Category: Ukraine

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Press Arrangements for IAEA Board of Governors Meeting, 20-22 November 2024 

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

    The IAEA Board of Governors will convene its regular November meeting at the Agency’s headquarters starting at 10:30 CET on Wednesday, 20 November, in Board Room C, Building C, 4th floor, in the Vienna International Centre (VIC). 

    Board discussions are expected to include, among others: applications for membership of the Agency; report of the Technical Assistance and Cooperation Committee; verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 (2015); nuclear verification: the conclusion of safeguards agreements and of additional protocols (if any), staff of the Department of Safeguards to be used as Agency inspectors, application of safeguards in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, implementation of the NPT safeguards agreement in the Syrian Arab Republic, naval nuclear propulsion: Australia and naval nuclear propulsion: Brazil, and NPT safeguards agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran; nuclear safety, security and safeguards in Ukraine; transfer of the nuclear materials in the context of AUKUS and its safeguards in all aspects under the NPT; and restoration of the Sovereign Equality of Member States in the IAEA. 

    The Board of Governors meeting is closed to the press. 

    Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi will open the meeting with an introductory statement, which will be released to journalists after delivery and posted on the IAEA website.  

    Press Conference 

    Director General Grossi is expected to hold a press conference at 13:00 CET on Wednesday, 20 November, in the Press Room of the M building. 

    A live video stream of the press conference will be available. The IAEA will provide video footage of the press conference and the Director General’s opening statement here and will make photos available on Flickr.  

    Photo Opportunity 

    There will be a photo opportunity with the IAEA Director General and the Chair of the Board, Ambassador Philbert Abaka Johnson of Ghana, before the start of the Board meeting, on 20 November at 10:30 CET in Board Room C, in the C building in the VIC. 

    Press Working Area 

    The Press Room on the M-Building’s ground floor will be available as a press working area, starting from 9:00 CET on 20 November. 

    Accreditation

    All journalists interested in covering the meeting in person – including those with permanent accreditation – are requested to inform the IAEA Press Office of their plans. Journalists without permanent accreditation must send copies of their passport and press ID to the IAEA Press Office by 14:00 CET on Tuesday, 19 November. 

    We encourage those journalists who do not yet have permanent accreditation to request it at UNIS Vienna

    Please plan your arrival to allow sufficient time to pass through the VIC security check. 

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Press Arrangements for IAEA Board of Governors Meeting, 12 December 2024

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

    The IAEA Board of Governors will convene a meeting at the Agency’s headquarters starting at 10:00 CET on Thursday, 12 December, in Board Room C, Building C, 4th floor, in the Vienna International Centre (VIC).

    The meeting is convened by the Chair of the Board following a letter addressed to him by the Governor from Ukraine, requesting a meeting of the Board.

    The Board of Governors meeting is closed to the press.

    Photo Opportunity

    There will be a photo opportunity before the start of the Board meeting on Thursday, at 10:00 in Board Room C, Building C, 4th floor, in the VIC.

    Press Working Area and Accreditation

    The Press Room on the M-Building’s ground floor will be available as a press working area starting from 09:00 on 12 December.

    All journalists interested in covering the meeting in person – including those with permanent accreditation – are requested to inform the IAEA Press Office of their plans. Journalists without permanent accreditation must send copies of their passport and press ID to the IAEA Press Office by 14:00 on Wednesday, 11 December. 

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Press Arrangements for IAEA Board of Governors Meeting, 3-7 March 2025

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

    The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors will convene its regular March meeting at the Agency’s headquarters starting at 10:30 CET on Monday, 3 March, in Board Room C, Building C, 4th floor, in the Vienna International Centre (VIC). 

    Board discussions are expected to include, among others: Nuclear Safety Review 2025; Nuclear Security Review 2025; Nuclear Technology Review 2025; verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 (2015); the conclusion of safeguards agreements and of additional protocols; application of safeguards in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; implementation of the NPT safeguards agreement in the Syrian Arab Republic; NPT safeguards agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran; nuclear safety, security and safeguards in Ukraine; transfer of the nuclear materials in the context of AUKUS and its safeguards in all aspects under the NPT; the restoration of the sovereign equality of Member States in the IAEA; and personnel matters. 

    The Board of Governors meeting is closed to the press. 

    IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi will open the meeting with an introductory statement, which will be released to journalists after delivery and posted on the IAEA website.  

    Press Conference 

    Director General Grossi is expected to hold a press conference at 13:00 CET on Monday, 3 March, in the Press Room of the M building. 

    A live video stream of the press conference will be available. The IAEA will provide video footage of the press conference and the Director General’s opening statement here and will make photos available on Flickr.  

    Photo Opportunity 

    There will be a photo opportunity with the IAEA Director General and the Chair of the Board, Ambassador Matilda Aku Alomatu Osei-Agyeman of Ghana, before the start of the Board meeting, on 3 March at 10:30 CET in Board Room C, in the C building in the VIC. 

    Press Working Area 

    Conference room M7 on the M-Building’s ground floor will be available as a press working area, starting from 09:00 CET on 3 March. Please note the change of room.

    Accreditation

    All journalists interested in covering the meeting in person – including those with permanent accreditation – are requested to inform the IAEA Press Office of their plans. Journalists without permanent accreditation must send copies of their passport and press ID to the IAEA Press Office by 14:00 CET on Friday, 28 February. 

    We encourage those journalists who do not yet have permanent accreditation to request it at UNIS Vienna

    Please plan your arrival to allow sufficient time to pass through the VIC security check. 

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – 23-24 June: EVP Séjourné, Mercosur hearing, CTIP, Ukraine-Moldova, Israel – Committee on International Trade

    Source: European Parliament

    On 23rd and 24th of June Executive Vice President Séjourné will deliver a presentation on the trade dimension of the Clean Industrial Deal. Members will hold exchanges on the review of the EU’s Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas with Ukraine and Moldova. Members will hold a public hearing on the EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement

    Members will exchange with the Commission on the State of Play of EU-US trade relations.

    The European Commission will deliver a presentation on the new task force on import surveillance.

    The new Clean Trade and Investment Partnership negotiations, the first of which were launched with South Africa, will be subject to an exchange of views.

    Members will exchange on the trade aspects of the EU-Israel Association agreement.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – 23-24 June: EVP Séjourné, Mercosur hearing, CTIP, Ukraine-Moldova, Israel – Committee on International Trade

    Source: European Parliament

    On 23rd and 24th of June Executive Vice President Séjourné will deliver a presentation on the trade dimension of the Clean Industrial Deal. Members will hold exchanges on the review of the EU’s Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas with Ukraine and Moldova. Members will hold a public hearing on the EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement

    Members will exchange with the Commission on the State of Play of EU-US trade relations.

    The European Commission will deliver a presentation on the new task force on import surveillance.

    The new Clean Trade and Investment Partnership negotiations, the first of which were launched with South Africa, will be subject to an exchange of views.

    Members will exchange on the trade aspects of the EU-Israel Association agreement.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: At a Glance – Tax challenges facing the EU defence union – 18-06-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Confronted with warfare on the European continent since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, EU Member States, along with other European partners, have backed the need for a substantial increase in defence spending. This budgetary challenge has in turn raised important questions about the role of taxation in financing these efforts.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: At a Glance – Tax challenges facing the EU defence union – 18-06-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Confronted with warfare on the European continent since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, EU Member States, along with other European partners, have backed the need for a substantial increase in defence spending. This budgetary challenge has in turn raised important questions about the role of taxation in financing these efforts.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – Presentation of HIV/AIDS Policy Report: The EU’s role in ending HIV/AIDS in Ukraine – Committee on Public Health

    Source: European Parliament

    AIDS/HIV

    On the 25th of June, Dr Andriy Klepikov, the Executive Director of the International Charitable Foundation “Alliance for Public Health”, a Ukraine based organisation, developing work on the epidemics of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, viral hepatitis and other socially dangerous diseases in Ukraine, will present the report on The EU’s role in ending HIV/AIDS in Ukraine and its key policy recommendations.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Minutes – Tuesday, 17 June 2025 – Strasbourg – Final edition

    Source: European Parliament

    PV-10-2025-06-17

    EN

    EN

    iPlPv_Sit

    Minutes
    Tuesday, 17 June 2025 – Strasbourg

     Abbreviations and symbols

    + adopted
    rejected
    lapsed
    W withdrawn
    RCV roll-call votes
    EV electronic vote
    SEC secret ballot
    split split vote
    sep separate vote
    am amendment
    CA compromise amendment
    CP corresponding part
    D deleting amendment
    = identical amendments
    § paragraph

    IN THE CHAIR: Antonella SBERNA
    Vice-President

    1. Opening of the sitting

    The sitting opened at 09:00.



    2. Combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (recast) ***I (debate)

    Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (recast) [COM(2024)0060 – C9-0028/2024 – 2024/0035(COD)] – Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. Rapporteur: Jeroen Lenaers (A10-0097/2025)

    Jeroen Lenaers introduced the report.

    The following spoke: Magnus Brunner (Member of the Commission).

    The following spoke: Heléne Fritzon (rapporteur for the opinion of the FEMM Committee), Javier Zarzalejos, on behalf of the PPE Group, Marina Kaljurand, on behalf of the S&D Group, Susanna Ceccardi, on behalf of the PfE Group, Assita Kanko, on behalf of the ECR Group, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, on behalf of the Renew Group, Saskia Bricmont, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Irene Montero, on behalf of The Left Group, Mary Khan, on behalf of the ESN Group, Michał Wawrykiewicz, Alex Agius Saliba, Anders Vistisen, who also answered a blue-card question from Jeroen Lenaers, Paolo Inselvini, Laurence Farreng, Alice Kuhnke, Nikos Pappas, Zsuzsanna Borvendég, Monika Beňová, Lukas Sieper, on comments made by some of the previous speakers (the President took note), Ewa Kopacz, Maria Guzenina, Margarita de la Pisa Carrión, Georgiana Teodorescu, Moritz Körner, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Anja Arndt, who also declined to take a blue-card question from Moritz Körner, Malika Sorel, Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Mathilde Androuët, Gheorghe Piperea, Ana Miguel Pedro, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Laura Ballarín Cereza, Elisabeth Dieringer, Chiara Gemma, Péter Magyar, who also answered a blue-card question from Jorge Buxadé Villalba, Jaak Madison, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Lara Magoni and François-Xavier Bellamy, who also answered a blue-card question from Petras Gražulis.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Eleonora Meleti, Maria Grapini, Viktória Ferenc, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Nina Carberry, Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, Annamária Vicsek, João Oliveira and Alessandra Moretti.

    IN THE CHAIR: Pina PICIERNO
    Vice-President

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Sunčana Glavak and Lukas Sieper.

    The following spoke: Magnus Brunner and Jeroen Lenaers.

    The debate closed.

    Vote: 17 June 2025.



    3. European Ocean Pact (debate)

    Commission statement: European Ocean Pact (2025/2744(RSP))

    Costas Kadis (Member of the Commission) made the statement.

    The following spoke: Isabelle Le Callennec, on behalf of the PPE Group, Christophe Clergeau, on behalf of the S&D Group, Silvia Sardone, on behalf of the PfE Group, Bert-Jan Ruissen, on behalf of the ECR Group, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin, on behalf of the Renew Group, Isabella Lövin, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Emma Fourreau, on behalf of The Left Group, Siegbert Frank Droese, on behalf of the ESN Group, Carmen Crespo Díaz, André Rodrigues, António Tânger Corrêa, Nora Junco García, Ana Vasconcelos, Rasmus Nordqvist, Nikolas Farantouris, Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Antonio Decaro, André Rougé, who also answered a blue-card question from Christophe Clergeau, Michal Wiezik, Mélissa Camara, Catarina Martins, Željana Zovko, Sofie Eriksson, France Jamet, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Sebastian Everding, Francisco José Millán Mon, Thomas Bajada, who also answered a blue-card question from Lukas Sieper, Yvan Verougstraete, Luke Ming Flanagan, Sander Smit, Nicolás González Casares, Billy Kelleher, Fredis Beleris, Sakis Arnaoutoglou, Salvatore De Meo, Giuseppe Lupo, César Luena and Idoia Mendia.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Ingeborg Ter Laak, Sebastian Tynkkynen and João Oliveira.

    The following spoke: Costas Kadis.

    The debate closed.

    (The sitting was suspended at 11:57.)



    IN THE CHAIR: Roberta METSOLA
    President

    4. Resumption of the sitting

    The sitting resumed at 12:06.



    5. Formal sitting Address by His Majesty King Abdullah II, King of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

    The President made an address to welcome His Majesty Abdullah II, King of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

    King Abdullah II addressed the House.

    (The sitting was suspended for a few moments.)



    IN THE CHAIR: Antonella SBERNA
    Vice-President

    6. Resumption of the sitting

    The sitting resumed at 12:33.

    ***

    The following spoke: Fernand Kartheiser on the response time for written questions (the President provided some clarifications) and Alexander Jungbluth (the President cut him off as remarks did not constitute a point of order).



    7. Voting time

    For detailed results of the votes, see also ‘Results of votes’ and ‘Results of roll-call votes’.



    7.1. Amending Regulation (EU) No 228/2013 as regards additional assistance and further flexibility to outermost regions affected by severe natural disasters and in the context of cyclone Chido devastating Mayotte ***I (vote)

    Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 228/2013 as regards additional assistance and further flexibility to outermost regions affected by severe natural disasters and in the context of cyclone Chido devastating Mayotte (COM(2025)0190 – C10-0071/2025 – 2025/0104(COD)) – Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    COMMISSION PROPOSAL

    Approved (P10_TA(2025)0115)

    Detailed voting results



    7.2. Combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (recast) ***I (vote)

    Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (recast) [COM(2024)0060 – C9-0028/2024 – 2024/0035(COD)] – Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. Rapporteur: Jeroen Lenaers (A10-0097/2025)

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    COMMISSION PROPOSAL and AMENDMENTS

    Approved (P10_TA(2025)0116)

    REQUEST FOR REFERRAL BACK TO COMMITTEE

    Approved

    The following had spoken:

    Jeroen Lenaers (rapporteur), after the vote on the Commission proposal, to request that the matter be referred back to the committee responsible, for interinstitutional negotiations in accordance with Rule 60(4).

    Detailed voting results



    7.3. Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine amending the Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine on the carriage of freight by road of 29 June 2022 *** (vote)

    Recommendation on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine amending the Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine on the carriage of freight by road of 29 June 2022 [16072/2024 – C10-0226/2024 – 2024/0290(NLE)] – Committee on Transport and Tourism. Rapporteur: Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi (A10-0102/2025)

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    DRAFT COUNCIL DECISION

    Approved (P10_TA(2025)0117)

    Parliament consented to the conclusion of the agreement.

    Detailed voting results



    7.4. Termination of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Cameroon on forest law enforcement governance and trade in timber and derived products to the Union *** (vote)

    Recommendation on the draft Council decision on the termination of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Cameroon on forest law enforcement, governance and trade in timber and derived products to the Union [05673/2025 – C10-0012/2025 – 2024/0245(NLE)] – Committee on International Trade. Rapporteur: Karin Karlsbro (A10-0089/2025)

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    DRAFT COUNCIL DECISION

    Approved (P10_TA(2025)0118)

    Parliament consented to the termination of the agreement.

    Detailed voting results



    7.5. Termination of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Cameroon on forest law enforcement governance and trade in timber and derived products to the Union (Resolution) (vote)

    Report containing a motion for a non-legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council decision on the termination of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Cameroon on forest law enforcement, governance and trade in timber and derived products to the Union [2024/0245M(NLE)] – Committee on International Trade. Rapporteur: Karin Karlsbro (A10-0094/2025)

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

    Adopted by single vote (P10_TA(2025)0119)

    Detailed voting results



    7.6. Electoral rights of mobile Union citizens in European Parliament elections * (vote)

    Report on the proposal for a Council directive laying down detailed arrangements for the exercise of the right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament for Union citizens residing in a Member State of which they are not nationals (recast) [09789/2024 – C10-0001/2024 – 2021/0372(CNS)] – Committee on Constitutional Affairs. Rapporteur: Sven Simon (A10-0090/2025)

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    COUNCIL DRAFT

    Approved (P10_TA(2025)0120)

    Detailed voting results



    7.7. Amendments to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure concerning the declaration of input (Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure) (vote)

    Report on amendments to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure concerning the declaration of input (Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure) [2025/2067(REG)] – Committee on Constitutional Affairs. Rapporteur: Sven Simon (A10-0086/2025)

    (Majority of Parliament’s component Members required)

    PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION

    Adopted (P10_TA(2025)0121)

    This amendment would enter into force on the first day of the following part-session.

    The following had spoken:

    Sven Simon (rapporteur), before the vote, to make a statement on the basis of Rule 165(1).

    Detailed voting results



    7.8. Strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy (vote)

    Report on strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy [2024/2105(INI)] – Committee on Regional Development. Rapporteur: Denis Nesci (A10-0092/2025)

    The debate had taken place on 16 June 2025 (minutes of 16.6.2025, item 22).

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

    Adopted by single vote (P10_TA(2025)0122)

    Detailed voting results



    7.9. Financing for development – ahead of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in Seville (vote)

    Report on financing for development – ahead of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in Seville [2025/2004(INI)] – Committee on Development. Rapporteur: Charles Goerens (A10-0101/2025)

    (Majority of the votes cast)

    MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

    Rejected

    The following had spoken:

    Charles Goerens (rapporteur), before the vote, to make a statement under Rule 165(4), and after the vote on the resolution as a whole.

    Detailed voting results

    9

    (The sitting was suspended for a few moments.)



    8. Resumption of the sitting

    The sitting resumed at 12:57.



    9. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

    The following spoke: Marion Maréchal, to make a personal statement in the light of the comments made by Benedetta Scuderi during the previous day’s sitting, before the adoption of the agenda (minutes of 16.6.2025, item 16).

    The minutes of the previous sitting were approved.



    10. Implementation report on the Recovery and Resilience Facility (debate)

    Report on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility [2024/2085(INI)] – Committee on Budgets – Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. Rapporteurs: Victor Negrescu and Siegfried Mureşan (A10-0098/2025)

    Victor Negrescu and Siegfried Mureşan introduced the report.

    The following spoke: Raffaele Fitto (Executive Vice-President of the Commission).

    The following spoke: Carla Tavares (rapporteur for the opinion of the BUDG Committee), Marie-Pierre Vedrenne (rapporteur for the opinion of the EMPL Committee), Jonas Sjöstedt (rapporteur for the opinion of the ENVI Committee), Giuseppe Lupo (rapporteur for the opinion of the TRAN Committee), Markus Ferber, on behalf of the PPE Group, Jean-Marc Germain, on behalf of the S&D Group, Enikő Győri, on behalf of the PfE Group, Denis Nesci, on behalf of the ECR Group, and Ľudovít Ódor, on behalf of the Renew Group.

    IN THE CHAIR: Sabine VERHEYEN
    Vice-President

    The following spoke: Nikolas Farantouris on behalf of The Left Group, Rada Laykova, on behalf of the ESN Group, Karlo Ressler, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Jonás Fernández, Julien Sanchez, who also answered a blue-card question from Lukas Sieper, Ruggero Razza, Rasmus Andresen, Jussi Saramo, Alexander Jungbluth, who also answered a blue-card question from Radan Kanev, Thomas Geisel, Dirk Gotink, Costas Mavrides, Klara Dostalova, Bogdan Rzońca, Gordan Bosanac, who also answered a blue-card question from Sunčana Glavak, Milan Mazurek, Danuše Nerudová, Pierre Pimpie, Aurelijus Veryga, Radan Kanev, Alex Agius Saliba, Tomasz Buczek, Dick Erixon, Gheorghe Falcă, Idoia Mendia, Angéline Furet, Giovanni Crosetto, Georgios Aftias, Nils Ušakovs, Marlena Maląg, Kinga Kollár, who also answered a blue-card question from Enikő Győri, Evelyn Regner, Marion Maréchal, Angelika Winzig, Eero Heinäluoma, Adrian-George Axinia, Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz, Sandra Gómez López, Jacek Ozdoba, Adnan Dibrani, César Luena and Damian Boeselager.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Nikolina Brnjac, Maria Grapini, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă and Hélder Sousa Silva.

    The following spoke: Raffaele Fitto, Victor Negrescu and Siegfried Mureşan.

    The debate closed.

    Vote: 18 June 2025.



    11. The Commission’s 2024 Rule of Law report (debate)

    Report on The Commission’s 2024 Rule of Law report [2024/2078(INI)] – Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. Rapporteur: Ana Catarina Mendes (A10-0100/2025)

    Ana Catarina Mendes introduced the report.

    The following spoke: Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission).

    IN THE CHAIR: Christel SCHALDEMOSE
    Vice-President

    The following spoke: Isabel Wiseler-Lima (rapporteur for the opinion of the AFET Committee), Ilhan Kyuchyuk (rapporteur for the opinion of the JURI Committee), Michał Wawrykiewicz, on behalf of the PPE Group, Birgit Sippel, on behalf of the S&D Group, Jorge Buxadé Villalba, on behalf of the PfE Group, Alessandro Ciriani, on behalf of the ECR Group, Moritz Körner, on behalf of the Renew Group, Daniel Freund, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Gaetano Pedulla’, on behalf of The Left Group, Milan Uhrík, on behalf of the ESN Group, Dolors Montserrat, who also declined to take a blue-card question from Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Marco Tarquinio, Fabrice Leggeri, Mariusz Kamiński, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Mary Khan, Ondřej Dostál, Javier Zarzalejos, Chloé Ridel, András László, who also answered a blue-card question from Gabriella Gerzsenyi, Patryk Jaki (the President reminded the House of the rules on conduct), Irena Joveva, Marcin Sypniewski, who also answered a blue-card question from Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Zoltán Tarr, Alessandro Zan, Marieke Ehlers, Nicolas Bay, Nikola Minchev, Sven Simon, Marc Angel, Gilles Pennelle, Dainius Žalimas, Paulo Cunha, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Matjaž Nemec, Csaba Dömötör, David Casa, Katarina Barley, who also answered a blue-card question from Patryk Jaki, and Loucas Fourlas.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Gabriella Gerzsenyi, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Katrin Langensiepen, Petras Gražulis and Maria Zacharia.

    The following spoke: Michael McGrath and Ana Catarina Mendes.

    The debate closed.

    Vote: 18 June 2025.



    12. 2023 and 2024 reports on Montenegro (debate)

    Report on the 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Montenegro [2025/2020(INI)] – Committee on Foreign Affairs. Rapporteur: Marjan Šarec (A10-0093/2025)

    Marjan Šarec introduced the report.

    The following spoke: Marta Kos (Member of the Commission).

    The following spoke: Reinhold Lopatka, on behalf of the PPE Group, Costas Mavrides, on behalf of the S&D Group, Jaroslav Bžoch, on behalf of the PfE Group, and Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, on behalf of the ECR Group.

    IN THE CHAIR: Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ
    Vice-President

    The following spoke: Vladimir Prebilič, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Giorgos Georgiou, on behalf of The Left Group, Davor Ivo Stier, Matjaž Nemec, Matthieu Valet, Carlo Ciccioli, Thomas Waitz, who also answered a blue-card question from Tomislav Sokol, Katarína Roth Neveďalová, Željana Zovko, Tonino Picula, Annamária Vicsek, Stephen Nikola Bartulica, Sunčana Glavak, Carla Tavares, Liudas Mažylis and Tomislav Sokol.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis and Lukas Sieper.

    The following spoke: Marta Kos and Marjan Šarec.

    The debate closed.

    Vote: 18 June 2025.



    13. 2023 and 2024 reports on Moldova (debate)

    Report on 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Moldova [2025/2025(INI)] – Committee on Foreign Affairs. Rapporteur: Sven Mikser (A10-0096/2025)

    Sven Mikser introduced the report.

    The following spoke: Marta Kos (Member of the Commission).

    The following spoke: Andrzej Halicki, on behalf of the PPE Group, Marta Temido, on behalf of the S&D Group, Cristian Terheş, on behalf of the ECR Group, Dan Barna, on behalf of the Renew Group, Virginijus Sinkevičius, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Jonas Sjöstedt, on behalf of The Left Group, Alexander Sell, on behalf of the ESN Group, Andrey Kovatchev, Victor Negrescu, Eugen Tomac, Davor Ivo Stier, Marcos Ros Sempere, Karin Karlsbro, Mika Aaltola, Kristian Vigenin and Krzysztof Brejza.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Maria Grapini, Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis and Lukas Sieper.

    The following spoke: Marta Kos and Sven Mikser.

    The debate closed.

    Vote: 18 June 2025.



    14. Two years since the devastating Tempi rail accident (debate)

    Commission statement: Two years since the devastating Tempi rail accident (2025/2698(RSP))

    The President provided some procedural clarifications.

    Apostolos Tzitzikostas (Member of the Commission) made the statement.

    IN THE CHAIR: Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS
    Vice-President

    The following spoke: Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, on behalf of the PPE Group, Yannis Maniatis, on behalf of the S&D Group, Afroditi Latinopoulou, on behalf of the PfE Group, Emmanouil Fragkos, on behalf of the ECR Group, Sandro Gozi, on behalf of the Renew Group, Virginijus Sinkevičius, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Konstantinos Arvanitis, on behalf of The Left Group, and Siegbert Frank Droese, on behalf of the ESN Group.

    The following spoke: Apostolos Tzitzikostas.

    The debate closed.



    15. Corrigenda (Rule 251) (action taken)

    Corrigendum P9_TA(2024)0348(COR02) had been announced on 16 June 2025 (minutes of 16.6.2025, item 15).

    As no requests for a vote had been made in accordance with Rule 251(4), the corrigendum was deemed approved.



    16. Delegated acts (Rule 114(6)) (action taken)

    The recommendation from the AGRI Committee to raise no objections to a delegated act had been announced in plenary on 16 June 2025 (minutes of 16.6.2025, item 14).

    As no objections to the recommendation had been raised in accordance with Rule 114(6), the recommendation was deemed approved.



    17. Interpretations of the Rules of Procedure (action taken)

    The AFCO Committee had provided interpretations of Article 3(5), first subparagraph, of Annex I and Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure. The interpretations had been announced in plenary on 16 June 2025 (minutes of 16.6.2025, item 11).

    As they had not been contested by a political group or Members reaching at least the low threshold in accordance with Rule 242(4), the interpretations were appended to the Rules (P10_TA(2025)0123).



    18. EU framework conditions for competitive, efficient and sustainable public transport services at all levels (debate)

    Commission statement: EU framework conditions for competitive, efficient and sustainable public transport services at all levels (2025/2742(RSP))

    Apostolos Tzitzikostas (Member of the Commission) made the statement.

    The following spoke: Dariusz Joński, on behalf of the PPE Group, Johan Danielsson, on behalf of the S&D Group, Roman Haider, on behalf of the PfE Group, Antonella Sberna, on behalf of the ECR Group, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, on behalf of the Renew Group, Lena Schilling, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Elena Kountoura, on behalf of The Left Group, Milan Uhrík, on behalf of the ESN Group, Nina Carberry, François Kalfon, Annamária Vicsek, Kosma Złotowski, Cynthia Ní Mhurchú, Kai Tegethoff, Kostas Papadakis, Elena Nevado del Campo, Rosa Serrano Sierra, Julien Leonardelli, Péter Magyar, who also answered a blue-card question from Annamária Vicsek, Sérgio Gonçalves, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Sérgio Humberto, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Matteo Ricci, Nikolina Brnjac and Regina Doherty.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Sebastian Tynkkynen, Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos, Maria Zacharia and Lukas Sieper.

    The following spoke: Apostolos Tzitzikostas.

    The debate closed.

    (The sitting was suspended for a few moments.)



    IN THE CHAIR: Sabine VERHEYEN
    Vice-President

    19. Resumption of the sitting

    The sitting resumed at 19:33.



    20. Latest developments on the revision of the air passenger rights and airline liability regulations (debate)

    Council and Commission statements: Latest developments on the revision of the air passenger rights and airline liability regulations (2025/2743(RSP))

    Adam Szłapka (President-in-Office of the Council) and Apostolos Tzitzikostas (Member of the Commission) made the statements.

    The following spoke: Andrey Novakov, on behalf of the PPE Group, Matteo Ricci, on behalf of the S&D Group, Roman Haider, on behalf of the PfE Group, Kosma Złotowski, on behalf of the ECR Group, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, on behalf of the Renew Group, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Arash Saeidi, on behalf of The Left Group, Stanislav Stoyanov, on behalf of the ESN Group, Jens Gieseke, Johan Danielsson, Julien Leonardelli, Michele Picaro, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Nina Carberry, Rosa Serrano Sierra, Annamária Vicsek, Cynthia Ní Mhurchú, Borja Giménez Larraz, François Kalfon, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Nikolina Brnjac, Sérgio Gonçalves, Barbara Bonte, Sophia Kircher, Isabella Tovaglieri, Markus Ferber and Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Sérgio Humberto, Ana Miranda Paz, Elena Kountoura and Magdalena Adamowicz.

    The following spoke: Apostolos Tzitzikostas and Adam Szłapka.

    The debate closed.



    21. Situation in the Middle East (joint debate)

    Statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy: Risk of further instability in the Middle East following the Israel-Iran military escalation (2025/2770(RSP))

    Statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy: Review of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza (2025/2747(RSP))

    Kaja Kallas (Vice President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) made the statements.

    The following spoke: Michael Gahler, on behalf of the PPE Group, Iratxe García Pérez, on behalf of the S&D Group, Sebastiaan Stöteler, on behalf of the PfE Group, Bert-Jan Ruissen, on behalf of the ECR Group, Bart Groothuis, on behalf of the Renew Group, Hannah Neumann, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Rima Hassan, on behalf of The Left Group, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Yannis Maniatis and Elena Donazzan.

    IN THE CHAIR: Younous OMARJEE
    Vice-President

    The following spoke: Bernard Guetta, Mounir Satouri, Marc Botenga, Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos, Hildegard Bentele, Kathleen Van Brempt, Rihards Kols, Barry Andrews, Villy Søvndal, Kathleen Funchion, Ruth Firmenich, Reinhold Lopatka, Ana Catarina Mendes, Alexandr Vondra, Irena Joveva, Catarina Vieira, Catarina Martins, Erik Kaliňák, Wouter Beke, Leire Pajín, Alberico Gambino, Abir Al-Sahlani, Saskia Bricmont, João Oliveira, Maria Zacharia, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, who also answered a blue-card question from Ana Miranda Paz, Marta Temido, Geadis Geadi, Leoluca Orlando, Luke Ming Flanagan, Fidias Panayiotou, Maria Walsh, Thijs Reuten, Cynthia Ní Mhurchú, Alice Kuhnke, Danilo Della Valle, David Casa, Chloé Ridel, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Majdouline Sbai, Céline Imart, Vasile Dîncu, Michael McNamara, Anna Strolenberg, Michał Szczerba, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, Evin Incir and Regina Doherty.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Ana Miranda Paz, Jaume Asens Llodrà, Lukas Sieper and Katarína Roth Neveďalová.

    The following spoke: Kaja Kallas.

    The debate closed.



    22. Assassination attempt on Senator Miguel Uribe and the threat to the democratic process and peace in Colombia (debate)

    Statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy: Assassination attempt on Senator Miguel Uribe and the threat to the democratic process and peace in Colombia (2025/2749(RSP))

    Kaja Kallas (Vice President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) made the statement.

    The following spoke: Davor Ivo Stier, on behalf of the PPE Group, Leire Pajín, on behalf of the S&D Group, Sebastian Kruis, on behalf of the PfE Group, Carlo Fidanza, on behalf of the ECR Group, Cristina Guarda, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Anthony Smith, on behalf of The Left Group, Francisco José Millán Mon, Javi López, Jorge Martín Frías, Reinhold Lopatka, Julien Sanchez and Rody Tolassy.

    The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Sebastian Tynkkynen.

    The following spoke: Kaja Kallas.

    The debate closed.



    23. Oral explanations of votes (Rule 201)



    23.1. Combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (recast) (A10-0097/2025)
    Cristian Terheş



    23.2. Strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy (A10-0092/2025)
    Cristian Terheş, Kathleen Funchion



    24. Explanations of votes in writing (Rule 201)

    Explanations of votes given in writing would appear on the Members’ pages on Parliament’s website



    25. Agenda of the next sitting

    The next sitting would be held the following day, 18 June 2025, starting at 09:00. The agenda was available on Parliament’s website.



    26. Approval of the minutes of the sitting

    In accordance with Rule 208(3), the minutes of the sitting would be put to the House for approval at the beginning of the afternoon of the next sitting.



    27. Closure of the sitting

    The sitting closed at 22:52.



    LIST OF DOCUMENTS SERVING AS A BASIS FOR THE DEBATES AND DECISIONS OF PARLIAMENT



    I. Documents received

    The following documents had been received from committees:

    – ***I Report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the welfare of dogs and cats and their traceability (COM(2023)0769 – C9-0443/2023 – 2023/0447(COD)) – AGRI Committee – Rapporteur: Veronika Vrecionová (A10-0104/2025)



    ATTENDANCE REGISTER

    Present:

    Aaltola Mika, Abadía Jover Maravillas, Adamowicz Magdalena, Aftias Georgios, Agirregoitia Martínez Oihane, Agius Peter, Agius Saliba Alex, Alexandraki Galato, Allione Grégory, Al-Sahlani Abir, Anadiotis Nikolaos, Anderson Christine, Andresen Rasmus, Andrews Barry, Andriukaitis Vytenis Povilas, Androuët Mathilde, Angel Marc, Annemans Gerolf, Annunziata Lucia, Antoci Giuseppe, Arias Echeverría Pablo, Arimont Pascal, Arłukowicz Bartosz, Arnaoutoglou Sakis, Arndt Anja, Arvanitis Konstantinos, Asens Llodrà Jaume, Assis Francisco, Attard Daniel, Aubry Manon, Auštrevičius Petras, Axinia Adrian-George, Azmani Malik, Bajada Thomas, Baljeu Jeannette, Ballarín Cereza Laura, Bardella Jordan, Barley Katarina, Barna Dan, Barrena Arza Pernando, Bartulica Stephen Nikola, Bartůšek Nikola, Bausemer Arno, Bay Nicolas, Bay Christophe, Beke Wouter, Beleris Fredis, Bellamy François-Xavier, Benea Dragoş, Benifei Brando, Benjumea Benjumea Isabel, Beňová Monika, Bentele Hildegard, Berendsen Tom, Berger Stefan, Berlato Sergio, Bernhuber Alexander, Biedroń Robert, Bielan Adam, Bischoff Gabriele, Blaha Ľuboš, Blinkevičiūtė Vilija, Blom Rachel, Bloss Michael, Bocheński Tobiasz, Boeselager Damian, Bogdan Ioan-Rareş, Bonaccini Stefano, Bonte Barbara, Borchia Paolo, Borrás Pabón Mireia, Borvendég Zsuzsanna, Borzan Biljana, Bosanac Gordan, Boßdorf Irmhild, Bosse Stine, Botenga Marc, Boyer Gilles, Brasier-Clain Marie-Luce, Braun Grzegorz, Brejza Krzysztof, Bricmont Saskia, Brnjac Nikolina, Brudziński Joachim Stanisław, Bryłka Anna, Buchheit Markus, Buczek Tomasz, Buda Daniel, Buda Waldemar, Budka Borys, Bugalho Sebastião, Buła Andrzej, Bullmann Udo, Buxadé Villalba Jorge, Bystron Petr, Bžoch Jaroslav, Camara Mélissa, Canfin Pascal, Carberry Nina, Cârciu Gheorghe, Carême Damien, Casa David, Caspary Daniel, Cassart Benoit, Castillo Laurent, del Castillo Vera Pilar, Cavazzini Anna, Cavedagna Stefano, Ceccardi Susanna, Cepeda José, Ceulemans Estelle, Chahim Mohammed, Chaibi Leila, Chastel Olivier, Christensen Asger, Ciccioli Carlo, Cifrová Ostrihoňová Veronika, Ciriani Alessandro, Cisint Anna Maria, Clausen Per, Clergeau Christophe, Cormand David, Corrado Annalisa, Costanzo Vivien, Cotrim De Figueiredo João, Cowen Barry, Cremer Tobias, Crespo Díaz Carmen, Cristea Andi, Crosetto Giovanni, Cunha Paulo, Dahl Henrik, Danielsson Johan, Dauchy Marie, Dávid Dóra, David Ivan, Decaro Antonio, de la Hoz Quintano Raúl, Della Valle Danilo, Deloge Valérie, De Masi Fabio, De Meo Salvatore, Demirel Özlem, Devaux Valérie, Dibrani Adnan, Dieringer Elisabeth, Dîncu Vasile, Di Rupo Elio, Disdier Mélanie, Dobrev Klára, Doherty Regina, Doleschal Christian, Dömötör Csaba, Do Nascimento Cabral Paulo, Donazzan Elena, Dorfmann Herbert, Dostalova Klara, Dostál Ondřej, Droese Siegbert Frank, Düpont Lena, Dworczyk Michał, Ecke Matthias, Ehler Christian, Ehlers Marieke, Eriksson Sofie, Erixon Dick, Eroglu Engin, Estaràs Ferragut Rosa, Everding Sebastian, Falcă Gheorghe, Falcone Marco, Farantouris Nikolas, Farreng Laurence, Farský Jan, Ferber Markus, Ferenc Viktória, Fernández Jonás, Fidanza Carlo, Fiocchi Pietro, Firmenich Ruth, Fita Claire, Flanagan Luke Ming, Fourlas Loucas, Fourreau Emma, Fragkos Emmanouil, Freund Daniel, Fritzon Heléne, Froelich Tomasz, Fuglsang Niels, Funchion Kathleen, Furet Angéline, Furore Mario, Gahler Michael, Galán Estrella, Gálvez Lina, Gambino Alberico, García Hermida-Van Der Walle Raquel, Garraud Jean-Paul, Gasiuk-Pihowicz Kamila, Geadi Geadis, Gedin Hanna, Geese Alexandra, Geier Jens, Geisel Thomas, Gemma Chiara, Georgiou Giorgos, Gerbrandy Gerben-Jan, Germain Jean-Marc, Gerzsenyi Gabriella, Geuking Niels, Gieseke Jens, Giménez Larraz Borja, Girauta Vidal Juan Carlos, Glavak Sunčana, Glucksmann Raphaël, Goerens Charles, Gomart Christophe, Gomes Isilda, Gómez López Sandra, Gonçalves Bruno, Gonçalves Sérgio, González Casares Nicolás, González Pons Esteban, Gori Giorgio, Gosiewska Małgorzata, Gotink Dirk, Gozi Sandro, Grapini Maria, Gražulis Petras, Gregorová Markéta, Grims Branko, Griset Catherine, Gronkiewicz-Waltz Hanna, Groothuis Bart, Grossmann Elisabeth, Grudler Christophe, Gualmini Elisabetta, Guarda Cristina, Guetta Bernard, Guzenina Maria, Győri Enikő, Hadjipantela Michalis, Haider Roman, Halicki Andrzej, Hansen Niels Flemming, Hassan Rima, Hauser Gerald, Häusling Martin, Hava Mircea-Gheorghe, Heinäluoma Eero, Henriksson Anna-Maja, Herbst Niclas, Herranz García Esther, Hetman Krzysztof, Hojsík Martin, Holmgren Pär, Hölvényi György, Homs Ginel Alicia, Humberto Sérgio, Ijabs Ivars, Imart Céline, Incir Evin, Inselvini Paolo, Iovanovici Şoşoacă Diana, Jamet France, Jarubas Adam, Jerković Romana, Jongen Marc, Joński Dariusz, Joron Virginie, Jouvet Pierre, Joveva Irena, Juknevičienė Rasa, Junco García Nora, Jungbluth Alexander, Kabilov Taner, Kalfon François, Kaliňák Erik, Kaljurand Marina, Kalniete Sandra, Kamiński Mariusz, Kanev Radan, Kanko Assita, Karlsbro Karin, Kartheiser Fernand, Karvašová Ľubica, Katainen Elsi, Kefalogiannis Emmanouil, Kelleher Billy, Kelly Seán, Kemp Martine, Kennes Rudi, Khan Mary, Kircher Sophia, Knafo Sarah, Kobosko Michał, Köhler Stefan, Kohut Łukasz, Kokalari Arba, Kolář Ondřej, Kollár Kinga, Kols Rihards, Konečná Kateřina, Kopacz Ewa, Körner Moritz, Kountoura Elena, Kovařík Ondřej, Kovatchev Andrey, Krištopans Vilis, Kruis Sebastian, Krutílek Ondřej, Kubín Tomáš, Kuhnke Alice, Kyllönen Merja, Kyuchyuk Ilhan, Lagodinsky Sergey, Lakos Eszter, Lalucq Aurore, Lange Bernd, Langensiepen Katrin, Laššáková Judita, László András, Latinopoulou Afroditi, Laurent Murielle, Laureti Camilla, Laykova Rada, Lazarov Ilia, Lazarus Luis-Vicențiu, Le Callennec Isabelle, Leggeri Fabrice, Lenaers Jeroen, Leonardelli Julien, Lewandowski Janusz, Lexmann Miriam, Liese Peter, Lins Norbert, Loiseau Nathalie, Løkkegaard Morten, Lopatka Reinhold, López Javi, López Aguilar Juan Fernando, López-Istúriz White Antonio, Lövin Isabella, Lucano Mimmo, Luena César, Łukacijewska Elżbieta Katarzyna, Lupo Giuseppe, McAllister David, Madison Jaak, Maestre Cristina, Magoni Lara, Magyar Péter, Maij Marit, Maląg Marlena, Manda Claudiu, Mandl Lukas, Maniatis Yannis, Mantovani Mario, Maran Pierfrancesco, Marczułajtis-Walczak Jagna, Maréchal Marion, Mariani Thierry, Marino Ignazio Roberto, Marquardt Erik, Martín Frías Jorge, Martins Catarina, Martusciello Fulvio, Marzà Ibáñez Vicent, Mato Gabriel, Matthieu Sara, Mavrides Costas, Maydell Eva, Mayer Georg, Mazurek Milan, Mažylis Liudas, McNamara Michael, Mebarek Nora, Mehnert Alexandra, Meimarakis Vangelis, Meleti Eleonora, Mendes Ana Catarina, Mendia Idoia, Mertens Verena, Mesure Marina, Metsola Roberta, Metz Tilly, Mikser Sven, Milazzo Giuseppe, Millán Mon Francisco José, Minchev Nikola, Miranda Paz Ana, Molnár Csaba, Montero Irene, Montserrat Dolors, Morace Carolina, Morano Nadine, Moreira de Sá Tiago, Moreno Sánchez Javier, Moretti Alessandra, Motreanu Dan-Ştefan, Mularczyk Arkadiusz, Müller Piotr, Mullooly Ciaran, Mureşan Siegfried, Muşoiu Ştefan, Nagyová Jana, Nardella Dario, Navarrete Rojas Fernando, Negrescu Victor, Nemec Matjaž, Nerudová Danuše, Nesci Denis, Neuhoff Hans, Neumann Hannah, Nevado del Campo Elena, Nica Dan, Niebler Angelika, Niedermayer Luděk, Niinistö Ville, Nikolaou-Alavanos Lefteris, Nikolic Aleksandar, Ní Mhurchú Cynthia, Noichl Maria, Nordqvist Rasmus, Novakov Andrey, Nykiel Mirosława, Obajtek Daniel, Ódor Ľudovít, Oetjen Jan-Christoph, Oliveira João, Olivier Philippe, Omarjee Younous, Ondruš Branislav, Ó Ríordáin Aodhán, Orlando Leoluca, Ozdoba Jacek, Paet Urmas, Pajín Leire, Palmisano Valentina, Panayiotou Fidias, Papadakis Kostas, Papandreou Nikos, Pappas Nikos, Pascual de la Parte Nicolás, Paulus Jutta, Pedro Ana Miguel, Pedulla’ Gaetano, Pellerin-Carlin Thomas, Peltier Guillaume, Penkova Tsvetelina, Pennelle Gilles, Pereira Lídia, Peter-Hansen Kira Marie, Petrov Hristo, Picaro Michele, Picierno Pina, Picula Tonino, Piera Pascale, Pietikäinen Sirpa, Pimpie Pierre, Piperea Gheorghe, de la Pisa Carrión Margarita, Polato Daniele, Polfjärd Jessica, Popescu Virgil-Daniel, Pozņaks Reinis, Prebilič Vladimir, Princi Giusi, Protas Jacek, Pürner Friedrich, Rackete Carola, Radev Emil, Radtke Dennis, Rafowicz Emma, Ratas Jüri, Razza Ruggero, Rechagneux Julie, Regner Evelyn, Repasi René, Repp Sabrina, Ressler Karlo, Reuten Thijs, Riba i Giner Diana, Ricci Matteo, Ridel Chloé, Riehl Nela, Ripa Manuela, Rodrigues André, Ros Sempere Marcos, Roth Neveďalová Katarína, Rougé André, Ruissen Bert-Jan, Ruotolo Sandro, Rzońca Bogdan, Saeidi Arash, Salini Massimiliano, Salis Ilaria, Salla Aura, Sánchez Amor Nacho, Sanchez Julien, Sancho Murillo Elena, Saramo Jussi, Sardone Silvia, Šarec Marjan, Sargiacomo Eric, Satouri Mounir, Saudargas Paulius, Sbai Majdouline, Sberna Antonella, Schaldemose Christel, Schaller-Baross Ernő, Schenk Oliver, Scheuring-Wielgus Joanna, Schieder Andreas, Schilling Lena, Schneider Christine, Schnurrbusch Volker, Schwab Andreas, Scuderi Benedetta, Seekatz Ralf, Sell Alexander, Serrano Sierra Rosa, Serra Sánchez Isabel, Sidl Günther, Sienkiewicz Bartłomiej, Sieper Lukas, Simon Sven, Singer Christine, Sinkevičius Virginijus, Sippel Birgit, Sjöstedt Jonas, Śmiszek Krzysztof, Smith Anthony, Smit Sander, Sokol Tomislav, Solier Diego, Solís Pérez Susana, Sommen Liesbet, Sonneborn Martin, Sorel Malika, Sousa Silva Hélder, Søvndal Villy, Squarta Marco, Staķis Mārtiņš, Stancanelli Raffaele, Ștefănuță Nicolae, Steger Petra, Stier Davor Ivo, Storm Kristoffer, Stöteler Sebastiaan, Stoyanov Stanislav, Strack-Zimmermann Marie-Agnes, Strada Cecilia, Streit Joachim, Strik Tineke, Strolenberg Anna, Sturdza Şerban Dimitrie, Stürgkh Anna, Sypniewski Marcin, Szczerba Michał, Szekeres Pál, Szydło Beata, Tamburrano Dario, Tânger Corrêa António, Tarquinio Marco, Tarr Zoltán, Târziu Claudiu-Richard, Tavares Carla, Tegethoff Kai, Temido Marta, Teodorescu Georgiana, Teodorescu Måwe Alice, Terheş Cristian, Ter Laak Ingeborg, Terras Riho, Tertsch Hermann, Thionnet Pierre-Romain, Timgren Beatrice, Tinagli Irene, Tobback Bruno, Tobé Tomas, Tolassy Rody, Tomac Eugen, Tomašič Zala, Tomaszewski Waldemar, Tomc Romana, Tonin Matej, Toom Jana, Topo Raffaele, Torselli Francesco, Tosi Flavio, Toussaint Marie, Tovaglieri Isabella, Toveri Pekka, Tridico Pasquale, Trochu Laurence, Tsiodras Dimitris, Tudose Mihai, Turek Filip, Tynkkynen Sebastian, Uhrík Milan, Ušakovs Nils, Vaidere Inese, Valchev Ivaylo, Vălean Adina, Valet Matthieu, Van Brempt Kathleen, Vandendriessche Tom, Van Dijck Kris, Van Lanschot Reinier, Van Leeuwen Jessika, Vannacci Roberto, Van Overtveldt Johan, Van Sparrentak Kim, Varaut Alexandre, Vasconcelos Ana, Vasile-Voiculescu Vlad, Vedrenne Marie-Pierre, Ventola Francesco, Verheyen Sabine, Verougstraete Yvan, Veryga Aurelijus, Vešligaj Marko, Vicsek Annamária, Vieira Catarina, Vigenin Kristian, Vilimsky Harald, Vincze Loránt, Vind Marianne, Vistisen Anders, Vivaldini Mariateresa, Volgin Petar, von der Schulenburg Michael, Vondra Alexandr, Voss Axel, Vozemberg-Vrionidi Elissavet, Vrecionová Veronika, Vázquez Lázara Adrián, Waitz Thomas, Walsh Maria, Walsmann Marion, Warborn Jörgen, Warnke Jan-Peter, Wąsik Maciej, Wawrykiewicz Michał, Wcisło Marta, Wechsler Andrea, Weimers Charlie, Werbrouck Séverine, Wiezik Michal, Winkler Iuliu, Winzig Angelika, Wiseler-Lima Isabel, Wiśniewska Jadwiga, Wölken Tiemo, Wolters Lara, Yar Lucia, Yon-Courtin Stéphanie, Zacharia Maria, Zajączkowska-Hernik Ewa, Zalewska Anna, Žalimas Dainius, Zan Alessandro, Zarzalejos Javier, Zdechovský Tomáš, Zdrojewski Bogdan Andrzej, Zijlstra Auke, Zīle Roberts, Zingaretti Nicola, Złotowski Kosma, Zoido Álvarez Juan Ignacio, Zovko Željana, Zver Milan

    Excused:

    Berg Sibylle, Burkhardt Delara, Friis Sigrid, Hazekamp Anja

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • Trump’s bid to bar foreign students from Harvard threatens Kennedy School’s lifeblood

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    When 35-year-old Oscar Escobar completed his term as the youngest elected mayor in his Colombian hometown in 2023, he was accepted into a program at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government tailored to aspiring global leaders like him.

    If the Trump administration gets its way, Escobar may be among the last foreign students for the foreseeable future to attend the Kennedy School, widely considered one of the world’s best schools for preparing future policymakers.

    Last month, the Department of Homeland Security sought to revoke Harvard’s ability to enroll international students and force those who are there to transfer or lose their legal status. It accused the university of “fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party.”

    In early June, President Donald Trump doubled-down by issuing a proclamation to bar U.S. entry for foreign nationals planning to study at Harvard and directed the State Department to consider revoking visas for those already enrolled. Trump argued that Harvard has tolerated crime on campus and that its relationships with China threatened national security.

    Harvard said the orders – which affect thousands of students – were illegal and amounted to retaliation for rejecting government’s demands to control its governance and curriculum among other things. It said it was addressing concerns about antisemitism and campus threats.

    A federal judge has temporarily blocked both orders while the courts review legal challenges, but if allowed to stand, they would represent a huge blow to Harvard, and the Kennedy School in particular.

    Over the past five years, 52% of Kennedy students have come from outside the United States, the school’s media office said. With students from more than 100 countries, it is “the most global” school at Harvard.

    The large foreign contingent is a big part of why the school has been so successful as a training ground for future leaders, including Americans, said Nicholas Burns, a Kennedy School professor and a former U.S. diplomat.

    “It’s by design,” Burns said in an interview, referring to the number of international students. “It’s a decision that the Kennedy School leadership made because it replicates the world as it is.”

    Kennedy counts an impressive list of foreign leaders among its alumni, including former Mexican President Felipe Calderon and former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau.

    Another is Maia Sandu, who was elected president of Moldova in 2020 after she graduated. She has since emerged as an important regional voice against Russian influence, spearheading the country’s drive to join the European Union and taking a stand against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

    “At Harvard I met interesting people from all over the world, everyone with his or her own story,” Sandu said in a 2022 address to Kennedy School graduates. “And, very quickly, I realized that my country was not the only one which had been struggling for decades. I realized that development takes time.”

    ‘SOFT POWER’

    For the school’s defenders, foreign students bring more benefits than risks. They say educating future world leaders means boosting U.S. “soft power,” a concept coined in the 1980s by Harvard political scientist Joseph Nye, later a Kennedy School dean, to refer to non-coercive ways to promote U.S. values such as democracy and human rights.

    Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, a Kennedy School graduate who must now navigate the rivalry between the United States and China in Southeast Asia, has acknowledged the influence of American culture on him.

    He says he decided to study in the U.S. in part because his favorite musicians were Americans. Last year, Wong posted a TikTok video of himself playing Taylor Swift’s “Love Song” on acoustic guitar, dedicating the performance to teachers.

    To be sure, the Kennedy School has courted its share of controversies – including criticism over who it accepts into its programs and who it invites to teach and speak to its students.

    A notable example came in 2022 when Kennedy’s Carr Center for Human Rights Policy offered a fellowship to Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch, and then rescinded it. Roth said at the time he believed the school caved to pressure from supporters of Israel who believed HRW had an anti-Israel bias. Kennedy denied that, but eventually reversed course amid widespread criticism that it was limiting debate.

    Smiling as he posed for graduation photos with his family in May, Escobar said it was a bittersweet moment to complete his studies at Kennedy.

    “If this university cannot receive international students anymore, of course we are missing an opportunity,” said Escobar, who has since returned to Colombia to work on the presidential campaign of leftist politician Claudia Lopez, also a former Harvard fellow.

    “If what President Donald Trump wants is to make America great again, it will be a mistake.”

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Press release – Montenegro and Moldova: MEPs applaud EU membership progress

    Source: European Parliament 3

    MEPs welcome Montenegro´s objective to join the EU in 2028 and praise Moldova’s EU membership efforts in resolutions adopted on Wednesday.

    Importance of political stability in Montenegro

    Parliament calls for political stability in Montenegro and substantial progress regarding electoral and judicial reforms as well as the fight against organised crime and corruption. In a report adopted by 470 votes in favour. 102 against and 77 abstentions, MEPs stress that Montenegro remains the leading candidate in the EU enlargement process and point to the overwhelming support of its citizens and the majority of political actors for joining the EU in 2028. Parliament welcomes the country’s full alignment with the EU’s common foreign and security policy, including EU sanctions against Russia, and commends Montenegro for its support for the international rules-based order at the United Nations.

    Fight against foreign interference

    Parliament is however seriously concerned by malign interference, cyber-attacks, hybrid threats, disinformation campaigns and efforts to destabilise Montenegro, including attempts to influence its political processes and public opinion. These discredit the EU and undermine the country’s progress towards EU membership.

    The rapporteur on Montenegro Marjan Šarec (Renew Europe, Slovenia) said: “It is important to note that the adoption of necessary legislation involved cooperation between both coalition and opposition parties. This reflects a high level of awareness that the European path is the only right one for Montenegro, with no viable alternative. Montenegro’s achievements thus far provide a solid foundation for addressing future challenges, which are numerous and far from easy. The fight against organised crime and corruption, judicial reform, and the prevention of influence from third countries are of critical importance for meeting democratic standards.”

    MEPs praise Moldova’s EU membership efforts

    Commending Moldova’s exemplary commitment to advancing its progress towards EU membership, a report approved by MEPs by 456 votes in favour to 118 against with 51 abstentions recognises that EU-Moldova relations have entered into a new phase. Cooperation has intensified alongside sustained efforts by the government in Chișinău to align Moldova’s laws with those of the EU (the so-called “EU acquis”). Despite significant internal and external challenges, such as the effects of Russia’s continuing war against neighbouring Ukraine and Moscow’s interference in Moldova’s democratic processes, MEPs welcome the Moldovan government’s progress on meeting the EU’s enlargement requirements and the country’s ambition to open negotiations on more enlargement-related issues. MEPs call on the European Commission to enhance its support for Moldova to achieve these objectives.

    Russian interference in Moldova’s democratic processes
    MEPs note that in both Moldova’s recent constitutional referendum on European integration and the 2024 presidential election Moldovans reaffirmed their support for EU membership and the government’s pro-European reform agenda. Despite being subject to a massive hybrid campaign by Russia and its proxies, MEPs say both the referendum and the election were held professionally and “with an extraordinary sense of duty and dedication”. They also note that the country’s parliamentary elections in autumn 2025 will be crucial for the continuation of Moldova’s pro-European trajectory and warn about the likely intensification of foreign, in particular Russian, malign interference and hybrid attacks.

    The rapporteur on Moldova Sven Mikser (S&D, Estonia) said: “We commend Moldova’s strong commitment to EU integration and acknowledge the country’s strategic importance for Europe. The Moldovan authorities have demonstrated remarkable determination to pursue reforms and align with EU values despite facing major challenges and external pressure by the Kremlin and its proxies.”

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: IAEA Director General’s Introductory Statement to the Board of Governors

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

    (As prepared for delivery)

    As the armed conflict in Ukraine enters its fourth year, the nuclear safety and security situation throughout the country continues to be highly precarious. The presence of the IAEA at all Ukrainian nuclear facilities has been and continues to be an invaluable asset to the international community and must be preserved.

    The IAEA remains present at Ukraine’s nuclear power plant facilities. Difficult conditions have in the past month complicated and delayed one rotation of experts, which was safely completed in recent days. Back in December, a drone hit and severely damaged an IAEA official vehicle during a rotation. As I reported to you in the special Board meeting shortly afterward, staff survived this unacceptable attack unharmed, but the rear of the vehicle was destroyed. Other episodes followed, confirming the dangerous situation.

    Around Ukraine, the Khmelnitsky NPP, the Rivne NPP and the South Ukraine NPP, continue to operate amid serious challenges, including on the electricity infrastructure, a major risk to the reliable and stable supply of power crucial for the safe operation of NPPs. The electrical grid’s ability to provide a reliable off-site power supply to Ukrainian NPPs was further reduced by damage sustained following military attacks in November and December 2024, a mission of IAEA experts that visited and assessed seven critical electrical substations concluded late last year. Considering the seriousness of the situation, I visited the Kyivska electrical substation last month to observe the damage sustained first hand. On what was my 11th visit to Ukraine since the start of the war, I also met with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, reiterating the IAEA’s commitment to supporting nuclear safety and security in Ukraine and our readiness to support the country’s plans to expand nuclear power at Khmelnytskyy NPP. Consultations with Moscow have also taken place and will continue, in the interest of nuclear safety and security at Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant.

    At Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP), where the 6 reactor units are in cold shutdown, the status of the off-site power supply remains extremely vulnerable. For about one week ZNPP had to rely on a single off-site power line following the loss of its only remaining back-up line, confirming the extremely fragile situation. 

    Last month at the Chornobyl site a drone caused significant damage to the structure built to prevent any radioactive release from the reactor damaged in the 1986 accident and to protect it from external hazards. Although this attack did not result in any radioactive release, it nevertheless underlines the persistent risk to nuclear safety during this military conflict.

    Since the Board gathered for its last regular meeting in November 2024, the Agency has arranged 31 deliveries of nuclear safety, security and medical equipment and supplies to Ukraine, bringing the total so far to 108 deliveries valued at more than EUR 15.6 million. The Agency also has initiated the first phase of its support on safety and security of radioactive sources in Ukraine.

    We are grateful to all 30 donor states and the European Union for their extrabudgetary contributions, and I encourage those who can, to support the delivery of the comprehensive assistance programme, for which EUR 22 million are necessary.

    As reflected in my latest report to the Board on Nuclear Safety, Security and Safeguards in Ukraine, I would like to reiterate that all the IAEA’s activities in Ukraine are being conducted in line with relevant resolutions of the UN General Assembly and of the IAEA policy-making organs.

    Madame Chairperson,

    In February, I travelled to Fukushima to participate in collecting water samples off the coast of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. I did this together with scientists from China, Korea and Switzerland as part of additional measures to promote transparency and build trust in the region during the ongoing release of ALPS-treated water from the plant. Additional measures focus on expanding international participation and transparency, allowing hands-on independent measurements of the concentration level of the water. This work is conducted within agreed parameters set by the IAEA in its role as an independent, impartial and technical organization.  IAEA officials and experts from laboratories from China, France, the Republic of Korea, and Switzerland also sampled ALPS -treated water – prior to dilution – from measurement/confirmation tanks on the premises at the site. The IAEA has maintained its independent monitoring and analysis efforts, confirming that tritium concentrations in the discharged batches remain far below operational limits.

    In December 2024, an IAEA Task Force concluded that the approach TEPCO, and the Government of Japan are taking continues to align with international safety standards.

    While in Japan, I also visited facilities where soil removed after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident is safely stored, managed, and recycled, an effort the IAEA has been supporting by working to ensure it meets international safety standards.

    You have before you the Nuclear Safety Review 2025 and the Nuclear Security Review 2025. Both documents present, in their respective areas, an analytical overview, the global trends, and the Agency’s main activities in 2024. They also identify the top priorities for the years ahead.

    This month the inaugural meeting of the Nuclear Security Working Group established under the Nuclear Harmonization and Standardization Initiative’s Regulatory Track will identify nuclear security topics of common interest amongst participating States and share regulatory approaches, good practices and lessons learned in ensuring the security of SMRs.

    Our preparatory work in advance of the launch of Atomic Technology Licensed for Applications at Sea (ATLAS) later this year is progressing. ATLAS will provide a framework to enable the peaceful maritime uses of nuclear technology, a prospect that is generating significant interest.

    Contracting Parties to the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management (Joint Convention) later this month will participate in the 8th Review Meeting to study National Reports with the aim of improving safety in radioactive waste and spent fuel management.

    December saw the start of a new project supporting the establishment of sustainable regulatory infrastructure for radiation safety and the security of radioactive material in Central East Asia and the Pacific Islands.

    In June, Romania will host ConvEx-3, the IAEA’s highest level and most complex emergency exercise. In the event of an incident with transboundary implications, Member States will be called upon to implement a harmonized response and therefore this exercise will have a particular focus on regional collaboration.

    The International Conference on Nuclear and Radiological Emergency Preparedness and Response will be held in December in Riyadh in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

    Madame Chairperson,

    Today, 417 nuclear power reactors operating in 31 countries make up almost 377 gigawatts of installed capacity, providing just under 10 per cent of the world’s total electricity and a quarter of its low-carbon supply.

    It is clear that countries are turning more and more to nuclear energy. In the IAEA’s high case scenario, global nuclear electricity generating capacity is seen increasing two and a half times by 2050.  Delivering on that promise will require public support. That is why the first IAEA International Conference on Stakeholder Engagement for Nuclear Power Programmes will gather governments, industry and practitioners from around the world in the final week of May. Mayors of municipalities with nuclear power facilities from around the world will share their experiences. No one is better placed to assess the impact and contribution to the community of nuclear facilities than those living there.

    Following our first Nuclear Stakeholder Engagement School, hosted by the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics in Trieste, Italy last November, we are now planning two more later this year. In addition, we have also established a new Stakeholder Engagement Advisory Service, which will help countries assess and strengthen their stakeholder engagement programmes.

    The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly evolving and growing in all spheres of life, including in nuclear science and technology. AI data centres require a lot of energy and nuclear reactors provide clean, reliable, and adaptable options, including in the form of SMRs and micro reactors.  Meanwhile, the integration of AI into the nuclear sector offers the chance to streamline operations across the nuclear power project life cycle. In this context the IAEA will host the International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Nuclear Energy this December. We look forward to welcoming as many of you as possible to this important and first-of-a-kind event here at the Agency’s headquarters.

    Within the Secretariat we are also intent on making the most of AI while mitigating its risks, therefore we have established official guidelines, a portal and a community of practice.

    Our work on fusion continues apace with the publication of Experiences for Consideration in Fusion Plant Design Safety and Safety Assessment.

    Madame Chairperson,

    The Nuclear Technology Review before you highlights key advancements in nuclear applications that support Member States in addressing critical priorities. This year’s review places particular emphasis on innovations in food safety and authenticity, energy security, early disease detection and cancer treatment, environmental sustainability, and advanced manufacturing.

    In November, the IAEA hosted the Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Science, Technology and Applications and the Technical Cooperation Programme. The Ministerial Declaration recognized both the critical role of nuclear science, technology, and applications in tackling global challenges, and the important role of the Technical Cooperation programme as a key mechanism in transferring, expanding and further accelerating Member State access to nuclear technology, materials, equipment and expertise for peaceful purposes.

    I am pleased to report the IAEA’s technical cooperation programme achieved an implementation rate of 86% in 2024. We provided our emergency assistance to Türkiye and Syria, assessing damage to civil structures following the earthquakes and building the capacities of Turkish and Syrian experts in non-destructive testing. We initiated procurement to reinstate X-ray and laboratory services in Grenada and Honduras in the aftermath of Hurricane Beryl and Tropical Storm Sara, and we aided oil-spill clean-up efforts in Trinidad and Tobago.

    In 2024, the Rate of Attainment for contributions to the TC Fund was 95%, underscoring Member States’ commitment to our work. To ensure resources for the TC programme are sufficient, assured and predicable, I urge Member States to contribute on time, and in full, to the TC Fund.

    Our flagship initiatives are making progress across the globe. Under Atoms4Food, about 27 countries from all regions have officially requested support. Member States have pledged almost EUR 9 million, two thirds of which was contributed by Japan to support livestock production in Côte d’Ivoire, food safety in Mauritania, and molecular laboratories in Vietnam, among other projects.

    Our network of international partnerships has grown with Memoranda of Understanding having been signed with Anglo American, CGIAR, and the Inter-American Institute of Cooperation in Agriculture (IICA). The partnership with Anglo American focuses on combating soil salinization through climate-smart agricultural practices.

    While I was in Japan last month, I signed a partnership with Sumitomo Corporation, one of the world’s largest integrated trading companies, to cooperate particularly in the area of sustainable uses of nuclear related technologies for multiple areas, including healthcare, shipping, fusion and capacity building efforts.  

    Under Rays of Hope, the Anchor Centre in Argentina held its first capacity-building event to strengthen paediatric radiotherapy services in Latin America and the Caribbean, creating a regional network for knowledge exchange and support.

    In January 2025, the IAEA conducted its first national-level quality assurance audit in diagnostic radiology, reviewing 16 hospitals in Qatar.

    The International Conference on Advances in Radiation Oncology (ICARO-4) will take place in the first week of June, focusing on emerging radiotherapy techniques to address global health challenges.

    Under the Zoonotic Disease Integrated Action (ZODIAC), a novel surveillance technology for high-risk pathogens was transferred to the IAEA’s Animal Production and Health Laboratory in November and will soon be passed on to Member States. New funding pledges from the Republic of Korea, Portugal, and Japan are supporting ZODIAC’s coordinated research projects in Asia and Africa, as well as the development of AI-driven platforms for zoonotic disease monitoring.

    Under NUTEC Plastics 104 Member States are engaged in microplastic monitoring, with 42 developing recycling technologies. Four countries in Asia-Pacific and Latin America have validated radiation-based upcycling technology at lab scale, with private sector collaboration helping to build up operations. China is developing a pilot-scale facility, bringing the total number of countries promoting the technology to nine.

    In November this year, the International High-Level Forum on NUclear TEChnology for Controlling Plastic Pollution (NUTEC-Plastics): Scaling Solutions and Partnerships for Global Impact will take place in the Philippines. I thank the Philippines Government for hosting this important milestone.

    The Global Water Analysis Laboratory Network (GloWAL) baseline survey has received 85 responses from 65 countries, informing future activities. Its first coordination meeting for the Spanish-speaking Latin America and the Caribbean is underway.

    Under ReNuAL 2, the construction of new greenhouses in Seibersdorf is nearing completion and the modernized laboratories will be ready to welcome staff soon.  

    Madame Chairperson,

    Regarding the issue of Iran’s nuclear programme, you have before you my latest report on verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231 (2015).

    Following my last report, Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% U‑235 has increased to 275 kg, up from 182 kg in the past quarter. Iran is the only non-nuclear weapon State enriching to this level, causing me serious concern.

    It has been four years since Iran stopped implementing its nuclear-related commitments under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), including provisionally applying its Additional Protocol and therefore it is also four years since the Agency was able to conduct complementary access in Iran.

    You also have before you my report on the NPT Safeguards Agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran says it has declared all nuclear material, activities and locations required under its NPT Safeguards Agreement. However, this statement is inconsistent with the Agency’s findings of uranium particles of anthropogenic origin at undeclared locations in Iran. The Agency needs to know the current location(s) of the nuclear material and/or of contaminated equipment involved.

    There is also a discrepancy in the material balance of uranium involved in uranium metal production experiments conducted at Jaber Ibn Hayan Mutlipurpose Laboratory, for which Iran has not accounted.

    Having stated it had suspended such implementation, Iran still is not implementing modified Code 3.1, which is a legal obligation for Iran.

    I am seriously concerned that the outstanding safeguards issues remain unresolved. They stem from Iran’s obligations under its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement and need to be resolved for the Agency to be in a position to provide assurance that Iran’s nuclear programme is exclusively peaceful.

    I deeply regret that Iran, despite having indicated a willingness to consider accepting the designation of four additional experienced Agency inspectors, did not accept their designation.

    There has been no significant progress towards implementing the Joint Statement of 4 March 2023. I call upon Iran urgently to implement the Joint Statement through serious engagement.

    In response to the Board’s request in its resolution of November 2024, I will produce a comprehensive and updated assessment on the presence and use of undeclared nuclear material in connection with past and present outstanding issues regarding Iran’s nuclear programme.

    High-level engagement is indispensable to making real progress. My visit to Tehran last November, and meetings with President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi indicate that there may be room for constructive compromises. I hope to see them again soon and pursue effective dialogue and tangible results.

    The Board has before it for approval a draft Additional Protocol for Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.

    I have made it a priority to strengthen the legal framework for safeguards. Since the last Board meeting in November, Oman, Mongolia, Cyprus, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Zambia have amended their original Small Quantities Protocols and Saudi Arabia has rescinded its original SQP. The number of States with safeguards agreements in force remains 191, and 143 of these States have additional protocols in force. I call upon the remaining three States Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons without comprehensive safeguards agreements to bring such agreements into force without delay. I also encourage States that have not yet concluded additional protocols to do so as soon as possible, and I reiterate my repeated calls for the remaining 14 States with SQPs based on the original standard text to amend or rescind them as soon as possible. Let me assure you that I will continue to use my good offices to strengthen the indispensable legal framework on which the continued peaceful uses of nuclear science and technology rest.

    The IAEA continues to monitor the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s nuclear programme.

    The Agency has observed that the 5MW(e) reactor at Yongbyon resumed operation in mid-October 2024, following a shutdown period of approximately 60 days. This shutdown is assessed to be of sufficient length to refuel the reactor and start its seventh operational cycle. Strong indicators of preparations for a new reprocessing campaign, including the operation of the steam plant serving the Radiochemical Laboratory, have been observed.

    In late-January 2025, the DPRK released photographs of General Secretary Kim Jong Un visiting “the nuclear material production base and the Nuclear Weapons Institute”. The depicted centrifuge cascades and infrastructure are consistent with the layout of a centrifuge enrichment facility and with the structure of the Yongbyon Uranium Enrichment Plant. This development follows the DPRK’s publication in September 2024 of photographs of an undeclared enrichment facility at the Kangson Complex. The undeclared enrichment facilities at both Kangson and Yongbyon, combined with General Secretary Kim’s call for “overfulfilling the plan for producing weapons-grade nuclear materials,” are of serious concern. There are indications that the uranium enrichment plants at Kangson and Yongbyon continue to operate, and there are indications that the light water reactor (LWR) at Yongbyon continues to operate. Additions to the support infrastructure have been observed adjacent to the LWR.

    There were no indications of significant changes at the Nuclear Test Site at Punggye-ri, which remains prepared to support a nuclear test.

    The continuation and further development of the DPRK’s nuclear programme are clear violations of relevant UN Security Council resolutions and are deeply regrettable. I call upon the DPRK to comply fully with its obligations under relevant UN Security Council resolutions, to cooperate promptly with the Agency in the full and effective implementation of its NPT Safeguards Agreement and to resolve all outstanding issues, especially those that have arisen during the absence of Agency inspectors from the country. The Agency continues to maintain its enhanced readiness to play its essential role in verifying the DPRK’s nuclear programme.

    Concerning the safety of the LWR, we lack the necessary information to make an assessment. Safety should always be a paramount consideration when operating a reactor. Nuclear safety is a sovereign responsibility of the State and the IAEA supports the States in this area.

    Following the change of Government in the Syrian Arab Republic towards the end of 2024, I have written to the new Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates. I requested cooperation with the Agency to enable us to fulfill our obligation to verify nuclear material and facilities under Syria’s safeguards agreement. I conveyed the importance of continuing and reinforcing cooperation between Syria and the Agency to address unresolved issues. Clarifying these issues remains essential to Syria demonstrating its commitment to nuclear non-proliferation and international peace and security.

    I hope to be able to engage with the new government soon. Bringing total clarity to the situation regarding past activities in this field in Syria is indispensable to the realization of current efforts to modernize the country and put it on a firm path to peace and development.

    In April and May, the IAEA will participate in the Third Preparatory Meeting for the 2026 Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in New York.

    Madame Chairperson,

    The IAEA’s Marie Sklodowska‑Curie Fellowship Programme has been expanding the talent base for the nuclear field since 2020 with 760 female students and graduates from 121 Member States so far having been supported in studying in 72 countries. In the current, fifth cycle, we selected 200 candidates from 109 countries. I would like to thank Member States that have contributed so far. For this programme to continue accepting new fellowship candidates it urgently needs further support. I ask those who can, to support this endeavor. 

    This year, we have planned three Lise Meitner Programme cohorts, in Argentina, Canada and Japan. They are focused on nuclear power, advanced nuclear technologies and research reactors.

    I am happy to report that we have reached parity, women now make up half the staff in the professional and higher categories. This is up from about 30% when I took office in 2019.

    I thank Member States who have paid their regular budget contributions, including some who paid in advance. It is important that all Member States pay their contributions in a timely manner. This will ensure liquidity of the regular budget throughout the year, allowing the Agency to carry out its activities effectively.

    You recently received for your consideration my proposed programme and budget for the 2026-2027 biennium.

    It has been prepared with due consideration of the constraints of the prevailing financial environment. Despite increasing demands and higher operational costs, I have decided for the third time in a row to propose a zero real growth budget. The proposal maintains balance among the different programmes and emphasises my commitment to ensuring our resources are managed with discipline, efficiency and restraint so that we maximize the impact of the Agency’s work.

    This being our first Board meeting of 2025, I want to conclude by saying that I look forward to making 2025 a successful year in which the IAEA benefits all Member States as we advance our common goals of peace and development.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Update 296 – IAEA Director General Statement on Situation in Ukraine

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

    Nuclear safety remains precarious at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) and its six reactors cannot be restarted as long as the military conflict continues to jeopardize the situation at the site, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi told IAEA Member States this week.

    Addressing the regular June meeting of the Board of Governors, the Director General briefed them about his 12th mission to Ukraine during the current conflict, which took place in early June, followed by a visit to Russia, which also focused on nuclear safety and security at the ZNPP.

    Addressing the Board meeting, he highlighted “the extremely vulnerable” status of the off-site power supply at the site, which for more than a month now has relied on one single power line for the electricity it needs to cool its reactors and spent fuel. Before the conflict, Europe’s largest nuclear power plant (NPP) had access to ten power lines.

    In addition, Director General Grossi noted that the ZNPP reactors’ “reliance on groundwater for cooling remains an interim solution, whilst in their cold shutdown state”.  The plant has depended on 11 groundwater wells since the downstream Kakhovka dam was destroyed two years ago.

    In their meeting in Kyiv on 3 June, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy “made a point to recognize the importance of the IAEA’s permanent presence” at the ZNPP, the Director General told the Board, adding he had assured President Zelenskyy of the IAEA’s continued commitment to Ukraine’s nuclear safety and to helping it rebuild its energy infrastructure.

    The Director General added: “As the military conflict moves further into its fourth year, Ukraine needs support, and the IAEA is providing it … it is also crucial to prepare for the reconstruction phase.”

    At the ZNPP, the IAEA team based there has held several meetings with the ZNPP to discuss the site’s electrical system and also visited its 750 kilovolt (kV) switchyard.

    Apart from the sole remaining 330 kV back-up line that was disconnected due to military activities on 7 May, the site does not know the current condition of its five other 330 kV lines, which remain unavailable after they were damaged outside of the ZNPP area early in the conflict.

    The ZNPP said maintenance work was conducted at one of the four 750 kV power lines that was originally connected to the ZNPP before being damaged in 2022. Since the conflict, the ZNPP had lost access to three of its 750 kV lines.

    In addition, the ZNPP informed the IAEA about a planned project to pump water into the cooling pond from the Dnipro River in order to maintain a water level that is sufficient to cool one operating reactor initially, followed by a second unit, until the pond reaches its full capacity. According to the site, a pumping station will be constructed to supply water directly to the cooling pond until the plant can rebuild the Kakhovka dam.

    The exact location of the pumping station cannot yet be determined, as it depends on the security conditions, the ZNPP said, adding the project would only start once military activities cease.

    Separately this week, the IAEA team was informed that that the Russian regulator, Rostekhnadzor, over the next two weeks will perform pre-licensing inspection activities at ZNPP reactor units 1 and 2, whose current operational licences issued by Ukraine are due to expire in December this year and in February 2026, respectively. The IAEA team has requested to observe these activities and will seek additional information regarding items such as the scope of these undertakings and any criteria for assessing nuclear safety.

    Over the past several weeks, the IAEA team has also been monitoring a leak in one reactor unit’s essential service water system which delivers cooling water to the safety systems. The leak – which can occur in NPPs without any significant safety consequences – was discovered during maintenance and the team was informed that it was caused by corrosion. It has since been repaired.

    The IAEA team reported hearing military activities on most days over the past weeks, at varying distances away from the ZNPP including last week’s purported drone attack on the site’s training centre.

    The Khmelnytskyy, Rivne and the South Ukraine NPPs are continuing to operate amid the problems caused by the conflict. Three of their nine operating reactor units are still undergoing planned outages for refuelling and maintenance. The IAEA teams at these plants and the Chornobyl sites have continued to report on – and be informed about – nearby military activities, including drones observed flying nearby. Last Monday, the IAEA teams at Khmelnytskyy and Rivne were required to shelter.

    Over the past two weeks, the IAEA teams based at these four sites have all rotated.

    As part of the IAEA’s assistance programme to support nuclear safety and security in Ukraine, the Chornobyl site received essential items to improve staff living conditions and the National Scientific Centre Institute of Metrology received personal radiation detectors.

    These deliveries were funded by Austria, Belgium, France and Norway and brought the total number of IAEA-coordinated deliveries since the start of the armed conflict to 140.

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Press Arrangements for IAEA Board of Governors Meeting, 9-13 June 2025

    Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

    The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors will convene its regular June meeting at the Agency’s headquarters at 10:00 CEST on Monday, 9 June, in Board Room C, Building C, 4th floor, in the Vienna International Centre (VIC). 

    Board discussions are expected to include, among others: Annual Report for 2024; strengthening of the Agency’s technical cooperation activities: Technical Cooperation Report for 2024; Report of the Programme and Budget Committee; verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 (2015); staff of the Department of Safeguards to be used as Agency inspectors; Safeguards Implementation Report for 2024; application of safeguards in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Syrian Arab Republic; NPT Safeguards Agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran; nuclear safety, security and safeguards in Ukraine; transfer of the nuclear materials in the context of AUKUS and its safeguards in all aspects under the NPT; designation of members to serve on the Board in 2025–2026; provisional agenda for the 69th regular session of the General Conference; restoration of the sovereign equality of Member States in the IAEA; and representation of other organizations at the 69th regular session of the General Conference.

    The Board of Governors meeting is closed to the press. 

    IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi will open the meeting with an introductory statement, which will be released to journalists after delivery and posted on the IAEA website.  

    Press Conference 

    Director General Grossi is expected to hold a press conference at 12:30 CEST on Monday, 9 June, in the Press Room of the M building. 

    A live video stream of the press conference will be available. The IAEA will provide video footage of the press conference and the Director General’s opening statement here and will make photos available on Flickr.  

    Photo Opportunity 

    There will be a photo opportunity with the IAEA Director General and the Chair of the Board, Ambassador Matilda Aku Alomatu Osei-Agyeman of Ghana, before the start of the Board meeting, on 9 June at 10:00 CEST in Board Room C, in the C building in the VIC. 

    Press Working Area 

    The Press Room of the M building’s ground floor will be available as a press working area, starting from 09:00 CEST on 9 June.

    Accreditation

    All journalists interested in covering the meeting in person – including those with permanent accreditation – are requested to inform the IAEA Press Office of their plans. Journalists without permanent accreditation must send copies of their passport and press ID to the IAEAPress Office by 14:00 CEST on Friday, 6 June. 

    We encourage those journalists who do not yet have permanent accreditation to request it at UNIS Vienna

    Please plan your arrival to allow sufficient time to pass through the VIC security check. 

    The time for the press conference was updated from an earlier version. 

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Biggest-ever aid cut by G7 members a death sentence for millions of people, says Oxfam

    Source: Oxfam –

    • Aid cuts could cost millions of lives and leave girls, boys, women and men without access to enough food, water, education, health treatment
    • G7 countries are making deliberate and deadly choices by cutting life-saving aid, enabling atrocities, and reneging on their international commitments
    • Low and middle-income countries face reduced aid, rising debt, and trade barriers — a perfect storm that threatens development and recovery.

    The Group of Seven (G7) countries, which together account for around three-quarters of all official development assistance (ODA), are set to slash their aid spending by 28 percent for 2026 compared to 2024 levels.  

    It would be the biggest cut in aid since the G7 was established in 1975, and indeed in aid records going back to 1960, reveals a new analysis by Oxfam ahead of the G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Canada.

    “The G7’s retreat from the world is unprecedented and couldn’t come at a worse time, with hunger, poverty, and climate harm intensifying. The G7 cannot claim to build bridges on one hand while tearing them down with the other. It sends a shameful message to the Global South, that G7 ideals of collaboration mean nothing,” said Oxfam International Executive Director Amitabh Behar.

    2026 will mark the third consecutive year of decline in G7 aid spending – a trend not seen since the 1990s. If these cuts go ahead, G7 aid levels in 2026 will crash by $44 billion to just $112 billion. The cuts are being driven primarily by the US (down $33 billion), Germany (down $3.5 billion), the UK (down $5 billion) and France (down $3 billion).

    “Rather than breaking from the Trump administration’s cruel dismantling of USAID and other US foreign assistance, G7 countries like the UK, Germany, and France are instead following the same path, slashing aid with brutal measures that will cost millions of lives,” said Behar.

    “These cuts will starve the hungry, deny medicine to the sick, and block education for a generation of girls and boys. This is a catastrophic betrayal of the world’s most vulnerable and crippling to the G7’s credibility,” said Behar.

    Economic projections show that aid cuts will mean 5.7 million more people across Africa will fall below extreme poverty levels in the coming year, a number expected to rocket to 19 million by 2030.  

    Cuts to aid are putting vital public services at risk in some of the world’s poorest countries. In countries like Liberia, Haiti, Malawi, and South Sudan, US aid had made up over 40 percent of health and education budgets, leaving them especially exposed. Combined with a growing debt crisis, this is undermining governments’ ability to care for their people.

    Global aid for nutrition will fall by 44 percent in 2025 compared to 2022:

    • The end of just $128 million worth of US-funded child nutrition programs for a million children will result in an extra 163,500 child deaths a year.  
    • At the same time, 2.3 million children suffering from severe acute malnutrition – the most lethal form of undernutrition – are now at risk of losing their life-saving treatments.
       

    One in five dollars of aid to poor countries’ health budgets are cut or under threat:  

    • WHO reports that in almost three-quarters of its country offices are seeing serious disruptions to health services, and in about a quarter of the countries where it operates some health facilities have already been forced to shut down completely.
    • US aid cuts could lead to up to 3 million preventable deaths every year, with 95 million people losing access to healthcare. This includes children dying from vaccine-preventable diseases, pregnant women losing access to care, and rising deaths from malaria, TB, and HIV.

    G7 countries are not just reneging on commitments to global aid and solidarity, they are fuelling conflicts by allowing grave violations of international law, like in Gaza where people are facing starvation. Whether in Ukraine, the occupied Palestinian territory, the Democratic Republic of the Congo or elsewhere, civilians must always be protected, and aid is often the first line of protection they get. G7 countries are illuminating a double standard that risks more global instability, conflict and atrocities.  

    While G7 countries cut aid, their citizen billionaires continue to see their wealth surge. Since the beginning of 2025, the G7 ultra-rich have made $126 billion, almost the same amount as the group’s 2025 aid commitment of $132 billion.  

    At this pace, it would take the world’s billionaires less than a month to generate the equivalent of the G7’s 2025 aid budget.

    By taxing the super-rich, the G7 could easily meet their financial commitments to end poverty and climate breakdown, whilst also having billions in new revenue to fight inequality in their own countries.  

    “The world is not short of money. The problem is that it is in the hands of the super-rich instead of the public. Rather than fairly taxing billionaires to feed the hungry, we see billionaires joining government to slash aid to the poorest in order to fund tax cuts for themselves,” said Behar.

    Oxfam is calling on the G7 to urgently reverse aid cuts and restore funding to address today’s global challenges. More than 50 years after the United Nations set the target of 0.7 percent for aid spending, most G7 countries remain well below this.  

    Oxfam is also urging the G7 to support global efforts led by Brazil and Spain to raise taxes on the super-rich, and to back the call from the African Union and The Vatican for a new UN body to help manage countries’ debt problems.
     

    According to OECD Data Explorer, the combined annual aid expenditure of the G7 in 2024 was $156.694 billion. Canada spent $7.323 billion, the United States $61.821 billion, Japan $17.583 billion, France $15.047 billion, Germany $31.382 billion, Italy $6.534 billion, and the United Kingdom $17.005 billion.

    Donor Tracker estimates that the decline in combined annual aid spending of the G7 countries for the period 2024 to 2026 will be -$44,488 billion.

    In 2024, aid from G7 countries declined by 8 percent, and projections for 2025 point to a sharper drop of 19 percent.

    Modelling using finds that 5.7 million more Africans would fall below the US$2.15 extreme poverty income level in the next year if Trump’s administration succeeds in its aid-reduction ambition. This assumes a 20 percent reduction of aid to Africa, considering that some US aid would be maintained as the US alone accounted for 26 percent of aid to Africa before the cuts.

    The dismantling of USAID and major aid reductions announced by Western donors threaten to undo decades of progress on malnutrition. A 44 percent drop in funding from 2022 levels could lead to widespread hardship and death.

    Up to 2.3 million children with severe acute malnutrition risk losing life-saving treatment, warns the Standing Together for Nutrition Consortium.

    There are 2,968 billionaires in the world, and 1,346 live in G7 countries (45 percent). 
     

    MIL OSI NGO

  • Yoga: India’s timeless gift of peace and holistic well-being to a badly divided world

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    ‘Yoga’ is now widely considered as one of India’s most profound gifts to the world. This enlightening practice embodies a timeless Indian tradition of physical, psychological and spiritual well-being. Embedded in ancient Indian philosophy, now majority of the people globally accept that it is much more than just physical postures- termed as ‘asanas’ in great Hindu religious traditions and scriptures.

    This holistic practice integrates breath control, meditation and a moral principle for a harmonious life, which is the ultimate goal of the ‘Hindu Sanatam Tradition’, which is the world’s oldest living spiritual and philosophical way of life. It is worth-mentioning here that unlike other religions of the world, Hinduism or Sanatam Dharma is not based on a single founder or scripture, rather it’s a cosmic and ever-evolving way of life rooted in the eternal truths of life.

    Yoga’s immense value to life, can be traced back in great Hindu scriptures like the Bhagavad Gita, which is revered as one of the most influential spiritual books globally. Gita says- ‘Yoga is the journey of the self, through the self, to the self,’ which explains how holistic it is for our life irrespective of one’s roots, ideological affiliations or leanings.

    The Vedas- the oldest and most sacred scriptures of Hinduism, composed between 1500–500 BCE, contain the earliest references to Yoga, though not in the systematized form seen in later great texts like the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. Vedic Yoga is more about mental discipline, meditation and the union of the individual soul with the cosmic reality. It is worth-mentioning that Vedas also form the foundation of Hindu philosophy, rituals and spirituality.

    Earlier, scholars dated the origins of Yoga to around 500 BCE, coinciding with the rise of Buddhism. However, archaeological discoveries from the Indus-Saraswati Valley Civilization suggest that yogic practices existed much earlier. Excavations have revealed seals depicting figures seated in meditative postures, strongly resembling yogic asanas. Additionally, artifacts such as the Mother Goddess idols indicate ritualistic and spiritual traditions that may have been precursors to Yoga. These findings push back the timeline of Yoga’s origins, linking it to one of the world’s oldest urban cultures.

    However, Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras, which is a foundational text of classical yoga and composed around 400 BCE, gave Yoga a greater meaning and wider relevance, re-establishing that Yoga is not just about physical postures but a complete science of mind control and self-realization. Yoga Sutras also systematically outlines the philosophy and practice of Rajya Yoga. It moves from ethical discipline to meditation and finally liberation, emphasizing direct experience over theoretical knowledge.

    The practice of Yoga also finds expression across a diverse range of ancient Indian texts and traditions including the Upanishads, Smritis, Puranas, Buddhist and Jain scriptures and the epics Mahabharata and Ramayana. Theistic traditions such as Shaivism, Vaishnavism and Tantra further preserved and refined yogic wisdom, emphasizing mystical experiences and meditative disciplines. This widespread presence suggests the existence of a pure form of Yoga that deeply influenced the spiritual landscape of South Asia long before its formal systematization.

    The modern evolution and global dissemination of Yoga owe much to the profound contributions of revered spiritual masters like Ramana Maharshi, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Paramahansa Yogananda, Swami Vivekananda and a few others. Among these spiritual Gurus, Swami Vivekananda played a pivotal role by introducing Yoga and Vedanta philosophy to international audiences through his historic address at the 1893 Parliament of Religions in Chicago. His groundbreaking efforts not only revived ancient yogic wisdom but also established Indian spiritual traditions as a significant force in the global discourse on consciousness and self-realization.

    These visionary saints collectively bridged the gap between traditional yogic practices and contemporary spiritual seeking, ensuring Yoga’s enduring relevance across cultures and geographical boundaries. In last few decades, Yoga gained further momentum through the contributions of Swami Sivananda, T. Krishnamacharya, Swami Kuvalayananda, Sri Aurobindo, B.K.S. Iyengar and Pattabhi Jois, who explored Yoga’s healing, psychological and spiritual dimensions.

    There came a marked change when on 27th September 2014, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s UNGA address highlighted Yoga’s holistic benefits, leading to the UN’s unanimous declaration of 21st June as International Yoga Day. This Indian spiritual practice now draws participation from world leaders and celebrities in its annual global celebrations.

    Now, when world is facing a number of wars, conflicts and confrontations, Yoga being more than just physical exercises, acquires greater relevance as it offers people timeless values of harmony and well-being, transcending all boundaries and offering everyone a path to balanced living and inner peace, which is fast depleting.

    On the one hand, the asanas enhance flexibility and strength, while pranayama regulates vital energy and calms the nervous system. Meditation cultivates mental clarity and emotional balance, creating inner stillness amidst life’s challenges. Together, these elements form an integrated approach to health that addresses modern lifestyle diseases also at their core. In today’s fast-paced world, yoga provides an antidote to fragmented and conflict-ridden living.

    The practice of Yoga teaches balance between activity and rest, effort and surrender, individuality and interconnectedness. By integrating yoga into daily life, practitioners develop resilience, compassion and a deeper understanding of life’s unity. This complete system of self-care continues to gain global recognition as an essential tool for comprehensive wellness in our modern era.

    This global phenomenon is now practiced in nearly every country worldwide. The United States leads with over 36 million practitioners, followed by European nations like Germany, France and the UK, where yoga studios flourish. Australia and Canada have embraced yoga as part of mainstream wellness culture. In Asia, China, Japan and Singapore have seen exponential growth in yoga adoption, while traditional practices continue in Nepal and Sri Lanka. Middle Eastern countries like UAE and Israel host thriving yoga communities. Even conflict zones like Syria and Ukraine use yoga for trauma relief. African countries like South Africa, Kenya and Nigeria show growing interest.

    From megacities to remote villages, yoga’s universal appeal transcends borders, cultures and religions, making it truly global while maintaining its Indian spiritual roots. The UN’s recognition through International Yoga Day, has further cemented its worldwide acceptance as a great tool for holistic health.

  • Zelenskiy leaves G7 with no Trump meeting or fresh arms support from US

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy left the Group of Seven summit on Tuesday with new aid from host Canada for its war against Russia but said diplomacy is in “crisis” having missed the chance to press U.S. President Donald Trump for more weapons.

    The G7 wealthy nations struggled to find unity over the conflict in Ukraine after Trump expressed support for Russian President Vladimir Putin and left a day early to address the Israel-Iran conflict from Washington.

    A Canadian official initially said Ottawa had dropped plans for the G7 to issue a strong statement on the war in Ukraine after resistance from the United States.

    Emily Williams, director of media relations for Prime Minister Mark Carney, later said no proposed statement on Ukraine had ever been planned.

    Carney had started the day by announcing Ottawa would provide C$2 billion ($1.47 billion) in new military assistance for Kyiv as well as impose new financial sanctions.

    Zelenskiy said he had told the G7 leaders that “diplomacy is now in a state of crisis” and said they need to continue calling on Trump “to use his real influence” to force an end to the war, in a post on his Telegram account.

    Although Canada is one of Ukraine’s most vocal defenders, its ability to help it is far outweighed by the United States, the largest arms supplier to Kyiv. Zelenskiy had said he hoped to talk to Trump about acquiring more weapons.

    After the summit in the Rocky Mountain resort area of Kananaskis concluded, Carney issued a chair statement summarizing deliberations.

    “G7 leaders expressed support for President Trump’s efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine,” it said.

    “They recognized that Ukraine has committed to an unconditional ceasefire, and they agreed that Russia must do the same. G7 leaders are resolute in exploring all options to maximize pressure on Russia, including financial sanctions.”

    Canada holds the rotating G7 presidency this year. Other leaders do not need to sign off on G7 chair statements.

    Trump did agree to a group statement published on Monday calling for a resolution of the Israel-Iran conflict.

    “We had a declaration given the exceptional, fast moving situation in Iran,” Carney told a closing news conference.

    A European official said leaders had stressed to Trump their plans to be hard on Russia and Trump seemed impressed, though he does not like sanctions in principle.

    Three European diplomats said they had heard signals from Trump that he wanted to raise pressure on Putin and consider a U.S. Senate bill drafted by Senator Lindsey Graham, but that he had not committed to anything.

    “I am returning to Germany with cautious optimism that decisions will also be made in America in the coming days to impose further sanctions against Russia,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said.

    G7 leaders agreed on six other statements, about migrant smuggling, artificial intelligence, critical minerals, wildfires, transnational repression and quantum computing.

    KREMLIN SAYS G7 LOOKS ‘RATHER USELESS’

    Trump said on Monday he needed to be back in Washington as soon as possible due to the situation in the Middle East, where escalating attacks between Iran and Israel have raised risks of a broader regional conflict.

    A White House official on Tuesday said Trump explained that he returned to the U.S. because it is better to hold high-level National Security Council meetings in person, rather than over the phone.

    Upon arriving at the summit, Trump said that the then-Group of Eight had been wrong to expel Russia after Putin ordered the occupation of Crimea in 2014.

    The Kremlin said on Tuesday that Trump was right and said the G7 was no longer significant for Russia and looked “rather useless.”

    Many leaders had hoped to negotiate trade deals with Trump, but the only deal signed was the finalization of the U.S.-UK deal announced last month. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent remained at the summit after Trump left.

    Carney also invited non-G7 members Mexico, India, Australia, South Africa, South Korea and Brazil, as he tries to shore up alliances elsewhere and diversify Canada’s exports away from the United States.

    Carney warmly welcomed Indian counterpart Narendra Modi on Tuesday, after two years of tense relations between Canada and India.

    (Reuters)

  • Zelenskiy leaves G7 with no Trump meeting or fresh arms support from US

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy left the Group of Seven summit on Tuesday with new aid from host Canada for its war against Russia but said diplomacy is in “crisis” having missed the chance to press U.S. President Donald Trump for more weapons.

    The G7 wealthy nations struggled to find unity over the conflict in Ukraine after Trump expressed support for Russian President Vladimir Putin and left a day early to address the Israel-Iran conflict from Washington.

    A Canadian official initially said Ottawa had dropped plans for the G7 to issue a strong statement on the war in Ukraine after resistance from the United States.

    Emily Williams, director of media relations for Prime Minister Mark Carney, later said no proposed statement on Ukraine had ever been planned.

    Carney had started the day by announcing Ottawa would provide C$2 billion ($1.47 billion) in new military assistance for Kyiv as well as impose new financial sanctions.

    Zelenskiy said he had told the G7 leaders that “diplomacy is now in a state of crisis” and said they need to continue calling on Trump “to use his real influence” to force an end to the war, in a post on his Telegram account.

    Although Canada is one of Ukraine’s most vocal defenders, its ability to help it is far outweighed by the United States, the largest arms supplier to Kyiv. Zelenskiy had said he hoped to talk to Trump about acquiring more weapons.

    After the summit in the Rocky Mountain resort area of Kananaskis concluded, Carney issued a chair statement summarizing deliberations.

    “G7 leaders expressed support for President Trump’s efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine,” it said.

    “They recognized that Ukraine has committed to an unconditional ceasefire, and they agreed that Russia must do the same. G7 leaders are resolute in exploring all options to maximize pressure on Russia, including financial sanctions.”

    Canada holds the rotating G7 presidency this year. Other leaders do not need to sign off on G7 chair statements.

    Trump did agree to a group statement published on Monday calling for a resolution of the Israel-Iran conflict.

    “We had a declaration given the exceptional, fast moving situation in Iran,” Carney told a closing news conference.

    A European official said leaders had stressed to Trump their plans to be hard on Russia and Trump seemed impressed, though he does not like sanctions in principle.

    Three European diplomats said they had heard signals from Trump that he wanted to raise pressure on Putin and consider a U.S. Senate bill drafted by Senator Lindsey Graham, but that he had not committed to anything.

    “I am returning to Germany with cautious optimism that decisions will also be made in America in the coming days to impose further sanctions against Russia,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said.

    G7 leaders agreed on six other statements, about migrant smuggling, artificial intelligence, critical minerals, wildfires, transnational repression and quantum computing.

    KREMLIN SAYS G7 LOOKS ‘RATHER USELESS’

    Trump said on Monday he needed to be back in Washington as soon as possible due to the situation in the Middle East, where escalating attacks between Iran and Israel have raised risks of a broader regional conflict.

    A White House official on Tuesday said Trump explained that he returned to the U.S. because it is better to hold high-level National Security Council meetings in person, rather than over the phone.

    Upon arriving at the summit, Trump said that the then-Group of Eight had been wrong to expel Russia after Putin ordered the occupation of Crimea in 2014.

    The Kremlin said on Tuesday that Trump was right and said the G7 was no longer significant for Russia and looked “rather useless.”

    Many leaders had hoped to negotiate trade deals with Trump, but the only deal signed was the finalization of the U.S.-UK deal announced last month. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent remained at the summit after Trump left.

    Carney also invited non-G7 members Mexico, India, Australia, South Africa, South Korea and Brazil, as he tries to shore up alliances elsewhere and diversify Canada’s exports away from the United States.

    Carney warmly welcomed Indian counterpart Narendra Modi on Tuesday, after two years of tense relations between Canada and India.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: PM meeting with President Lee Jae Myung of the Republic of Korea: 17 June 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    PM meeting with President Lee Jae Myung of the Republic of Korea: 17 June 2025

    The Prime Minister met President Lee Jae Myung of the Republic of Korea at the G7 Summit

    The Prime Minister met President Lee Jae Myung of the Republic of Korea at the G7 Summit this afternoon and congratulated him on his recent election victory.

    Both leaders agreed to aim to complete the upgrade the existing Free Trade Agreement between the two countries as soon as possible.

    They also agreed on the need to cooperate on addressing the climate crisis and reducing carbon emissions. 

    Finally, the leaders discussed support for Ukraine and the challenges posed by Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

    Updates to this page

    Published 18 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • India never accepted mediation, does not accept it, will never accept it: PM Modi to Trump

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in a strong message to Washington, told US President Donald Trump that India rejects any form of mediation on issues concerning Pakistan, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said in a statement on Wednesday.

    Reiterating India’s long-standing position, Misri said, “Prime Minister Modi stressed that India has never accepted mediation, does not accept it, and will never accept it. There is complete political unanimity in India on this issue.”

    According to the foreign secretary, the two leaders spoke over the phone for 35 minutes — their first conversation since the Pahalgam terror attack and India’s response through Operation Sindoo

    The call took place after a scheduled in-person meeting between the two leaders on the sidelines of the G7 Summit was cancelled due to Trump’s early return to the US.

    “The phone conversation was held at the request of President Trump,” said Misri, adding that PM Modi used the opportunity to detail India’s measured military response to the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, which killed 26 tourists.

    “Prime Minister Modi said that on the night of May 6-7, India had targeted only terrorist hideouts in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. India’s actions were very measured, precise, and non-escalatory,” Misri said.

    “India had made it clear that it would respond to Pakistan’s ‘goli’ with ‘gola’ — a strong, proportionate military response,” he added.

    The foreign secretary also said that on the night of May 9, US Vice President Vance conveyed to PM Modi that Pakistan could launch a major retaliatory strike.

    “Prime Minister Modi told him clearly that if this happened, India would respond with even greater force. India’s strong counterattack on the night of May 9-10 May caused heavy damage to Pakistan’s military. Several of their airbases were rendered inoperable,” Misri said. He noted that, following India’s retaliation, Pakistan approached India with a ceasefire request.

    “Prime Minister Modi stated that the ceasefire was agreed to only at Pakistan’s request and that India does not want mediation. He made it clear that at no point during this episode were India-US trade talks or third-party mediation discussed,” Misri said.

    “The halt to military action was discussed directly between the two countries through existing military channels,” he added.

    President Trump, according to Misri, fully understood India’s position and expressed support for its fight against terrorism. The prime minister also informed Trump that India would consider any terror act emanating from Pakistan as an act of war, and that Operation Sindoor remains ongoing.

    Apart from regional security, the two leaders also discussed broader international developments, including the Iran-Israel conflict and the Russia-Ukraine war. Both leaders agreed on the need for direct dialogue between Moscow and Kyiv.

    “They also discussed the Indo-Pacific and the vital role of the QUAD. The PM invited President Trump to India for the next QUAD summit, and President Trump accepted the invitation,” Misri said.

    President Trump also invited PM Modi to visit Washington, but due to a pre-existing schedule, PM Modi was unable to accept the invitation. Both leaders agreed to meet in the near future, Misri said.

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: MITP – Moldova’s Digital Engine Accelerates: Record Results In 2024 And Projections Of 1 Billion Euros In Revenues For 2025

    Source: Moldova Innovation Technology Park

    Chisinau, Moldova — The IT sector contributes 6% to the national GDP – a result that reflects the efficiency and impact of the ecosystem created by the Moldova Innovation Technology Park (MITP). The data were presented by Marina Bzovîi, Administrator of MITP, at the Moldova Digital Summit 2025, confirming the essential role of the Park in the digital transformation of the Republic of Moldova. With 2024 marked by record performance, MITP expects a clear upward trajectory for 2025, supported by the accelerated expansion of the resident base and the increase in revenues generated by the IT sector.

    Unprecedented growth: 533 resident companies in a single year

    Currently, Moldova Innovation Technology Park brings together over 2,370 resident companies, of which 533 joined in 2024 alone – the largest annual advance since the park’s launch. This record growth reflects Moldova’s growing attractiveness for international investors and technology companies looking for a stable, competitive and future-oriented environment.

    The MITP model offers a unique framework in the region: an ultra-competitive tax regime with a flat tax of only 7%, VAT exemptions and simplified contributions, which allows companies to focus on growth and innovation. These conditions are guaranteed by law until 2035, providing investors not only with incentives, but also with long-term predictability.

    MITP is 100% virtual, allowing remote operation without the obligation of a physical presence in the Republic of Moldova — a key advantage in an era where remote work is becoming the global norm. In addition, initiatives such as the Visa IT program facilitate the attraction of international talent, ensuring quick and legal access to the global workforce.

    In this modern and well-connected ecosystem, residents benefit from quality digital infrastructure, constant dialogue with the authorities and specialized support for international expansion. It is no coincidence that more and more companies from Romania and Ukraine are choosing to relocate to Moldova, in search of a more efficient, flexible and innovation-friendly space.

    MITP is no longer just a tax-advantaged framework — it’s a complete platform for accelerated growth, global connection, and sustainable digital transformation.

    The park hosts companies with capital from 43 countries, most of them from Ukraine and Romania.

    “The regional geopolitical context has had a major impact. If in 2021 only three Ukrainian companies were registered in the MITP, in 2024 their number increased 14 times, reaching 42, amid strategic relocations caused by the war. In the same period, the presence of companies with Romanian capital has almost doubled, boosted by the recent tax changes in Romania applied to the IT sector. Today, there are 41 companies in Romania in MITP”,

    said Marina Bzovîi, MITP Administrator.

    IT sector – a force in the economy: 6.3% of GDP

    The contribution of the IT sector to the national economy has increased significantly, reaching 6.3% of GDP in 2024, according to preliminary estimates, compared to 1.8% in 2015. This remarkable evolution is a direct result of the expansion of tech companies, favorable fiscal policies and the sustained attraction of foreign investment.

    “For 2025, we estimate that the revenues generated by MITP resident companies will reach 1 billion euros, with an increase of approximately 30% compared to 2024, when they totaled 785 million euros. It is a clear confirmation of the potential for sustainable growth and the value that the IT sector brings to the Moldovan economy”,

    said Nadejda Hodus, Financial Manager MITP.

    IT exports – Moldova, regional leader in growth rate

    Exports of IT services increased spectacularly, reaching 523 million euros in 2023, 10 times more than in 2015 (53 million euros). Although the absolute volume is lower than that reported by countries such as Romania (7.5 billion euros) or Ukraine (6 billion euros), Moldova’s growth rate is the fastest in the region.

    “This performance is all the more impressive as Moldova is a small country, both in terms of territory and population. MITP’s development model proves to be an efficient and sustainable one, transforming Moldova into a regional digital hub with strategic potential”,

    added Nadejda Hodus.

    Record contributions to the state budget

    The economic impact of the MITP is also directly felt in the revenues of the National Public Budget. In 2024, resident companies contributed €78 million – four times more than in 2017. About 50% of these amounts come from newly established businesses after the launch of the park.

    According to a recent analysis conducted by MITP, the contributions paid by resident companies could cover up to 16% of the national expenditure on health care and about 90% of the financing of vocational higher education – an eloquent illustration of the real economic impact generated by the IT sector in the Republic of Moldova.

    “Through these results, MITP imposes itself not only as a successful model in the region, but also as an example of effective public policy, which creates jobs, attracts investments and amplifies the country’s digital competitiveness. With clear objectives and a sustained pace of development, Moldova is getting closer to becoming a regional pole of innovation and technology”,

    concluded the Administrator of Moldova Innovation Technology Park, Marina Bzovîi.

    About Moldova Innovation Technology Park (MITP)

    Launched in 2016, MITP is Moldova’s national platform dedicated to the tech industry, offering a unique 7% tax regime and 100% virtual operation. With more than 2,300 resident companies in 43 countries, MITP contributes significantly to the national GDP and attracts global investment. Supported by legislative guarantees until 2035, the park promotes innovation, IT exports and Moldova’s integration into the European digital economy.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News

  • MIL-OSI Global: US and Iran have a long, complicated history, spanning far beyond Israel’s strikes on Tehran

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jeffrey Fields, Professor of the Practice of International Relations, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

    People observe fire and smoke from an Israeli airstrike on an oil depot in Tehran, Iran, on June 15, 2025. Stringer/Getty Images

    Relations between the United States and Iran have been fraught for decades – at least since the U.S. helped overthrow a democracy-minded prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh, in August 1953. The U.S. then supported the long, repressive reign of the Shah of Iran, whose security services brutalized Iranian citizens for decades.

    The two countries have been particularly hostile to each other since Iranian students took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in November 1979, resulting in economic sanctions and the severing of formal diplomatic relations between the nations.

    Since 1984, the U.S. State Department has listed Iran as a “state sponsor of terrorism,” alleging the Iranian government provides terrorists with training, money and weapons.

    Some of the major events in U.S.-Iran relations highlight the differences between the nations’ views, but others arguably presented real opportunities for reconciliation.

    1953: US overthrows Mossadegh

    Mohammed Mossadegh.
    Wikimedia Commons

    In 1951, the Iranian Parliament chose a new prime minister, Mossadegh, who then led lawmakers to vote in favor of taking over the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, expelling the company’s British owners and saying they wanted to turn oil profits into investments in the Iranian people. The U.S. feared disruption in the global oil supply and worried about Iran falling prey to Soviet influence. The British feared the loss of cheap Iranian oil.

    President Dwight Eisenhower decided it was best for the U.S. and the U.K. to get rid of Mossadegh. Operation Ajax, a joint CIA-British operation, convinced the Shah of Iran, the country’s monarch, to dismiss Mossadegh and drive him from office by force. Mossadegh was replaced by a much more Western-friendly prime minister, handpicked by the CIA.

    Demonstrators in Tehran demand the establishment of an Islamic republic.
    AP Photo/Saris

    1979: Revolutionaries oust the shah, take hostages

    After more than 25 years of relative stability in U.S.-Iran relations, the Iranian public had grown unhappy with the social and economic conditions that developed under the dictatorial rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

    Pahlavi enriched himself and used American aid to fund the military while many Iranians lived in poverty. Dissent was often violently quashed by SAVAK, the shah’s security service. In January 1979, the shah left Iran, ostensibly to seek cancer treatment. Two weeks later, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile in Iraq and led a drive to abolish the monarchy and proclaim an Islamic government.

    Iranian students at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran show a blindfolded American hostage to the crowd in November 1979.
    AP Photo

    In October 1979, President Jimmy Carter agreed to allow the shah to come to the U.S. to seek advanced medical treatment. Outraged Iranian students stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran on Nov. 4, taking 52 Americans hostage. That convinced Carter to sever U.S. diplomatic relations with Iran on April 7, 1980.

    Two weeks later, the U.S. military launched a mission to rescue the hostages, but it failed, with aircraft crashes killing eight U.S. servicemembers.

    The shah died in Egypt in July 1980, but the hostages weren’t released until Jan. 20, 1981, after 444 days of captivity.

    An Iranian cleric, left, and an Iranian soldier wear gas masks to protect themselves against Iraqi chemical-weapons attacks in May 1988.
    Kaveh Kazemi/Getty Images

    1980-1988: US tacitly sides with Iraq

    In September 1980, Iraq invaded Iran, an escalation of the two countries’ regional rivalry and religious differences: Iraq was governed by Sunni Muslims but had a Shia Muslim majority population; Iran was led and populated mostly by Shiites.

    The U.S. was concerned that the conflict would limit the flow of Middle Eastern oil and wanted to ensure the conflict didn’t affect its close ally, Saudi Arabia.

    The U.S. supported Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in his fight against the anti-American Iranian regime. As a result, the U.S. mostly turned a blind eye toward Iraq’s use of chemical weapons against Iran.

    U.S. officials moderated their usual opposition to those illegal and inhumane weapons because the U.S. State Department did not “wish to play into Iran’s hands by fueling its propaganda against Iraq.” In 1988, the war ended in a stalemate. More than 500,000 military and 100,000 civilians died.

    1981-1986: US secretly sells weapons to Iran

    The U.S. imposed an arms embargo after Iran was designated a state sponsor of terrorism in 1984. That left the Iranian military, in the middle of its war with Iraq, desperate for weapons and aircraft and vehicle parts to keep fighting.

    The Reagan administration decided that the embargo would likely push Iran to seek support from the Soviet Union, the U.S.’s Cold War rival. Rather than formally end the embargo, U.S. officials agreed to secretly sell weapons to Iran starting in 1981.

    The last shipment, of anti-tank missiles, was in October 1986. In November 1986, a Lebanese magazine exposed the deal. That revelation sparked the Iran-Contra scandal in the U.S., with Reagan’s officials found to have collected money from Iran for the weapons and illegally sent those funds to anti-socialist rebels – the Contras – in Nicaragua.

    At a mass funeral for 76 of the 290 people killed in the shootdown of Iran Air 655, mourners hold up a sign depicting the incident.
    AP Photo/CP/Mohammad Sayyad

    1988: US Navy shoots down Iran Air flight 655

    On the morning of July 8, 1988, the USS Vincennes, a guided missile cruiser patrolling in the international waters of the Persian Gulf, entered Iranian territorial waters while in a skirmish with Iranian gunboats.

    Either during or just after that exchange of gunfire, the Vincennes crew mistook a passing civilian Airbus passenger jet for an Iranian F-14 fighter. They shot it down, killing all 290 people aboard.

    The U.S. called it a “tragic and regrettable accident,” but Iran believed the plane’s downing was intentional. In 1996, the U.S. agreed to pay US$131.8 million in compensation to Iran.

    1997-1998: The US seeks contact

    In August 1997, a moderate reformer, Mohammad Khatami, won Iran’s presidential election.

    U.S. President Bill Clinton sensed an opportunity. He sent a message to Tehran through the Swiss ambassador there, proposing direct government-to-government talks.

    Shortly thereafter, in early January 1998, Khatami gave an interview to CNN in which he expressed “respect for the great American people,” denounced terrorism and recommended an “exchange of professors, writers, scholars, artists, journalists and tourists” between the United States and Iran.

    However, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei didn’t agree, so not much came of the mutual overtures as Clinton’s time in office came to an end.

    In his 2002 State of the Union address, President George W. Bush characterized Iran, Iraq and North Korea as constituting an “Axis of Evil” supporting terrorism and pursuing weapons of mass destruction, straining relations even further.

    Inside these buildings at the Natanz nuclear facility in Iran, technicians enrich uranium.
    AP Photo/Vahid Salemi

    2002: Iran’s nuclear program raises alarm

    In August 2002, an exiled rebel group announced that Iran had been secretly working on nuclear weapons at two installations that had not previously been publicly revealed.

    That was a violation of the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which Iran had signed, requiring countries to disclose their nuclear-related facilities to international inspectors.

    One of those formerly secret locations, Natanz, housed centrifuges for enriching uranium, which could be used in civilian nuclear reactors or enriched further for weapons.

    Starting in roughly 2005, U.S. and Israeli government cyberattackers together reportedly targeted the Natanz centrifuges with a custom-made piece of malicious software that became known as Stuxnet.

    That effort, which slowed down Iran’s nuclear program was one of many U.S. and international attempts – mostly unsuccessful – to curtail Iran’s progress toward building a nuclear bomb.

    2003: Iran writes to Bush administration

    An excerpt of the document sent from Iran, via the Swiss government, to the U.S. State Department in 2003, appears to seek talks between the U.S. and Iran.
    Washington Post via Scribd

    In May 2003, senior Iranian officials quietly contacted the State Department through the Swiss embassy in Iran, seeking “a dialogue ‘in mutual respect,’” addressing four big issues: nuclear weapons, terrorism, Palestinian resistance and stability in Iraq.

    Hardliners in the Bush administration weren’t interested in any major reconciliation, though Secretary of State Colin Powell favored dialogue and other officials had met with Iran about al-Qaida.

    When Iranian hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president of Iran in 2005, the opportunity died. The following year, Ahmadinejad made his own overture to Washington in an 18-page letter to President Bush. The letter was widely dismissed; a senior State Department official told me in profane terms that it amounted to nothing.

    Representatives of several nations met in Vienna in July 2015 to finalize the Iran nuclear deal.
    Austrian Federal Ministry for Europe, Integration and Foreign Affairs/Flickr

    2015: Iran nuclear deal signed

    After a decade of unsuccessful attempts to rein in Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the Obama administration undertook a direct diplomatic approach beginning in 2013.

    Two years of secret, direct negotiations initially bilaterally between the U.S. and Iran and later with other nuclear powers culminated in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, often called the Iran nuclear deal.

    Two years of secret, direct negotiations conducted bilaterally at first between the U.S. and Iran and later with other nuclear powers culminated in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, often called the Iran nuclear deal.

    Iran, the U.S., China, France, Germany, Russia and the United Kingdom signed the deal in 2015. It severely limited Iran’s capacity to enrich uranium and mandated that international inspectors monitor and enforce Iran’s compliance with the agreement.

    In return, Iran was granted relief from international and U.S. economic sanctions. Though the inspectors regularly certified that Iran was abiding by the agreement’s terms, President Donald Trump withdrew from the agreement in May 2018.

    2020: US drones kill Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani

    An official photo from the Iranian government shows Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who was killed in a Jan. 3 drone strike ordered by President Donald Trump.
    Iranian Supreme Leader Press Office/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

    On Jan. 3, 2020, an American drone fired a missile that killed Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the leader of Iran’s elite Quds Force. Analysts considered Soleimani the second most powerful man in Iran, after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.

    At the time, the Trump administration asserted that Soleimani was directing an imminent attack against U.S. assets in the region, but officials have not provided clear evidence to support that claim.

    Iran responded by launching ballistic missiles that hit two American bases in Iraq.

    2023: The Oct. 7 attacks on Israel

    Hamas’ brazen attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, provoked a fearsome militarized response from Israel that continues today and served to severely weaken Iran’s proxies in the region, especially Hamas – the perpetrator of the attacks – and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

    2025: Trump 2.0 and Iran

    Trump saw an opportunity to forge a new nuclear deal with Iran and to pursue other business deals with Tehran. Once inaugurated for his second term, Trump appointed Steve Witkoff, a real estate investor who is the president’s friend, to serve as special envoy for the Middle East and to lead negotiations.

    Negotiations for a nuclear deal between Washington and Tehran began in April, but the countries did not reach a deal. They were planning a new round of talks when Israel struck Iran with a series of airstrikes on June 13, forcing the White House to reconsider is position.

    Jeffrey Fields receives funding from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and Schmidt Futures.

    ref. US and Iran have a long, complicated history, spanning far beyond Israel’s strikes on Tehran – https://theconversation.com/us-and-iran-have-a-long-complicated-history-spanning-far-beyond-israels-strikes-on-tehran-259240

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: WATCH: Padilla Delivers Floor Speech Following His Forcible Removal From DHS Press Conference

    US Senate News:

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

    WATCH: Padilla Delivers Floor Speech Following His Forcible Removal From DHS Press Conference

    WATCH: Padilla: “If this Administration is this afraid of just one Senator with a question, colleagues, imagine what the voices of tens of millions of Americans peacefully protesting can do.”
     
    “If that is what the Administration is willing to do to a United States Senator for having the [audacity] to simply ask a question, imagine what they’ll do to any American who dares to speak up. If what you saw happen can happen when the cameras are on, imagine not only what can happen — but what is happening — in so many places where there are no cameras.”
     
    Video of Senator Padilla’s full speech can be viewed here and downloaded here.

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee, spoke on the Senate floor following his forcible removal from Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem’s press conference, where he was thrown to the ground and handcuffed after attempting to ask a question. Padilla delivered a strong rebuke to the Trump Administration’s unprecedented militarization of Los Angeles and called for his colleagues on both sides of the aisle, as well as the American people, to speak up against Trump’s abuse of power.

    Last week, Trump deployed approximately 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 active-duty Marines to Los Angeles amid unrest caused by his indiscriminate immigration raids across the region. Padilla flew to Los Angeles to conduct oversight over the Trump Administration’s unprecedented military deployment to California — without Governor Newsom’s consent — and was in the high-security Los Angeles Federal Building for a scheduled oversight meeting with the commanding general in charge of the military presence in the region before law enforcement escorted him into Secretary Noem’s briefing room.

    • The Trump Administration has done everything in their power but to provide transparency to the American people about their mission in Los Angeles. And so last week, I chose to go home to try to get answers from the Administration as they are literally militarizing our city.”
    • “I want to share what I learned. I want to share what I heard because it should shock the conscience of our country.

    In the hopes of learning new information after having his requests ignored for months, Padilla tried to ask a question in response to Noem’s demonizing rhetoric toward immigrants and Los Angeles’ democratically elected leadership.

    • “At one point, the United States Secretary of Homeland Security said that the purpose of federal law enforcement and the purpose of the United States military was to ‘liberate’ Los Angeles from our governor and our mayor. To somehow liberate us from the very people that we democratically elected to lead our city and our state.
    • “Colleagues, let that fundamentally un-American mission statement sink in. That is not a mission focused on public safety. And that simply is not, and cannot be, the mission of federal law enforcement and the United States military.
    • To my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, are we truly prepared to live in a country where the President can deploy the Armed Forces to decide which duly elected governors and mayors should be allowed to lead their constituents? Is that really the precedent that we’re okay with setting?”
    • “Throughout the country’s history, we’ve had conflict, we’ve had tumult, but we’ve never had a tyrant as a commander-in-chief.

    Padilla detailed his own background as the proud son of immigrants from Mexico who left behind his MIT engineering degree to protest against the vile anti-immigrant rhetoric in the 1990s that a Republican governor up for reelection spread across California. He said he felt he had to speak out against the Trump Administration’s “un-American” scapegoating of immigrants and California, and detailed the violent reaction to his question.

    • So last week, when I heard something so blatantly un-American from the Secretary of Homeland Security, a cabinet official — of course I was compelled, both as a Senator and as an American, to speak up.
    • “But before I could even get out my question, I was physically and aggressively forced out of the room — even as I repeatedly announced I was a United States Senator, and I had a question for the Secretary. And even as the National Guardsman and the FBI agent who served as my escorts and brought me into that press briefing room stood by, silently, knowing full well who I was.”
    • You’ve seen the video. I was pushed and pulled, struggled to maintain my balance. I was forced to the ground — first on my knees and then flat on my chest. And as I was handcuffed and marched down a hallway, repeatedly asking why am I being detained, not once did they tell me why.

    Padilla expressed his gratitude for the immense support for him and his family that poured in since his forcible removal. However, he emphasized that this fight was not about him but about the fundamental democratic rights of all Americans across the country.

    • “If you watched what unfolded last week and thought what happened is just about one politician and one press conference, you’re missing the point.”
    • If that is what the Administration is willing to do to a United States Senator for having the [audacity] to simply ask a question, imagine what they’ll do to any American who dares to speak up. If what you saw happen can happen when the cameras are on, imagine not only what can happen — but what is happening — in so many places where there are no cameras.
    • “Colleagues, this isn’t about me. In fact, it’s not just about immigrant communities or even just the State of California. It’s about every single American who values their Constitutional rights. It’s about anyone who’s ever exercised their First Amendment rights, or anyone who’s ever disagreed with a president, or anyone who simply values our democracy and wants to keep it.

    Padilla set the record straight on Republican misinformation on undocumented immigrants as Trump has used the same playbook when the headlines turn against him: scapegoat immigrants and manufacture a crisis. Public reporting shows that the majority of immigrants currently in ICE custody have no prior criminal conviction, and under 10 percent of immigrants taken into ICE custody since October have serious criminal convictions. Yet, President Trump has blamed immigrants to distract from his failed policies, including Republicans’ billionaire-first budget reconciliation bill that would cut critical services like health care and nutrition for millions of working families across the country.

    As President Trump takes unprecedented action to militarize Los Angeles without justification or the Governor’s request, Padilla warned of the stakes for cities across the United States and American democracy.

    • “Donald Trump is continuing to test the boundaries of his power. And he’s surrounded himself with yes-men and underqualified attack dogs — from the DHS Secretary to the FBI Director to the Secretary of Defense — who will rubberstamp every anti-democratic step he takes.”
    • “This Administration’s officials and maybe not all, but many Republicans in Congress may choose not to do their job, but they cannot stop me from doing mine.”
    • Again, if you really think this is just about immigrants and immigration, it’s time to wake up. What’s happening is not just a threat to California; it’s a threat to everyone in every state. If Donald Trump can bypass the Governor and activate the National Guard to put down protests on immigrant rights, he can do it to suppress your rights, too. If he can deploy the Marines to Los Angeles without justification, he can deploy them to your state, too. And if he can ignore due process, strip away First Amendment rights, and disappear people to foreign prisons without their day in court, he can do it to you too.”
    • “California is just the test case for the rest of the country. Last week for many was a warning shot. But I pray that it also serves as a wakeup call.

    Padilla concluded his speech with a call to action for Angelenos and millions of Americans to stand up and keep peacefully protesting against the Trump Administration’s attack on fundamental rights.

    • “It doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican, or a Democrat, or an Independent — we all have a responsibility to speak up and to push back, before it’s too late. So I do encourage people to keep peacefully protesting. There’s nothing more patriotic than to peacefully protest for your rights.”
    • Because no one will liberate Los Angeles but Angelenos. No one will redeem America but Americans. No one is coming to save us but us.
    • “And we know that the cameras are not on in every corner of the country. But if this Administration is this afraid of just one Senator with a question, colleagues, imagine what the voices of tens of millions of Americans peacefully protesting can do.

    Senator Padilla has been outspoken in calling out the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in Los Angeles and Trump’s misguided deployment of the National Guard and U.S. Marine Corps. This weekend, Padilla led the entire Senate Democratic Caucus in demanding that President Trump immediately withdraw all military forces from Los Angeles and cease all threats to deploy the National Guard or active-duty servicemembers to American cities. Last week, Padilla and Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) demanded answers regarding the Trump Administration’s decision to deploy approximately 700 Marines to Los Angeles. Padilla has spoken at a spotlight hearing and on the Senate floor multiple times to blast President Trump for manufacturing a crisis by launching indiscriminate ICE raids across Los Angeles and deploying the National Guard and active-duty servicemembers to the region. He also joined all Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats today in calling on Chairman Grassley to schedule Department of Homeland Security Secretary Noem for a broad oversight hearing for testimony before the committee.

    Padilla’s full remarks as prepared for delivery are available below:

    [Mr./Madam] President,

    Over the last two weeks in Los Angeles – my hometown – we’ve seen masked federal agents in tactical gear ordered into our communities . . .

    We’ve seen a disturbing pattern of extreme and cruel immigration enforcement operations, targeting non-violent people at places of worship, schools, and courthouses.

    All to meet an arbitrary quota.

    Now, we’re seeing President Trump federalize and deploy the National Guard without the Governor’s consent . . .

    Active-duty Marines have been deployed, escalating tensions in our city . . .

    All without coordination with the state and local law enforcement.

    Despite repeated requests for justification for these extreme actions…and after months of little to no response from the Administration on their aggressive and theatrical immigration raids…

    The Trump administration has done everything in their power BUT provide transparency to the American people about their mission in Los Angeles.

    So last week, I went home to try to get answers from the administration as they militarize our city.

    What I heard should shock the conscience of our country.

    One of the first items on my schedule last Thursday was a meeting with General Guillot, the four-star general in charge of U.S. Northern Command at the Federal Building in west Los Angeles, where they are overseeing these military operations.

    When the United States military is deployed domestically…

    When our own troops are deployed against the wishes of the Governor for the first time since 1965, against the wishes of the mayor, against even the wishes of local law enforcement — then we’re in uncharted territory.

    So in an effort to do my duty to conduct congressional oversight — and to try to get answers from the Department of Defense that state and local officials were not receiving— I went to the federal building in West LA.

    I was met at the entrance by a National Guardsman and an FBI agent, who escorted me through the security screening and up to a conference room for my scheduled briefing.

    While waiting for my scheduled briefing with General Guillot, I learned that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was holding a press conference just down the hall and that the press conference was causing my briefing to be delayed.

    The thought occurred to me that maybe I could attend and listen in, in the hopes of hearing Secretary Noem provide some new information that could help us make sense of what was happening.

    I asked and was escorted by my National Guard and FBI escorts into the press conference. They opened the door for me. They accompanied me into the press briefing room.

    It was there that I listened as the United States Secretary of Homeland Security said that the purpose of federal law enforcement and the United States military was to “liberate” Los Angeles from our governor and our mayor . . .

    . . . To somehow liberate us from the very people we democratically elected to lead our city and our state.

    Colleagues, let that fundamentally un-American mission statement sink in.

    That’s not a mission focused on public safety.

    That simply is not, and cannot be, the mission of federal law enforcement and the United States military.

    To my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, are you truly prepared to live in a country where the President can deploy the armed forces to decide which duly elected governors and mayors should be allowed to lead their constituents?

    Is that really the precedent you’re okay with setting?

    As Secretary Noem herself said last year when serving as Governor of South Dakota, “If Joe Biden federalizes the National Guard, that would be a direct attack on states’ rights.”

    Throughout the country’s history, we’ve had conflict, and we’ve had tumult. But we have never had a tyrant as a commander-in-chief.

    That’s not by coincidence!

    It’s because the American people have always been willing to speak up and exercise their First Amendment right to protest – especially when our fundamental rights have been threatened.

    As the proud son of immigrants from Mexico, it’s that same right I came to revere when marching through the streets of Los Angeles in 1994 alongside friends and family protesting against the vile anti-immigrant rhetoric that was growing in California.

    It was that year that a Republican Governor up for reelection and down in the polls, turned to scapegoating immigrants to try to improve his political standing.

    That fight is what got me to leave an engineering career behind and dedicate myself to influencing government and politics. So, I’ve seen this before. Californians have seen this before.

    So last week, when I heard something so blatantly un-American from the Secretary of Homeland Security — I was compelled, both as a Senator AND as an American, to speak up.

    But before I could even get out my question, I was physically and aggressively forced out of the room — even as I announced I was a United States Senator, and I had a question for the Secretary.

    And even as the National Guardsman and FBI agent who escorted me into the press conference stood by, silently, knowing full well who I was.

    You’ve seen the video.

    I was pushed and pulled, struggling to maintain my balance.

    I was forced to the ground — first to my knees and then flat on my chest.

    As I was handcuffed and marched down a hallway, I repeatedly asked why I was being detained. Not once did they tell me why.

    In that moment, a lot of questions run through your head.

    Where are they taking me?

    Am I being arrested?

    What will a city already on edge from being militarized think when they see their Senator has been handcuffed just for trying to ask a question? Or . . .

    What will my wife and our three boys think?

    I also remember asking myself: if this aggressive escalation is the result of speaking up against the abuses and overreach of the Trump administration, was it really worth it?

    But colleagues, how many Americans in our nation’s history have marched, have protested, have shed blood and lost their lives to protect our rights?

    How many Americans have served in wars overseas to protect our freedoms here at home?

    And how many Americans in the year 2025 see a vindictive president on a tour of retribution, unrestrained by the majority of this separate but co-equal branch of government in this building, and wonder if it’s worth it to stand up or to speak out?

    If a United States Senator is too afraid to speak up, how can we expect any other American to do the same?

    Colleagues, you know me.

    I’m not aware of anyone who would describe me as a flamethrower. I try to be respectful and considerate to every member of this body— regardless of your politics.

    So I want to thank all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who reached out to share messages of support — whether it was public or in private.

    In means a great deal to me and my family.

    But if you watched what unfolded last week and thought this was about one politician or one press conference, you’re missing the point.

    If that’s what this Administration will do to a United States Senator for having the audacity to simply ask a question, imagine what they’ll do to any American who dares to speak up.

    If that’s what can happen when the cameras are on, imagine not only what can happen — but what is happening — when the cameras are off.

    This isn’t about me. In fact, it’s not even just about immigrant communities or about Californians.

    It’s about every single American who values their constitutional rights. It’s about anyone who’s ever exercised their First Amendment rights, or ever disagreed with a president, or who simply values living in a democracy and wants to keep it.

    The President will tell you this is about undocumented immigrants, and about law and order and about targeting dangerous, violent criminals.

    But we know differently.

    Public data released by the administration shows that the majority of immigrants currently in ICE custody do not have a prior criminal conviction.

    And new reporting shows that less than 10 percent of immigrants taken into ICE custody since October have serious criminal convictions.

    Less than 10 percent!

    Two weeks ago, Donald Trump was at the lowest point in his presidency so far.

    He was drowning in a week of terrible headlines.

    The American people were finally waking up to the realities of the budget reconciliation bill that will cut health care, nutrition assistance, and good paying clean energy jobs in order to cut taxes for billionaires.

    He was losing his tariff wars as the costs of everyday goods were continuing to rise.

    His promises to end Russia’s invasion of Ukraine were falling flat.

    He’d been handed loss after loss in federal court.

    And maybe the most embarrassing part was his public breakup with Elon Musk.

    But we know what happens when the headlines turn on Donald Trump. Donald Trump turns to the same tired playbook he always has: when in doubt, scapegoat immigrants. And manufacture a crisis to distract the media from your failures.

    That’s the reason he ramped up ICE raids in California.

    And when Californians took to the streets to peacefully protest, that’s the reason he bypassed the Governor and federalized the National Guard. And as things began to settle in Los Angeles, he escalated even further by sending in the Marines.

    He wants the spectacle — not just to distract, but to justify his undemocratic crackdowns and his authoritarian power grabs.

    That’s the reason why even while the vast majority of protests have remained peaceful, the President, the Vice President, and their allies have called protestors insurrectionists!

    Yes, this is the same man who provoked an actual insurrection on our Capitol on January 6th.

    The same man who incited a violent mob, carrying confederate flags, against Congress.

    The same man who then pardoned the convicted felons who assaulted our brave Capitol Police officers.

    Trump is testing the boundaries of his power. And he’s surrounded himself with yes-men and underqualified attack dogs — from the DHS Secretary to the FBI Director to the Secretary of Defense — who will rubberstamp every anti-democratic step he takes.

    This Administration’s officials and Congressional Republicans may choose not to do their job, but they cannot stop me from doing mine.

    And I refuse to let immigrants be pawns on the path to fascism.

    Again, if you really think this is just about immigrants, it’s time to wake up.

    What’s happening isn’t just a threat to California, it’s a threat to everyone in every state.

    If Donald Trump can bypass the Governor and activate the National Guard to put down protests for immigrant rights, he can do it to suppress your rights, too.

    If he can deploy Marines to Los Angeles without justification, he can deploy them to your city, too.

    If he can ignore due process, strip away First Amendment rights, and disappear people to foreign prisons without their day in court, he can do it to you too.

    California is just Trump’s test case for the rest of the country.

    Last week was a warning shot.

    But I pray that it can be our wakeup call, too.

    We’ve now seen Trump threaten to do the same in other cities run by elected Democrats.

    It doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican, a Democrat, or an independent — we all have a responsibility to speak up and to push back, before it’s too late.

    So I encourage people to keep peacefully protesting. There’s nothing more patriotic than peacefully protesting for your rights.

    No one will liberate Los Angeles but Angelenos.

    No one will redeem America but Americans.

    No one is coming to save us but us.

    The cameras won’t always be on.

    But if this Administration is this scared of just one Senator with a question, imagine what the voices of tens of millions of Americans in the streets can do.

    Thank you, [Mr./Madam] President, I yield the floor.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: The Middle East is a major flight hub. How do airlines keep passengers safe during conflict?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Natasha Heap, Program Director for the Bachelor of Aviation, University of Southern Queensland

    Screenshot June 17 2025, Courtesy of Flightradar24

    The Middle East is a region of intense beauty and ancient kingdoms. It has also repeatedly endured periods of geopolitical instability over many centuries.

    Today, geopolitical, socio-political and religious tensions persist. The world is currently watching as longstanding regional tensions come to a head in the shocking and escalating conflict between Israel and Iran.

    The global airline industry takes a special interest in how such tensions play out. This airspace is a crucial corridor linking Europe, Asia and Africa.

    The Middle East is now home to several of the world’s largest international airlines: Emirates, Qatar Airways and Etihad Airways. These airlines’ home bases – Dubai, Doha and Abu Dhabi, respectively – have become pivotal hubs in international aviation.

    Keeping passengers safe will be all airlines’ highest priority. What could an escalating conflict mean for both the airlines and the travelling public?

    Safety first

    History shows that the civil airline industry and military conflict do not mix. On July 3 1988, the USS Vincennes, a US navy warship, fired two surface-to-air missiles and shot down Iran Air Flight 655, an international passenger service over the Persian Gulf.

    More recently, on July 17 2014, Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 was shot down over eastern Ukraine as the battle between Ukrainian forces and pro-Russian separatists continued.

    Understandably, global airlines are very risk-averse when it comes to military conflict. The International Civil Aviation Organization requires airlines to implement and maintain a Safety Management System (SMS).

    One of the main concerns – known as “pillars” – of the SMS is “safety risk management”. This includes the processes to identify hazards, assess risks and implement risk mitigation strategies.

    The risk-management departments of airlines transiting the Middle East region will have been working hard on these strategies.

    Headquartered in Montreal, Canada, the International Civil Aviation Organization has strict requirements and protocols to keep passengers safe.
    meunierd/Shutterstock

    Route recalculation

    The most immediate and obvious evidence of such strategies being put in place are changes to aircraft routing, either by cancelling or suspending flights or making changes to the flight plans. This is to ensure aircraft avoid the airspace where military conflicts are flaring.

    At the time of writing, a quick look at flight tracking website Flightradar24 shows global aircraft traffic avoiding the airspace of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Israel, Jordan, Palestine and Lebanon. The airspace over Ukraine is also devoid of air traffic.

    Rerouting, however, creates its own challenges. Condensing the path of the traffic into smaller, more congested areas can push aircraft into and over areas that are not necessarily equipped to deal with such a large increase in traffic.

    Having more aircraft in a smaller amount of available safe airspace creates challenges for air traffic control services and the pilots operating the aircraft.

    More time and fuel

    Avoiding areas of conflict is one of the most visible forms of airline risk management. This may add time to the length of a planned flight, leading to higher fuel consumption and other logistical challenges. This will add to the airlines’ operating costs.

    There will be no impact on the cost of tickets already purchased. But if the instability in the region continues, we may see airline ticket prices increase.

    It is not just the avoidance of airspace in the region that could place upward pressure on the cost of flying. Airliners run on Jet-A1 fuel, produced from oil.

    If Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz, the “world’s most important oil transit chokepoint”, this could see the cost of oil, and in turn Jet-A1, significantly increase. Increasing fuel costs will be passed on the paying passenger. However, some experts believe such a move is unlikely.

    A major hub

    The major aviation hubs in the Middle East provide increased global connectivity, enabling passengers to travel seamlessly between continents.

    Increased regional instability has the potential to disrupt this global connectivity. In the event of a prolonged conflict, airlines operating in and around the region may find they have increased insurance costs. Such costs would eventually find their way passed on to consumers through higher ticket prices.

    The Middle East is a major connecting hub for global aviation.
    Art Konovalov/Shutterstock

    Passenger confidence

    Across the globe, airlines and governments are issuing travel advisories and warnings. The onus is on the travelling public to stay informed about changes to flight status, and potential delays.

    Such warnings and advisories can lead to a drop in passenger confidence, which may then lead to a drop in bookings both into and onwards from the region.

    Until the increase in instability in the Middle East, global airline passenger traffic numbers were larger than pre-pandemic figures. Strong growth had been predicted in the coming decades.

    Anything that results in falling passenger confidence could negatively impact these figures, leading to slowed growth and affecting airline profitability.

    Despite high-profile disasters, aviation remains the safest form of transport. As airlines deal with these challenges they will constantly work to keep flights safe and to win back passenger confidence in this unpredictable situation.

    Natasha Heap 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. The Middle East is a major flight hub. How do airlines keep passengers safe during conflict? – https://theconversation.com/the-middle-east-is-a-major-flight-hub-how-do-airlines-keep-passengers-safe-during-conflict-259034

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Prime Minister Carney concludes 2025 G7 Leaders’ Summit

    Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

    In an increasingly dangerous and divided world, co-operation with reliable partners is more important than ever. With G7 partners, Canada will build a new era of collaboration – one rooted in mutual support and resilient partnerships. Canada is ready to lead.

    Today, the Prime Minister, Mark Carney, concluded his participation in the 2025 G7 Leaders’ Summit in Kananaskis, Alberta. Under Canada’s Presidency, this G7 deepened co-operation with joint statements in the following areas: 

    Prime Minister Carney also announced the following measures in support of Ukraine:

    • Sanctions on individuals, entities, and vessels that continue to support Russia’s aggression in Ukraine.
    • An additional $2 billion in military assistance this year.
    • The disbursement of a $2.3 billion loan to Ukraine through the G7 Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration Loans mechanism.
    • The allocation of $57.4 million in security-related assistance.

    Canada will also be taking action to build stronger economies and international systems:

    • $391.3 million to catalyze private capital toward economic growth and development projects around the world.
    • Up to $185.6 million to accelerate the adoption and commercialization of artificial intelligence.
    • $120.4 million to global wildfire prevention, response, and recovery.
    • $80.3 million to build reliable critical minerals supply chains.
    • $22.5 million to accelerate the development and use of quantum technologies.
    • Up to $544 million in guarantees for new development financing in Latin America and the Caribbean.

    While our threats cross borders, so do our partnerships and opportunities. In these areas of common interest, Canada is leading G7 co-operation to deliver stability, security, and prosperity. 

    Quote

    “In Kananaskis, Canada’s Presidency showed that we’re ready to create new international partnerships, deepen alliances, and lead member nations into a new era of global co-operation. Canada has the resources the world wants and the values to which others aspire. Canada is meeting this moment with purpose and strength.”

    Related Products

    Associated Link

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI: Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP Announces Regular Quarterly Cash Distribution and Listing For Sale of Vantage at Fair Oaks

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    OMAHA, Neb., June 17, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP (NYSE: GHI) (the “Partnership”) announced that the Board of Managers of Greystone AF Manager LLC (“Greystone Manager”) declared a cash distribution to the Partnership’s Beneficial Unit Certificate (“BUC”) holders of $0.30 per BUC.

    The cash distribution will be paid on July 31, 2025 to all BUC holders of record as of the close of trading on June 30, 2025. The BUCs will trade ex-distribution as of June 30, 2025.

    Commenting on the Partnership’s quarterly distribution, Chief Executive Officer Ken Rogozinski stated, “Persistently high interest rates, coupled with higher capitalization rates, have combined to create a more muted environment for sales of certain high quality joint venture properties within our investment portfolio, particularly in Texas markets. As a result, we are reducing our quarterly distribution to appropriately align with the current operating environment. Our quarterly distribution equates to a 9.5% annualized distribution yield based on our net book value as of March 31, 2025, which we believe is attractive in the current operating environment.”

    Greystone Manager is the general partner of America First Capital Associates Limited Partnership Two, the Partnership’s general partner. Distributions to the Partnership’s BUC holders, including regular and any supplemental distributions, are determined by Greystone Manager based on a disciplined evaluation of the Partnership’s current and anticipated operating results, financial condition and other factors it deems relevant. Greystone Manager continually evaluates the factors that go into BUC holder distribution decisions, consistent with the long-term best interests of the BUC holders and the Partnership.

    The Partnership also announced that Vantage at Fair Oaks, a 288-unit market rate multifamily property located in Boerne, TX (the “Property”), was publicly listed for sale by Institutional Property Advisors Texas at the direction of the Property-owning entity’s managing member. The Partnership’s non-controlling investment in the Property was originated in September 2021 and the Partnership contributed equity totaling $12.0 million to date. Construction of the Property was completed in May 2023. Consistent with past Vantage property sales, the managing member controls the listing and sales process under the terms of the Property-owning entity’s operating agreement, with the Partnership entitled to certain net proceeds upon the successful completion of the sale of the Property.

    About Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP

    Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP was formed in 1998 under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act for the primary purpose of acquiring, holding, selling and otherwise dealing with a portfolio of mortgage revenue bonds which have been issued to provide construction and/or permanent financing for affordable multifamily, seniors and student housing properties. The Partnership is pursuing a business strategy of acquiring additional mortgage revenue bonds and other investments on a leveraged basis. The Partnership expects and believes the interest earned on these mortgage revenue bonds is excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes. The Partnership seeks to achieve its investment growth strategy by investing in additional mortgage revenue bonds and other investments as permitted by its Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement, dated December 5, 2022, (the “Partnership Agreement”), taking advantage of attractive financing structures available in the securities market, and entering into interest rate risk management instruments. Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP press releases are available at www.ghiinvestors.com.

    Safe Harbor Statement

    Certain statements in this press release are intended to be covered by the safe harbor for “forward-looking statements” provided by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements generally can be identified by use of statements that include, but are not limited to, phrases such as “believe,” “expect,” “future,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “foresee,” “may,” “should,” “will,” “estimates,” “potential,” “continue,” or other similar words or phrases. Similarly, statements that describe objectives, plans, or goals also are forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and are generally beyond the control of the Partnership. The Partnership cautions readers that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, implied, or projected by such forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: defaults on the mortgage loans securing our mortgage revenue bonds and governmental issuer loans; the competitive environment in which the Partnership operates; risks associated with investing in multifamily, student, senior citizen residential properties and commercial properties; general economic, geopolitical, and financial conditions, including the current and future impact of changing interest rates, inflation, and international conflicts (including the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war) on business operations, employment, and financial conditions; uncertain conditions within the domestic and international macroeconomic environment, including monetary and fiscal policy and conditions in the investment, credit, interest rate, and derivatives markets; adverse reactions in U.S. financial markets related to actions of foreign central banks or the economic performance of foreign economies, including in particular China, Japan, the European Union, and the United Kingdom; the general condition of the real estate markets in the regions in which the Partnership operates, which may be unfavorably impacted by pressures in the commercial real estate sector, incrementally higher unemployment rates, persistent elevated inflation levels, and other factors; changes in interest rates and credit spreads, as well as the success of any hedging strategies the Partnership may undertake in relation to such changes, and the effect such changes may have on the relative spreads between the yield on investments and cost of financing; the aggregate effect of elevated inflation levels over the past several years, spurred by multiple factors including expansionary monetary and fiscal policy, higher commodity prices, a tight labor market, and low residential vacancy rates, which may result in continued elevated interest rate levels and increased market volatility; the Partnership’s ability to access debt and equity capital to finance its assets; current maturities of the Partnership’s financing arrangements and the Partnership’s ability to renew or refinance such financing arrangements; local, regional, national and international economic and credit market conditions; recapture of previously issued Low Income Housing Tax Credits in accordance with Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code; geographic concentration of properties related to investments held by the Partnership; changes in the U.S. corporate tax code and other government regulations affecting the Partnership’s business; and the other risks detailed in the Partnership’s SEC filings (including but not limited to, the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and Current Reports on Form 8-K). Readers are urged to consider these factors carefully in evaluating the forward-looking statements.

    If any of these risks or uncertainties materializes or if any of the assumptions underlying such forward-looking statements proves to be incorrect, the developments and future events concerning the Partnership set forth in this press release may differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these statements, which speak only as of the date of this document. We anticipate that subsequent events and developments will cause our expectations and beliefs to change. The Partnership assumes no obligation to update such forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this document or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, unless obligated to do so under the federal securities laws.

    MEDIA CONTACT:
    Karen Marotta
    Greystone
    212-896-9149
    Karen.Marotta@greyco.com
     
    INVESTOR CONTACT:
    Andy Grier
    Senior Vice President
    402-952-1235
     

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP Announces Regular Quarterly Cash Distribution and Listing For Sale of Vantage at Fair Oaks

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    OMAHA, Neb., June 17, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP (NYSE: GHI) (the “Partnership”) announced that the Board of Managers of Greystone AF Manager LLC (“Greystone Manager”) declared a cash distribution to the Partnership’s Beneficial Unit Certificate (“BUC”) holders of $0.30 per BUC.

    The cash distribution will be paid on July 31, 2025 to all BUC holders of record as of the close of trading on June 30, 2025. The BUCs will trade ex-distribution as of June 30, 2025.

    Commenting on the Partnership’s quarterly distribution, Chief Executive Officer Ken Rogozinski stated, “Persistently high interest rates, coupled with higher capitalization rates, have combined to create a more muted environment for sales of certain high quality joint venture properties within our investment portfolio, particularly in Texas markets. As a result, we are reducing our quarterly distribution to appropriately align with the current operating environment. Our quarterly distribution equates to a 9.5% annualized distribution yield based on our net book value as of March 31, 2025, which we believe is attractive in the current operating environment.”

    Greystone Manager is the general partner of America First Capital Associates Limited Partnership Two, the Partnership’s general partner. Distributions to the Partnership’s BUC holders, including regular and any supplemental distributions, are determined by Greystone Manager based on a disciplined evaluation of the Partnership’s current and anticipated operating results, financial condition and other factors it deems relevant. Greystone Manager continually evaluates the factors that go into BUC holder distribution decisions, consistent with the long-term best interests of the BUC holders and the Partnership.

    The Partnership also announced that Vantage at Fair Oaks, a 288-unit market rate multifamily property located in Boerne, TX (the “Property”), was publicly listed for sale by Institutional Property Advisors Texas at the direction of the Property-owning entity’s managing member. The Partnership’s non-controlling investment in the Property was originated in September 2021 and the Partnership contributed equity totaling $12.0 million to date. Construction of the Property was completed in May 2023. Consistent with past Vantage property sales, the managing member controls the listing and sales process under the terms of the Property-owning entity’s operating agreement, with the Partnership entitled to certain net proceeds upon the successful completion of the sale of the Property.

    About Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP

    Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP was formed in 1998 under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act for the primary purpose of acquiring, holding, selling and otherwise dealing with a portfolio of mortgage revenue bonds which have been issued to provide construction and/or permanent financing for affordable multifamily, seniors and student housing properties. The Partnership is pursuing a business strategy of acquiring additional mortgage revenue bonds and other investments on a leveraged basis. The Partnership expects and believes the interest earned on these mortgage revenue bonds is excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes. The Partnership seeks to achieve its investment growth strategy by investing in additional mortgage revenue bonds and other investments as permitted by its Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement, dated December 5, 2022, (the “Partnership Agreement”), taking advantage of attractive financing structures available in the securities market, and entering into interest rate risk management instruments. Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP press releases are available at www.ghiinvestors.com.

    Safe Harbor Statement

    Certain statements in this press release are intended to be covered by the safe harbor for “forward-looking statements” provided by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements generally can be identified by use of statements that include, but are not limited to, phrases such as “believe,” “expect,” “future,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “foresee,” “may,” “should,” “will,” “estimates,” “potential,” “continue,” or other similar words or phrases. Similarly, statements that describe objectives, plans, or goals also are forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and are generally beyond the control of the Partnership. The Partnership cautions readers that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, implied, or projected by such forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: defaults on the mortgage loans securing our mortgage revenue bonds and governmental issuer loans; the competitive environment in which the Partnership operates; risks associated with investing in multifamily, student, senior citizen residential properties and commercial properties; general economic, geopolitical, and financial conditions, including the current and future impact of changing interest rates, inflation, and international conflicts (including the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war) on business operations, employment, and financial conditions; uncertain conditions within the domestic and international macroeconomic environment, including monetary and fiscal policy and conditions in the investment, credit, interest rate, and derivatives markets; adverse reactions in U.S. financial markets related to actions of foreign central banks or the economic performance of foreign economies, including in particular China, Japan, the European Union, and the United Kingdom; the general condition of the real estate markets in the regions in which the Partnership operates, which may be unfavorably impacted by pressures in the commercial real estate sector, incrementally higher unemployment rates, persistent elevated inflation levels, and other factors; changes in interest rates and credit spreads, as well as the success of any hedging strategies the Partnership may undertake in relation to such changes, and the effect such changes may have on the relative spreads between the yield on investments and cost of financing; the aggregate effect of elevated inflation levels over the past several years, spurred by multiple factors including expansionary monetary and fiscal policy, higher commodity prices, a tight labor market, and low residential vacancy rates, which may result in continued elevated interest rate levels and increased market volatility; the Partnership’s ability to access debt and equity capital to finance its assets; current maturities of the Partnership’s financing arrangements and the Partnership’s ability to renew or refinance such financing arrangements; local, regional, national and international economic and credit market conditions; recapture of previously issued Low Income Housing Tax Credits in accordance with Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code; geographic concentration of properties related to investments held by the Partnership; changes in the U.S. corporate tax code and other government regulations affecting the Partnership’s business; and the other risks detailed in the Partnership’s SEC filings (including but not limited to, the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and Current Reports on Form 8-K). Readers are urged to consider these factors carefully in evaluating the forward-looking statements.

    If any of these risks or uncertainties materializes or if any of the assumptions underlying such forward-looking statements proves to be incorrect, the developments and future events concerning the Partnership set forth in this press release may differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these statements, which speak only as of the date of this document. We anticipate that subsequent events and developments will cause our expectations and beliefs to change. The Partnership assumes no obligation to update such forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this document or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, unless obligated to do so under the federal securities laws.

    MEDIA CONTACT:
    Karen Marotta
    Greystone
    212-896-9149
    Karen.Marotta@greyco.com
     
    INVESTOR CONTACT:
    Andy Grier
    Senior Vice President
    402-952-1235
     

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Chair’s Summary

    Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

    The Leaders of the Group of Seven (G7) gathered in Kananaskis, Alberta, from June 15-17, 2025, with the objective of building stronger economies by making communities safer and the world more secure, promoting energy security and accelerating the digital transition, as well as fostering partnerships of the future.  

    Five decades after its founding in 1975, the G7 continues to demonstrate its value as a platform for advanced economies to coordinate financial and economic policy, address issues of peace and security, and cooperate with international partners in response to global challenges.  

    G7 Leaders focused on economic developments. In a context of rising market volatility and shocks to international trade, as well as longer-term trends toward fragmentation and global imbalances, they discussed the need for greater economic and financial stability, technological innovation, and an open and predictable trading regime to drive investment and growth. They considered ways to collaborate on global trade to boost productivity and grow their economies, emphasizing energy security and the digital transition. They acknowledged that both are underpinned by secure and responsible critical mineral supply chains and that more collaboration is required, within and beyond the G7. Leaders undertook to safeguard their economies from unfair non-market policies and practices that distort markets and drive overcapacity in ways that are harmful to workers and businesses. This includes de-risking through diversification and reduction of critical dependencies. Leaders welcomed the new Canada-led G7 initiative – the Critical Minerals Production Alliance – working with trusted international partners to guarantee supply for advanced manufacturing and defence.

    G7 Leaders expressed support for President Trump’s efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine. They recognized that Ukraine has committed to an unconditional ceasefire, and they agreed that Russia must do the same. G7 Leaders are resolute in exploring all options to maximize pressure on Russia, including financial sanctions. The G7 met with President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Mark Rutte to discuss their support for a strong and sovereign Ukraine, including budgetary defence and recovery and reconstruction support.

    G7 Leaders reiterated their commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East. They exchanged on the evolving situation, following Hamas’s terrorist attacks against Israel on October 7, 2023, and the active conflict between Israel and Iran. Leaders discussed the importance of unhindered humanitarian aid to Gaza, the release of all hostages and an immediate and permanent ceasefire. Leaders also talked about the need for a negotiated political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that achieves lasting peace. Leaders affirmed Israel’s right to defend itself, and were clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. They underlined the importance of protecting civilians. They expressed their readiness to coordinate to safeguard the stability of international energy markets. They urged that the resolution of this crisis leads to a broader de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East, including a ceasefire in Gaza. G7 Leaders released a statement on recent developments between Israel and Iran.

    Leaders highlighted the importance of a free, open, prosperous and secure Indo-Pacific, based on the rule of law, and discussed growing economic cooperation with the region. They stressed the importance of constructive and stable relations with China, while calling on China to refrain from market distortions and harmful overcapacity, tackle global challenges and promote international peace and security. Leaders discussed their ongoing serious concerns about China’s destabilizing activities in the East and South China Seas and the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. They expressed concern about DPRK’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs and the need to jointly address DPRK cryptocurrency thefts fueling these programs. The need to resolve the abductions issue was also raised. Leaders acknowledged the links between crisis theatres in Ukraine, the Middle East and Indo-Pacific. Leaders discussed other instances of crisis and conflict, including in Africa and Haiti. 

    The G7 Leaders underscored their resolve to ensure the safety and security of communities. They condemned foreign interference, underlining the unacceptable threat of transnational repression to rights and freedoms, national security and state sovereignty. Leaders highlighted the importance of ongoing collaboration to promote border security and counter migrant smuggling and illicit synthetic drug trafficking, noting recent successes. They stressed the need to work with countries of origin and transit countries. Leaders discussed the impacts of increasingly extreme weather events around the world. They highlighted the need for more international collaboration to prevent, fight and respond to wildfires, which are destroying homes and ecosystems, and driving pollution and emissions. 

    The G7 welcomed participation in the Summit by the President of South Africa, Matamela Cyril Ramaphosa, President of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, President of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, President of the Republic Korea, Lee Jae-myung, Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, and Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese, as well as UN Secretary General, António Guterres, and President of the World Bank, Ajaypal Singh Banga. Together, they identified ways to collaborate on energy security in a changing world, with a focus on advancing technology and innovation, diversifying and strengthening critical mineral supply chains, building infrastructure, and mobilizing investment. They discussed just energy transitions as well as sustainable and innovative solutions to boost energy access and affordability, while mitigating the impact on climate and the environment. They talked about the consequences of growing conflicts for shared prosperity, including energy security, and the need to work towards a shared peace. 

    Leaders and guests had a productive discussion on the importance of building coalitions with reliable partners – existing and new – that include the private sector, development finance institutions and multilateral development banks, to drive inclusive economic growth and advance sustainable development. The upcoming United Nations’ Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development was raised as an opportunity to continue these discussions, including on private capital mobilization. 

    G7 Leaders agreed to collaborate with partners on concrete outcomes that deliver for everyone. To this end, they agreed to six joint statements. Their commitments included: 

    • Securing high-standard critical mineral supply chains that power the economies of the future.
    • Driving secure, responsible and trustworthy AI adoption across public and private sectors, powering AI now and into the future, and closing digital divides.
    • Boosting cooperation to unlock the full potential of quantum technology to grow economies, solve global challenges and keep communities secure.
    • Mounting a multilateral effort to better prevent, fight and recover from wildfires, which are on the rise around the world.
    • Protecting the rights of everyone in society, and the fundamental principle of state sovereignty, by continuing to combat foreign interference, with a focus on transnational repression.
    • Countering migrant smuggling by dismantling transnational organized crime groups. 

    G7 Leaders welcomed the endorsement by many outreach partners of the Critical Minerals Action Plan and the Kananaskis Wildfire Charter. 

    Discussions at the Kananaskis Summit were informed by the recommendations of the G7 Gender Equality Advisory Council (GEAC), which stressed the social and economic benefits of gender equality, and of all G7 engagement groups. 

    The G7 remains committed to working with domestic and international stakeholders and partners, including local governments, Indigenous Peoples, civil society, industry and international organizations, to advance shared priorities. 

    The G7 will continue its work under Canada’s presidency throughout 2025, and looks forward to France’s leadership in 2026.

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI—Hagerty Joins America Reports on Fox News to Discuss Conflict in Middle East

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Tennessee Bill Hagerty

    WASHINGTON—Today, United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Appropriations, Banking, and Foreign Relations Committees and former U.S. Ambassador to Japan, joined America Reports on Fox News to discuss the conflict in the Middle East.

    *Click the photo above or here to watch*

    Partial Transcript

    Hagerty on Trump preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon: “What you’ve heard President [Donald] Trump say time and again, is that he’s not going to allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. I think you’ve also heard President Trump say that he doesn’t want us to engage in more of these endless wars. So, whatever President Trump does—and I know that he’s three steps ahead of everybody else here—whatever he does, it’s going to be putting America’s interest first. It’s going to be bringing Iran to a point where they do not have a nuclear weapon. That’s the stated objective, and it’s going to have to happen very, very quickly. I don’t think the timeframe that Senator [Tim] Kaine is considering is relevant to this situation at all. President Trump wants to see the carnage come to an end. He’s been clear about that here. He’s been clear about that with Ukraine. He wants to see the loss of lives over. This regime has been extremely difficult to deal with. I’ve seen President Trump deal with this regime before. I served in his administration last time. The ‘Maximum Pressure Campaign’ that he imposed was working. Regretfully, the Biden administration put us back on this same train that [former President Barack] Obama had us on, with respect to Iran marching its way toward a nuclear weapon. President Trump is not going to allow that to happen. He’s had a much more difficult hand to deal with here. That’s why the Israelis have stepped in. They’ve seen the threat. They’re doing what they need to do. And whatever decision President Trump takes, I can assure you this: he’s going to be taking America’s interest to heart. And again, basic principles here, he wants to see an end of the carnage. He wants to see that end come fast, and he’s not going to allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”

    Hagerty on the need to resolve the situation quickly: “What I want to be clear about is President Trump has never articulated the need for a regime change. What he wants to do is to bring the Iranians to the table. The Iranians ought to look at this very, very carefully and realize President Trump is not going to allow them to have a nuclear weapon. They may need to consider what the consequence will be if they don’t get to the table and make a deal fast. He’s offering them an offramp here. I think the window’s closing, though. This needs to be resolved quickly.”

    Hagerty on Trump’s America First approach: “I know who the person is responsible for making this decision with the United States. I’m not getting ahead of him. This is President Trump’s decision with respect to that. But I’ll say this: the Iranian people will ultimately make the decision, and if the Ayatollahs continue down this path toward a nuclear weapon, I think the decision’s going to become very clear for the Iranian people too. Again, the Ayatollahs need to wake up. They need to consider the options that they have right now, and those options have narrowed dramatically. This needs to stop, and I think President Trump’s going to make certain that it does in a way that advances America’s interests.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: PM meeting with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine: 17 June 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    PM meeting with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine: 17 June 2025

    The Prime Minister met President Zelenskyy of Ukraine at the G7 Summit this afternoon.

    The Prime Minister met President Zelenskyy of Ukraine at the G7 Summit this afternoon.

    Their meeting followed an extensive session with wider partners, focused on maintaining momentum to secure a just and lasting peace for Ukraine.

    The Prime Minister and President agreed to drive forward the next stage of military support – adding that a strong Ukraine is essential to guarantee peace in the long term. They agreed to convene the next Coalition of the Willing meeting in the coming weeks.

    They also discussed ramping up the economic pressure on Putin, with the Prime Minister updating the President on the new sanctions announced by the United Kingdom today.

    They agreed there should be no place to hide for those who fund Putin’s war machine.

    Updates to this page

    Published 17 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom