NewzIntel.com

    • Checkout Page
    • Contact Us
    • Default Redirect Page
    • Frontpage
    • Home-2
    • Home-3
    • Lost Password
    • Member Login
    • Member LogOut
    • Member TOS Page
    • My Account
    • NewzIntel Alert Control-Panel
    • NewzIntel Latest Reports
    • Post Views Counter
    • Privacy Policy
    • Public Individual Page
    • Register
    • Subscription Plan
    • Thank You Page

Category: Russian Federation

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Murray on Senate Republicans’ Pro-Billionaire Budget Resolution, Trump and Musk’s Devastating Funding Freeze and Mass Firings

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    Murray: “Republicans are going down this partisan path because they know Democrats are not going to join them in throwing Medicaid, nutrition assistance, and veterans’ benefits into the wood chipper so they can throw more tax cuts at billionaires and the biggest corporations.”

    Murray: “We should not be taking kids out of child care to give billionaires a tax break. We should not be taking food off the family table to put more fuel in private jets.”

    ICYMI: Senator Murray speaks at Budget Committee markup of resolution, offers common sense amendments rejected by Republicans

    ***VIDEO HERE***

    Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and a senior member and former chair of the Senate Budget Committee, took to the Senate floor to forcefully speak out against Senate Republicans’ budget resolution that will help billionaires at working families’ expense—as well as the Trump administration’s lawless mass firings and ongoing funding freeze that is hurting people and jeopardizing critical services they need in every part of the country. She also underscored how a clean full-year CR is not an acceptable solution to government funding.

    Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered, are below:

    “Thank you M. President. We need to be focused on solving problems—and I think most of us here get that.

    “No matter who the President is, our constituents expect us to work for them. They expect us to fight for them. And they expect us to do the hard work of passing laws to make their lives better.

    [TRUMP LEAVING FARMILIES IN THE DUST]

    “People don’t send us here to make their lives worse. But that’s exactly what Trump and Musk are doing. They are looking at our most pressing problems—and making them so much worse. And this budget proposal will only add fuel to the fire.

    “Right now—even as egg prices hit an all time high—Trump and Musk have done nothing to lower prices.

    “They’ve done nothing to address the housing crisis, or help families get quality, affordable child care—or address other issues I hear about from folks all the time.

    “Instead, they are slashing programs that help our families make ends meet, they are gutting an agency that saves working people money and protects them from scams, and starting trade wars that will impose what is effectively a Trump sales tax entirely on the backs of American workers.

    “As China works to strengthen its global leadership, Trump and Musk have ceded the ground almost entirely—illegally cutting off investments we make to continue our country’s leadership and help allies.

    “At the most precarious moment for the Middle East in decades—Trump is casually proposing to ethnically cleanse Gaza so that Trump and his family can build waterfront property there.

    “When it comes to helping our allies in Ukraine secure a just peace—Trump is giving away countless concessions to Putin out of the gate, calling our ally a dictator and meeting with Russia without inviting Ukraine.

    “When it comes to the Bird Flu—Trump and Musk are firing the very workers who are responsible for tracking the disease and keeping it from spreading further. And now, suddenly, they are desperately trying to hire them back.

    “And as Texas deals with a serious measles outbreak, Trump’s Health Secretary can’t even confirm the obvious, and tell parents the vaccine doesn’t cause autism—which, to be clear, it does not!


    “And, almost unbelievably, just weeks after the deadliest commercial plane crash in the U.S. in over two decades—Trump and Musk are firing FAA workers who make sure flying is safe. Who does that help?

    “And now Trump is letting Musk run wild by inappropriately accessing and rifling through sensitive SSA and Treasury files, with IRS being next—your data! How does that make sense?

    “But while President Trump is busy making problems worse, and trampling our laws, and quoting dictators—what are we doing here in the Senate?

    “Are we holding President Trump accountable? Are we holding his co-President, Elon Musk—the richest man in the world, who has billions of dollars in conflicts of interest—accountable? 

    “Are we putting a stop to the catastrophic cuts and reckless firings that are hurting people and our communities, and setting our country back decades?

    “Seems to me that would be a good use of our time—after all, I’ve even heard some Republicans admit that cutting things like medical research, and firing people like VA workers are bad ideas. So you would think—maybe—we could work together from that common ground.

    “But instead—Republicans are throwing all their effort behind a partisan plan to slash and burn programs that help our families, and raise costs for everyday Americans, and shovel billions of dollars to help people who already have billions of dollars.

    “Meanwhile, I would like to remind my colleagues we are less than a month away from a deadline to pass bills to fund our government. And as we approach that deadline, the entire world is watching as President Trump and Elon Musk shut the government down bit-by-bit—whatever parts Elon doesn’t like.

    [TRUMP AND MUSK’S RECKLESS, HEARTLESS MASS FIRINGS]

    “Trump and Musk are already showing thousands of essential workers the door—despite the fact that they have no clue what these workers do, or why their jobs matter. They’re just turning off the lights and hoping for the best! 

    “I am hearing so much alarm about this back home—from fired workers and from the people who depend on them.

    “Trump and his co-president are shuttering entire agencies, they are locking workers out of their devices and out of their buildings, and demanding the work of the American people come to a screeching halt—again, for no good reason.

    “And let me really drive home just how damaging and extreme these firings are—because we are not talking about some routine changing of the guard or some thoughtful or strategic plan to make government more efficient.

    “Trump and Musk are just taking a wrecking ball through the U.S. government. They don’t care what they smash up. They don’t care who they hurt. And they don’t seem to have any idea just how painful this is for American families.

    “We are talking about tens of thousands of people—and counting—being pushed out the door without any plan, and without any justification beyond Trump and Elon want to slash and cut with reckless abandon.

    “This has nothing to do with making government more efficient—it is about breaking it beyond repair.

    “Fundamentally, this is not about cutting waste or curbing fraud. Instead, this is about putting the federal workforce into ‘trauma’—that’s how OMB Director Russ Vought callously put it. 

    “So, they are mass firing hardworking women and men—many of them veterans—whose only mistake was serving our country, serving our communities, and believing they wouldn’t get stabbed in the back by a wannabe dictator and the richest man in the world.

    “And, setting aside the fact that many were illegally fired and without real cause, it’s not just the workers who are suffering because of this.

    “These cuts undermine essential services for the American people—right down to some of the most basic functions of government.

    “Trump and Musk are firing people who help Americans find quality, affordable health insurance, people who help small businesses get a loan, people who help communities and families get back on their feet after a disaster, and people who help Americans get their tax refunds.

    “They are firing people who help our economy stay competitive—from firings that undermine energy projects and thousands of good, new jobs, to firings that undermine innovation and technology, to firings that are hurting our farmers and undermining agricultural research.

    “They are laying off National Park Rangers—which will mean longer wait times, dirtier bathrooms, delayed emergency responses, and closed parks.

    “They fired Forest Service workers who are crucial to preventing wildfires.

    “Again, I have to emphasize, they are firing FAA workers for crying out loud—including personnel who work on radar, landing, and other critical infrastructure that help our aircraft navigate safely.

    “They are firing these people, and pretending it is no big deal, all just weeks after the deadliest crash our nation has seen in decades.

    “Trump and Elon might not fly commercial—but the rest of us do.

    “In the Pacific Northwest, the Bonneville Power Administration is losing hundreds of highly skilled workers. This includes everyone from electricians and engineers, to dispatchers, to lineworkers, to cybersecurity experts, and so many others.

    “These are literally the people who help keep the lights on—and now they’re being fired on a whim because Trump and Elon Musk don’t have a clue about what they do and why it’s important, and you know what? They don’t care to learn.

    “They don’t even seem to understand that these are positions funded by ratepayers—by all of us who live in the Northwest—they are not from federal funding.

    “Trump and Musk have even fired over a thousand VA workers, including people who are doing lifesaving research for our veterans—research to prevent veteran suicide, build life changing prosthetics, address opioid addiction, and more.

    “These layoffs could mean longer wait times for veterans to see their health care providers. It could mean ongoing clinical trials coming to a sudden stop. It could mean delays getting your disability claims approved.

    “Because Trump and Musk went ahead and fired clinicians and claims raters—even while the current back log of disability claims is over 250,000!

    “That is not just a betrayal of these public workers—it is a betrayal of our women and men who have served us in uniform.

    “And it is also worth noting—many of the workers being fired are veterans themselves. Trump is firing veterans.

    “And let’s not forget the thousands of NIH researchers who are having their research thrown into jeopardy, and the patients who are watching President Trump carelessly toss their best hope for a cure into the shredder.

    “Or CMS experts, who were working on improving maternal health outcomes so fewer pregnant women die in this country.

    “And medical research layoffs aren’t the only ones putting American lives at risk because Trump and Musk are firing public health workers who respond to disease outbreaks, cybersecurity experts who protect our critical infrastructure, sensitive systems, and our data, scientists who make sure our water and air are clean, and that we are ready for extreme weather, workers that help communities prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters—not to mention, members of law enforcement who help stop violent criminals—and of course, our nuclear engineers!

    “Seriously—people who manage our nuclear weapons stockpile were being fired by the hundreds, with no real strategy. 

    “And we know there isn’t a strategy—because then Trump and Musk frantically turned around and rehired many of them.

    “And we also know they haven’t learned their lesson—because they just did the exact same thing to workers responding to bird flu.

    “Reckless layoffs—followed by ‘Wait, no! Come back!’ That is not a plan.

    “To callously fire people who help us stay ahead of deadly diseases, or who maintain a safe, secure, and reliable nuclear weapons stockpile—that is the height of dangerous incompetence.

    “And nuclear clean-up work has been hit as well. I’ve been fighting to get more resources for the Hanford clean-up in Washington state for years—it is already understaffed, and now Trump is actively making things worse.

    “I have heard directly from workers at Hanford who have been laid off—even after some were recognized just this past year for their outstanding work. And by the way: that underscores another reality of these firings—they have absolutely nothing to do with merit.

    “In fact, the way they are targeting new employees includes people who were recently promoted—so now these workers are getting fired from their newly earned jobs. Literally pushing out some of our best performers and our most committed workers.

    “Oh, and one more thing—they are even illegally firing the government watchdogs who provide accountability and prevent fraud.

    “If Trump and Musk were really committed to tackling waste, fraud, and abuse, would they fire the very people serving in nonpartisan roles whose very job is to uncover and reduce waste, fraud, and abuse?

    “If they were really interested in transparency, would they have torn down websites where the public can find information about agencies’ spending and policy?

    “The list of pointless, actively dangerous firings goes on, and on, and on. It grows by the day—as does the fallout and alarm being caused by it. My phones have been ringing off the hook—and I know I am not the only one.

    “Again, these sweeping layoffs do not address fraud or waste. These firings are totally arbitrary—pushing out high performers and the promising next generation of our federal workforce who won’t be easily replaced. Not to mention—the hiring freeze prevents them from even trying!

    “And here’s the thing that is so important to remember: these are people who have families, who work hard, who love their country. They are not being sent packing because they’ve done anything wrong or because their work is not important.

    “They are being pushed out simply because Trump and Musk are trying to break the government—trying to make it not work for the people who need it. It is wrong, and if this doesn’t stop now, it will be catastrophic.

    “The scale and scope of Trump and Elon’s purge will set our country back decades. It is not like you can fire everyone, say ‘oh wait, my bad,’ and rehire everyone with the snap of a finger.

    “If you are a VA medical researcher working for less than you could make in the private sector, and you’re fired by a billionaire who decides your research on cancer and burn pit exposure isn’t worth the investment, would you want to come back? Especially with the chaos and sheer incompetence of this administration?

    “The federal government is not Twitter. You can’t just fire everyone and break things and hope for the best—people’s lives are at stake.

    “Elon Musk has no clue what nuclear safety engineers do at Hanford. He doesn’t care that the Social Security Administration is already understaffed, and that pushing more of those federal workers out the door will make life harder for seniors.

    “This effort to push out and arbitrarily fire federal workers is going to break something, worse than it already has—and it’s going to break it irreparably.

    “When that happens, the blame will fall squarely on Trump, Musk, and Republicans.

    [TRUMP AND MUSK’S ILLEGAL FUNDING FREEZE]

    “And it is not just people being fired that is a serious problem—there are also funds still being frozen without rhyme, or reason, or any legal authority for Trump to do that.

    “So I’m not only worried about the fast-approaching funding deadline in March—I’m worried about the de facto government shutdown happening right now.

    “As we speak, Trump and Musk are still illegally blocking hundreds of billions of dollars in funding we all secured for the people we represent back home, putting good-paying jobs on the chopping block, creating incredible uncertainty for businesses, stalling funds for infrastructure and energy projects, and so much else.

    “As another week of Trump’s illegal funding blockade has come and gone, still, reports are coming in from across my state, and across the country—of the chaos and cuts this is causing.

    “And yet, little to nothing has been done by this administration to restore investments people in red and blue states are counting on. And Republicans here in Congress continue to sit by idly while our communities are robbed of hundreds of billions of dollars in bipartisan spending.

    “Meanwhile, it’s our workers, it’s our families, it’s our businesses that are feeling this consequence.

    “With each day that passes, the uncertain fate of these investments takes a toll of its own: ever-growing anxiety for workers whose jobs are in jeopardy, for farmers who are eyeing the calendar and waiting on resources that they are owed, and for business owners worried a ripped-up contract might put them under.

    “I’ve heard USDA grants have been cut off to rural businesses and farmers in my home state of Washington—and it is putting those hard-working Americans in dire straits.

    “A small laundromat ordered new machines—but Trump is now stiffing them on funds they need to make the payment.

    “A wheat farmer installed solar panels under a federal program—but Trump is going to leave them holding the bag.

    “A greenhouse has completed its end of the bargain to install upgrades—but Trump has stopped the federal government from doing the part it promises.

    “And there are so many other federal investments on hold as well: Forest Service funding to reduce wildfire risks and restore ecosystems. EPA funding for clean water infrastructure and clean-up work at superfund sites. HUD and Department of Energy investments to bring down folks’ energy costs and create new, good-paying jobs. Funding for our roads, bridges, transit, flood mapping, fisheries—and so many other things.

    “Medical research has also been completely upended at research institutions across the country—throwing lifesaving research, clinical trials, and patients into uncertainty.

    “Meanwhile they have not only illegally blocked our foreign assistance and shuttered USAID programs that bolster our global leadership and make the world safer for Americans—they are now illegally dismantling the Department of Education.

    “They have already bulldozed the independent research arm of the Department of Education—taking a wrecking ball to ongoing evidence-based research and basic collection data we need for accountability to improve student outcomes at our K-12 schools and colleges.

    “And, among the many contracts Trump cancelled with his executive orders was funding for a program that helps students with disabilities transition from high school to work and work to improve adoption of evidence-based literacy practices in Washington state. These billionaires have no idea what programs they are cutting.

    “Given the chaos of all these efforts—from Trump’s sweeping, radical, and illegal Executive Orders, to Elon Musk jumping from agency to agency and doing seemingly whatever he pleases and whatever is good for his businesses—it’s getting hard to even keep track of all the funding that is being illegally blocked.

    “Even stuff they say is not blocked, or say has been unblocked—is still frequently frozen.

    “But one thing that is clear? This is hurting our families. It is hurting our communities. And it needs to stop.

    “Remember, Musk is the richest man on earth—with deep business ties to China and a direct line to Putin.

    “Republicans have chosen to stand by and twiddle their thumbs, as he unilaterally, clandestinely, and illegally cuts our constituents off from the federal investments they are owed and badly need.

    “We have zero insight or oversight of what conflicts of interest Musk has as he chokes off government funding left and right, and as he hands over our sensitive financial data and systems to patently unqualified individuals with no accountability.

    “This multi-billionaire is operating completely in the dark, hoping his lies are loud enough to drown out any calls for truth or for transparency.


    “You can agree or disagree about federal spending—goodness knows we have debates on it here—but it is a complete lie to try and say this is all fraud, or waste, or a conspiracy.

    “As a long-time Appropriator—I can tell you—we debate these bills publicly, we post the details out in the open. We pass them in a bipartisan way.

    “Republicans overwhelmingly supported the individual bills we put together in Committee last year—many unanimously.


    “Spending is not a ‘conspiracy’ just because Elon Musk doesn’t know how to read USA-Spending.gov.

    “A program is not waste just because it doesn’t help the richest man in the world. It is not fraud just because he doesn’t like it.

    “A law is not illegal just because he disagrees with it. This guy just does not know what he is talking about—and it is frankly embarrassing, he doesn’t know how to count!

    [MUSK, DOGE LIES AND CORRUPTION]

    “The ‘DOGE’ website says it is slashing $55 billion—but it only lists $16.6 billion, and half of that is a typo.

    “They took $8 million with an M—as in ‘Musk can’t count’—and counted it as $8 billion with a B—as in ‘BS.’ That is not saving money—it is poor reading comprehension.

    “Speaking of reading comprehension—I don’t think Elon fully grasps what the concepts of ‘transparency’ and ‘accountability’ mean.

    “When he tweeted out the names of government employees months ago—and again this month even—that was ‘accountability,’ but when reporters name people gaining illegal access to Treasury’s payment system, that is a crime?

    “Elon Musk gets to look at all of our most sensitive data but no one gets to look at what he is actually doing? That cannot be the standard.

    “It’s not ‘maximally transparent’ for Elon Musk to decide for himself what he shares publicly about his actions.

    “It is maximally concerning—especially given there are many obvious conflicts of interest—but Elon has not recused himself from a single decision.

    “How is it not a conflict—when the owner of Space X is gutting NASA while taxpayer funds to his company keep flowing?

    “How is it not blatant corruption—when the owner of Tesla is freezing grants and loans that benefit his competitors?

    “How are we supposed to just trust him, when he is probing agencies that have done—or are doing right now—investigations into his businesses?

    “Trump fired the Ag Inspector General who was investigating Elon’s company, Neuralink—and then fired the FDA officials who were reviewing it.


    “He fired the EPA Inspector General and Transportation Inspector General as they were looking at Tesla.


    “He fired the Labor Inspector General—as the Department has several investigations into Musk’s companies.

    “And Trump fired the Defense Inspector General who was looking at Space X—and notably, Musk’s connections to Putin.

    “And it’s not just Musk who is concerning—he’s brought on an army of walking red flags to pry into our government’s most sensitive data.

    “How are Americans supposed to feel, knowing someone who was previously fired for leaking sensitive information from their employer is digging through your most private financial data?

    “How are Americans supposed to feel, knowing someone who engaged with prominent white supremacists and misogynists online is helping to shutdown USAID?

    “How are they supposed to feel, knowing someone who tweeted explicitly racist statements, someone who said they were, quote, ‘racist before it was cool,’ was given control over incredibly important Treasury payment systems?

    “What sort of vetting—if any—is going on here? Are they trying to pick the least qualified, most concerning people? Hey Elon—you are supposed to filter out red flags—not select for them!

    “The American people deserve transparency—if Elon Musk really has nothing to hide, then he should leave his safe place on X and at Trump rallies and come before us at a Congressional hearing to be held accountable to the public.

    [TRUMP HURTING PEOPLE IN RED AND BLUE STATES]

    “What they are doing here is not just illegal—it is devastating for working people in every single zip code in America, red and blue states alike.

    “Right now, we need to be speaking out with a unified voice to ensure that when Congress passes a bill, the law is followed.

    [DANGERS OF A FULL-YEAR CR]

    “And we need to focus on negotiating serious funding bills on a bipartisan basis ahead of the fast-approaching March 14th deadline. That is exactly what I am trying to do right now. And, a long term CR should not be acceptable for anyone here.

    “As I have reminded my colleagues many times now: there is a world of difference between a short term CR that gives us additional time for good faith negotiations on our full-year funding bills, and a long term CR that would not only create major shortfalls for critical programs, but would also hand vast power over spending decisions to an administration that absolutely cannot and should not be trusted.

    “Passing a clean full year CR would, first of all, create major shortfalls and fail to adjust for new realities on the ground.

    “It could mean that instead of babies getting fed through WIC, moms are getting put on a waitlist for the first time in that program’s history. And instead of families getting rental assistance, they get cut off.

    “A clean full year CR means veterans are not able to get the care they need and benefits they have earned in a timely way.

    “And it means our military falling behind—from forcing cuts across DoD, to pausing promotions, station changes, and other really essential functions.

    “It also means losing opportunities to provide new resources for new challenges, and to provide a check on Trump policies—including ones it is clear members on both sides have issues with.

    “And on that note, I want to emphasize this—because this is really critical—unlike a short-term CR, a clean, full-year CR means hundreds of specific funding directives from Congress fall away, effectively creating slush funds for this administration to adjust spending priorities and potentially eliminate longstanding programs as they see fit. That is a nonstarter.


    “With a full-year CR, Congress would be turning over our power of the purse to a President who has already shown he couldn’t care less about the separation of powers.

    “A yearlong CR could be a green light for President Trump, Elon Musk, and Russell Vought to redirect funding to their own pet projects—and slash, burn, and zero out programs we have supported from Congress, that our families count on.

    “Maybe they siphon money away from public schools. Maybe they slash federal work study grants and other financial aid. Maybe they zero out money for national parks or monuments they think are too ‘Woke…’ or what would that even mean!

    “Maybe they scrap all our oversight of immigration courts, or end family reunification efforts, or dismantle the guardrails for detaining immigrants—something we are already seeing, by the way, with the use of Guantanamo Bay.

    “They could cut funding to eliminate HIV, address maternal mortality, or increase vaccination rates.

    “They could turn our constituents’ priorities into slush funds. Clean energy investments could become a payday for fossil fuels. Money meant to stop fentanyl and opioids could fuel private prison operations and mass deportations.

    [THE COMMON SENSE, BIPARTISAN PATH FORWARD]

    “Congress must detail its spending priorities—and direct President Trump to implement these programs faithfully by passing appropriations bills just as it does every year.

    “There is truly no telling just how far they will go in bending our federal budget from what our constituents need into whatever Trump and Musk want.

    “If you don’t think things could get worse—you’re wrong. A clean, yearlong CR is frankly an unacceptable outcome.


    “We cannot tell our constituents, that instead of using our authority to check a President, we give him the keys to the kingdom.

    “We cannot say, instead of fighting to get you the resources you need, we’ll let a billionaire have more say in where your tax dollars go instead.

    “So we need Republicans to get serious about bipartisan funding bills. And we have got to know that once those bills become law, Trump will actually follow them.

    “We cannot just reach an agreement, pass a bill, and then stand by while President Trump rips our laws in half.

    “There is a serious, bipartisan path forward for our country—but it is one where Congress works together to avoid a shutdown, stops the de facto shutdown that is already happening, and reasserts its authority to protect the funding our communities need.

    [REPUBLICANS’ PRO-BILLIONAIRE BUDGET RESOLUTION]

    “But unfortunately, that’s a far cry from the path Republicans are going down with this pro-billionaire, anti-middle-class budget resolution.

    “Let’s be very clear: Republicans’ budget resolution doesn’t just accept, it actually doubles down on what Trump and Musk are doing.

    “And it is not about balancing the budget—we all know that, because they don’t plan to reverse one of the biggest drivers of the debt: Republican tax cuts.

    “Despite all of the boogeymen that Republicans like to point to as driving the national debt—the reality is that the single biggest driver of our national debt since 2001 has been Republican tax cuts.

    “The Trump and Bush tax cuts have cost our nation over $10 trillion dollars and counting. And you’ll never guess what our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are focused on right now—nothing to lower the cost of eggs—it’s actually more Republican tax cuts!

    “And, no, they will not be paid-for. And, yes, they will blow up the national debt.

    “While Elon Musk hacks and chops his way through the government in the name of meager ‘savings’ and Republicans are cheering him on, they are all hoping we will ignore the elephant they brought into the room.

    “Even as this budget is a roadmap for painful cuts to programs families count on each and every day—all so they can give billionaires more tax cuts.

    “Republicans are going down this partisan path because they know Democrats are not going to join them in throwing Medicaid, nutrition assistance, and veterans’ benefits into the wood chipper, so they can throw more tax cuts at billionaires and the biggest corporations.

    “Make no mistake—this budget resolution is the DOGE resolution, as it assumes the staggering amount of $1 trillion in unspecified cuts in 2025 alone and $9 trillion over 10 years.

    “Where do we think those sort of dramatic cuts are going to come from? It’s going to come out of SNAP benefits that keep our kids from going hungry. It is going to come out of public schools and community health centers. It is going to come out of life-saving medical research.

    “It will mean costs going up for everyday Americans. 

    “It means child care costs going up when families lose access to Head Start and other quality, affordable options.

    “It means heating and cooling costs going up when families get cut off from LIHEAP.

    “It means rent going up as assistance programs get slashed.

    “It means your health care costs go up as community health centers and family planning providers are forced to close their doors.

    “It means grocery costs going up as programs like SNAP and WIC are gutted—not to mention what happens when you cut support for farmers, and for ag-research.

    “And make no mistake, if you are cutting that deeply, that painfully, you are going to start cutting things like veterans’ disability and education benefits, you are going to start cutting Medicare and Medicaid—which, for the information of all Senators, 30 million children rely on.

    “There is just no other way to make their numbers work. Especially when we know that this is just step one in their plan—and step two: tax breaks for billionaires and massive corporations.

    “So, first they are handing Elon Musk a chainsaw to cut programs families rely on with no accountability—then they are rewarding him with enormous tax breaks. And that is completely unacceptable.

    “We should not be taking kids out of child care to give billionaires a tax break.


    “We should not be taking food off the family table to put more fuel into private jets.

    “I grew up in a family that knew what it was like to fall on hard times. My dad— who was a veteran—got too sick to work. He had multiple sclerosis.

    “My mom, kept us afloat with Dad’s VA benefits, food stamps, and the new job she got thanks to a federal workforce program.

    “It wasn’t easy. Mom always said they crawled—crawled—to Social Security and Medicare. But she worked hard, and our government was there for them when those hard times came.

    “I know there are families struggling now, just like my family struggled then. I hear from them every day—in the letters we get here in Washington D.C., and in the conversations I have back home in Washington state.

    “They work hard. They play by the rules. They deserve—at the very least—the same opportunity my parents had when I was growing up.

    “And I am not going to stand by silently while Republicans try to sell that opportunity away, to pay for even more tax breaks for billionaires.

    “I get why that sounds like a good idea to billionaires like Donald Trump. I get why it’s a sweet deal for Elon Musk—the richest man in the world. It’s great for them—because they are not the ones footing the bill!

    “The bill for these tax breaks, the cost of these cuts, is going to be paid by folks like my mom and dad.

    “Everyday Americans will pay for billionaire tax breaks with their health care. They will pay for billionaire tax breaks with abandoned medical research. They will pay for billionaire tax breaks with shuttered family farms and small businesses

    “Republicans can try and spin a fairy tale about how this will pay for itself, how this will work out for everyone and nobody cares about what will be affected—but the reality is going to show through pretty darn quick, and pretty darn painfully.

    “Because spin is not going to put food on the table. It will not pay the rent. It won’t fix the roads. It won’t lower prices. It won’t lower interest rates. And it won’t put money in families’ dwindling bank accounts.

    “When it comes to the job we were all sent here to do helping people, and solving problems—families need real solutions, not tax breaks for billionaires and talking points for everyone who loses out.

    “So, M. President, I would urge all of my colleagues: hit the breaks, and not just on this devastating, partisan budget resolution. Hit the brakes on what President Trump and Elon Musk are doing right now.

    “Let’s instead come together, and work on serious, bipartisan bills to fund the government. Let’s get investments that are sorely needed out to the folks we represent. Let’s pass legislation to give folks a hand—instead of this Republican plan that gives billionaires a handout.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Dmitry Chernyshenko held the first meeting of the Government Commission for the implementation of the comprehensive state program of the Russian Federation “Development of physical culture and sports”

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

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

    Dmitry Chernyshenko held the first meeting of the Government Commission for the implementation of the comprehensive state program “Development of physical culture and sports”

    February 20, 2025

    Dmitry Chernyshenko held the first meeting of the Government Commission for the implementation of the comprehensive state program “Development of physical culture and sports”

    February 20, 2025

    Dmitry Chernyshenko held the first meeting of the Government Commission for the implementation of the comprehensive state program “Development of physical culture and sports”

    February 20, 2025

    Dmitry Chernyshenko held the first meeting of the Government Commission for the implementation of the comprehensive state program “Development of physical culture and sports”

    February 20, 2025

    Previous news Next news

    Dmitry Chernyshenko held the first meeting of the Government Commission for the implementation of the comprehensive state program “Development of physical culture and sports”

    Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Chernyshenko held the first meeting of the Government Commission for the implementation of the comprehensive state program of the Russian Federation “Development of physical culture and sports”.

    Dmitry Chernyshenko recalled that in 2024, at a meeting of the Sports Council, the President instructed to increase the level of coordination of the management of physical education and sports, affecting various areas and spheres of the economy. This Government Commission was established by a Government Resolution.

    “President Vladimir Putin has set us the task of developing a unified approach to the development of physical education and sports under the state program. The total expenditure of budgets at all levels on sports in the country alone is more than 700 billion rubles, and there are also corporate expenses. The commission is called upon to unite all available resources and increase the efficiency of financial investments. Within the framework of the state program, large-scale construction of sports facilities is planned for 2030: flat sports grounds, modular complexes and capital sports facilities, and much more,” Dmitry Chernyshenko emphasized.

    The Deputy Prime Minister added that, on the instructions of the President, work is underway to increase the level of transparency of payments and create a system of incentives for coaches and athletes, which will be implemented, including through funds from the Russian Sports Fund.

    The draft law on the Russian Sports Fund has already been approved by the Government and submitted to the State Duma. The fund will also direct funds to the development of children’s and youth and mass sports, support for Olympians and Paralympians, and, if necessary, to the development of sports infrastructure. When selecting applications, the development of sports, the effectiveness of organizations, the volume of invested funds and attracted private investments will be taken into account.

    On the instructions of the head of state, the Government prepared directives for joint-stock companies with a Russian Federation share of more than 50% on the regular submission of information on extra-budgetary expenditures in the field of sports and the coordination of regions in the construction of sports infrastructure.

    Sports Minister Mikhail Degtyarev emphasized key changes in the approach to the development of the industry, and also outlined priorities for the coming years.

    “In accordance with the instructions of the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, the program “Development of Physical Culture and Sports” received the status of a comprehensive one. An important criterion for efficiency is now not only the fulfillment of plans, but also the level of satisfaction of the population with the conditions created for sports. For us, this is now the main guideline,” the head of the department noted.

    The comprehensive state program until 2030 provides for large-scale construction of sports facilities throughout the country. The planned projects include 150 capital sports facilities, 637 smart sports grounds, 1078 small sports grounds and 86 quickly erected modular facilities: swimming pools, halls, skating rinks with artificial ice.

    In addition, the Ministry of Sports will continue to build modular sports facilities in historical regions that have returned to Russia. Five such facilities will be built there annually with a total funding of 1 billion rubles.

    The Minister stressed that taking into account existing sources of funding will be an important part of the work.

    “Information on consolidated regional expenditures, as well as on off-budget sources of development at the expense of state corporations, large businesses and sports federations will be systematized in the second quarter of this year. I would like to emphasize that this will not be additional financing for the industry, but a consideration of existing sources,” noted Mikhail Degtyarev.

    This approach will allow for more effective coordination between regions and the federal center, which will ensure the comprehensive development of sports infrastructure throughout the country.

    The President of the Russian Gymnastics Federation, CEO and Chairman of the Board of JSC Russian Railways Oleg Belozerov emphasized that JSC Russian Railways, being the largest company in Russia, is ready to actively integrate into the implementation of the sports development program.

    “More than 600 physical culture and sports clubs have been created and are developing in the Russian Railways system, including at its own sports facilities. This is the largest organization in terms of personnel in the Russian Federation. We hold more than 11 thousand events, covering more than 2.6 million employees, family members and veterans of the industry. All-Russian sports federations, as well as clubs and other components, receive financial support. And we can definitely say that good unified coordination within the framework of the mechanisms being created is extremely important. This will improve the quality of missionary activities,” said Oleg Belozerov.

    The head of the Federal Medical and Biological Agency, Veronika Skvortsova, noted that in order to improve the results of athletes, it is necessary to extend unified approaches to medical and biological support and analysis to regional teams, expand the digital health system for athletes, create a single database of permits based on an electronic passport, and modernize complex scientific groups, which will allow sports achievements to be brought to a new level.

    Dmitry Chernyshenko also instructed to create an expert council to support the commission and propose innovative solutions, and to continue collecting proposals to increase the level of citizen satisfaction with the conditions for physical education and sports, including through the public services portal.

    In addition, the Deputy Prime Minister noted the importance of providing information support for the development of sports and gave instructions regarding the coverage of the successes of Russian athletes.

    The work plan of the government commission for the implementation of the comprehensive state program “Development of Physical Culture and Sports” for 2025 and the composition of its presidium were also approved.

    The meeting was attended by the Minister of Sports Mikhail Degtyarev, the head of the Federal Medical and Biological Agency Veronika Skvortsova, the President of the Russian Gymnastics Federation, CEO and Chairman of the Board of JSC Russian Railways Oleg Belozerov, the Governor of the Tula Region, Chairman of the State Council Commission on Physical Culture and Sports Dmitry Milyaev, the CEO of the National Priorities ANO Sofia Malyavina, as well as representatives of relevant departments, organizations and subjects of the Russian Federation.

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

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: TV interview, ABC Afternoon Briefing with Patricia Karvelas

    Source: Australian Government – Minister of Foreign Affairs

    Patricia Karvelas, Host: Minister, welcome to the program.

    Penny Wong, Foreign Minister: Good to be with you, PK.

    Karvelas: Some breaking news, Minister, this afternoon – commercial pilots we are reporting, have been warned of a potential hazard in airspace between Australia and New Zealand, where three Chinese warships are conducting military exercises. Do you have any information to share regarding what is happening here?

    Foreign Minister: This is a Chinese task group that the Deputy Prime Minister has previously spoken about. We are aware of this task group. We are monitoring this task group very closely. It is, as I understand it, operating in international waters. We will be discussing this with the Chinese and we already have at officials’ level, in relation to the notice given and the transparency that is being provided in relation to these exercises, particularly the live fire exercises.

    Karvelas: Can you tell us why Airservices are telling commercial pilots not to fly over the area?

    Foreign Minister: Well, obviously this is an evolving situation, but it would be normal practice where a task group is engaging in exercises for there to be advice given to vessels and aircraft in the area, and Airservices is doing what it should do, which is to give that advice.

    Karvelas: And is there a fear of live fire and how that may affect these commercial flights? Is that, just for our viewers who perhaps don’t understand how these military exercises work, is that what would be exercising the minds of Airservices Australia?

    Foreign Minister: Well, obviously, as I said, this is an evolving situation, but I can talk to you about what the practice is. The practice is that countries, including Australia and others, can conduct military exercises in international waters. The advice to me is that this is what China is doing. When they do conduct those exercises, obviously notice is provided to ensure – that is available to anyone in the area, and that is what Airservices is doing. We do have concerns about the transparency associated with this and the notice, and I certainly will be having a discussion with Foreign Minister Wang about that.

    Karvelas: What will you raise with the Foreign Minister when you meet?

    Foreign Minister: There are many issues that I regularly raise in bilaterals with Foreign Minister Wang. You would anticipate I will cover those, and I will be very clear with him about some of the issues you and I have spoken about, PK.

    Karvelas: Will you press the Foreign Minister and Chinese officials to be more transparent about what this naval task force is doing and also where it is going?

    Foreign Minister: What I would say is that China is operating in international waters, just as Australia and other countries operate in international waters. We always express that all countries should comply with the UN Convention are the Law of the Sea – and that is what we will always be articulating to China and to all others who utilise the maritime commons.

    Karvelas: Some analysts have called this a deliberate show of force by China, which wants to demonstrate it can now easily project power into the Tasman, the South Pacific. Is that a fair assessment?

    Foreign Minister: I think that is a commentary piece that you probably should speak to a commentator about. As the Foreign Minister, what I need to articulate is Australia’s interest and Australia’s interests are in transparency and the observance of international law including the law of the sea. That is what we always articulate, for example, in relation to the South China Sea.

    Karvelas: New Zealand’s Defence Minister, Judith Collins, says the task force is a wake-up call for her country and should remind its citizens their geographical isolation no longer offers protection. Does that apply to Australia as well? Are you concerned that our geographic location also doesn’t protect us and that we need to actually be more aware of this threat?

    Foreign Minister: Well, they’re your words, not mine. What I would say is the government is very clear about the importance of Australia having the strategic and military capability to enable both deterrence and assurance. And you’ve seen, whether it’s through AUKUS or the work that Minister Marles has done, the importance the Government places on making sure the Australian Defence Force is appropriately equipped to enable deterrence. And why do we want deterrence? Because that is central to stability. You need both deterrence and assurance to enable and promote stability and peace in the region.

    Karvelas: Minister, in terms of Airservices and their diversion of commercial planes, how long should we expect this will go on for? Is that something you will seek clarity for, from the Chinese?

    Foreign Minister: Well, I don’t have any advice about that, but that is ultimately a matter for Airservices to determine, the notice they need to give to vessels and aircraft.

    Karvelas: I want to change the topic if I can, Minister, to another foreign issue that has been of course, huge, and there is an anniversary coming up, which makes it very pivotal, I think. President Trump has referred to Zelenskyy as a dictator. Does that language alarm you?

    Foreign Minister: Well, I don’t believe he is. What I’ve said very clearly for many years now, is Russia is the aggressor here. Russia is engaged in an illegal and immoral war against Ukraine, contravened the UN Charter as a permanent member of the Security Council, used its veto to protect itself so it could continue to conduct this war. 

    We stand very firmly in solidarity with the people of Ukraine. I had the opportunity to briefly meet President Zelenskyy when I was in Poland recently, and I made very clear to him that we, the people of Australia, the country of Australia, continues to stand with him and the people of Ukraine in their struggle for their sovereignty. 

    Karvelas: Minister, are you concerned that the US is refusing to co-sponsor a draft UN resolution that demands Russia withdraw its troops?

    Foreign Minister: Well, the US can make its decisions, and it can articulate the reasons for it, what I will say to you is what our position is, and I’ve outlined it.

    Karvelas: Yesterday I spoke to former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, and he told me we can’t assume we can rely on America anymore, that this is quite a dramatic shift in geopolitical positioning. Is that right? We can’t rely on America anymore?

    Foreign Minister: America has been Australia’s principal strategic partner and strategic ally for many decades, and that alliance has stood the test of time, and it has stood the test of political change. It’s an alliance which has been, and a relationship, which has been fostered by and carried by administrations and governments of both political persuasions. 

    It is the case that President Trump is charting a very different course – and he said he would, and we should expect that – but we should also have some confidence in our capacity to navigate that. I was very pleased to and honoured to be the first Australian Foreign Minister to be invited to a presidential inauguration. I was very pleased to have the opportunity so early on in the Trump Administration to engage with my counterpart, Secretary Marco Rubio, and also National Security Advisor Waltz. Deputy Prime Minister Marles has also been and engaged with his counterpart. So, this is a very deep relationship. It’s a relationship where there is a lot of engagement, and it’s a relationship which is important to both countries. 

    Karvelas: I understand that the Russian Foreign Minister is also attending the meeting of Foreign Ministers, where you are. Have you spoken to him and raised the issue in relation to Oscar Jenkins?

    Foreign Minister: As you know, Patricia, we have discontinued engagement, or halted engagement with Russian officials at senior levels since the invasion of Ukraine. I did, however, make an exception for that yesterday, because I wanted to express very clearly to Mr Lavrov the importance of Oscar Jenkins’ condition. I expressed to him the importance we associate with Mr Jenkins being treated appropriately, and Russia complying with its international legal obligations. 

    Karvelas: And what response did you get? I mean, are you getting any opening in terms of what we might be able to do to get Oscar Jenkins back?

    Foreign Minister: Well, obviously I’m not going to disclose more than is in Mr Jenkins’ interest, but I can say to you very clearly that Mr Lavrov understood that our view was that Mr Jenkins needed to be treated appropriately and Russia needed to comply with its international legal obligations.

    Karvelas: Did you shirtfront him?

    Foreign Minister: Well, I think that’s a Tony Abbott term. I spoke to him, as you would expect, I would speak to him on such a matter.

    Karvelas: OK, you used the Penny Wong method, I understand. 

    Just finally, Minister, I understand, before I let you go, on Israel, are you concerned over the behaviour exhibited by Hamas, parading the bodies of these dead hostages, and are worried about one of the bodies was incorrectly returned – it is obviously incredibly, a very difficult time, especially the implications for the ceasefire?

    Foreign Minister: First, I condemn unequivocally the way in which Hamas dealt with this. It was a sickening and cruel way to deal with the return of these two young children, the bodies of two young children. So, I would just express my condolences and sympathy to the families. 

    In relation to the ceasefire, we obviously continue, as so many countries do around the world, to urge all parties to comply with the ceasefire, including the return of hostages.

    Karvelas: Foreign Minister, thank you so much for joining us.

    Foreign Minister: Good to speak with you, Patricia.

    MIL OSI News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Silver medals of the NSU aerobics team

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Novosibirsk State University – Novosibirsk State University –

    The Novosibirsk Region Cup in sports aerobics was held at the NSTU Sports Palace, in which NSU athletes showed excellent results.

    In January 2025, the rules for holding competitions in this sport changed, and teams had to quickly rework their compositions, adapting to the new requirements. Despite this, our students became silver medalists in all group nominations – in dance gymnastics, gymnastics platform and Group-5.

    The following players played for the NSU team:

    Vladislava Bulavina, Victoria Detusheva, Olga Shishkina and Valeria Shatskova (GI)

    Lada Avdonina, Anna Nikulina and Maria Yukhnina (FIT)

    Victoria Babakova and Arina Gulenko (FEN)

    Ulyana Gruzdeva (IFP)

    Sofia Balya (EF)

    Anastasia Iskova (FF)

    Nadezhda Semina (MMF)

    Olga Terina (FEN) and Polina Maryasova (IFP) fulfilled the standard of candidate for master of sports.

    We congratulate the girls and their coach Anna Timofeeva on their successful performance and wish them success in all upcoming competitions.

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

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump is ruling like a ‘king’, following the Putin model. How can he be stopped?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By William Partlett, Associate Professor of Public Law, The University of Melbourne

    A month in, and it is clear even to conservatives that US President Donald Trump is attempting to fundamentally reshape the role of the American president.

    Trump and his supporters sees the natural authority of the American president in broad terms, similar to those of the Russian president, or a king. Trump, in fact, has already likened himself to a king.

    This desire to “Russify” the presidency is not an accident: Trump and many of his supporters admire the king-like power that Vladimir Putin exercises as Russian president.

    Understanding how Trump is attempting to transform presidential power is key to mobilising in the most effective way to stop it.

    Decrees by a ‘king’

    Russia’s system of government is what I call a “crown-presidential” system, which makes the president a kind of elected king.

    Two powers are central to this role.

    First, like a king, the Russian “crown-president” does not rely on an elected legislature to make policy. Instead, Putin exercises policy-making authority unilaterally via decree.

    Putin has used decrees to wage wars, privatise the economy and even to amend the constitution to lay claim to the parts of Ukraine occupied by Russia since 2014.

    He has also used these decrees in a performative way, for example, by declaring pay raises for all Russian state employees without any ability to enforce it.

    Over the last month, Trump has made similar use of decrees (what the White House now terms “presidential actions”).

    He has issued scores of presidential decrees to unilaterally reshape vast swathes of American policy – far more than past presidents. Trump sees these orders as a way of both exercising and demonstrating his vast presidential power.

    Control over the bureaucracy

    Second, like a king, Putin does not allow the Russian legislature to use the law to organise the executive branch and create agencies independent of presidential control. Instead, he has unquestioned dominance over both the organisation and staffing of the executive branch. This has given him vast power to dominate politics by controlling information gathering and legal prosecutions.

    A similar push is underway in the United States. Trump has appointed key loyalists to head the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation.

    Moreover, he is seeking to restructure the executive branch by abolishing some agencies altogether and vastly reducing the size of the workforce in others.

    Can the courts stop Trump?

    Trump’s attempt to Russify the American presidency undermines the American constitutional order.

    Courts are the natural “first responders” in this kind of crisis. And many courts have blocked some of Trump’s early decrees.

    This legal response is important. But it is not enough on it own.

    First, the US Supreme Court might be more willing to accept this expansion of presidential power than lower courts. In a ruling last year, for example, the court granted the president immunity from criminal prosecution, showing itself to be sympathetic to broad understandings of executive power.

    Second, presidential decrees can be easily withdrawn and modified. This can allow Trump and his legal team to recalibrate as his decrees are challenged and find the best test cases to take to the Supreme Court.

    Third, parts of the conservative right have long argued for a far more powerful president. For instance, the idea of a “unitary executive” has been discussed in conservative circles for years. This essentially claims that the president should be able to direct and control the entire executive branch, from the bureaucracy to prosecutors to the FBI.

    These arguments are already being made to justify Trump’s actions. As Elon Musk has said, “you could not ask for a stronger mandate from the public” to reform the executive branch. These arguments will be made to courts to justify Trump’s expansion of power.

    Fourth, even if the Supreme Court does block some decrees, it is possible the White House will simply ignore these actions. We had an early glimpse of this when Trump posted that “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law”.

    Vice President JD Vance has also said judges “aren’t allowed” to block the president’s “legitimate power”.

    The importance of political mobilisation and messaging

    Trump’s aggressive use of presidential power is not just a constitutional crisis, it is a political one. For those seeking to resist, this is too important to just be left to the courts; it must also involve America’s key political institutions.

    The most obvious place to start is in Congress. Lawmakers must act decisively to assert the legal power granted to them in the constitution to check the power of the presidency. This would include active Congressional use of its budgeting power, as well as its oversight powers on the presidency.

    This could happen now if a few Republicans were to take a principled position on important constitutional issues, though nearly all have so far preferred to fall in line. Democrats could retake both branches of Congress in the midterm elections in 2026, though, and assert this power.

    The states can and should also act to resist this expansion of presidential power. This action could take many forms, including refusing to deploy their traditional police powers to enforce decrees they view to be unconstitutional or unlawful.

    In mobilising to defend the constitution, these institutions could appeal to the American people with more than the narrow legal argument that Trump’s acts are unconstitutional. They could also make the broader political argument that turning the American president into a Russian-style, elected king will foster a form of inefficient, unresponsive and corrupt politics.

    Or, in the words of The New York Times columnist Ezra Klein, “it’s the corruption, stupid”.

    Time is of the essence. Russia shows the more time a “crown-president” is able to operate, the more entrenched this system becomes. For those hoping to preserve American democracy, the time is now for not just legal, but political resistance.

    William Partlett 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. Trump is ruling like a ‘king’, following the Putin model. How can he be stopped? – https://theconversation.com/trump-is-ruling-like-a-king-following-the-putin-model-how-can-he-be-stopped-249721

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Chinese, Russian FMs meet on bilateral ties

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, meets with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on the sidelines of the Group of 20 (G20) Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Johannesburg, South Africa, Feb. 20, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi discussed China-Russia relations with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov Thursday on the sidelines of the Group of 20 (G20) Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Johannesburg, South Africa.

    Wang, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, said that the China-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination for a new era is advancing to a higher level and broader dimensions.

    The two sides have maintained steady progress in mutually beneficial cooperation and engaged in close and effective strategic coordination, playing a crucial role in safeguarding the common interests of both countries and their peoples while advancing the process of global multipolarity, Wang said.

    China is willing to work with Russia to fully implement the important consensus reached by the two heads of state and to further advance China-Russia relations in the new year, he added.

    Lavrov, for his part, said that Russia is willing to work with China to strengthen high-level exchanges, deepen practical cooperation in economy, trade, finance, culture, and other fields, and promote the further development of the China-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination.

    Noting that Russia and China both uphold multipolarity and serve as stabilizing forces in a complex and turbulent world, he said that Russia highly recognizes the global initiatives put forward by China, values the high level of mutual trust between the two countries, and is willing to continue to strengthen communication and coordination with China under the BRICS mechanism, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the United Nations, the G20, and other frameworks.

    The two sides also exchanged views and coordinated positions on international and regional issues of mutual concern, including the situation in the Middle East.

    MIL OSI China News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Direct road transport service launched between China, Turkmenistan

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

    ZHENGZHOU, Feb. 20 — A truck bearing TIR signs on Thursday departed from an international road transport assembly center in Zhengzhou, the capital of central China’s Henan Province, bound for Ashgabat, the capital of Turkmenistan, embarking on the first journey of a new direct road transport service between the two countries.

    TIR, an abbreviation for Transports Internationaux Routiers, or International Road Transport, is an international customs transit system that saves time and costs for transport operators and customs authorities moving goods across borders.

    “The batch of cargo — mainly office supplies — will pass through the Horgos border port in China’s Xinjiang, after which it will transit through Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan,” said Wang Ti, deputy general manager of Zhengzhou Hongyi Transport Co., Ltd.

    A single trip on the Zhengzhou-Ashgabat TIR transport service takes nine days, covering about 6,000 kilometers. It saves approximately 35 percent of transport costs when compared to air freight services, and half the time when compared to rail transport services.

    Located in the Zhengzhou Airport Economic Zone, the International Road Transportation Henan Assembly Center is the first such center located in an inland region of China. It includes a TIR certificate issuance office and an international road transport vehicle inspection center, allowing companies to apply for international road transport documents and handle annual reviews.

    Li Zhen, deputy director of the Zhengzhou Airport Economic Zone’s management committee, said that the center has launched 18 TIR transport routes to and from nine countries, including Russia, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Georgia.

    According to customs data, Zhengzhou Customs has overseen 458 TIR transport vehicle trips over the past two years, with a total throughput value exceeding 420 million yuan (about 57.9 million U.S. dollars). Approximately 1,200 trade companies have used the service to transport goods falling under more than 500 categories, ranging from automotive parts to food products.

    “Though it is an inland province without border or sea ports, Henan has built international logistics channels via TIR road transport, air freight and China-Europe freight train services to become a new pathway in the central China region,” said Ouyang Liangyuan, deputy director of Xinzheng Customs, which is administrated by Zhengzhou Customs.

    MIL OSI China News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Trump is ruling like a ‘king’, following the Putin model. How can he be stopped?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By William Partlett, Associate Professor of Public Law, The University of Melbourne

    A month in, and it is clear even to conservatives that US President Donald Trump is attempting to fundamentally reshape the role of the American president.

    Trump and his supporters sees the natural authority of the American president in broad terms, similar to those of the Russian president, or a king. Trump, in fact, has already likened himself to a king.

    This desire to “Russify” the presidency is not an accident: Trump and many of his supporters admire the king-like power that Vladimir Putin exercises as Russian president.

    Understanding how Trump is attempting to transform presidential power is key to mobilising in the most effective way to stop it.

    Decrees by a ‘king’

    Russia’s system of government is what I call a “crown-presidential” system, which makes the president a kind of elected king.

    Two powers are central to this role.

    First, like a king, the Russian “crown-president” does not rely on an elected legislature to make policy. Instead, Putin exercises policy-making authority unilaterally via decree.

    Putin has used decrees to wage wars, privatise the economy and even to amend the constitution to lay claim to the parts of Ukraine occupied by Russia since 2014.

    He has also used these decrees in a performative way, for example, by declaring pay raises for all Russian state employees without any ability to enforce it.

    Over the last month, Trump has made similar use of decrees (what the White House now terms “presidential actions”).

    He has issued scores of presidential decrees to unilaterally reshape vast swathes of American policy – far more than past presidents. Trump sees these orders as a way of both exercising and demonstrating his vast presidential power.

    Control over the bureaucracy

    Second, like a king, Putin does not allow the Russian legislature to use the law to organise the executive branch and create agencies independent of presidential control. Instead, he has unquestioned dominance over both the organisation and staffing of the executive branch. This has given him vast power to dominate politics by controlling information gathering and legal prosecutions.

    A similar push is underway in the United States. Trump has appointed key loyalists to head the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation.

    Moreover, he is seeking to restructure the executive branch by abolishing some agencies altogether and vastly reducing the size of the workforce in others.

    Can the courts stop Trump?

    Trump’s attempt to Russify the American presidency undermines the American constitutional order.

    Courts are the natural “first responders” in this kind of crisis. And many courts have blocked some of Trump’s early decrees.

    This legal response is important. But it is not enough on it own.

    First, the US Supreme Court might be more willing to accept this expansion of presidential power than lower courts. In a ruling last year, for example, the court granted the president immunity from criminal prosecution, showing itself to be sympathetic to broad understandings of executive power.

    Second, presidential decrees can be easily withdrawn and modified. This can allow Trump and his legal team to recalibrate as his decrees are challenged and find the best test cases to take to the Supreme Court.

    Third, parts of the conservative right have long argued for a far more powerful president. For instance, the idea of a “unitary executive” has been discussed in conservative circles for years. This essentially claims that the president should be able to direct and control the entire executive branch, from the bureaucracy to prosecutors to the FBI.

    These arguments are already being made to justify Trump’s actions. As Elon Musk has said, “you could not ask for a stronger mandate from the public” to reform the executive branch. These arguments will be made to courts to justify Trump’s expansion of power.

    Fourth, even if the Supreme Court does block some decrees, it is possible the White House will simply ignore these actions. We had an early glimpse of this when Trump posted that “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law”.

    Vice President JD Vance has also said judges “aren’t allowed” to block the president’s “legitimate power”.

    The importance of political mobilisation and messaging

    Trump’s aggressive use of presidential power is not just a constitutional crisis, it is a political one. For those seeking to resist, this is too important to just be left to the courts; it must also involve America’s key political institutions.

    The most obvious place to start is in Congress. Lawmakers must act decisively to assert the legal power granted to them in the constitution to check the power of the presidency. This would include active Congressional use of its budgeting power, as well as its oversight powers on the presidency.

    This could happen now if a few Republicans were to take a principled position on important constitutional issues, though nearly all have so far preferred to fall in line. Democrats could retake both branches of Congress in the midterm elections in 2026, though, and assert this power.

    The states can and should also act to resist this expansion of presidential power. This action could take many forms, including refusing to deploy their traditional police powers to enforce decrees they view to be unconstitutional or unlawful.

    In mobilising to defend the constitution, these institutions could appeal to the American people with more than the narrow legal argument that Trump’s acts are unconstitutional. They could also make the broader political argument that turning the American president into a Russian-style, elected king will foster a form of inefficient, unresponsive and corrupt politics.

    Or, in the words of The New York Times columnist Ezra Klein, “it’s the corruption, stupid”.

    Time is of the essence. Russia shows the more time a “crown-president” is able to operate, the more entrenched this system becomes. For those hoping to preserve American democracy, the time is now for not just legal, but political resistance.

    William Partlett 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. Trump is ruling like a ‘king’, following the Putin model. How can he be stopped? – https://theconversation.com/trump-is-ruling-like-a-king-following-the-putin-model-how-can-he-be-stopped-249721

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA News: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-left”>
    1:05 P.M. EST
     
         MS. LEAVITT:  Hello.  Good afternoon, everybody.  I brought some heavy hitters in here with me today. 
     
    Today marks one month of President Trump’s return to the Oval Office, and there is no denying this administration is off to a historic start.  The President has already signed 73 executive orders.  That is more than double the number signed by Joe Biden and more than quadruple the number signed by Barack Obama over the same period.
     
    These executive orders have ended burdensome regulations; sealed the border; unleashed our domestic energy sector; eliminated divisive DEI from our federal government; stopped the weaponization of government; cut waste, fraud, and abuse; reinstituted “America First” trade and foreign policies; and ultimately restored common sense. 
     
    The President also signed the Laken Riley Act into law, which ensures ICE will detain illegal aliens arrested or charged with theft or violence. 
     
    As of today, the Senate has already confirmed 18 Cabinet-level nominees, which is more than at this point under the Obama administration in 2009 and more than double the pace of the Biden administration in 2021. 
     
    And today, we expect Kash Patel to be confirmed as the next director of the FBI. 
     
    We are proud to announce that the president will host his first official Cabinet meeting here at the White House next Wednesday, February 26th. 
     
    In just four weeks, President Trump has already hosted the leaders of Israel, Japan, Jordan, and India.  And next Monday, the President will host France’s President, Emmanuel Macron, and on Thursday, the UK Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, will visit the White House as well. 
     
    As you all know, over the past month, the President has taken questions from the press — all of you — nearly every single day, sometimes on multiple different occasions in the same day, on any topic any of you wish to talk about. 
     
    President Trump set the tone on this approach immediately when he took more than 12 times the questions in his first few hours in office as Joe Biden did in his entire first week. 
     
    Yesterday, we hosted a local media row here at the White House with television and radio stations from across the country that reached up to 60 million viewers and listeners. 
     
    In our ongoing pursuit of transparency, on this one-month celebration, I am thrilled to bring three of my colleagues and our policy experts here at the White House to further recap this incredible first month of accomplishments in greater detail.
     
    We have Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller; the Director of the National Economic Council, Kevin Hassett; and our National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz. 
     
    I will hand it over to them.  They will deliver brief remarks on the accomplishments of this administration in the first month, and then we will open it up to Q and A.  When we open up the Q and A portion, I do ask, for the sake of efficiency in this room, that you direct your question to the principal you seek an answer from.  And I will call on you in this room.
     
    But first I will let them roll through their remarks.  And first up, I’ll turn it over to Stephen Miller.
     
    MR. MILLER:  Thank you.  It’s great to be back.
     
    And I want to just thank you all for joining today our one-month celebration of the most historic opening to a presidency in American history.  No president comes close to what Donald Trump has achieved over just the last 30 days.
     
    He has packed eight years of transformative action restoring this nation, restoring our laws, restoring fairness, restoring economic opportunity, restoring national security in just one month.  No one in this country has ever seen anything like it. 
     
    And when you look at the consequentiality and the significance and the transformative nature of the actions he’s taking, it truly defies description.  For example, in just one area, this nation has been plagued and crippled by illegal discrimination: diversity, equity, and inclusion policies.  It strangled our economy.  It has undermined public safety.  It has made every aspect of life more difficult, more painful, and less safe. 
     
    He has ended all DEI across the federal government.  He has terminated all federal workers involved in promulgating these unlawful policies.  He has ended diversity, equity, and inclusion in all federal contracting.  He has restored merit as the cornerstone of all federal policy; restored the full, fair, impartial enforcement of our federal civil rights laws for the first time in generations; and he has cracked down on individuals across this government and nonprofits who have engaged in illegal racial discrimination against the American people. 
     
    This includes making clear to every educational institution in this country that ending diversity, equity, and inclusion, ending unlawful race discrimination is a precondition of receiving federal funds. 
     
    He has also saved women’s sports by ending the participation of men in women’s sports.  He has ended radical gender ideology across the entire federal government, and he’s pressured the private sector to also end and combat radical gender ideology.  He’s reestablished the scientific and biological truth that there are only two sexes in this country — male and female — that those are biologically based determinations.  They are not based and can never be based on gender identity. 
     
    That includes rooting out of the Department of Defense all DEI policies, all critical race theory, all gender madness, and once again having a military that is focused solely and exclusively on readiness, preparedness, and lethality.
     
    As I’m sure Kevin will talk about more, of course, he has undertaken a historic cost-cutting effort across the federal government, launching the first-ever Department of Government Efficiency, uncovering corruption on a scale that we never thought imaginable, terminating every single federal worker that we — that we have found to be engaged in the corruption and theft and the waste of taxpayer dollars, and already saving $50 billion in a single year, which over a 10-year period would be $500 billion.  Just think about how vast and enormous that sum is. 
     
    Of course, as you all know, he has renamed the Gulf of Mexico to its correct and proper name: the Gulf of America.  He has renamed Mount Denali into Mount McKinley, part of a historic effort to restore patriotism and national pride all across this land. 
     
    He has ended the weaponization of the federal government, restored the Department of Justice to its true mission of combating threats to this nation and keeping the American people safe. 
     
    He has ended all federal censorship of free speech.  This has been one of the greatest crises that has plagued this nation.  Years and years and years, the federal government violating the First Amendment to take away Americans’ right of free speech — President Trump has ended that.  And he has demanded that all federal workers, all law enforcement cease any effort to intimidate the rights of Americans or to police their speech. 
     
    He has also restored the death penalty at the Department of Justice, including for illegal aliens who commit murder, including for those who murder cops, and including for all of those who threaten Americans with heinous acts of violence.  The death penalty is back.  Law and order is back.  The streets are being made safe once again. 
     
    On the public health front, he has launched the nation’s first-ever commission — the MAHA Commission — Make America Healthy Again, following the historic confirmation of RFK Jr., to finally uncover the true root causes of the public health crisis in this country, the childhood disease epidemic in this country, the spiraling rates of pediatric cancer and devastating childhood sickness. 
     
    He has finally created a situation where the federal heal- — health agencies in this country will be focused on preventing disease, on keeping children from getting sick in the first place, not sentencing them to a lifetime in and out of hospitals, suffering needlessly, when we can find ways to prevent this epidemic of illness. 
     
    Then, of course, on homeland security.  Today, it is officially the law of the land at the conclusion of the congressional notification process that six Mexican cartels and two transnational gangs — Tren de Aragua, or TDA, and MS-13 — so eight organizations in total — are now formally designated as foreign terrorist organizations, which means that every single member of those organizations who operates on U.S. soil is now, as a legal matter, a terrorist, and they will be treated as terrorists. 
     
    This is a sea change in U.S. policy.  And this means the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security, along with the rest of U.S. law enforcement and the Department of Defense, are now operating in a legal reality where these cartels are recognized as terrorists, and there will be a whole-of-government effort to remove these terrorists from our soil and to degrade their ability to threaten or undermine any American security or sovereignty interests.
     
    Border crossings since the day he took office are down 95 percent.  I think it’s almost impossible to even describe the scale and scope of that achievement.  President Trump, within days of taking office, cut border crossings 95 percent. 
     
    And those few who have dared to cross are being either prosecuted or deported.  They’re either facing significant jail time for trafficking, smuggling, harboring, aiding, impeding, or they’re being immediately removed from our soil.  Either way, at the end of the process, they are going home. 
     
    He has reimplemented Remain in Mexico, and he has obtained historic cooperation from foreign countries all around the world in accepting their deportees back. 
     
    And he has used the United States military to fully seal the southern border with a historic deployment of both active duty and National Guard troops, resumed the building of infrastructure.  He has opened up Guantanamo Bay, and he’s using military aircraft to carry out deportations all across this country. 
     
    And ICE is joining with ATF, DEA, and FBI to carry out the largest deportation operation in American history.  The criminals are going home.  The border is sealed shut.  America is safe, sovereign, proud, and free.  We are a nation that everyone in the world understands all across this planet: You do not come here illegally.  You will not get in.  You will go to jail.  You will go home.  You will not succeed. 
     
    This is the biggest and most successful change in any area of law enforcement that this nation has ever seen, and he did it in under one month. 
     
    Thank you.
     
    MR. HASSETT:  Should I go?
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Yes, yes.
     
    MR. HASSETT:  Well, thank you, Karoline.  Thank you, Stephen. 
     
    You know, one of the things that President Trump cares most about is job creation.  And it was about seven years ago I had the honor of joining you in this room for the first time, and it looks like we’ve created a lot more jobs in the last month.  Look at how many people are here.  I — my estimate is about 180 but — but I didn’t count. 
     
    So, thank you.  It’s really an honor to be back here.  I think that I just want to go over a few things and then hand it off to Mike. 
     
    The first thing is that the President has told us to prioritize fighting inflation, and he had to do that because, as you know, President Biden let inflation get completely out of control.  And he did it with policies that made no sense.  They made no sense. 
     
    You know, a lot of times, you people say to us — our friends, the journalists — you know, “Why are you doing that?”  But — but, you know, I like to think, “Why did they do that?  Why did they spend so much money and then — why did the Fed print so much money so that we had inflation as high as we’ve ever seen since Jimmy Carter?  So, why did they do that?”
     
    So, we’re addressing inflation.  We didn’t have to address it in the first term, because it was always in the 1s, almost always.  But we’re going to get it back there. 
     
    And how are we doing it?  Well, we’re doing it with a plan that President Trump and I and others have talked about in the Oval that involves, like, every level of fighting inflation. 
     
    First, the macroeconomic level.  We’re cutting spending.  We’re cutting spending in negotiations with people on the Hill.  We’re cutting spending with the advice of our IT consultant, Elon Musk.  And then we’re also looking into supply-side things, like restoring Trump’s tax cuts, maybe even expensing new factories so that there is an explosion of supply.  If you have an explosion of supply and a reduction in government demand, then inflation goes way down. 
     
    And then, one of the things that you want to say is “Well, when are you going to see it?”  Well, the first thing that you’ll see when the markets believe that we’re going to get inflation under control is that the 10-year Treasury rate goes down, because that’s how they think about future expected inflation. 
     
    And so, we’re still going to see some memory of Biden’s inflation.  It’s not going to go away in a month.  But the 10-year Treasury before the last Consumer Price Index had dropped about 40 basis points.  Forty basis points because markets were optimistic about our ability to fight inflation. 
     
    Forty basis points is kind of not a fun thing to say.  I — economists talk that way.  I apologize.  But the way to think about it is, for a typical mortgage, if that affects the mortgage rate, then it’s going to save a typical family buying a house about a thousand bucks a year, and that’s just in our first month. 
     
    Okay.  The second thing we’ve done is we’ve had a lot of trade talks.  In fact, I was just meeting a minister from Mexico with Howard Lutnick just a couple of hours ago.  And we’re talking about reciprocal trade, and we’re also talking about the fentanyl crisis. 
     
    And so, reciprocal trade is about our government treating other governments the way they treat us.  We want trade to be fair.  It turns out that Americans have been disadvantaged by foreign governments over and over, and President Trump wants it to stop.  And the fact that struck me as most noticeable, when I started to look at what President Trump was asking us to do, is that last year — last year — we have data — U.S. companies paid $370 billion in taxes to foreign governments — $370 billion.  Last year, foreign multinationals paid us $57 billion in taxes. 
     
    We have one quarter of world GDP.  They have three quarters of world GDP.  And we’re paying $370.  They’re paying $57.  This is not reciprocal.  We’re going to try — or we’re going to fix it. 
     
    The other thing that we’ve done is we’ve had an all-of-the-above energy approach that’s led by Doug Burgum and Chris and a really large team — EPA — and we’ve already made so many actions that are going to affect the price of energy and lower inflation. 
     
    We’ve opened up 625 million acres to energy exploration.  We’ve cut 50 years of red tape that makes it so you can’t have permits.  And we’ve even made it so that when you go home, if you get a new one, then you can take a shower or flush a toilet or read under a light bulb.  We’re doing that too. 
     
    So — so, finally, let’s just think about, like, the facts that we can see right now that we think are awesome.  So, guess what?  Small-business optimism is — has go- — gone up by the most ever since President Trump came in.  ISM, which is the measure of what’s going on in manufacturing, it’s expanding again for the first time in years.  CEO confidence is the highest it’s been in years.  And the reason — the reason people are thinking this is that our policies give people cause for optimism. 
     
    And then I want to reiterate what Stephen Miller said, because it’s so important — and it’s so important for financial markets to start to digest this — that if, say, the Treasury secretary or the — any Cabinet secretary, with Elon Musk, is able to find some savings — say, $100 billion — well, in CBO land, that’s actually, like, about 10 times that or maybe 12 times that over a 10-year window. 
     
    And so, when you’re thinking about the negotiations right now over reconciliation and thinking about, well, $4 trillion, $5 trillion, well, those numbers, in terms of the savings, are going to end up being small because of all the waste that we’re finding. 
     
    And so, we’re incredibly optimistic about the future of inflation and the future of our economy.  And we’re optimistic because we’re making so much progress so far, and we already see it in market prices. 
     
    And, with that, I’ll hand it off to Mike. 
     
    MR. WALTZ:  All right.  Thanks, Kevin. 
     
    Well, good afternoon.  What a month and what a sea change in our — in our foreign policy.  In addition to what we’re doing on the border and restoring American sovereignty, in addition to what we’re doing in our economy and the job creation and the inflation reduction, we are bringing the world back to where it was at the end of President Trump’s first term, which is a world of peace, prosperity, and — and looking forward and getting us out of the chaos that we’ve just seen over the last four years. 
     
    So, over the last month, just to name a few, I had the honor of sitting in the Oval Office as President Trump spoke with President Putin and then immediately spoke with President Zelenskyy, and both of them said only President Trump could bring both sides to the table, and only President Trump could stop the horrific fighting that has been going on now for the better part of four years and that only President Trump could drive the world back to peace.  Both of those leaders said that in back-to-back calls.
     
    And, of course, we just had our historic talks mediated by our — our good friends and partners, Saudi Arabia — we give great thanks to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman for hosting — and sat down for the first time in years with the Russians and talked about a path forward with peace.
     
    On top of that and one of the things that led to that was a tremendous co- — confidence-building measure that we had with the release of Marc Fogel.  I’ll remind everyone, the last time that we had an American released from the Russians, either we gave up a deadly spy; pressured our allies to give up a lethal killer; or we released, under the Biden administration, the world’s most notorious arms dealer, Viktor Bout, who, by the way, had one of his main clients for arms the cartels in — in Mexico and Central America. 
     
    We gave up none of that.  This was released as a confidence-building measure, working with our great Middle East Envoy, Steve Witkoff, and our secretary of State as a first step towards opening these talks and then moving forward towards peace. 
     
    On top of that, we’ve secured, just in a month, the return of a dozen — 12 — American hostages from Russia, from Bulgaria, from Venezuela, the Taliban, and Hamas.  Excuse me, that’s from Belarus, not Bulgaria. 
     
    We also had — for the first time in quite some time, we took out a senior leader of ISIS, an international financier and recruiter that the military had been trying to take out for quite some time and — and wasn’t able to do so, frankly, because of a bureaucratic approval process.  President Trump said, “Take him out.”  And that ISIS financier and leader is no longer on this Earth. 
     
    We’ve also taken action to eliminate other terrorist organizations in the Middle East.  We drove — before the President was even in office, he started talking consequences for people that would hold Americans. 
     
    Heretofore, there’s been nothing but upside.  You take an American, you get some better deal.  You take another one, maybe you get a better deal.  No more.  There is now nothing but downside for taking Americans illegally, either as hostages or illegal detainees. 
     
    And when President Trump sent a very clear message across the Middle East, but particularly to Hamas, that there would be all hell to pay, we suddenly saw a breakthrough.  And now we just saw the release of yet another group of hostages.  There have been dozens now, including two Americans that we’ve seen once again reunited with their families. 
     
    As part of the talks with King Abdullah, he offered — and — and I think the entire world has graciously accepted — to take 2,000 sick children, cancer patients, and others out of Gaza.  As a humanitarian — as a humanitarian gesture, 2,000 Gazans will come out of that hellhole that it is, that wasteland that Gaza is right now, with unexploded ordnance, with debris everywhere, with no sewage, with no water.  And — and President Trump has — has put forward a plan to deal with the practical reality that is 1.8 million Gazans now — now truly suffering.
     
    And then, you know, just to bring it back to our own hemisphere, we’ve seen literally, in the last month — after years of national security experts, the generals in charge, and others testifying and ringing the alarm bells about — about the Chinese Communist Party’s presence in our own hemisphere, particularly in the Panama Canal, we’re seeing the leadership of Panama step away from the Belt and Road program, move away from China and back towards the United States, and even enter into talks and — and other negotiations about addressing the ports on either side of the canal. 
     
    And then, finally, last but not least, we’ve had four world leaders in the White House, in the Oval Office.  We’ve had the prime minister of Japan, the prime minister of India, the king of — of Jordan, and, of course, the prime minister of Israel just in the last four weeks.  And next week, we’ll have the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and we’ll have the president of France, Macron. 
     
    So, President Trump is on what we call Trump warp speed.  We are all — we are all honored to be really serving under — under his leadership and his vision.  And truly, you know, when we all say — and the President himself say — says, he is a president of peace.  He is a president focused on restoring stability.  I think the entire world saw what the world would look like without strong American leadership in the last four years.
     
    And it’s truly been an honor to get us back to where we were and back on track under President Trump’s leadership. 
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you, Mike. 
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Mm-hmm.
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.  Thank you, everybody.  I’m sure you’re very eager to ask questions of these very smart people working very hard on behalf of the president. 
     
    We do have somebody in our new media seat today.  We have John Stoll, who is the head of news at X.  As you all know — you’re all on X — it’s home to hundreds of millions of users, a large contingent of independent journalists and news organizations across geographies and political spectrums.  And at the same time, X remains the go-to platform for many legacy news outlets.  And I know, as I mentioned, many of the reporters in this room use X to attract eyeballs to your work. 
     
    Prior to joining X, John spent two decades in journalism, including several years as an editor at The Wall Street Journal.  We are excited to have him in the briefing room today.
     
    John, we’ll let you kick it off.  And as I said at the top, please direct your question to the individual up here who you’d like an answer from. 
     
    John, why don’t you begin.
     
    Q    All right.  Thank you very much.  I am sitting in for a thriving ecosystem of journalists, independent and — and emerging news organizations who do depend on X for publicity, for a business model.  And so, I look forward to seeing many of them in this seat in months and years to come. 
     
    I also thank you, Karoline, for opening this seat up to new media.  It — it really is a testament not only to your open-mindedness but also to innovation that you’d actually think about, you know, folks that are not traditionally credentialed to be in this room to be in this room and to not only have a question but also to witness — you know, this is at a very important intersection of power and the free press.
     
    And so, just the ability to witness this and — and be part of it, it brings everybody’s game up.  So, thank you for that. 
     
    I think this is for Mike Waltz.  My question is about Ukraine.
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Sure.
     
    Q    For about more than 10 years, I’ve been fascinated, like all — like many, with what’s going on.  I was in Northern Europe working out of the Baltics when Crimea was annexed and was — a lot — a lot of this came on Twitter.  The platform used to be known as Twitter.  Was — a lot of European leaders would — would talk about their disappointment and — and solidarity with Ukraine, but when it came to actually doing something, it felt like they were passing a hot potato and sent it over the Atlantic. 
     
    I wonder how much of what we’re seeing right now out of the administration and President Trump is a call to Europe and the European leaders and allies that we’ve traditionally had to pick up that hot potato and — and start doing something a little bit more concrete to win and preserve the peace in Ukraine. 
     
    The second question I have is — it — it’s related — is there’s been some — a lot of speculation that President Trump and the administration might be manipulated by Pre- — by Vladimir Putin.  I wonder if you can just talk a little bit about the administration’s posture —
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Yeah.
     
    Q    — and your confidence in the competence of this administration to d- — go toe to toe with Vladimir Putin. 
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Well, if there’s an- — I’ll take the l- — second question first.  If there’s anybody in this world that can go toe to toe with Putin, that could go toe to toe with Xi, that could go toe to toe with Kim Jong Un — and we could keep going down the list — it’s Donald J. Trump.  He is the dealmaker in chief.  There is no question that he is the commander in chief. 
     
    And I, for one — and I think all Americans and around the world should have no doubt about his ability to not only handle Putin but to handle the complexity of driving this war to an end. 
     
    And then on your first piece on Europe, I’ll take you back to 2014.  You’re right.  There was a lot of hand-wringing in Europe and not a lot of action.  There was also a lot of hand-wringing here in Washington under the Obama administration and not a lot of action.  They literally threw blankets at the problem. 
     
    And so, I’ll remind everyone that Putin had, you know, some type of conflict, invasion, or issue with their neighbor under President Bush, with Georgia; under President Obama, with Ukraine in 2014; not under President Trump, 45; and again with President Biden in 2022.  The war should have been deterred.  The war should have never happened, and I have no doubt it would not have happened under President Trump and will stop under President — President Trump again. 
     
    But I just want to push back on this notion of our European allies not being consulted as we’ve entered into this process.  I already mentioned the immediate phone call President Trump made to President Zelenskyy.  He has talked to President Macron of France repeatedly last week.  President Macron convened European leaders and then is coming here on Monday.  Prime Minister Starmer is coming next Thursday. 
     
    We’ve also — I’ve talked to every one of my national security — national security advisor counterparts across — across the spectrum in Europe.  I’ve talked to Secretary-General Rutte, the — the leader of NATO, the secretary-general of NATO.  We have repeatedly — oh, by the way, we had half our Cabinet — seven Cabinet officials, including the vice president, at the Munich Security Conference, all engaging, all listening, and all making sure our allies were heard. 
     
    However, we’ve also made it clear for years — decades, even — that it is unacceptable that the United States and the United States taxpayer continues to bear the burden not only of the cost of the war in Ukraine but of the defense of — of Europe.  We fully support our NATO Allies.  We fully support the Article 5 commitment.  But it’s time for our European allies to step up. 
     
    And one of the things that Secretary-General Rutte said on our call was this last couple of weeks have been a real wake-up call.  And I asked him, “What have you been missing the last couple of years?” 
     
    The fact that we are going to enter into a NATO summit this June with a third of our NATO Allies still not meeting the 2 percent minimum, a commitment they made a decade ago — literally a decade ago — with a war on their doorstep — the largest war that they’re all extremely concerned about — but yet it’s “Well, somebody else needs to pay.  We’ve got other domestic priorities.”  It’s unacceptable.  President Trump has made that clear. 
     
    And the minimum needs to be met.  We need to be at 100 percent in — this June at the NATO summit.  And then let’s talk about exceeding it, which what — is what President Trump has been talking about, with 5 percent of GDP. 
     
    Europe needs to step up for their own defense as a partner.  And we can be friends and allies and have those tough conversations. 
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Great.  Peter.
     
    Q    Thank you, Karoline.  I have a Ukraine one and a DOGE one.  Who can talk DOGE?
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Stephen, go ahead.
     
    Q    Well, so — so, Stephen, we’re hearing about these DOGE dividend checks that would be 20 percent back to taxpayers, 20 percent to pay down the debt.  Sixty percent is left.  Who gets that?
     
    MR. MILLER:  Well, the way that it works is when you achieve savings, you can either return it to taxpayers, you can return it to our debtors, or it can be cycled into next year’s budget, and then it just lowers the overall baseline for next year.  So, in other words, you can just transfer it into the next fiscal window and then lower the overall spending level.  And that means that you can achieve a permanent savings that way, and that reduces the deficit. 
     
    Q    And when is it that people might see those checks?
     
    MR. MILLER:  Well, this is all going to be worked on through the reconciliation process with Congress that’s going underway right now, as you’ve seen.  The Senate is moving a bill.  The House is moving a bill.  The president has great confidence in both chambers to deliver on his priorities. 
     
    I would just take this opportunity to note that President Trump has made a historic commitment to the working class of this country to fight for a major tax relief and major price relief.  And cutting spending, as DOGE is doing, and cutting taxes is the key to delivering on both of those promises.  And President Trump is resolutely committed to doing both. 
     
    Q    Thank you.  And on Ukraine.  I guess, this is for Mike.
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Sure. 
     
    Q    After the president’s post on Truth Social yesterday, need to know: Who does he think is more responsible for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Putin or Zelenskyy?
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Well, look, his — his goal, Peter, is to bring this war to an end, period.  And there has been ongoing fighting on both sides.  It is World War I-style trench warfare. 
     
    His frustration with President Zelenskyy is — that you’ve heard — is multifold.  One, there needs to be a deep appreciation for what the American people, what the American taxpayer, what President Trump did in — in his first term, and what we’ve done since.  So, some of the rhetoric coming out of Kyiv, frankly, and — and insults to President Trump were unacceptable.  Number one. 
     
    Number two, our own secretary of Treasury personally made the trip to offer the Ukrainians what is — can only be described as a historic opportunity — that is for America to coinvest with Ukraine in their minerals, in their resources, to truly grow the pie. 
     
    So, case in point, there’s a foundry that processes aluminum in Ukraine.  It’s — it’s been damaged.  It’s not at its current capacity.  If that is restored, it would account for America’s entire imports of aluminum for an entire year — that one foundry.
     
    There are tremendous resources there.  Not only is that long-term security for Ukraine, not only do we help them grow the pie with investments, but, you know, we do have an obligation to the American taxpayer in helping them recoup the hundreds of billions that ha- — that have occurred. 
     
    So, you know, rather than enter — enter into some constructive conversations about what that deal should be going forward, we got a lot of rhetoric in the media that was — that was incredibly unfortunate. 
     
    And I could just tell you, Peter, you know, as a veteran, as somebody who’s been in combat, this war is horrific.  And I think we’ve lost sight of that, of the literally thousands of people that are dying a day, families that are going without the next generation. 
     
    And I find it kind of, you know, frankly, ridiculous.  So many people in Washington that were just demanding, pounding the table for a ceasefire in Gaza are suddenly aghast that the president would demand one and both sides come to the table when it talks to — when it comes to Ukraine, a war that has been arguably far greater in — in scope and scale and far more dangerous in terms of global escalation to U.S. security.
     
    Q    And I do have one for Karoline.
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Sure.
     
    Q    Does President Trump have a bet with Trudeau about this USA-Canada hockey game tonight?  (Laughter.)  And when there is a big hockey game on, is the president watching for the goals or for the fights?
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  (Laughs.)  Probably both.  I think he’s watching for the United States to win tonight.  I know he talked to the USA hockey team this morning.  He talked to the players after their morning practice, around 10 o’clock.  And I also spoke to some folks from that team after.  They were jubilant over President Trump’s comments to the team.  I believe they’re going to put out a video of that call. 
     
    So, he looks forward to watching the game tonight, and we look forward to the United States beating our soon-to-be 51st state, Canada.  (Laughter.)
     
    Bloomberg, go ahead. 
     
    Q    My question is for Mike Waltz.  Can you give us a readout of Kellogg’s meeting with Zelenskyy that just wrapped up?  And, in particular, Zelenskyy publicly rejected this deal about the rare earth minerals.  Where — where does that stand?
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Well, we’re going to continue to have — he needs to come back to the table, and we’re going to continue to have discussions about where that deal is going. 
     
    Again, we have an obligation to the taxpayer.  I think this is an opportunity.  The president thinks this is an opportunity for Ukraine going forward.  There can be, in my view, nothing better for Ukraine’s future and for their security than — than to have the United States invested in their prosperity long-term.  And then a key piece of this has also been security guarantees. 
     
    Look, the — the reality that we’re talking about here is: Is it in Ukraine’s interest?  Is it in Europe’s interest?  It certainly isn’t in Russia’s interest or in the American people’s interest for this war to grind on forever and ever and ever. 
     
    So, a key part of his conversation was helping President Zelenskyy understand this war needs to come to an end.  This kind of open-ended mantra that we’ve had under the Biden administration, that’s over.  And I think a lot of people are having a hard time accepting that.
     
    And then the other piece is there’s been discussions from Prime Minister Starmer and also President Macron about European-led security guarantees.  We welcome that.  We’ve been asking Europe to step up and secure its own prosperity, safety, and security.  So, we certainly welcome that. 
     
    And we certainly welcome more European assistance.  As I told my counterparts, “Come to the table with more, if — if you want a bigger seat at the table.”  And we’ve been asking for that for quite some time. 
     
    Q    And has Russia pushed for sanctions in your talks with them?  And have you consulted with international partners and allies about potentially rolling back sanctions in these negotiations to end the war?
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Those — the talks with — with our Russian counterparts — both with my counterpart, the national security advisor; Secretary Rubio’s counterpart, the Foreign Minister, Foreign Minister Lavrov — you know, it — it really were — was quite broad, focused on what is the goals for our broader relationship, but very clear that the fighting has to stop to get to any of those brighter goals. 
     
    And as a first step, we’re just going to do some commonsense things, like restore the — the ability of both of our embassies to function. 
     
    And, again, you know, this is — this was common sense.  In — in foreign policy world, they call it “shuttle diplomacy.”  We have to talk to both sides in order to get to both sides to the table, and both sides have said only President Trump could do that. 
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Diana.
     
    Q    Thank you.  And my question is for Mike Waltz.  (Laughter.)
     
    MR. WALTZ:  All right.
     
    Q    The president has called Zelenskyy a dictator.  Does he view Putin as a dictator? 
     
    And does he want Zelenskyy out of power?  I know he’s called for elections. 
     
    And then, thirdly, the head of the Defense Committee in Ukraine’s parliament just has claimed that the U.S. has stopped selling weapons to Ukraine.  Is that true?
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Well, most of our weapons that have gone to Ukraine have been part of a drawdown authority, where we’ve literally taken them out of our stocks and then, eventually, through appropriations, started buying them again to refill our stocks. 
     
    I’ll, you know, just state that there has been a lag in a lot of that process.  So, many of our stocks, as we look at our operations around the world, are becoming more depleted.  That’s one of the reasons many people have had a lot of concern about: When does this end?  How much is it going to take?  How many lives will be lost?  How much will we be — how much will we spend? 
     
    As a member of Congress, we repeatedly asked the Biden administration those questions, and we never got a satisfactory answer. 
     
    Look, President Trump is obviously very frustrated right now with President Zelenskyy — the fact that — that he hasn’t come to the table, that he hasn’t been willing to take this opportunity that we have offered.  I think he eventually will get to that point, and I hope so very quickly.
     
    But President Trump is — as we made clear to our Russian counterparts, and I want to make clear today — he’s focused on stopping the fighting and moving forward.  And we could argue all day long about what’s happened in the past. 
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Reagan.
     
    Q    Thanks.  I have a question for Stephen —
     
    (Cross-talk.)
     
    Q    — and a question for Mike.
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Excuse me, I just called on Reagan.  Reagan, go ahead. 
     
    Q    I have a question for Stephen and a question for Mike. 
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Sure.
     
    Q    Stephen, I can start with you.  There have been reports —
     
    MR. MILLER:  Thank you.
     
    Q    — that Trump is unhappy with the rate of deportations and he wants them to be higher.  Is the president happy with the rate of deportations, and are there any plans to speed up the process?
     
    MR. MILLER:  Well, first of all, we all appreciate the encouragement from the media to deport as many illegal aliens as humanly possible.  So, thank you. 
     
    And I will promise you that the full might of the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, and every element and instrument of national power will be used to remove, with speed, all criminal illegals from the soil of the United States of America, to enforce final removal orders, and to ensure that this country is for American citizens and those who legally belong in this country.
     
    We inherited an ICE that was completely shuttered.  We inherited a Department of Homeland Security whose sole mission was to resettle illegal aliens within the United States of America. 
     
    In 30 days, the president sealed the border shut, declared the cartels to be terrorist organizations, has increased ICE deportations to levels not seen in decades, and we are shortly on the verge of achieving a pace and speed of deportations this country has never before seen. 
     
    Thank you. 
     
    Q    And Mike.
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Mm-hmm.
     
    Q    There have been reports that there’s some underground opposition to Trump’s pick for Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Elbridge Colby.  Have you or anyone from the administration been personally lobbying senators to support Elbridge Colby? 
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Look, I’ve worked with Bridge Co- — Colby in the past.  He has the president’s full support to be the Undersecretary of policy, which will be a critical policy arm for Secretary Hegseth going forward that will implement a lot of these policies. 
     
    And — and really, that’s — that’s been the extent of it.  I think there’s been a lot of kind of, you know, breathless — I don’t know — back-and-forth in the — in the press, but we’re full speed ahead to get the president’s team in place so we can implement his America First policy. 
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.  Mike has spoken pretty extensively.  Does anybody have questions for Stephen or for Mr. Hassett?
     
    Q    I do.
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Nobody wants to talk about the economy?  (Laughter.)
     
    (Cross-talk.)
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Sure. 
     
    Q    IRS.
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  IRS.  Okay.  Go ahead.
     
    Q    And this would be for either one of you.  So, we have reported, several other outlets have reported that about 3,500 people are due to be — lose their jobs at the IRS by the end of the week.  If the goal of these spending cuts across the federal government has been to reduce the debt, why impose some of the deepest cuts we’ve seen so far at the agency responsible for raising revenue for the federal government?
     
    MR. HASSETT:  Well, I think our objective is to make sure that the employees that we pay are being productive and effective.  And there are many, many — more than 100,000 people working to collect taxes, and not all of them are fully occupied.  And the Treasury secretary is studying the matter and feels like 3,500 is a small number and probably can get bigger, especially as we improve the IT at the IRS.
     
    And so — so, I think that it’s absolutely something that is on the table for good reasons.  And the point is that — don’t just talk about the IRS.  Talk about all of government, that there are so many places — I live in D.C.; you maybe live in D.C. — where you never — there — nobody — nobody is going into the buildings.  People aren’t commuting because nobody is doing their job.  We look back and we see that there are all these people doing two jobs while they’re getting a government payroll — on the payroll. 
     
    So, the point is, we’re fixing that, and the IRS is a small part of that picture. 
     
    Q    So, you’re saying that everybody who’s being let go was doing a bad job?
    MR. HASSETT:  I’m saying that we’re studying every agency and deciding who to let go and why, and we’re doing so very rationally with a lot of support from analysis. 
     
    Q    Because we’re being told by a lot of people who have been let go at other agencies that they were told they were being dismissed because of poor performance, when, in some cases, they haven’t even had a performance review yet because they’ve only been on the job a couple of months. 
     
    MR. HASSETT:  Yeah, I’ve never seen a person who was laid off for poor performance say that they were performing poorly.  (Laughter.)  Okay?
    Q    Karoline.
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Good point.  Sure, Kaitlan.
     
    Q    I have a question.  I’ll start with you, Kevin Hassett.  Thank you for being here.  And then I’ve got a question for Mr. Waltz.
     
    On these potential checks that you might send out from DOGE, is there a concern, as you’re thinking through this, that they could be inflationary?
     
    MR. HASSETT:  Oh, absolutely not, because imagine if we don’t spend government money and we give it back to people, then the — you know, if they spend it all, then you’re even.  But they’re probably going to save a lot of it, in which case, you’re reducing inflation. 
     
    Q    Okay.  So, you’re not —
     
    MR. HASSETT:  And also, when the government spends a lot, that’s what creates inflation.  We learned that from Joe Biden.  And so, if we reduce government spending, then that’s — you know, reduces inflation.  And if you give people money, then they’re going to save a bunch of it.  And — and when they save it, then that also reduces demand and reduces inflation. 
     
    Q    Okay.  So, you’re not worried about it. 
     
    MR. HASSETT:  No, I’m not.
     
    Q    And, Mr. Waltz, to follow up on Peter’s question, you wrote in an op-ed in the fall of 2023 that, quote, “Putin is to blame, certainly, like al Qaeda was to blame for 9/11.”
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Mm-hmm.
     
    Q    Do you still feel that way now, or do you share the president’s assessment, as he says Ukraine is to blame for the start of this war?
     
    MR. WALTZ:  Well, it shouldn’t surprise you that I share the president’s assessment on all kinds of issues.  What I wrote as a Member of Congress is — was as a former Member of Congress. 
     
    Look, what I share the president’s assessment on is that the war has to end.  And what comes with that?  What comes with that should be, at some point, elections.  What comes with that should be peace.  What comes with that is prosperity that we’ve just offered in this natural resources and economic partnership arrangement: an end to the killing and European security and security for the world.  The President is not only determined to do that in Europe, he’s determined to do it in the Middle East. 
     
    And just a few months ago, we had an administration that had tried for 15 months, week after week, sitting with you here, and couldn’t get us to a ceasefire, couldn’t get our hostages out.  Now we’re at that point.  We’re back to the maximum pressure on Iran.
     
    And we will — we have just begun, and we will drive towards a ceasefire and all of those other steps.  I’m not going to pre-negotiate or get ahead of the sequencing of all of that.  It’s a very delicate situation. 
     
    But this is a president of peace.  And who here would argue against peace?
     
    Q    Okay.  So, you do share that assessment. 
     
    And can I follow up.  In 2017 —
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  No.  Go ahead, Jordan.
     
    Q    — then-President Trump —
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Go ahead, Jordan. 
     
    Q    Can I just follow up really quickly?
     
    Q    Thank you.  So —
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  You just had two questions, Kaitlan.
     
    Q    May I — can I just —
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Jordan, go ahead. 
     
    Q    Mr. — Mr. Hassett —
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you.
     
    Q    I have an important follow-up for Mike Waltz.
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Jordan, go ahead.  Go ahead.
     
    Q    So, Mr. Hassett, you were speaking about tariff revenue, and you also addressed a question about the R- — IRS.  President Trump has spoken about replacing income tax with tariff revenue, especially with all this waste, fraud, and abuse that we’re seeing cut.  Is that a possibility?
     
    MR. HASSETT:  Absolutely.  And, in fact, if you think about the China tariff revenue that we’re estimating is coming in from the 10 percent that we just added, plus the de minimis thing, that it’s between $500 billion and a trillion dollars over 10 years, is our estimate.  And that’s something that is outside of the reductions that markets are seeing through the negotiations up on the Hill.
     
    And so, we expect that the tariff revenue is actually going to make it much easier for Republicans to pass a bill, and that was the President’s plan all along. 
     
    Thank you.
     
    Q    And I — I have a question for Stephen Miller about DOGE.  So, you — you spoke about DOGE.  You said roughly $50 billion is set to be cut in a year of waste, fraud, and abuse by unelected bureaucrats.  We’re hearing this ironic narrative from the President’s critics and the left-wing media that Elon Musk is an unelected bureaucrat, and he’s doing all this terrible stuff.  Isn’t one of DOGE’s objectives to get — get rid of the federal bureaucracy, the — the deep state?  And also, who was running the White House when Joe Biden was in office —
     
    MR. MILLER:  (Laughs.)
     
    Q    — because I don’t know a single person who believes it was Joe Biden? 
     
    MR. MILLER:  Yes.  You’re — you’re tempting me to say — (laughs) — some very harsh things about some of our media friends.  The — yes, it is true that many of the people in this room, for four years, failed to cover the fact that Joe Biden was mentally incompetent and was not running the country. 
     
    It is also true that many people in this room who have used this talking point that Elon is not elected fail to understand how government works.  So, I’m glad for the opportunity for a brief civics lesson. 
     
    A president is elected by the whole American people.  He’s the only official in the entire government that is elected by the entire nation.  Right?  Judges are appointed.  Members of Congress are elected at the district or state level.  Just one man. 
     
    And the Constitution, Article Two, has a clause, known as the vesting clause, and it says, “The executive power shall be vested in a president,” singular.  The whole will of democracy is imbued into the elected president.  That president then appoints staff to then impose that democratic will onto the government. 
     
    The threat to democracy — indeed, the existential threat to democracy — is the unelected bureaucracy of lifetime, tenured civil servants who believe they answer to no one, who believe they can do whatever they want without consequence, who believe they can set their own agenda no matter what Americans vote for. 
     
    So, Americans vote for radical FBI reform, and FBI agents say they don’t want to change.  Or Americans vote for radical reform in our energy policies, but EPA bureaucrats say they don’t want to change.  Or Americans vote to end DEI — racist DEI policies, and lawyers in the Department of Justice say they don’t want to change. 
     
    What President Trump is doing is he is removing federal bureaucrats who are defying democracy by failing to implement his lawful orders, which are the will of the whole American people. 
     
    Thank you. 
     
    Q    Thanks, Stephen.  Can I follow up?
     
    Q    Karoline.
     
    MS. LEAVITT:  Thank you very much, everybody.  I’m looking at the clock.  We’ve almost had an hour of time. 
     
    (Cross-talk.)

    LEAVITT:  I know a couple of these individuals have a meeting to get to at 2:00 p.m.  So, you’re welcome to follow up with my team for further questions.  We’re going to let these guys get back to running the United States government.
     
    And we will see you all later.  President Trump will be speaking at 3 o’clock at the Black History Month reception.
     
    So, thank you.  It’s good to see you.  We’ll see you in a bit.  Thanks.
     
    Q    Are you going to the Black History Month reception, Mr. Miller?
     
    Q    Stephen, on the fraud.  Should we expect indictments?
     
    Q    What is your reaction to Mitch McConnell’s retirement?
     
    Q    Are there indictments coming for all the fraud we’ve found?
     
         MR. MILLER:  I’d love to follow up with you.  Just set up a time with Karoline.
     
         Q    Okay.  Thank you. 
     
    END                   1:56 P.M. EST

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Zelensky says meeting with US envoy ‘productive’

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Thursday that he held a “productive meeting” with Keith Kellogg, the U.S. special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, in Kiev.

    “We had a detailed conversation about the battlefield situation, how to return our prisoners of war, and effective security guarantees,” he said on social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter.

    Zelensky thanked the United States for the assistance and bipartisan support for Ukraine and voiced readiness to sign “a strong, effective investment and security agreement” with U.S. President Donald Trump.

    “We have proposed the fastest and most constructive way to achieve results,” Zelensky emphasized.

    Kellogg, who arrived in Kiev on Wednesday, met with Zelensky earlier in the day.

    According to Ukrainian presidential spokesperson Serhii Nikiforov, a joint press conference between Zelensky and Kellogg did not take place at the request of the U.S. side.

    Also on Thursday, Kellogg met with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha to discuss ways toward “comprehensive, just and lasting peace” in Ukraine.

    After the meeting, Sybiha wrote on X that he affirmed Ukraine’s willingness to achieve peace through strength and briefed Kellogg on Kiev’s vision for the necessary steps.

    MIL OSI China News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Senators Coons, Cassidy reintroduce the Retirement Security for American Hostages Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons
    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-La.) reintroduced the Retirement Security for American Hostages Act to ensure American hostages and wrongful detainees don’t see reduced Social Security earnings as a result of being unlawfully held abroad. In addition to Senators Coons and Cassidy, this legislation is co-sponsored by Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). This legislation was previously introduced in the 118th Congress.
    “The financial impact of wrongful detention doesn’t end when Americans come home – the damage can last into their years of retirement,” said Senator Coons. “Americans like Paul Whelan – unjustly held in a Russian prison for six years until the Biden Administration secured his release – see severely reduced Social Security benefits for the rest of their lives and have precious little time to make those earnings back. The Retirement Security for American Hostages Act provides a straightforward and practical solution so that years spent in foreign detention don’t translate into permanently reduced retirement benefits for these Americans who have already suffered so much.”
    “Losing one’s freedom is enough to endure. Americans held hostage should not also lose their Social Security benefits,” said Senator Cassidy. “Ensuring their benefits are protected makes a difference in someone’s life.” 
    “Hostage US strongly supports the Retirement Security for American Hostages Act. As the leading organization providing reintegration support, guidance, and resources to Americans held hostage or wrongfully detained abroad, we see firsthand the long-term impact captivity has on individuals and their loved ones. This critical piece of legislation prevents reduced retirement security when hostages return home and means former captives can rebuild their lives without additional hardship. Americans who have endured captivity should have financial protections and this commonsense legislation will provide much-needed relief to those who have already suffered so much,” said Liz Cathcart, Executive Director of Hostage US.
    “The lives of Americans held hostage or wrongfully detained are forever altered in damaging ways that can continue upon their release and return home,” said Diane Foley, President, the James W. Foley Legacy Foundation. “This bill provides an important measure of relief to reduce the burdens faced by those who are lucky enough to be freed.” 
    Last summer, several Americans were released from wrongful detention in Russia as part of a historic prisoner exchange, and additional Americans have been released from hostage situations since then. These individuals now face financial obstacles resulting from their captivity, including diminished Social Security benefits when they reach retirement. Because they may not have received a paycheck or paid payroll taxes while in captivity, their Average Indexed Monthly Earnings (AIME), which determines their Social Security benefit upon retirement, may have diminished by a meaningful amount.
    The Retirement Security for American Hostages Act would amend the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) calculation of benefits for individuals identified as wrongful detainees by the federal government. The bill ensures that when calculating Social Security benefits, the SSA would assume “deemed wages” equal to the national average for each month a former hostage or detainee was held, preventing unjust reductions in their retirement benefits.
    Senator Coons has led numerous bills supporting American hostages and wrongful detainees and addressing financial hardships they often face upon their return. He reintroduced the Retirement Security for American Hostages Act alongside two other hostage bills today–– the Fair Credit for American Hostages Act and the Stop Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act. The first is a bill with Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) that would empower former hostages and detainees to restore credit scores that may have been negatively impacted during their detention. The latter is with Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) and would stop the IRS from imposing fines and penalties on American hostages and wrongful detainees for late tax payments while they are held abroad. Both of those bills unanimously cleared the Senate last year.
    A one-pager is available here.
    The full text of the legislation can be found here. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: IMF Executive Board Concludes 2024 Article IV Consultation with Thailand

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    February 20, 2025

    Washington, DC: On February 11, The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded the Article IV consultation[1] with Thailand and endorsed the staff appraisal without a meeting on a lapse-of-time basis.

    Thailand’s economy is gradually recovering, but at a slower pace than peers. Economic activity expanded modestly by 1.9 percent in 2023 and 2.3 percent in the first three quarters of 2024, driven by private consumption growth and a rebound in tourism. Inflation remained subdued, averaging 0.4 percent (y/y) annually in 2024, well below the Bank of Thailand’s target range of 1 to 3 percent. External factors such as the decline in global energy and food prices, lower import prices have played a role, but domestic factors such as energy subsidies, price controls, and the unwinding of pandemic-related fiscal support have also contributed to the lower inflation. The current account balance strengthened to 1.4 percent of GDP in 2023, from -3.5 percent of GDP in 2022, and continues to register a moderate surplus as of November 2024, supported by the continued recovery in tourism and higher exports.

    A gradual cyclical recovery is expected to continue. Real GDP is projected to grow by 2.7 percent in 2024 and to increase to 2.9 percent in 2025. This is underpinned by the expansionary fiscal stance envisaged under the 2025 budget, which includes additional cash transfers of 1.0 percent of GDP and a rebound in public investment. Tourism-related sectors are expected to continue to support growth, as well as private consumption that will be further boosted by the authorities’ cash transfers. As growth continues to firm up, inflation is expected to pick up but remain in the bottom half of the target range in 2025. The current account balance is expected to improve further in 2024 and 2025, driven by the ongoing recovery in tourist arrivals.

    Risks to Thailand’s economic outlook are tilted to the downside. On the external front, an escalation of global trade tensions or deepening geoeconomic fragmentation could disrupt Thailand’s export recovery and dampen FDI inflows, while increased commodity price volatility could affect growth and lead to inflation spikes, and potentially tighter-for-longer global financial conditions. The intensification of regional conflicts could disrupt trade and travel flows while more frequent extreme climate events would adversely impact growth prospects. On the domestic front, the private sector debt overhang could impair financial institutions’ balance sheets and further decrease credit supply, negatively affecting growth. Renewed political uncertainty could hinder policy implementation and undermine confidence.

    Executive Board Assessment[2]

    In concluding the 2024 Article IV consultation with Thailand, Executive Directors endorsed the staff’s appraisal, as follows:

    Thailand’s economic recovery is ongoing, but it has been relatively slow and uneven. Economic activity expanded modestly in 2024, driven by private consumption and a rebound in tourism-related activities, while delayed budget implementation slowed the pace of public investment. The slow recovery, compared to ASEAN peers, is also rooted in Thailand’s longstanding structural weaknesses, while emerging external and domestic headwinds have also contributed to subdued inflation. The outlook remains highly uncertain with significant downside risks.

    As economic slack narrows, the focus should shift to rebuilding fiscal space. A less expansionary fiscal stance than envisaged under the FY25 budget would still provide impulse to support the recovery while helping to preserve policy space. Alternatively, reallocating part of the planned cash transfers toward productivity-enhancing investments or social protection would enable stronger inclusive growth and help reduce the public debt-to-GDP ratio. Starting in FY26, a revenue-based medium-term fiscal consolidation is needed to bring down public debt and rebuild buffers.

    Thailand’s fiscal framework can be further strengthened. This would require strengthening fiscal rules to better support the debt anchor by introducing a risk-based rules approach. Costs associated with quasi-fiscal operations such as energy price caps should be adequately accounted for, and fiscal risks closely monitored. Improving data provision for government finance statistics and SOEs is important.

    Staff welcomes the BOT’s decision to cut the policy rate in October and recommends a further reduction in the policy rate to support inflation and also translate into improvements in borrowers’ debt-servicing capacity with limited risk of additional leverage amid tight lending. Given remaining high uncertainty in the outlook, the authorities should stand ready to adjust their monetary policy stance in a data and outlook-dependent manner. Central bank independence with clear communication of policy moves is key to maintaining the credibility and effectiveness of monetary policy in anchoring inflation expectations.

    Effective coordination across policy tools, underpinned by adequate buffers, is essential for managing adverse scenarios. While the flexible exchange rate should continue to act as a shock absorber, the complementary use of FXI might alleviate policy trade-offs by smoothing destabilizing premia when large non-fundamental shocks render the FX market dysfunctional. Further liberalization of the FX ecosystem and phasing out of remaining capital flow management measures would help deepen the FX market and limit the need for FXI over time.

    A comprehensive package of prudential and legal measures needs to be deployed to facilitate an orderly private deleveraging. Staff welcomes the measures already implemented to address both the existing household debt stock and the buildup of new leverage. However, simultaneous and forceful implementation of personal debt workouts via more effective bankruptcy proceedings is essential to lower the existing household debt stock.

    The external position in 2024 was moderately stronger than warranted by fundamentals and desirable policy settings. Policies aimed at promoting investment, enhancing social safety nets, liberalizing the services sector, and minimizing tax incentives and subsidies that distort competition would facilitate external rebalancing.

    Resolute structural reforms are needed to boost productivity and competitiveness. Reform priorities include facilitating competition and openness, upgrading physical and ICT infrastructure, upskilling/reskilling the labor force, increasing export sophistication by leveraging digitalization, and strengthening governance. Providing an adequate social protection floor to vulnerable households could help enhance their resilience to shocks and address structural drivers of household debt accumulation.

    Table 1. Thailand: Selected Economic Indicators, 2019–30

    Per capita GDP (2023): US$7,338

    Exchange Rate (2023): 34.8 Baht/USD

    Unemployment rate (2023): 1 percent

    Poverty headcount ratio at national poverty line (2021): 6.3 percent

    Net FDI (2023): US$ -7.16 billion

    Population (2023): 70.18 million

                       

    Actual

    Projections

    2019

    2020

    2021

    2022

    2023

    2024

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    Real GDP growth (y/y percent change) 1/

    2.1

    -6.1

    1.6

    2.5

    1.9

    2.7

    2.9

    2.6

    2.7

    2.7

    2.7

    2.7

    Consumption

    3.4

    -0.3

    1.3

    4.8

    4.6

    4.3

    4.0

    2.9

    2.1

    2.3

    2.6

    2.6

    Gross fixed investment

    2.0

    -4.8

    3.1

    2.3

    1.2

    0.1

    4.1

    2.1

    1.8

    2.3

    2.4

    2.5

    Inflation (y/y percent change)

                           

    Headline CPI (end of period)

    0.9

    -0.3

    2.2

    5.9

    -0.8

    1.2

    1.3

    1.5

    1.5

    1.7

    1.7

    1.8

    Headline CPI (period average)

    0.7

    -0.8

    1.2

    6.1

    1.2

    0.4

    1.0

    1.3

    1.5

    1.6

    1.7

    1.8

    Core CPI (end of period)

    0.5

    0.2

    0.3

    3.2

    0.6

    0.8

    1.3

    1.0

    1.2

    1.4

    1.4

    1.6

    Core CPI (period average)

    0.5

    0.3

    0.2

    2.5

    1.3

    0.6

    1.1

    1.2

    1.1

    1.3

    1.4

    1.5

    Saving and investment (percent of GDP)

                           

    Gross domestic investment

    23.8

    23.8

    28.6

    27.8

    22.5

    20.8

    21.9

    22.2

    22.0

    21.8

    21.8

    21.6

    Private

    16.9

    16.8

    16.9

    17.3

    17.3

    16.7

    16.6

    16.4

    16.3

    16.1

    16.1

    16.0

    Public

    5.7

    6.4

    6.5

    6.1

    5.6

    5.6

    5.9

    5.8

    5.7

    5.7

    5.7

    5.7

    Change in stocks

    1.2

    0.5

    5.1

    4.5

    -0.4

    -1.5

    -0.6

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    Gross national saving

    30.8

    27.9

    26.5

    24.4

    24.0

    22.6

    24.0

    24.5

    24.4

    24.4

    24.5

    24.4

    Private, including statistical discrepancy

    25.8

    26.2

    26.8

    22.6

    21.0

    19.8

    21.8

    21.9

    21.7

    21.7

    21.8

    21.6

    Public

    5.0

    1.8

    -0.3

    1.7

    3.0

    2.8

    2.2

    2.5

    2.7

    2.7

    2.7

    2.8

    Foreign saving

    -7.0

    -4.2

    2.1

    3.5

    -1.4

    -1.8

    -2.2

    -2.3

    -2.4

    -2.6

    -2.7

    -2.8

    Fiscal accounts (percent of GDP) 2/

                           

    General government balance 3/

    0.4

    -4.5

    -6.7

    -4.5

    -2.0

    -2.2

    -3.6

    -3.2

    -2.9

    -2.8

    -2.8

    -2.8

      SOEs balance

    0.4

    0.6

    -0.3

    -0.6

    -0.7

    -0.1

    -0.2

    -0.1

    -0.1

    -0.1

    -0.1

    0.0

    Public sector balance 4/

    0.8

    -3.9

    -7.1

    -5.1

    -2.7

    -2.3

    -3.8

    -3.3

    -3.0

    -2.9

    -2.9

    -2.8

    Public sector debt (end of period) 4/

    41.1

    49.4

    58.3

    60.5

    62.4

    63.3

    64.7

    65.4

    66.0

    66.1

    66.4

    66.4

    Monetary accounts (end of period, y/y percent change)

               

    Broad money growth

    3.6

    10.2

    4.8

    3.9

    1.9

    2.3

    3.7

    3.5

    3.2

    3.8

    3.2

    3.7

    Narrow money growth

    5.7

    14.2

    14.0

    3.1

    4.2

    5.9

    3.2

    4.7

    4.2

    5.1

    4.3

    4.9

    Credit to the private sector (by other depository corporations)

    2.4

    4.5

    4.5

    2.5

    1.5

    0.1

    1.0

    1.6

    1.8

    2.1

    2.3

    2.5

    Balance of payments (billions of U.S. dollars)

                           

    Current account balance

    38.3

    20.9

    -10.7

    -17.2

    7.4

    9.5

    11.9

    13.2

    14.6

    16.5

    18.2

    19.4

    (In percent of GDP)

    7.0

    4.2

    -2.1

    -3.5

    1.4

    1.8

    2.2

    2.3

    2.4

    2.6

    2.7

    2.8

    Exports of goods, f.o.b.

    242.7

    227.0

    270.6

    285.2

    280.7

    293.6

    301.8

    312.5

    327.2

    343.1

    359.0

    375.5

    Growth rate (dollar terms)

    -3.3

    -6.5

    19.2

    5.4

    -1.5

    4.6

    2.8

    3.6

    4.7

    4.9

    4.6

    4.6

            Growth rate (volume terms)

    -3.7

    -5.8

    15.4

    1.2

    -2.7

    2.1

    1.9

    2.7

    3.5

    3.6

    3.2

    3.2

    Imports of goods, f.o.b.

    216.0

    186.6

    238.6

    271.6

    261.4

    274.9

    284.6

    295.1

    309.1

    324.1

    339.1

    354.9

    Growth rate (dollar terms)

    -5.6

    -13.6

    27.9

    13.8

    -3.8

    5.2

    3.5

    3.7

    4.7

    4.9

    4.6

    4.7

            Growth rate (volume terms)

    -5.8

    -10.4

    18.0

    1.0

    -4.1

    3.7

    3.5

    3.3

    3.4

    3.3

    3.3

    3.3

    Capital and financial account balance 5/

    -24.7

    -2.6

    3.6

    6.9

    -4.9

    -9.5

    -11.9

    -13.2

    -14.6

    -16.5

    -18.2

    -19.4

    Overall balance

    13.6

    18.4

    -7.1

    -10.2

    2.6

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    Gross official reserves (including net forward position, end of period) (billions of U.S. dollars)

    259.0

    286.5

    279.2

    245.8

    254.6

    262.5

    262.5

    262.5

    262.5

    262.5

    262.5

    262.5

    (Months of following year’s imports)

    16.7

    14.4

    12.3

    11.3

    11.1

    11.1

    10.7

    10.2

    9.7

    9.3

    8.9

    8.5

    (Percent of short-term debt) 6/

    338.0

    315.3

    291.2

    236.3

    242.7

    239.6

    231.7

    222.5

    213.7

    206.2

    199.6

    252.3

    (Percent of ARA metric)

    252.5

    278.3

    263.3

    222.3

    233.2

    231.8

    226.4

    219.2

    212.3

    205.4

    199.3

    200.0

    Exchange rate (baht/U.S. dollar)

    31.0

    31.3

    32.0

    35.1

    34.8

    35.3

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    NEER appreciation (annual average)

    7.2

    -0.3

    -4.5

    -1.8

    3.9

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    REER appreciation (annual average)

    5.8

    -2.6

    -5.7

    -1.1

    1.2

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    External debt

                           

    (In percent of GDP)

    31.7

    38.0

    38.9

    40.6

    38.2

    38.4

    38.5

    38.6

    38.7

    38.7

    38.8

    38.8

    (In billions of U.S. dollars)

    172.7

    190.1

    196.9

    201.4

    196.5

    202.4

    213.1

    223.8

    233.8

    245.9

    257.0

    270.0

    Public sector 7/

    38.0

    37.2

    41.5

    41.2

    35.8

    38.4

    40.8

    43.3

    45.6

    48.1

    50.8

    53.7

    Private sector

    134.0

    152.9

    155.4

    160.3

    160.7

    164.5

    172.9

    181.1

    188.8

    198.3

    206.8

    217.0

    Medium- and long-term

    74.6

    79.4

    82.3

    82.3

    80.3

    80.7

    86.5

    91.1

    95.3

    101.5

    107.1

    114.0

    Short-term (including portfolio flows)

    59.4

    73.5

    73.1

    78.0

    80.4

    83.8

    86.4

    90.0

    93.5

    96.8

    99.7

    103.0

    Debt service ratio 8/

    7.8

    7.5

    6.3

    7.3

    7.9

    7.8

    7.8

    7.3

    8.3

    9.3

    10.3

    10.3

    Memorandum items:

                           

    Nominal GDP (billions of baht)

    16889.2

    15661.3

    16188.6

    17378.0

    17922.0

    18603.0

    19371.2

    20282.2

    21143.0

    22211.7

    23164.5

    24307.8

    (In billions of U.S. dollars)

    544.0

    500.5

    506.3

    495.6

    515.0

    527.1

    553.9

    580.2

    604.8

    635.4

    662.7

    695.4

    Output Gap (in percent of potential output)

    0.2

    -4.2

    -4.1

    -2.0

    -1.5

    -0.7

    0.0

    0.1

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    Sources: Thai authorities; CEIC Data Co. Ltd.; and IMF staff estimates and projections.

    1/ This series reflects the new GDP data based on the chain volume measure methodology, introduced by the Thai authorities in May 2015.

    2/ On a fiscal year basis. The fiscal year ends on September 30.

    3/ Includes budgetary central government, extrabudgetary funds, and local governments.

    4/ Includes general government and SOEs.

    5/ Includes errors and omissions.

    6/ With remaining maturity of one year or less.

    7/ Excludes debt of state enterprises.

    8/ Percent of exports of goods and services.

                                                             

    [1] Under Article IV of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement, the IMF holds bilateral discussions with members, usually every year. A staff team visits the country, collects economic and financial information, and discusses with officials the country’s economic developments and policies. On return to headquarters, the staff prepares a report, which forms the basis for discussion by the Executive Board.

    [2] The Executive Board takes decisions under its lapse-of-time procedure when the Board agrees that a proposal can be considered without convening formal discussions.

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Pavis Devahasadin

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

    @IMFSpokesperson

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/02/20/pr25040-thailand-imf-executive-board-concludes-2024-article-iv-consultation-with-thailand

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Warner Files Amendments to Republican Budget Plan

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Commonwealth of Virginia Mark R Warner
    WASHINGTON –  As the Senate prepares for an all-night vote-a-rama on the Republican reconciliation budget bill agenda that will cut taxes for the ultra-wealthy at the expense of Virginia families, Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), a member of the Senate Budget Committee, filed 21 amendments to the GOP budget proposal to address the needs of working Americans and taking aim at the Trump administration’s lawlessness.
    “As President Trump and Senate Republicans try to move a budget resolution clearing the way to cut taxes for the richest Americans at the expense of the programs working families depend on, it’s important to understand what we’re talking about here: the GOP plans to provide tax breaks for billionaires while slashing health care, education and public safety and doing nothing about the really big problems most Americans are facing, like the rising costs of housing and child care,” said Sen. Warner. “I hope some of my Republican friends will think twice about supporting a budget plan that cuts taxes for the richest and doubles down on the chaos of the Trump-Musk administration.”
    Specifically, Warner’s amendments would:
    Put senators on the record for raising costs, gutting programs American families rely on
    Create a point of order against any reconciliation bill that would not decrease the cost of housing for American families. Text
    Establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to providing benefits to survivors of miners who died due to pneumoconiosis. Text
    Create a point of order against reconciliation legislation that would increase monthly student loan costs for borrowers of Federal student loans. Text
    Establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to preserving funding and current staffing levels at the Department of Education. Text
    Establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to providing affordable health care for American families, which may include making permanent the extended and expanded advance premium tax credits. Text
    Create a point of order against reconciliation legislation that would increase the cost of child care for United State families. Text
    Create a point of order against any reconciliation legislation that would increase health care costs for children receiving Medicaid. Text
    Establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to prohibiting cuts to critical health programs, which may include preventing the institution of a Medicaid per capita cap policy. Text
    Put senators on the record on combating Trump-Musk lawlessness and corruption
    Establish a deficit-neutral fund relating to protecting the American people from the People’s Republic of China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, transnational organized crime, and terrorism by prohibiting the mass termination of critical employees in the intelligence community. Text
    Create a point of order against reconciliation legislation if certain Federal civil service laws are being violated. Text
    Establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to ensuring that employees of the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and elements of the intelligence community are not subject to retaliation and firing due to political preferences of any Presidential administration. Text
    Create a point of order against consideration of reconciliation legislation until the Congressional Budget Office certifies that health, education, research, law enforcement, and foreign aid funding authorized by Congress is not subject to programmatic funding delays, deferrals, or rescissions. Text
    Create a point of order against considering funding legislation for the Office of the President while there is pending litigation alleging a violation of the Take Care Clause. Text
    Create a point of order against reconciliation legislation that would rescind obligated or awarded amount made available under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Text
    Create a point of order against considering reconciliation legislation during a period during which there is an ongoing violation of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Act of 1974, as determined by the Comptroller General of the United States. Text
    Create a point of order against consideration of spending or revenue legislation during any period during which there is an ongoing violation of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, as determined by the Comptroller General of the United States. Text
    Establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to protecting duly-enacted appropriations from unconstitutional cancellation by the President. Text
    Create a point of order against reconciliation legislation during any year in which an employee has been placed in administrative leave for more than a total of 10 work days. Text
    Create a point of order against reconciliation legislation during any period in which there is litigation pending against the President or another Federal officer alleging a violation of certain provisions of title 5, United States Code. Text
    Establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to protecting classified and sensitive information on programs and individuals of the United States from being accessed by DOGE employees. Text
    Establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to prohibiting the closure or relocation of Federal agencies without congressional authorization. Text

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: ChildFund – Don’t Abandon Ukrainian Children Now

    Source: ChildFund New Zealand

    “While the politicians talk, Ukrainian children enter their fourth year of no school and no normal childhood – longer if you include the interruptions of Covid,” says Josie Pagani CEO of ChildFund.
    Thousands of children have relied on the help of New Zealanders and others around the world to make sure they can keep accessing online education, have safe places to play, or learn abroad as their families seek refuge in places like Moldova.
    Many have never set foot in a classroom.
    ChildFund will keep supporting these children, with the help of donations from the New Zealand public, and support from The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
    “This is the generation who will have to rebuild Ukraine. They will be the builders, engineers, teachers, and leaders of the future. It’s not just that they deserve to be safe, to learn, to have a future like any other child. It’s also that they are literally the future of Ukraine,” says Josie Pagani.
    Since 2022, ChildFund’s partners implementing the Ukraine Regional Refugee Response have:
    • Reached over 3,700 caregivers and children with psychosocial support and counselling services
    • Provided access to child friendly spaces, supporting access for 2,383 children to play activities and facilities
    • Provided child dedicated food bags to 8,237 children and caregivers
    • Provided access to additional education and training services for 204 children and young people
    • Provided referrals, assistive devices and systems strengthening for 88 children with disabilities and service providers.
    Since Russia invaded, more than 4,000 schools and educational institutions in Ukraine have been damaged or destroyed.
    “We are asking New Zealanders to keep supporting these efforts. Ukrainian children need decent food, safe places to learn. They need to be able to play like other children, and get the counselling they so desperately need.”
    “We don’t know how this war will end. But we do know these children will be tasked with rebuilding their country and their communities. They need our support more than ever.”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Kaine Files Amendments to Republican Budget Resolution

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Virginia Tim Kaine
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA), a member of the Senate Budget Committee, filed amendments to the Senate Republicans’ budget resolution in an attempt to improve the bill, which currently tees up tax cuts for billionaires by cutting critical funding for programs that Virginians rely on. Republicans are using a legislative process known as “reconciliation,” which allows certain legislation to be expedited and passed in the Senate by a simple majority, avoiding the 60-vote threshold needed for most other legislation. The Senate will begin consideration of the budget resolution later today.
    “I’d like to focus on cutting taxes for the middle-class. Unfortunately, Republicans disagree. Instead, they are coming after your Medicaid and Medicare benefits, your health care, education programs, and other critical funding that Virginians rely on so that they can tee up their tax cuts for billionaires. I’m filing several amendments to safeguard Virginians from President Trump’s proposed tariffs, which would raise costs; protect federal employees who provide essential services to millions of Americans; prevent cuts in funding for community health centers and national security programs; and more. I will be pushing to get votes on my amendments and will do everything I can to stop Republicans from passing policies that hurt Virginians and our economy and make us less safe,” Kaine said.
    Kaine filed a series of amendments, including:
    To cut taxes for middle-class Americans.
    To protect Americans from new, senseless taxes by preventing abuse of emergency authorities to launch trade wars with Canada and Mexico.
    To prevent cuts to federal funding for air traffic safety.
    To prevent the Department of Veterans’ Affairs from reducing its workforce below levels needed to staff and provide services at new or remodeled facilities.
    To prohibit funding for agency efforts to reclassify federal employees in the civil service outside of any schedule not currently in the competitive service.
    To prevent federal agencies and departments from terminating, rescheduling, or furloughing federal workers who are also veterans.
    To prevent federal employees in harm’s way overseas from losing critical protections.
    To protect Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents and federal prosecutors from political retribution.
    To deny access to classified materials to anyone without a proper security clearance.
    To protect Virginians who receive health insurance coverage through Medicaid expansion.
    To protect rural hospitals from cuts that would threaten rural communities’ access to health care.
    To protect access to health care services provided by Federally Qualified Health Centers.
    To ensure working families are able to access affordable and high-quality child care.
    To prevent a reduction of programs that support high-quality teacher and school leader preparation.
    To protect seniors and people with disabilities who use long-term services and supports.
    To prevent reductions in staff at the Mine Safety and Health Administration, who ensure miners do not get hurt or die on the job.
    To undo the harm that the January federal funding freeze did to Head Start programs.
    To protect the Pell Grant program from facing cuts or changes to the program that will hurt low- and middle-income students most.
    To prohibit termination of national security programming implemented by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
    To prohibit termination of foreign assistance contracts with U.S. farmers or with faith-based organizations.
    To prohibit funding for a new Middle East war in Gaza or appeasement of Russia in Ukraine.
    To prevent cuts to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program.
    To prevent cuts to voluntary conservation agriculture programs.
    To ensure that much-needed funding comes to Virginia to repair federally maintained trails—such as the Virginia Creeper Trail—impacted by natural disasters in 2024.
    To prohibit any efforts to privatize or defund the United States Postal Service.
    Kaine has spoken out against Republicans’ proposal on the Senate floor and during a Senate Budget Committee markup.
    President Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are currently negotiating an extension to Trump’s 2017 tax law, which cut taxes for large corporations and the highest-income earners and substantially increased the federal deficit. They are now proposing broad-based tariffs and massive, across-the-board cuts to federal programs like Medicaid to fund these tax cuts for billionaires. Tax estimates have shown that if fully enacted, Trump’s tariffs could raise costs by $2,500 to nearly $4,000 per household, and American consumers could lose between $46 billion to $78 billion in spending power each year.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Kugler, Navigating Inflation Waves: A Phillips Curve Perspective

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    Thank you, Tom, and thank you for the invitation to give the Whittington Lecture.1 It is humbling to be here giving this lecture to honor the memory and legacy of Leslie Whittington. While I did not cross paths with Leslie here at Georgetown University, when I arrived, I heard so many stories about her contributions to the school, the university, and the students. She worked on research about the effects of economic policies on children and families, so I know that if I had had the good fortune to overlap with her as a colleague, I would have benefited greatly from her work and presence. It is also an honor to be giving this lecture, because so many dynamic leaders have previously stood before you, including some who have been inspirations to me in my career, such as Alice Rivlin and Cecilia Rouse.
    Today I will be discussing a topic that has certainly captured the attention of central bankers, and the public at large, in recent years: inflation and the relationship between inflation and unemployment. But before I talk about a lens through which to think about the inflation experienced in the pandemic period, I want to update you with my views on the current outlook for the U.S. economy and the Federal Open Market Committee’s (FOMC) efforts to sustainably return inflation to our 2 percent objective while maintaining a strong labor market.
    Economic OutlookThe overall picture is that the U.S. economy remains on a firm footing, with output growing at a solid pace. Real gross domestic product grew 2.5 percent in 2024. Consumer spending continued to drive this solid pace last year. While retail sales posted a decline last month, January data are often difficult to interpret. Bad weather and seasonal adjustment difficulties may have affected the release, and it should be noted the slowdown came after a strong pace of sales in the second half of last year. That said, as usual, I pay attention to many indicators to gauge the state of the economy. Employment readings show that the labor market is healthy and stable. Payroll job gains have been solid recently, averaging 189,000 per month over the past four months, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). After touching 4.2 percent as recently as November, the unemployment rate has flattened to 4 percent since then, consistent with a labor market that is neither weakening nor showing signs of overheating.
    Inflation has fallen significantly since its peak in the middle of 2022, though the path continues to be bumpy and inflation remains somewhat elevated. Readings last week from the BLS showed price pressures persisted in the economy in January. Our preferred inflation gauge at the Fed, the personal consumption expenditures (PCE) price index, will be released next week. Based on the consumer price index and producer price index data for January, it is estimated that the PCE index advanced about 2.4 percent on a 12-month basis in January. Excluding food and energy costs, core prices are estimated to have risen 2.6 percent. Those readings show there is still some way to go before achieving the FOMC’s 2 percent objective.
    Regarding monetary policy, the FOMC judged in September that it was time to begin reducing our policy interest rate from levels that were strongly restrictive on aggregate demand and putting downward pressure on inflation. We reduced that rate 100 basis points through December, leaving our policy rate at moderately restrictive levels. At our latest meeting in January, I supported the decision to hold the policy rate steady. I see this as appropriate, given that the downward risks to employment have diminished but upside risks to inflation remain. The potential net effect of new economic policies also remains highly uncertain and will depend on the breadth, duration, reactions to, and, importantly, specifics of the measures adopted.
    Going forward, in considering the appropriate federal funds rate, we will watch these developments closely and continue to carefully assess the incoming data and evolving outlook.
    Now, turning back to the main topic of my speech, I will start with the core mission of the Federal Reserve: to pursue the dual mandate, given to us by Congress, of promoting maximum employment and stable prices. We saw firsthand during the pandemic period why the price-stability portion of the mandate is so important. High inflation imposes significant hardship and erodes Americans’ purchasing power, especially for those least able to meet the higher costs of essentials like food, housing, and transportation. As a policymaker and economist, I think it is vitally important to have a good understanding of inflation dynamics and how those dynamics may have evolved over time. This knowledge allows me to pursue the best policies to deliver stable prices while maintaining a solid labor market.
    Waves of InflationFive years after the pandemic took hold suddenly and with little warning, there is a tendency to remember the inflation buildup as a fast and uniform phenomenon. But that was not the case. Inflation stemming from the pandemic shock came in waves. Today I will first describe the different waves of inflation experienced in the pandemic period. Then I invite you aboard the sailboat that we will use to navigate those waves: You could call it the SS Phillips Curve. The Phillips curve is a model that has been used for a long time to try to explain inflation dynamics and the tradeoffs between inflation and unemployment. Finally, I will discuss with you how this voyage may have changed the charts for policymakers.
    Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S., and much of the world’s developed economies, experienced a prolonged period of low inflation. Then, when the economy broadly shut down in March and April 2020, the U.S. experienced a brief period of deflation. But by the middle of that year, we saw that the first of several waves of inflation began hitting the economy’s shores.
    The first notable wave of inflation came from food prices. With many restaurants closed and people fearful of gathering, consumers pivoted their spending to grocery stores and online grocery delivery to meet their families’ needs, with some stockpiling essential items because they feared future shortages. This jump in demand was met with snarled supply chains for food processing and groceries. Annual food inflation reached a first peak of 5 percent in June 2020. There was a second food inflation wave with the onset of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in the middle of 2022. Beyond the cost alone, grocery prices are an important determinant of inflation expectations for consumers since food is purchased so frequently.2 Another wave of inflation came from goods other than food and energy—what economists call “core goods.” In the years immediately before the pandemic, goods prices were not a significant source of inflation. During the expansion from 2009 until 2020, core goods inflation declined 0.5 percent annually on average. However, once the pandemic took hold, consumer demand rotated from services to goods. At the same time, additional supply chain issues arose, including closed factories and disrupted ports. As consumption rapidly shifted toward goods, their prices rose sharply.3 Core goods inflation picked up markedly in the spring of 2021 and reached a peak of 7.6 percent on a 12-month basis in February 2022. This was a notable development because, during most of this century, goods price deflation offset price increases in other categories and thus kept a lid on overall inflation.
    A third wave of inflation came from services costs, excluding housing. Near the start of the pandemic, millions of Americans lost their jobs, and many left the labor market, with some retiring and others fearful of being exposed to the virus. When the economy began to reopen from shutdowns, demand for workers rose faster than the supply. As a result, the labor market quickly became very tight. To attract workers, employers raised wages. And to offset that expense, many raised prices. Given that labor is the most important input into the production of services, core services inflation ensued, reaching a peak of 5.2 percent on a 12-month basis in December 2021. Core services inflation stayed persistently high until it began to turn down in February 2023.
    The final wave of inflation I will discuss came from PCE housing services inflation. During the pandemic, many Americans reassessed housing choices, including those who preferred to move to detached homes in the suburbs from multifamily dwellings in cities. The supply of housing has long been constrained, so when a further increase in demand met limited supply, prices rose. Housing inflation rose to a peak of 8.27 percent on a 12-month basis in April 2023 and has moved lower since then. The run-up in housing inflation came more slowly, but it is also the component most slowly to abate. This is an area that experienced catch-up inflation, as housing inflation rises and falls slowly because rents are reset infrequently, usually only once a year for most renters.
    For the remainder of this discussion, I will focus on core inflation, and specifically core goods and core services inflation. My objective is to discuss several additions to an augmented Phillips curve model that allow us to capture the dynamics of those waves we encountered on our journey.
    The Traditional Phillips CurveSince price stability and maximum employment are the two components of the Fed’s dual-mandate goal, it is important for policymakers to be able to interpret the inflation process and relate it to macroeconomic conditions, including unemployment. One traditional way of understanding the usual tradeoff between inflation and unemployment is the use of the Phillips curve. It was first employed by New Zealand economist A.W. Phillips in 1958 to describe a simple relationship between wage growth and unemployment. Basically, it demonstrates that wage inflation is lower when unemployment is high, and higher when unemployment is low. Since then, several variants and updates have been offered to the Phillips curve model, and I will offer updates, too.
    One of the most notable updates came from Milton Friedman in 1967 in his presidential address to the American Economic Association.4 In that speech, he argued that there is only a temporary tradeoff between inflation and unemployment, because inflation depends on both the unemployment rate relative to a natural rate (the unemployment gap) and expectations of future inflation.
    The unemployment gap measures how much unemployment is above or below some reference level such as the natural rate of unemployment, or NAIRU (non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment), which is thought to be the normal level of unemployment absent cyclical forces. An unemployment rate that is above the reference level indicates that there is slack in the economy. Conversely, if the unemployment rate is below the reference level, the economy is tight. The unemployment gap has an inverse relation to wage and price inflation, because slack in the economy means that there are excess resources to meet demand while tightness in the labor market means there is little room to expand demand without putting upward pressure on prices. Let’s turn now to the other ingredient in Friedman’s Phillips curve: inflation expectations. Inflation expectations represent the rate at which people expect prices to rise in the future. A Phillips curve model that includes inflation expectations is called an “expectations-augmented Phillips curve.”
    The idea behind adding inflation expectations to a Phillips curve is that workers care about their inflation-adjusted wage, rather than nominal wages, over the course of a period of employment when bargaining their pay. Meanwhile, price-setting firms care about their relative price in pricing their products. Both sets of agents must forecast as best as possible the future path of inflation to efficiently bargain their wages or set their prices. In other words, both parties form expectations about the general price level, and these expectations will feed back into the inflation process.5 Friedman assumed that inflation expectations respond to lagged observed inflation—or what are called “adaptive expectations”—and when that is so, it provides a mechanism for inflation to be persistent.
    This view captured inflation dynamics in the 1970s and early 1980s fairly well; however, it was not broadly applicable to the period from the late 1980s through 2019, often called the “Great Moderation.” Rather, regarding inflation dynamics over an extended period, inflation appears to be more strongly related to long-run inflation expectations than to lagged inflation or short-run inflation expectations measures. Monetary policy can play an important role in setting long-run inflation expectations. Both wage seekers and price setters form their inflation expectations, in part, from their beliefs about the central bank’s inflation goal. When long-run inflation expectations stay close to the central bank’s goal, we say that inflation expectations are anchored at that goal. That goal is currently set at 2 percent, and long-run inflation expectations have indeed been in a tight range around that target.6
    The empirical literature on the Phillips curve has considered additional variables that may affect inflation and used those variables to create new versions of a Phillips curve. For example, Phillips curves have long included measures of “cost-push” pressures such as core import prices. These cost pressures more fully capture shocks to firms’ costs coming from global price pressures and not captured by other measures of slack. Other Phillips curves also include lags of inflation to capture persistence in the inflation process.7
    To summarize, the empirical literature has come to the conclusion that inflation dynamics can best be captured by a Phillips curve that includes lags of inflation, long-run inflation expectations, and a measure of slack, as well as import and energy prices as cost-push shocks. An instance of that formulation of a Phillips curve is included in former Chair Janet Yellen’s speech from 2015.8 Next, I would like to assess the accuracy of this baseline model during the recent run-up of inflation and consider how to augment the Phillips curve model with some new variables that may be able to capture some of the shocks experienced during the pandemic and post-pandemic period. A large literature has emerged on how to interpret the recent run-up in inflation, and more research is needed to fully understand this complicated episode. The Phillips curve model that I will use is another approach to consider. This is a simple approach, but it is possible to consider more complex models, such as models that consider the joint dynamics of inflation and other variables or models that explicitly consider nonlinearities.9 However, I still see value in starting from this simple framework, seeing what it can and cannot explain about pandemic inflation, and then seeing whether the addition of certain variables can help the model more fully account for inflation during the pandemic.
    Estimation of the Phillips Curve TodayAs I just explained, the Phillips curve model allows flexibility in the choice of variables, but economists employing the model must decide how to weight these variables. And those weights must be chosen in some way. Economists choose weights by examining available data and deciding which capture the inflation process in the best possible way. This decision is called “estimation.” The modern way to undertake such an estimation is called “training.” Economists train a model on a specific set of data and consider different cuts of the data set to determine different ways to compute those weights.
    I will consider quarterly data that have been consistently produced since 1964, allowing us to include the periods of the Great Inflation, the Great Moderation, and the most recent inflation run-up. We could use this entire data set to train the model. However, subsample analysis also serves to prove some valuable points.
    First Result: Examining the Great ModerationLet’s start by updating former Fed Chair Yellen’s results. She estimated the model using the data during the so-called Great Moderation; I will update her results by training the model through 2019, the last year before the COVID-19 pandemic took hold in the U.S. As the term “moderation” implies, this was a period in which both inflation and output became much less volatile. We do not know exactly what brought about the Great Moderation. Hypotheses include the effects of better inventory management or better monetary policy. We do know, however, that inflation settled into a trend near to or slightly below 2 percent during that period. We estimate the model with data from this period, and we decompose how much of inflation is explained by the variables and how much is left unexplained, which economists call the “residual.” As it turns out, this model does a good job of capturing the inflation process over that period before the pandemic, and my results are similar to Yellen’s. The model explains 70 percent of the variation in inflation, meaning that only 30 percent of the variation in inflation is attributed to unexplained residuals. An alternative way to understand the unexplained part is as the standard deviation of the residual or the unexplained portion of the model, which was 0.50 percentage point for the period from 2010 to 2019, compared with the standard deviation of inflation of about 0.8 percentage point.
    This model, however, struggles to explain the run-up in inflation in the years immediately after the pandemic took hold. The unexplained portion of inflation, the residual, rises dramatically in 2021 and 2022. In 2021, the unexplained portion is almost 2 percentage points, and the following year, it is about 1.5 percentage points. Perhaps we should not be surprised by the outcome. These years saw inflation reach a four-decade peak, but the model has been trained on a Great Moderation sample that saw relatively quiet inflation.10
    Second Result: Using a Longer SampleThe results are more encouraging if, instead, we also include data from the previous period of significant inflation and train the model on data starting in 1964. Intuitively, it makes sense that including a period with persistent inflation, like the 1970s, might help us better understand another inflationary episode. I stop at 2019 because I want to see if training on data from the previous 55-year period can explain the post-2020 inflation.
    The model captures more of the most recent run-up in inflation when using the longer period of analysis. The unexplained residual drops to about 1.5 percentage points in 2021 and to a bit above 0.5 percentage point in 2022. Allowing for greater persistence in inflation allows an inflation equation to fit the pandemic period better, though it does not settle the question of whether the pandemic inflation was caused by large and persistent shocks or by large shocks and a persistent inflation process—for example, because of greater feedback between wages and prices.
    To improve the model further, it would be useful to include additional explanatory variables that could better capture the overheating of the economy. In what follows, I include variables that might account for factors experienced in the most recent bout of inflation, such as a very tight labor market and supply chain snarls.
    Third Result: Alternative Measure of SlackAs I mentioned before, the very tight labor market was an important contributor to inflation in recent years, especially to services inflation, yet the weight on the unemployment gap in the Phillips curve for the more recent period is very small. This measure of slack has become less and less important over time in explaining inflation, except during selected episodes such as in the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis, which was characterized by a very sluggish recovery. Outside of that episode, and very few others, the Phillips curve places little weight on that measure of slack in explaining inflation over the Great Moderation, including during the recent run-up. This is also a reflection of training the model over the Great Moderation, in which inflation moved fairly tightly around a very flat trend. Notice that this would suggest a “flat Phillips curve” or a big penalty in terms of unemployment needed to reduce inflation. Instead, I focus on another very promising alternative measure that I have paid a lot of attention to since I was chief economist at the Department of Labor—and again since I joined the Board of Governors—and that I am very familiar with as a scholar of labor markets. The measure is the ratio of vacancies to the level of unemployment.11 In effect, this ratio measures how much competition there is for a given job, or the “tightness” of the labor market. Labor is an important input into most production processes, and, thus, tightness in the labor market is closely related to price pressures. I use the standard version of this ratio that measures job openings from the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey as the numerator and the unemployment level from the Current Population Survey as the denominator. This allows me to use data back to the 1960s.12 The vacancy-to-unemployment ratio as a measure of slack is more effective at explaining inflation than the unemployment gap. This represents an interesting result because it offers a larger role to heated labor markets in explaining the run-up in inflation. My results echo research that finds the vacancy-to-unemployment ratio is a helpful measure of slack to consider in out-of-sample forecasting exercises.13
    Fourth Result: Supply Chain SnarlsAlthough the vacancy-to-unemployment ratio offers a promising measure of slack and supply chain pressures due to labor shortages, that measure does not necessarily capture supply chain snarls whose roots lie outside of the labor market. As I mentioned earlier, there were substantial supply chain disruptions during the past few years that came at the same time as strong demand. That resulted in material and labor shortages. Attempts at quantifying supply-side disruptions have been around for some decades now.14 I rely on a new monthly shortages index created by a team of Fed Board economists, which relies on textual analysis to scan news articles for sentences that include the word pairs “labor shortages,” “material shortages,” or “food shortages.”15 The Shortage Index allows us to better measure cost-push pressures from different sources and is constructed all the way back to the beginning of the previous century. Thus, it makes a difference to have access to advances in natural language processing.16 When I add the Shortage Index to the baseline Phillips curve or to the vacancy-to-unemployment–based Phillips curve, I obtain that the Shortage Index explains an even larger portion of the inflation run-up during and after the pandemic. The residual for 2020 is cut in half, the residual for 2021 is about 1 percentage point, and the residual is effectively eliminated in 2022. I judge this a noteworthy result and a proof of concept that with additional augmentation, the Phillips curve model can better capture inflation dynamics during the recent period. Through the lens of this model, supply shortages played an important role in 2022 in constraining output to grow at an anemic rate and in pushing up inflation. Moreover, the model is also able to capture the decline in inflation in 2023 and 2024 despite the strong expansion in real activity. I view the Shortage Index as a powerful indicator of the nonlinear effects stemming from a compounding of the contemporaneous interaction of demand and supply bottlenecks.
    I have offered additional variables to account for a measure of slack as it relates to labor supply and material supply. This exercise could be extended further to better account for some of the subcategories of inflation that caused the waves I discussed earlier. For example, food inflation, which is characterized by two distinct waves, can mostly be explained by the Food Shortage Index, which captures a large portion of the residual in the baseline model.
    Lessons for the PolicymakerToday I have discussed the waves of inflation the country faced starting five years ago. I also talked about how the vessel we use to navigate those choppy waters can be improved upon. As I conclude, I want to discuss with you how central bankers might recalibrate their compasses, based on what we learned from considering these augmentations to Phillips curve models. I think a clear lesson is that no single model alone can give a policymaker an understanding of every possible state of the economy. Policymakers must be open to various options, models, and frameworks—and not be afraid to experiment in search of more accurate answers. Policymakers must be very attentive to the most recent contributions from academia and empirical practitioners. Broadly, that is the approach I take, and why I apply the same rigor I did as an academic researcher to the monetary policy decisions that I confront.
    The recent run-up in inflation in many ways was a rather unique period, spurred, at least initially, by the first onset of a global pandemic in more than a century. Fully understanding the dynamics at play has provided a tough test for economists. The models I described today have had some success in capturing salient features of the inflation process during the pandemic period. I hope this illustrative analysis helps you see the difficulties of forecasting inflation in real time.
    Another lesson to be learned from this experience is that the feared harsh tradeoff between unemployment and inflation, one that requires large costs in terms of job loss and reduction in incomes in order to reduce inflation, did not materialize in the years immediately after the 2022 inflation peak. Inflation has been significantly reduced while the labor market has remained solid. This is a historically unusual, but most welcome, outcome. While this outcome is in part due to the actions of Fed policymakers, it is also possible to explain that remarkable result through the lens of the models that I have presented today. A large fraction of the rise in inflation, most specifically core goods inflation, can be explained by supply chain snarls. The untangling of supply chains contributed to a decline in inflation with little cost in terms of unemployment. Likewise, labor markets were very tight in this period. As workers returned to the labor force, labor markets became less tight, and the vacancy-to-unemployment ratio declined. That corresponded with a subsequent decline in inflation. That is a consistent result because services inflation is closely connected to the cost of labor.
    Thank you for your time today. Once again, it is humbling to be asked to give the Whittington Lecture to honor the memory of fellow educator Leslie Whittington. I look forward to your questions.

    1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Open Market Committee. Return to text
    2. D’Acunto, Malmendier, Ospina, and Weber (2021) show that consumers disproportionately rely on the price changes of goods in their grocery bundles when forming expectations about aggregate inflation; see Francesco D’Acunto, Ulrike Malmendier, Juan Ospina, and Michael Weber (2021), “Exposure to Grocery Prices and Inflation Expectations,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 129 (May), pp. 1615–39. Return to text
    3. Ferrante, Graves, and Iacoviello (2020) show that a sharp reallocation of demand from one sector to another can exacerbate supply chain disruption and cause aggregate inflation; see Francesco Ferrante, Sebastian Graves, and Matteo Iacoviello (2023), “The Inflationary Effects of Sectoral Reallocation,” Journal of Monetary Economics, supp., vol. 140 (November), pp. S64–81. Return to text
    4. See Milton Friedman (1968), “The Role of Monetary Policy,” American Economic Review, vol. 58 (March), pp. 1–17; and Edmund S. Phelps (1967), “Phillips Curves, Expectations of Inflation and Optimal Unemployment over Time,” Economica, vol. 34 (135), pp. 254–81. Return to text
    5. Friedman did not consider forward-looking price-setting firms, but more recent advances in macroeconomics do, such as New Keynesian models; see Jordi Galí (2015), Monetary Policy, Inflation, and the Business Cycle: An Introduction to the New Keynesian Framework and Its Applications (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press). Return to text
    6. In an earlier speech, I have sketched a model in which agents infer the central bank target by observing inflation, interest rates, and unemployment data; see Adriana D. Kugler (2024), “Central Bank Independence and the Conduct of Monetary Policy,” speech delivered at the Albert Hirschman Lecture, 2024 Annual Meeting of the Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association and the Latin American and Caribbean Chapter of the Econometric Society, Montevideo, Uruguay, November 14. Return to text
    7. For a review of Phillips curve formulations, see Robert J. Gordon (2018), “Friedman and Phelps on the Phillips Curve Viewed from a Half Century’s Perspective,” Review of Keynesian Economics, vol. 6 (4), pp. 425–36. Return to text
    8. The model that I will use is similar to the one described by Janet Yellen in her famous speech at the University of Massachusetts in 2015; see Janet L. Yellen (2015), “Inflation Dynamics and Monetary Policy,” speech delivered at the Philip Gamble Memorial Lecture, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, September 24. Return to text
    9. See Pierpaolo Benigno and Gauti B. Eggertsson (2023), “It’s Baaack: The Surge in Inflation in the 2020s and the Return of the Non-Linear Phillips Curve,” NBER Working Paper Series 31197 (Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research, April). Return to text
    10. The results that I obtain for the 1990–2019 period are similar to those that Yellen reports for the 1990–2014 period. Return to text
    11. The ratio of job openings to unemployment has attracted the attention of many researchers. See, for instance, Olivier J. Blanchard and Ben S. Bernanke (2023), “What Caused the US Pandemic-Era Inflation?” NBER Working Paper Series 31417 (Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research, June). Return to text
    12. Although job openings from the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) go back only as far as the early 2000s, I use here the extended series from Barnichon that pieces together JOLTS data for the more recent period with a corrected version of the help-wanted index originally from the Conference Board for the period before 2001. See Regis Barnichon (2010), “Building a Composite Help-Wanted Index,” Economics Letters, vol. 109 (December), pp. 175–78. Return to text
    13. See Regis Barnichon and Adam Shapiro (2022), “What’s the Best Measure of Economic Slack?” FRBSF Economic Letter 2022-04 (San Francisco: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, February); and Régis Barnichon and Adam Hale Shapiro (2024), “Phillips Meets Beveridge,” Journal of Monetary Economics, supp., vol. 148 (November), 103660. Return to text
    14. The Institute for Supply Management’s Supplier Deliveries Index has been around since the 1950s, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Global Supply Chain Pressure Index since 1998, and the Census Bureau’s Quarterly Survey of Plant Capacity Utilization since 2008. Return to text
    15. See Dario Caldara, Matteo Iacoviello, and David Yu (2024), “Measuring Shortages since 1900,” working paper. Their index is available at https://www.matteoiacoviello.com/shortages.html. Return to text
    16. Other authors have used natural language processing in an attempt to produce a measure of shortages. For instance, see Paul E. Soto (2023), “Measurement and Effects of Supply Chain Bottlenecks Using Natural Language Processing,” FEDS Notes (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 6). Blanchard and Bernanke use Google searches for the word “shortage” as an indicator of sectoral supply constraints in a Phillips curve equation; see Blanchard and Bernanke, “What Caused the US Pandemic-Era Inflation?” in note 11. For an early-attempt, hand-coded shortage index, see Owen Lamont (1997), “Do ‘Shortages’ Cause Inflation?” in Christina D. Romer and David H. Romer, eds., Reducing Inflation: Motivation and Strategy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), pp. 281–306. Return to text

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Signs of ‘Historic Progress’ towards Peace Emerge, Central African Republic’s Delegate Tells Security Council, Requesting Donor Support for 2025 Elections

    Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

    UN Official Notes Fragility in Border Areas despite Overall Security Improvement

    The Central African Republic has made significant progress towards the 2025 elections, the head of the United Nations peacekeeping mission in the country told the Security Council today, while also noting overall security improvements and persistent fragility in border areas.

    Valentine Rugwabiza, Secretary-General’s Special Representative and Head of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA), emphasized that the upcoming electoral cycle represents a historic opportunity to lay the foundation for decentralized governance.  Recently, national authorities along with MINUSCA’s support were able to register 570,000 new voters and had opened the first-ever multiservice post at the country’s border with Chad.

    However, despite this important progress, serious pockets of insecurity persist, particularly in areas where armed groups try to control mining sites and transhumance corridors, she continued.  Implementation of the national border-management policy requires additional support as the conflict in Sudan also threatens to spill over.  While welcoming the dissolution of 9 out of 14 armed groups who signed the Political Agreement for Peace and Reconciliation six years ago, she also said that more needs to be done — in collaboration with regional partners — to facilitate the return of armed group leaders and ensure their disarmament.

    On the human rights front, she urged the Government to launch the Truth, Justice, Reparation and Reconciliation Commission, through the appointment of its new commissioners.  “If left unaddressed, [human rights] crimes could undermine the hard-earned security gains and further erode social cohesion,” she warned. Paying tribute to a 29-year-old Tunisian peacekeeper recently killed in an ambush in Bamingui-Bangoran, she urged the authorities to bring the perpetrators to justice.

    “We need your support to build a stronger and more inclusive economy in the Central African Republic,” said Portia Deya Abazene, President of the Federation of Women Entrepreneurs of the Central African Republic, via video link.  Despite the adoption of international conventions and a constitution guaranteeing equal rights, “harmful practices continue to hinder the progress of women in [Central African Republic]”, she said, highlighting the low representation of women in leadership positions.  Women represent only 15.52 per cent of business owners in certain sectors and face constraints in accessing land, means of production, education, financing, markets and decent employment.

    Women Key to Economic Development

    Ms. Abazene’s organization provides a space for experience-sharing among women entrepreneurs at the local level, as well as training programmes in leadership, management, financial education and digital marketing.  “The achievements of Central African women in entrepreneurship are the result of their determination and political will,” she underscored, calling for policies promoting female entrepreneurship and easier access to financing.  “The Central African Republic will not reach its potential as long as more than 51 per cent of its population” —  women —  continue to be marginalized, she said. 

    Council members emphasized the need to address human rights violations in the country, urged its authorities to seize the opportunity to hold credible elections, and highlighted MINUSCA’s vital role in helping to expand State authority.  Several speakers, however, offered differing views on the root causes of Bangui’s instability.

    United States, United Kingdom, Russian Federation Trade Barbs 

    “It is clear that Kremlin-backed actors, purporting to be security partners, are undercutting Central African Republic’s authorities and undermining peace with the primary goal of stealing [Central African Republic] resources without contributing to its development,” said the representative of the United States. . “It is unacceptable that a member of this Council continues to disseminate disinformation that diminishes the credibility and effectiveness of MINUSCA,” he added, expressing serious concern over the violation of the Status of Forces Agreement, namely the blocking of MINUSCA fuel trucks.

    The United Kingdom’s delegate said his country has information “that proxies directed by the Russian State have plans to interfere with [Central African Republic] elections, including through suppressing political voices and conducting disinformation campaigns to interfere in political debate”.  They are acting without regard for the country’s sovereignty and jeopardizing the dedicated UN role, he said.  Also highlighting reports of Wagner Ti Azande and other armed groups committing atrocities against civilians, he called on all actors to the conflict to uphold their obligations under international law.

    The representative of the Russian Federation said that, given the considerable security improvements in the Central African Republic, it is “surprising” that the United States and United Kingdom continue “whipping the dead horse of their campaign to smear” her country.  This campaign has run out of steam.  Moscow remains committed to cooperating with Bangui to achieve lasting peace and security.  As far as the security situation, she expressed concerns for the area bordering Sudan, which has become an “additional burden” of human rights concerns.  Successful municipal elections in July will be a “milestone on the road to peaceful life” in the Central African Republic.

    The representative of China, Council President for February, speaking in his national capacity, said the situation in the country “is good, in general”, with progress in enhancing governance capacity and consolidating political gains.  MINUSCA must prioritize support for election preparations, he said, adding that the international community should avoid undue external interference.

    Democratic, Inclusive, Fair Elections

    The representative of Somalia, also speaking for Algeria, Guyana and Sierra Leone, welcomed the inauguration of “the first-ever multiservice border post in the Central African Republic” built with MINUSCA’s support. Despite security, logistical and financial challenges — preparations towards local, legislative and presidential elections are progressing.  Emphasizing the need for open and constructive dialogue between the Government and opposition parties, he also called for “concerted” efforts to ensure that all eligible citizens are registered to vote.  “We wish to underline that the success of the local election process is essential for the strengthening of direct democracy, legitimacy, local development and the extension of State authority throughout the national territory,” he added.

    Other speakers also said that the upcoming elections were a unique opportunity for the Central African Republic, with Panama’s delegate emphasizing that 2025 is a “pivotal year” for Bangui.  “These will be the first local elections in more than three decades,” he said, urging the Government to guarantee that “these elections will be carried out in a peaceful environment”.  Slovenia’s delegate said that, while local elections can signify a major step in the further decentralization of the country, they “will only be considered credible and democratic, if all eligible voters are able to register and cast their vote, including women, youth, minorities, internally displaced persons, returnees and refugees”.

    Fear of Sudan Conflict Spillover

    Joining others in expressing concern over the spillover of the conflict in Sudan, the representative of the Republic of Korea said that the presence of the Rapid Support Forces — a paramilitary group in Sudan — in the Central African Republic “only brings more risk to the already-fragile landscape”.  Similarly, Greece’s representative said that recent gains in border-management policy “are undermined by the transiting of armed groups across the porous north-eastern region”.

    Pakistan’s delegate noted that his country had contributed 1,300 troops to MINUSCA and expressed concern over the shortfall in funding.  “As of 4 February, unpaid assessed contributions to the Special Account for MINUSCA amounted to $570.7 million,” he said.  Other Council members also stressed the need to provide financial and material support for the Central African Republic, with France’s delegate noting that Paris has allocated €2 million to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) for Bangui’s upcoming elections, and €200,000 to enable the country’s Special Criminal Court to function.  Peacebuilding “depends on progress achieved in combating impunity”, he stressed.

    The representative of the Central African Republic, detailing his country’s “considerable progress in pursuing peace” since the signing of the 2019 peace agreement, reported that 9 of 14 armed groups have dissolved, 7,000 combatants have disarmed and demobilized, and 20,000 weapons of various calibres have been collected.  “This is a sign of historic progress,” he stressed, while noting the “one major challenge” remaining — “the complete eradication of isolated armed groups, which continue to carry out atrocities against civilians”.  To the armed groups that remain, he underscored:  “The door for dialogue remains wide open.”

    He went on to stress:  “Insecurity directly threatens the democratic process that we intend to consolidate.” Noting that the crisis is Sudan is seriously impacting his own, he called on the international community to support Bangui’s forces; provide training, logistical and intelligence support; and strengthen MINUSCA’s mandate so the Mission can be more proactive in addressing security threats.  And for the ongoing electoral process — “a fundamental pillar for stability and lasting peace” — he appealed for financial support amounting to $7 million. “By supporting this process, the international community will be directly contributing to peace and development in our country,” he said.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Graham Votes To Confirm Kash Patel

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for South Carolina Lindsey Graham
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today made this statement after voting to confirm Kash Patel as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Patel was confirmed by a vote of 51-49.
    “I am extremely pleased to have cast my vote to confirm Kash Patel as the new director of the FBI. Kash has been a federal defense attorney and prosecutor, and he has been deeply involved in counter terrorism practice and policy. He was also one of the key figures who discovered the Russian hoax against President Trump.
    “Kash is the right man to clean up the FBI to restore Americans’ confidence and trust that the FBI is not a political organization, it is a law enforcement organization. The men and women of the FBI will be in good hands with Kash Patel.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – European drone capabilities and defence autonomy: steps to reduce dependency on China and foster innovation in drone- and counter-drone systems – E-000668/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000668/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Hilde Vautmans (Renew)

    The ongoing Russian-Ukrainian war has demonstrated the transformative role of drones in modern conflict, from intelligence gathering and precision strikes to logistical support and decoy operations. Ukrainian drone production has skyrocketed to unprecedented levels, reaching up to four million units annually, with Russia reportedly matching this pace. This rapid development underscores the need for Europe to reassess its own defence strategies, particularly as the fast innovation cycles of drone and counter-drone technologies quickly render systems obsolete.

    Moreover, Europe remains heavily dependent on Chinese-manufactured drones and components. Given China’s growing geopolitical influence and its close cooperation with Russia, this dependency poses a significant risk to European defence autonomy. Efforts to establish production in Ukraine highlight the need for European support in both technological and industrial capacities.

    In the light of these developments:

    • 1.What steps is the Commission taking (or considering taking) to reduce Europe’s dependency on Chinese drone components?
    • 2.How does the Commission plan to promote scalable and adaptable drone production to meet future defence needs, while fostering innovation in counter-drone systems?
    • 3.Will the Commission address the increasing involvement of civilians in warfare through drone use, and its implications for European defence and security policy?

    Submitted: 12.2.2025

    Last updated: 20 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Inside Porton Down: what I learned during three years at the UK’s most secretive chemical weapons laboratory

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Thomas Keegan, Senior Lecturer in Epidemiology, Lancaster University

    When I first arrived at the top secret Porton Down laboratory, I was aware of very little about its activities. I knew it was the UK’s chemical defence research centre and that over the years it had conducted tests with chemical agents on humans.

    But what really happened there was shrouded in mystery. This made it a place which was by turns fascinating and scary. Its association with the cold war, reinforced by images of gas mask-wearing soldiers and reports of dangerous (and in one case fatal) experiments, also made it seem a little sinister.

    The shroud of secrecy resulted in it being the subject of some lively fiction, such as The Satan Bug by Alistair MacLean, which revolves around the theft of two deadly germ warfare agents from a secret research facility and in the “Hounds of Baskerville” episode of the BBC drama Sherlock in which the hero uncovers a sinister plot involving animals experiments.

    Even Porton’s own publicity material recognises that where secrecy exists imagination can take flight, and attests:

    No aliens, either alive or dead have ever been taken to Porton Down or any other Dstl [Defence Science and Technology Laboratory] site.

    But it’s also the place where in recent years scientists analysed samples confirming that a Novichok nerve agent had been used to poison former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter (coincidentally, just a few miles away). And where an active research programme on Ebola played an important role in the UK’s support to Sierra Leone during the 2014 outbreak.

    So what is the truth? Over three years my research took me into the heart of the mystery, as I studied its extensive historical archive. The reality was not as I expected. I came across no aliens, but I did discover records of experiments that ran from the ordinary, through to the bizarre. And sadly, in one isolated case, the lethal.

    Arriving at Porton Down, for example, was unexpectedly low key. The main gate is located off a public road on an otherwise quiet stretch between Porton Down village and the A30. It is in many ways visually similar to the entrance to Lancaster University in the north of England where I work as a lecturer in epidemiology.

    Bar some signs announcing it as the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (dstl) of the Ministry of Defence, the road is devoid of obvious security. No barriers block entry. This sense of the extraordinary hiding behind the ordinary was reinforced by the undistinguished visitor car park from where it is a short walk to the nondescript single story reception building.

    There is also (perhaps unusually for a government chemical weapons research centre) a bus stop next to the main gate, from where you can get the number 66 to Salisbury.

    So on my first visit in 2002 I made that short walk from the visitor car park to the reception and announced myself. I was pleased to find I was expected and looked into the security camera as bidden. After a hard stare from the receptionist I was issued, on that my first day, with a temporary pass. On it was written: “MUST BE ACCOMPANIED AT ALL TIMES” in bright red.

    My contact, Dawn, arrived and led me through the main gate where security started to become more obvious. An armed policeman gave us a small nod as we passed through, his hands staying firmly on the machine gun strapped to his chest. Dawn paid little attention other than a brief hello and we were inside, heading to the headquarters.

    It was from here that the management of Porton Down organised the programmes of testing which had ultimately resulted in my presence there – to research the health effects of chemical experiments on humans.


    The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.


    Since its inception in 1916 it has researched chemical weapons, protective measures against chemical weapons, and has recruited over 20,000 volunteers to participate in tests in its research programmes.

    Hut 42 – opening the archive

    This archive was opened to my colleagues and I after previously being firmly hidden from public view. This shift in approach was the result of government approval for a study into the long-term health of the human volunteers. The action was triggered by complaints from a group of people who had been tested on and who claimed their health had been damaged as a result.

    The government was also keen to ward off accusations of cover ups. In 1953 Ronald Maddison, a young RAF volunteer, died in a nerve agent experiment at the site. The original inquest was held in secret and returned a verdict of misadventure. But in 2004 the government ordered a second, public, inquest.

    This, along with a police investigation into the behaviour of some of the Porton Down scientists persuaded the government to fund independent research into the health effect of the experiments.

    A research group from the department of public health at the University of Oxford won IS WON RIGHT WORD? sk I was part of that group. Porton participated fully and opened its doors and archive to the project. I went ahead of the research team to deal with the practicalities of gaining access. My first task was to set up an office. So Dawn led me onwards to the building that had been put aside for our use.

    We passed into the inner, more secure, area. This part of Porton Down was where the main scientific work was carried out. This inner secure area was surrounded by a high chain link fence and there was one principal entry point, next to a guard room.

    Inspecting our passes was another armed MoD police officer. Alerted by my red pass he was all for barring my way until Dawn stepped in. Now vouched for, we were waved through and passed onwards to the building that would become my home for the best part of three years – hut 42.

    ‘People had neat handwriting then’

    Hut 42 was a nondescript redbrick, single-story building, which sits next to the main library and information centre and from the outside could be mistaken for a school boiler room. In it were five desks and several metal filing cabinets closed with combination locks.

    Our purpose there was to study the historical archive, including the handwritten books of experiment data. We then transferred that material into a database for later analysis. This process took four people two years of hard work, but we were lucky.

    Porton Down’s record keeping was excellent. Early on I had worried that handwritten records would be hard to decipher and had asked a Porton Down librarian whether they would be legible. “Definitely”, was the reply. “People had neat handwriting then. It’s the records from the 1970s you’ll have to watch. They’re dreadfully scrappy,” he said.

    And so it was proved. The records of tests from an era before computers, carried out with substances such as mustard gas, were routinely neatly and clearly documented.

    Porton Down experiment book, showing drop tests to the arms during one of the first nerve agent tests.

    A picture of a page in one of the experiment books on which is recorded the first nerve agent test for Tabun on April 10, 1945.
    Thomas Keegan

    I met Porton Down’s resident medical doctor in the archive to start discussing the nature of the experiments. Simon (not his real name) was in his mid-thirties with boyish curly hair and an anorak. “You’ll find everything you’ll need in here, in these cupboards,” he said. “First, I’ll show you how to open the cupboard. It’s like this”, he said. “A five number combination. Five times anticlockwise to reach the first number, four times clockwise for the second, three times anticlockwise for the third and so on.”

    There was a pause while he demonstrated. “Sometimes they can be a bit sticky”, he said after the first attempt. He got the cupboard open on the second try.

    The archive was a mixture of handwritten experimental and administrative records. The administrative records were essentially lists of attendees with dates and personal characteristics such as age. The experimental records reported the results of the tests with people in a variety of ways. Some were in the form of descriptive text, others used pictograms to record the site visually, for example where a drop of mustard gas was placed on the skin. Many contained tables of data, all hand drawn and as legible as if they had been printed. Our cupboards contained around 140 such books spanning a period from the start of the second world war to the end of the 1980s.

    The story the records told was a fascinating one.

    In the 50 years following the outbreak of the second world war, Porton Down encouraged over 20,000 men, nearly all members of the UK armed forces, to take part in experiments at the site.

    These men (the regular armed forces had yet to admit women) took part in a programme of tests that ran from experiments using liquid mustard “gas” dropped onto bare skin to inhalation of nerve agents. There were also tests with antidotes and other gasses and liquids too.

    Chemical experiments

    The records show that between 1939 and 1989, over 400 different substances were tested at Porton. Mustard gas, sarin, and nitrogen mustard were frequently tested. These chemicals are known as “vesicants” for their ability to cause fluid filled blisters (or vesicles) on the skin or any other site of contact. First world war soldiers were familiar with the horrors of this gas, which was first used by Germany at the Battle of Ypres in 1915. John Singer Sergeant’s powerful painting Gassed expressed the effect of mustard gas on soldiers exposed in the trenches.

    Other major chemical tests were riot control agents, such as CS and CR, these being the only chemicals tested that have been used by UK forces in peacetime, their purpose being crowd control.

    Mostly, we were kept far away from anything other than paper records. As Britain had given up its chemical arsenal and any offensive capability in the 1950s, there was, as Simon had explained, no stores of chemical agents at Porton Down, except of course, small amounts of those that were needed to test human defences. By a circuitous route however, I came nearer to some than I was expecting.

    ‘Would you like a sniff?’

    Hut 42, was not, it turned out, wholly for our use. While some Porton staff shared access to the archive and popped in now and then to examine records and take photocopies, the building had one other permanent resident – Porton Down’s in-house historian Gradon Carter. Carter was in his late 70s and had worked at Porton Down as an archivist for more than 20 years. He prided himself on knowing more than anyone alive about the history and administration of the institution.

    He wore tweed and had the air of a world weary Latin master, but rather than the accoutrements of his trade being Latin textbooks, his were the paraphernalia of chemical warfare. Around his desk were examples of gas masks from various periods of history, and on the wall, posters inviting people to “always carry your gas mask”.

    One of his exhibits was a box, about the size of a packet of breakfast cereal, which contained glass phials, each carefully labelled with the contents. These included mustard gas, lewsite and phosgene.

    The box was from the 1940s. It was a training tool to help troops recognise different gasses on the battlefield. “Would you like a sniff of mustard?”, he offered. It so happened I did. Nearly 60 years after it was first bottled, I can report that Carter’s mustard gas had very little smell, but I was reluctant to get close to test any of its other properties. He re-corked it. “Some lewisite?” he suggested.

    Lewisite was produced in 1918 for use in the first world war but its production was too late for it to be used. Another vesicant, it causes blistering of the skin and mucous membranes (eyes, nose, throat) on contact.

    I declined Carter’s kind offer.

    Other chemicals appeared in the records less frequently. There were the lovely vomiting agents, which are designed to winkle their way under your gas mask to make you sick, which will make you take off your gas mask making you vulnerable to the next wave of attack by, for example, nerve agents.

    These agents were relatively standard members of a chemical arsenal. In an effort to expand its horizons, Porton Down opened its collective mind in the early 1960s to the usefulness of psychedelics in warfare and tested LSD for its potential as a disruptor of enemy military discipline.

    The tests showed that troops became unable to put up much of a fight, but ultimately the chemicals were rejected as means of mass disruption. You can see a video of a test at Porton Down with LSD below.

    In the video, a troop of Royal Marines can be seen taking part in an exercise during which they are given LSD. Not long afterwards the men become barely capable of military action and seem to find almost everything funny. One man seems not to know which end of a bazooka to point at the enemy.

    The most commonly tested substances at Porton, according to our data, were mustard gas, lewisite and pyridostigmine (more of which later) with thousands of tests undertaken. Less frequently tested were a basket of chemicals including sodium amytal (a barbiturate) and more strangely perhaps, 49 tests with pastinacea sativa – the irritant wild parsnip.

    Not all men who took part in tests did so with chemical agents. Many visited Porton Down and were “tested” with substances that were not intended to be harmful but which must have been providing useful information of some kind. Some people were tested with “lubricating oil” (498 people) and “ethanol” (204 people). Many tests were with protective equipment such as materials for protective suits and with respirators.

    Nerve agent tests

    Around 3,000 people were tested with nerve agents. The number of nerve agents tested was not extensive, with six principal agents recorded. These were tabun, (known as GA), soman (GD), sarin (GB), cyclo sarin (GF), and methylphosphonothioic acid (VX).

    The period of nerve agent research ran from the early postwar period to the late 1980s, and coincided with the cold war, when military tension between the Nato countries and the USSR was high.

    The archive was rich in information on these tests. The records included detail of the time and place of each test along with details of who took part, noting both staff and volunteer participants. Records on the early tests are especially revealing.

    Chambers like this were used to carry out tests on nerve agents.
    Thomas Keegan

    For example, in 1945 nerve agents were not yet known to Porton Down scientists. They had come close to discovering nerve agents when they had worked on PF-3, a chemical of the same organophosphate type as the nerve agents, but they had not thought it sufficiently toxic.

    However, these agents were well known to German scientists, and to the German military who weaponised them during the second world war. Despite fears to the contrary, gas was not used in the fighting, though Germany had clearly prepared for chemical warfare.

    Nazi agents and gin and tonic

    Advancing US forces moving through Germany came across stockpiles of artillery shells in a railway marshalling yard near Osnabrück that contained suspicious liquids. The markings on the shells – a white ring on one type and green and yellow rings on the other – were new to the Americans. The shells were sent to the US and Porton Down for investigation.

    After initial analysis, Porton scientists found that the shells with the white ring contained tear gas. The other contained an unknown substance (later it would be named tabun).

    Tabun is one of the extremely toxic organophosphate nerve agents. It has a fruity odour reminiscent of bitter almonds. Exposure can cause death in minutes. Between 1 and 10 mL of tabun on the skin can be fatal.

    On April 10 1945, after some laboratory tests, the scientists decided to test the new chemical on people. In fact, as Carter pointed out to me, disaster could have struck immediately as the first nerve agent to arrive at Porton for testing was transported to the lab in a test tube stoppered only with cotton wool.

    Thinking this was a new variety of mustard gas, they placed drops on the participants’ skin. The scientists also placed drops in the eyes of some rabbits. The records show that before any serious effect to the humans could be noted one of the rabbits died, giving the scientists running the tests a fright.

    The chemical was quickly wiped off the men’s arms and the test ended there. According to a brief memoir supplied by Carter, Dr Ainsworth (who was involved in the tests) said that Captain Fairly (the Porton scientist being tested on) had been shaken by the experience but recovered “after a stiff gin and tonic in his office”.

    This sporting attitude to self-testing was not uncommon among scientists, however. Dr Ainsworth later tested a method for reducing the effect of a splash of nerve agent on the skin which involved a tourniquet and opening a vein – something he thought worked well.

    But he was used to the pioneering methods of the day. “Taste this,” the pharmacologist John (later Sir John) Gaddum had ordered on one previous occasion. Dr Ainsworth sipped the liquid offered and reported that it tasted a little like gin. “That’s strange”, Professor Gaddum said. “I can’t taste anything. It’s diluted lewisite and the rats simply won’t drink it.”

    Back at the wartime testing lab they were keen to find out more about what was now understood to be a new type of chemical agent developed by German scientists and weaponsied by their armed forces. The following week, ten people were exposed in a chamber, at the higher concentration of 1 in 5 million. In the pioneering spirit not uncommon at Porton, four of the subjects: Commandant Notley, Major Sadd, Mr Wheeler and Major Curten were Porton staff. Major Curten reported having a tightness of chest, and a slight contraction of the pupils, unlike the commandant who had no reaction but thought the gas smelled of boiled sweets.

    An undated photograph of the southern end of the Porton Down campus showing the bus stop outside. The grey building is thought to be one of the exposure chambers.
    Thomas Keegan

    Later that morning the scientists had another go, this time at a higher concentration, 1 in 1 million. The symptoms were now more noticeable, with more than one person vomiting and others needing treatment the following day for the persistent symptoms of headaches and eye pain.

    Given what we have since learned about tabun, it seems at the very least cavalier of the scientists to conduct these tests on themselves and others. They were were lucky not to have been seriously injured or even killed, but those were the risks they seemed willing to take.

    Fatal consequences

    The last entries in the archive for nerve agent tests were for 1989 so newer compounds such as novichok, used in an attempted assassination in nearby Salisbury, were not included. One later nerve agent tested in the 1960s was VX, then a scarily potent new nerve agent.

    According to the Centers for Disease Control in the US, VX is one of the most toxic of the known chemical warfare agents. It is tasteless and odourless and exposure can cause death in minutes. As little as one drop of VX on the skin can be fatal.

    It was not developed into a weapon by the UK, as by then it had abandoned an offensive capability, but tests were carried out on a relatively small number of volunteers. I mentioned VX to Carter. He recalled that the first sample of VX was first discovered, accidentally, at an ICI chemical factory in the UK and sent to Porton in the regular post. Luckily, nobody was exposed.

    In one notorious episode however, the tests of nerve agents on humans did not go as expected.

    As I referred to earlier, in 1953, during an early nerve agent experiment, the young airman, Ronald Maddison died. Testing was paused at Porton after an inquiry by the eminent Cambridge academic Lord Adrian and limits on exposures were set after resumption in 1954. A second inquest into the death returned a verdict of unlawful killing in 2004.

    While no charges were made against the scientists involved, the Ministry of Defence agreed to pay Maddison’s family £100,000 in compensation.

    One of the founders of the Porton Down Veterans Group, Ken Earl was in the same experiment. He remembered vividly being in the same chamber as Maddison, and while not affected seriously at the time, felt his health issues later in life were directly related to the test. In an interview with the BBC, he attributed the many health problems he suffered through his life, including skin conditions, depression and a heart irregularity, to his experience at Porton Down.

    Our research could not establish a direct link to the kind of ill health Earl suffered. But our data on the short-term effects did show a good deal about the immediate aftermath of a nerve agent exposure, similar to the type Earl experienced.

    The physiological effect of exposure to nerve agents varies greatly between individuals as our previous research has shown. The strength of symptoms varies too. Five of the six participants in the same test as Maddison did not report adverse effects other than feeling a bit cold.

    However, tests before this had shown that certain effects were consistently seen with nerve agent exposures. In July 1951 six people participated in a test with soman. The lab book notes:

    5/5 experienced pain in eyes, blinker effect and blurred vision 30 minutes after exposure (these symptoms continued for 24 hours). 1 participant vomited 4 hours after exposure. 2 participants vomited 24 hours after exposure. Eye pain and vision improved after 48 hours but not normal – return to normal after 5 days. 4/5 given multiple doses of atropine.

    While these effects must have been unpleasant, it is also shown that participants in nerve agent tests had between one and two “exposures”. Those in tests with other chemicals such as mustard gas may have had many.

    To further regulate exposures, strict limits on the amount of nerve agent allowed in tests were imposed after Maddison died. The levels of exposure typically experienced by servicemen induced: pinpoint pupils (miosis), headaches, a tightness in the chest and vomiting. These symptoms recur many times in the records, as does documentation of the drugs used to treat them, typically atropine and pralidoxime.

    A new era

    Despite the range of agents which have been developed, chemical weapons have rarely been used by states in conflict, perhaps held back by adherence to the Chemical Weapons Convention or by their difficulty of use.

    Despite this they were used by Iraq (not then bound by the CWC) in the Iran-Iraq war (1980-88), who used mustard gas and tabun against Iranian troops. They have also been used by states against civilians – for example by Iraq against its Kurdish population and more than once by Syria against its civilian population between 2014 and 2020.

    In 2017, North Korean agents used VX to assassinate Kim Jong-nam, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s half-brother in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. And more recently the Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny was poisoned with a nerve agent. He later recovered only to die in a Russian prison in early 2024.

    These are not just remote threats. As I previously noted, a particularly high-profile example of a state using a chemical weapon to kill someone took place in the UK in 2018 when it is alleged that the Russian state tried to kill an ex-KGB spy using small quantities of the then new and especially toxic nerve agent Novichok.

    Sergei Skripal, the intended victim, and his daughter Yulia survived the attack.

    A public inquiry heard how the Skripals were found slumped in a park in Salisbury. While the presence of nerve agents was not at first suspected, the emergency services noted how the Skripals suffered from a range of symptoms including pinprick pupils, muscle spasms and vomiting. For those experienced with nerve agents these symptoms are typical.

    But these symptoms were not known to Nick Bailey, a detective sergeant who had been assigned to check over a house in Salisbury, home to the two people that had recently been found collapsed. This should have been routine but the first indication to DS Bailey that something was amiss was when he looked in the mirror.

    His pupils, normally wide open at this time of night, had shrunk into pinpricks. He was also beginning to feel very strange. But it was when Bailey’s vision fractured and he vomited that he knew something was seriously wrong.

    It would later become clear that the agents sent to kill Skripal had sprayed the liquid nerve agent onto the door handle of the Skripal house. Sergei and his daughter both used the handle and were poisoned. So was Bailey, who had closed the door and locked it after his checks on the house later that evening.

    Four months later, the boyfriend of Dawn Sturgess found a discarded perfume bottle in nearby Amesbury, picked it up and then later gave it to her as a present. Neither could have imagined it had been used to bring Novichok to Salisbury and left behind by the attackers. Sturgess died after spraying the contents onto her skin. Her boyfriend survived.

    It was in partnership with experts at Porton Down that the local health services were able to treat the victims. According to the inquiry, a key challenge was for the hospital to work out what had poisoned the Skripals so they could treat them effectively. Porton Down worked nonstop to determine what type of nerve agent had been used. Once the cause was known the hospital was able to save the Skripals’ lives.

    That Porton Down is situated just a few miles from Salisbury where the Novichok attack took place was probably useful to those treating victims. The Russian state however, used this proximity to try to muddy the waters of accountability for the poisoning, but there seems little doubt that blame for the nerve agent poisoning lies with Russia.

    Despite the efforts of those agents, five out six people poisoned with Novichok survived, not unscathed perhaps, but alive. That they did so is in some way the result of the expertise and knowledge gained over years of nerve agent research at Porton Down.

    It seems clear that the more information about the effects of nerve agent exposure that are known outside specialist research circles the better. Though nerve agent attack is extremely rare the events in Salisbury and Amesbury have shown they are not impossible.


    For you: more from our Insights series:

    • Climate scientists: concept of net zero is a dangerous trap

    • The overshoot myth: you can’t keep burning fossil fuels and expect scientists of the future to get us back to 1.5°C

    • We found over 300 million young people had experienced online sexual abuse and exploitation over the course of our meta-study

    • Novelist J.G. Ballard was experimenting with computer-generated poetry 50 years before ChatGPT was invented

    To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.

    The research study that took Thomas Keegan to Porton Down was led by the University of Oxford and funded by the Medical Research Council.

    – ref. Inside Porton Down: what I learned during three years at the UK’s most secretive chemical weapons laboratory – https://theconversation.com/inside-porton-down-what-i-learned-during-three-years-at-the-uks-most-secretive-chemical-weapons-laboratory-248376

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s art of the deal horrifies Ukraine and its allies

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor

    Browse through Donald Trump’s ghostwritten memoir, The Art of the Deal, and you’ll come across an aphorism which will go some way to explaining the US president’s approach to negotiating. Having established that he would do nearly anything within legal bounds to win, Trump adds that: “Sometimes, part of making a deal is denigrating your competition.”

    It’s an idea which makes a lot of sense when you consider Trump’s record. We saw it time and again on the campaign trail, as he sought to seal the deal with the US public by repeatedly denigrating first Joe Biden and then Kamala Harris. Which begs the question, in seeking to make a deal to end the war in Ukraine, exactly who he sees as the competition he needs to denigrate: Vladimir Putin or Volodymyr Zelensky?

    Trump has certainly gone out of his way to excoriate the Ukrainian president over the past day or two, both in public and on his TruthSocial platform. He has variously blamed Zelensky for starting the war, called him a “dictator without elections” and a “modestly successful comedian … very low in Ukrainian polls” who “has done a terrible job, his country is shattered, and MILLIONS have unnecessarily died”.

    Putin, meanwhile, takes a rather different view of how to seal a deal with the US president. Far from denigrating Trump, he has set out to charm the flattery-loving president with a view to driving a wedge between the US and Europe, claiming that EU leaders had “insulted” Trump during his election campaign and insisting that “they are themselves at fault for what is happening”.


    Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.


    The Russian president will be well pleased with the events of the past week or so. After three years of increasing isolation under the Biden presidency, he’s now back at the top table with the US president – two powerful men discussing the future of Europe.

    For the man who, in 2005, complained that the collapse of the Soviet Union had been “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the 20th century, to be back deciding the fate of nations is a dream come true, writes James Rodgers of City St George’s, University of London.

    Rodgers, a former BBC Moscow correspondent, observes that Putin has fulfilled this mission having “conceded not an inch of occupied Ukrainian territory to get there. Nor has he even undertaken to give back any of what Russian forces have seized since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine three years ago.”

    Not only that, but Putin also appears to have enlisted US support for one of the key objectives that encouraged him to invade Ukraine in the first place: preventing Ukraine from joining Nato. That much was clear from the US defense secretary Pete Hegseth’s speech to European defence officials last week. The views of Washington’s European allies (and of the Biden administration) – that Ukraine’s membership of Nato is a matter for the alliance members to decide with Ukraine as a sovereign state in control of its own foreign policy – don’t appear to matter to Trump and his team.




    Read more:
    Ukraine peace talks: Trump is bringing Russia back in from the cold and ticking off items on Putin’s wish list


    Meanwhile, Trump’s policy volte-face over Ukraine and, more broadly, European security in general has driven a dangerous wedge between the US and its allies in Europe. France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, responded by convening a meeting on Monday of the leaders of what the French foreign minister, Jean-Noël Barrot, described as “the main European countries”. This turned out to include Germany, the UK, Italy, Poland, Spain, the Netherlands and Denmark, as well as the Nato secretary-general and the presidents of the European Council and European Commission.

    Passing over the question of how the leaders of the Baltic states felt about this, given they all share a border with Russia (as does Finland) and presumably are well aware of the vulnerability of their position, the fact is Europe is deeply divided over its response to the situation.

    As Stefan Wolff observes, the Weimar+ group of countries that met in Paris only represent one shade of opinion within the EU. Meanwhile, Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orbán, is openly scathing about European efforts to support Ukraine, posting on X: “While President @realDonaldTrump and President Putin negotiate on peace, EU officials issue worthless statements.”

    Wolff, an expert in international security at the University of Birmingham, notes that disrupting European unity is a stated aim of the Project 2025 initiative which has guided, if not Trump himself, many of his close advisers. The past week, taking into account both Hegseth’s meeting with European defence ministers and the subsequent appearance by the US vice-president, J.D. Vance, at the Munich Security Conference, has gone a fair way down the path towards achieving that disruption.

    At the same time, Vance’s lecture to the conference – during which he was heavily critical of Europe as “the enemy within” which was undermining democracy and threatening free speech – will have united most of those present in anger and dismay at his remarks.




    Read more:
    Europe left scrambling in face of wavering US security guarantees


    Constitutional matters

    Trump has declared that Zelensky is a “dictator” because he cancelled last year’s election in Ukraine. In fact, Ukraine’s constitution provides that elections are prohibited during periods of martial law. And martial law has been in force since the day of the invasion on February 24 2022.

    Lena Surzhko Harned, a professor of political science at Penn State University, writes that the delegitimisation of Zelensky is a tactic Putin has been striving for from the very start. The Kremlin has pushed the narrative that there is no legitimate authority with which to negotiate a peace deal, and that Zelensky’s government is “illegitimate”.

    “What Putin needs for this plan to work is a willing partner to help get the message out that Zelensky and the current Ukraine government are not legitimate representatives of their country,” writes Harned. “And into this gap the new US administration appears to have stepped.”

    Despite Zelensky still enjoying relatively strong support in recent opinion polls, an election campaign in the middle of this conflict would be a needlessly divisive exercise. And that’s before you consider the potential for Russian interference, which would be seriously debilitating for a country fighting for its survival.

    Putin knows all this – and he also knows by framing the issue in a way that suggests Ukraine is dragging its feet over peace, he will enjoy a propaganda coup. And that’s what he is doing, with the apparent support of the US president.




    Read more:
    In pushing for Ukraine elections, Trump is falling into Putin-laid trap to delegitimize Zelenskyy


    Another way Putin hopes to discredit the Ukrainian leadership is by deliberately excluding it from the talks – at least for the present. Zelensky has said, with the support of his European allies, that there can be no deal without Ukrainian participation.

    It’s easy to see why Zelensky and his allies are so adamant that they should be involved, writes Matt Fitzpatrick, a professor of international history at Flinders University. History is littered with examples of large powers getting together to decide the fate of smaller nations that have no agency in the division.

    Three such shameful debacles determined the history of much of the 20th century – and not in a good way. The Sykes-Picot agreement divided the Middle East between British and French spheres of influence, and sowed the seed for discord which continues to this day. The Munich conference of 1938, at which the fate of Czechoslovakia was decided without any Czech input, showed Adolf Hitler that naked aggression really does pay. And having failed to learn from either of these, in 1945 the Big Three (Russia, the US and Britain) got together at Yalta to carve up Germany, thereby setting the scene for the cold war.




    Read more:
    Ukraine isn’t invited to its own peace talks. History is full of such examples – and the results are devastating


    Deal or no deal

    One of Trump’s assertions this week has been that Zelensky had his chance to strike a deal and avoid all the bloodshed and much of the territorial loss suffered by Ukraine in the three years of war. Reacting to questions about why Zelensky or any Ukrainian diplomats hadn’t been involved in the talks, he scoffed: “Today I heard: ‘Oh, well, we weren’t invited.’ Well, you’ve been there for three years … You should have never started it. You could have made a deal.”

    Stephen Hall, who specialises in Russian and post-Soviet politics at the University of Bath, recalls the early talks in the spring of 2022. He says that the idea – also floated in the press by several commentators – that Ukraine should have concluded a peace deal in March or April of 2022 after talks in Istanbul is absurd.

    While there was momentum for peace, particularly on Kyiv’s part, the two sides were a long way apart on issues such as the size of Ukraine’s military and the fate of territories such as Crimea. “Had Ukraine done a deal based on the Istanbul communique, it would have essentially led to the country becoming a virtual province of Russia – led by a pro-Russian government and banned from seeking alliances with western countries,” Hall writes.




    Read more:
    Ukraine war: the idea that Kyiv should have signed a peace deal in 2022 is flawed – here’s why


    And in any case, back then there was scant support among Ukraine’s allies in Europe and the Biden White House for appeasing Putin by offering him concessions in return for aggression. But that’s now history. Trump and his team appear to have already granted the Russian president some of his dearest wishes before the negotiations proper have even started.


    World Affairs Briefing from The Conversation UK is available as a weekly email newsletter. Click here to get updates directly in your inbox.


    – ref. Trump’s art of the deal horrifies Ukraine and its allies – https://theconversation.com/trumps-art-of-the-deal-horrifies-ukraine-and-its-allies-250461

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Ukraine war: the idea that Kyiv should have signed a peace deal in 2022 is flawed – here’s why

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stephen Hall, Lecturer (Assistant Professor) in Russian and Post-Soviet Politics, University of Bath

    It has been an eventful and, for Ukraine and its European allies, alarming past week or so. First they heard that the US president, Donald Trump, had spent 90 minutes on the phone with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin. In one stroke, Trump upended three years in which his predecessor, Joe Biden, had sought to isolate Russia after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

    On the same day, February 12, Trump’s newly installed secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, told a gathering of senior defence officials in Brussels that Europe would no longer be the primary focus for US security policy, and that Ukraine could not hope to regain the territory Russia had illegally occupied since 2014, nor join Nato.

    Hegseth added that not only would the US not contribute to any peacekeeping force in Ukraine in the event of a peace deal, but that any European peacekeeping operation would not be done under the protection of Nato’s Article 5.

    This was soon followed by the US vice-president, J.D. Vance, telling the Munich Security Conference that it was Europe, not Russia or China, that was the main security threat – the “enemy within” that fostered anti-democratic practices and sought to curtail free speech.

    This week, a US team led by the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, sat down with their Russian opposite numbers led by the foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, to discuss peace negotiations. Ukraine was not represented. Nor was Europe. Following that, and perhaps taking his cue from Hegseth, Lavrov declared that Russia would not accept any European peacekeepers in Ukraine – deal or no deal.

    Meanwhile, Trump has taken to his TruthSocial media platform to repeat several favourite Kremlin talking points. Ukraine was responsible for the war, he said. Its president, Volodymyr Zelensky, was a “dictator” who had cancelled elections, and whose popularity with his own people was now as low as 4% (it’s actually 57%, at least 10 points higher than Trump’s rating in the US).

    Trump also mocked Zelensky’s concern at his country’s exclusion from the Riyadh talks, telling reporters: “Today I heard: ‘Oh, well, we weren’t invited.’ Well, you’ve been there for three years … You should have never started it. You could have made a deal.”

    This leads us back to the Istanbul communique, produced at the end of March 2022 after initial peace talks between Russia and Ukraine in Antalya, Turkey. Some US commentators have suggested Ukraine could now be better off had it signed this deal.

    Istanbul communique

    What happened in Istanbul, and how close Russia and Ukraine were to an agreement, has been hotly debated, with some arguing a deal was close and others refuting this.

    Ukraine reportedly agreed to a range of concessions including future neutrality, as well as giving up its bid for membership of Nato. Russia, in turn, would apparently have accepted Ukraine’s membership of the EU. This concession, incidentally, is still on the table.

    But there were sticking points, primarily over the size of Ukraine’s armed forces after a deal – Kyiv reportedly wanted 250,000 soldiers, the Kremlin just 85,000 – and the types of weaponry Ukraine could keep in its arsenal.

    There were also issues about Ukraine’s Russian-occupied territory, particularly Crimea – this was projected to be resolved over 15 years with Russia occupying the peninsula on a lease in the meantime. Another Kremlin demand was for Zelensky to stand down as president, with the presidency being taken up by the pro-Russian politician Viktor Medvedchuk.

    Negotiations continued through April 2022, only to break down when Russian atrocities were reported in Bucha, a town Ukrainian troops had retaken as part of their spring counter-offensive. But the fact is, an agreement was never really close.

    The UK’s former prime minister, Boris Johnson, has taken much flack over reports that he urged Zelensky not to accept the deal. But there was never a realistic chance this deal would be acceptable to Ukraine. A neutral Ukraine with a reduced military capacity would have no way to defend itself against any future aggression.

    Had Ukraine done a deal based on the Istanbul communique, it would have essentially led to the country becoming a virtual province of Russia – led by a pro-Russian government and banned from seeking alliances with western countries. As for joining the EU, it was the Kremlin’s opposition to Kyiv’s engagement with the EU in 2013 which provoked the Euromaidan protests and led to Russia’s initial annexation of Crimea the following year.

    What next?

    Kyiv signing the Istanbul communique may have quickly stopped the war and the killing. But the Kremlin has repeatedly shown it cannot be trusted to adhere to agreements – you only have to look at the way it repeatedly violated the Minsk accords of 2015, which attempted to end hostilities in eastern Ukraine.

    Further, a deal that rewards Russian aggression by agreeing to its taking of territory and demanding the neutrality of the victim would undermine global security, and encourage other illegal foreign policy adventurism.

    If the Trump administration has the blueprint of a fair peace deal, it’s hiding it well at this point. Instead, European leaders have been put in a position where they must face the prospect of having to fund Ukraine’s continued defence, while coping with a US retreat from its security guarantees for Europe as a whole.

    Either that or, as my University of Bath colleague Patrick Bury wrote on X this week, accept some pretty dire consequences.

    Europe is facing a crisis that it could have prepared for after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. With Trump back in power, the relationship between the US and Europe appears increasingly fractured. But Europe too is bitterly divided over how to approach this crisis.

    Britain and France initially talked up the idea of providing troops as peacekeepers in Ukraine – but Germany adamantly refused to go along with that plan. Both Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer have since rethought the idea (although there is a report that the UK prime minister has considered a scheme for a 30,000-strong “monitoring force” away from the ceasefire line).

    The Kremlin reacts to signals. While it was clearly preparing for the invasion in late 2021, Joe Biden’s statement that he would not send troops to defend Ukraine showed the limits to US involvement. A message that Europe is prepared to dispatch peacekeepers to Ukraine now would send a strong signal to Putin – and the Trump administration – that Europe is serious.

    Stephen Hall 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. Ukraine war: the idea that Kyiv should have signed a peace deal in 2022 is flawed – here’s why – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-the-idea-that-kyiv-should-have-signed-a-peace-deal-in-2022-is-flawed-heres-why-250423

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Canada, Greenland, Panama, Gaza and now Ukraine: Wake up, world, Donald Trump is coming for you

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jeffrey B. Meyers, Instructor, Legal Studies and Criminology, Kwantlen Polytechnic University

    It’s no longer speculative to ask how the post-Second World War world order, led by the United States, will end. It’s apparently already ended.

    The U.S. has snubbed its NATO partners and Ukraine itself from purported “peace talks” to end the three-year-old war in Europe in favour of direct bilateral talks between American and Russian officials hosted by Saudi Arabia.

    President Donald Trump has actually described Ukraine’s widely admired wartime President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as “a dictator” and falsely claimed he started the war.

    These lies came directly after Vice President JD Vance’s recent broadside against NATO partners at the Munich Security Conference in which he downplayed the threat of Russia and China to the western alliance and suggested instead that liberal centrism was the real threat.

    His remarks were widely regarded as an intervention on behalf of the European far right, particularly far-right political parties in Germany ahead of upcoming elections in that country.

    Dreaming of a Gaza takeover

    Eighty years after the liberation of Auschwitz and 36 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, we are in the midst of new crimes against humanity, new forms of ethnic cleansing and even, potentially, genocide.

    In a news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump mused about an American takeover of the Gaza Strip by removing its occupants to neighbouring countries and developing the region as a seaside resort. This would very likely constitute a war crime.

    Snubbing international law

    Trump’s return to the American presidency marks a normalization of this type of threat.

    Instead of embracing the international rule of law in the post-Second World War spirit of avoiding another devastating global conflict, the U.S. is building new walls rather than tearing them down while at the same time threatening to annex other sovereign nations and amass new territory.

    Trump is obviously unsentimental about America’s longtime allies, including the innermost circle of English-speaking democracies — the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom, Australian and New Zealand — that make up the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance.

    A group of countries that wouldn’t normally be fussed about the transition from one American president to another is now very nervous about how far Trump is going to go.




    Read more:
    Allies or enemies? Trump’s threats against Canada and Greenland put NATO in a tough spot


    Anarchy, colonialism

    During the first angry weeks of Trump’s second presidency, the U.S. appears to be signalling a return to an anarchic and explicitly colonial imagining of the world. In this regard, Trump’s disdain for the rule of law at home tracks a potentially even greater disdain for the international legal order, one that’s existed since 1945.

    The only real connection between the past and contemporary times predates the American-led post-war order of the past eight decades and harkens further back to America’s imperialist and expansionist past and ideas like Manifest Destiny from more than a century ago.




    Read more:
    How the U.S. could in fact make Canada an American territory


    Trump, not historically much of an imperialist in his rhetoric, has now doubled down on classical imperialist threats as he repeatedly proposes expanding the physical map of the U.S., musing in particular about Greenland, Panama, Canada and now Gaza.

    Greenland holds a strategic interest for the U.S. — there’s already an American airbase on the island — since its location is increasingly important as the Arctic ice melts and amid greater competition from Russia and China.

    Panama has been in America’s imperialistic sights more often than Greenland, and was even invaded by U.S. forces in 1989.

    Canada as a 51st state

    But Canada? At least Trump agreed at a news conference before taking office that military force was off the table. Instead, Canada only had to worry about “economic force” being used to annex it.

    Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has told business leaders that Trump’s talk about annexing Canada is “the real thing,” aimed at obtaining Canada’s critical minerals.

    Trump’s interactions with Denmark, Canada and Panama all demonstrate a disdain for basic principles of the rule of law at the international level, which is underpinned by the sovereignty of states.

    His musings on Gaza, which led United Nations Secretary General António Guterres to warn him specifically against endorsing ethnic cleansing, demonstrate a willingness to break completely with international legal norms.

    He’s not only peacocking on the global stage, he is also telegraphing that he holds international legal norms in even lower esteem than the norms of his own country, where he is a convicted felon. This situation is as alarming as it unprecedented.




    Read more:
    Despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s gift to Donald Trump, he could be barred from Canada as a convicted felon


    America now a threat

    Right now, cognitive dissonance in the form of status quo bias poses a real danger in terms of Trump’s dismissal of the rule of law. This means that folks are somehow convincing themselves that the undoing of the global rules-based order in real time is just a blip; things will somehow ramp down and return to normal.

    But the evidence is glaringly to the contrary.

    Trump is plainly communicating his wishes: a new age of American imperialism. At first few took him seriously. Now we all are. Canada, due to its proximity to and reliance on the U.S., must especially face a new reality in which an American president casually and repeatedly threatens its sovereignty.

    Canada, America’s closest ally in terms of shared language, culture and geography, should be the first and not the last to start believing Trump’s threats to annex it.




    Read more:
    Allies or enemies? Trump’s threats against Canada and Greenland put NATO in a tough spot


    Even when Trump is no longer in office, neither Canadians nor any of America’s other allies can be certain someone just like him will not be returned to power by the U.S. voters. That means America’s western allies, like Canada and Denmark, must learn the lessons Latin American and Middle Eastern countries learned along time ago: America is a threat.

    The Democratic Party must also figure out how it’s going to effectively resist Trump over the next four years.

    Only an American concern?

    Some might ask: Aren’t these American problems for the American people? As Canadians can attest, no. Trump poses grave dangers to the rest of the world due to the unique place the U.S. occupies in the geopolitical system.

    Nothing about Trump’s second presidency bodes well for America’s allies and friends, including Canada.

    A kleptocrat who regards friends and allies as transactional customers and for whom everything is “just business,” including national security, Trump poses an existential threat not only to America, but to the international world order.

    Jeffrey B. Meyers 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. Canada, Greenland, Panama, Gaza and now Ukraine: Wake up, world, Donald Trump is coming for you – https://theconversation.com/canada-greenland-panama-gaza-and-now-ukraine-wake-up-world-donald-trump-is-coming-for-you-248737

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Ukraine’s natural resources are at centre stage in the ongoing war, and will likely remain there

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Nino Antadze, Associate Professor, Environmental Studies, University of Prince Edward Island

    Three years after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the world now knows the exact price for American military support of Ukraine. During a recent interview with Fox News, United States President Donald Trump put a $500 billion price tag on American aid to the war-torn country.

    But there was a catch: the exchange should be made in the form of Ukraine’s valuable natural resources, including rare earth minerals. “We have to get something. We can’t continue to pay this money,” Trump said in the interview.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has since told his aides to reject the proposal.

    Given the dizzying pace of events that have unfolded since the Trump interview, it’s unclear now whether any deal with Ukraine on its rare earth minerals will ever come to pass. This is especially true given Trump’s subsequent surprise phone conversation with Russian leader Vladimir Putin and ongoing peace talks between the U.S. and Russia that have excluded Ukrainian and European Union officials.

    But there’s little doubt Ukraine’s natural resources will be an important element in future diplomatic negotiations.

    Always a strategic factor

    Ukraine’s rich natural resources have always been a strategic factor in the war. To some extent, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was driven by the interest to capture and control these resources — including critical minerals, fertile farmland and energy reserves.

    Ukraine’s previous attempts to develop its mineral deposits and energy reserves — such as oil and gas privatization in 2013 and later attracting investments for the development of its mineral resource extraction in 2021 — were cut short first by Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and then by the full-scale Russian invasion in 2022.

    In 2021, the European Union signed a strategic partnership with Ukraine to include “activities along the entire value chain of both primary and secondary critical raw materials and batteries.”

    The timing of the military campaign against Ukraine may not have been determined solely by the country’s attempts to develop its natural resources, but they have certainly been a factor. Most of these deposits, including oil and gas fields, are located in the eastern and southern regions of Ukraine, which are currently either under Russian occupation or near the front line.

    Ukraine’s mineral wealth

    Ukraine’s mineral wealth amounts to about 20,000 mineral deposits and 116 types of minerals. Most of these deposits are unexplored, with only 15 per cent of all the deposits active prior to the Russian invasion.

    Rare earth minerals are among this mineral wealth as demand for them has skyrocketed in the past several years.

    According to recent estimates, Ukraine has the largest titanium reserves in Europe and seven per cent of the world’s reserves, as well as the largest lithium reserves in Europe. It also has significant production capacity when it comes to rare earth minerals.

    Ukraine also has confirmed deposits of beryllium, uranium and manganese. Before the war, Ukraine was the world’s fifth-largest producer of gallium and is a major producer of neon gas.

    In addition, Ukraine also has large reserves of nonferrous metals, including copper, zinc, silver, lead, nickel, cobalt, as well as one of the largest global reserves of graphite.

    Estimates vary, but Ukrainian critical mineral deposits could be worth trillions of dollars.

    These resources are important from a geopolitical perspective: China has become the major supplier of rare earth minerals on the global market. Not only has China led in the extraction of these minerals, but it also has the largest production and refinement capacity.

    As reliance on Chinese supply has increased, China used it as leverage during the U.S.-China trade dispute in 2019 and stopped rare earth exports to Japan in 2010.

    China’s dominance in this sector means diversifying the supply of rare earth minerals has geopolitical importance, especially for the U.S. and the EU. They want to ensure the supply comes from a strategic partner — Ukraine.

    Ukraine’s natural wealth

    Ukraine’s natural riches go beyond critical minerals and include large deposits of hydrocarbons, particularly natural gas. Ukraine ranks second for natural gas reserves in Europe and fourth in terms of natural gas production.

    Ukraine’s fertile soil — or chernozem, humus-rich grassland soils used extensively for growing cereals and raising livestock — is also economically and strategically important, making the country one of the largest exporters of food globally.

    In 2021, Ukrainian wheat exports accounted for 12 per cent of the global wheat supply, 16 per cent of the global corn supply, 18 per cent of the global barley supply and almost half of the global supply of sunflower seeds, mainly to developing countries.

    Last but not least, Ukraine’s biodiversity, landscapes and ecosystems — some of which have been severely damaged due to the war — are invaluable to the country’s natural environment and essential for the health and well-being of Ukrainians.

    The country’s nuclear facilities and radioactive sites are also at risk of being compromised, which would result in severe environmental and health ramifications in the region. In fact, a recent Russian drone attack reportedly damaged part of the Chernobyl nuclear facility.

    What’s next for Ukraine’s natural resources

    The fate of Ukraine’s mineral riches will largely depend on how the conflict and post-conflict processes unfold.

    But their existence has already proven to be of strategic importance in the war — first, to Russia, and now to the U.S. as well.

    Ukraine’s natural wealth and how it features in current conversations about the future of the conflict reminds us about the central role resource politics can play in shaping war and peace.

    Nino Antadze 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. Ukraine’s natural resources are at centre stage in the ongoing war, and will likely remain there – https://theconversation.com/ukraines-natural-resources-are-at-centre-stage-in-the-ongoing-war-and-will-likely-remain-there-249254

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: “Russia is Us”: a concert dedicated to Defender of the Fatherland Day was held at the State University of Management

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –

    On February 20, 2025, a festive concert dedicated to Defender of the Fatherland Day was held at the State University of Management for residents of the South-Eastern Administrative District of Moscow.

    According to tradition, the patriotic concert opened with the anthem of the Russian Federation. Prefect of the South-Eastern Administrative District Andrey Tsybin greeted the residents of the district from the stage and reminded them of the enormous significance of the holiday, which has been celebrated for over a hundred years.

    “Our country is an example of how to protect your sovereignty and your interests on the world stage. First of all, I want to congratulate the guys of the South-Eastern District, who are now fulfilling their civic duty in the SVO. I also congratulate those who provide their rear with their labor and solve state problems here in the city. It is nice to see when citizens of all ages, both children and the older generation, collect humanitarian aid for the newly acquired territories of Russia. I thank the deputies of the district who organize this work. And of course, I congratulate the veterans, whose example is important for all of us. I wish everyone a peaceful sky above their heads, warmth and light in their homes,” Andrei Tsybin addressed the residents of the district.

    Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Pyotr Tolstoy also congratulated those gathered on the upcoming February 23. The parliamentarian supported the prefect’s words that in this difficult time, everyone in their place helps to defend the interests of the entire country.

    “Previously, February 23 was an exclusively men’s holiday, and March 8 was a women’s holiday. Today, Defender of the Fatherland Day no longer divides us by gender. I congratulate the soldiers who ensure our safety and prosperity in a special military operation. I congratulate their family members. I express my condolences and support to the relatives and friends of the soldiers who died for their homeland. Unfortunately, this also happens. Now a political situation has arisen that can help resolve the conflict in Ukraine more quickly. We all feel close to success, but this feeling depends only on the actions of the guys at the front. And they need our support and any help,” said Pyotr Tolstoy.

    A military choir and a children’s vocal group performed for the audience, as well as a power team, literally tying nails into knots. It is worth noting that the entire audience rose from their seats during the performance of the song “Vstanem”, many filmed the event on their phones. The headliner of the concert was Honored Artist of Russia and now State Duma deputy Denis Maidanov, known for his concert trips to the sites of military operations and unequivocal support of the SVO.

    Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 02/20/2025

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

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: German election: a triple crisis looms large at the heart of the economy

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ralph Luetticke, Professor of Economics, School of Business and Economics, University of Tübingen

    Oleg Senkov/Shutterstock

    Ahead of the election on February 23, many German voters are deeply concerned about the economy – and for good reason. The German economy is in a recession and has been shrinking for two consecutive years. In fact, it is now about the same size as it was in 2019, even as some of its peers among the world’s advanced economies have experienced solid growth (on the left of the chart below).

    This matters for voters, who have experienced stagnating real incomes and remain pessimistic – expecting real incomes to decline further.

    GDP and productivity growth of Germany, UK and US:

    There could be several reasons for Germany’s economic malaise. First, fiscal policy in Germany is tighter than in other countries, meaning higher taxes and lower public spending. Due to the “debt brake” enshrined in its constitution, Germany is severely restricted in running budget deficits, except when the government declares an emergency, as it did due to COVID.

    The last coalition government collapsed over a dispute about whether to declare another emergency over the war in Ukraine in order to increase borrowing capacity. This did not happen, and as a result Germany’s fiscal deficit has remained relatively moderate. The argument goes that a larger deficit might have boosted economic growth.

    Second, for decades, Germany has relied on foreign demand to sustain economic growth at home. During the first two decades of the 21st century, it benefited greatly from China’s integration into the world economy.

    To build up its productive capacity, China relied heavily on machinery produced in Germany and it purchased a significant number of German cars. However, this is no longer the case. As China has moved to the technology frontier, it no longer depends as much on German cars or machinery.

    However, both factors only go so far in accounting for the stagnating German economy. For if demand – domestic or foreign – is too weak to sustain growth, this should be reflected in falling prices.

    Yet prices have been rising strongly. Inflation in Germany has been running high over the last couple of years.

    And it has not been systematically lower than in, say, the US or the rest of the euro area. Over the next 12 months, households expect inflation to be above 3% – well above the European Central Bank’s 2% target.

    Another relevant indicator also suggests that lack of demand is unlikely to be the main reason for Germany’s stagnation. Unemployment is low in Germany, lower than in most European countries and hardly higher than in 2019.

    Instead, adverse supply conditions are key, as reflected in households’ expectations of falling incomes and higher inflation.

    Overall, supply is simply the combination of labour and capital inputs (for example, the size of the workforce and the machinery or premises available to them) along with productivity or technology, which tells us how much output we get from the labour and capital inputs. Germany is facing a triple crisis in this regard – expensive energy, weak labour supply and low productivity growth.

    First, there are energy prices, which have been pushed up everywhere by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, the effect has been particularly strong in Germany due to its direct dependency on Russian gas.

    The outgoing government, in which the Greens have been a key player, is widely credited with trying to accelerate Germany’s green transition. This raised the costs of the transition above those caused by the European Emissions Trading System, whereby polluters pay for their emissions.

    While it is difficult to determine the exact contributions of the war and the green transition to the rise in energy prices, both clearly act as a drag on growth, particularly on the supply side (that is to say, production potential).

    The productivity problem

    But Germany faces more fundamental supply-side challenges. The second issue becomes apparent when comparing GDP per hour worked (a measure of a country’s productivity, as seen on the right of the chart above).

    Here, the trends in Germany and the UK are quite similar, implying that Germany’s lower economic growth relative to the UK is primarily due to people working fewer hours. This, in turn, may reflect demographic changes, migration that does not contribute to the labour force or shifting preferences in the wake of COVID.

    The third issue is productivity growth. Consider the increase in GDP per hour worked in the US, which has risen by more than 10% as shown in the chart above, dwarfing the developments in both Germany and the UK. Common causes of weak productivity growth include ageing infrastructure, low private sector investment, a lack of start-ups and fewer new companies growing into multinational leaders.

    A turnaround requires far-reaching improvements in supply conditions. In terms of energy, Germany should avoid measures such as introducing more regulation on the heating or insulation of new and existing homes, and instead rely on the EU-wide emissions trading scheme to curb emissions.

    In the labour market, increased participation or skilled migration is needed, supported by policies that encourage people to retire later and entice more women into the workforce.

    Increasing defence spending could be a way to boost German productivity.
    Ryan Nash Photography/Shutterstock

    Productivity growth remains the most challenging issue. A good start would be increased funding for universities and reduced regulation, particularly for AI technology.

    Deepening the EU’s single market, for example by removing restrictions on cross-border energy trade to allow firms to access cheaper electricity, would enhance competition and drive productivity growth. This way, companies could expand and create well-paying jobs.

    Finally, an additional boost may come from higher defence spending, not only to address the much-needed improvement of Germany’s external security but also because it has been shown to increase productivity.

    While immigration may be a major talking point for the German electorate in the coming vote, the economy – as ever – will be an important factor in measuring the mood of the country.

    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. German election: a triple crisis looms large at the heart of the economy – https://theconversation.com/german-election-a-triple-crisis-looms-large-at-the-heart-of-the-economy-250320

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Yuri Trutnev visited the branch of the Voin center in Kalmykia

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

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

    Yuri Trutnev visited the branch of the Voin center in Kalmykia

    February 20, 2025

    Yuri Trutnev visited the branch of the Voin center in Kalmykia

    February 20, 2025

    Yuri Trutnev visited the branch of the Voin center in Kalmykia

    February 20, 2025

    Yuri Trutnev visited the branch of the Voin center in Kalmykia

    February 20, 2025

    Yuri Trutnev visited the branch of the Voin center in Kalmykia

    February 20, 2025

    Yuri Trutnev visited the branch of the Voin center in Kalmykia

    February 20, 2025

    Previous news Next news

    Yuri Trutnev visited the branch of the Voin center in Kalmykia

    As part of a working visit to the Republic of Kalmykia, Deputy Prime Minister – Presidential Plenipotentiary Representative in the Far Eastern Federal District Yuri Trutnev visited the regional branch of the Voin center in Elista. The working meeting was attended by the head of the region Batu Khasikov, deputy chairman of the board of the Voin center, participant in the Time of Heroes program, Hero of Russia Andranik Gasparyan and director of the branch of the Voin center in Kalmykia Chimid Dzhangaev.

    “The Voin Center was created by order of the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, and its regional branches have been opened in 21 regions. Since its operation in May 2023, more than 56 thousand children have been trained in the regional branches of the center. We try to monitor how the work is going in all territories, meet, watch the work of the instructors, because they pass on their experience, knowledge, and ability to love the Motherland to children. And we believe that this is very important. We were pleased to come to Kalmykia. I know that Kalmykia has established military traditions. There are many heroes here who serve with dignity today in the special military operation zone. I met with the instructors, they are confident people ready to work. A few days ago I was in Khabarovsk and got acquainted with the work of the branch there. Our task is to create a mechanism for transferring traditions, experience and spirit in each center. This is also very important. We came to visit on the eve of Defender of the Fatherland Day, and I am pleased to congratulate everyone who works in the center today, and in general all residents of Kalmykia on this common holiday of ours,” said Yuri Trutnev.

    The guests of honor began their visit with an inspection of the Nona airborne combat vehicle, which was recently installed near the branch building. They then attended classes in classrooms and familiarized themselves with the regional branch’s material and technical base.

    The guests saw how the cadets hone their skills in UAV control, tactical medicine, and undergo fire and tactical training. After that, they visited the museum of the special military operation, located in the branch building. At the end of the meeting, they discussed with the heads of the training areas the development of the regional branch of the “Voin” center.

    A unique patriotic project of the Kalmyk branch on the creation of “Warrior” platoons in the region’s schools was presented. The first such platoon was opened on February 14 at school No. 10 named after V.A. Bembetov, its cadets were 20 students from grades 7-11. The platoon’s work is supervised by the senior instructor-methodologist of the “Warrior” center, veteran of the SVO Dmitry Chulchinov.

    “I would like to thank Yuri Petrovich for visiting the regional branch of the Voin center, for his attention, support and communication with the team of instructors. I am pleased, as the one responsible for the development of our branch of the Voin center, with the involvement of our cadets. Not only young people come here, but also active soldiers – guys who participate in a special military operation. This means that what is taught here is in demand, relevant and effective. We will continue this work and will popularize it, because we must live with the motto: “Be prepared for everything”. And, of course, we will also improve the material and technical equipment. We have big plans in this regard,” said the head of the Republic of Kalmykia Batu Khasikov.

    The branch of the Voin center in the Republic of Kalmykia opened its doors on May 11, 2023. And during its operation, it was able to become the largest military-patriotic platform in the region. The branch’s arsenal includes advanced simulators, dummies, training machines and mass-dimensional models of weapons, which allow for high-quality training of cadets.

    The pride and competitive advantage of the Kalmyk branch of the Voin center are its instructors, many of whom are participants in a special military operation. Batu Khasikov took direct part in their selection.

    In 2023, the branch trained 1,500 teenagers aged 14 to 18, including 900 as part of the summer military-patriotic shifts “Time of Young Heroes”.

    In 2024, instructors from the Kalmyk branch have already trained 2,015 people, 450 of them during the “Time of Young Heroes” shifts. Significant work was carried out on patriotic education and popularization of military-sports training.

    Since the beginning of 2025, 961 teenagers have started classes in the first educational stream at the branch; in total, it is planned to train more than 2 thousand boys and girls. In less than two months of work, a number of patriotic events have already been organized. Among them are “Lessons of Courage”, “Conversations about Important Things”, master classes on the basics of tactical medicine, the basics of UAV piloting and fire training.

    The Center for Military-Sports Training and Patriotic Education of Youth “Voin” was created by order of the President of Russia and is already represented in 21 regions of Russia. The “Voin” Center implements programs for schoolchildren and students on patriotic education and military-sports training, including practical training camps and military-sports games and competitions.

    In early August 2024, Russian President Vladimir Putin instructed the Government to involve participants in the special military operation in educational work with young people by developing branches of the Voin center in all regions of the country.

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

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Alexander Novak met with Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Belarus Viktor Karankevich

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

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

    Alexander Novak met with Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Belarus Viktor Karankevich

    Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Alexander Novak met with Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Belarus Viktor Karankevich.

    “Russia remains Belarus’s main trading partner. Over the past three years, Russia has consistently accounted for more than half of Belarus’s foreign trade in goods. The Republic is Russia’s main trading partner in the CIS and the fourth in the world. Belarus’s share in Russia’s foreign trade turnover is almost 9%. Based on last year’s results, the volume of trade between the two countries will likely break the record again. In January-October, trade turnover increased by 6.5%, while trade turnover in economic products increased by 16.1% compared to the same period in 2023,” Alexander Novak noted, opening the meeting.

    The parties discussed work to deepen integration within the Union State, interaction in the trade, economic and energy spheres, progress in forming a unified oil and gas market, as well as projects in the electric power industry and in the peaceful nuclear sector.

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

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: The UK has information that Proxies directed by the Russian state have plans to interfere with CAR elections: UK statement at the UN Security Council

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Statement by Ambassador James Kariuki, UK Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, at the UN Security Council meeting on the Central African Republic.

    President, like others I extend condolences to the fallen Tunisian peacekeeper’s family, and express our gratitude for the personal sacrifices that peacekeepers and their families make in support of peace.

    We condemn all attacks on UN peacekeepers.

    I will make three points today.

    First, the UK welcomes the work by the government of CAR, in coordination with MINUSCA, to advance voter registration for elections. 

    The elections should be an important milestone in expanding the political participation of all individuals in CAR.

    However, the UK has information that Proxies directed by the Russian state have plans to interfere with CAR elections, including through suppressing political voices and conducting disinformation campaigns to interfere in political debate. 

    These actions demonstrate that Russian proxies act without regard for CAR’s sovereignty in order to secure continued support for their destabilising objectives. 

    Furthermore, they jeopardise the dedicated UN role, mandated by this Council, to help support inclusive, free and fair elections in 2025 and 2026.

    Second, the UK also welcomes progress by the government of CAR to improve its security and accountability capacity. 

    This includes delivering the first disciplinary sanctions against magistrates since 2013.

    However, as the Secretary-General’s report highlights, CAR faces many security challenges. 

    Attacks by Sudanese Rapid Support Forces in CAR threaten progress made in implementing the 2019 Political Agreement. 

    The UK calls on all actors to respect CAR’s territorial integrity. 

    We also encourage the government of CAR to enhance border management with Sudan to support refugees and prevent their exploitation by armed elements.

    Third, we remain concerned at the human rights situation in the country. 

    The UK condemns reports of ‘Wagner Ti Azande’ and other armed groups committing atrocities against civilians, including conflict-related sexual violence. 

    Grave violations against children are also increasing. 

    We urge the government of CAR to enhance their efforts to identify recruited children and secure their handover to child protection actors. 

    We also call on all actors to the conflict to uphold their obligations under International Humanitarian and Human Rights Law.

    President, to conclude, the coming year will be important for supporting peace and security in CAR, including through elections. 

    The UK remains committed to supporting MINUSCA and the government of CAR to embed genuine long-term security while preserving CAR’s sovereignty.

    Updates to this page

    Published 20 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    February 21, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: America Is Back — and President Trump Is Just Getting Started

    US Senate News:

    Source: The White House
    President Donald J. Trump took office just one month ago, but has already accomplished more than most presidents do in their entire term as he makes good on his promise to usher in the New Golden Age of America.
    Here is a non-comprehensive list of President Trump’s wins after just one month:
    SECURING OUR HOMELAND:
    President Trump declared a national emergency at the border and deployed the military, including the 10th Mountain Division, to secure our nation.
    Illegal border crossings have hit lows not seen in decades as U.S. Border Patrol is re-empowered to once again enforce the law.
    ABC News: “From Jan. 21 through Jan. 31, the number of U.S. Border Patrol apprehensions along the southwest border dropped 85% from the same period in 2024, according to data obtained by ABC News. In the 11 days after Jan. 20, migrants apprehended at ports of entry declined by 93%.”

    Illegal aliens have started turning around in droves amid the crackdown.
    The Department of Homeland Security announced that arrests of criminal illegal immigrants have doubled under President Trump.
    President Trump signed the Laken Riley Act into law, which requires illegal immigrants arrested or charged with theft or violence to be detained — honoring the legacy of Laken Riley, a Georgia college student brutally murdered by an illegal alien released into the country.
    President Trump ended “catch-and-release,” reversing the dangerous Biden-era policy that released dangerous illegal aliens back into our communities.
    President Trump shut down the “CBP One” app, which “paroled” more than one million illegal immigrants into the country.
    A migrant shelter in San Diego announced it will shut down after it has received no new arrivals since President Trump took office.

    President Trump terminated all taxpayer-funded public benefits for illegal aliens.
    President Trump ramped up deportation flights of criminal illegal aliens.
    After President Trump announced “urgent and decisive retaliatory measures” against Colombia over its refusal to accept deportation flights from the U.S., the country’s president quickly backtracked — even offering the use of his personal plane for the deportations.
    El Salvadorian President Nayib Bukele offered to accept deportees of any nationality, including violent American criminals currently imprisoned in the U.S.

    President Trump began transferring criminal illegal aliens to Guantanamo Bay ahead of their repatriation back to their own countries.
    President Trump re-established the successful “Remain in Mexico” policy.
    President Trump restarted construction of the border wall.
    The Trump Administration officially declared Tren de Aragua, MS-13, the Sinaloa Cartel, the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, the United Cartels, the Gulf Cartel, the Northeast Cartel, and the Michoacán Family as Foreign Terrorist Organizations.
    New York City Mayor Eric Adams (D) agreed to allow federal immigration officials to operate on Rikers Island and deport illegal alien criminals following his meeting with Border Czar Tom Homan.
    Mexico announced a deployment of 10,000 troops to the border to combat illegal immigration and fentanyl trafficking, while Canada announced a flurry of measures to combat fentanyl manufacturing and trafficking following President Trump’s imposition of tariffs on the two countries.
    President Trump implemented an additional 10% tariff on imports from China in order to stem the flow of illegal aliens and fentanyl.
    President Trump ordered an end to birthright citizenship.
    President Trump suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.
    The Department of Justice filed suit against the State of New York and some of its elected officials over their willful failure to follow federal immigration law and announced that it will take action against so-called “sanctuary cities” for their obstruction of U.S. law.
    The Department of Homeland Security “clawed back” tens of millions of dollars in funds paid by rogue FEMA officials to house illegal aliens in luxury New York City hotels.
    President Trump reinstated the death penalty for federal capital crimes.
    PROTECTING AMERICAN WORKERS AND FOSTERING ECONOMIC GROWTH:
    President Trump restored a 25% tariff on steel imports and elevated the tariff to 25% on aluminum imports to protect these critical American industries from unfair foreign competition — a move praised by the Steel Manufacturers Association, the Aluminum Association, and businesses across the country.
    Robert Simon, CEO of JSW Steel USA, praised President Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs, celebrating them “as a project that will flood the U.S. with jobs as trading partners move their industries to U.S. soil to avoid tariffs.”

    Makoto Uchida, the CEO of global automaker Nissan, said President Trump’s tariffs could push the car manufacturer to move its production from Mexico to the U.S.
    President Trump unveiled a plan for fair and reciprocal trade, making clear to the world that the United States will no longer tolerate being ripped off.
    President Trump secured hundreds of billions of dollars in new investments.
    President Trump announced the largest artificial intelligence infrastructure project in history, securing $500 billion in planned private sector investment — with major CEOs agreeing it would not have been possible without President Trump’s leadership.
    Saudi Arabia declared its intention to invest $600 billion in the United States over the next four years.
    President Trump secured a $20 billion investment by DAMAC Properties to build new U.S.-based data centers.
    Taiwan pledged to boost its investment in the United States.
    Electronics giants Samsung and LG “are considering moving their plants in Mexico to the U.S.” now that President Trump is back in office.

    In February, forecasters from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia revised their economic growth projections for the first quarter of 2025 up from 1.9% to 2.5%, and their unemployment rate projections for the quarter down from 4.2% to 4.1%.
    After a meeting with President Trump, Stellantis announced it will reopen its assembly plant in Belvidere, Illinois — putting 1,500 employees back to work — and build its next-generation Dodge Durango in Detroit, Michigan. The company also announced new investments in their Toledo, Ohio, and Kokomo, Indiana, facilities.
    President Trump laid out a visionary plan to establish a Sovereign Wealth Fund to maximize the stewardship of the $5+ trillion in assets held by the United States.
    Following President Trump’s victory, the S&P 500 set a new record as the stock market surged to record highs — while major Wall Street firms like JP Morgan Chase posted their highest ever annual profits.
    LOWERING THE COST OF LIVING:
    President Trump directed the heads of all executive departments and agencies to “deliver emergency price relief … to the American people and increase the prosperity of the American worker.”
    President Trump established the National Energy Dominance Council to maximize use of the U.S.’ extensive energy resources, thereby enabling lower energy prices.
    Crude oil prices have fallen over 5% since President Trump took office.
    The Department of Energy postponed burdensome Biden-era efficiency standard rules for the following appliances, saving American consumers large sums:
    Central air conditioners: Biden rules were slated to make air conditioners $1,100 more expensive, according to Alliance for Consumers.
    Gas water heaters: Biden rules were slated to make water heaters $2,800 more expensive.
    Clothes washers and dryers: Biden rules were slated to make washers $200 more expensive.
    Light bulbs: Biden rules were slated to make light bulbs $140 more expensive.
    Walk-in coolers and freezers, commercial refrigeration equipment, and air compressors.

    The total cost of federal regulations in 2023 was a record-breaking $2.1 trillion, or $15,788 per U.S. household, according to the Competitive Enterprise Institute. By requiring agencies to identify at least ten existing rules, regulations, or guidance documents to be repealed for every one rule they promulgate, President Trump has put the U.S. on track to severely reduce regulatory costs for everyday Americans.
    The National Associations of Manufacturers found the cost of federal regulations was even greater — at $3.079 trillion in 2022.

    Secretary Sean Duffy’s very first action at the Department of Transportation was to initiate rulemaking resetting Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards — effectively eliminating the Biden-era electric vehicle mandate.
    NBER economist Mark R. Jacobsen “estimates that a one-mpg increase in CAFE standards costs consumers of all income levels approximately 0.5% of their income in the first year of the increase. By the 10th year following the increase, however, this cost becomes regressive, as the increase drives up the price of used cars. A one-mpg increase in CAFE standards costs consumers earning less than $25,000 per year 1.12% of their income, but only costs consumers earning more than $75,000 per year 0.41% of their income.”

    RE-ESTABLISHING AMERICAN STRENGTH:
    President Trump secured the release of six American hostages in Venezuela, two Americans in Afghanistan, an American-Israeli citizen in Hamas captivity, a Pennsylvania teacher in Russian captivity, and an American citizen in Belarus — bringing the total number of American hostages released under President Trump to 11.
    President Trump spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in pursuit of finally securing peace as negotiations get underway.
    President Trump restored maximum pressure on Iran, “sanctioning an international network for facilitating the shipment of millions of barrels of Iranian crude oil worth hundreds of millions of dollars to the People’s Republic of China.”
    President Trump redesignated the Iran-backed Houthis as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.
    President Trump hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for a visit where he proposed a bold vision for securing lasting peace in Gaza.
    Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman described the proposal as “brilliant, historic and the only idea I have heard in 50 years that has a chance of bringing security, peace and prosperity to this troubled region.”

    President Trump hosted Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, who announced his intention to “elevate Japan’s investment in the United States to an unprecedented amount of $1 trillion,” import “historic” quantities of LNG from Alaska, and open new auto plants in the U.S.
    President Trump hosted Jordan’s King Abdullah II, who announced that the Kingdom will accept 2,000 sick children from Gaza “as quickly as possible.”
    President Trump hosted Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for a visit where they announced new deals between the two countries on immigration, trade, energy, and artificial intelligence.
    President Trump banned funding to UNRWA — a United Nations agency that employed hundreds of Hamas and jihad operatives.
    President Trump imposed sanctions on the International Criminal Court, which has illegitimately asserted jurisdiction over internal U.S. matters and baselessly targeted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
    President Trump reinstated the Mexico City Policy to ensure no taxpayer dollars support foreign organizations that perform, or actively promote, abortion in other nations.
    The Department of State ordered embassies worldwide to only fly the American flag — not activist flags.
    President Trump declared all foreign policy must be conducted under the President’s direction, ensuring career diplomats reflect the foreign policy of the United States at all times.
    The Department of State declared that U.S. foreign policy will be America First going forward.
    Following a visit from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino agreed to withdraw from China’s Belt and Road Initiative, a debt-trap diplomacy scheme the Chinese Communist Party uses to gain influence over developing nations.
    The U.S. rejoined the Geneva Consensus Declaration, which promotes and strengthens opportunities for women and girls around the world, and protects the family as the fundamental unit of society.
    President Trump cracked down on anti-Semitism by canceling visas for foreign students who are Hamas sympathizers.
    President Trump ordered the immediate dismissal of the Board of Visitors for the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Coast Guard following years of woke ideologies infiltrating U.S. service academies.
    The U.S. Army barred transgender people from enlisting and stopped using taxpayer funds for sex change surgeries.
    President Trump reinstated, with backpay, U.S. service members who were discharged under the military’s nonsensical COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
    Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth restored Fort Liberty, North Carolina, to “Fort Bragg,” in honor of a World War II hero.
    President Trump withdrew the U.S. from the World Health Organization.
    President Trump paused enforcement of the overregulation of American businesses abroad, which negatively impacted national security.
    President Trump proclaimed “Gulf of America Day” after the Department of the Interior officially established it on its mapping databases.
    President Trump initiated a process to build a next-generation missile defense shield over the United States.
    UNLEASHING AMERICAN ENERGY:
    President Trump declared a National Energy Emergency to unlock America’s full energy potential and bring down costs for American families.
    President Trump rescinded every one of the Biden Administration’s job-killing, pro-China, anti-American energy regulations.
    President Trump empowered Americans with choice in vehicles, showerheads, toilets, washing machines, light bulbs, and dishwashers, and killed Biden-era regulations that restricted water flow and mandated inadequate light bulb standards.
    President Trump terminated the job-killing Green New Scam.
    President Trump withdrew from the disastrous Paris Climate Agreement, which unfairly ripped off our country.
    President Trump paused federal permitting for massive wind farms, which degrade our natural landscapes and fail to serve American consumers.
    President Trump reversed bureaucratic regulations that impeded Alaska’s ability to develop its vast natural resources.
    President Trump re-opened 625 million acres for offshore drilling, which Biden banned in his waning days, in order to “drill, baby, drill.”
    President Trump scrapped an Obama-era rule on greenhouse gases.
    President Trump ended the Liquefied Natural Gas pause and approved the first LNG project since the Biden Administration banned them last year.
    BRINGING BACK COMMON SENSE:
    Health systems across the nation stopped or downsized their sex change programs for minors following President Trump’s “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation” executive order.
    In Illinois, Chicago’s Lurie Children’s Hospital paused sex-change surgeries for patients under 19 as it “work[s] to understand the rapidly evolving environment.”
    In Colorado, Denver Health announced it would stop performing sex change surgeries on minor children, while UCHealth said it was ending so-called “gender-affirming care” for all minors.
    In Washington, D.C., Children’s National Hospital “paused” prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapies for minors, while Northwest Washington Hospital did the same.
    In Virginia, VCU Health and Children’s Hospital of Richmond “suspended” providing transgender-related medication and surgeries for minors, while UVA Health also “suspended” transgender-related services for minors.

    President Trump ended the unfair, demeaning practice of forcing women to compete against men in sports — which resulted in the NCAA changing its rules.
    The Department of Education launched investigations into the California Interscholastic Federation and the Minnesota State High School League over their failures to comply.

    President Trump made it the official policy of the U.S. government that there are only two sexes.
    President Trump banned COVID-19 vaccine mandates at schools that receive federal funding.
    President Trump rolled back the Biden-era push to mandate paper straws.
    President Trump instructed the Secretary of the Treasury to stop production of the penny, which cost 3.69 cents each to make.
    President Trump directed full enforcement of the Hyde Amendment, which bars taxpayer dollars from being used to fund or promote elective abortion.
    The Department of Transportation terminated the approval for New York City’s burdensome “congestion pricing” scheme.
    RESTORING ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY IN GOVERNMENT
    President Trump established the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to maximize government productivity and ensure the best use of taxpayer funds — which has already achieved billions of dollars in savings for taxpayers.
    President Trump commenced his plan to downsize the federal bureaucracy and eliminate waste, bloat, and insularity.
    President Trump ordered federal workers to return to the office five days a week.
    President Trump ordered federal agencies hire no more than one employee for every four employees who leave.
    President Trump ended the wasteful Federal Executive Institute, which had become a training ground for bureaucrats.
    President Trump ordered the termination of all federal Fake News media contracts.

    President Trump ordered the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — the brainchild of Elizabeth Warren, which funneled cash to left-wing advocacy groups — to halt operations.
    President Trump ordered an end to anti-Christian bias in the Federal Government.
    President Trump ordered an examination of all regulations to assess any infringements on Americans’ Second Amendment rights.
    The Environmental Protection Agency canceled tens of millions of dollars in contracts to left-wing advocacy groups, announced an investigation into a scheme by Biden EPA staffers to shield billions of dollars from oversight and accountability, and put 168 “environmental justice” employees on leave.
    President Trump stopped the waste, fraud, and abuse within USAID — ensuring taxpayers are no longer on the hook for funding the pet projects of entrenched bureaucrats, such as sex changes in Guatemala.
    President Trump ordered an end to the weaponization of the Federal Government against American citizens.
    The Department of Justice immediately began rooting out politically motivated lawfare that occurred in the Biden Administration.

    President Trump reversed the massive over-expansion of the IRS that took place during the Biden Administration.
    President Trump eliminated discriminatory DEI offices, employees, and practices across the bureaucracy alongside a return to merit-based hiring — including at the Federal Aviation Administration, where the Biden Administration specifically recruited individuals with intellectual disabilities and psychiatric issues.
    As a result, taxpayer-funded PBS closed its DEI office, Disney dropped two of its DEI programs, Goldman Sachs ended its DEI policy, and Institutional Shareholder Services announced it would no longer consider diversity of company boards when making its voting recommendations.
    The Federal Communications Commission opened an investigation into discriminatory DEI policies at Comcast, an entity it regulates.

    President Trump ordered an end to all censorship of Americans by the federal government.
    President Trump ordered a review of funding for all non-governmental organizations, so taxpayers are no longer funding those that undermine America’s interests.
    The Department of State issued a “pause” on existing foreign aid grants to ensure accountability and efficiency.

    President Trump lifted last-minute collective bargaining agreements issued by the Biden Administration, which sought to impede reform.
    President Trump overrode bureaucratic red tape that limited water availability in California following the failure of the state’s water system during the devastating wildfires.
    President Trump terminated the Biden-era electric vehicle mandate.
    President Trump suspended the Biden-era EV charging program, which had resulted in just eight charging stations despite $7.5 billion earmarked for the program.

    President Trump shut down the wasteful Biden-era “Climate Corps” program.
    The Federal Communications Commission took action against a Soros-backed radio station that leaked sensitive information about ICE operations.
    President Trump ordered the declassification of documents related to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Jr., Robert F. Kennedy, and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
    President Trump opened the White House Press Briefing Room to non-legacy media outlets as the White House sets a new standard for transparency in the digital age.
    President Trump reinstated press privileges for roughly 440 journalists who the Biden Administration sought to silence.
    President Trump fired members of The Kennedy Center’s Board of Trustees amid their obsession with perpetuating radical, left-wing ideology at taxpayer expense.
    President Trump revoked the security clearances of the 51 “spies who lied.”
    EMPOWERING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
    President Trump established the Make America Healthy Again Commission, which redirects the national focus to promoting health rather than simply managing disease.
    President Trump took executive action to expand access to in vitro fertilization (IVF).
    President Trump established the White House Faith Office to protect Americans’ religious liberty.
    President Trump ordered an end to the radical indoctrination of children in K-12 schools that receive federal funding.
    President Trump took executive action to support parents in choosing the best education for their children.
    President Trump established the Presidential Working Group on Digital Asset Markets to strengthen U.S. leadership in digital finance.
    President Trump granted full and unconditional pardons to 23 pro-life Americans who were unjustly persecuted by the Biden Administration.
    President Trump pardoned two Washington, D.C., police officers who were imprisoned simply for doing their jobs of apprehending criminals.
    President Trump has had his cabinet confirmed by the Senate at a far faster pace than his predecessors, with a majority of his cabinet earning confirmation in his first month.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 21, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 411 412 413 414 415 … 530
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

  • Blog
  • About
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Events
  • Shop
  • Patterns
  • Themes

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress