Category: Politics

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Dan Goldman’s Statement on Trump Prosecuting Rep. LaMonica McIver

    Source: US Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10)

    “Patriotic Americans must not be fooled: by charging a sitting member of Congress on completely bogus charges, the Trump Administration is weaponizing the Department of Justice in an unprecedented way to silence and intimidate his political opposition.  

    “This is how banana republics and authoritarian dictatorships work, not the oldest democracy in the world.  

    “My Republican colleagues may be drunk on their own power and convinced of their own baseless accusations of the last administration’s weaponization of the federal government, but their cowardice as President Trump lawlessly attacks their own institution will be a permanent stain on each and every one of them. I recommend that they stand up to this tyranny before it is too late or one of them becomes a defendant in a criminal prosecution. 

    ### 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • Yoga Sangam 2025: India gears up for historic wellness celebration

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Over 1,000 entities have already registered on the Yoga Sangam portal, setting the stage for what promises to be India’s largest-ever wellness celebration on June 21 — the 10th International Day of Yoga (IDY). The theme for 2025, “Yoga for One Earth, One Health,” reflects India’s global leadership in promoting holistic well-being.

    Participation spans all corners of the country, including schools, colleges, corporates, NGOs, Resident Welfare Associations, government departments, and community groups from all 28 States and 7 Union Territories. Each group has pledged to follow the Common Yoga Protocol (CYP), representing national unity through coordinated breath and movement. More than one lakh venues are expected to host yoga sessions — from the snow-capped Himalayas to the southern tip of Kanyakumari.

    The initiative encourages individuals and institutions to host yoga sessions and contribute to a national wave of wellness. Participants can earn recognition as community wellness ambassadors and receive official certificates of appreciation.

    To take part, visit yoga.ayush.gov.in/yoga-sangam, register your organisation, conduct your Yoga Sangam event on June 21, and upload participation details after the event.

    India’s Wellness Diplomacy: Ayush at Osaka Expo 2025

    India’s presence at the World Expo 2025 in Osaka, Japan, is garnering praise for showcasing the country’s rich traditions of holistic health. The Ministry of Ayush, in collaboration with the India Trade Promotion Organisation (ITPO), Embassy of India in Tokyo, Consulate General of India in Osaka-Kobe, and the Heartfulness Institute, has been hosting daily yoga sessions at the India Pavilion — Bharat — from May 2 through October 13.

    So far, 55 sessions have been held, engaging over 2,100 participants, including Japanese nationals and international visitors. The inaugural session on May 2, attended by Ambassador Sibi George and Consul General Chandru Appar, coincided with Japan’s Golden Week and attracted a large audience.

    The upcoming Yoga Week from June 15 to 21 will culminate in a mega celebration of International Day of Yoga, featuring multiple daily sessions in various formats. From June 29 to July 5, the India Pavilion will also spotlight traditional medicinal plants, herbs, and Ayush-based wellness products. On June 30, a dedicated B2B meet and road show will promote investment opportunities and global partnerships in Ayush healthcare.

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Grenfell Tower next steps

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    Correspondence

    Grenfell Tower next steps

    An update about the Grenfell Tower site.

    Applies to England

    Documents

    Grenfell Tower next steps

    Details

    The government recognises that Grenfell Tower has a deep personal significance to those most affected by the tragedy and that all work at the Grenfell Tower site is sensitive. We are continuing to share information about the Tower, and listen to bereaved families, survivors and residents in the immediate community. 

    In this community update, we provide information about how the community can speak to us, and what to expect from the next stages as we prepare for work to carefully take down Grenfell Tower. We provide details of how we can support the community to mark the anniversary in June, and pay respects at the site. The update also includes information about health and wellbeing support, and how to get in touch with us. 

    The content of this update reflects information that has been sent directly to bereaved family members, survivors and residents in the immediate community.

    Updates to this page

    Published 20 May 2025

    Sign up for emails or print this page

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories: Foreign Secretary statement, 20 May 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3

    Oral statement to Parliament

    Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories: Foreign Secretary statement, 20 May 2025

    Statement by Foreign Secretary David Lammy to the House of Commons on the situation in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories

    With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

    This weekend, the Israeli Defence Force started a new, extensive ground operation throughout Gaza, Operation Gideon’s Chariot. Five Israeli divisions are now operating there.

    Prime Minister Netanyahu says that they are going to take control of the Strip letting only minimal amounts of food reach Gazans. Madam Deputy Speaker I quote Prime Minister Netanyahu – “just enough to prevent hunger.”

    Fewer than ten trucks entered Gaza yesterday. The UN and WHO have issued stark warnings of the threat of starvation hanging over hundreds of thousands of civilians. Madam Deputy Speaker, this is abominable.

    Civilians in Gaza facing starvation, homelessness, trauma, desperate for this war to end, now confront renewed bombardment, new displacement and new suffering. And the remaining hostages kept apart from their loved ones by Hamas for almost six hundred days are now at heightened risk from the war around them.

    Madam Deputy Speaker, two months ago the ceasefire collapsed. Since then, the humanitarian catastrophe has rapidly intensified.

    For eleven weeks, Israeli forces have blockaded Gaza, leaving the World Food Programme without any any remaining stocks. Israel has repeatedly struck hospitals, with three more hospitals in northern Gaza ceasing operations this weekend.

    Yet more aid workers and medical workers have been killed. After last year proved the deadliest year on record for humanitarian personnel.

    The diplomatic deadlock between Israel and Hamas has sadly also hardened. Despite the efforts of the United States, Qatar and Egypt – which we of course support – no ceasefire has emerged.

    We repeat our demand that Hamas release all the hostages immediately and unconditionally and reiterate that they cannot continue to run Gaza.

    Madam Deputy Speaker, we are now entering a dark new phase in this conflict. Netanyahu’s government is planning to drive Gazans from their homes into a corner of the Strip to the south and permit them a fraction of the aid that they need.

    Yesterday, Minister Smotrich even spoke of Israeli forces “cleansing” Gaza, “destroying what’s left”, of resident Palestinians “being relocated to third countries”.

    We must call this what it is. It is extremism. It is dangerous. It is repellent. It is monstrous. And I condemn it in the strongest possible terms.

    Madam Deputy Speaker, Israel suffered a heinous attack on October 7th and the Government has always backed Israel’s right to defend itself. We have condemned Hamas and its abhorrent treatment of the hostages. And we have stood with families and demanded their loved ones be released.

    But the planned displacement of so many Gazans is morally unjustifiable, wholly disproportionate and utterly counter-productive. Whatever Israeli ministers claim, this is not the way to bring the hostages safely home.

    Nearly all the hostages have been freed through negotiations, not military force. And that is why hostage families themselves – and many other Israelis – oppose this plan so strongly.

    Nor will this plan eliminate Hamas or make Israel secure. This war has left a generation orphaned and traumatised, ready for Hamas to recruit. As we learned in Northern Ireland to defeat terrorists and their warped ideology you cannot just rely on military might. You have to offer a viable political alternative. Opposing the expansion of a war that’s killed thousands of children is not rewarding Hamas.

    Madam Deputy Speaker, since entering office, we have taken concerted action on Gaza.

    We restored funding to UNRWA. We supported the independence of international courts. We suspended arms export licences. We provided food and medical care to hundreds of thousands of Gazans. We’ve worked with Arab partners on a plan to ensure a reconstructed Gaza no longer run by Hamas.

    And since Israel restarted strikes on Gaza, this Government has demanded Israel change course. Privately, in my conversations with Foreign Minister Sa’ar and Strategic Affairs Minister Dermer, and publicly, in repeated joint statements with my French and German counterparts, we have made clear that Israel’s actions are intolerable.

    We have raised our concerns in the UN Security Council and before the International Court of Justice. Yesterday, my Right Honourable Friend the Prime Minister joined leaders from France and Canada strongly opposing the expansion of Israel’s military operations. And the UK led a further statement with twenty-seven partners criticising Israel’s proposed new aid delivery mechanism and defending the essential humanitarian principles of the international system that the UK did so much to establish in the first place.

    Our message is clear. There is a UN plan ready to deliver aid at scale, needed with mitigations against aid diversion. There are brave humanitarians ready to do their jobs. There are 9,000 trucks at the border. Prime Minister Netanyahu: end this blockade now and let the aid in.

    Regrettably, Madam Deputy Speaker, despite our efforts, this Israeli government’s egregious actions and rhetoric have continued. They are isolating Israel from its friends and partners around the world. Undermining the interests of the Israeli people. And damaging the image of the state of Israel in the eyes of the world.

    I find this deeply painful, as a lifelong friend of Israel and a believer in the values expressed in its declaration of independence.

    As the Prime Minister and fellow leaders said yesterday, we cannot stand by in the face of this new deterioration. It is incompatible with the principles that underpin our bilateral relationship. Rejected by Members across this House and frankly it’s an affront to the values of the British people.

    Therefore today, I am announcing that we have suspended negotiations with this Israeli government on a new free trade agreement. We will be reviewing cooperation with them under the 2030 Bilateral Roadmap.

    The Netanyahu government’s actions have made this necessary. Madam Deputy Speaker, today, my Honourable Friend the Minister for the Middle East is summoning the Israeli Ambassador to the Foreign Office to convey this message.

    I say now to the people of Israel: we want, I want a strong friendship with you based on our shared values with flourishing ties between our people and societies. We are unwavering in our commitment to your security and to your future, to countering the very real threat from Iran, the scourge of terrorism and the evils of antisemitism.

    But the conduct of the war in Gaza is damaging our relationship with your government. And, as the Prime Minister has said, if Israel pursues this military offensive as it has threatened, failing to ensure the unhindered provision of aid, we will take further actions in response.

    The UK, Madam Deputy Speaker, will not give up on a two-state solution. Israelis living in secure borders, recognised and at peace with their neighbours, free from the threat of terrorism. Palestinians living in their own state, in dignity and security, free of occupation.

    The two-state solution remains the ideal framework, indeed, the only framework, for a just and lasting peace. But as the House knows, its very viability is in peril.

    Endangered not only by the war in Gaza, but by the spread of illegal Israeli settlements and outposts across the Occupied West Bank, with the explicit support of this Israeli government.

    There are now weekly meetings to approve new settlement construction. Settlement approval has accelerated while settler violence has soared. Here too, we have acted, repeatedly pressing for a change in this course and direction, sanctioning seven entities last October, and signing a landmark agreement to bolster support for the Palestinian Authority, when Prime Minister Mustafa visited London just last month.

    But here too, we must do more. Today, we are therefore imposing sanctions on a further three individuals and four entities involved in the settler movement.

    I have seen for myself the consequences of settler violence. The fear of its victims. The impunity of its perpetrators. Today, we are demonstrating again that we will continue to act against those who are carrying out heinous abuses of human rights.

    Madam Deputy Speaker, despite the glimmer of hope from January’s ceasefire, the suffering from this conflict has worsened. But January showed another path was possible.

    We urge Netanyahu’s government to choose this path. The world is judging. History will judge them. Blocking aid, expanding the war, dismissing the concerns of your friends and partners. This is indefensible and it must stop.

    I commend this statement to the House.

    Updates to this page

    Published 20 May 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Deputy Prime Minister speech to UKREiif – 20 May 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    Speech

    Deputy Prime Minister speech to UKREiif – 20 May 2025

    Transcript of the Deputy Prime Minister’s speech at the UK Real Estate and Infrastructure Forum (UKREiiF) on 20 May 2025.

    Good morning!

    It’s fantastic to be back at UKREiiF, as Deputy Prime Minister.

    And it’s excellent to be here in Leeds.

    A great city under a great council and West Yorkshire’s Mayor, my friend Tracy Brabin.

    From Holbeck to Hunslet to Horsforth, it’s being remade and reborn.     

    Creating new good-quality jobs as well as opportunities for growth and investment.

    And it’s a testament to partnership between local, regional, and national government.

    And I want to say a big thanks to all of you here today. And it was great to hear Tom and the enthusiasm when I was backstage then and also throwing down the gauntlet to us to say we will match your ambition if you’ve got it, Tom we have that ambition.

    From our local leaders to housebuilders to investors.

    For the part you’re playing in all of this.

    And I’m here, today, to tell you that there’s more to come…

    … As we get Britain building again as part of our Plan for Change.

    I said last year that we would deliver this change.

    New homes, new infrastructure projects, jobs, higher living standards, strong communities and a strong economy.

    And I said that we would deliver this by working in partnership.

    By backing you to build, invest and succeed.

    So that our country and that is what we can do together to succeed.

    Last year, I told you about a new development that I had just visited in my own constituency.

    That delivered 62 much-needed new social and affordable homes.

    For families in my community who needed them.

    I told you what that development meant to me.

    [Political content removed]

    Because our vision is not just building houses, but it’s building homes for people of our country.

    And building the communities in which they live.

    We have a target to build 1.5 million homes this Parliament.

    As most of you in this room know I’m a straight talker, so I’ll say it straight.

    I know that target is stretching.

    [Political content removed]

    But I won’t shy away from the challenge.

    It’s desperately needed after years of failure.

    But I also want to be clear that our vision for housing is about so much more than hitting one target.

    We must continue building well beyond this Parliament.

    These must be well-designed, decent homes for local people.

    And they must come alongside the GP surgeries, schools and parks they need too.

    So, how will we know we’re succeeding?

    Firstly, if we get more and more homes – in every part of the country,  including here in West Yorkshire – built long into the future too.

    We can’t just ramp-up housebuilding over the next few years.

    Secondly, if more people have a home they can afford.

    And we bring crippling costs down.

    Thirdly, if we’re ensuring all homes are safe, secure and warm.

    And we’re driving down bills for working people.

    And finally, if we’re tackling the shameless homelessness crisis that is destroying the life chances of so many.

    Now this will demand huge ambition.

    And I am ready to meet it.

    Already, we are creating the right conditions for building.

    Ensuring smarter regulation for planning.

    And pro-growth and pro-building policy.

    We’re also working in partnership with you –

    Investors, industry…

    … The builders of our great nation.

    And I want to see new players, entrepreneurs and disruptors flourish.

    Small and medium enterprises, community-led housing projects and Councils who can disrupt the market for the better.

    Radically changing what we build, and who builds it.

    And transforming the system.

    To make it more diverse and innovative.

    Capable of not just delivering more homes, more quickly.

    But delivering secure, affordable and decent homes – for everyone, everywhere…

    And homes that will stand the test of time.

    I say that I don’t shy away from the scale of the crisis facing us.

    Because it is  monumentous.

    There’s barely a family in this country hasn’t been affected by it.

    The dream of home ownership has been snatched away from a generation.

    Just over 1.3 million people languish on waiting lists for social housing.

    It is a scandal we have over 160,000 children in temporary accommodation.

    Their lives have been held back.

    Our country is being held back.

    I know, from my own experience, how much having a secure, affordable home matters.

    Alongside decent work and a strong community.

    These were the foundations on which our parents and grandparents built good lives.

    But which are now just not there for too many working people.

    This is not just taking a personal toll, but it’s taking an economic one too.

    Because growth and development go hand in hand.

    Unlocking decent jobs, vital infrastructure and supporting our local economies.

    Which in turn delivers the growth that is so needed to improve living standards and revitalise our public services.

    Yet, I’ve heard from so many people since coming into office, how the system just stopped working.

    Desperate families failed.

    Local leaders feeling powerless to act.

    Developers navigating a complex system.

    This is not a series of crises.

    But the symptoms of a broken system.

    And so, nothing less than action everywhere will do.

    It’s a momentous challenge – but we will meet this moment.

    And in our first ten months of Government that is what I set out to do.

    We said getting shovels in the ground was crucial.

    And so, I wasted no time in turning the pages on years of decline.

    With unwavering action to reverse the tide and get Britain building again.

    We reintroduced local housing targets.

    [Political content removed]

    We set out and consulted on a new pro-growth, pro-supply National Planning Policy Framework within our first three weeks in Office.

    Unlocking brownfield and grey belt land for development.

    And before the summer was out, we started getting stalled sites moving again through our New Homes Accelerator.

    We’re pressing ahead with the hugely ambitious Planning and Infrastructure Bill.

    To speed up the delivery of new homes and critical infrastructure.

    With innovative reforms like our Nature Restoration Fund to unblock building.

    While creating a win-win for nature and development.

    As well as plans to modernise planning committees and bring in a new system of strategic planning.

    Changes which could add up to £7.5 billion to the UK economy over the next decade.  

    The New Towns Task force is also hard at work on its recommendations for sites.

    We’ve committed £3bn of support to small to medium enterprises and the build to rent sector, to access cheaper lending.

    And as part of our commitment to building 1.5 million homes this Parliament…

    …We’ll deliver  the biggest wave of affordable and social housing in a generation.

    And we’ve already topped up investment by £800 million.

    As well as a £2 billion top-up funding next year.

    With more to come at the Spending Review. 

    And that’s not all.

    Our landmark Renters’ Rights Bill was introduced within our first four months.

    Banning no fault evictions and giving the millions renting more security.

    In November, we also set out our blueprint to ending the feudal leasehold system.

    And earlier this year we published our Commonhold White Paper.

    Giving leaseholders more say and power over their homes and lives.

    And we’re empowering mayors through our devolution revolution.

    Because the homes we build must deliver for people in all corners of our country.

    This is the biggest shift of power from Whitehall to our town halls in a generation.

    That was why I was delighted to celebrate the launch of The Great North last night. Not just because I am a northerner.

    The North’s mayors coming together to herald a new era of Northern cooperation.

    Showing what’s possible when we work together.

    And we’re already seeing green shoots of this coming through.

    Today Homes England has announced it’s delivering thousands more homes across the country compared to last year.

    But this is just the start.

    Because I know that there is so much more that still needs to be done.

    As I’ve said, our planning reforms are a game-changer.

    But we know that there must also be a renewed focus on social housebuilding.

    I’m committed to resetting the foundations of the sector.

    And to give the sector stability and confidence to invest in the future.

    It’s also why we have made planning changes to support affordable housing too.

    And we’ve helped Councils to borrow sustainably from the Public Works Loan Board.

    Extending the preferential rate for council housebuilding to the end of 2025-26.

    And we’ll shortly be confirming future regulatory standards.

    To ensure that homes are safe, decent and warm.

    And that social housing tenants are treated with the respect that they deserve.

    Whilst also giving the sector the certainty to invest for the future. 

    I’m committed to this Council housebuilding revolution.

    And not just because social and affordable housing are a nice add-on.

    But because it’s essential to ensuring homes are built – and more quickly.

    Because we know developments with a mix of housing build out faster.

    And that affordable homes are the vital ingredient to unlocking private housebuilding too.

    Partnerships between housebuilders and the public sector – like Vistry’s partnerships model…

    And the projects between Homes England, Muse and Pension Insurance Corporation that are delivering 100% affordable sites in Bradford and Wakefield.

    And are adding greater diversity, ensuring we meet the needs of local communities.

    And I want to see these continue.

    And more partnerships like them too.

    We also want to see smaller housebuilders playing a bigger role.

    Both in terms of who builds our homes and the types of homes they build.

    They already make a significant contribution on smaller brownfield sites.

    Building out faster than is often possible on larger and more complex sites.

    So, we’re backing them to reclaim their rightful place as the backbone of housebuilding.

    But a diverse housing market also depends on a workforce that’s fit for the future.

    And so, we’re working closely with the construction sector to improve skills.

    And job opportunities across the country.

    The Chancellor has already announced £600 million to recruit an extra 60,000 construction workers by 2029.

    And I’m proud to be joining the inaugural meeting of the Construction Skills Mission Board with Mark Reynolds from Mace. This industry-led group will bring together the whole sector to invest in UK plc, and oversee industry plans to recruit 100,000 more workers per year by the end of the Parliament, securing the next generation of construction workers.  

    It’s also why we’re also plugging capacity back into local planning authorities.

    Making funds available to hire 300 new planners.

    And through reforms to our Planning and Infrastructure Bill, letting Councils set their own planning fees.

    And ringfencing this money to reinvest in planning.

    Today, we don’t have to look too far afield for inspiration.

    Just round the corner from this hall, the Leeds College of Building – the UK’s only specialist construction college – is training the next generation of workers.

    And when it comes to who will drive delivery, our Mayors will be key.

    With the powers we’re handing them, they will be critical to powering regional growth.

    They’ve already achieved so much.  

    South Yorkshire’s on course for 20,000 new homes over the next 20 years.

    In West Yorkshire, Mayor Brabin has helped get shovels in the ground on the Dyecoats project where 1,600 new homes will be built.

    In Greater Manchester, there’s a strategic place partnership with Homes England that’s supporting 10 councils with 13 projects.

    And in the North-East, Mayor McGuinness is supporting the delivery of 100 new family homes – including council housing – as part of a regeneration project in East Durham.

    And, just last week, Mayor Parker in the West Midlands, announced 300 affordable homes on the site of the former Yardley Sewage Works…

    … Including 150 for social rent.

    And going forward, we want to forge a stronger partnership between Mayors and Homes England.

    Moving Homes England to a more regionalised model, over time.

    This is Britain [Political content removed].

    Open to building.

    Open for business.

    And delivering for working people.

    So we give people the security and control they deserve.

    Regardless of whether they rent or they own their home.

    Or are in the private or social rented sector.

    We have big changes in the pipeline.

    Disrupting, diversifying and transforming the housing market.

    So that it delivers for working people.

    Big changes that mean big opportunities for investment and growth.

    I urge everyone across the whole system to seize them with both hands.

    To investors, I say: there are an exciting array of opportunities. Tom spoke about them.

    To our housebuilders, we have listened and we’re reversing the tide to create the right conditions.

    But now we need you to build, build, build.

    To our mayors, I say don’t hold back.

    Take control of planning to drive the growth across housing, transport and skills.

    Our councils, too, must raise their game with up-to-date Local Plans.

    And work together with housing associations to build a new generation of social housing.

    Because the days of business as usual are over.

    It’s time to fight for a brighter, more ambitious future for our country.

    And what better inspiration than Clement Attlee’s 1945 Labour Government.

    Out of the ruins of war, he built homes for heroes.

    And as we mark its 80th anniversary, it’s time to recommit ourselves to delivering in the same spirit.

    This is how we’ll unleash the growth and opportunities we all want to see.

    It’s how we will rebuild the foundations of a good life for everyone.

    And it’s how we will deliver for working people.

    Thank you.

    Updates to this page

    Published 20 May 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Russia: IMF Executive Board Concludes the Fourth Review of Kosovo’s Stand-By and Resilience and Sustainability Facility Arrangements

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    May 20, 2025

    • The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund completed the Fourth and final review of Kosovo’s Stand-By and Resilience and Sustainability Facility Arrangements. The completion of the review makes available SDR 13.352 million (€16.08 million) under the SBA and SDR 7.744 million (€9.32 million) under the RSF.
    • The objectives of both programs have been successfully achieved. The economy has maintained healthy growth, inflation has notably decelerated, fiscal buffers have been rebuilt, and reforms have accelerated.
    • Building on the progress made under the programs, the authorities should continue with prudent fiscal policies, strengthen the fiscal framework, and advance structural reforms in the fiscal and financial sectors.

    Washington, DC: The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded the Fourth and final review of Kosovo’s Stand-By and Resilience and Sustainability Facility Arrangements. The authorities have consented to the publication of the staff report and associated documents. The completion of the review makes available SDR 13.352 million (€16.08 million) under the SBA and SDR 7.744 million (€9.32 million) under the RSF. This will bring the total disbursements under the RSF to SDR 61.95 million (€74.61 million). The SBA, which so far has been treated as precautionary by the authorities, amounts to SDR 80.122 million (€96.50 million).

    Kosovo’s economic performance continues to be strong. In 2024, growth was 4.4 percent, driven by household consumption, supported by strong private credit and rising wages. Inflation decelerated sharply, reaching an average of 1.6 percent in 2024 down from 4.9 percent in 2022. The external current account deficit widened to 9 percent of GDP, as increases in consumption and investment led to higher imports; growth of remittances slowed. In 2025, despite heightened external uncertainty from rising trade tensions, growth is expected to remain strong at 4 percent, with inflation stabilizing at 2¼ percent.

    Program implementation under both arrangements has been strong. All quantitative performance criteria for end-December 2024 were met. All indicative targets for end-December 2024 and for end-March 2025 were also met. Two structural benchmarks for this review—implementation of a cash forecasting function within the Treasury and the development of a roadmap for adopting the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process to assess bank risk profiles—were implemented. The remaining RSF reform measure to launch an auction for the construction and operation of the wind power plant has also been implemented.

    Following the Executive Board’s discussion, Bo Li, IMF Deputy Managing Director and Acting Chair, issued the following statement:

    “The Kosovo authorities have successfully implemented a Stand-By Arrangement and an Arrangement under the Resilience and Sustainability Facility. The SBA supported the authorities’ economic program to reduce inflation and sustain strong growth, while safeguarding the economy against adverse shocks. The RSF supported the authorities’ ambitious climate reform agenda.

    “Prudent fiscal policies under the SBA, anchored in the authorities’ rules-based fiscal framework, helped deliver low deficits and debt. In 2025, fiscal policy will aim to sustain growth amid heightened uncertainty, strengthen buffers against future shocks and continue addressing large developmental needs. An ongoing review of the fiscal framework seeks to align it with EU norms while supporting Kosovo’s developmental objectives and maintaining fiscal discipline.

    “The structural fiscal agenda has considerably advanced under the SBA. Revenue mobilization has improved through broadening the tax base, leading to higher tax collection. Public financial management reforms have enhanced capacity to assess fiscal risks, improved the quality of fiscal reporting, and increased fiscal transparency. Strengthening the public investment management system will help to further boost execution rates of public investment.

    “The Central Bank of Kosovo (CBK) has been driving forward critical reforms to enhance governance and institutional quality, develop the financial sector and strengthen resilience. The banking sector continues to expand rapidly providing vital support to economic activity while maintaining strong capitalization, liquidity, and profitability. The CBK is strengthening its ability to monitor risks related to rapid private sector credit growth.

    “Reform measures implemented under the RSF have been instrumental in advancing the authorities’ ambitious strategic energy goals, including expanding renewable generation capacity, reducing pollution, improving energy efficiency, and enhancing regional cooperation. The authorities remain committed to making continued and meaningful progress across all these areas.”

    Kosovo: Selected Economic Indicators, 2022–25

    Population: 1.6 million (2024)

    Nominal GDP per capita (2024): € 6,497

    Gini index: 0.29 (2017)

    Poverty rate: 19.8% (2018)

    Quota (current): SDR 82.6 million

    Main products and exports: Minerals, base metals, agricultural products, tourism.

    2022

    2023

    2024

    2025

    Act.

    Act.

    Prel.

    Proj.

    Output

       Real GDP growth (percent)

    4.3

    4.1

    4.4

    4.0

    Employment

       Unemployment rate (percent)

    12.6

    10.9

    Prices

       Consumer prices (period average, percent)

    11.6

    4.9

    1.6

    2.3

       GDP deflator

    7.2

    4.6

    2.0

    3.8

    General government finances (percent of GDP)

       Revenue and grants

    28.1

    29.5

    30.0

    29.8

       Expenditure

    28.8

    29.8

    30.3

    31.9

       Overall balance, excluding IFI- and privatization-financed capital projects (Fiscal rule definition)

    -0.5

    -0.1

    -0.1

    -1.6

       Overall balance

    -0.7

    -0.2

    -0.3

    -2.1

       Total public debt

    20.0

    17.5

    16.9

    18.3

       Stock of government bank balance

    3.9

    2.8

    3.1

    3.4

    Money and credit

       Non-performing loans (percent of total loans)

    1.9

    1.9

    1.8

       Credit to the private sector (eop, percent change)

    16.0

    12.9

    18.3

    15.8

       Effective bank lending rate (eop, percent)

    6.3

    6.3

    5.9

    Balance of payments (percent of GDP)

       Current account balance

    -10.3

    -7.6

    -9.0

    -8.3

       Remittance inflows

    13.7

    13.8

    13.1

    12.6

       Net foreign direct investment

    -6.8

    -6.9

    -6.1

    -7.5

       External debt

    38.6

    39.8

    41.1

    42.4

    Sources: Kosovo authorities and IMF staff estimates.

                   
    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Camila Perez

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/05/19/pr25154-kosovo-imf-concludes-4th-review-of-kosovos-stand-by-and-rsf-arrangements

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Testimony Before the United States House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government

    Source: Securities and Exchange Commission

    Chairman Joyce, Ranking Member Hoyer, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to testify today.[1]

    I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss the SEC, including our important mission on behalf of our fellow citizens, investors, and taxpayers.  I also appreciate the opportunity as well to speak to some of my priorities as Chairman.

    Four weeks ago today, I was sworn in by Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent in the Oval Office with President Donald Trump; my family was by my side. I am honored by the trust and confidence that the President and the Senate placed in me to lead the SEC.

    As I testify before you, this is my 20th working day as Chairman. I have returned to the SEC where I was a Commissioner from 2002 to 2008. In that time, I advocated for greater transparency at the agency and emphasized robust cost-benefit analysis when considering new regulations. I also previously served on the staff of two SEC chairmen—Richard Breeden, appointed by President George H.W. Bush, and Arthur Levitt, appointed by President Bill Clinton.

    With my fellow Commissioners, Congress, and SEC staff, I look forward to working to ensure that the United States is well-positioned to seize on the new excitement for investment and economic opportunity that President Trump’s leadership and pro-growth policies have inspired.

    SEC Mission

    First and foremost, it is a new day at the SEC. I am determined that we return to our core mission that Congress set for us more than 90 years ago.

    The SEC’s three-part mission was enunciated by Congress in the Exchange Act: protecting investors; facilitating capital formation; and maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets.  

    Investor protection is vital to our mission—holding accountable those who lie, cheat, and steal. The SEC will remain vigilant in our important role to ensure that investors have confidence to participate in the markets.

    Capital formation is also at the root of what we do—fostering a direct, economical route for investors’ capital to find its way to entrepreneurs and industry to create products and services. This engine of growth employs people, helping them to work and save to achieve their dreams.

    The third core part of our mission is maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets. Congress calls on the Commission to ensure that our regulations balance costs and benefits, that they do not become too burdensome by adding needless friction to the marketplace, undermining the capital formation that yields so much benefit.

    During my tenure as chairman, the SEC will not stray from this core three-part mission.

    My time in public service and the private sector, both earlier in my career and more recently, has allowed me to see firsthand how regulations affect markets and investors. They can stoke innovation, facilitate investment goals, and create opportunities—or burdens—on businesses’ ability to compete and serve their customers.

    How we implement regulations at the SEC is crucial; it is one thing to write a regulation, quite another for it to achieve its intended goal. Regulation should be smart, effective, and appropriately tailored within the confines of our statutory authority.

    It takes market experience and focused application to ensure that customers and investors of financial services firms benefit from efficient, effective, and well-designed regulation. Our goal at the SEC must be to facilitate those efforts, analyze their effectiveness, and use our enforcement power to cure and rectify wayward actions.

    In short, clear rules of the road benefit all market participants.

    The SEC is returning rulemaking to regular order. Our comment periods will not be artificially short, and the public will have ample time to provide feedback. The SEC will also be sure to take into consideration how rules overlap and how regulatory burdens build, in keeping with our obligation to consider their costs and benefits. The SEC also looks forward to working with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs on our rulemaking.

    I am grateful to Commissioner Mark Uyeda for his stewardship of the agency as acting Chairman of the SEC from January to April, a very productive three months.

    During this transition, he brought clarity to some urgent policy issues that we faced in the courts and some organizational issues as the new Administration came into office.

    He established the Crypto Task Force together with Commissioner Pierce, which  has worked with staff to provide necessary guidance to the industry. He normalized the agency’s stance regarding materiality of disclosure requirements to comply with Supreme Court rulings and backed agency actions to extend certain compliance dates and remove personally identifiable information (PII) from the Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT).

    As we look ahead, I am confident in the direction of our work. My experience over the decades will naturally inform my approach as Chairman.

    The Commission will focus on providing meaningful pathways for entrepreneurs to obtain the capital that they need to execute their innovative ideas and grow their companies in both the private and public markets. At the same time, investors that provide such capital must be able to continue to depend on effective enforcement against fraudulent activities.

    Digital Assets

    From 2017 until my nomination, I worked to help develop best practices for the digital assets industry and saw firsthand how ambiguous or nonexistent regulations in this space created uncertainty and inhibited innovation. That lack of regulatory framework also invites fraud. 

    A key priority of my Chairmanship will be to develop a rational regulatory framework for crypto asset markets that establishes clear rules of the road for the issuance, custody, and trading of crypto assets while continuing to discourage bad actors from violating the law. Clear rules of the road are necessary for investor protection against fraud—not the least to help them identify scams that do not comport with the law.

    Policymaking will be done through notice and comment rulemaking not through regulation-by-enforcement. The Commission will utilize its existing authorities to set fit-for-purpose standards for market participants. The Commission’s enforcement approach will return to Congress’ original intent, which is to police violations of these established obligations, particularly as they relate to fraud and manipulation.

    This undertaking requires coordination across multiple offices and divisions within the Commission, which is why I am pleased that Commissioner Uyeda and Commissioner Hester Peirce have worked together to establish the Crypto Task Force. For too long, the Commission has been hindered by policymaking silos. The Crypto Task Force exemplifies how our policy divisions can come together to expeditiously provide long-needed clarity and certainty to the American public.

    I am confident that Commissioner Peirce, known for her principled and tireless advocacy for common-sense policy, is the right person to lead the Crypto Task Force’s effort to come up with a rational regulatory framework for crypto asset markets.

    The task force has held four roundtables so far on further defining security status, tailoring regulation for crypto trading, custody considerations, and tokenization. I look forward to the input from industry and additional public feedback during the next roundtable on decentralized finance.

    This is important work. Entrepreneurs across the United States and around the world are harnessing blockchain technology to modernize aspects of our financial system. I anticipate  benefits from this market innovation for efficiency, cost reduction, transparency, and risk mitigation.

    SEC Commissioner Roles

    In addition to Commissioner Peirce’s continued leadership of the Crypto Task Force, I have asked Commissioner Uyeda to be our “ambassador” to the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). Commissioner Caroline Crenshaw has agreed to take on the SEC’s administrative law proceedings framework and the procedures in adjudications used by our administrative law judges in light of Supreme Court rulings that oblige us to rethink and reform this area.

    SEC Staff Numbers

    The SEC’s Offices and Divisions have decreased headcount by 15% since the beginning of the current fiscal year. Many of our colleagues at the SEC elected to take advantage of the Administration’s Fork in the Road, Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA) or Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments (VSIP). Some left to pursue other opportunities. These departures leave vacancies that in many cases need to be filled. When I left the agency in 2008, we had approximately 3,600 employees. At our height a year ago, we had approximately 5,000 employees plus 2,000 contractors. Today we are at approximately 4,200 employees and 1,700 contractors.

    Reorganization

    Under Acting Chairman Uyeda, the reporting lines in the Divisions of Enforcement and Examinations were realigned to better reflect each Division’s national programs to improve efficiency, management, and oversight of the Divisions. There will be targeted, common-sense reorganizations to come at the SEC. To start, I am seeking approval from Congress to disband what is known as agency’s Strategic Hub for Innovation and Financial Technology (FinHub). Innovation should be ingrained into the culture SEC-wide and not limited to a relatively small office. Established in 2018, FinHub was created during a critical period of emerging technologies. The rapid development of distributed ledger technology, including digital assets, artificial intelligence, and machine learning, required a centralized effort to build understanding at the SEC. The principles and priorities under which it was established are being integrated into the very fabric of the SEC.

    Technology Review and Optimizing Efficiency

    We have begun a process to review our technology infrastructure and our contractual obligations. This review is long overdue—call it a spring cleaning and reassessment of contracts, especially regarding information technology.

    We publicly announced last week that the Commission determined that certain masked data fields on publicly available reports on Form N-PORT submitted between Feb. 3, 2025, and May 8, 2025, were inadvertently made public on the SEC’s EDGAR system. This was the result of a software update effective Feb. 3. The masking error has been corrected and did not affect Form N-PORT filings made after May 8, 2025.

    This situation is not acceptable. I have directed the initiation of a comprehensive review of the EDGAR system to ensure for data integrity. We need to evaluate what we have, where our vulnerabilities are, and how we can shore up and improve our systems. We will work on optimizing our efficiency and eliminating redundancy.  

    SEC Regional Offices and Leasing

    The SEC has 10 regional offices across the country. In late February, the GSA informed the SEC that it would terminate leases utilized by the SEC’s Los Angeles Regional Office and the Philadelphia Regional Office. Discussions with the GSA and the landlords are ongoing, and I will keep this committee apprised of those developments.  In the meantime, the leases are in their “soft term” and are not terminated.

    I firmly believe in the SEC’s regional office concept. We cannot and should not have all of the SEC’s staff in Washington and New York. Risk management, human resource development, and practicality for our examination teams –as one example – provide ample reinforcement for the need to maintain these offices.

    SEC Funding

    The SEC’s budget is set through the Appropriations process. Fees on securities transactions that the SEC collects provide an offset. The annual collections–fees paid by SROs based on the aggregate dollar amount of securities sales–go to the Treasury’s general fund.

    On April 8, 2025, the SEC announced that starting on May 14, 2025, the fee rates applicable to most covered sales would be set at $0 per million in securities transactions.[2] The Commission determined this new rate in accordance with Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

    The Commission collected its entire fiscal year 2025 appropriation before the new fee rate of $0 per million became effective on May 14. The prior fee rate was $27.80 per million. The Commission is required to set the fee rate to a level that generates fees equal to the Commission’s appropriated amount, so no further collections for fiscal year 2025 are required.

    The Commission will continue to keep this committee, and the public, informed of developments relating to fees on the SEC website.

    Conclusion

    As I said at the outset of this testimony, it is a new and brighter day for the SEC.

    We will work with our colleagues in the Administration, especially other financial services regulators, and with Congress to bolster the economy and build on U.S. leadership of the global markets.

    This is a pivotal moment for our economy. Entrepreneurs, businesses, and individuals here at home and across the globe are eager to invest in America.

    This SEC will work to protect investors from fraud, keep politics out of how our securities laws and regulations are applied, and advance clear rules of the road that encourage investment in our economy to the benefit of all Americans.

    This SEC will work to ensure that regulations promote capital formation rather than stifle it. We will work together to ensure American investors get disclosures that actually help them understand the true risks of an investment.

    This SEC will make every effort to ensure that the U.S. is the best and most secure place in the world to invest and do business. Americans should always have utmost confidence when investing their hard-earned dollars to save and provide for their future and the future of their families.

    Thank you.

     


    [1] The views expressed in this testimony are those of the Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and do not necessarily represent the views of the President, the full Commission, or any Commissioner. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Georgia’s Gubernatorial Dem Primary Takes Shape

    Source: US Republican Governors Association

    The following text contains opinion that is not, or not necessarily, that of MIL-OSI –

    WASHINGTON, D.C. –The Republican Governors Association (RGA) issued the following statement in response to Keisha Lance Bottoms’ announcement that she is entering the Georgia gubernatorial race, joining Jason Esteves in the Democratic primary:

    “The gubernatorial primary is shaping up to be nothing but disappointing for Georgia Democrats. Keisha Lance Bottoms’ record as Mayor is one that was a disaster for Atlanta — crime skyrocketed, with incidents of homicide, rape, aggravated assault all surging due to her failed policies. Atlanta was drastically unsafe under Bottoms, and the last thing Georgians want is to bring her policies to the entire state. Bottoms is a risk Georgians cannot afford,” said RGA Communications Director Courtney Alexander. “She joins Jason Esteves who, from opposing the border wall, to standing in the way of parental rights in education, has proven over and over again that he is woefully out of touch with Georgians. And let’s not forget, Democrats are still hopeful that two-time failed candidate Stacey Abrams will hop into the race.”

    Keisha Lance Bottoms’ Record: 

    Bottoms was a key member of the Biden-Harris campaign teams and their failed administration that was responsible for skyrocketing costs and increasingly dangerous communities.

    Bottoms did not run for a second term as mayor as crime skyrocketed in Atlanta as homicides, rapes, and aggravated assaults surged due to her failed leadership.

    Bottoms enacted sanctuary policies, and refused to work with ICE to hold those with immigration violations accountable – letting illegal criminals run free, and making Georgia less safe.

    Bottoms pushed to implement a statewide mask mandate as Georgia was safely being reopened during the COVID-19 pandemic and fought to keep the state locked down.

    Bottoms was unable to even be responsible when it came to managing her own finances, and was fined for campaign finance violations.

    Jason Esteves’ Record: 

    -Esteves strongly supported Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’ failed administration and even backed him after his disastrous debate performance.

    -Esteves stood against allowing parents to have a choice in their children’s education and opposed a statewide school choice program in Georgia.

    -Esteves opposed safety measures that would hold sanctuary cities accountable for crimes committed by illegal immigrants.

    -Esteves opposed building a Southern border wall to keep families and communities safe, even after Georgia was devastated by crimes committed by illegal aliens.

    -Esteves would allow children to receive irreversible transgender surgeries.

    -Esteves failed to protect girls’ sports, opposing a commonsense bill that banned biological males from playing on girls’ sports teams.

    -Esteves is against Second Amendment rights.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: How mindfulness therapy could help those left behind by depression treatment

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Thorsten Barnhofer, Professor of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, School of Psychology, University of Surrey

    Yuri A/PeopleImages.com/Shutterstock

    For some people, depression is like an unwanted guest who moves in and refuses to leave. Even with therapy and medication, the heavy fog of low mood, exhaustion and hopelessness never fully lifts for long. For around 30% of people with depression, this is a daily reality.

    It’s not just a personal burden. Difficult-to-treat depression affects families, workplaces and communities – and carries a huge cost for society.

    In England, the NHS Talking Therapies programme is the first place many adults turn when they’re struggling with depression or anxiety. In 2023-24, it supported more than 1.26 million people. Yet, for all its reach, around half of those who complete treatment still feel depressed by the end. And if the therapy hasn’t worked, there are often no further options available.

    Most people in this situation are sent back to their GP. A small number may be referred to more specialist mental health services, but those are typically reserved for the most severe cases. That leaves a significant number of people in limbo – still unwell, but without a clear route to further care.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    This is part of a wider problem in mental health services: the so-called “missing middle”. These are people whose needs are too complex for primary (GP) care, but not severe enough for secondary services. As a result, they fall through the cracks.

    For many of these people, medication is often the only treatment on offer. But our study, with colleagues, suggests that a different approach, using mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT), could offer a way forward.

    Promising results

    We worked with more than 200 patients who had completed NHS Talking Therapies but were still experiencing symptoms of depression. Half were offered an eight-week MBCT course, delivered in small online groups. The others continued with their usual care.

    MBCT blends traditional cognitive therapy (which aims to reduce negative thinking patterns) with intensive mindfulness training. Participants learn how to stay present, recognise harmful thought spirals early, and respond to difficult emotions with greater awareness and compassion. Most importantly, they gain skills they can use for the rest of their lives.

    The results were promising. People who took part in the mindfulness programme reported bigger improvements in their depressive symptoms than those who didn’t. Six months later, the benefits had not only lasted – they had consolidated and slightly strengthened.

    What’s more, those in the MBCT group used fewer health and social care services overall. The programme was also inexpensive to run, costing less than £100 per person. In a time when health systems are under extreme financial pressure, that’s a big deal. Our research suggests MBCT is not just effective, it’s cost-saving too.

    When depression doesn’t respond to standard treatment, it can upend lives. People may struggle to work, maintain relationships, or care for their families. Children are especially affected when a parent has long-term depression. Without the right support, things often get worse – and the costs, both personal and financial, continue to grow.

    MBCT is already being used for relapse prevention – and there is a trained workforce to deliver it. Consisting of just eight group-based sessions, it is accessible and designed to equip people with practical tools. We believe it can offer hope to those who do not benefit sufficiently from existing services, and should be made available to more people.

    Beyond the promise of MBCT itself, this research offers a wider message: we need to invest in psychological therapies for people in the “missing middle”. These are people who are often overlooked but stand to gain the most from targeted, practical support.

    In times of tight budgets, the idea that we can improve lives and save money is more than compelling – it’s necessary. This is a clear opportunity to improve outcomes, reduce strain on overstretched services, and help people move forward with their lives.

    Thorsten Barnhofer is the author of a book on mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT). He regularly provides workshops on mindfulness-based interventions. He is co-investigator of a programme grant evaluating an adapted MBCT course for adolescents experiencing depression and is among the investigators for the NIHR Research for Patient Benefit-funded trial described in this article.

    Barney Dunn receives funding from the National Institute of Health Research for mental health treatment trials at the University of Exeter, including the Research for Patient Benefit Funding for the RESPOND trial discussed in this article. He co-directs an NHS commissioned psychological therapies service, which delivers Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy.

    Clara Strauss is co-lead for Sussex Mindfulness Centre (SMC), part of Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, and has received funding to conduct MBCT research from NIHR and other funders, funding to deliver MBCT courses and funding to train MBCT therapists within SMC.

    ref. How mindfulness therapy could help those left behind by depression treatment – https://theconversation.com/how-mindfulness-therapy-could-help-those-left-behind-by-depression-treatment-256547

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Labour governments have always struggled with immigration – here’s what Keir Starmer could learn from them

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Erica Consterdine, Senior Lecturer in Public Policy, Lancaster University

    The government has outlined its plans to reduce net migration to the UK. The proposals are generally restrictive: scrapping social care visas, tightening work visas, longer residency requirements, tougher English tests and restructuring student visas.

    While Reform’s recent success at the local elections hardened Keir Starmer’s rhetoric in announcing the changes, the thrust of this policy was to be expected. But will the political calculation pay off?

    Immigration has long been a headache for Labour. It is a topic that cuts across the party’s ideological factions – its protectionist roots, its universalist values, and its market-friendly third way leanings. Each of these calls for a different approach on immigration.

    Labour’s record on immigration is historically patchy. Previous Labour governments have been responsible for some of the most deplorable immigration acts, including the racially discriminatory 1968 act, which restricted non-white immigration in a betrayal of Kenyan Asians fleeing persecution.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    The British public then was far more illiberal on immigration than it is today. Trade unions were historically anti-immigrant, perceiving foreign labour as a threat to wages and job displacement. Labour, like their Tory counterparts, mostly operated on a bipartisan consensus of limiting immigration, on the idea that this was better for cohesion.

    This is exemplified in the Hattersley equation (named for former MP Roy Hattersley), a bipartisan political consensus that lasted from the postwar years up until Thatcher’s government. The compromise was between restrictive immigration policy and liberal integration measures (the Race Relations Act) to appease Labour’s liberal base.

    New Labour embraced the Thatcherite, neoliberal agenda, with Tony Blair declaring that there is no alternative to globalisation and therefore immigration. Framing immigration as an economic good, and humanitarian mobility as the bogeyman, Labour’s regime radically transformed the immigration system from one of the most restrictive in Europe to one of the most liberal labour regimes. But this was never for the benefit of migrants – it was simply economic calculation.

    We know what happened next: the political battleground, the cursed net migration target, Brexit and the lurches to the right ever since. In opposition, Labour has never been able to resolve this.

    Starmer’s approach

    A sticking point since 2010 has been traditionally working-class Labour constituents, viewed as “left behind” due to globalisation, and who now make up the red wall. The narrative goes that these voters have drifted rightwards due to dissatisfaction with immigration.

    But overall, Labour voters are still more positive than Conservatives towards immigration. A regressive policy on migrant rights could lose Labour some of its voter base.

    What’s more, net migration is likely to decrease over Labour’s term anyway, due to changes made by the last government and the tailing off of unprecedented migration from bespoke humanitarian schemes, like the one for Ukrainians. Arguably, Starmer’s reforms weren’t strictly necessary.

    Starmer could have framed the same policies around a softer rhetoric, one that embraces multicultural Britain while making the case for reforming the labour market. The enemy could have easily been cast as the Conservative government that neglected investment in the people at the expense of global corporations.

    Data from the Institute of Public Policy Research suggests that the UK public has become softer on immigration, but they want fairness. The easy way out here was to praise the benefits that immigration can bring while emphasising the need for control to maximise those benefits.

    Denigrating the current system as a “squalid chapter” of history is playing to Reform voters – arguably a foolish move, given that evidence shows you can’t beat the far right at its own game.

    Will the proposals work?

    If these proposals do reduce migration, it will come at a high cost for the country, not least in the consequences for the higher education and social care sectors. It may even increase irregular migration, as more people go underground in their attempts to reach Britain.

    The crux of the government’s problem is promising to reduce immigration in a system dependent on labour market flexibility. The proposals would make the UK extortionately expensive for both applicants and the employers who sponsor them, and make it economically unviable for the sectors that rely on foreign labour to recruit.

    A more social democratic immigration policy would invest in training, skills and wages of domestic workforces, while providing rights to the migrants who already reside here.

    Labour’s policy does not do this. It curtails rights significantly, for example in the doubling of the waiting period to apply for the right to stay indefinitely, and the plans to review how the right to family life is applied. Both of these are arguably counterproductive to the aims of integration and out of step with other countries.

    The theory behind the government reforms is that migrant workers will be replaced by the economically inactive domestic labour force – a win-win. Aside from the suspect simplicity of this equation, it will require more than sticks on employers and migrants. It necessitates a radical overhaul of the system, the economic model and a more interventionist state to move towards a coordinated market economy, one with more organisation and regulation on the labour market.

    Despite the government’s significant majority, a disciplined cabinet and an infighting opposition, the government appears reluctant to make such dramatic change, wedded to the existing paradigms of neoliberal free markets in a quest for growth in stagnating economies. If it wants its plans to work, Labour will have to be bolder and provide carrots to go with the sticks.

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

    ref. Labour governments have always struggled with immigration – here’s what Keir Starmer could learn from them – https://theconversation.com/labour-governments-have-always-struggled-with-immigration-heres-what-keir-starmer-could-learn-from-them-256737

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: After another call with Putin, it looks like Trump has abandoned efforts to mediate peace in Ukraine

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

    After a two-hour phone call with Russian leader Vladimir Putin on May 19, US president Donald Trump took to social media to declare that Russia and Ukraine will “immediately start negotiations” towards a ceasefire and an end to the war. He did, however, add that the conditions for peace “will be negotiated between the two parties, as it can only be”.

    With the Vatican, according to Trump, “very interested in hosting the negotiations” and European leaders duly informed, it seems clear that the US has effectively abandoned its stalled mediation efforts to end the war in Ukraine.

    It was always a possibility that Trump could walk away from the war, despite previous claims he could end it in 24 hours. This only became more likely on May 16, when the first face-to-face negotiations between Ukraine and Russia for more than three years predictably ended without a ceasefire agreement.

    When Trump announced shortly afterwards that he would be speaking to his Russian and Ukrainian counterparts by phone a few days later, he effectively mounted the beginning of a rearguard action. This was further underlined when, shortly before the Trump-Putin call, Vice-President J.D. Vance, explicitly told reporters that the US could end its shuttle diplomacy.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    The meagre outcomes of the talks between Russia and Ukraine – as well as between Trump and Putin – are not surprising. Russia is clearly not ready for any concessions yet. It keeps insisting that Ukraine accept its maximalist demands of territorial concessions and future neutrality.

    Putin also continues to slow-walk any negotiations. After his call with Trump, he reportedly said that “Russia will offer and is ready to work with Ukraine on a memorandum on a possible future peace agreement”, including “a possible ceasefire for a certain period of time, should relevant agreements be reached.”

    The lack of urgency on Russia’s part to end the fighting and, in fact, the Kremlin’s ability and willingness to continue the war was emphasised the day before the Trump-Putin call. Russia carried out its largest drone attack against Ukraine so far in the war, targeting several regions including Kyiv.

    There has been no let-up in the fighting since. And the fact that Putin spoke to Trump while visiting a music school in the southern Russian city of Sochi does not suggest that a ceasefire in Ukraine is high on the Russian leader’s priority list.

    A large part of the Kremlin’s calculation seems to be its desire to strike a grand bargain with the White House on a broader reset of relations between the US and Russia. It is signalling clearly that this is more important than the war in Ukraine and might even happen without the fighting there ending.

    This also appears to be driving thinking in Washington. Trump foreshadowed an improvement in bilateral relations by describing the “tone and spirit” of his conversation with Putin as “excellent”. He also seemed pleased about the prospects of “large-scale trade” with Russia.

    Abandoning European allies

    Trump is on record as saying that there would be no progress towards peace in Ukraine until he and Putin get together. But it is worth bearing mind that very little movement towards a ceasefire in Ukraine – let alone a peace agreement – occurred after the last phone call between the two presidents in February.

    Part of this lack of progress has been Trump’s reluctance to put any real pressure on Putin. And despite agreement in Brussels and preparations in Washington for an escalation in sanctions against Russia, it is unlikely that Trump will change his approach.

    In this context, the sequence in which the calls occurred is telling. Trump and Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, had a short call before the former spoke with Putin. Zelensky said he told Trump not to make decisions about Ukraine “without us”.

    But rather than presenting Putin with a clear ultimatum to accept a ceasefire, Trump apparently discussed future relations with Putin at great length before informing Zelensky and key European allies that the war in Ukraine is now solely their problem to solve.

    This has certainly raised justifiable fears in Kyiv and European capitals that, for the sake of a reset with Russia, the US might yet completely abandon its allies across the Atlantic.

    However, if a reset with Russia at any cost really is Trump’s strategy, it is bound to fail. As much as Putin seems willing to continue with his aggression against Ukraine, Zelensky is as unwilling to surrender. Putin can rely on China’s continued backing while Zelensky can count on support from Europe.

    Supporting Russia’s war in Ukraine is essential for China to keep Moscow on side in its rivalry with the US. And for Europe, supporting Ukraine has become an existential question of deterring and containing a revisionist Russia hell-bent on restoring a Soviet-style sphere of influence in central and eastern Europe.

    In a world that has been in flux since Trump’s return to the White House, these are some of the emerging constants. And they make a US-Russia reset highly improbable.

    Even if it were to happen, it would not strengthen Washington’s position with Beijing. Walking away from Ukraine and Europe now will deprive the US of the very allies it will need in the long term to prevail in its rivalry with China.

    By abandoning his mediation between Moscow and Kyiv, Trump may have broken the deadlock in his efforts to achieve a reset with Russia. But getting this deal over the line will be a pyrrhic victory.

    Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

    ref. After another call with Putin, it looks like Trump has abandoned efforts to mediate peace in Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/after-another-call-with-putin-it-looks-like-trump-has-abandoned-efforts-to-mediate-peace-in-ukraine-257021

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why do protestors use disruptive, confrontational tactics? New research shows they’re not just a last resort

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mete Sefa Uysal, Lecturer in Social & Political Psychology, University of Exeter

    HJBC/Shutterstock

    Public protests are on the rise globally, from climate marches and university occupations to roadblocks and mass political demonstrations. These actions may sometimes include confrontational tactics such as civil disobedience, disruption and, at times, violent resistance.

    At Columbia University in the US, for instance, pro-Palestine student protests recently captured global attention for their tactics. They ranged from non-confrontational actions such as gatherings and sit-ins to campus encampments and occupations aimed at disrupting daily activities, which eventually led to confrontations with police.

    Actions like these often spark debate. Are activists acting strategically, or simply reacting out of desperation and rage? Our new research sheds light on this question. Contrary to popular belief, people do not only turn to confrontational protest because they are desperate or lack political alternatives.

    Confrontational protests are frequently portrayed negatively. They are often associated with extremism, disorder, or desperation. So it’s long been a mystery why people choose such confrontational forms of protest, especially given more conventional options like petitions or authorised rallies offer broader public support and visibility.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    In our surveys of 3,833 people across three countries – Germany, Turkey and the UK – we found that people choose confrontational action when they believe it is effective and legitimate for achieving their group’s political goals.

    That said, in some protests, confrontational tactics may emerge spontaneously as a self-defence, driven by immediate threats. But it is not simply an emotional outburst or a last resort: it can be a strategic choice.

    This challenges a widely discussed idea in social and political psychology called the “nothing-to-lose” hypothesis. According to this view, people are driven to confrontational protest when they see non-confrontational action (such as voting, petitioning, or authorised marches) as ineffective. This is often because they have little political trust or are oppressed. Our studies ultimately tested this hypothesis.

    We found that most people rated non-confrontational actions as more effective than confrontational ones. But they still saw confrontational tactics as worthwhile if they also seemed effective and justifiable.

    Interestingly, we discovered that low political trust – a lack of belief that the political system works fairly – did not predict confrontational protest. In fact, it was only weakly linked to perceived effectiveness and legitimacy of such tactics.

    While previous theories suggested that people with nothing to lose would be the ones most drawn to radical action, our findings paint a more complex picture. People don’t necessarily need to lose all faith in the political system before considering disruptive protest. Rather, they judge whether a specific tactic will advance their cause and align with their collective moral values.

    Just Stop Oil protestors with hands glued to the frame of da Vinci’s The Last Supper.
    wikipedia, CC BY-SA

    We also found that when people think that protests are more likely to be met with state violence, they are more likely to view confrontational tactics as legitimate and effective. In other words, when crowds foresee push-back, they recalibrate their strategies rather than withdrawing altogether from activism.

    Constructive disruption

    This research matters now more than ever. From climate movement and pro-Palestine rallies in many countries to anti-government and pro-democracy protests in the US, Turkey, Serbia and Argentina, we are witnessing a global wave of protest crowds.

    Understanding what drives people to disruptive and confrontational actions can help both policymakers and the public make sense of protest in today’s divided world. This may be a better option than moralising about good versus bad forms of protests, which serves to silence and criminalise disruptive and confrontational actions.

    The former UK home secretary Suella Braverman labelled climate protesters “extremists” and pro-Palestinian protests “hate marches”. She also proposed harsher crackdowns. But such an approach is only likely to make the protests more disruptive.

    Similarly, several government responses to UK parliamentary reports on protest policing distinguish “right to peaceful protest” from any kind of disruptive and confrontational activism. They also highlight that the legal definition of “serious disruption” has been widened.

    But viewing all disruptive protests as being outside of legal boundaries is likely to create pushback among activists and limit the potential constructive social influence of such protests.

    We argue that it’s time to rethink how we talk about confrontational and disruptive protests. Rather than viewing them as irrational, extreme or born of despair, we should understand it as part of a wider repertoire of political action.

    Here, labelling a set of protests through binary, moralised terms can lead to overlooking and silencing a crucial and effective protest strategy: constructive disruption. Constructive disruption relies on carefully balancing non-violent but disruptive actions. This can apply pressure for change while signalling positive intent that encourages a conciliatory response to protest.

    As a group of social psychologists recently showed, constructive disruption could generate support even among those who are most resistant.

    If we recognise that such tactics are often grounded in a sense of justice and strategic reasoning, we can move away from moralistic judgements and toward democratic dialogue by better engaging with the underlying demands that drive them.

    As protest movements continue to shape political life around the world, we believe it’s time to take their strategies seriously – not just their slogans.

    Mete Sefa Uysal received funding from the International Society of Political Psychology Scholar Under Threat Fund for a part of this study.

    John Drury and Yasemin Gülsüm Acar 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.

    ref. Why do protestors use disruptive, confrontational tactics? New research shows they’re not just a last resort – https://theconversation.com/why-do-protestors-use-disruptive-confrontational-tactics-new-research-shows-theyre-not-just-a-last-resort-256716

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Is this bad for my health? Kenyan study tests three types of warning labels on food

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Shukri F. Mohamed, Research Scientist, African Population and Health Research Center

    Diet-related health conditions, such as diabetes, hypertension and obesity, are on the rise in Kenya, putting immense strain on already over-stretched public health systems. These conditions are often driven by high intake of sugars, salts and unhealthy fats. So it’s more critical than ever for consumers to understand what’s in the foods they’re buying.

    But making sense of nutrition information isn’t always straightforward, especially with the small, complex labels on the back of most packages.

    Our recent study examined whether front-of-pack food labels could help Kenyan consumers make better choices. We tested three types of label designs to see which one was most effective at helping people identify nutrients of concern and make healthier purchase decisions.

    Front-of-pack labels are simplified labels on the front of food packaging, designed to help consumers quickly assess healthiness through symbols, colours, or ratings. Examples include providing a “high in sugar” warning. In contrast, back-of-pack labels provide mandatory, detailed information such as full ingredient lists, nutrition facts and expiry dates typically in a standardised, text-heavy format on the back or side. Front-of-pack labels aren’t mandatory in all countries but back-of-pack labels are.

    Many countries, including Chile, Mexico and Israel, have already introduced mandatory warning labels. Research shows that there has been a positive impact on public health.

    Kenya is planning to take a major step in promoting public health by introducing a front-of-label system that will rank packed foods and non-alcoholic beverages based on their nutritional quality. Currently, packaged foods in Kenya are required to list ingredients, but this information can be hard to interpret. Front-of-pack labels will simplify this by highlighting key nutritional facts at a glance.

    The new system will also guide policies like restricting marketing of unhealthy foods to children and other measures to improve Kenya’s food environment. With rising obesity and diet-related diseases driven by a shift from traditional foods to processed options, changes are urgently needed.




    Read more:
    Marketing unhealthy food as good for kids is fuelling obesity in South Africa: how to curb it


    We have been involved in food environment policies research for the last five years. Our study emphasises the potential of front-of-pack food labels to affect consumers’ choices. Presenting clear information about a product’s nutritional content on the front of packaging could shift consumer behaviour towards healthier choices. In turn, this could lead to better public health outcomes.

    Testing three label types

    The study randomly assigned participants to different label types to compare the results fairly.

    The study involved 2,198 adults from four counties: the capital, Nairobi; Mombasa, the second largest city; Kisumu, which is home to the third largest city; and Garissa in north-eastern Kenya. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three label types: red and green octagon label (RG), red and green octagon with icons (RGI), and black octagon warning label (WL).

    Each label had a unique approach to highlighting sugars, fats and salts, which are the nutrients linked to diet-related diseases.

    • The Red-Green (RG) label used the colours red and green to show if a product had high or within-threshold levels of salt, sugar, fat, or saturated fat. Red meant the nutrients were above the set threshold, making that food unhealthy, while green meant it was below the set threshold levels.

    • The Red-Green with Icons (RGI) label worked like the RG label and it also included icons (like a spoon for sugar, a salt shaker for salt) and abbreviations (F for fat, SF for saturated fat) to make it easier to understand.

    • The black octagon Warning Label (WL) only appeared on products high in salt, sugar or fats, with a clear “high in” warning message to alert consumers.




    Read more:
    Why South Africa should introduce mandatory labelling for fast foods


    Each participant was asked to evaluate a sample of food products based on the label type they were shown. They were also asked about their purchase intentions and perceptions of the products’ healthiness.

    First, the study participants were shown images of packaged foods without any labels, and they were asked to answer questions about them. Then, study participants were shown the same images, but this time with a front-of-pack label added to the images. They were then asked the same questions again to see if the labels influenced their responses.

    Our results showed that warning labels were the most effective in helping consumers identify foods high in sugars, salts and fats. Participants who saw the warning labels were more likely to recognise unhealthy packaged food products and less likely to choose them, compared to those who used the Red and Green labels.

    In the same study we asked consumers about awareness and use of labels and we found that approximately two thirds (64.3%) reported being aware of food labels, while 55.0% reported reading nutrition information before purchasing products.

    Next steps

    Our research provides a strong evidence base to support policymakers in adopting mandatory front-of-pack labelling.

    Moving forward, establishing a clear regulatory framework that mandates simple, effective and standardised labelling systems is essential in reducing diet-related diseases. Ensuring these labels are easily understandable and prominently displayed on all packaged foods will empower consumers to make healthier choices, particularly those in low- and middle-income communities, who are at higher risk of poor dietary outcomes.

    Several law-making processes are in place that Kenya could use to implement mandatory labelling. But efforts are needed to identify and pursue the most effective route to effective legal change.

    Shukri F. Mohamed receives funding from the International Development Research Center.

    ref. Is this bad for my health? Kenyan study tests three types of warning labels on food – https://theconversation.com/is-this-bad-for-my-health-kenyan-study-tests-three-types-of-warning-labels-on-food-253657

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: The UK might have accepted the idea of youth mobility with the EU, but it’s not happening any time soon

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Simon Usherwood, Professor of Politics & International Studies, The Open University

    View Apart/Shutterstock

    The language might be dry, but the political shift is significant. Monday’s summit between the UK and EU leaders in London resulted in an acknowledgement of the “mutual interest to deepen our people-to-people ties, particularly for the younger generation”.

    This announcement is an important step forward in the creation of a youth mobility scheme between the EU and UK, even if it has required a name change to become a “youth experience scheme”. It is the first time that a British government has formally accepted this as something to negotiate and implement.

    However, there is scant detail about how it will work in practice and what the inevitable limits will be. While the permitted activities (“work, studies, au-pairing, volunteering, or simply travelling”) seem extensive, they are prefaced with the dreaded words “such as” – which means no one has actually agreed any of it.

    It was clear over a year ago that the basic models that the two sides have for youth mobility differ. The EU wants lengthy exchange periods and home tuition fees for students; the UK wants shorter stays, caps on numbers and retention of international fees for EU students at UK universities. The achievement of a deal would require at least one of them to move. This week makes this difference now the formal position, rather than showing whether movement is possible.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    It’s possible that discussion of British participation in the Erasmus+ scheme for student mobility might be a partial stopgap, making exchanges within study programmes easier. However, the ambition for creating those deeper people-to-people ties will need more to make it meaningful.

    As the troubled history of this idea should indicate, there’s still a very long way to go before anyone gets to use the scheme in practice.

    The founding irony of a youth mobility scheme with the EU after Brexit is that it was originally a British idea. It was produced under Rishi Sunak following his conclusion of the Windsor Framework on Northern Ireland, when he was looking for areas to rebuild ties with Europe.

    In 2023, feelers had been put out to various EU member states about concluding bilateral deals with the UK. While there was some interest, the general feeling was that this was best handled at an EU level, to avoid any cherrypicking of countries by London.

    A summary of UK-EU youth mobility proposals.
    Simon Usherwood, CC BY-NC-SA

    In April 2024, the European Commission produced an ambitious proposal for a scheme. It put forward that 18- to 30-year-olds would be able to get a visa for up to four years for any purpose – work, study, travel – without quotas on numbers.

    Both the Conservative government and the Labour opposition had rejected the proposal out of hand. This was partly out of concerns over the potential impact on immigration figures and on student finances: the commission suggested EU students should be able to pay UK university fees. Mostly, however, it came from a desire not to be seen to make a big agreement with the EU that looked a bit like freedom of movement.

    To be clear, youth mobility is very much not freedom of movement. The latter implies no limits on entry, length or purpose of stay, as well as access to any kinds of public services as if you were a resident national. The former still means paying for a visa and strict limits on those services. But such legal points remain rather marginal in the British political and media debate.

    Since last year, there has been some to and fro, but largely behind closed doors and with the incoming Labour government continuing the line that such a scheme wasn’t on the cards. While the UK has a number of youth mobility schemes with countries around the world, these are typically limited by quotas and time (normally to two years) and require the person to be working or studying.

    Moving on?

    On the British side, Home Office concern about immigration figures is clearly still critical, especially in the context of the recent white paper that aims to cut back migration. Universities too have been vocal about the financial impact of losing tuition fee income from EU students.

    But on the EU side, the matter is seen very differently. To some extent, the interest is in maintaining the links with the UK, especially for young people that could gain from experiencing more of how their neighbours live. But much more than this is the sense that youth mobility has become something of a test for the British government.

    Labour’s return to office last July marked the unleashing of a significant diplomatic effort to engage with European counterparts and to talk up the value of working together. Youth mobility is a test of that value for some in European capitals, both in terms of being able to negotiate an agreement and of being able to sell it to the British public.

    The coming weeks and months will therefore be a key period if the reset is to result in more sustainably improved relations. Even if the basic shape of UK-EU relations isn’t about to shift, the ability for both sides to be able to talk and act constructively will still matter in delivering from that long list of summit ambitions.

    Simon Usherwood receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council, as a Senior Fellow of the UK in a Changing Europe initiative.

    ref. The UK might have accepted the idea of youth mobility with the EU, but it’s not happening any time soon – https://theconversation.com/the-uk-might-have-accepted-the-idea-of-youth-mobility-with-the-eu-but-its-not-happening-any-time-soon-256628

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: The DIY guide to checking how well you’re ageing

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Marco Arkesteijn, Lecturer in Sport and Exercise Biomechanics, Aberystwyth University

    Ground Picture/Shutterstock

    A few years ago, a social media trend challenged people to see if they could stand up from the floor without using their hands. Now, it’s all about how long you can balance on one leg while brushing your teeth. These quirky “tests” promise to tell us how well we’re ageing – but do they really?

    When we talk about “ageing well”, we’re usually referring to both physical and psychological wellbeing. That includes feeling good (hedonic wellbeing) and finding meaning and purpose (eudaimonic wellbeing). Engaging in activities and monitoring ourselves plays a role in both.

    But ageing isn’t just about how strong your grip is or how fast you can walk. It’s a complex mix of physical, cognitive, emotional and social changes – and no single test captures the whole picture.

    Physically, one simple measure that gets a lot of attention is walking speed. According to one famous study, people who walk faster than 1.32 metres per second were less likely to die in the next three years – jokingly framed as “too fast for the Grim Reaper to catch”.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    On the flip side, a slower walking speed – below 0.8 metres per second – can be a sign of sarcopenia, a condition involving reduced muscle mass, muscle strength and physical function. These are all important indicators of age-related decline.

    But while these markers are useful, they’re not easy to measure at home. Most research relies on specialist equipment and your local GP probably doesn’t have a grip-strength dynamometer sitting in a drawer. But they could time how long it takes you to stand up and sit down five times from a chair.

    How to do a DIY MOT

    So, what can you realistically do to track your own ageing?

    To truly understand how you’re ageing, it helps to think beyond physical health. Mental sharpness, emotional resilience and social connection matter just as much. One helpful idea is to assess your cognitive fitness, which includes skills like attention, memory and flexibility.

    Here are some cognitive tests you can try at home:

    Trail making test: connect numbers and letters in sequence (1, A, 2, B, etc.) and time how long it takes. This measures your ability to switch between tasks.

    Stroop task: challenges your ability to ignore competing information. Try saying the colour of a word, not the word itself – like saying “red” when you see the word “blue” printed in red ink. It’s harder than it sounds!

    Dual-task challenge: walk at your normal speed while counting backwards from 100 in threes. If your walking speed changes significantly, it could indicate cognitive strain.

    These kinds of tasks test how well your brain handles competing demands – a key ability that becomes even more important as we age. This skill is known as cognitive flexibility, and it helps you adapt to changing situations, switch between tasks and manage distractions.

    Trying out these tests is great, but how do you know if you’re improving? After all, when you have spent time trying to improve your walking speed, or Stroop ability – or even rubbing your head, patting your belly while saying the Finnish alphabet out loud – it’s important to know if you are seeing benefits.

    Some measures, like single-leg stance, can vary wildly from day to day – or even hour to hour. You might get better just from repeating it, which doesn’t necessarily mean you’re ageing better, just that you’ve practised.

    Others, like grip strength, change very slowly even with regular strength training. And some improvements are task-specific: getting better at the trail making test doesn’t necessarily make you sharper at doing Wordle.

    That’s why it helps to complete the test a few times at the start, then retest yourself once a month or so – again, doing it a couple of times – to track any improvements. Cognitive changes may be slower to notice than physical ones, so regular checks can help reveal progress over time.

    More of a puzzle than a test

    There’s no single test or score that can capture how well you’re ageing. Think of it more like a jigsaw puzzle. Physical health, mental agility, emotional balance, social connection – they all matter, and they all interact. And, of course, even if you perform well now, some changes in the future may be beyond your control. No test can fully predict what lies ahead.

    At the end of the day, maybe the best sign of ageing well isn’t how fast you walk or how long you can stand on one leg – it’s how you feel about your life. Are you feeling engaged, content, connected?

    Tools like the Scale of Positive and Negative Experience can help you take stock of your emotional wellbeing. This short, 12-question survey asks about your everyday feelings – from joy and calm to sadness and frustration – offering insight into both the pleasurable (hedonic) and meaningful (eudaimonic) sides of wellbeing.

    Ageing well isn’t about beating a stopwatch or acing a memory test. It’s about knowing yourself – your body, your mind and your values – and making small, meaningful changes that help you feel more you.

    So, go ahead, stand on one leg if you like. But don’t forget to check in with your brain, body, emotions and your sense of purpose too.

    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.

    ref. The DIY guide to checking how well you’re ageing – https://theconversation.com/the-diy-guide-to-checking-how-well-youre-ageing-256297

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: How to tackle new strains of potato blight and avoid another great famine

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By David O’Connor, Associate Professor, School of Chemical Sciences, Dublin City University

    A new aggressive potato blight strain was detected in Wales and eastern Scotland earlier this year. The strain, identified as EU 46, can withstand certain fungicides, making it harder to control. It serves as a stark reminder that nearly 175 years after Ireland’s great famine, this destructive pathogen continues to evolve and endanger crops around the world.

    Each year, farmers lose an estimated US$6–7 billion (£4.5-5.2 billion) worth of crops due to this disease. In Europe alone, direct losses and control costs amount to over €1 billion (£800 million) annually. That includes the cost of expensive fungicide sprays that farmers rely on for protection.

    In developing countries, the stakes are even higher. Many smallhold farmers lack resources for intensive disease management. In Uganda, potato blight can destroy up to 100% of a farmer’s crop, endangering livelihoods and local food security.

    Just as in the Irish famine, dependence on a single crop is risky. When blight strikes these vulnerable communities, the consequences can be devastating.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    After decades of research, blight remains hard to defeat, partly due to the pathogen’s remarkable adaptability. Over the years, Phytophthora infestans (late blight) has repeatedly evolved new genetic strains that overcome both chemical fungicides and the resistant potato varieties bred to fend it off.

    The newly identified EU 46 strain is just one example of how quickly blight can develop resistance. In this case, tolerating a key fungicide and showing reduced sensitivity to others.

    Meanwhile, environmental changes and global trade create opportunities for wind-blown spores to migrate into new regions. All of this means farmers must remain vigilant; what worked against blight last year might not work today.

    After the Irish famine of the 1840s, science eventually identified its microscopic culprit and ways to fight it, but innovation didn’t stop there. Today, researchers and farmers are enlisting cutting-edge technology to stay ahead of blight.

    One promising tool is real-time spore detection. Devices like the SwisensPoleno, a monitor developed in Switzerland, can constantly scan the air on farms and spot signs of P. infestans spores as they appear.

    In Ireland, I’m leading a project testing this technology out on farms. These sensors rely on advanced imaging and AI to tell blight spores apart from other particles, giving farmers an early warning so they can act before the disease spreads.

    Potato blight is caused by a pathogen called Phytophthora Infestans.
    Elena Masiutkina/Shutterstock, CC BY-NC-ND

    Equally, new rapid DNA diagnostics can detect blight more quickly than traditional lab tests which take days to identify new strains. Portable testing kits are bringing diagnostics to the field. My colleagues and I have developed a simple in-field test (like COVID-19 lateral flow tests) that detects specific blight strains from a crushed leaf or air samples in under 30 minutes.

    Such tests not only confirm the presence of blight but can tell if the strain is one known to resist certain fungicides. This information allows farmers to choose the right treatment immediately, targeting the pathogen’s weaknesses and avoiding wasted effort.

    Farmers are also using data and computer modelling to anticipate outbreaks of the disease allowing them to act before it can takes hold. Sophisticated forecasting systems crunch weather data (temperature, humidity, rainfall) and spore counts to predict when and where blight is likely to strike next.

    By pinpointing high-risk periods, these models help schedule fungicide applications more strategically – only when needed, rather than on a fixed calendar. This not only cuts costs and environmental damage by reducing unnecessary sprays, but also slows down resistance development in the pathogen.

    Digital tech can help farmers detect crop diseases like potato blight quickly and accurately.
    Andrii Medvediuk/Shutterstock

    A global fight

    Defeating potato blight demands international efforts. There’s no wonder drug or magic gene that can eliminate this ever-changing pathogen. Like other experts, I advocate for an integrated pest-management approach.

    This combines cultural practices (like crop rotation and destroying infected plant debris) alongside biological controls (naturally occurring microbes, like beneficial bacteria, to help suppress the disease and limit its impact on crops). Judicious fungicide use to reduce the chances of blight taking hold is also effective.

    Using technology to leverage real-time data enables farmers to act on early warnings and apply treatments in a targeted way, preserving yields while minimising environmental damage.

    Investing in research and farmer education is essential too – from developing resistant potato breeds to training farmers in remote areas on how to use new diagnostic kits.

    The fight against potato blight is global by necessity. An airborne spore originating in one country can hop to another on the wind, as Europe’s experience shows. Likewise, breakthroughs in one lab or farm – whether a new sensor, a resistant potato variety, or an effective organic spray – need to be shared and supported across borders.

    International initiatives are putting the latest blight-fighting tools into the hands of farmers around the world. Supporting smallhold farmers in developing countries is especially vital, because they often face blight with limited resources and far more is at stake in terms of food security.

    In the mid-19th century, Ireland’s potato-dependent society was caught tragically off guard. Today, we have knowledge, technology and hard-earned lessons on our side.

    By embracing an integrated, technology driven strategy and ensuring it reaches farmers everywhere, that blight cycle could be broken. The continued emergence of strains like EU 46 is a warning, but also a call to action. One that we are now better equipped than ever to answer.


    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.


    David O’Connor receives funding from Research Ireland and Irish EPA.

    ref. How to tackle new strains of potato blight and avoid another great famine – https://theconversation.com/how-to-tackle-new-strains-of-potato-blight-and-avoid-another-great-famine-256926

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: The Coin by Palestinian writer Yasmin Zaher wins the 20th Dylan Thomas Prize – an expert from the judging panel explains why

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Daniel G. Williams, Professor of English Literature, Swansea University

    Yasmin Zaher’s remarkable novel The Coin has won the 20th International Swansea University Dylan Thomas Prize for writers under the age of 40.

    This is not a story that begins at the beginning. Instead, its narrator starts with dirt and an obsession with cleanliness, but suggests later that the coin of the title – an Israeli shekel that she accidentally swallowed on a family road trip in which her parents were killed in a car crash – would have been an equally appropriate place to begin.

    Long forgotten, the swallowed coin begins to make its presence felt, somewhere in her body, following her move to America. The narrator is a wealthy young Palestinian woman, teaching boys at a New York City middle school. Her wealth, however, is in the hands of a brother who controls her allowance. She responds by developing a scheme to resell luxury handbags with a homeless con-artist, known throughout as “Trenchcoat”.

    This is one of several attempts at shaping the world around her: she revels in her sexuality and ability to redefine herself through fashionable clothes and accessories; she teaches her class about black power and takes them on a trip to listen to the “dagger poems” of a black nationalist poet in New Jersey.

    I assume this poet is Amiri Baraka since they eat “Black Dada Nihilismus” burgers, a reference to his poem of the same name. But such acts of resistance, if not futile, are limited. Like the swallowed coin, the levers of control, whether material or psychic, lie out of reach as we witness the narrator’s gradual unravelling.

    It is perhaps appropriate that a novel set in New York should win the prize named after Swansea’s most famous poet. New York both enticed and frightened Dylan Thomas. It was the city in which he died. The city, also, in which he recorded the ground-breaking reading of A Child’s Christmas in Wales.


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


    In that story, as in his earlier Return Journey, his childhood self is a ghostly presence wandering among the “blitzed flat graves” of shops “marbled with snow and headstoned with fences”. The snow hides devastation. The destruction of the city that Thomas knew as a child. The 44 air raids mounted on Swansea between 1940 and 1943 killed 390 people. And it’s the similar loss of people and places, and the suffering in Gaza today, which Zaher’s novel examines.

    Palestine is a persistent and troubling presence in the The Coin. For Dylan the devastation of Swansea was a metonym for a wider world where civilians were increasingly the victims of war. His world is, regrettably, still ours in that sense. The Coin is a profound meditation on our contemporary world and our complicity in the destruction of another place and people.

    In a moving scene, the narrator recalls a Jewish friend, “a very gentle girl who dreamed of becoming a ballerina”. She lived in a house that once belonged to “a Palestinian family that had been expelled in 1948”. The friend tells her about two underground rooms in the garden. One of the rooms, “the poop room”, allows access to the second which contains “a big wooden chest full of treasures and gold”. The narrator keeps “thinking of that secret chamber off the shit room, the wooden chest inside, full of silverware and gold of the family who thought they would return.”

    The swallowed coin. The inaccessible allowance. The wooden chest full of treasures and gold. Unreachable currency functions as a powerful symbolic centre connecting the brief scenes and meditations that constitute this appropriately fragmented novel. Lost somewhere in the narrator’s entrails, removed from economic exchange, the coin belongs with the excrement and detritus of urban life, which is the object of the narrator’s disgusted obsessions.

    New York in this novel is a repository of failed circulation – the filth of the city’s streets offering a gothic underside to the endless flows of capitalism, frustrating the narrator’s obsessive attempts at keeping herself clean. Narratives and circulation end in the stasis of dirt. Palestinian history ends in dispossession. Swallowed coin, inaccessible allowance and a buried treasure chest are symbolic repositories of Palestinian traumatic memory.

    Zaher shows us how the novel form can still offer a unique way of understanding the world, of mapping our contemporary disorientation. It does this not by offering clarity, but by lingering in the spaces where movement, value and meaning break down. This is a novel about circulation – of money, of bodies and of meaning.

    The swallowed coin is itself a kind of resistance, a refusal to go along with the restless movement of capital that defines our world. The coin refuses liquidity and thereby refuses complicity; its removal from the economic system mimics a kind of muted protest. Beneath the novel’s often frenetic and energetic surface hides a resistant counter-politics of inaction.

    Daniel G. Williams was a judge of this years’ Dylan Thomas Prize.

    ref. The Coin by Palestinian writer Yasmin Zaher wins the 20th Dylan Thomas Prize – an expert from the judging panel explains why – https://theconversation.com/the-coin-by-palestinian-writer-yasmin-zaher-wins-the-20th-dylan-thomas-prize-an-expert-from-the-judging-panel-explains-why-257063

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: International Booker prize 2025: six experts review the shortlisted novels

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Helen Vassallo, Associate Professor of French and Translation, University of Exeter

    From a longlist of 13, six novels have been shortlisted for the 2025 International Booker prize. Our academics review the finalists ahead of the announcement of the winner on May 20.

    Under the Eye of the Big Bird by Hiromi Kawakami, translated by Asa Yoneda

    Hiromi Kawakami’s Under the Eye of the Big Bird offers us glimpses of one imagined future for earth and humanity.

    Its vision could be described as post-apocalyptic. After unspecified cataclysmic events, humans exist only in tiny, scattered communities and extinction seems imminent. But this is also a beautiful, if dreamlike, world and one in which humanity still has the potential for astonishing growth and change.

    Each chapter introduces something new and startling to the reader. Many of the tropes are familiar – cloning, superpowers, mutation, AI. Yet they are configured in unfamiliar ways and prompt reflections on the nature of humanity and our relationship with the rest of creation – as well as on time, religion and the possibility of an afterlife.

    Despite grappling with so many huge questions, Under the Eye of the Big Bird is an accessible and absorbing novel. And, although tragedy is never far away, there remains humour – and hope.

    Sarah Annes Brown, Professor of English Literature

    Heart Lamp by Banu Mushtaq, translated by Deepa Bhasthi

    Banu Mushtaq’s Heart Lamp shines a light on the lives of Muslim women in rural India. In a bold and memorable translation from Kannada by Deepa Bhasthi, this quietly powerful collection of short stories opens up the intimate space of domestic rituals and family tensions.

    Mushtaq’s fervent advocacy of women’s rights is evident in the compassion with which she brings to life the women in the stories: from the lack of autonomy suffered by young girls forced into wedlock to the indignity of an older woman obliged to accept her husband taking a second wife or a widow whose son arranges a new marriage for her, the women’s lives are dictated by men.

    Heart Lamp is perhaps best summed up in the final story, “Be a Woman Once, O Lord!” Throughout these stories, Mushtaq invites us – and whichever male deity might be listening – to walk in the shoes of women overlooked by an unquestioned patriarchal hierarchy.

    Helen Vassallo, Associate Professor of French and Translation

    A Leopard-Skin Hat by Anne Serre, translated by Mark Hutchinson

    Published in France in 2008 as Un chapeau léopard, A Leopard-Skin Hat is a novel about a friendship spanning 20 years between a woman called Fanny and a man known throughout only as “the Narrator”. He is not, though, the narrator of the novel. Rather, an unknown storyteller tells us how the Narrator sees Fanny gradually lose the fight against madness (the novel’s word) and, in the end, death.

    This is a novel about the mystery of other people, about how unknowable others are to us. It explores how we narrate to try to understand people who are not us, but whom we love. What is most extraordinary about Serre’s novel is the way it shows us two friends doing very ordinary things – going out for dinner, going on holiday, walking in the countryside and swimming in lakes – but shows us through this the strangeness and complexity of friendship, love and life.

    Leigh Wilson, Professor of English Literature

    Perfection by Vincenzo Latronico, translated by Sophie Hughes

    Perfection is a slim account of the way that time “disappears” for Anna and Tom, an expat couple living in Berlin as creative freelancers in the 2010s.

    Written in homage to Georges Perec’s Things: The Story of the Sixties (1965), the novel opens with an overbearing description of the items in their apartment, moving in and out of the characters’ dissatisfaction with the aesthetic, social, creative, economic and political routes open to them in 120 pages spanning a little over 10 years.

    As international elections, the European refugee crises and climate catastrophe dance in and out of their peripheral vision, Anna and Tom find neither satisfaction with their current moment nor successfully imagine a better one. As such, Latronico gently, but with an increasing sense of fatalism, considers the stagnation of a millennial creative class whose views on influence, status, power and happiness remain deeply linked to the “new emotions” of digital mediation.

    By Rachel Sykes, Associate Professor in Contemporary Literature and Culture

    On The Calculation of Volume I by Solvej Balle, translated by Barbara Haveland

    In On The Calculation of Volume, a woman, Tara Selter, finds herself trapped in an endlessly repeating day, November 18. Volume I, the first of seven books, recounts the first 365 days of this time loop, with Tara attempting to make sense of her predicament, to explain it to her husband – who is still bound by the normal rules of time – and to try to fix whatever has initiated this situation.

    As the novel continues, it becomes less focused on the novelty of the situation and more on the philosophical questions it raises: the alternate claustrophobia and liberation of replaying the same day; how our friends and partners sometimes feel like they inhabit a different reality; the way in which time pulls things and people apart; of the importance we place in the idea of “tomorrow”.

    What’s remarkable about Balle’s novel is how compulsive it is – even though we know time is standing still, we still want to know what will happen next.

    David Hering, Senior Lecturer in English Literature

    Small Boat by Vincent Delecroix, translated by Helen Stevenson

    Vincent Delecroix’s Small Boat is a slim, bruising novel that centres on a real horror: the drowning of 27 migrants in the English Channel in November 2021. In a small, inflatable craft, they reached out over crackling radio lines, asking for help that never came.

    Small Boat focuses not on the migrants themselves, but on a French coastguard operator who spent that night on the radio, fielding their calls for rescue. Delecroix’s brilliance lies in showing how violence at the border is carried out not by villains, but by workers. It was not evil that allowed those people to die in the water, it was a string of decisions made by people in warm rooms who believed they were doing their jobs.

    In a world ever more brutal towards those who flee war, hunger and despair, Delecroix’s novel is a necessary – and merciless – indictment. It reminds us that the shipwreck is not theirs alone. It is ours too.

    Fiona Murphy, Assistant Professor in Refugee and Intercultural Studies

    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.

    ref. International Booker prize 2025: six experts review the shortlisted novels – https://theconversation.com/international-booker-prize-2025-six-experts-review-the-shortlisted-novels-255464

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: In ‘Paying For It,’ ex-lovers reimagine friendship, family and the meaning of sex work

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ummni Khan, Associate Professor, Department of Law and Legal Studies, Carleton University

    Emily Lê and Daniel Beirne star in the film that sees director and multidisciplinary artist Sook-Lin Yee adapt the graphic memoir of her ex-lover, Chester Brown, for the screen. (Wilding Pictures & Hawkeye Pictures)

    The film Paying For It, Sook-Yin Lee’s live-action adaptation of cartoonist Chester Brown’s 2011 graphic memoir, reveals unexpected overlaps between paid sexual encounters and romantic relationships.

    Lee, a boundary-shattering artist working across film, music, acting and broadcast, has never shied away from taboo. With Paying For It, she takes on sex work, romance and the messy labour of chosen family by adapting her ex-lover’s memoir for the screen.

    ‘Paying For It,’ graphic memoir by Chester Brown.
    (Drawn & Quarterly)

    In my 2019 article “Chester Brown and the Queerness of Johns,” I analyze Brown’s original book, which traces his pivot from monogamy with Lee to regularly seeing sex workers in the late 1990s.

    Both a memoir and a manifesto, the book pairs accounts of paid sex with arguments for decriminalizing sex work, voiced through debates with friends and a detailed appendix. In my analysis, I frame Brown’s memoir as a queer intervention, one that disrupts heteronormative ideals of romantic relations, intimate exchanges and sexual propriety.

    Lee’s cinematic version of Paying For It affirms Brown’s stance, but filters the story through her own perceptions and snapshots of her love life. In doing so, she traces how she and Brown reinvented their relationship, while portraying his encounters with sex workers with nuance and care.

    Drawing on my research in sexuality — including scholarship on sex work, client surveillance and client regulation — I see the film as a defiant celebration of unconventional bonds between exes who remain best friends, and between clients and sex workers, where even purchased orgasms can carry moments of tenderness and mutual respect.

    Radical relationship honesty

    The film opens with Sonny (Lee’s fictional persona, played by Emily Lê) confessing to live-in boyfriend Chester (Daniel Beirne) that she’s falling in love with someone else.

    Rather than erupting in rage or jealousy, Chester remains composed. Together, they choose to see what might come next. As Sonny begins seeing other people, Chester continues living in the house and becomes privy to her romantic sagas, from the steamy beginnings to the bitter blowouts. To the bewilderment of his friends, he remains content with the arrangement.

    Eventually, Chester decides to pay for sex, a decision he shares with Sonny.
    What emerges is a portrait of creative kinship where two people refuse the usual scripts and choose radical openness instead.

    Unconventional bond

    Decades after the events depicted in the film, Lee has described Brown as her “best friend” and “as family.”

    Lee and Brown shape personal histories into overlapping narratives. That they’ve promoted the film together, and appeared in joint interviews and public discussions, suggests a sense of mutual trust at the heart of their collaboration.

    Probing the meanings of sex and intimacy

    Chester moves — and sometimes stumbles — through criminalized terrain, figuring out how to find sex workers, engage respectfully and follow the unspoken rules of the exchange. The film suggests sometimes it’s just sex for Chester, and at other times, the exchange carries an emotional connection for him.

    With one sex worker, Chester shares his real name and gifts a book he wrote about Louis Riel.

    Sociologist Elizabeth Bernstein has analyzed how sex workers are sometimes paid to offer their clients an erotic experience “premised upon the performance of authentic interpersonal connection.”

    In the film, a potential for emotional reciprocity between Chester and a sex worker becomes evident. Without giving too much away, by the film’s end we see how a casual and transactional beginning transforms into something more enduring for both parties.

    ‘Paying For It,’ trailer.

    Risks in both romance and sex work

    The film also highlights the risks running through both sex work and romance.

    Sex workers face threats of abuse, arrest, disrespect and boundary violations. The film gestures to these realities in a scene following a police raid on a sex work venue.

    But the film also shows Sonny’s relationships aren’t immune to danger either. One boyfriend’s rage nearly results in harm to her pet.

    Just as navigating risk is part of both romance and sex work, so too is grappling with the social forces that shape desire. In one pointed exchange, Sonny calls out Chester for only paying young, conventionally attractive women. He counters by asking why she doesn’t date Asian men, forcing them both to confront their own biases.

    Sex worker rights

    While Paying For It is deeply personal, it is also unmistakably political, especially in its implicit advocacy for sex worker rights.

    To navigate the ethical complexities of depicting sex work, Lee consulted with performer, activist and author Andrea Werhurn, who wrote a memoir about being a former escort; Werhurn stars in the film as the sex worker Denise.

    Lee also interviewed Valerie Scott — one of the applicants who challenged Canada’s prostitution laws in the Bedford case.

    The film presents sex work as legitimate labour, highlighting the skills and emotional intelligence it demands. At the same time, it underscores how sex workers remain vulnerable to police harassment, violence and social stigma.

    Canada’s perverse laws on sex work

    The marginalized status of sex work, as dramatized in the film, is shaped by a legal system structured by moralism and hypocrisy.

    Set in the 1990s, Paying For It takes place at a time when Canada didn’t criminalize the sale of sex directly but prohibited nearly everything around it, including soliciting, working indoors and operating brothels.

    These contradictions pushed the industry underground, exposing sex workers to abuse, police harassment, sting operations and heightened health risks, while often branding them with criminal records.

    Sex work kept in the shadows

    In 2013, the Supreme Court’s Bedford decision struck down these provisions, ruling that they violated sex workers’ constitutional rights, most importantly, the right to security of the person.

    But the legal victory was short-lived. In 2014, the Conservative government introduced the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act, which criminalized the purchase of sexual services while ostensibly decriminalizing its sale.

    In practice, the model keeps paid sex in the shadows, where workers face ongoing risks, limited negotiating power and barriers to reporting abuse or working in safer indoor settings. What’s being protected isn’t sex workers, but a puritanical social order.




    Read more:
    Sex workers are left out in the cold by Ottawa’s unjust conviction amendments


    This puritanical approach also underpins the newly criminalized status of clients. In my chapter “From Average Joe to Deviant John,” I trace how western attitudes toward men who pay for sex evolved from a “boys will be boys” tolerance to a framework that pathologizes and vilifies them.

    Paying For It resists this framing. The film presents Chester as awkward but principled: a considerate client navigating desire in a criminalized and judgmental culture.

    The price of choosing love freely

    Paying For It offers an alternative kind of love story. It spotlights a relationship where former lovers honour the heart (their continued commitment to one another), the body (respecting each other’s sexual autonomy) and the mind (their willingness to question social norms).

    In this way, the film redefines “paying for it” not as a burden but as a conscious and liberating investment in diverse forms of love and intimacy.

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

    ref. In ‘Paying For It,’ ex-lovers reimagine friendship, family and the meaning of sex work – https://theconversation.com/in-paying-for-it-ex-lovers-reimagine-friendship-family-and-the-meaning-of-sex-work-255294

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Meta’s Community Notes program is promising, but needs to prioritize transparency

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sameer Borwankar, Assistant Professor of Information Systems, McGill University

    Meta has changed its approach to fact-checking, moving away from platform-controlled moderation. (Shutterstock)

    Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, has more than 3.35 billion combined monthly active users. Recently, Meta has changed its approach to fact-checking in response to criticisms of its role in circulating fake news and disinformation. The company frames its Community Notes program as a way to uphold free expression.

    Although Meta has not officially announced a launch date for Community Notes in Canada, interested users can join the waitlist via Meta’s Community Notes page.




    Read more:
    Meta shift from fact-checking to crowdsourcing spotlights competing approaches in fight against misinformation and hate speech


    The initiative was first launched in the United States, and will be expanding globally. Meanwhile, X (formerly Twitter) has already experimented with a similar program, with mixed results. The experience of X’s Community Notes (previously known as Birdwatch) underscores that both platforms and regulators must take an active role in refining these programs.

    Meta has the opportunity to learn from four years of Community Notes evolution at X and improve upon its shortcomings. This involves adjusting features, addressing algorithmic biases and ensuring that they function as effective tools rather than mere symbolic gestures.

    CBC reports on Meta ending its fact-checking program.

    Community-driven moderation

    X launched Birdwatch in January 2021 when it was known as Twitter. Marketed as a way to broaden the range of voices beyond platform-based and centralized fact-checking efforts, the program aimed to curb the spread of misinformation through community-driven moderation.

    Over time, the team refined many of its features based on feedback from pilot participants and internal research. When Elon Musk acquired Twitter in 2022, he implemented major changes, including a rebranding of the program’s name.

    Community Notes operates on the principles of crowdsourcing, a method proven effective in various domains. Research has shown that groups of users can collectively identify low-quality news sources and misleading content.

    On X, users participating in the Community Notes program contribute additional context to posts in the form of notes. They can also rate others’ contributions. Notes that receive supportive ratings from a diverse group of users become publicly visible. Once approved, they appear directly beneath the original post, providing added context for the broader audience.

    However, even if a post is widely deemed misleading by Community Notes contributors, the platform does not take action against the post itself or the individuals who spread misinformation. Instead, the program relies solely on surfacing user-generated context rather than the company moderating content.

    Positive impact?

    Preliminary research suggests that the Community Notes program has had a positive impact on curbing the spread of misinformation on the platform. Recent work shows that when a note is attached to a post, authors often voluntarily retract their posts by deleting them.

    On the content creation aspect, participation in the program appears to influence user behaviour: contributors tend to adopt a more measured tone, reducing extreme sentiment in their writing after engaging with the system.

    One of the most notable strengths of X’s Community Notes is its transparency. Since the program’s inception, X has provided public access to both the data and the algorithms that determine which fact-checks are displayed.

    This open-source approach has allowed researchers — both within and outside the company — to study the program and propose improvements. This stands in contrast to the recent trend of social media platforms rolling back data-sharing partnerships.

    Prior to Musk’s acquisition, X also had a dedicated team researching the impact of the program. Early changes to the program were shaped by feedback from participants and internal research.

    For example, in November 2021, X introduced anonymity for fact-checkers to prevent trolling and harassment. This decoupling of roles between content creators and fact-checkers has had a positive effect, reducing the risk of retaliation and fostering a more positive content creation by the participants of the program.

    Groups of users can collectively identify low-quality news sources and misleading content.
    (Shutterstock)

    Challenges and limitations

    Despite its potential, X’s Community Notes program faces several significant challenges, including its low popularity among users. Meta now has an opportunity to address these shortcomings from the outset.

    One of the biggest concerns is manipulation by co-ordination. Given the presence of organized troll networks on social media, there is a high risk that co-ordinated groups could misuse the program to flag legitimate content as misinformation.

    To counteract this, X implemented a consensus-based approach, where a note is only made visible if users with diverse viewpoints agree on its accuracy.

    While this system appears sound in theory, in practice it has led to a severe lack of approved notes as less than nine per cent of submitted notes reach the general audience. Many contributions never gain visibility, often due to insufficient ratings from diverse users.

    Another limitation of the consensus approach is that the algorithm must first recognize diverse viewpoints, which are not always straightforward. Social media platforms operate across hundreds of countries, where political, cultural and social divisions can be complex and nuanced. In such cases, enforcing consensus among a diverse audience may be highly unreliable and require reassessment.

    Shifting responsibility

    There is also the risk that Community Notes serve as a smokescreen, allowing platforms to shift responsibility away from active misinformation management. Since taking over X, Musk has laid off more than 80 per cent of the company’s Trust and Safety team.

    This included members of the Community Notes team, leaving critical gaps in oversight and research. Meta’s recent move to distance itself from third-party fact-checkers suggests a similar retreat from proactive intervention.

    Legal frameworks across different countries add further complications. Although Community Notes contributors remain anonymous to the public, it is unclear how platforms will respond if governments demand access to contributor identities.

    The Wikipedia legal case in India serves as a cautionary example of how platforms may be pressured into compliance. In September 2024, the Delhi High Court issued a contempt-of-court notice to Wikipedia over the site’s delay in providing identifying information about edits.

    No real consequences

    Finally, these programs are further weakened by the platforms’ explicit assurance that they will not take enforcement action based on Community Notes outcomes. Without real consequences for those spreading misinformation, the program risks being a symbolic effort rather than an effective tool for content moderation.

    Overall, there is hope that Meta’s Community Notes program can be effective, but its success will depend on continuous experimentation and improvement. The company must prioritize transparency to rebuild public trust and ensure the program does not become another performative gesture.

    Regulators also have a crucial role in holding platforms accountable, ensuring that data from these programs remains accessible to independent researchers and that the algorithms determining which notes are displayed are fair and unbiased.

    Without these safeguards, Community Notes risks becoming yet another tool that platforms use to shift responsibility rather than a meaningful solution to misinformation.

    Sameer Borwankar receives funding from SSHRC.

    ref. Meta’s Community Notes program is promising, but needs to prioritize transparency – https://theconversation.com/metas-community-notes-program-is-promising-but-needs-to-prioritize-transparency-248324

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Is this bad for my health? Kenyan study tests three types of warning labels on food

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Shukri F. Mohamed, Research Scientist, African Population and Health Research Center

    Diet-related health conditions, such as diabetes, hypertension and obesity, are on the rise in Kenya, putting immense strain on already over-stretched public health systems. These conditions are often driven by high intake of sugars, salts and unhealthy fats. So it’s more critical than ever for consumers to understand what’s in the foods they’re buying.

    But making sense of nutrition information isn’t always straightforward, especially with the small, complex labels on the back of most packages.

    Our recent study examined whether front-of-pack food labels could help Kenyan consumers make better choices. We tested three types of label designs to see which one was most effective at helping people identify nutrients of concern and make healthier purchase decisions.

    Front-of-pack labels are simplified labels on the front of food packaging, designed to help consumers quickly assess healthiness through symbols, colours, or ratings. Examples include providing a “high in sugar” warning. In contrast, back-of-pack labels provide mandatory, detailed information such as full ingredient lists, nutrition facts and expiry dates typically in a standardised, text-heavy format on the back or side. Front-of-pack labels aren’t mandatory in all countries but back-of-pack labels are.

    Many countries, including Chile, Mexico and Israel, have already introduced mandatory warning labels. Research shows that there has been a positive impact on public health.

    Kenya is planning to take a major step in promoting public health by introducing a front-of-label system that will rank packed foods and non-alcoholic beverages based on their nutritional quality. Currently, packaged foods in Kenya are required to list ingredients, but this information can be hard to interpret. Front-of-pack labels will simplify this by highlighting key nutritional facts at a glance.

    The new system will also guide policies like restricting marketing of unhealthy foods to children and other measures to improve Kenya’s food environment. With rising obesity and diet-related diseases driven by a shift from traditional foods to processed options, changes are urgently needed.


    Read more: Marketing unhealthy food as good for kids is fuelling obesity in South Africa: how to curb it


    We have been involved in food environment policies research for the last five years. Our study emphasises the potential of front-of-pack food labels to affect consumers’ choices. Presenting clear information about a product’s nutritional content on the front of packaging could shift consumer behaviour towards healthier choices. In turn, this could lead to better public health outcomes.

    Testing three label types

    The study randomly assigned participants to different label types to compare the results fairly.

    The study involved 2,198 adults from four counties: the capital, Nairobi; Mombasa, the second largest city; Kisumu, which is home to the third largest city; and Garissa in north-eastern Kenya. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three label types: red and green octagon label (RG), red and green octagon with icons (RGI), and black octagon warning label (WL).

    Each label had a unique approach to highlighting sugars, fats and salts, which are the nutrients linked to diet-related diseases.

    • The Red-Green (RG) label used the colours red and green to show if a product had high or within-threshold levels of salt, sugar, fat, or saturated fat. Red meant the nutrients were above the set threshold, making that food unhealthy, while green meant it was below the set threshold levels.

    • The Red-Green with Icons (RGI) label worked like the RG label and it also included icons (like a spoon for sugar, a salt shaker for salt) and abbreviations (F for fat, SF for saturated fat) to make it easier to understand.

    • The black octagon Warning Label (WL) only appeared on products high in salt, sugar or fats, with a clear “high in” warning message to alert consumers.


    Read more: Why South Africa should introduce mandatory labelling for fast foods


    Each participant was asked to evaluate a sample of food products based on the label type they were shown. They were also asked about their purchase intentions and perceptions of the products’ healthiness.

    First, the study participants were shown images of packaged foods without any labels, and they were asked to answer questions about them. Then, study participants were shown the same images, but this time with a front-of-pack label added to the images. They were then asked the same questions again to see if the labels influenced their responses.

    Our results showed that warning labels were the most effective in helping consumers identify foods high in sugars, salts and fats. Participants who saw the warning labels were more likely to recognise unhealthy packaged food products and less likely to choose them, compared to those who used the Red and Green labels.

    In the same study we asked consumers about awareness and use of labels and we found that approximately two thirds (64.3%) reported being aware of food labels, while 55.0% reported reading nutrition information before purchasing products.

    Next steps

    Our research provides a strong evidence base to support policymakers in adopting mandatory front-of-pack labelling.

    Moving forward, establishing a clear regulatory framework that mandates simple, effective and standardised labelling systems is essential in reducing diet-related diseases. Ensuring these labels are easily understandable and prominently displayed on all packaged foods will empower consumers to make healthier choices, particularly those in low- and middle-income communities, who are at higher risk of poor dietary outcomes.

    Several law-making processes are in place that Kenya could use to implement mandatory labelling. But efforts are needed to identify and pursue the most effective route to effective legal change.

    – Is this bad for my health? Kenyan study tests three types of warning labels on food
    – https://theconversation.com/is-this-bad-for-my-health-kenyan-study-tests-three-types-of-warning-labels-on-food-253657

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI USA: Grassley, Banks Renew Call for Investigation into Milley’s Chain of Command Interference, Efforts to Undermine Civilian Control of the Military

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    WASHINGTON – Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Jim Banks (R-Ind.) are renewing calls for the Department of Defense (DOD) to finally address alleged misconduct by former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) General Mark Milley.
    In a letter to the DOD’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG), the senators cite reports Milley tampered with the statutory chain of command, undermined civilian control of the military, violated military code through making derogatory and political public statements and provided inaccurate sworn testimony.
    “The nation’s highest-ranking military officer has a solemn responsibility to set an example of excellence and to model good conduct for all American service members. The record suggests that General Milley failed to meet those standards,” the senators wrote.
    Grassley and Banks are following up on their 2022 request for an independent review of Milley’s actions. Former DOD Inspector General Robert Storch closed the review without providing answers.
    “[Milley’s] conduct and willful undermining of his Commander-in-Chief posed a grave threat to civilian control of the military. The issues raised by Milley’s alleged misconduct are too important to be swept under the rug. They must be examined, and if substantiated, General Milley should be held accountable,” the senators continued.
    In January, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth directed OIG to conduct a review of Milley’s misconduct and determine whether enough evidence exists for Milley to be stripped of a star in retirement.
    The full text of the letter is available HERE.
    Background:Milley – who, per the Constitution and law, does not have command authority as JCS chairman – reportedly ordered senior officers to check with him before executing orders from President Trump during his first term.
    Milley also has made partisan statements to the press, admissions in the book Peril and derogatory comments about Trump, including those in his now-public draft resignation letter. Milley also reportedly promised a Chinese military official he would alert them ahead of time if the United States was about to attack China.
    In April 2022, Grassley and Banks wrote to Milley regarding their concerns. After months without answers, they sought an inspector general review of Milley’s actions.
    After nearly nine months, the OIG claimed to have conducted a thorough review, but offered no material or details to support its finding to halt its investigation.
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UK sanctions hit West Bank violence network

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    UK sanctions hit West Bank violence network

    UK sanctions individuals, illegal settler outposts and organisations supporting violence against Palestinian communities in the West Bank, as Foreign Secretary pauses Free Trade Agreement negotiations with Israel

    • New sanctions target 3 individuals, 2 illegal settler outposts and 2 organisations supporting violence against Palestinian communities in the West Bank. 
    • Today’s measures include financial restrictions and travel bans, including on high-profile extremist settler leader Daniella Weiss
    • In a statement to the House, the Foreign Secretary is set to announce a formal pause of Free Trade Agreement negotiations with Israel, effective immediately.
    • He will make clear the UK’s complete opposition to the IDF’s new, extensive ground operation through Gaza, repeat UK demands that Hamas release all the hostages immediately and unconditionally, and reiterate that Hamas cannot continue to run Gaza.

    In response to the persistent cycle of serious violence undertaken by extremist Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank, the Foreign Secretary has announced new sanctions today.

    Today’s measures target 3 individuals, including prominent settler leader Daniella Weiss, as well as 2 illegal outposts and 2 organisations that have supported, incited and promoted violence against Palestinian communities in the West Bank.

    These individuals and entities are now subject to measures including financial restrictions, travel bans, and director disqualifications, and will follow 18 other individuals, entities, and companies already sanctioned relating to serious violence against communities in the West Bank.

    The measures follow a dramatic surge in settler violence in the West Bank, with the UN recording over 1,800 attacks by settlers against Palestinian communities since 1 January 2024.

    In a statement to Parliament, the Foreign Secretary is also set to announce the formal pause of Free Trade Agreement negotiations with Israel, effective immediately. While the UK government remains committed to the existing trade agreement in force, it is not possible to advance discussions on a new, upgraded FTA with a Netanyahu government that is pursuing egregious policies in the West Bank and Gaza.

    His statement will address latest developments on the ground in Gaza, making clear the UK’s complete opposition to the IDF’s new, extensive ground operation through Gaza, the threat of starvation for the Gazan population, and the UK’s condemnation of the Israeli government’s plans to drive Gazans from their homes into a corner of the Strip. The Foreign Secretary will also repeat UK demands that Hamas release all the hostages immediately and unconditionally and reiterate that Hamas cannot continue to run Gaza.

    The new steps follow a joint statement issued by the Prime Minister along with the leaders of France and Canada, setting out their strong opposition to the expansion of Israel’s military operations in Gaza and to illegal settlements in the West Bank. They also made clear that if Israel does not cease this action, further action will be taken in response.

    Foreign Secretary David Lammy said:

    I have seen for myself the consequences of settler violence. The fear of its victims. The impunity of its perpetrators.

    The sanctioning of Daniella Weiss and others today demonstrates our determination to hold extremist settlers to account as Palestinian communities suffer violence and intimidation at the hands of extremist settlers.

    The Israeli government has a responsibility to intervene and halt these aggressive actions. Their consistent failure to act is putting Palestinian communities and the two-state solution in peril.

    The announcement comes as Minister for the Middle East Hamish Falconer summons Israel’s Ambassador Tzipi Hotovely to the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office over the expansion of military operations in Gaza.

    Minister for the Middle East Hamish Falconer said:

    Today I will set out to Ambassador Hotovely the government’s opposition to the wholly disproportionate escalation of military activity in Gaza and emphasise that the 11-week block on aid to Gaza has been cruel and indefensible. I will urge Israel to halt settlement expansion and settler violence in the West Bank.

    Israel must abide by its obligations under International Humanitarian Law and ensure full, rapid, safe and unhindered provision of humanitarian assistance to the population in Gaza. The limited amount of aid entering is simply not enough.

    We must get an immediate ceasefire and the release of all hostages and a path to a two-state solution is the only way to ensure the long-term peace and security of both Palestinians and Israelis.

    Background

    Individuals and entities sanctioned today:

    • Daniella Weiss – has been involved in threatening, perpetrating, promoting and supporting, acts of aggression and violence against Palestinian individuals. Weiss is now subject to an asset freeze, travel ban, and director disqualification.

    • Harel Libi – Owner of Libi Construction and Infrastructure. Libi has been involved in threatening and perpetuating acts of aggression and violence against Palestinian individuals. Libi is now subject to an asset freeze, travel ban, and director disqualification.

    • Zohar Sabah – has been involved in threatening, perpetrating, promoting and supporting, acts of aggression and violence against Palestinian individuals. Sabah is now subject to an asset freeze, travel ban, and director disqualification.

    • Coco’s Farm – is associated with a person who is or has been involved in activity which amounts to facilitating, inciting, promoting or providing support for activity which amounts to a serious abuse of the right of individuals not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.  Coco’s Farm is now subject to an asset freeze.

    • Libi Construction and Infrastructure –has provided logistical and financial support for the establishment of illegal outposts resulting in the forced displacement of Palestinians in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, activities which cause the psychological suffering of Palestinians, and activities which often leads to violence perpetrated against Palestinians. Libi Construction and Infrastructure is now subject to an asset freeze and director disqualification.

    • Nachala – has been involved in facilitating, inciting, promoting and providing logistical and financial support for the establishment of illegal outposts and forced displacement of Palestinians in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, activities which cause the psychological suffering of Palestinians, and which often lead to violence perpetrated against Palestinians. Nachala is now subject to an asset freeze.

    • Neria’s Farm – is associated with a person who is or has been involved in activity which amounts to facilitating, inciting, promoting or providing support for activity which amounts to a serious abuse of the right of individuals not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neria’s Farm is now subject to an asset freeze.

    Definitions

    • Asset freeze: where an asset freeze applies, in summary, it is generally prohibited within the UK, and for UK persons outside the UK, to: (1) deal with funds or economic resources, owned, held or controlled by a designated person; (2) make funds or economic resources available, directly or indirectly, to, or for the benefit of, a designated person; and (3) engage in actions that, directly or indirectly, circumvent the financial sanctions prohibitions. 
    • Director Disqualification Sanctions: Where director disqualification sanctions apply, it will be an offence for a person designated for the purpose of those sanctions to act as a director of a company or to take part in the management, formation or promotion of a UK company. 
    • Travel ban: an individual subject to a travel ban will be an excluded person under section 8B of the Immigration Act 1971, meaning that they must be refused leave to enter or to remain in the United Kingdom.

    Media enquiries

    Email newsdesk@fcdo.gov.uk

    Telephone 020 7008 3100

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

    Updates to this page

    Published 20 May 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Free Shingles Vaccine Available This Month

    Source: Government of Canada regional news

    Starting today, May 20, Nova Scotians aged 65 and older can book their free shingles vaccine appointment. The first appointments will be May 28.

    “Across Canada, nearly one in three people develop shingles, despite the availability of the vaccine,” said Premier Tim Houston. “That’s why we are delivering on our promise of removing barriers to access and making the shingles vaccine free.”

    The vaccine costs about $400 but will be free for seniors starting May 28. People can book an appointment by calling their primary health care provider or at https://novascotia.ca/routinevaccine

    Shingles is a viral infection that causes an extremely painful, burning skin rash and nerve pain that can last 90 days or more. For many people, it is debilitating. Anyone who has had chickenpox or has been exposed to the virus is at risk of developing shingles later in life.


    Quotes:

    “We are committed to investing in things that matter and that make a real impact on the day-to-day lives of Nova Scotians. We know how severe the symptoms of shingles are, and the good news is that it can be easily prevented.”
    Michelle Thompson, Minister of Health and Wellness

    “The free shingles vaccine is life changing for older Nova Scotians. For many people, the high cost made the vaccine out of reach. By breaking down barriers to care, we are protecting more older Nova Scotians from the needless suffering that comes with this awful virus.”
    Barbara Adams, Minister of Seniors and Long-Term Care

    “CARP is extremely pleased to hear this announcement. The free shingles vaccine is great news for older Nova Scotians, who are at risk for developing this awful life-impacting disease. By removing the cost, this will open the door for more seniors to have access to the vaccine.”
    Bill VanGorder, Advocacy and Education Officer, Canadian Association of Retired Persons

    “Seniors of Nova Scotia welcome the announcement of free shingles vaccine available to all people over 65. We recognize the impact of this debilitating and disabling virus, the effects of which can last weeks, months and can cause lifelong nerve pain. This vaccine will enable seniors to protect themselves from such serious life-altering effects and decrease their vulnerability to chronic problems, enabling seniors to enjoy a higher quality of life.”
    Alyson Hillier, co-Chair, Seniors Advisory Council of Nova Scotia


    Quick Facts:

    • the government is investing more than $26 million in fiscal 2025-2026 in the rollout of the free shingles vaccine
    • people aged 65 and older are at highest risk for severe disease, and that age group has the highest hospitalization rates
    • the vaccine, called Shingrix, prevents shingles complications, which can ease pressure on emergency departments, primary care and the overall health system
    • two doses are needed for full protection

    Additional Resources:

    Information on shingles vaccine eligibility is available at: https://www.nshealth.ca/public-health/immunizations


    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Padilla Places Holds on EPA Nominees Until Republicans Cease Efforts to Abuse the CRA to Revoke California’s Clean Air Act Waivers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)

    Padilla Places Holds on EPA Nominees Until Republicans Cease Efforts to Abuse the CRA to Revoke California’s Clean Air Act Waivers

    Senator Padilla: “If this attempt is successful, the consequences will be far-reaching, not only for our clean energy economy, the air our children breathe, and for our climate, but for the future of the CRA and for the Senate as an institution.”

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration and a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, placed a hold on the four pending Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) nominees until Republicans stop their reckless attempts to overrule the Senate Parliamentarian’s decision regarding California’s clean air waivers that allow the state to implement more protective air quality standards.

    The Trump-led EPA recently submitted three California waivers as “rules” to Congress — despite knowing full well that these waivers were not rules — in a cynical attempt to overturn the waivers with a 50-vote threshold under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The Senate Parliamentarian determined that any resolutions aimed at overturning California waivers would not be entitled to the CRA’s expedited procedures and would therefore require 60 votes to secure Senate passage. Reporting indicates that Senate Republicans may soon move forward to bypass the filibuster to rescind these waivers, which would require overruling the Parliamentarian.

    Revoking California’s waivers would not only cause disastrous public health, environmental, and economic impacts, but would also mean Republicans took the “nuclear option,” undermining longstanding Senate procedures that could be applied to legislation far beyond the CRA and giving agencies significantly more control over the Senate floor.

    “This objection is a direct result of the agency’s cynical attempt to weaponize the Congressional Review Act (CRA) by attempting to submit as ‘rules’ three waivers issued to the State of California under the Clean Air Act (CAA),” wrote Senator Padilla. “If this attempt is successful, the consequences will be far-reaching, not only for our clean energy economy, the air our children breathe, and for our climate, but for the future of the CRA and for the Senate as an institution.”

    Padilla detailed the longstanding precedent making clear that EPA’s waivers are not rules subject to the Congressional Review Act. None of the more than 100 individual waivers or waiver-related decisions to California — under both Democratic and Republican Administrations — have ever been submitted as a rule since Congress granted the EPA this waiver authority in 1967 in bipartisan fashion. He also underscored the enormous stakes of overruling the Senate Parliamentarian, including for providing essential checks against executive branch agencies trying to exploit the CRA to enact their own agenda on matters that are not rules.

    “Here, for the first time in the history of the CRA, an agency submitted matters that they knew were not rules. Some of my Republican colleagues are now arguing that the Parliamentarian should have no role to limit this partisan gamesmanship, and the Senate should throw out the rulebook and overturn the Parliamentarian,” continued Senator Padilla. “If the Trump EPA and Senate Republicans are successful at this ploy, the Senate will have no choice but to accept this as status quo in the future. This would grant agencies unchecked control over the Senate floor — an unprecedented encroachment by the executive branch into the Senate’s internal operations.”

    Padilla laid out a list of potential actions that the Trump Administration could take to abuse the CRA, including revoking the broadcast licenses or other approvals for media outlets when they disagree with their news coverage; rescinding Food and Drug Administration approvals of vaccines, birth control, or mifepristone; or targeting the organizations of President Trump’s political opponents for retribution.

    “None of these actions are rules, which is why they’ve never been submitted to Congress as rules. But if my Republican colleagues open this door and overturn the Parliamentarian’s wise safeguards on this type of abuse, there would be no practical limit, and the Senate could be forced to vote repeatedly on such matters that are clearly not ‘rules’ notwithstanding the plain language of the CRA,” added Senator Padilla.

    By taking the nuclear option to overrule the Senate Parliamentarian, Padilla noted that a future Democratic Administration could target approvals for fossil fuel project leases, loan agreements, or permitting as well as for liquified natural gas (LNG) export terminals. They could also use the CRA to try to reverse the Trump Administration’s actions on matters including immigration, foreign policy, and staffing cuts.

    “Since this cynical attempt to weaponize the CRA was triggered by the administration’s political leadership at the EPA, at the urging of their Big Oil allies, I must object to proceeding to any nominations for the EPA pending on the Senate’s executive calendar,” concluded Senator Padilla. “I will continue to object until the agency withdraws its false submissions to Congress or the Majority Leader commits not to overturn the Parliamentarian’s determination on this matter.”

    A Senate hold blocks unanimous consent to speed up consideration of a nomination and forces the body to spend time debating and voting on the nominee. The EPA nominees currently pending on the Senate floor include Deputy Administrator nominee David Fotouhi, Chief Financial Officer nominee Catherine Hanson, and Assistant Administrator nominees Jessica Kramer and Aaron Szabo.

    Senator Padilla has been outspoken in pushing back against Republican attacks on California’s Clean Air Act waivers. Earlier this month, Senators Padilla, Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, took to the Senate floor to sound the alarm on Senate Republicans’ consideration of moving forward with their plan to revoke California’s Clean Air Act waivers. Padilla, Whitehouse, and U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) also led Democratic Ranking Members in strongly warning Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Majority Whip John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) of the dangerous and irreparable consequences if Senate Republicans overrule the Senate Parliamentarian’s decision on California’s waivers.

    Last month, Senators Padilla, Whitehouse, and Schiff welcomed the Senate Parliamentarian’s decision that the waivers are not subject to the CRA. Padilla also joined Whitehouse and Schiff in blasting Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin’s weaponization of the EPA after the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) similar finding. Padilla and Schiff previously slammed the Trump Administration’s intent to roll back dozens of the EPA’s regulations that protect California’s air and water.

    Full text of Padilla’s hold statement is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: ZeroFox Partners With GASA and GSE to Fight Fraud With Enhanced Threat Detection Capabilities

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    WASHINGTON, May 20, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — ZeroFox, the leader in external cybersecurity, has entered into a collaborative partnership with the Global Anti-Scam Alliance (GASA) and the Global Signal Exchange (GSE) to bolster joint measures to prevent online scams and fraud.

    GASA is a nonprofit organization dedicated to preventing scams by bringing together law enforcement, cybersecurity companies and governments to fight fraud. GSE is a global clearinghouse for real-time sharing of scam and fraud signals. This alliance gives GASA and GSE access to ZeroFox’s threat intelligence on scams and fraudulent and malicious sites, and other threat data, empowering the larger security community with more visibility into online impersonation and related threats in order to defend against them more effectively.

    Every day, ZeroFox leverages its global intelligence collection and analysis to process tens of thousands of malicious URLs, IPs, and phishing domains. Access to this critical data is granted to select partners – now including GASA and GSE – through integrations to ZeroFox’s Global Disruption Network (GDN), which publishes information on newly-found threats like malicious content for the threat intelligence community.

    This new partnership will arm GASA and GSE with a comprehensive view of the cyber threat landscape, and will display any malicious URL, IP or domain received from ZeroFox’s GDN on their platform, alerting other GSE partners of potential digital risks.

    “ZeroFox’s Global Disruption Network is a powerful tool providing fresh, high-fidelity phishing, fraud and malware insights for rapid knowledge sharing. We enable GDN partners to protect their users quickly and reduce the likelihood of success for malicious actors,” said Russ Bentley, Executive VP of Product Management, ZeroFox. “We’re proud to partner with GASA and GSE, two organizations dedicated to protecting consumers worldwide from online scams and fraud. Collaborating with them aligns with our mission of making the internet safer for everyone.”

    Jorij Abraham, Managing Director of GASA, shared: “ZeroFox has been in the business of fighting cybercrime since 2013. In this time, they developed deep expertise in domain monitoring, managed threat intelligence services, and domain takedown services. Their know-how and cybercrime knowledge will be of tremendous value to the Global Signal Exchange.”

    “We’re really pleased to be partnering with ZeroFox. Their data that GSE is consuming, including URLs that might contain malware, phishing domains, IP addresses identified as hosting fraudulent sites, or even social media sites potentially impersonating a brand or person, is already making a significant contribution to the volumes of open signals we are providing via the GSE,” states Mark Robertshaw, COO of Oxford Information Labs, creator of the GSE.

    To learn more about ZeroFox’s Global Disruption Network or join our list of partners, visit https://www.zerofox.com/products/global-disruption-network/.

    About ZeroFox
    ZeroFox, an enterprise software-as-a-service leader in external cybersecurity, has redefined security outside the corporate perimeter on the internet, where businesses operate, and threat actors thrive. The ZeroFox platform combines advanced AI analytics, digital risk and privacy protection, full-spectrum threat intelligence, and a robust portfolio of breach, incident and takedown response capabilities to expose and disrupt phishing and fraud campaigns, botnet exposures, credential theft, impersonations, data breaches, and physical threats that target your brands, domains, people, and assets. Join thousands of customers, including some of the largest public sector organizations as well as finance, media, technology and retail companies to stay ahead of adversaries and address the entire lifecycle of external cyber risks. ZeroFox and the ZeroFox logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of ZeroFox, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the U.S. and other countries. Visit www.zerofox.com for more information.

    About GASA
    GASA brings together governments, law enforcement, consumer protection organizations, financial authorities and providers, brand protection agencies, social media, Internet service providers and cybersecurity companies to share knowledge and define joint actions to protect consumers from getting scammed.

    About GSE
    The GSE platform provides tools for trusted parties to share threat intelligence. Currently processing more than 130 million threat signals, plus hundreds of millions of data points for enrichment, the GSE enables multi-directional signal sharing.

    Media Inquiries
    Sara Jacono
    LaunchTech Communications for ZeroFox
    press@zerofox.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Thomas Financial Group Closes Over $34 Million in Bridge Loans for USDA Takeout in Under 40 Days

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ATLANTA, May 20, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — In a powerful demonstration of speed and strategic execution, Thomas Financial Group (TFG), a wholly owned subsidiary of Community Bankshares Inc., in partnership with Siguler Guff, Phoenix Lender Services (PHX), and Community Bank & Trust, successfully originated, underwrote, and closed three hospitality bridge loans totaling over $34 million in less than 40 days. All loans are structured for USDA Business & Industry (B&I) program takeout, reinforcing the firm’s capacity to deliver complex, time-sensitive financing solutions.

    • $11.335MM Bridge Loan (USDA B&I Takeout Pending)
    • $12.19MM Bridge Loan (USDA B&I Takeout Pending)
    • $10.545MM Bridge Loan (USDA B&I Takeout Pending)

    While USDA lending is traditionally known for its thorough but lengthy approval process, TFG is redefining what’s possible. Through creative structuring and seamless collaboration across its lending ecosystem, TFG and its partners provide rapid bridge loan execution to fill the timing gap – giving borrowers immediate access to capital while finalizing their long-term USDA financing. The recently closed projects will create and retain nearly 50 jobs across key rural markets.

    “These transactions prove that USDA lending doesn’t have to be slow or complicated,” said Zach Chandler, SVP, Government Guaranteed Lending of Thomas Financial Group. “When you work with TFG, PHX, and Community Bank & Trust, you’re getting a team that understands how to move at the speed of business – without compromising the long-term benefits of USDA-backed financing.”

    TFG’s USDA bridge-to-permanent platform is available in all 50 states and every U.S. territory, providing borrowers in rural communities with access to flexible financing structures tailored to their timing and growth needs. In a market climate defined by rate uncertainty and capital constraints, borrowers value the security of a 30-year fully amortizing loan with no balloons or call provisions – exactly what USDA lending can provide.

    “Peace of mind in today’s economy is priceless,” added Chandler. “Our ability to deliver both speed and long-term stability makes us a trusted partner for developers, business owners, and project sponsors across the country.”

    If you’re seeking fast, creative financing for your rural project – with the peace of mind that comes from a long-term USDA solution – now is the time to act.

    Contact TFG today to explore our USDA bridge-to-permanent platform and discover what’s possible when you partner with a team built for execution.

    TFG Contact
    Email: Zach@thomasfinancialgroup.com
    Phone: (770) 655-1569

    About Thomas Financial Group

    Thomas Financial Group, a wholly owned subsidiary of Community Bankshares Inc., is a nationally recognized leader in USDA and SBA lending. In partnership with Phoenix Lender Services and Community Bank & Trust, TFG specializes in complex capital solutions that support rural economic development, small business growth, and infrastructure expansion.

    About Community Bankshares Inc.

    Community Bankshares Inc. is a privately held financial holding company headquartered in LaGrange, Georgia, with subsidiaries including Community Bank & Trust, Thomas Financial Group, and Phoenix Lender Services. Through its network of specialized financial institutions, Community Bankshares Inc. delivers innovative, relationship-driven banking and lending services across the United States, with a strong emphasis on rural development, government-guaranteed lending, and community reinvestment.

    About Community Bank & Trust

    Community Bank & Trust is a full-service commercial bank and a subsidiary of Community Bankshares Inc. Based in LaGrange, Georgia, CB&T is an SBA Preferred Lender with a growing national footprint in USDA and small business lending. Known for its personalized service and deep lending expertise, CB&T partners with businesses and communities to deliver flexible, dependable financing solutions that support long-term growth across rural and underserved markets.

    About Phoenix Lender Services

    Phoenix Lender Services is the operational engine behind the USDA and SBA lending platform and wholly owned subsidiary of Community Bankshares Inc. Specializing in origination, underwriting, processing, closing, and servicing, Phoenix provides seamless back-end support and strategic oversight for government-guaranteed loans. With a team of seasoned professionals and a nationwide reach, Phoenix empowers lenders and borrowers with the tools and expertise needed to deliver consistent, compliant, and efficient results.

    Media Contact
    Abigail Davison
    Uproar by Moburst for Community Bankshares, Inc.
    abigail.davison@moburst.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Cloudera Delivers AI-Powered Unified Data Visualization in On-Premises Data Centers

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    SANTA CLARA, Calif., May 20, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Cloudera, the only true hybrid platform for data, analytics, and AI, today announced the latest release of Cloudera Data Visualization, extending its AI capabilities to customers operating in on-premises environments.

    This new offering is a high-performance AI tool that democratizes insights across the full data lifecycle. With Cloudera Data Visualization, data engineers, business analysts, and data scientists can seamlessly communicate, collaborate, and share insights, without compromising data security or governance – all through the common language of visualization.

    Enterprises often struggle to appropriately visualize data due to silos across multiple platforms, complex integrations, and data governance limitations. Without a unified view, data visualization can be incomplete or misleading, often resulting in ineffective decision-making.

    Cloudera Data Visualization, now available on-premises, provides secure and integrated AI capabilities native to the Cloudera platform, empowering organizations to self-service visualization across multi-cloud and hybrid environments and the entire data lifecycle. This enables users to now unlock the value of their on-prem data through intuitive, out-of-the-box picturing and natural language querying. With Cloudera Data Visualization, enterprises can move faster, more efficiently, and with increased collaboration.

    “As enterprises continue to prioritize both multi-cloud and hybrid environments, they need to see their data as a part of a bigger picture,” says Leo Brunnick, Chief Product Officer at Cloudera. “Bringing together AI-driven insights, secure infrastructure, and seamless collaboration in one unified platform, users can see the missing puzzle pieces of their data, wherever they may be. It’s not just about being able to see the data; it’s about seeing how it all fits together to deliver business-critical insights.”

    Key features of Cloudera Data Visualization include: 

    • Out-of-the-Box Imaging: Use an intuitive drag-and-drop builder or choose from a wide range of custom extension options to create graphs or charts for every use case—from customer loyalty shifts to decades’ worth of trading trends—all in one platform.
    • Built-in AI Tools: Leverage AI in your BI workflows with AI Visual, a built-in AI tool in Cloudera Data Visualization. Unlock visual and structured reports easily using natural language querying, making AI-driven insights more accessible than ever.
    • Predictive Application Builder: Create unique applications with this innovative capability that is pre-built with machine learning models served in Cloudera AI, as well as models in Amazon Bedrock, OpenAI, and Microsoft Azure OpenAI.
    • Enterprise Security: Leverage enterprise data from anywhere without moving, copying, or creating security gaps with integrated security with Cloudera Shared Data Experience (SDX).
    • Robust Governance: Take complete control of data used for picturing with advanced governance features.

    “By integrating directly with Cloudera’s unified platform, users benefit from a consistent experience, enhanced collaboration, and full lifecycle data exploration—all while retaining full control over their own infrastructure,” said industry analyst, Sanjeev Mohan. “Now, Cloudera users can picture and share insights securely within their on-prem environment, allowing their teams to be more agile and informed in their decision-making.”

    Visit the Cloudera website to learn more about Cloudera Data Visualization, now available on-premises.

    About Cloudera
    Cloudera is the only true hybrid platform for data, analytics, and AI. With 100x more data under management than other cloud-only vendors, Cloudera empowers global enterprises to transform data of all types, on any public or private cloud, into valuable, trusted insights. Our open data lakehouse delivers scalable and secure data management with portable cloud-native analytics, enabling customers to bring GenAI models to their data while maintaining privacy and ensuring responsible, reliable AI deployments. The world’s largest brands in financial services, insurance, media, manufacturing, and government rely on Cloudera to use their data to solve what once seemed impossible—today and in the future.

    To learn more, visit Cloudera.com and follow us on LinkedIn and X. Cloudera and associated marks are trademarks or registered trademarks of Cloudera, Inc. All other company and product names may be trademarks of their respective owners.

    Contact
    Jess Hohn-Cabana
    cloudera@v2comms.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Cautious investor sentiment pulls global deal activity down 5% YoY in first four months of 2025, finds GlobalData

    Source: GlobalData

    Cautious investor sentiment pulls global deal activity down 5% YoY in first four months of 2025, finds GlobalData

    Posted in Business Fundamentals

    Cautious investor sentiment has weighed heavily on the global deal landscape, with mergers and acquisitions, private equity, and venture financing activities collectively declining by approximately 5% year-on-year (YoY) during the first four months of 2025. Geopolitical uncertainty and macroeconomic headwinds have prompted dealmakers to adopt a more selective, risk-averse approach, leading to a slowdown across major markets, reveals GlobalData, a leading data and analytics company.

    The contraction in deal volume during the first four months of 2025 can be primarily attributed to 4.3% reduction in M&A activity, which accounts for more than half of the combined total of all deal types.

    An analysis of GlobalData’s Deals Database revealed that private equity and venture financing deals also faced contractions, indicating a cautious approach from investors amid uncertain market conditions.

    The number of private equity deals announced during the first four months of 2025 showcased a decline of 4.5% compared to January-April 2024 while venture financing deals volume were down by 6.8% YoY.

    Aurojyoti Bose, Lead Analyst at GlobalData, comments: “The global decline can be attributed to several factors, including geopolitical tensions and macroeconomic challenges that have made dealmakers risk-averse. As companies reassess their growth strategies, many seem to have opted for organic growth over acquisitions, leading to a slowdown in M&A activity. Additionally, investors are becoming selective and cautious while making investment decisions.”

    North America continues to dominate the global deal activity. However, it has not been immune to the slowdown, recording a YoY decline of around 4%. The US, historically a powerhouse in deal-making, reported a decrease in deal volume, reflecting a broader trend of caution among the dealmakers. Similarly, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa, and South and Central America also experienced declines of around 7%, 3%, 11% and 13%, respectively.

    Bose adds: “Despite the overall downturn, certain markets have shown resilience suggesting that these may serve as a beacon of opportunity amid the global decline.”

    India, for instance, recorded a growth of around 13% in deal volume. Japan also demonstrated a positive trend with a growth rate of approximately 25%. Meanwhile, the US, the UK and China witnessed their respective deal volume fall by around 4%, 7% and 15%, respectively, during January-April 2025.

    Bose concludes: “The global deal landscape is undergoing a significant transformation as we move further into 2025. However, it is essential to recognize that certain markets are still thriving, reflecting a shift in focus towards nations that offer growth potential despite broader economic challenges.”

    Note: Historic data may change in case some deals get added to previous months because of a delay in disclosure of information in the public domain.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Supply chain remains resilient in M&A landscape despite 13% YoY fall in deal value in Q1 2025, reveals GlobalData

    Source: GlobalData

    Supply chain remains resilient in M&A landscape despite 13% YoY fall in deal value in Q1 2025, reveals GlobalData

    Posted in Strategic Intelligence

    Amid the impact of heightened geopolitical uncertainties and low growth across all the major economies, the first quarter of 2025 saw an overall decline in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) deal value of 13% compared to the same quarter in 2024. Supply chain resilience was the single most important theme, with $84 billion in supply chain-related transactions across 25 deals, covering sectors like healthcare and materials, reveals GlobalData, a leading data and analytics company.

    GlobalData’s latest Strategic Intelligence report, “Global M&A Deals in Q1 2025 – Top Themes by Sector,” reveals that mega-deals, deals with a transaction value greater than or equal to $1 billion, decreased by 11% to $453 billion, compared to $507 billion in Q1 2024.

    Priya Toppo, Strategic Intelligence Analyst at GlobalData, comments: “Amid rising geopolitical tensions, demographic shifts, stricter ESG regulations, persistent labor shortages, and rapid digital transformation, companies are sharpening their focus on supply chain-related M&A activity. To mitigate risks and boost operational efficiency, they are increasingly investing in resilient, localized, and technology-enabled supply chains. This was especially true in the healthcare, materials, industrials, and consumer sectors.

    The biggest supply chain deal was Sycamore Partners’ acquisition of Walgreens Boots Alliance for $23.7 billion. This deal was also the biggest in the consumer sector in Q1 2025. It was followed by Borouge Group International’s acquisition of Nova Chemicals for $13.4 billion and QXO’s acquisition of Beacon Roofing Supply for $10 billion.

    Toppo continues: “An ongoing trend is the dominance of North America in M&A deal activity, accounting for 2,920 deals worth $380 million during Q1 2025. However, North America, Europe, China, APAC Ex-China, and the Middle East and Africa all saw a YoY decline in deal value.”

    Toppo concludes: “The M&A outlook for the rest of 2025 is cautiously optimistic. Prospects of rate cuts in certain markets and an overall improving global growth outlook could drive increased activity. However, mega-deals may continue to face challenges, particularly in the US, where antitrust scrutiny remains a key focus for regulators.”

    MIL OSI Economics