Department Posture: Protecting American Interests.” McCaul and Rubio discussed how the committee’s work to reauthorize the State Department can help the Trump administration advance its foreign policy objectives, including restoring U.S. foreign aid to its core mission.
Click to watch
Full exchange below:
Chair Emeritus McCaul: Let me express my deep sympathy to the family of Gerry Connolly. He was a dear friend of mine. I will miss him dearly and the Irish twinkle in his eye.
Mr. Secretary, thanks for being here today. Under the last four years — under President Biden — the world is on fire now. From the debacle, the evacuation, poorly executed from Afghanistan, which then led, I believe, to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine — the largest land invasion since World War II in Europe — to the Middle East on fire now, to October 7th. I commend you for trying to seek peace in these hotspots, including the Indo-Pacific, which probably presents the greatest threat.
I would be clear-eyed with Mr. Putin. I personally don’t think he’s negotiating in good faith. The Ayatollah cannot be trusted. In fact, it was recently reported that they got their proxy, Hamas, to invade Israel on October 7th to derail the normalization talks between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Let me go to the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act. It was initially created to counter the rise of the Soviet Union. Today, I believe it should be used to counter the influence of Communist China around the globe, and that’s a core mission I know you support, as do I. When I was chairman of this committee, I put holds on the programs the current chairman is talking about — that being the drag shows in Ecuador to grants to advance atheism in Nepal. These are not in the interest of the United States or our national security interests.
So, I think we need to return these agencies and programs to their core mission. I believe that you’re trying to do that by bringing them under your supervision at the State Department. It’s not a new idea. Madeline Albright tried to do that many years ago. And I do think under your supervision, that we’ll have transparency and accountability with the foreign assistance programs.
We are engaged in a reauthorization of the State Department. Sir, can you tell me how this would assist you, with respect to reorganization of these important agencies under your department?
Secretary Rubio: Well, I think the key to reorganization — and by the way, we never did it in all the years that I was in the Senate either. It never happened. It needs to happen. We want it to happen. As you know, in our reorganization, we didn’t touch any of the statutory offices because we can’t. But there’s two advantages to it, or three advantages.
The first is it becomes permanent. We can create an organizational structure that becomes enduring, especially if it’s one that we believe in. Second, I think that it will help us with the input and ideas. Look, we provided the initial preliminary indication to Congress.
We’ve been taking input — including from many on the minority — and some of those are going to be reflected when we put out our final approach that we want to take. But ultimately, we would love to work with the committee to find ways to improve on the streamlining.
By the way, we’re also taking input from inside our building. Some of the ideas in our reorg — many of the ideas from our reorg — came from inside the State Department from career officials, including some that are still providing input for us on sort of how to structure it.
But I think the advantage of doing it statutorily is that it becomes enduring and permanent and provides certainty in the days to come. Otherwise, you know, it can change over time and continue to bloat and expand to levels that it got to. It was an unreadable org chart. The org chart that I showed you — the initial org chart that I inherited — was just the top line. Within each one of those boxes, there were multiple boxes — some of them duplicative, redundant, and in many cases, no one could even tell us what they were doing, because it’s easy to grow. It’s much harder to reorganize and to streamline activity, and that’s what we want to do.
Chair Emeritus McCaul: Well, it’s a very noble effort. With my one minute remaining, I authorized the Remain in Mexico program in this committee. I commend the administration; within a matter of months, [they] have restored order to the border, taking chaos and turned it into a safe border.
I mean, the crossings have gone down 95%. There’s no longer catch and release. And I do think the executive order on Remain in Mexico is very important. I know you share that responsibility with the Department of Homeland Security — a committee I chaired as well. What is the latest on your negotiations with Mexico to bring that important program back?
Secretary Rubio: Well, as you’re aware, I’m sure that we’ve had a number of what I recall, both irritants, but also areas of cooperation with the Mexican government. It’s been actually pretty positive. They have been very responsive on our security concerns. They’ve increased their security cooperation with us in ways that have been very productive.
In fact, at some point here over the next few weeks, I intend to travel potentially to Mexico along with a couple other cabinet members to sort of finalize some of these areas of cooperation. This may be one we talk about, but we’ve been primarily focused with Mexico on two things.
One is on trade — which is not my department — but obviously, our trade representative, Mr. Greer, and also Commerce Secretary Lutnick has been engaging with them. And then the other is on security cooperation. We have a mutual interest in Mexico. In essence, the cartels that operate within Mexico and threaten the state are armed from weapons that are bought in the United States and shipped there.
We want to help stop that flow. The reverse is [that] those cartels threaten the state. There are parts of Mexico that are governed by cartels where there is — in fact, I think I heard last night — two more people were murdered in Mexico City associated with the mayor of Mexico City. The political violence there is real.
They have a vested interest and a desire to go after these cartels, and we want to help equip them and provide them information. They’ve also been increasingly cooperative — more than ever before — in bringing back and extraditing people wanted in this country for crimes who are in their custody.
So, I think we’ve got good areas of cooperation. We still have some more work to do on migration, but they’ve been cooperative.
When world leaders engage, the assumption is always that they engage on issues based on verified facts, which their administrative staff are supposed to prepare. Under this assumption, we thought the meeting at the White House on 21 May between South Africa’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa, and US president Donald Trump would follow this pattern.
Issues of agriculture, farming and land (and rural crime) were central to the discussions. What is clear to us as agricultural economists is that the skewed views expressed by Trump about these issues originate in South Africa. This includes Trump’s statement: “But Blacks are not farmers.”
In our work as agricultural economists, we have, in many pieces and books (our latest titled The Uncomfortable Truth about South Africa’s Agriculture), tried to present South Africans with the real facts about the political economy policy reforms and structural dimensions of South African agriculture.
Writing on these matters was necessary given that official data – agricultural census 2017, as well as the official land audit of 2017 – all provide an incomplete picture of the real state and structure of South African agriculture. The reason is that the agricultural census, which is supposed to provide a comprehensive and inclusive assessment of the size and structure of the primary agricultural sector, and the land audit, which was supposed to record the ownership of all land in South Africa, are incomplete in their coverage.
The incomplete and inaccurate official data provides fertile ground for radical statements by the left and the right – and novices on social media. This is why South Africa has to deal with falsehoods coming from the US. These include Trump’s statement that black people are not farmers in South Africa.
South Africa is to blame for providing inaccurate data to feed these false narratives.
The facts presented here should allow a more nuanced interpretation of South Africa’s farm structure. Firstly, there are more black farmers in South Africa than white farmers. And not all white commercial farm operations are “large-scale”, and not all black farmers are “small-scale”, “subsistence” or “emerging”. Most farm operations can be classified as micro, or small in scale.
This is important so that one doesn’t view South Africa’s agriculture as mainly white farmers. Indeed, we are a country of two agricultures with black farmers mainly at small scale and accounting for roughly 10% of the commercial agricultural output. Still, this doesn’t mean they are not active in the sector. They mainly still require support to expand and increase output, but they are active.
The facts
In the wake of the circus in the Oval Office, we were amazed by the total silence of the many farmers’ organisations in South Africa. We have not seen one coming out to reject all of Trump’s claims. The only thing we can deduce from this is that these falsehoods suit the political position of some farmer organisations. But at what cost? Will many of their members be harmed by trade sanctions or tariffs against South Africa? The US is an important market for South Africa’s agriculture, accounting for 4% of the US$13.7 billion exports in 2024.
When Ramaphosa highlighted the fact that crime, and rural crime in particular, has an impact on all South Africans and that more black people than white people are being killed, Trump’s response was disturbing, to say the least: “But Blacks are not farmers”. This requires an immediate fact check.
We returned to the text from our chapter in the Handbook on the South African Economy we jointly prepared in 2021. In the extract below, we discuss the real numbers of farmers in South Africa and try to provide a sensible racial classification of farmers to denounce Trump’s silly statement.
As highlighted earlier, the two latest agricultural censuses (2007 and 2017) are incomplete as they restricted the sample frame to farm businesses registered to pay value added tax. Only firms with a turnover of one million rands (US$55,500) qualify for VAT registration.
We were able to expand the findings from the censuses with numbers from the 2011 population census and the 2016 community survey to better understand the total number of commercial farming units in South Africa. The Community Survey 2016 is a large-scale survey that happened between Censuses 2011 and 2021. The main objective was to provide population and household statistics at municipal level to government and the private sector, to support planning and decision-making.
Data from the 2011 population census (extracted from three agricultural questions included in the census) shows that 2,879,638 households out of South Africa’s total population, or 19.9% of all households, were active in agriculture for subsistence or commercial purposes.
Only 2% of these active households reported an annual income derived from agriculture above R307,000 (US$17,000). This translates into 57,592 households that can be considered commercial farmers, with agriculture as the main or only source of household income. This corresponds in some way with the 40,122 farming businesses that are registered for VAT as noted in the 2017 agricultural census report.
If we use the numbers from the agricultural census it is evident almost 90% of all VAT-registered commercial farming businesses could be classified as micro or small-scale enterprises. If the farm businesses excluded from the census are accounted for under the assumption that they are too small for VAT registration, then the fact still stands that the vast majority of all farm enterprises in South Africa are small family farms.
There are, however, 2,610 large farms (with turnover exceeding R22.5 million (US$1.2 million per annum) which are responsible for 67% of farm income and employed more than half the agricultural labour force of 757,000 farm workers in 2017.
Another way to get to farm numbers is to use the 2016 Community Survey. Using the shares as shown in Table 2, we estimate there are 242,221 commercial farming households in South Africa, of which only 43,891 (18%) are white commercial farmers. (This is very much in line with the VAT registered farmers but also acknowledging the fact that many white farm businesses are not necessarily registered for VAT.)
Let’s consider only the agricultural households with agriculture as their main source of income, surveyed in the 2016 community survey. We end up with a total of 132,700 households, of whom 93,000 (70%) are black farmers. This reality is something that policy makers and farm organisations find very difficult to deal with and it seems that Trump also found this too good to be true.
We have tried here in a long winded way to deal with farm numbers and how to get to a race classification of farmers in South Africa. In the end we trust that we have managed to show that there are more black farmers in South Africa than white farmers. Their share in total output is smaller than that of their white counterparts. The National Agricultural Marketing Council puts black farmers’ share of agricultural production as roughly 10%. But these numbers are also incomplete and largely an undercount.
It will always be challenging to get to the real number of black farmers’ share of agricultural output as nobody would ever know whether the potato or the cabbage on the shelf came from a farm owned by a black farmer or a white person but operated by a black farmer, for example. As South Africans know, the labour on farms, in pack houses, distribution systems and retail are all black. So, the sweat and hard work of black South African workers are integral to the food supply chain in South Africa.
Let’s get these facts straight and promote them honestly.
Wandile Sihlobo is the Chief Economist of the Agricultural Business Chamber of South Africa (Agbiz) and a member of the Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC).
Johann Kirsten 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.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Speech
UK reaffirms its support for Ukraine’s self-defence, while President Putin rejects ceasefire as war deepens Russia’s economic and global isolation: UK Statement to the OSCE
UK Military Advisor, Lt Col Joby Rimmer, says that Russia’s invasion shatters European security and undermines peace. Despite President Putin’s claims, continued attacks show absolutely no intent to negotiate. The UK urges an immediate, lasting ceasefire to enable real dialogue and end the humanitarian crisis.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The United Kingdom remains resolute in its commitment to supporting Ukraine in the face of Russia’s ongoing illegal invasion. Our immediate priority is to secure a ceasefire as swiftly as possible – one that endures long enough to create the conditions necessary for meaningful negotiations toward a robust and lasting peace.
President Putin claims that he is interested in peace, all the while Russian attacks increasingly escalate the humanitarian crisis. These are not the actions of a government seeking peaceful resolution, but of one determined to prolong suffering and instability. Over the weekend, Russia launched a massive aerial assault involving 69 missiles and 298 drones, targeting over 30 cities and towns across Ukraine. At least 12 civilians, including children, were killed, and dozens more were injured. Kyiv was among the hardest hit, suffering casualties and significant damage during its Kyiv Day celebrations. A symbolic, cynical and deliberate act of aggression.
At last week’s Forum for Security Co-operation (FSC), Russia accused NATO of ‘pumping up military budgets and militarising at the expense of ordinary taxpayers.’ As it continues to escalate the conflict, the economic toll on Russia’s own population is becoming increasingly severe: Interest rates in Russia have surged to 21%, reflecting deep financial instability; 40% of Russia’s federal government spending in 2025 has been committed to defence; for the first time in post-Soviet history, defence spending has exceeded social spending; Russia has depleted two-thirds of the liquid assets in its National Wealth Fund; and due to international sanctions, Russia has lost an estimated $450 billion USD in energy revenues. These figures reveal a government that clearly prioritises war over the welfare of its own citizens. The Kremlin’s choices are impoverishing Russia. We stand ready to ratchet up the pressure on President Putin with new sanctions if our calls for a ceasefire are not answered now.
The UK stands by its economic and military support to Ukraine – a sovereign nation defending itself against an unprovoked attack. We would remind Russia, that alongside the billions already committed in aid and military assistance, the UK is also investing in Ukraine’s long-term recovery and reconstruction through non-military support. It is estimated that Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction will require $524 billion USD over the next decade. It represents the cost of rebuilding homes, schools, hospitals, and infrastructure destroyed by Russian aggression. It is a moral and strategic investment in the future of a free and democratic Ukraine.
The United Kingdom condemns Russia’s illegal invasion in the strongest possible terms. We will continue to stand with Ukraine – militarily, economically, and diplomatically -until peace is achieved, and Ukraine’s sovereignty is safeguarded. Russia’s invasion is a flagrant violation of international law, of the United Nations Charter and the principles enshrined in the 1975 Helsinki Final Act, to which Russia is a signatory. These principles include the sovereign equality of states, the inviolability of frontiers, and the prohibition of the threat or use of force. Russia’s actions have shattered the foundations of European security. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Speech
Russia’s continued contravention of OSCE principles: UK Statement to the OSCE
UK Counsellor, Ankur Narayan, says that in line with the OSCE Code of Conduct, the UK will continue to support Ukraine towards achieving a just and lasting peace, while continuing to urge Russia to return to full compliance – including withdrawing to within its own internationally recognised borders.
Thank you, Madam Chair, for hosting this FSC Security Dialogue on the Code of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security. Thank you also to the distinguished speakers for their interventions.
My statement today will focus on the purpose of the Code, which democratic control is designed to ensure implementation of. Namely, the commitment of States to abide by the Helsinki Final Act and to respond when these principles are breached in the OSCE region.
As per paragraph 1 of the Code, the “implementation in good faith of all commitments” are of “fundamental importance for stability and security”, and “consequently constitute a matter of direct and legitimate concern to all of them”. As we know, the Code spells these commitments out. Commitments such as “respect for each other’s sovereign equality and individuality”. Such as “the right freely to choose its own security arrangements … to belong or not to belong to … treaties of alliance”.
The Code explicitly states: “No participating State will attempt to impose military domination over any other participating State”. This includes not stationing armed forces in the territories of other States without a freely negotiated agreement … in accordance with international law.
Madam Chair, as detailed at the weekly FSC, Russia remains in breach of multiple commitments in the OSCE’s Zone of Application. Namely in Moldova, in Georgia and in Ukraine.
The Code is clear about what States must do in response: “In the event of armed conflict, they will seek to facilitate the effective cessation of hostilities and seek to create conditions favourable to the political solution of the conflict.” It adds that States are determined to “act in solidarity if CSCE norms and commitments are violated” and to “facilitate concerted responses”. It provides that States will: “consult promptly … with a participating State seeking assistance in realizing its individual or collective self-defence”. It also provides that States will “consider jointly the nature of the threat and actions that may be required in defence of their common values.”
In line with Code, we support Ukraine to defend itself, in line with the UN Charter and Helsinki Final Act principles. In line with the Code, we commend Ukraine’s steadfast commitment to reaching a just and lasting peace. And in line with the Code, we keep on calling on Russia to withdraw fully and unconditionally, from the whole territory of Ukraine, to inside its internationally recognised borders. And to return to the path of peace, starting with an immediate, unconditional ceasefire.
