Category: Universities

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Design and Disability at the V&A is a rich, thought-provoking exhibition

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Laudan Nooshin, Professor of Music, School of Communication and Creativity, City St George’s, University of London

    One of the first things to greet visitors at the V&A’s new Design and Disability exhibition is a striking blue bench by artist Finnegan Shannon titled, Do You Want Us Here Or Not? This exhibit is a response to the often inadequate seating in museums, which not only acts as a barrier to accessibility for many people, but is more widely symptomatic of ableist approaches to museum and exhibition design.

    In this case, the invitation to “Please sit here!” sets the tone for the whole exhibition, which also includes a large sensory map of the layout (located at wheelchair level), a tactile map, and QR codes that link to audio description for blind and partially sighted visitors, and also British Sign Language interpretation.


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


    Aiming to showcase the radical contributions of disabled, deaf and neurodivergent people to design history and contemporary culture from the 1940s until the present, the exhibition goes well beyond this, addressing an impressively wide range of issues around access, disability and exclusion. It also reveals how ableism operates across a range of exclusions, such as race, gender, class and more.

    As the introductory notes point out: “Disabled people past and present have challenged and confronted the imbalance of design in society. This exhibition highlights disabled individuals at the heart of design history … It is both a celebration and a call to action.”

    While the fight for disability justice goes back many decades – also documented in the exhibition – it’s only relatively recently that questions of access and equality have gone beyond the physical. These include a wide range of issues related to neuro-inclusion and sensory access, including calm spaces and sensory maps that indicate noisy areas.

    My own interest in sound in museums has come partly out of research focusing on the role of acoustics in creating accessible spaces, and from my own experience of noise sensitivity conditions hyperacusis and misophonia. Inclusive sonic design seeks to address how sound operates as a factor of social inclusion and exclusion in places like museums.

    The V&A exhibition comprises three sections: visibility, tools and living. Visibility focuses on design and art as fundamental tools of activism and includes work created as part of disability justice movements over many decades. This section is a stark reminder of the justice and rights that only come about through extensive struggles.

    Tools highlight the extraordinary contribution to design innovation made by disabled people. Living explores stories of disabled people claiming space and imagining the worlds that they want to live in.

    Sections two and three both advocate for the social model of disability in which people are rendered disabled by their environment, something that calls for design solutions (as opposed to the medical model in which people are required to navigate and find solutions to their “problem”).

    The exhibition draws attention to a wide range of physical and sensory exclusions, both in the displays and the design of the space itself. The in-house design team includes staff with personal experience of disability who also worked closely with external partners living with disability.

    There are plenty of exhibits that can be experienced through touch. For partially sighted visitors, there are strong visual contrasts in the wall colours and the edges of displays are lit up. And there are raised edgings on all exhibits for people using a cane – all of which help with navigation.

    There are also quiet areas and plenty of seating. Some of these features are already being incorporated into gallery and exhibition design, and hopefully will soon become standard.

    I particularly liked the way various issues intersect in the exhibition, in which a range of exclusions are set alongside one another: race, hearing impairment, youth exclusion and stammering, for example.

    Other favourites included the B1 Blue Flame rattling football used for blind football, which visitors can pick up, feel, smell, shake and listen to. The Deaf Rave set and Woojer Vest are designed for deaf clubbers and performers and use vibrating tactile discs that amplify sound vibrations.

    The beautiful blanket and pillow entitled Public S/Pacing by Helen Statford offers an invitation to rest, drawing attention to “crip time”, accepting “a different pace to non-disabled norms, challenging conventions of productivity, and resting in radical ways that would actually benefit society at large”.

    The blanket highlights the failures of the design of public spaces to include disabled people, “challenging ableist assumptions with care and visibility”. The reverse of the blanket has a quotation from Rhiannon Armstrong’s Radical Act of Stopping (2016), embroidered by Poppy Nash.

    The exhibition includes many examples of “disability gain” by which design aimed at a particular group of people unintentionally benefits others, too. An example is the smartphone touchscreen, based on technology developed by engineers Wayne Westerman and John Elias as an alternative to the standard keyboard, which Westerman was unable to use due to severe hand pain.

    Initially marketed to people with hand disabilities, the technology was later sold to Apple where it revolutionised mobile phone technology.

    The final panel of the exhibition is titled Label for Missing Objects, an imaginative and fitting way to mark the continuing story of designing a world that works for “every body and every mind”.

    Design and Disability is a rich, thought-provoking and landmark exhibition. Kudos to the V&A, although its importance is so obvious, I wonder why it took this long to host a show dedicated to disabled artists and designers and the wider social impact of their work.

    I very much hope there are plans for the exhibition to tour the UK and beyond, and to become a permanent gallery at the V&A, so that it can inform curation and design work in other museums.

    Design and Disability at the V&A runs until February 15 2026.

    Laudan Nooshin received funding from the AHRC for the project Place-making Through Sound: Designing for Inclusivity and Wellbeing (2023-24).

    ref. Design and Disability at the V&A is a rich, thought-provoking exhibition – https://theconversation.com/design-and-disability-at-the-vanda-is-a-rich-thought-provoking-exhibition-261135

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Why Russia is not taking Trump’s threats seriously

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Patrick E. Shea, Senior Lecturer in International Relations and Global Governance, University of Glasgow

    The US president, Donald Trump, recently announced that Russia had 50 days to end its war in Ukraine. Otherwise it would face comprehensive secondary sanctions targeting countries that continued trading with Moscow.

    On July 15, when describing new measures that would impose 100% tariffs on any country buying Russian exports, Trump warned: “They are very biting. They are very significant. And they are going to be very bad for the countries involved.”

    Secondary sanctions do not just target Russia directly, they threaten to cut off access to US markets for any country maintaining trade relationships with Moscow. The economic consequences would affect global supply chains, targeting major economies like China and India that have become Russia’s commercial lifelines.

    Despite the dire threats, Moscow’s stock exchange increased by 2.7% immediately following Trump’s announcement. The value of the Russian rouble also strengthened. On a global scale, oil markets appear to have relaxed, suggesting traders see no imminent risks.


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


    This market reaction coincided with a nonplussed Moscow. While official statements noted that time was needed for Russia to “analyse what was said in Washington”, other statements suggested that the threats would have no effect. Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev, for example, declared on social media that “Russia didn’t care” about Trump’s threats.

    The positive market reaction and lack of panic from Russian officials tell us more than simple scepticism about Trump’s willingness to follow through.

    If investors doubted Trump’s credibility, we would expect market indifference, not enthusiasm. Instead, the reaction suggests that financial markets expected a stronger response from the US. As Artyom Nikolayev, an analyst from Invest Era, quipped: “Trump performed below market expectations.”

    A reprieve, not a threat

    Trump’s threat isn’t just non-credible – the positive market reaction in Russia suggests it is a gift for Moscow. The 50-day ultimatum is seen not as a deadline but as a reprieve, meaning nearly two months of guaranteed inaction from the US.

    This will allow Russia more time to press its military advantages in Ukraine without facing new economic pressure. Fifty days is also a long time in American politics, where other crises will almost certainly arise to distract attention from the war.

    More importantly, Trump’s threat actively undermines more serious sanctions efforts that were gaining momentum in the US Congress. A bipartisan bill has been advancing a far more severe sanctions package, proposing secondary tariffs of up to 500% and, crucially, severely limiting the president’s ability to waive them.

    By launching his own initiative, Trump seized control of the policy agenda. Once the ultimatum was issued, US Senate majority leader John Thune announced that any vote on the tougher sanctions bill would be delayed until after the 50-day period. This effectively pauses a more credible threat facing the Kremlin.

    This episode highlights a problem for US attempts to use economic statecraft in international relations. Three factors have combined to undermine the credibility of Trump’s threats.

    First, there is Trump’s own track record. Financial markets have become so accustomed to the administration announcing severe tariffs only to delay, water down or abandon them that the jibe “Taco”, short for “Trump always chickens out”, has gained traction in financial circles.

    This reputation for failing to stick to threats means that adversaries and markets alike have learned to price in a high probability of backing down.




    Read more:
    Investors are calling Trump a chicken – here’s why that matters


    Second, the administration’s credibility is weakened by a lack of domestic political accountability. Research on democratic credibility in international relations emphasises how domestic constraints – what political scientists call “audience costs” – can paradoxically strengthen a country’s international commitments.

    When leaders know they will face political punishment from voters or a legislature for backing down from a threat, their threats gain weight. Yet the general reluctance of Congress to constrain Trump undermines this logic. This signals to adversaries that threats can be made without consequence, eroding their effectiveness.

    And third, effective economic coercion requires a robust diplomatic and bureaucratic apparatus to implement and enforce it. The systematic gutting of the State Department and the freezing of United States Agency for International Development (USAID) programmes eliminate the diplomatic infrastructure necessary for sustained economic pressure.

    Effective sanctions require careful coordination with allies, which the Trump administration has undermined. In addition, effective economic coercion requires planning and credible commitment to enforcement, all of which are impossible without a professional diplomatic corps.

    Investors and foreign governments appear to be betting that this combination of presidential inconsistency, a lack of domestic accountability, and a weakened diplomatic apparatus makes any threat more political theatre than genuine economic coercion. The rally in Russian markets was a clear signal that American economic threats are becoming less feared.

    Patrick E. Shea 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. Why Russia is not taking Trump’s threats seriously – https://theconversation.com/why-russia-is-not-taking-trumps-threats-seriously-261296

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Estes Honors the Life of Intern Eric Tarpinian-Jachym on House Floor

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Ron Estes (R-Kansas)

    Estes Honors the Life of Intern Eric Tarpinian-Jachym on House Floor

    U.S. Congressman Ron Estes (R-Kansas) delivered remarks on the House floor honoring the life of Eric Tarpinian-Jachym. Eric was an intern in Rep. Estes’ office for the summer. He was killed in Washington, D.C., on June 30, 2025, as an innocent bystander. A moment of silence was held following Rep. Estes’ remarks. Read his remarks below and watch here.

    Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize and celebrate the life of Eric Jachym of Granby, Massachusetts, who was an intern in my office.  

    Eric’s life was tragically cut short by a senseless act of violence in our nation’s capital. Eric was an innocent bystander who was gunned down as he walked down the street less than one mile from the White House.

    I want to offer my prayers and condolences to Eric’s family, friends and loved ones. 

    Eric was a rising senior at the University of Massachusetts Amherst who came to Washington to participate in our government. 

    He was a kind and friendly presence in my office, greeting everyone who came through the door with a smile.

    The loss of Eric will be felt for a long time. We will never forget his presence and kindness in my office. Those he met in his short term in my office will never forget him either. 

    Eric Jachym was a dedicated, and thoughtful and kind person who loved our country, and he gave his life in the service of others. I thank him for his service and for the impact he made on our lives.

    May he rest in peace. 

    Mr. Speaker, I ask that the House observe a moment of silence to remember Eric Jachym. 

    Mr. Speaker, with that, I yield back.http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_rFD-BA-qc

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: My liberal vision for a thriving economy

    Source: Liberal Democrats UK

    Read Ed’s speech in full

    Thank you very much. It’s lovely to see you all this afternoon – as I hope to make a splash… this time, on dry land!

    I don’t know if someone planned it, or if it is just a coincidence that my speech on the economy comes a day after the Chancellor’s Mansion House speech. But I’m grateful both to the Chancellor for being my warm-up act, and to the IPPR for such a timely invitation.

    Let me start by taking you back 12 months…

    Just a few weeks after taking office, the Government quietly decided to cancel plans for a brand new “exascale” supercomputer at Edinburgh University – a supercomputer that could perform a billion billion calculations every second. 50 times more powerful than any computer in the UK. The announcement didn’t attract much attention at the time. It was rather overshadowed by Labour’s incomprehensible decision to withdraw the Winter Fuel Payment from millions of struggling pensioners. But just like Winter Fuel Payments, Ministers were forced to admit they’d made a mistake, and last month they U-turned on that decision too.

    So why am I talking to you about a supercomputer? Partly because I think that computer in Edinburgh, and other projects like it, will be essential to growing our economy over the years and decades ahead. If we are going to support Britain’s amazing tech start-ups and scale-ups… If we are going to attract investment and entrepreneurs from around the world… If we are going to be the home of the next big breakthroughs in science and medicine and artificial intelligence… Then we have to show that we are absolutely committed to investing in the digital infrastructure that those companies and researchers need.

    So I am glad that Ministers U-turned, but they cost that project a year. And we all know that in the world of scientific and technological innovation – especially when it comes to artificial intelligence – a year is an awfully long time to lose. 

    But the other reason I bring up that story is that I think it encapsulates what has gone so badly wrong in government over the past year – especially when it comes to fixing the economy. Labour came into office, opened the books, and found a terrible mess left by the Conservative Party. In this case, Conservative Ministers had announced a new £800 million supercomputer in a glittering press release full of boosterish language and self-congratulation. Just one problem: the project was completely unfunded. So, faced with the challenge of finding the money to make this crucial investment, Labour chose short-term penny-pinching instead.

    Just like when it came to Winter Fuel Payments, or bus fares, or family farms, or Personal Independence Payments, or the National Insurance hike that is hurting British businesses so badly. Mistakes made by a government with no vision for our economy, no strategy for growth. Just a desire to find some cash to keep the Treasury spreadsheet happy, no matter what.

    Now let me be clear: fiscal responsibility is essential. The Conservatives showed what happens when you let borrowing spiral out of control and don’t grow the economy.

    Borrowing more than £100 billion a year, just to pay the interest on our existing debts. More than the entire education budget. Enough to fund the whole of the National Health Service for six months. At a time when government debt is 100% of national income. So managing the public finances carefully, to bring down those borrowing costs and the national debt, and to give businesses the confidence they need to invest, is critically important.

    Yet in truth, this started before the last Conservative Government – even before the 2008 financial crisis. For decades now, Britain’s long-term fiscal future has been weakened because the big budget challenges haven’t been faced up to – by governments or oppositions. And I think a key reason for this is the way we do the Budget itself.

    The Treasury, hoarding power behind those intimidating walls on Horse Guards Road. The Chancellor, emerging every six months to make a fiscal statement, with a new set of forecasts and a scorecard of policies carefully tuned to meet her fiscal rules. And then what? No real debate.

    In theory, MPs have to approve spending for each individual department every year. It’s called the “estimates” process. In practice, it’s a sham. Last month, Parliament “approved” £1.1 trillion in government spending with just three hours of debate. That’s about £6 billion every minute. So instead of real debate and scrutiny, all we get is endless speculation about what new black hole the Chancellor will face in six months’ time, and what tweaks she will make to bring the numbers back into line. 

    Having tough fiscal rules and sticking to them is critical. But the way we scrutinise the budgets prepared to meet those rules, is nothing short of lamentable. And we need nothing less than a major overhaul of the whole system.

    I think we should look at a budget process more like the one Sweden brought in when it faced its own budget crisis in the early nineties. When its debt soared to just over 70% of GDP. Now the Swedish Parliament gets to debate the Government’s budget – and can propose alternatives and amendments – before it is finalised, and gets a proper period of scrutiny and accountability in the months that follow. And now, Sweden’s debt is down to 30% of GDP.

    It matters how a country takes its decisions on the budget. It may be less exciting, but process matters. So I think we should put more power in MPs’ hands to hold the Treasury and every Department properly to account on behalf of our constituents. Supported by a new Office of the Taxpayer, based in Parliament. That alone would rock Whitehall to its core. It would make MPs roll up their sleeves, get their hands dirty and take more responsibility. The trade-offs and choices that get hidden and ignored by Britain’s opaque system, would become stark and unavoidable. And without such a major system change like this, I fear British politics will never deliver the fiscal responsibility so desperately needed.

    But let’s remember: fiscal responsibility alone is a means to an end. Not the end in itself. And certainly no substitute for an economic vision. You won’t be surprised to hear that my economic vision is a liberal one. With free trade, investment in education, support for enterprise. And rigorous competition policy to stop bigger businesses rigging the system. But if we are to build a liberal economy, we have to start with a clear-eyed analysis of where liberal economic policies have gone wrong in recent years.

    We cannot celebrate the advances in overall prosperity without recognising that, too often, that prosperity has not been properly shared. Individuals, communities – even whole regions have been left behind. Boris Johnson’s point about the need to “level up” was right, even if the execution left a lot to be desired. People from all over the world have enriched our economy and our society – but when governments lose control of immigration, as they so clearly did under the same Boris Johnson, it can impose social and financial costs too. And sometimes comfort and complacency has led liberal economists to neglect the importance of security. Food security. Personal security. National security.

    Our new liberal economics can’t afford to repeat those mistakes. It can’t be about going back to the world as it was – before Trump, before Covid, before Brexit, before the crash. What we need is Liberal Economics 2.0. Retaining all that worked so brilliantly in version one. But recognising its errors and correcting them, too. Grasping the new realities of our changing world – from AI to climate change, to demographic trends that make the fiscal outlook even more challenging. From the need to increase defence spending to the strength of new economic superpowers like China and India. 

    The era of interdependence is over. We need cooperation, but not dependence.

    But even in this new world, some old truths remain. Some are even truer than before. Like the importance of trade.

    Trade was how Victorian Liberals overturned protectionism imposed by the Tories – to usher in a period of free trade and growth. We champion free trade because it enlarges individual freedom. As one of my predecessors as Liberal leader put it – free trade “gives the freest play to individual energy and initiative and character, and the largest liberty both to producer and consumer”. And of course, free trade brings growth and lowers the cost of living.

    That is why we opposed the Conservatives’ Brexit deal – the biggest and most destructive act of protectionism in our lifetime. It’s why Liberal Democrats have pressed for a new bespoke UK-EU Customs Union. Why we are pressing Labour to go well beyond its timid “reset” with Europe and tear down Tory trade barriers as quickly as possible. To free British businesses from reels of costly red tape and bring down prices in our shops. And why Liberal Democrats are arguing for a new economic coalition of the willing, for more free trade not just with Europe, but with Commonwealth allies, and Asian allies too.

    The anti-free trade politics of Donald Trump have to be taken on. We can’t let the tariff man’s bullying approach to trade and geopolitics succeed. We know where that ends. That’s why appeasing the White House isn’t smart. Remember, Donald Trump isn’t forever. And as ordinary Americans suffer the costs of his idiocy, the tide will turn. Let the Conservatives and Nigel Farage champion Trump. We Liberal Democrats will champion Britain, and defend free trade so hard-won by those nineteenth century Liberals. 

    The party of trade. And as Liberals, we are also the party of people. Because underpinning our vision for the economy is an understanding of what the economy really is. It isn’t just a series of abstract percentages and meaningless slogans. We understand that, when you strip everything else away, an economy is its people.

    So growing the economy means getting the right people, with the right skills, in the right jobs. That starts with a new approach to education and training – which across the UK has got narrower and narrower, when the rest of the world has got broader.

    But my local university, Kingston, is reversing that trend with its Future Skills programme. Every undergraduate – whatever they are studying – now also studies everything from creative problem solving to digital competency and artificial intelligence, from empathy to resilience, from adaptability to being enterprising. Skills they need. And skills businesses say they want. That’s the kind of education I want for all our young people. And anyone else who wants it later in life.

    And because the economy is about people, I believe that means that to get growth, to boost productivity, we need to focus far more on incentives. We need to build an incentive economy. An economy that gets the incentives right – to motivate people, to encourage people, to reward people who do their bit and play by the rules. And to stop people who break the rules.

    In Government, Liberal Democrats focused on getting the incentives right. Introducing the pupil premium. An incentive for schools to take more of the most disadvantaged children – and focus on them. Raising the personal income tax allowance by four thousand pounds. Taking the lowest paid out of income tax. Incentivising work for everyone, but especially the less well-off. So the Liberal Democrat record shows we’ve long been the party of incentives – and so many of our big ideas today are about how we encourage people to do the right thing.

    When it comes to backing Britain’s small and growing businesses, for example. The start-ups and scale-ups. The entrepreneurs and the self-employed. They are the engines of our economy, the beating heart of local communities, but they’ve been so let down in recent years. Just remember how the Conservative Government shamefully excluded over a million self-employed people from financial support during Covid. Leaving only us – the Liberal Democrats – to stand up for them in Parliament.

    Because we prioritise growth, we have long championed the self-employed and the small business owners. For them too, it’s about government getting the incentives right. That’s why we’d abolish the unfair system of business rates and replace it with a better Commercial Landowner Levy – to increase the incentive to invest and grow. It’s why we’re opposing Labour’s misguided job tax and its unfair tax raid on family farms and other family businesses.

    It’s why I’ve proposed the idea of “Employment in a Box”, to force every Government department – especially HMRC – to come together to make the UK the easiest place in the world for a business to take on its first employees. Because we need to stop holding back small firms that want to grow, and free them – encourage them – to do so. 

    And getting the incentives right also means getting rid of the wrong incentives. So a ban on bonuses for water company CEOs who keep polluting our rivers and seas – and fines if they don’t stop – fit my vision of an incentive economy. We’ve got to stop rewarding failure.

    And, of course, we need to think totally afresh about how we incentivise more people into work. With our focus on care and carers, Liberal Democrats have argued for a special higher minimum wage for care workers – £2 an hour higher than the national minimum wage – to incentivise more people into the care sector. And for family carers – where millions have given up work to look after their loved ones, and millions more have had to reduce their hours – we have argued for an overhaul of the crazy Carer’s Allowance system. So it properly supports carers and enables them to juggle work and care – instead of penalising them for taking on more hours. Getting the incentives right.

    And that inevitably takes us to the unsustainable welfare bill – and the Government’s shambolic attempt to reform welfare. Cutting Personal Independence Payments from disabled people and their carers was indefensible and it’s right those plans were dropped. But what got lost in the Government’s desperation to make the sums add up was an important truth: we need to get more people who aren’t working into work. It’s better for their dignity. It’s better for their families. And it’s better for the economy. The problem is, the Government’s proposed solution would have made the problem worse. Taking away the very support that enables many disabled people to work at all.

    What we need to do – and what our party will always champion – is to put in place the flexibility, security and support people need in order to work. Working from home, if that’s what their condition requires. Part-time, if that’s all they can manage. Helping employers to make whatever reasonable adjustments their workers need. Again, it comes back to Liberal values. Seeing people as individuals, and treating them fairly.

    It’s what makes me so angry about the assessment process. The impenetrable forms that show no comprehension of what life is like for disabled people or their carers. The dehumanising nature of it all. Trying to turn everyone into a box to be ticked or crossed. Not an individual to be engaged with and understood. Let me give you an example. Before the pandemic, 83% of PIP assessments were done face-to-face. There were often problems with such face-to-face assessments, no doubt about it. But at least they happened. Then during lockdown, they understandably switched to being done on the phone or by video. But when the pandemic ended, Conservative Ministers chose to make that switch to phone assessments permanent. So, last year, just 5% of PIP assessments were face-to-face. I think that was a massive mistake. That Conservative policy opened the door to error, abuse and fraud. And I strongly suspect it’s one of the main reasons the welfare bill has ballooned – and why public trust in the system has been undermined. We must go back to face-to-face assessments as soon as possible – so those who need support get it, and those who don’t, don’t.

    And of course we need to invest in people’s health. Physical and mental health. To get the welfare bill down, and more people back into work. How can we rebuild the economy, when more than six million people are stuck on NHS waiting lists?  How can we grow the economy when 2.8 million people are shut out of the labour market by long-term illness? When people are waiting weeks for a GP appointment? A healthy economy needs a healthy population, and a healthy NHS. So Liberal Democrat campaigns on GPs and dentists and hospitals and social care are about giving people the healthcare they deserve, but they are also core to our economic vision too.

    And while we’re thinking about people, let me turn to the cost-of-living crisis people are facing right now, and the number one thing driving it: energy bills. With inflation rising to 3.6% last month, this needs tackling urgently. Families and pensioners are being clobbered with energy bills that are still more than £50 a month higher than they were five years ago. So many people, who were already struggling to make ends meet, having to find an extra £50 a month – just to keep the lights on, or keep their homes warm this winter.

    And businesses are suffering too. Even with the welcome extra help promised in the new Industrial Strategy, parts of British industry will continue to face some of the highest electricity prices in the OECD.

    We have to get those prices down – to boost living standards and grow our economy.

    A big part of that are the things Liberal Democrats have consistently championed… Generating far more electricity from cheap, clean, renewable sources: solar, wind, tidal, hydro-electric. Insulating people’s homes and making them more energy efficient, so they are much cheaper to heat. Things the Liberal Democrats had a great track record on in government. Things the Conservatives put into reverse after 2015. And – when it comes to home insulation especially – something I’m afraid this Labour Government simply hasn’t made enough of a priority so far.

    But there’s another part of this problem that we haven’t spoken enough about, that I want to address today. And that’s the narrative – seized upon by Nigel Farage and Kemi Badenoch – that says the reason energy bills are so high is that we’re investing too much in renewable power. And if we just stopped that investment – and relied more on oil and gas instead – bills would magically come down for everyone.

    The experience of record high gas prices in recent years shows that’s not true. And even when gas prices are softer, the long history of volatility in fossil fuel prices means it’s only a matter of time before high prices return. So we know that tying ourselves ever more to fossil fuels would only benefit foreign dictators like Vladimir Putin – which is probably why Farage is so keen on it.

    But I think we also have to be honest and admit that we have done a really bad job winning that argument. Those of us who understand how important renewable energy is for our economy – how only renewable energy can deliver permanently low and secure energy prices, today and in the future – have too readily dismissed the rantings of Farage. But refusing to engage hasn’t stopped his myths from spreading. From gaining traction in the new world of fake news.

    So we must change that. Starting with the kernel of truth that underpins the myth. People are currently paying too much for renewable energy. But not for the reasons Nigel Farage would have you believe.

    Because generating electricity from solar or wind is now significantly cheaper than gas – even when you factor in extra system costs for back-up power when the wind isn’t blowing or the sun isn’t shining. But people aren’t seeing the benefit of cheap renewable power, because wholesale electricity prices are still tied to the price of gas – Even though half of all our electricity now comes from renewables, compared to just 30% from gas. That’s because the wholesale price is set by the most expensive fuel in the mix – and in the UK, that’s almost always gas. 97% of the time in 2021, the cost of electricity was set by the price of gas.

    And what does that mean for families, pensioners and businesses? It means we’re all paying that higher gas price in our bills, even though most of the energy we’re using comes from much cheaper sources. Not only is that manifestly unfair, but it is also undermining public support for the investment we need in renewable power. When people don’t see the benefits of cheap, clean energy in their bills, we shouldn’t be surprised if they’re sceptical about building more of it.

    So we have got to break the link between gas prices and electricity costs. We have to. It’s something both the Conservative Government and now Labour have spoken about. But when it came to it, both of them put it in the “too difficult” drawer, and just left the problem to fester. So, as with social care, as with sewage, it falls to us – the Liberal Democrats – to say: it might be difficult, but we have to do it. We can’t afford not to. Not when the price is Nigel Farage.

    Now this happens to be a problem we’ve grappled with before – that I grappled with before – back when we were in government. It was part of the thinking behind the incentive mechanism we created for new renewable projects: Contracts for Difference. These contracts give energy companies the certainty they need to invest in renewables. If the wholesale price drops below the agreed strike price, the government pays them the difference.

    But crucially, they give consumers a fair deal too. If the wholesale price goes above the strike price – like they did when gas prices soared when Russia invaded Ukraine – energy companies pay back the difference, taking money off household energy bills. If all renewables were on Contracts for Difference, the electricity market would be a lot fairer and people would see the benefits of cheap renewables in their bills when gas prices are high.

    The problem is, only about 15% of renewable power is generated under Contracts for Difference. The rest is still governed by the old Renewables Obligation Certificates scheme – or ROCs – introduced by the last Labour Government all the way back in 2002 – when ministers didn’t have the foresight to realise that renewable power would get so much cheaper over the next two decades. Unlike Contracts for Difference, companies with ROCs get paid the wholesale price – in other words, the price of gas – with a subsidy on top. Subsidies paid through levies on our energy bills – costing a typical household around £90 a year. It shouldn’t be this way, and it doesn’t have to be any longer. The Government should start today a rapid process of moving all those old ROC renewable projects onto new Contracts for Difference.

    It’s an idea from academics at the UK Energy Research Centre that they call “pot zero”. And in 2022 they estimated that it could save around £15 billion a year – not only encouraging the end of those Renewable Obligation Certificate levies, but in the process cutting the typical household energy bill by more than £200. So my challenge to ministers is this. If you want to bring people’s energy bills down, if you want to tackle the cost of living, if you want to build support for renewable power – stop tinkering, stop dithering, stop deliberating. Start phasing out those unfair Renewable Obligation Certificate schemes today, by offering instead new Contracts for Difference we Liberal Democrats brought in. The incentive scheme is there. We created it. Please – use it. One simple trick to save everyone at least £200 a year.

    And there are so many ways we could do more to cut electricity bills for people and businesses. One example: why aren’t we pushing much harder for more interconnectors, cables that allow us to import electricity from Europe when it’s more expensive here, and export electrons when it’s more expensive there? Of course, Brexit was bad news for this trade – for both existing interconnectors and worse news for new projects. But one potentially big benefit for the UK rejoining the EU’s internal energy market is greater cross-border trade in power, and so lower electricity bills for consumers.

    After nearly a decade of criminally negligent energy policies under the Conservatives, that pushed up everyone’s bills, I believe the right policies now could cut energy bills in half – at least – within ten years. That should be the goal. Nothing less.

    A Liberal Democrat energy policy in service of the British people. Not a Nigel Farage energy policy in service of Vladimir Putin. So just imagine what our economy could look like, in the next decade or so.

    Energy bills slashed – easing the pressures on families and businesses. People helped into work, instead of trapped on NHS waiting lists or discarded as “inactive”. Education and training to equip people with the skills for the future.

    British start-ups and scale-ups thriving with the support they need. Entrepreneurs and the self-employed recognised for the risks they take. Trade boosted, especially with our neighbours in Europe.

    The public finances, carefully managed and properly scrutinised in Parliament. And a supercomputer or two, hopefully not putting think tanks out of business!

    An economy growing strongly, where everyone feels the benefits. An economy underpinned by our proud Liberal Democrat values. Proud British values. An economy that is truly innovative, dynamic, prosperous and fair.

    That is our vision – and I can’t wait to make it happen.

    Thank you.
     

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Seclusion rooms don’t make schools safe, and Ontario needs a policy

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Hunter Knight, Assistant Professor of Childhood and Youth Studies, Western University

    A recent report entitled Crisis in the Classroom: Exclusion, Seclusion and Restraint of Students with Disabilities in Ontario Schools shares accounts of the frightening use of seclusion rooms in schools. It makes recommendations towards improving inclusion, belonging and educational achievement for disabled students.

    The report is from Community Living Ontario, a non-profit organization that advocates for people who have an intellectual disability. It analyzes the results from a survey of 541 caregivers of students with disabilities about their experiences in Ontario schools.

    Seclusion rooms are spaces where students can be kept in isolation and are not permitted to leave. Respondents to the Crisis in the Classroom report detailed incidents such as a student being secluded in a padded room, and a student being isolated in a small, closet-sized room.




    Read more:
    How school systems can honour the human rights of people with disabilities


    While some school boards have developed guidance independently, there is currently no provincial policy on the use of seclusion rooms in Ontario. The Crisis in the Classroom report calls for clear and enforceable provincial regulations and policy around seclusion and restraint.

    As an assistant professor of childhood and youth studies whose work examines constructions of the “problem child” and everyday injustices against disabled and racialized children, I believe it is critical for Ontario residents and policymakers to take stock of the negative effects of seclusion rooms and commit to alternatives.

    I am unaffiliated with this report, but earlier in my career, I worked as as a one-on-one educational aide for students who attended a special education school that used seclusion.

    Defining seclusion rooms

    As education researchers Nadine Alice Bartlett and Taylor Floyd Ellis show, there is inconsistent terminology used to describe seclusion in schools, meaning that “the conditions under which such practices may be used in some instances are subjective,” and this “may contribute to a broad interpretation of what is deemed acceptable … in schools.”

    As opposed to sensory rooms, which students can usually leave at will and are often designed with sensory tools available for self-regulation (like weighted toys), seclusion rooms serve to isolate or contain students.

    Across North America, there are reports of seclusion rooms being built into schools or constructed in classroom corners.

    In the Crisis in the Classroom report, 155 survey respondents said seclusion was used on their child in the 2022-23 school year, where seclusion means having a locked/blocked door (83 respondents) or being physically prevented from leaving (25 respondents).

    Regular, sustained seclusion

    Crisis in the Classroom notes that almost half of the students who had experienced seclusion were secluded on a regular basis, and more than 10 per cent were secluded for longer than three hours.

    Research shows that seclusion is often discriminatory along lines of race, class and ability. Reflecting these patterns identified in larger research, the report flags that students had a higher risk for being secluded if they came from households with lower parental education and income levels, and if they were labelled with a behavioural identification or a mild intellectual disability.

    More than half of the caregivers surveyed had never given permission for their children to be secluded, and the report includes quotes from caregivers who were never told it was happening.

    Response to perceived source of school violence

    Seclusion rooms are commonly justified as necessary tools to keep teachers and (other) students safe.

    This justification ignores the evidenced success of schools that have reduced seclusion or eliminated it entirely through adequate staff support and trauma-informed training that draws from research-proven de-escalation strategies.

    I argue that turning to these alternatives, as the report recommends, is of dire importance. Investigations elsewhere repeatedly find that seclusion rooms are most frequently used for discipline or punishment — not for safety.

    With adequate staffing and trauma-informed training, some schools have reduced or eliminated seclusion.
    (CDC/Unsplash)

    Outside Ontario, where policy requires tracking the reasons why children are sent into seclusion, seclusion has followed incidents like spilling milk or asking for more food at lunch.

    Seclusion rooms act primarily as a disciplinary tool that targets the most vulnerable students in our schools.

    Ineffective, dangerous tools

    Seclusion is an ineffective educational and therapeutic practice and highly dangerous: research shows that seclusion rooms increase injury and violence in schools.

    This appears in the physical harm (for students and staff) that can occur in the physical restraints often required to force a student into a seclusion room. It also appears in the trauma that can ensue from seclusion (for students and staff) that increases the likelihood of future physical confrontations.

    Placing students, often in high distress, into a locked space where they cannot be closely supervised can and has resulted in their deaths.

    Seclusion without regulation

    As the Crisis in the Classroom report and repeated exposés illustrate, a lack of policy does not mean seclusion isn’t happening in Ontario. It means seclusion is happening without provincial policy to regulate things like:

    • Which students can or cannot be secluded, for how long and how often;
    • What rooms for seclusion must look like and essential safety features;
    • What data staff must collect about why seclusion rooms are used;
    • When caregivers must be notified.

    Without these guidelines, sometimes no one knows that seclusion is happening — much less in what spaces, for which students and why — beyond the students and school staff who may be traumatized by this practice.

    Reports of violence in schools

    Crisis in the Classroom notes that teachers’ unions have reported there’s been an increase in violence by students against teachers, often presented in a way that suggests that disabled students are a primary source of this violence. The report acknowledges that the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario has said that students with special education needs have been “chronically under-served by the government.”

    News media coverage, the report suggests, “often takes the side of educational staff, and has an unfortunate habit of conflating disability with aggressive behaviour.”

    Unfortunately, the faulty perspective that disabled students are a source of school violence depends on an ableist logic that has worked historically to subject disabled people to over-incarceration. It effaces the fact that disabled children are actually more likely to be subjected to violence than their peers.




    Read more:
    Achieving full inclusion in schools: Lessons from New Brunswick


    The report points to the dire need to eliminate seclusion and turn towards possibilities that do not increase violence in schools and target disabled students.

    The report’s recommendations echo calls from teachers’ unions for appropriate, adequate staffing in schools and increased professional development, especially trauma-informed training, that would support teachers’ work delivering supportive and inclusive education that keeps everyone safe.

    And these recommendations make an urgent call for strong and clear policy on seclusion and restraint in Ontario that would severely limit it or eliminate it entirely — and at least track when it’s occurring.

    Safer and more humane schools

    This devastating report illustrates that we need policy on seclusion in Ontario now to protect everyone in our schools.

    I know first-hand that teaching, especially for educators working with students with disabilities, is underpaid and underappreciated work.

    More humane practices will keep schools safer for everyone, including teachers and all students, especially students who are still being subjected to seclusion today.

    Hunter Knight receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

    ref. Seclusion rooms don’t make schools safe, and Ontario needs a policy – https://theconversation.com/seclusion-rooms-dont-make-schools-safe-and-ontario-needs-a-policy-259010

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: When big sports events expand, like FIFA’s 2026 World Cup matches across North America, their climate footprint expands too

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Brian P. McCullough, Associate Professor of Sport Management, University of Michigan

    Lionel Messi celebrates with fans after Argentina won the FIFA World Cup championship in 2022 in Qatar. Michael Regan-FIFA/FIFA via Getty Images

    When the FIFA World Cup hits North America in June 2026, 48 teams and millions of soccer fans will be traveling to and from venues spread across the United States, Canada and Mexico.

    It’s a dramatic expansion – 16 more teams will be playing than in recent years, with a jump from 64 to 104 matches. The tournament is projected to bring in over US$10 billion in revenue. But the expansion will also mean a lot more travel and other activities that contribute to climate change.

    The environmental impacts of giant sporting events like the World Cup create a complex paradox for an industry grappling with its future in a warming world.

    A sustainability conundrum

    Sports are undeniably experiencing the effects of climate change. Rising global temperatures are putting athletes’ health at risk during summer heat waves and shortening winter sports seasons. Many of the 2026 World Cup venues often see heat waves in June and early July, when the tournament is scheduled.

    There is a divide over how sports should respond.

    Some athletes are speaking out for more sustainable choices and have called on lawmakers to take steps to limit climate-warming emissions. At the same time, the sport industry is growing and facing a constant push to increase revenue. The NCAA is also considering expanding its March Madness basketball tournaments from 68 teams currently to as many as 76.

    Park Yong-woo of team Al Ain from Abu Dhabi tries to cool off during a Club World Cup match on June 26, 2025, in Washington, D.C., which was in the midst of a heat wave. Some players have raised concerns about likely high temperatures during the 2026 World Cup, with matches scheduled June 11 to July 19.
    AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson

    Estimates for the 2026 World Cup show what large tournament expansions can mean for the climate. A report from Scientists for Global Responsibility estimates that the expanded World Cup could generate over 9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, nearly double the average of the past four World Cups.

    This massive increase – and the increase that would come if the NCAA basketball tournaments also expand – would primarily be driven by air travel as fans and players fly among event cities that are thousands of miles apart.

    A lot of money is at stake, but so is the climate

    Sports are big business, and adding more matches to events like the World Cup and NCAA tournaments will likely lead to larger media rights contracts and greater gate receipts from more fans attending the events, boosting revenues. These are powerful financial incentives.

    In the NCAA’s case, there is another reason to consider a larger tournament: The House v. NCAA settlement opened the door for college athletic departments to share revenue with athletes, which will significantly increase costs for many college programs. More teams would mean more television revenue and, crucially, more revenue to be distributed to member NCAA institutions and their athletic conferences.

    When climate promises become greenwashing

    The inherent conflict between maximizing profit through growth and minimizing environmental footprint presents a dilemma for sports.

    Several sport organizations have promised to reduce their impact on the climate, including signing up for initiatives like the United Nations Sports for Climate Action Framework.

    However, as sports tournaments and exhibition games expand, it can become increasingly hard for sports organizations to meet their climate commitments. In some cases, groups making sustainability commitments have been accused of greenwashing, suggesting the goals are more about public relations than making genuine, measurable changes.

    For example, FIFA’s early claims that it would hold a “fully carbon-neutral” World Cup in Qatar in 2022 were challenged by a group of European countries that accused soccer’s world governing body of underestimating emissions. The Swiss Fairness Commission, which monitors fairness in advertising, considered the complaints and determined that FIFA’s claims could not be substantiated.

    Alessandro Bastoni, of Inter Milan and Italy’s national team, prepares to board a flight from Milan to Rome with his team.
    Mattia Ozbot-Inter/Inter via Getty Images

    Aviation is often the biggest driver of emissions. A study that colleagues and I conducted on the NCAA men’s basketball tournament found about 80% of its emissions were connected to travel. And that was after the NCAA began using the pod system, which is designed to keep teams closer to home for the first and second rounds.

    Finding practical solutions

    Some academics, observing the rising emissions trend, have called for radical solutions like the end of commercialized sports or drastically limiting who can attend sporting events, with a focus on fans from the region.

    These solutions are frankly not practical, in my view, nor do they align with other positive developments. The growing popularity of women’s sports shows the challenge in limiting sports events – more games expands participation but adds to the industry’s overall footprint.

    Further compounding the challenges of reducing environmental impact is the amount of fan travel, which is outside the direct control of the sports organization or event organizers.

    Many fans will follow their teams long distances, especially for mega-events like the World Cup or the NCAA tournament. During the men’s World Cup in Russia in 2018, more than 840,000 fans traveled from other countries. The top countries by number of fans, after Russia, were China, the U.S., Mexico and Argentina.

    There is an argument that distributed sporting events like March Madness or the World Cup can be better in some ways for local environments because they don’t overwhelm a single city. However, merely spreading the impact does not necessarily reduce it, particularly when considering the effects on climate change.

    How fans can cut their environmental footprint

    Sport organizations and event planners can take steps to be more sustainable and also encourage more sustainable choices among fans. Fans can reduce their environmental impact in a variety of ways. For example:

    • Avoid taking airplanes for shorter distances, such as between FIFA venues in Philadelphia, New York and Boston, and carpool or take Amtrak instead. Planes can be more efficient for long distances, but air travel is still a major contributing factor to emissions.

    • While in a host city, use mass transit or rent electric vehicles or bicycles for local travel.

    • Consider sustainable accommodations, such as short-term rentals that might have a smaller environmental footprint than a hotel. Or stay at a certified green hotel that makes an effort to be more efficient in its use of water and energy.

    • Engage in sustainable pregame and postgame activities, such as choosing local, sustainable food options, and minimize waste.

    • You can also pay to offset carbon emissions for attending different sporting events, much like concertgoers do when they attend musical festivals. While critics question offsets’ true environmental benefit, they do represent people’s growing awareness of their environmental footprint.

    Through all these options, it’s clear that sports face a significant challenge in addressing their environmental impacts and encouraging fans to be more sustainable, while simultaneously trying to meet ambitious business and environmental targets.

    In my view, a sustainable path forward will require strategic, yet genuine, commitment by the sports industry and its fans, and a willingness to prioritize long-term planetary health alongside economic gains – balancing the sport and sustainability.

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

    ref. When big sports events expand, like FIFA’s 2026 World Cup matches across North America, their climate footprint expands too – https://theconversation.com/when-big-sports-events-expand-like-fifas-2026-world-cup-matches-across-north-america-their-climate-footprint-expands-too-259437

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: The golden oyster mushroom craze unleashed an invasive species – and a worrying new study shows it’s harming native fungi

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Aishwarya Veerabahu, Ph.D. Candidate in Botany, University of Wisconsin-Madison

    Golden oyster mushrooms can be cultivated, but they can also escape into the wild. DDukang/iStock/Getty Images Plus

    Golden oyster mushrooms, with their sunny yellow caps and nutty flavor, have become wildly popular for being healthy, delicious and easy to grow at home from mushroom kits.

    But this food craze has also unleashed an invasive species into the wild, and new research shows it’s pushing out native fungi.

    In a study we believe is the first of its kind, fellow mycologists and I demonstrate that an invasive fungus can cause environmental harm, just as invasive plants and animals can when they take over ecosystems.

    A scientist documents golden oyster mushrooms growing wild in a Wisconsin forest, where these invasive fungi don’t belong. DNA tests showed the species had pushed out other native fungi.
    Aishwarya Veerabahu

    Native mushrooms and other fungi are important for the health of many ecosystems. They break down dead wood and other plant material, helping it decay. They cycle nutrients such as carbon and nitrogen from the dead tissues of plants and animals, turning it into usable forms that enter the soil, atmosphere or their own bodies. Fungi also play a role in managing climate change by sequestering carbon in soil and mediating carbon emissions from soil and wood.

    Their symbiotic relationships with other organisms also help other organisms thrive. Mycorrhizal fungi on roots, for example, help plants absorb water and nutrients. And wood decay fungi help create wooded habitats for birds, mammals and plant seedlings.

    However, we found that invasive golden oyster mushrooms, a wood decay fungus, can threaten forests’ fungal biodiversity and harm the health of ecosystems that are already vulnerable to climate change and habitat destruction.

    The dark side of the mushroom trade

    Golden oyster mushrooms, native to Asia, were brought to North America around the early 2000s. They’re part of an international mushroom culinary craze that has been feeding into one of the world’s leading drivers of biodiversity loss: invasive species.

    As fungi are moved around the world in global trade, either intentionally as products, such as kits people buy for growing mushrooms at home, or unintentionally as microbial stowaways along with soil, plants, timber and even shipping pallets, they can establish themselves in new environments.

    Where golden oyster mushrooms, an invasive species in North America, have been reported in the wild, including in forests, parks and neighborhoods. Red dots indicate new reports each year. States in yellow have had a report at some point. Aishwarya Veerabahu

    Many mushroom species have been cultivated in North America for decades without becoming invasive species threats. However, golden oyster mushrooms have been different.

    No one knows exactly how golden oyster mushrooms escaped into the wild, whether from a grow kit, a commercial mushroom farm or outdoor logs inoculated with golden oysters – a home-cultivation technique where mushroom mycelium is placed into logs to colonize the wood and produce mushrooms.

    As grow kits increased in popularity, many people began buying golden oyster kits and watching them blossom into beautiful yellow mushrooms in their backyards. Their spores or composted kits could have spread into nearby forests.

    Evidence from a pioneering study by Andrea Reisdorf (née Bruce) suggests golden oyster mushrooms were introduced into the wild in multiple U.S. states around the early 2010s.

    Species the golden oysters pushed out

    In our study, designed by Michelle Jusino and Mark Banik, research scientists with the U.S. Forest Service, our team went into forests around Madison, Wisconsin, and drilled into dead trees to collect wood shavings containing the natural fungal community within each tree. Some of the trees had golden oyster mushrooms on them, and some did not.

    We then extracted DNA to identify and compare which fungi, and how many fungi, were in trees that had been invaded by golden oyster mushrooms compared with those that had not been.

    We were startled to find that trees with golden oyster mushrooms housed only half as many fungal species as trees without golden oyster mushrooms, sometimes even less. We also found that the composition of fungi in trees with golden oyster mushrooms was different from trees without golden oyster mushrooms.

    For example, the gentle green “mossy maze polypore” and the “elm oyster” mushroom were pushed out of trees invaded by golden oyster mushrooms.

    Mossy maze polypore growing on a stump. This is one of the native species that disappeared from trees when the golden oyster mushroom moved in.
    mauriziobiso/iStock/Getty Images Plus

    Another ousted fungus, Nemania serpens, is known for producing diverse arrays of chemicals that differ even between individuals of the same species. Fungi are sources of revolutionary medicines, including antibiotics like penicillin, cholesterol medication and organ transplant stabilizers. The value of undiscovered, potentially useful chemicals can be lost when invasive species push others out.

    The invasive species problem includes fungi

    Given what my colleagues and I discovered, we believe it is time to include invasive fungi in the global conversation about invasive species and examine their role as a cause of biodiversity loss.

    That conversation includes the idea of fungal “endemism” – that each place has a native fungal community that can be thrown out of balance. Native fungal communities tend to be diverse, having evolved together over thousands of years to coexist. Our research shows how invasive species can change the makeup of fungal communities by outcompeting native species, thus changing the fungal processes that have shaped native ecosystems.

    There are many other invasive fungi. For example, the deadly poisonous “death cap” Amanita phalloides and the “orange ping-pong bat” Favolaschia calocera are invasive in North America. The classic red and white “fly agaric” Amanita muscaria is native to North America but invasive elsewhere.

    The orange ping-pong bat mushroom is invasive in North America. These were photographed in New Zealand.
    Bernard Spragg. NZ/Flickr Creative Commons

    The golden oyster mushrooms’ invasion of North America should serve as a bright yellow warning that nonnative fungi are capable of rapid invasion and should be cultivated with caution, if at all.

    Golden oyster mushrooms are now recognized as invasive in Switzerland and can be found in forests in Italy, Hungary, Serbia and Germany. I have been hearing about people attempting to cultivate them around the world, including in Turkey, India, Ecuador, Kenya, Italy and Portugal. It’s possible that golden oyster mushrooms may not be able to establish invasive populations in some regions. Continued research will help us understand the full scope of impacts invasive fungi can have.

    What you can do to help

    Mushroom growers, businesses and foragers around the world may be asking themselves, “What can we do about it?”

    For the time being, I recommend that people consider refraining from using golden oyster mushroom grow kits to prevent any new introductions. For people who make a living selling these mushrooms, consider adding a note that this species is invasive and should be cultivated indoors and not composted.

    If you enjoy growing mushrooms at home, try cultivating safe, native species that you have collected in your region.

    Most mushrooms you see in the grocery store are grown indoors.

    There is no single right answer. In some places, golden oyster mushrooms are being cultivated as a food source for impoverished communities, for income, or to process agricultural waste and produce food at the same time. Positives like these will have to be considered alongside the mushrooms’ negative impacts when developing management plans or legislation.

    In the future, some ideas for solutions could involve sporeless strains of golden oysters for home kits that can’t spread, or a targeted mycovirus that could control the population. Increased awareness about responsible cultivation practices is important, because when invasive species move in and disrupt the native biodiversity, we all stand to lose the beautiful, colorful, weird fungi we see on walks in the forest.

    Aishwarya Veerabahu receives funding from UW-Madison Dept. of Botany, the UW Arboretum, the Society of Ecological Restoration, and the Garden Club of America. Aishwarya Veerabahu was an employee of the USDA Forest Service.

    ref. The golden oyster mushroom craze unleashed an invasive species – and a worrying new study shows it’s harming native fungi – https://theconversation.com/the-golden-oyster-mushroom-craze-unleashed-an-invasive-species-and-a-worrying-new-study-shows-its-harming-native-fungi-259006

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Paolo Borsellino: the murder of an anti-mafia prosecutor and the enduring mystery of his missing red notebook

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Felia Allum, Professor of Comparative Organised Crime and Corruption, University of Bath

    It has been 33 years since anti-mafia prosecutor Paolo Borsellino was blown up by Cosa Nostra in front of his mother’s home in Palermo, Sicily. His death on July 19 1992 came 57 days after the murder of his colleague, Giovanni Falcone. This was the peak of Cosa Nostra’s attack on state representatives.

    A vital document was lost that day – a red notebook believed to have been in Borsellino’s work bag. This loss has hampered attempts to understand how deep into the Italian state Cosa Nostra’s activities run.

    The early 1990s were a turbulent time in Italy. The fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 broke the Italian party system and wiped out the traditional political parties, which had been based around the opposing forces of the Christian Democrats (supported by the US and the Vatican) and the Communist party.

    The Christian Democrats, in power during the post-war period, had often protected Cosa Nostra. But losing power meant an inability to honour its “pact” with mafiosi. This led to the mafia attacking anyone who got in its way.

    Falcone and Borsellino, as anti-mafia prosecutors, had got under the skin of Cosa Nostra. Their work zoned in on its mentality and activities. They were the driving force behind the 1986 “maxi trial” that saw hundreds of mafiosi prosecuted. This was the first time important mafia bosses were imprisoned. Falcone and Borsellino had brought a new understanding to the internal workings of the mafia, including its links with politics and money laundering operations.

    The mafia was deploying terrorist tactics against state representatives and institutions in the early 1990s in what appears to have been an attempt to get the state to negotiate with it. Borsellino, it is believed, was investigating this when he was murdered.

    The red notebook

    Crucially, on the day Borsellino was murdered, his work bag, which contained his red notebook (“l’agenda rossa”) disappeared from the wreckage of his car.

    He carried his red notebook around with him everywhere, making copious notes of his investigations and ideas. Had it been recovered, l’agenda rossa could have revealed the possible links between state representatives (including with the police and judiciary), businessmen and Cosa Nostra.

    It could, in effect, have mapped out how and to what extent Cosa Nostra had infiltrated the Italian state and the nature of its relationships with the new political class, the business elite, freemasons and other covert actors.

    A photograph of a police officer walking off with what looks very much like the bag that presumably contained the notebook has circulated ever since. But this is where the trail ends. The bag – minus the notebook – was later found in the office of the head of the flying squad, with no explanation as to how and why it got there.

    The disappearance of the red notebook remains a persistent enigma – and one which continues to haunt contemporary Italy because of what it might suggest about the nation’s underworld and political class.

    This photo could even suggest that the goal of killing Borsellino was not just to eliminate a zealous public prosecutor but to remove a pantheon of knowledge about organised crime and its infiltration into the public realm as part of a more orchestrated plan.

    Then, in 1993, Cosa Nostra suddenly and inexplicably ceased its terrorist tactics against the state. It was as though a truce had been reached. Could this be the case?

    Many have speculated that there was a secret dialogue and a trattativa – a state-mafia negotiation entered and a deal struck between state representatives and Cosa Nostra leaders to stop the violence. In exchange for an end to the violence, it was suggested that state representatives promised softer anti-mafia laws. It’s possible that the disappearance of Borsellino’s red notebook could have been part of the deal.

    Interpreting history

    The history of these dynamics between state and the mafia has since been written and re-written, dividing Italians and mafia scholars.

    At the heart of all these disagreements lie two questions: was the notebook taken intentionally and why did Cosa Nostra stop its attacks on the state at the specific moment that it did?. The answer to these would essentially establish whether or not there was a negotiated peace between the mafia and the state.

    In 2014, high-profile politicians, police officers and mafiosi were put on trial, accused of playing a role and enabling these negotiations. This was, in effect, the Italian state putting itself on trial.

    Some legal experts and historians have argued that the theory of coordinated action by state representatives and mafiosi was always an absurd hypothesis. While there might have been some random informal contacts, they contest that there was never a formal pact. The end of Cosa Nostra‘s violence, they argue, was due to a combination of other factors, including greater enforcement of the law.

    Others argue that there is evidence of a pact. These include first-hand accounts from former criminals. But of course it is hard to make these stories stick because all evidence of a relationship of this kind would, by definition, be covert and off the books. As with many trials and in particular, mafia trials, there are no facts, just interpretations of facts.

    In 2018, some state representatives and mafiosi were found guilty. But in 2023, the Italian supreme court overturned the 2018 ruling and concluded that there was no pact and no state-mafia negotiation.

    All involved were cleared for different reasons as the court attempted to draw a line under the intrigue by articulating a clear position. But with the mafia, answers are rarely that simple. And history is not only written in the courtroom.

    Borsellino’s legacy is celebrated in Italy to this day – but the unresolved matter of his missing notebook haunts the country more profoundly. His bag – minus the notebook – has recently been put on show at the Italian senate to celebrate his life. The display is also a reminder of how much remains unresolved from that period.

    Felia Allum 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. Paolo Borsellino: the murder of an anti-mafia prosecutor and the enduring mystery of his missing red notebook – https://theconversation.com/paolo-borsellino-the-murder-of-an-anti-mafia-prosecutor-and-the-enduring-mystery-of-his-missing-red-notebook-259101

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Deluzio Fights Price Gouging, Secures Wins for Western PA in Annual Defense Bill

    Source: US Congressman Chris Deluzio (PA)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Last night, Congressman Chris Deluzio (PA-17) with colleagues on the powerful House Armed Services Committee, marked up the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)—the large, annual defense bill that creates the policies related to our armed services and other national security-related efforts. Congressman Deluzio voted for the measure, which passed out of committee by a vote of 55-2.

    “The United States faces tremendous strategic challenges across the globe, including the war in Ukraine, intensifying competition with Communist China, and instability in the Middle East. All this activity is stressing the highly consolidated defense industrial base,” said Congressman Deluzio. “For too long, our government has neglected America’s manufacturing competitiveness and power. We need stronger accountability, transparency, and competition in government contracting to beef up our defense industrial base and to protect public money. While not a perfect bill, the 2026 NDAA takes on many of these important issues and more, and that’s why I voted yes last night.”  

    Specifically, the NDAA included Congressman Deluzio’s amendment to fight defense industry price gouging by requiring defense contractors to report when their products under sole source contracts increase by more than 25% of the price specified in the contract bid, over 25% more than the price of the product the preceding year, or by 50% more than the government paid for the product at any time over the last five years.   

    During the NDAA markup, Congressman Deluzio successfully secured several important wins, including some that will specifically benefit the people and economy of Western Pennsylvania. 

    This legislation: 

    • Implements an assessment and evaluation of the use of inland waterways for national defense purposes, and an assessment of vulnerabilities in our Marine Transportation Systems and associated infrastructure.
    • Authorizes an additional two and a half million dollars in funding to improve long range precision fires technology. This kind of research is ongoing at Western Pennsylvania institutions like the University of Pittsburgh.
    • Requires a new report about the technology and disposal methods of Per-and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS). This is important because the Defense Department has previously considered incinerating PFAS “forever chemicals” in East Liverpool, Ohio—just across the border from Pennsylvania’s 17th District.
    • This year’s NDAA also includes the text of Congressman Deluzio’s bill, the Depot Investment Reform Act. This bill strengthens federal investment in military depots, including those in Pennsylvania, like the Letterkenny and Tobyhanna Army Depots.   

    Congressman Deluzio secured additional national priorities in this defense bill. This legislation:

    • Strengthens the “right to repair,” requiring contractors to give access to tools, parts, and information for major weapon systems so that our military and servicemembers can repair their own equipment.
    • Adjusts annual reporting on the U.S. Navy’s shipyard modernization efforts at the four public shipyards to include efforts related to the incorporation of digital hardware, software, and cloud storage.
    • Extends the number of days that national guardsmen can be activated by a governor of a state to respond to an emergency like a natural disaster from 3 to 14 days, with possible extensions of 7 and up to 46 days.
    • Requires a report on the Department of Defense’s efforts to incorporate artificial intelligence data centers on Department of Defense land. This report will analyze the risks, benefits, impacts, and footprint of those facilities.
    • Requires the Department of Defense to identify shortfalls and propose solutions for shortfalls of critical minerals and other materials in the National Defense Stockpile. This will better inform the United States’ current readiness and preparedness for any future conflict.
    • Fights consolidation in the defense industry by requiring the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to investigate impacts of mergers and acquisitions on the defense industrial base and competition in the defense industry.
    • Requires that contractors who are negotiating sole-source contracts with the government provide timely and critical pricing data to the government. This will assist the military in getting the best deal for our servicemembers and will steward good use of American public dollars.
    • Requires the Department of Defense to assess the current competitive environment for contracts under $10 million. This will help the military and Congress assess whether recent policy changes have been effective in uplifting small businesses and growing the defense industrial base. 

    A full summary of the Fiscal Year 2026 NDAA as prepared by Democratic committee staff can be found here

    The NDAA now goes to the House Floor for a vote, and the final bill will be negotiated with the Senate. 

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Passing of Jean-Pierre Azéma

    Source: Universities – Science Po in English

    It is with deep sadness that we announce the passing of Jean-Pierre Azéma, historian and professor at Sciences Po, who died on Monday, 14 July 2025, in his eighty-seventh year.

    Alongside Serge Berstein, Jean-Noël Jeanneney, Pierre Milza, and Michel Winock, Jean-Pierre Azéma was one of the founding members of the group of historians at Sciences Po who, under the benevolent guidance of René Rémond, brought together scholars of contemporary history with a particular focus on modern political developments.

    A specialist in the Second World War, the Occupation, the Resistance and the Vichy regime, he established himself from the 1970s onwards as one of France’s foremost experts on the period. He authored numerous landmark publications — including De Munich à la Libération, 1938–1944 (Seuil, 1979) and Jean Moulin: Le politique, le rebelle, le résistant (Perrin, 2003) — and contributed to major collective volumes such as Vichy et les Français (Fayard, 1992).

    After teaching in secondary education, notably at the Lycées Lakanal and Henri IV, Jean-Pierre Azéma joined Sciences Po in 1973 as an assistant professor. There, he rejoined Serge Berstein and Pierre Milza, who had arrived a few years earlier, and was later followed by his lifelong friend and former schoolmate Michel Winock. A few years later, he was promoted to full professor – among the very first in the field of history at Sciences Po.

    Over the course of thirty-five years, Jean-Pierre Azéma taught with unwavering dedication and intellectual rigour across all levels of instruction at Sciences Po. As lecturer of the first-year general history course, he trained and inspired generations of students in the “année préparatoire” (undergraduate programme), his deep erudition and colourful temperament leaving a lasting impression.

    He was also a key figure in Sciences Po’s graduate programme in history, mentoring numerous master’s and doctoral students with both generosity and high standards (among them Alya Aglan, Anne Simonin, Guillaume Piketty, and Florent Brayard).

    “In history, you need the real stuff,” (by which he meant sources), he would often remind his students, regardless of their level — as recalled by historian Nicolas Offenstadt, one of his former undergraduate and postgraduate students.

    A committed member of the academic community, Jean-Pierre Azéma also served the institution in other capacities. For over a decade, he co-chaired Sciences Po’s Joint Committee, a university body established in the wake of May 1968, bringing together faculty and students in equal numbers — the forerunner of today’s Student Life and Education Committee (CVEF). In this role, he played a vital part in mediating between interests, always with integrity and without demagoguery.

    Beyond Sciences Po, his scholarly reputation led to frequent public engagement. He was notably cited by the civil parties during the Maurice Papon trial. He also brought historical insight to wider audiences through his contributions to L’Histoire magazine, his collaboration with Claude Chabrol on the documentary L’œil de Vichy, and his role as historical advisor for the acclaimed television series Un village français.

    For years, students, faculty, and staff at Sciences Po encountered the instantly recognisable figure of Jean-Pierre Azéma — often distinguished by his trademark scarf, long a vivid red, which never left his neck. Many will retain the memory of a professor whose mischievous gaze and intellectual passion brought history vividly to life.

    Our thoughts are with his family, his loved ones, and all those at Sciences Po who knew, respected, and loved him.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: HSE and NEFU graduate first bachelors in the double degree program “Economics and Data Analysis”

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: State University “Higher School of Economics” –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    The site may not display correctly in older browser versions. For optimal site experience, we recommend using a modern browser.

    We use cookies to improve the HSE website and make it more convenient to use. More detailed information about the use of cookies can be foundHere, our rules for processing personal data are –Here. By continuing to use the site, you confirm that you have been informed of the use of cookies by the HSE website and agree with our rules for processing personal data. You can disable cookies in your browser settings.

    ABC ABC ABC A A A A A

    Regular version of the site

    Date

    July 16

    Headings

    The article mentions

    Persons

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: HSE and NEFU graduate first bachelors in the double degree program “Economics and Data Analysis”

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: State University “Higher School of Economics” –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    The site may not display correctly in older browser versions. For optimal site experience, we recommend using a modern browser.

    We use cookies to improve the HSE website and make it more convenient to use. More detailed information about the use of cookies can be foundHere, our rules for processing personal data are –Here. By continuing to use the site, you confirm that you have been informed of the use of cookies by the HSE website and agree with our rules for processing personal data. You can disable cookies in your browser settings.

    ABC ABC ABC A A A A A

    Regular version of the site

    Date

    July 16

    Headings

    The article mentions

    Persons

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Why is Israel bombing Syria?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ali Mamouri, Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University

    Conflict in Syria has escalated with Israel launching bombing raids against its northern neighbour.

    It follows months of fluctuating tensions in southern Syria between the Druze minority and forces aligned with the new government in Damascus. Clashes erupted in the last few days, prompting Israeli airstrikes in defence of the Druze by targeting government bases, tanks, and heavy weaponry.

    Israel Minister Amichai Chikli has called the Syrian president Ahmed al-Sharaa

    a terrorist, a barbaric murderer who should be eliminated without delay.

    Despite the incendiary language, a ceasefire has been reached, halting the fighting – for now.

    Syrian forces have begun withdrawing heavy military equipment from the region, while Druze fighters have agreed to suspend armed resistance, allowing government troops to regain control of the main Druze city of Suwayda.

    What do the Druze want?

    The Druze are a small religious minority estimated at over one million people, primarily concentrated in the mountainous regions of Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Jordan.

    In Syria, their population is estimated at around 700,000 (of around 23 million total Syrian population), with the majority residing in the southern As-Suwayda Governorate – or province – which serves as their traditional stronghold.

    Since the 2011 uprising against the Assad regime, the Druze have maintained a degree of autonomy, successfully defending their territory from various threats, including ISIS and other jihadist groups.

    Following Assad’s fall late last year, the Druze — along with other minority groups such as the Kurds in the east and Alawites in the west — have called for the country to be federalized.

    They advocate for a decentralised model that would grant greater autonomy to regional communities.

    However, the transitional government in Damascus is pushing for a centralised state and seeking to reassert full control over the entire Syrian territory. This fundamental disagreement has led to periodic clashes between Druze forces and government-aligned troops.

    Despite the temporary ceasefire, tensions remain high. Given the core political dispute remains unresolved, many expect renewed conflict to erupt in the near future.

    Why is Israel involved?

    The ousting of the Assad regime created a strategic opening for Israel to expand its influence in southern Syria. Israel’s involvement is driven by two primary concerns:

    1. Securing its northern border

    Israel views the power vacuum in Syria’s south as a potential threat, particularly the risk of anti-Israeli militias establishing a foothold near its northern border.

    During the recent clashes, the Israeli military declared

    The Israeli Defence Forces will not allow a military threat to exist in southern Syria and will act against it.

    Likewise, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has stated he will not allow Syrian forces south of Damascus:

    We are acting to prevent the Syrian regime from harming them [the Druze] and to ensure the demilitarisation of the area adjacent to our border with Syria.

    In line with these warnings, the Israeli Air Force has conducted extensive strikes against Syrian military infrastructure, targeting bases, aircraft, tanks, and heavy weaponry.

    These operations are intended to prevent any future buildup of military capacity that could be used against Israel from the Syrian side of the border.

    2. Supporting a federated Syria

    Israel is backing the two prominent allied minorities in Syria — the Kurds in the northeast and the Druze in the south — in their push for a federal governance model.

    A fragmented Syria, divided along ethnic and religious lines, is seen by some Israeli policymakers as a way to maintain Israeli domination in the region.

    This vision is part of what some Israeli officials have referred to as a “New Middle East” — one where regional stability and normalisation emerge through reshaped borders and alliances.

    Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar recently echoed this strategy, stating:

    A single Syrian state with effective control and sovereignty over all its territory is unrealistic.

    For Israel, the logical path forward is autonomy for the various minorities in Syria within a federal structure.

    The United States’ role?

    According to unconfirmed reports, Washington has privately urged Israel to scale back its military strikes on Syria in order to prevent further escalation and preserve regional stability.

    The US is promoting increased support for Syria’s new regime in an effort to help it reassert control and stabilise the country.

    There are also indications the US and its allies are encouraging the Syrian government to move toward normalisation with Israel. Reports suggest Tel Aviv has held talks with the new Sharaa-led regime about the possibility of Syria joining the Abraham Accords (diplomatic agreements between Israel and several Arab states), which the regime in Damascus appears open to.

    US Special Envoy Tom Barrack has described the recent clashes as “worrisome”, calling for de-escalation and emphasising the need for

    a peaceful, inclusive outcome for all stakeholders – including the Druze, Bedouin tribes, the Syrian government, and Israeli forces.

    Given the deep-rooted political divisions, competing regional agendas, and unresolved demands from minority groups, the unrest in southern Syria is unlikely to end soon.

    Despite another temporary ceasefire, underlying tensions remain. Further clashes are not only possible but highly probable.

    Ali Mamouri 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. Why is Israel bombing Syria? – https://theconversation.com/why-is-israel-bombing-syria-261259

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: China’s insertion into India-Pakistan waters dispute adds a further ripple in South Asia

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Pintu Kumar Mahla, Research Associate at the Water Resources Research Institute, University of Arizona

    Indian Border Security Force soldiers patrol near the line of control in Kashmir. Nitin Kanotra/Hindustan Times via Getty Images

    With the future of a crucial water-sharing treaty between India and Pakistan up in the air, one outside party is looking on with keen interest: China.

    For 65 years, the Indus Waters Treaty has seen the two South Asian rivals share access and use of the Indus Basin, a vast area covered by the Indus River and its tributaries that also stretches into Afghanistan and China.

    For much of that history, there has been widespread praise for the agreement as a successful demonstration of cooperation between adversarial states over a key shared resource. But experts have noted the treaty has long held the potential for conflict. Drafters failed to factor in the effects of climate change, and the Himalayan glaciers that feed the rivers are now melting at record rates, ultimately putting at risk the long-term sustainability of water supply. Meanwhile, the ongoing conflict over Kashmir, where much of the basin is situated, puts cooperation at risk.

    With treaty on ice, China steps in

    That latest provocation threatening the treaty was a terrorist attack in the Indian union territory of Jammu and Kashmir on April 22, 2025. In response to that attack, which India blamed on Pakistan and precipitated a four-day confrontation, New Delhi temporarily suspended the treaty.

    But even before that attack, India and Pakistan had been locked in negotiation over the future of the treaty – the status of which has been in the hands of international arbitrators since 2016. In the latest development, on June 27, 2025, the Permanent Court of Arbitration issued a supplementary award in favor of Pakistan, arguing that India’s holding of the treaty in abeyance did not affect its jurisdiction over the case. Moreover, the treaty does not allow for either party to unilaterally suspend the treaty, the ruling suggested.

    Amid the wrangling over the treaty’s future, Pakistan has turned to China for diplomatic and strategic support. Such support was evident during the conflict that took place following April’s terrorist attack, during which Pakistan employed Chinese-made fighter jets and other military equipment against its neighbor.

    Meanwhile, in an apparent move to counter India’s suspension of the treaty, China and Pakistan have ramped up construction of a major dam project that would provide water supply and electricity to parts of Pakistan.

    So, why is China getting involved? In part, it reflects the strong relationship between Pakistan and China, developed over six decades.

    But as an expert in hydro politics, I believe Beijing’s involvement raises concerns: China is not a neutral observer in the dispute. Rather, Beijing has long harbored a desire to increase its influence in the region and to counter an India long seen as a rival. Given the at-times fraught relationship between China and India – the two countries went to war in 1962 and continue to engage in sporadic border skirmishes – there are concerns in New Delhi that Beijing may respond by disrupting the flow of rivers in its territory that feed into India.

    In short, any intervention by Beijing over the Indus Waters Treaty risks stirring up regional tensions.

    Wrangling over waters

    The Indus Waters Treaty has already endured three armed conflicts between Pakistan and India, and until recently it served as an exemplar of how to forge a successful bilateral agreement between two rival neighbors.


    Riccardo Pravettoni, CC BY-SA

    Under the initial terms of the treaty, which each country signed in 1960, India was granted control over three eastern rivers the countries share – Ravi, Beas and Satluj – with an average annual flow of 40.4 billion cubic meters. Meanwhile, Pakistan was given access to almost 167.2 billion cubic meters of water from the western rivers – Indus, Jhelum and Chenab.

    In India, the relatively smaller distribution has long been the source of contention, with many believing the treaty’s terms are overly generous to Pakistan. India’s initial demand was for 25% of the Indus waters.

    For Pakistan, the terms of the division of the Indus Waters Treaty are painful because they concretized unresolved land disputes tied to the partition of India in 1947. In particular, the division of the rivers is framed within the broader political context of Kashmir. The three major rivers – Indus, Jhelum and Chenab – flow through Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir before entering the Pakistan-controlled western part of the Kashmir region.

    But the instability of the Kashmir region – disputes around the Line of Control separating the Indian- and Pakistan-controlled areas are common – underscores Pakistan’s water vulnerability.

    Nearly 65% of Pakistanis live in the Indus Basin region, compared with 14% for India. It is therefore not surprising that Pakistan has warned that any attempt to cut off the water supply, as India has threatened, would be considered an act of war.

    It also helps to explain Pakistan’s desire to develop hydropower on the rivers it controls. One-fifth of Pakistan’s electricity comes from hydropower, and nearly 21 hydroelectric power plants are located in the Indus Basin region.

    Since Pakistan’s economy relies heavily on agriculture and the water needed to maintain agricultural land, the fate of the Indus Waters Treaty is of the utmost importance to Pakistan’s leaders.

    Such conditions have driven Islamabad to be a willing partner with China in a bid to shore up its water supply.

    China provides technical expertise and financial support to Pakistan for numerous hydropower projects in Pakistan, including the Diamer Bhasha Dam and Kohala Hydropower Project. These projects play a significant role in addressing Pakistan’s energy requirements and have been a key aspect of the transboundary water relationship between the two nations.

    Using water as a weapon?

    With it’s rivalry with India and its desire to simultaneously work with Pakistan on numerous issues, China increasingly sees itself as a stakeholder in the Indus Waters Treaty, too. Chinese media narratives have framed India as the aggressor in the dispute, warning of the danger of using “water as a weapon” and noting that the source of the Indus River lies in China’s Western Tibet region.

    Doing so fits Beijing’ s greater strategic presence in South Asian politics. After the terrorist attack, China Foreign Minister Wang Yi reaffirmed China’s support for Pakistan, showcasing the relationship as an “all-weather strategic” partnership and referring to Pakistan as an “ironclad friend.”

    And in response to India’s suspension of the treaty, China announced it was to accelerate work on the significant Mohmand hydropower project on the tributary of the Indus River in Pakistan.

    Construction at the Mohmand Dam.
    Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority

    Chinese investment in Pakistan’s hydropower sector presents substantial opportunities for both countries in regards to energy security and promoting economic growth.

    The Indus cascade project under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor initiative, for example, promises to provide cumulative hydropower generation capacity of around 22,000 megawatts. Yet the fact that project broke ground in Gilgit-Baltistan, a disputed area in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, underscores the delicacy of the situation.

    Beijing’s backing of Pakistan is largely motivated by a mix of economic and geopolitical interests, particularly in legitimizing the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. But it comes at the cost of stirring up regional tensions.

    As such, the alignment of Chinese and Pakistani interests in developing hydro projects can pose a further challenge to the stability of South Asia’s water-sharing agreements, especially in the Indus Basin. Recently, the chief minister of the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, which borders China, warned that Beijing’s hydro projects in the Western Tibet region amount to a ticking “water bomb.”

    To diffuse such tensions – and to get the Indus Waters Treaty back on track – it behooves India, China and Pakistan to engage in diplomacy and dialogue. Such engagement is, I believe, essential in addressing the ongoing water-related challenges in South Asia.

    Pintu Kumar Mahla is affiliated with the Water Resources Research Center, the University of Arizona. He is also a member of the International Association of Water Law (AIDA).

    Pintu Kumar Mahla has not received funding related to this article.

    ref. China’s insertion into India-Pakistan waters dispute adds a further ripple in South Asia – https://theconversation.com/chinas-insertion-into-india-pakistan-waters-dispute-adds-a-further-ripple-in-south-asia-258891

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Europe is stuck in a bystander role over Iran’s nuclear program after US, Israeli bombs establish facts on the ground

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Garret Martin, Hurst Senior Professorial Lecturer, Co-Director Transatlantic Policy Center, American University School of International Service

    Iran Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian, right, attends a news conference with EU foreign affairs representative Josep Borrell in Tehran on June 25, 2022. Atta KenareAFP via Getty Images

    The U.S. bombing of three Iranian nuclear facilities on June 22, 2025, sent shock waves around the world. It marked a dramatic reversal for the Trump administration, which had just initiated negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear program. Dispensing with diplomacy, the U.S. opted for the first time for direct military involvement in the then-ongoing Israeli-Iranian conflict.

    European governments have long pushed for a diplomatic solution to Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. Yet, the reaction in the capitals of Europe to the U.S. bombing of the nuclear facilities was surprisingly subdued.

    European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen noted Israel’s “right to defend itself and protect its people.” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz was equally supportive, arguing that “this is dirty work that Israel is doing for all of us.” And a joint statement by the E3 – France, the U.K. and Germany – tacitly justified the U.S. bombing as necessary to prevent the possibility of Iran developing nuclear weapons.

    Europe’s responses to the Israeli and American strikes were noteworthy because of how little they discussed the legality of the attacks. There was no such hesitation when Russia targeted civilian nuclear energy infrastructure in Ukraine in 2022.

    But the timid reaction also underscored Europe’s bystander role, contrasting with its past approach on that topic. Iran’s nuclear program had been a key focal point of European diplomacy for years. The E3 nations initiated negotiations with Tehran back in 2003. They also helped to facilitate the signing of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, which also included Russia, the European Union, China, the U.S. and Iran. And the Europeans sought to preserve the agreement, even after the unilateral U.S. withdrawal in 2018 during President Donald Trump’s first term.

    As a scholar of transatlantic relations and security, I believe Europe faces long odds to once again play an impactful role in strengthening the cause of nuclear nonproliferation with Iran. Indeed, contributing to a new nuclear agreement with Iran would require Europe to fix a major rift with Tehran, overcome its internal divisions over the Middle East and manage a Trump administration that seems less intent on being a reliable ally for Europe.

    Growing rift between Iran and Europe

    For European diplomats, the 2015 deal was built on very pragmatic assumptions. It only covered the nuclear dossier, as opposed to including other areas of contention such as human rights or Iran’s ballistic missile program. And it offered a clear bargain: In exchange for greater restrictions on its nuclear program, Iran could expect the lifting of some existing sanctions and a reintegration into the world economy.

    As a result, the U.S. withdrawal from the deal in 2018 posed a fundamental challenge to the status quo. Besides exiting, the Trump White House reimposed heavy secondary sanctions on Iran, which effectively forced foreign companies to choose between investing in the U.S. and Iranian markets. European efforts to mitigate the impact of these U.S. sanctions failed, thus undermining the key benefit of the deal for Iran: helping its battered economy. It also weakened Tehran’s faith in the value of Europe as a partner, as it revealed an inability to carve real independence from the U.S.

    U.S. President Donald Trump walks past French President Emmanuel Macron, center, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, right, in The Hague, Netherlands, on June 25, 2025.
    Christian Hartmann/AFP via Getty Images

    After 2018, relations between Europe and Iran deteriorated significantly. Evidence of Iranian state-sponsored terrorism and Iran-linked plots on European soil hardly helped. Moreover, Europeans strongly objected to Iran supplying Russia with drones in support of Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine – and later on, ballistic missiles as well. On the flip side, Iran deeply objected to European support for Israel’s war in the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks.

    These deep tensions remain a significant impediment to constructive negotiations on the nuclear front. Neither side currently has much to offer to the other, nor can Europe count on any meaningful leverage to influence Iran. And Europe’s wider challenges in its Middle East policy only compound this problem.

    Internal divisions

    In 2015, Europe could present a united front on the Iranian nuclear deal in part because of its limited nature. But with the nonproliferation regime now in tatters amid Trump’s unilateral actions and the spread of war across the region, it is now far harder for European diplomats to put the genie back in the bottle. That is particularly true given the present fissures over increasingly divisive Middle East policy questions and the nature of EU diplomacy.

    Europe remains very concerned about stability in the Middle East, including how conflicts might launch new migratory waves like in 2015-16, when hundreds of thousands of Syrians fled to mainland Europe. The EU also remains very active economically in the region and is the largest funder of the Palestinian Authority. But it has been more of a “payer than player” in the region, struggling to translate economic investment into political influence.

    In part, this follows from the longer-term tendency to rely on U.S. leadership in the region, letting Washington take the lead in trying to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But it also reflects the deeper divisions between EU member nations.

    With foreign policy decisions requiring unanimity, EU members have often struggled to speak with one voice on the Middle East. Most recently, the debates over whether to suspend the economic association agreement with Israel over its actions in Gaza or whether to recognize a Palestinian state clearly underscored the existing EU internal disagreements.

    Unless Europe can develop a common approach toward the Middle East, it is hard to see it having enough regional influence to matter in future negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. This, in turn, would also affect how it manages its crucial, but thorny, relations with the U.S.

    Europe in the shadow of Trump

    The EU was particularly proud of the 2015 nuclear deal because it represented a strong symbol of multilateral diplomacy. It brought together great powers in the spirit of bolstering the cause of nuclear nonproliferation.

    Smoke rises from a building in Tehran after the Iranian capital was targeted by Israeli airstrikes on June 23, 2025.
    Elyas/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images

    Ten years on, the prospects of replicating such international cooperation seem rather remote. Europe’s relations with China and Russia – two key signers of the original nuclear deal – have soured dramatically in recent years. And ties with the United States under Trump have also been particularly challenging.

    Dealing with Washington, in the context of the Iran nuclear program, presents a very sharp dilemma for Europe.

    Trying to carve a distinct path may be appealing, but it lacks credibility at this stage. Recent direct talks with Iranian negotiators produced little, and Europe is not in a position to give Iran guarantees that it would not face new strikes from Israel.

    And pursuing an independent path could easily provoke the ire of Trump, which Europeans are keen to avoid. There has already been a long list of transatlantic disputes, whether over trade, Ukraine or defense spending. European policymakers would be understandably reticent to invest time and resources in any deal that Trump could again scuttle at a moment’s notice.

    Trump, too, is scornful of what European diplomacy could achieve, declaring recently that Iran doesn’t want to talk to Europe. He has instead prioritized bilateral negotiations with Tehran. Alignment with the U.S., therefore, may not translate into any great influence. Trump’s decision to bomb Iran, after all, happened without forewarning for his allies.

    Thus, Europe will continue to pay close attention to Iran’s nuclear program. But, constrained by poor relations with Tehran and its internal divisions on the Middle East, it is unlikely that it will carve out a major role on the nuclear dossier as long as Trump is in office.

    Garret Martin receives funding from the European Union for the organization, the Transatlantic Policy Center, that he co-directs.

    ref. Europe is stuck in a bystander role over Iran’s nuclear program after US, Israeli bombs establish facts on the ground – https://theconversation.com/europe-is-stuck-in-a-bystander-role-over-irans-nuclear-program-after-us-israeli-bombs-establish-facts-on-the-ground-260740

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Tuberville Speaks with Crypto Stakeholders during Ag Hearing

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Tommy Tuberville (Alabama)
    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) spoke with Ji Kim, CEO of the Crypto Council for Innovation, The Honorable Rostin Behnam, Distinguished Fellow at Georgetown University, and Tom Sexton, President and CEO of National Futures Association, during a Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry (Ag) Committee hearing on federal oversight of digital commodities. During the hearing, they discussed the need for the U.S. to be a leader in digital assets.
    Read Sen. Tuberville’s remarks below or on YouTube or Rumble.
    TUBERVILLE: “Mr. Kim, you touched on this very briefly in your opening statement. The E.U. and U.K. are moving quickly to attract blockchain-based innovation. What risk are we at in the United States? What are we gonna face if we don’t get more urgent about what’s going on?
    I recently talked to some exchanges and they’re freaking out basically about, ‘Hey, we’ve gotta do something or we’re gonna move out of the country.’ What [are] your thoughts?”
    KIM: “Thank you very much for your question, Senator. As I mentioned in my testimony, it is a global race to the top. So other jurisdictions have not been waiting for the U.S. to lead. You have the E.U., Singapore, Japan, U.K. [are] all looking into technology resources. I see block chain development and digital assets as the plumbing and infrastructure for the second half of the 21st Century. We need the U.S. to lead.
    That said, despite the progress in other jurisdictions, everyone is watching the U.S. now. They’re seeing the Senate having passed [the] GENIUS [Act], they’re seeing development on the market structure bill, including in this Committee. And even the U.K. is actually a really good example, Senator, where they had been taking a very modular, patient approach, but recently they announced an all-at-once approach. And I believe that there’s an opportunity for the U.S. to cement this leadership and make sure this innovation stays here in the U.S. — and that starts with a comprehensive incentive framework as I discussed, Senator.”
    TUBERVILLE: “Thank you. Mr. Sexton [do] you want to follow-up on that? You got anything on that — about us dragging our feet?”
    SEXTON: “Senator, I encourage this Committee and the House to continue to work on legislation in this area. I think it’s very important. I can tell you that from our perspective, we have, as I indicated, member firms are already engaged in this activity. And to the extent that the CFTC would be provided with not only anti-fraud, but also regulatory oversight over digital commodities, I think it’d be very helpful as far as our own regulatory structure here.”
    TUBERVILLE: “Thank you.
    Mr. Behnam, the U.S. model of having two regulators — and we touched on this briefly — only works if there are clear jurisdictions. You’re very familiar with that. Can you talk about the need to clear up, you know, this regulatory definition between CFTC and the SEC?”
    BEHNAM: “Senator, thanks for the question. It’s the first and most important step because from that point, the two agencies will be able to really start to develop rules either distinctly and uniquely or in a joint fashion. But this is certainly a new asset that has a lot of characteristics that are similar to other assets but also have a lot of characteristics that are novel and new and are gonna require a different way of thinking about it. So, I do think it’s critically important. I also think, putting myself in my old shoes, it is important that the agencies get a bit of a steer from this Committee in Congress because there are lines that I think this committee and the Congress can draw to help the agencies start to really define the landscape of what tokens are securities and what tokens are commodities.”
    TUBERVILLE: “Thank you. I yield back.”
    Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP and Aging Committees.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: REP. HILL’S BILL TO TURN VACANT FEDERAL BUILDING INTO COMMUNITY SPACE IN PERRY COUNTY ADVANCES THROUGH COMMITTEE

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman French Hill (AR-02)

     Rep. French Hill (AR-02) today released the following statement after his bill, H.R. 3187, advanced out of the House Committee on Natural Resources with unanimous consent. The bill directs the Secretary of Agriculture to convey a vacant U.S. Forest Service building and surrounding land to Perry County.

    Rep. Hill said, “I’m pleased to see my bill to transfer a long-vacant U.S. Forest Service building to Perry County unanimously passed the House Natural Resources Committee. That building has sat empty for years, and now it’s one step closer to being put to good use for youth programs, agricultural education, and local conservation efforts. It’s a smart use of public resources and a clear win for Perry County.

    “I’m especially thankful to my friend and fellow Arkansan, Chairman Westerman, for moving this bill through his committee. As it heads to the House Floor, I’ll keep working to get my bill passed so local leaders can finally put the building to work for the people of Perry County.”

    Following the passage of H.R. 3187 through the House Committee on Natural Resources, Chairman Westerman said, “Congressman Hill’s simple land transfer removes a burden from the American taxpayer and will help support the needs of a local community in my home state. This commonsense legislation will provide Perry County with new resources to support the community. I’d like to thank Congressman Hill for his work on this bill and for his work for Arkansans.”

    Background

    The 0.81-acre parcel, located at 1069 Fourche Avenue, includes a federal building operated by the U.S. Forest Service. The building is vacant, and the U.S. Forest Service has no plans to use it going forward. While the building will require repairs and updates, Perry County has the funds to make the necessary improvements. Once conveyed and repaired, the property will support permanent operations of the University of Arkansas Extension Program and the Perry County Conservation District and serve as the meeting space for the 4-H Youth Development Program.

    Several local leaders and Perry County residents have voiced their support for the building to be conveyed to Perry County.

    You can read the full bill text HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senators King, Collins, Smith Introduce Bill to Combat Lyme and Other Tick-Borne Diseases

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Maine Angus King

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Tina Smith (D-MN) today introduced legislation to reauthorize the Kay Hagan Tick Act, their landmark legislation to improve research, prevention, diagnostics, and treatment for tick-borne diseases, which became law in 2019. Senator Angus King (I-ME) joins them as an original co-sponsor. The Kay Hagan Tick Act unites the effort to confront the alarming public health threat posed by Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases. Confirmed cases of Lyme disease reached a record number in Maine – 3,035 – last year. Senators Collins and Smith named their bill in honor of former Senator Kay Hagan (D-NC) who passed away on October 28th, 2019, due to complications from the tick-borne disease known as the Powassan virus.

    “Our state has been battling diseases like Lyme for decades, so it is critical we continue to invest in our research and understanding of these vector-borne diseases to better protect Maine residents and visitors,” said Senator King. “The Kay Hagan Tick Act will further the prevention efforts that keep us safe by funding research, testing and diagnostics along with resources for improved data collection. I am proud to work on this critical bipartisan legislation that will help mitigate this long-term public health threat for the future safety and health of all Maine people.”

    “Last year, Maine reported over 3,000 cases of Lyme disease—a record in our state. The reauthorization of our Tick Act is urgently needed to continue to support those who struggle with Lyme and other tick-borne illnesses and keep improving research, diagnostics, treatment, and prevention for these terrible diseases,” said Senator Collins. “Resources from the Tick Act have led to exciting developments such as the first-ever clinical trial for a Lyme disease vaccine for people, which is underway right now at the MaineHealth Institute for Research.”

    “My home state of Minnesota is proud to have more than 10,000 lakes and thousands of rivers for us to enjoy, and we’re always especially eager to get outside after a long winter,” said Senator Smith. “Unfortunately, the number of Lyme disease cases in the state—and states across the country—is on the rise. This bill would empower regional centers to lead the response against these diseases and expanded the federal government’s role in researching, testing and treating these diseases. For the sake of Americans’ health and well-being, we need to keep moving this bill forward.”

    “Reauthorizing the Kay Hagan Tick Act will continue the nation’s coordinated framework for tick-borne disease surveillance, diagnostics, and prevention”, said Griffin Dill, Director of the University of Maine Tick Lab. Continued support means earlier detection, targeted interventions, and fewer families facing the physical and financial burden of Lyme disease and other emerging infections. Through this investment, Congress can ensure a proactive approach to safeguarding our communities from increasing threats related to ticks.”

    “With an estimated 500,000 new cases of Lyme disease each year, it is critical that the United States is equipped to effectively prevent, detect, and respond to this growing public health threat,” said Bonnie Crater, co-founder and board member at Center for Lyme Action. “We applaud the foundation laid by the Kay Hagan Tick Act, which established the National Public Health Strategy to Prevent and Control Vector-Borne Diseases in Humans and we are committed to working with Congress and federal agencies to ensure this strategy is fully implemented and strengthened.  We commend Senator Collins, Senator King, and Senator Smith for their bipartisan leadership in advancing the reauthorization of this vital legislation to protect the health and safety of Americans nationwide.”

    Using a three-pronged approach, the Kay Hagan Tick Reauthorization Act would:

    1. Require the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to continue implementing and updating, as appropriate, its National Public Health Strategy to Prevent and Control Vector-Borne Diseases in People.  This strategy has been integral in expanding research into tick-borne diseases, improving testing and diagnostics, and coordinating efforts across the federal government.
    1. Reauthorize Regional Centers of Excellence in Vector-Borne Disease for five years. Funding for these centers, which was allotted in 2017, expires this year. These Centers have led the scientific response against tick-borne diseases, which now make up 75 percent of vector-borne diseases in the U.S.  There are four centers located at universities in California, Florida, Texas, and Wisconsin. 
    1. Reauthorize CDC Grants to State Health Departments to improve data collection and analysis, support early detection and diagnosis, improve treatment, and raise awareness.  These awards would help states continue to build a public health infrastructure for Lyme and other vector-borne diseases and amplify their initiatives through public-private partnerships.   

    In May, Senator Collins delivered the opening remarks at the Center for Lyme Action Congressional Series and spoke to the need for continued federal funding for tick-borne disease research. Click here to watch and here to download her remarks. Senator Collins has also urged leading health officials to continue to support the development of treatment for these illnesses, including the clinical trials currently ongoing in Maine for the first Lyme disease vaccine for people.

    Senator King is a longtime advocate for the elimination of vector-borne diseases. His SMASH Act, bipartisan legislation to reauthorize critical public health tools that support states and localities in their mosquito surveillance and control efforts, especially those linked to mosquitos that carry the Zika virus, and improve the nation’s preparedness for Zika and other mosquito-borne threats like West Nile virus, chikungunya, and Eastern Equine Encephalitis (“triple-e”) virus was signed into law in 2019. A re-authorization of SMASH was introduced in 2023 and included in the Pandemic All-Hazards Preparedness Act Reauthorization.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: In the world of books and artifacts: participants of the SPbPU library forum visited a rare excursion

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    A library forum was recently held at the Polytechnic University “KorFor-2025”A special gift for the forum guests was a tour of rare and often closed to the general public libraries of St. Petersburg.

    For example, the tour participants got acquainted with the oldest military library in Russia, which is located in the historical building of the General Staff on Palace Square. Over 210 years, the Military Historical Library of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation has collected a unique collection on military history and military art from ancient times to the present day. A special pride is the richest collection of maps of military operations for more than 200 years of history. The employees talked about their work, about new technologies used in the library, which carefully stores not only documents, but also the memory of great events in the history of our Motherland.

    The history of the Scientific Library of the Russian Academy of Arts begins at the time of the founding of the Academy of Arts in 1757. The basis of the library’s collection was a gift from the founder of the Academy of Arts, Ivan Ivanovich Shuvalov. Currently, the library collection contains more than half a million printed publications, engravings, photographs, reproductions, illustrations, revealing the entire diversity of world artistic culture.

    The excursionists walked through the unique halls of the library, learned about the history of its creation and development. And what awe and admiration were caused by the rare editions of the 15th-18th centuries, offsets, engravings, lithographs! The time spent in a warm, welcoming atmosphere flew by in an instant and left unforgettable impressions on all the excursion participants.

    During the visit to the Scientific Library of the Russian Geographical Society, the specialists got acquainted with a rare collection of books, maps and documents. These materials reflect almost all expeditions in Russia and other countries that took place under the auspices of the Russian Geographical Society. The reports on Arctic expeditions and the history of the discovery of the Northern Sea Route deserve special attention. The guests had the opportunity to get acquainted with rare editions of the 17th-19th centuries, representing historical and cultural significance.

    Head of the library Maria Bystrova told the guests in detail about the unique collections and modern methods of cataloguing and storing valuable materials.

    The librarians also got a glimpse into the inner life of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy of the Russian Orthodox Church: they walked along the rector’s corridor, visited the museum and classrooms, looked into the cozy reading room and, of course, into the library, the largest in the Orthodox world. Currently, its collection contains about 315,000 books, periodicals and musical editions. The library collection contains books mainly of theological and church-historical content. The excursionists were especially impressed by the academic temple in the name of the Apostle and Evangelist John the Theologian, which houses the revered icon of the Mother of God “The Sign” of Tsarskoye Selo and other holy relics.

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Pic of the Week – Bizzell Memorial Library, Historic Landmark and Home to Library of Congress History

    Source: US Global Legal Monitor

    My summer travels always end at a library. Every library I have visited, from the one of my childhood home to my current place of employment, is special to me, not to mention the communities they continue to serve. On a visit to Oklahoma, I discovered another.

    The Bizzell Memorial Library is located in Norman, on the campus of the University of Oklahoma. Built in 1929, the library’s architectural style is Cherokee Gothic, like many other buildings on the campus. In 2001, it was made a National Historic Landmark.

    The Peggy V. Helmerich Great Reading Room of Bizzell Library on a summer day. Photo by Bailey DeSimone.

    While exploring the halls, I learned that the library was an important part of a civil rights case. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (229 U.S. 637 (1950)), a unanimous court ruled that George W. McLaurin, the first African American to attend the University of Oklahoma, was deprived of his 14th Amendment rights in the “separate but equal” segregation practices of the University. Before this ruling, McLaurin “was required to sit apart at a designated desk in an anteroom adjoining the classroom” and “a designated desk on the mezzanine floor of the library, but not to use the desks in the regular reading room.” (p. 4.) The ruling was also delivered on the same day as Sweatt v. Painter (339 U.S. 629 (1950)), a case in which Herman Marion Sweatt, an African American applicant to the University of Texas School of Law, was ruled to have had his 14th Amendment rights violated when he was denied admittance on the grounds of his race.

    Also in the Bizzell Library is a select collection of awards granted to, and publications by, Daniel J. Boorstin, a notable author and winner of the Pulitzer Prize for History in 1974. He went on to serve as the Librarian of Congress from 1975 to 1987. Though not an alumnus of the University, Boorstin did grow up in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and was inducted into the Tulsa Hall of Fame in 1989.

    The Daniel J. Boorstin Collection at the University of Oklahoma Bizzell Memorial Library. Photo by Bailey DeSimone.

    I am grateful to every library that has welcomed me through its doors, and I am glad to add Bizzell Library to the list. I learn something new and interesting every time. This summer, check out your local library for their current displays and see what you learn!

    Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Pic of the Week – Bizzell Memorial Library, Historic Landmark and Home to Library of Congress History

    Source: US Global Legal Monitor

    My summer travels always end at a library. Every library I have visited, from the one of my childhood home to my current place of employment, is special to me, not to mention the communities they continue to serve. On a visit to Oklahoma, I discovered another.

    The Bizzell Memorial Library is located in Norman, on the campus of the University of Oklahoma. Built in 1929, the library’s architectural style is Cherokee Gothic, like many other buildings on the campus. In 2001, it was made a National Historic Landmark.

    The Peggy V. Helmerich Great Reading Room of Bizzell Library on a summer day. Photo by Bailey DeSimone.

    While exploring the halls, I learned that the library was an important part of a civil rights case. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (229 U.S. 637 (1950)), a unanimous court ruled that George W. McLaurin, the first African American to attend the University of Oklahoma, was deprived of his 14th Amendment rights in the “separate but equal” segregation practices of the University. Before this ruling, McLaurin “was required to sit apart at a designated desk in an anteroom adjoining the classroom” and “a designated desk on the mezzanine floor of the library, but not to use the desks in the regular reading room.” (p. 4.) The ruling was also delivered on the same day as Sweatt v. Painter (339 U.S. 629 (1950)), a case in which Herman Marion Sweatt, an African American applicant to the University of Texas School of Law, was ruled to have had his 14th Amendment rights violated when he was denied admittance on the grounds of his race.

    Also in the Bizzell Library is a select collection of awards granted to, and publications by, Daniel J. Boorstin, a notable author and winner of the Pulitzer Prize for History in 1974. He went on to serve as the Librarian of Congress from 1975 to 1987. Though not an alumnus of the University, Boorstin did grow up in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and was inducted into the Tulsa Hall of Fame in 1989.

    The Daniel J. Boorstin Collection at the University of Oklahoma Bizzell Memorial Library. Photo by Bailey DeSimone.

    I am grateful to every library that has welcomed me through its doors, and I am glad to add Bizzell Library to the list. I learn something new and interesting every time. This summer, check out your local library for their current displays and see what you learn!

    Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: How rising living costs are changing the way we date, live and love

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Melise Panetta, Lecturer of Marketing in the Lazaridis School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University

    Young adults in their 20s and 30s face an altered social landscape where financial realities influence their relationships. (Rene Ranisch/Unsplash)

    If it feels like rising prices are affecting your dating life or friendships, you’re not imagining it. Around the world, economic pressures are taking a significant toll on personal relationships.

    From strained romantic partnerships to postponed life milestones, financial uncertainty is changing the way people connect and relate to with one another.

    Young adults in their 20s and 30s, in particular, are facing an altered social landscape where even the most fundamental aspects of relationships are being influenced by financial realities.


    Dating today can feel like a mix of endless swipes, red flags and shifting expectations. From decoding mixed signals to balancing independence with intimacy, relationships in your 20s and 30s come with unique challenges. Love IRL is the latest series from Quarter Life that explores it all.

    These research-backed articles break down the complexities of modern love to help you build meaningful connections, no matter your relationship status.


    Financial stress and relationship strain

    Money has long been one of the biggest sources of conflict in relationships, but today’s economic landscape has made financial stress an even greater burden.

    In Canada, a staggering 77 per cent of couples report financial strain, and 62 per cent say they argue over money. The rising cost of rent, food and everyday expenses has forced many couples to make difficult financial decisions, sometimes at the expense of their relationship.

    These concerns are not unique to Canadian couples. A study in the United Kingdom found that 38 per cent of people in a relationship admit to having a secret account or “money stashed away” that their partner doesn’t know about. And in the United States, couples surveyed reported having 58 money-related arguments per year.

    Money has long been one of the biggest sources of conflict in relationships.
    (Shutterstock)

    Even more concerning, financial instability is affecting how long relationships last. A recent RBC poll found 55 per cent of Canadians feel they need to be in a relationship to afford their lifestyle.

    The economic barriers to independence are particularly pronounced for those contemplating separation or divorce. Traditionally, a breakup meant one partner moving out, but now more divorced and separated couples are finding themselves cohabitating simply because they can’t afford to live alone.

    Understanding how to maintain a healthy relationship when facing financial troubles is essential for couples to navigate these difficult times.

    Postponing major life decisions

    The cost-of-living crisis is also delaying key life milestones for young adults worldwide. A Statistics Canada survey found that 38 per cent of young adults have postponed moving out due to economic uncertainty, an increase from 32 per cent in 2018.

    This issue is not only delaying the journey to independent adulthood, it is also reversing it. For example, in the United Kingdom, one in five young adults who moved out have had to move back into their family home due to the cost of living crisis.

    Housing affordability plays a major role in these delays. With housing prices soaring in Canada, the U.S., the U.K. and elsewhere, home ownership feels out of reach for many. For instance, 55 per cent of young Canadians report the housing crisis is fuelling their decision to delay starting a family.

    The cost-of-living crisis is also delaying key life milestones for young adults worldwide. Real estate signs seen in Calgary in May 2023.
    (Shutterstock)

    These delays have cascading effects on individuals and on broader societal trends, including lower fertility rates and shifts toward smaller families.

    Dating in a cost-conscious era

    One side effect of the rising cost of living is that couples are moving in together sooner than they might have otherwise in order to split living expenses. Others are adopting a more pragmatic approach to dating and bringing up topics like financial stability, job security and housing much earlier in their relationships.

    A dating trend known as “future-proofing” is also spreading. According to Bumble’s annual trend report, 95 per cent of singles say their worries about the future are impacting who they date and how they approach relationships. Top concerns include finances, job security, housing and climate change.




    Read more:
    The price of love: Why millennials and Gen Zs are running up major dating debt


    At the same time, financial strain is leading to simpler and cheaper date nights. More than half of Canadians say the rising cost of living is affecting dating. Many people are opting for budget-friendly activities like coffee dates, picnics or home-cooked meals instead of expensive dinners or weekend getaways.

    In the U.K., inflation and other day-to-day expenses have also made 33 per cent of the nation’s young singles less likely to go on dates. Around one-quarter of them say it has made them less likely to seek out a romantic partner altogether.

    Financial strain is leading fewer people to go on expensive, extravagent date nights.
    (Shutterstock)

    These costs are forcing single Americans to adjust their dating plans. With 44 per cent of single Americans reporting adjusting a date for financial reasons, and 27 per cent outright cancelling plans due to financial pressures, it is clear that the cost of living is fundamentally changing how Americans date.

    Also, with 38 per cent of dating Canadians saying the costs associated with dating have negatively impacted their ability to reach their financial goals, some are even skipping dating altogether.

    The cost of friendship

    Friendships, too, are feeling the pinch. Gone are the days of casually grabbing dinner or catching a concert on the weekend. Nearly 40 per cent of Canadians, 42 per cent of Britons and 37 per cent of Americans have cut back on social outings due to financial constraints.

    While this may seem like a small sacrifice, the decline in social interactions carries serious consequences. Regular social engagement is critical for mental health, resilience and career development. The more social activities are reduced, the greater the risk of loneliness and isolation — two factors that can significantly impact emotional well-being.

    For many, socializing now means opting for budget-friendly alternatives. However, even with creative adjustments, financial pressures are making it harder to maintain strong social ties.

    The changing landscape of connection

    If you’re in your 20s or 30s, you’ve probably felt the way the economic realities of today are reshaping what relationships look like. Rising costs are influencing everything, from who you live with, how you date and when — or if — you take major life steps.

    Maybe you’ve moved in with a partner sooner than planned to split rent, swapped nights out for budget-friendly hangs or put off milestones like starting a family. You’re not alone. Financial pressures are redefining how we connect with each other.

    Finding ways to maintain strong relationships under economic stress is essential. Research shows providing emotional support to your partner, employing positive problem-solving skills and engaging in open communication are key maintaining high-quality relationships.

    Melise Panetta 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. How rising living costs are changing the way we date, live and love – https://theconversation.com/how-rising-living-costs-are-changing-the-way-we-date-live-and-love-252709

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ showcases Donald Trump’s penchant for visual cruelty

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Marycarmen Lara Villanueva, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Justice Education, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto

    The United States government recently announced the opening of a massive immigrant detention facility built deep within the Florida Everglades that’s been dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz.” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a media briefing that “there is only one road leading in … and the only way out is a one-way flight.”

    For some taking in her remarks, the moment felt dystopian. According to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, the facility is surrounded by swamps and alligators and is equipped with more than 200 security cameras, 8,500 metres of barbed wire and a security force of 400 personnel.

    Accounts from some of the first detainees at the facility have shed light on the inhumane conditions. They’ve described limited access to water and fresh air, saying they received only one meal a day and that the lights are on 24/7.

    Apparently designed to be an immigration deterrence and a display of cruelty, Alligator Alcatraz is much more than infrastructure. It is visual policy aimed to stage terror as a message while making Trump’s authoritarian and fascist politics a material reality.

    Contributing to this fascist visual apparatus, AI-generated images of alligators wearing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) hats have circulated widely on social media. Some have questioned whether these images were satire or state propaganda.

    A screenshot of a June 2025 Homeland Security post on X, formerly Twitter.

    Surveillance, migration, debilitation

    In a moment of growing right-wing rhetoric and support for anti-immigrant violence, understanding how visual regimes operate, and what they attempt to normalize, is important.




    Read more:
    Nearly 54% of extreme conservatives say the federal government should use violence to stop illegal immigration


    Surveillance and deterrence technologies used along the U.S.–Mexico border for decades were intentionally designed to restrict the movement of undocumented migrants. According to Human Rights Watch, this has resulted in more than 10,000 deaths.

    Since 1994, U.S. Border Patrol has been accused of directing migrants away from urban crossings along the southern border, intentionally funnelling them into harsh and inhospitable terrain like the Sonora Desert.

    The desert serves as a deterrent to prevent immigrants from reaching their destiny. American theorist Jasbir Puar’s concept of debility is useful in making sense of the strategic process whereby the state works not to kill, but to weaken, as a form of slow violence that wears people down over time. The desired outcome is deterrence.

    On the southern U.S. border, severe dehydration and kidney failure can be outcomes of this debilitating process, potentially resulting in disability or death.

    Infrastructures of violence

    Sarah Lopez, a built environment historian and migration scholar in the U.S., describes the architecture of migrant immobilization as existing on a continuum with prison design. She’s highlighted the increasingly punitive conditions of immigration detention facilities, such as small dark cells or the absence of natural light.

    French architect and writer Léopold Lambert explains that architecture isn’t just about buildings, but about how space is used to organize and control people. He coined and developed the term weaponized architecture to describe how spaces are designed to serve the political goals of those in power.

    Colonialism, capitalism and modernity are closely connected, and architecture has played a key role in making them possible. Alligator Alcatraz sits at the intersection of all three, intentionally created to invoke danger and isolation. In other words, it’s cruel by design.

    As Leavitt put it, the facility is “isolated and surrounded by dangerous wildlife and unforgiving terrain.” The Trump administration has essentially transformed land into infrastructure and migrants into disposable threats.

    Terrorizing the marginalized

    State-sanctioned “unforgiving terrains” are not new, and the use of alligators to terrorize people of colour isn’t new either.

    The grotesque history of Black children being used as “alligator bait” in Jim Crow-era imagery is well-documented.

    So when Trump publicly fantasized about alligators eating immigrants trying to escape the new detention centre, it came as no surprise to those familiar with the long racist visual history linking alligators to representations of Black people.

    This logic is redeployed in the form of a racial terror that is made visible, marketable and even humorous in mainstream political discourse.

    Visuality and migration

    “Visuality” is a key term in the field of visual and cultural studies, originally coined by Scottish historian Thomas Carlyle and reintroduced in the early 2000s by American cultural theorist Nicholas Mirzoeff. It can be understood as the socially, historically and culturally constructed ways of seeing and understanding the visual world.

    Visual systems have historically been used to justify western imperial and colonial rule by controlling how people see and understand the world.

    While Alligator Alcatraz is a brand-new detention facility, it draws from a longer visual and spatial history of domination.

    The AI-generated images of alligators wearing ICE hats can be seen as part of a broader visual system that makes racialized violence seem normal, justified and even funny. In this absurd transformation, the alligator is reimagined as a legitimate symbol of border enforcement.

    Migrant death by water

    The spectacle of Alligator Alcatraz, with its swampy inhospitable landscape, cannot be divorced from the long visual history of migrant death by water that’s relied on the circulation of images to provoke outrage — and sometimes state action.

    Examples include the iconic image of Aylan Kurdi, the Syrian child whose lifeless body washed ashore in Turkey in 2015, and the devastating photo of Oscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez and his two-year-old daughter who both drowned crossing the Rio Grande in 2019.

    These images sparked global concern, but they also reinforced the idea that migrant lives only matter when they end in death — as if borders only become visible when they cause deaths.

    Alligator Alcatraz was built in eight days. The fact that a detention camp — or what some have called a concentration camp — can be assembled almost overnight, while basic human needs like clean drinking water or emergency warning systems go unmet for years, speaks volumes about where political will and government priorities lie.

    Marycarmen Lara Villanueva 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. ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ showcases Donald Trump’s penchant for visual cruelty – https://theconversation.com/alligator-alcatraz-showcases-donald-trumps-penchant-for-visual-cruelty-260566

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Biology is complex and diverse, so scientific research approaches need to be too

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Thomas Merritt, Professor, Chemistry and Biochemistry, Laurentian University

    The beautiful, fascinating and often perplexing world around us grows from intricate and convoluted interactions of millions of pieces. As scientists, we work to understand and describe the parts and interactions of these systems.

    Scientific understanding is only as good as the questions we ask. Observing the world from a variety of viewpoints and asking questions from a diversity of perspectives helps us recognize and understand biological complexity. Science, and our own experience, tells us that diverse collaborations lead to better questions and more innovative solutions — but diversity in research is under threat.

    A major advancement in modern biology, specifically in the world of modern genetics that our research team works in, has been the realization that genes are far more complicated than we thought 20 years ago. When the human genome was first sequenced in 2001, scientists realized that each person’s DNA contained around 20,000 genes. Earlier estimates had been between 80,000 and 100,000.

    This drastic downsize may seem like a step back in complexity, but the reduced number means genes must be more complex in order to fulfil multiple roles and functions. There are fewer genes, but each gene has a complicated set of multiple functions modulated through intricate, interconnected and interactive gene-regulation mechanisms.

    Model species, surprising discoveries

    Our research group studies gene regulation using the fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster) as a model species — a non-human species studied extensively to reveal more about other organisms. Flies, like humans, have two copies of each chromosome, each copy with a full set of genes. Typically, regulation of each copy has been assumed to be independent.

    Flies, like humans, have two copies of each chromosome.
    (Mr.checker/Wikimedia)

    Unexpectedly, our research has found that in fruit flies, the copies on separate chromosomes physically interact to modulate each other’s regulation. This means that the chromosomes aren’t independent: they co-regulate in a way that depends on genome structure, or what we call chromosome architecture.

    This form of inter-chromosomal gene regulation, called transvection, was originally described in the 1950s, but is largely unknown. Its potential role to drive biological complexity is underappreciated because its effects are often (but not always) subtle and generally overshadowed by “typical” mechanisms of gene regulation along a single chromosome, cis-regulation.




    Read more:
    How to kill fruit flies, according to a scientist


    Complex genetic interactions

    Our transvection research focuses on subtle differences between individuals and environments. Too often, biology assumes that phenomena are simple, uniform and discreet.

    A classic example, taught in high school biology classes, demonstrates this thinking. Austrian biologist Gregor Mendel studied genetics in pea plants to propose dominant and recessive hereditary traits. His data was a little too clean, too good to be true: Mendel’s peas were either wrinkled or round, yellow or green.

    Genetics is works in more complex ways: think of eye colour. Our eyes are not a dichotomous brown or blue. Colour varies in a spectrum of shades of blues, greens, grays, hazels and browns.

    Similarly, we have shown that transvection, itself an unexpected twist, varies subtly and substantially, in unexpected ways. Recognizing that inter-chomosomal regulation was even possible, let alone could itself be modulated and variable, meant looking at our results from a non-typical view point, a different perspective.

    Our research into stress biology has drawn similar conclusions; diverse responses are the norm and appreciating this variability is absolutely fundamental to understanding the system.

    Differences between male and female biologies

    In our research into metabolism, we have repeatedly found significant and substantial differences between male and females. For example, in recent unpublished data, we find that differences between male and female fruit fly responses to metal toxicity were as large as we would have expected to occur between different species.

    Past conventional wisdom in the field assumed that the biology in the two sexes was interchangeable, with females essentially being just hypervariable males, although recent research in our lab and others is broadly pushing back against this misconception.




    Read more:
    Sex matters: Male bias in the lab is bad science


    The male and female responses are similar but distinct, and this is an important point. To understand biology, our research indicates, we need to identify, appreciate and study these subtle differences in order to produce more thorough scientific investigations.

    Unexpected complexity

    Our research regularly reveals unexpected biological complexity and, not coincidentally, the studies listed above were all collaborations. The technical complexity of research often requires involving experts in multiple disciplines.

    A typical project can involve half a dozen or more experiments and methods, ranging from biochemistry to genetics to life history, and techniques from enzyme kinetic assays to mass spectrometry and DNA sequencing.

    We are part of a genetics research group at Laurentian University whose diversity has greatly strengthened the quality and originality of contributions we have made to the field. In our experience, diverse collaborations combining different perspectives and viewpoints lead to innovative conclusions.

    The literature bears this out: a series of large-scale studies involving millions of researchers and publications repeatedly show that diverse groups of scientists ask more interesting, perceptive and innovative questions and pose more interesting solutions.

    Diversity and innovation

    But this diversity-innovation connection is under attack in the current social and political climate. This has been most visible under the current political regime in the United States, but is also present here in Canada.

    If successful, these attacks will narrow the perspective of scientific research and cripple scientific advances. Current diversity is the result of decades of programs fighting generations of systematic discrimination. Many researchers have been making research a more diverse and inclusive place.




    Read more:
    Want to reach out to an Indigenous scholar? Awesome! But first, here are 10 things to consider


    Sustainability is essential to the long-term health of scientific research. The research, and our own experiences, clearly shows that diverse groups of researchers conduct more creative, innovative and impactful science. Visibility in scientific research is important to ensure its sustainability. More young students will pursue careers in research if they can see themselves in that role.

    Our hope is that a broader appreciation of the importance of diversity in research, will lead to greater community and political, support for research programs that recognize the fundamental importance of diversity, equity and inclusion.

    The biological world is a beautifully diverse and complex place. To truly understand that world, the research laboratory must to be, too.

    Thomas Merritt receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council.

    Allie Hutchings 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. Biology is complex and diverse, so scientific research approaches need to be too – https://theconversation.com/biology-is-complex-and-diverse-so-scientific-research-approaches-need-to-be-too-260696

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: What is peer review? The role anonymous experts play in scrutinizing research before it gets published

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Joshua Winowiecki, Assistant Professor of Nursing, Michigan State University

    Reviewer 1: “This manuscript is a timely and important contribution to the field, with clear methodology and compelling results. I recommend publication with only minor revisions.”

    Reviewer 2: “This manuscript is deeply flawed. The authors’ conclusions are not supported by data, and key literature is ignored. Major revisions are required before it can be considered.”

    These lines could be pulled from almost any editorial decision letter in the world of academic publishing, sent from a journal to a researcher. One review praises the work, while another sees nothing but problems. For scholars, this kind of contradiction is common. Reviewer 2, in particular, has become something of a meme: an anonymous figure often blamed for delays, rejections or cryptic critiques that seem to miss the point.

    But those disagreements are part of the peer-review process.

    A world of memes – like this one shared on Reddit – has sprung up about the ridiculous feedback provided by a mythical Reviewer #2.
    Reddit/r/medicalschool

    As a clinical nurse specialist, educator and scholar who reviews studies in nursing and health care and teaches others to do so critically as well, I’ve seen how peer review shapes not just what gets published, but what ultimately influences practice.

    Peer review is the checkpoint where scientific claims are validated before they are shared with the world. Researchers and scholars submit their findings to academic journals, which invite other scholars with similar expertise – those are the peers – to assess the work. Reviewers look at the way the scholar designed the project, the methods they used and whether their conclusions stand up.

    The point of peer review

    This process isn’t new. Versions of peer review have been around for centuries. But the modern form – anonymous, structured and managed by journal editors – took hold after World War II. Today, it is central to how scientific publishing works, and nowhere more so than health, nursing and medicine. Research that survives review is more likely to be trusted and acted upon by health care practitioners and their patients.

    Millions of research papers move through this process annually, and the number grows every year. The sheer volume means that peer review isn’t just quality control, it’s become a bottleneck, a filter of sorts, and a kind of collective judgment about what counts as credible.

    In clinical fields, peer review also has a protective role. Before a study about a new medication, procedure or care model gains traction, it is typically evaluated by others in the field. The point isn’t to punish the authors – it’s to slow things down just enough to critically evaluate the work, catch mistakes, question assumptions and raise red flags. The reviewer’s work doesn’t always get credit, but it often changes what ends up in print.

    So, even if you’ve never submitted a paper or read a scientific journal, peer-reviewed science still shows up in your life. It helps shape what treatments are available, what protocols and guidelines your nurse practitioner or physician uses, and what public health advice gets passed along on the news.

    This doesn’t mean peer review always works. Plenty of papers get published despite serious limitations. And some of these flawed studies do real harm. But even scholars who complain about the system often still believe in it. In one international survey of medical researchers, a clear majority said they trusted peer-reviewed science, despite frustrations with how slow or inconsistent the process can be.

    What actually happens when a paper is reviewed?

    Before a manuscript lands in the hands of reviewers, it begins with the researchers themselves. Scientists investigate a question, gather and analyze their data and write up their findings, often with a particular journal in mind that publishes new work in their discipline. Once they submit their paper to the journal, the editorial process begins.

    At this point, journal editors send it out to two or three reviewers who have relevant expertise. Reviewers read for clarity, accuracy, originality and usefulness. They offer comments about what’s missing, what needs to be explained more carefully, and whether the findings seem valid. Sometimes the feedback is collegial and helpful. Sometimes it’s not.

    Peer reviewers’ comments can help researchers revise and strengthen their work.
    AJ_Watt/E+ via Getty Images

    Here is where Reviewer 2 enters the lore of academic life. This is the critic who seems especially hard to please, who misreads the argument, or demands rewrites that would reshape the entire project. But even these kinds of reviews serve a purpose. They show how work might be received more broadly. And many times they flag weaknesses the author hadn’t seen.

    Review is slow. Most reviewers aren’t paid, with nearly 75% reporting they receive no compensation or formal recognition for their efforts. They do this work on top of their regular clinical, teaching or research responsibilities. And not every editor has the time or capacity to sort through conflicting feedback or to moderate tone. The result is a process that can feel uneven, opaque, and, at times, unfair.

    It doesn’t always catch what it is supposed to. Peer review is better at catching sloppy thinking than it is at detecting fraud. If data is fabricated or manipulated, a reviewer may not have the tools, or the time, to figure that out. In recent years, a growing number of published papers have been retracted after concerns about plagiarism or faked results. That trend has shaken confidence in the system and raised questions about what more journals should be doing before publication.

    Imperfect but indispensable

    Even though the current peer-review system has its shortcomings, most researchers would argue that science is better off than it would be without the level of scrutiny peer review provides. The challenge now is how to make peer review better.

    Some journals are experimenting with publishing reviewer comments alongside articles. Other are trying systems where feedback continues after publication. There are also proposals to use artificial intelligence to help flag inconsistencies or potential errors before human reviewers even begin.

    These efforts are promising but still in the early stages of development and adoption. For most fields, peer review remains a basic requirement for legitimacy, while some, such as law and high-energy physics, have alternate methods of communicating their findings. Peer review assures a reader that a journal article’s claim has been tested, scrutinized and revised.

    Peer review doesn’t guarantee truth. But it does invite challenge, foster transparency, offer reflection and force revision. That’s often where the real work of science begins.

    Even if Reviewer 2 still has notes.

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

    ref. What is peer review? The role anonymous experts play in scrutinizing research before it gets published – https://theconversation.com/what-is-peer-review-the-role-anonymous-experts-play-in-scrutinizing-research-before-it-gets-published-258255

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Examining mushrooms under microscopes can help engineers design stronger materials

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Mohamed Khalil Elhachimi, PhD Student in Mechanical Engineering, Binghamton University, State University of New York

    White button mushrooms are one of the types studied to inform stronger materials. DigiPub/Moment via Getty Images

    Pick up a button mushroom from the supermarket and it squishes easily between your fingers. Snap a woody bracket mushroom off a tree trunk and you’ll struggle to break it. Both extremes grow from the same microscopic building blocks: hyphae – hair-thin tubes made mostly of the natural polymer chitin, a tough compound also found in crab shells.

    As those tubes branch and weave, they form a lightweight but surprisingly strong network called mycelium. Engineers are beginning to investigate this network for use in eco-friendly materials.

    Filaments called hyphae are a mushroom’s support structures both above and below ground, and the mycelium network links multiple mushrooms together.
    Milkwood.net/Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA

    Yet even within a single mushroom family, the strength of a mycelium network can vary widely. Scientists have long suspected that how the hyphae are arranged – not just what they’re made of – holds the key to understanding, and ultimately controlling, their strength. But until recently, measurements that directly link microscopic arrangement to macroscopic strength have been scarce.

    I’m a mechanical engineering Ph.D. student at Binghamton University who studies bio-inspired structures. In our latest research, my colleagues and I asked a simple question: Can we tune the strength of a mushroomlike material just by changing the angle of its filaments, without adding any tougher ingredients? The answer, it turns out, is yes.

    2 edible species, many tiny tests

    In our study, my team compared two familiar fungi. The first was the white button mushroom, whose tissue uses only thin filaments called generative filaments. The second was the maitake, also called hen-of-the-woods, whose tissue mixes in a second, thicker type of hyphae called skeletal filaments. These skeletal filaments are arranged roughly in parallel, like bundles of cables.

    The two types of mushrooms used in the study: The white button mushroom is monomitic, shown on the left, meaning it has only one type of hyphae. The maitake is shown on the right, and is dimitic, meaning it has two types of hyphae.
    Mohamed Khalil Elhachimi

    After gently drying the caps and stems to remove any water, which can soften the material and skew the results, we zoomed in with scanning electron microscopes and tested the samples at two very different scales.

    First, we tested macro-scale compression. A motor-driven piston slowly squashed each mushroom while sensors recorded how hard the sample pushed back – the same way you might squeeze a marshmallow, only with laboratory precision.

    Then we pressed a diamond tip thinner than a human hair into individual filaments to measure their stiffness.

    The white mushroom filaments behaved like rubber bands, averaging about 18 megapascals in stiffness – similar to natural rubber. The thicker skeletal filaments in maitake measured around 560 megapascals, more than 30 times stiffer and approaching the stiffness of high-density polyethylene – the rigid plastic used in cutting boards and some water pipes.

    The two mushrooms tested include the maitake, left, and the button mushroom.
    Lance Cheung/USDA and edenpictures/Flickr, CC BY

    But chemistry is only half the story. When we squeezed entire chunks, the direction we squeezed in mattered even more for the maitake. Pressing in line with its parallel skeletal filaments made the block 30 times stiffer than pressing across the grain. By contrast, the tangled filaments in white mushrooms felt equally soft from every angle.

    A digital mushroom and twisting the threads

    To separate geometry from chemistry, we converted snapshots from the microscope into a computer model using a 3D Voronoi network – a pattern that mimics the walls between bubbles in a foam. Think of ping-pong balls crammed in a box: Each ball is a cell, and the walls between cells become our simulated filaments.

    We assigned those filaments by the stiffness values measured in the lab, then virtually rotated the whole network to angles of 0 degrees, 30 degrees, 60 degrees, 90 degrees and completely random.

    Horizontal (0 degrees) filaments flexed like a spring mattress. Vertical (90 degrees) filaments supported weight almost as firmly as dense wood. Simply tilting the network to 60 degrees nearly doubled its stiffness compared with 0 degrees – all without changing a single chemical ingredient.

    The researchers modeled structures with different fiber orientations to see which are the strongest: (a) represents a horizontal fiber orientation, (b) a 30-degree fiber orientation, (c) a 60-degree fiber orientation, (d) a vertical fiber orientation, and (e) a random fiber orientation.
    Mohamed Khalil Elhachimi

    Basically, we found that orientation alone could turn a mushy sponge into something that stands up to serious pressure. That suggests manufacturers could make strong, lightweight, biodegradable parts – such as shoe insoles, protective packaging and even interior panels for cars – simply by guiding how a fungus grows rather than by mixing in harder additives.

    Greener materials – and beyond

    Startups already grow “leather” made from mycelium – the threadlike fungal network – for handbags, and mycelium foam as a Styrofoam replacement.

    Guiding fungi to lay their filaments in strategic directions could push performance much higher, opening doors in sectors where strength-to-weight ratio is king: think sporting goods cores, building-insulation panels or lightweight fillers inside aircraft panels.

    The same digital tool kit also works for metal or polymer lattices printed layer by layer. Swap the filament properties in the model, let the algorithm pick the best angles, and then feed that layout into a 3D printer.

    One day, engineers might dial up an app that says something like, “I need a panel that’s stiff north-south but flexible east-west,” and the program could spit out a filament map inspired by the humble maitake.

    Our next step is to feed thousands of these virtual networks into a machine learning model so it can predict – or even invent – filament layouts that hit a targeted stiffness in any direction.

    Meanwhile, biologists are exploring low-energy ways to coax real fungi to grow in neat rows, from steering nutrients toward one side of a petri dish to applying gentle electric fields that encourage filaments to align.

    This study taught us that you don’t always need exotic chemistry to make a better material. Sometimes it’s all about how you line up the same old threads – just ask a mushroom.

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

    ref. Examining mushrooms under microscopes can help engineers design stronger materials – https://theconversation.com/examining-mushrooms-under-microscopes-can-help-engineers-design-stronger-materials-260477

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Russia: HSE Online Campus Graduates First Bachelors

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: State University “Higher School of Economics” –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    The site may not display correctly in older browser versions. For optimal site experience, we recommend using a modern browser.

    We use cookies to improve the HSE website and make it more convenient to use. More detailed information about the use of cookies can be foundHere, our rules for processing personal data are –Here. By continuing to use the site, you confirm that you have been informed of the use of cookies by the HSE website and agree with our rules for processing personal data. You can disable cookies in your browser settings.

    ABC ABC ABC A A A A A

    Regular version of the site

    Date

    July 16

    Headings

    The article mentions

    Persons

    Bisyarina Nina Pavlovna

    Bondarenko Ivan Valerievich

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Small penises are still the butt of the joke in film and TV

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Neil Cocks, Associate Professor in the Department of English Literature, University of Reading

    Gen V (2023-present), the recent iteration of the wildly successful superhero satire The Boys (2019), thrives on scenes of bodily outrage. One such episode concerns a young woman who is able to shrink – an ability triggered by self-induced vomiting.

    Her boyfriend persuades her to use her powers during sex and we see her touching his penis, which is now taller than she is. We also understand why the boyfriend is so insistent about her transformation: relatively speaking, he has a small penis.

    In Companion (2025), a film about a young man who has an abusive sexual relationship with a self-conscious robot, a small penis is also mocked. When the robot gains autonomy, and has an intelligence boost, she confronts and shames the abusive man, claiming that he is motivated in his violent and controlling behaviour by “a below average-sized penis”.

    What interests me about these works, as a researcher of sexuality and film, is that they are otherwise committed to questioning reductive ideas about the body. Yes, in the universe of The Boys there is undoubted glee at all the exploding heads and superpowered, murderous buttocks, but the keynote is pathos.


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


    The girl who changes her shape through vomiting is arguably representing bulimic experience and there are characters whose superpowers can be understood to negotiate, for example, self-harm and dysmorphia. But when it comes to a man with a small penis, it’s a different story. His body is understood to directly influence both his actions and sense of morality.

    Likewise, in Companion, which is in so many senses a meditation on the fraught relationship between mind and body, the small penis of the young man is understood to be the obvious source of his repressive actions.

    In both cases, the audience is expected to laugh at the abuser because of his small penis. The small penis is framed as both a signifier and cause of abusiveness.

    ‘We are still so medieval about penis size’

    It could be argued that in Companion and Gen V, the small penis itself is not what is being mocked. The men involved in both are young, white and heterosexual. The idea is, perhaps, that mocking those with small penises is acceptable, because in this the creators are really questioning white, heterosexual and male power structures, and that the inadequacy of that power, its mythic nature, is exposed.

    One difficulty in this is that as only power held by men with small penises is mocked, the power of the well endowed, regardless of racial or sexual identity, is naturalised.

    Equally, those people of colour or queer people who have small penises might implicitly be included in the mockery, with the implication that they are somehow the beneficiaries of power structures, misuse this power, and have obvious, biologically rooted motivations in so doing.

    The trailer for Gen V.

    Gen V qualifies the laughter – the girl , talking later to a friend, makes clear that there is nothing wrong in having a small penis, just “don’t be a dick about it”. But the only small-penised character we see is, of course, being “a dick”.

    There have been a number of television shows that focus on penis size, but each explores the pathos of having a large penis: Hung (2009), The Hard Times of RJ Berger (2010), Sex Education (2019). Imagine an equivalent concerning a character with a small – or even simply not large – penis.

    As journalist Caitlin Moran wrote in a 2023 Guardian article introducing her book, What About Men:

    We are still so medieval about penis size that we see male genitalia as being inimical to a man’s soul. Remember when Stormy Daniels told the world that Donald Trump’s penis was ‘smaller than average – a dick like the mushroom character in Mario Kart’. And we were all like: ‘Yes, it makes sense the horrible man has a small, weird mushroom penis.’ The whole world joined in on that one.

    Let us instead question the relationship between biology and destiny. And let this action be taken not to frame heterosexual white men as a disadvantaged group, but for the good of us all. Our bodies are ours to negotiate, with ourselves, and with our significant others, as well as those others that find in them indifference, or more troubling affects.

    As Gen V and Companion suggest, in recent science fiction stories that otherwise reimagine the body, the small penis can only be imagined as shameful. It is taken to be an obvious motivation for abusive behaviour. Such an understanding helps no one. As the science fiction genre is especially well placed to question common-sense ideas about the human and its form, it would be a good place to begin.

    Neil Cocks 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. Small penises are still the butt of the joke in film and TV – https://theconversation.com/small-penises-are-still-the-butt-of-the-joke-in-film-and-tv-256748

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Alpha males are surprisingly rare among primates – new research

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Louise Gentle, Principal Lecturer in Wildlife Conservation, Nottingham Trent University

    Female lemurs are often dominant. Miroslav Halama/Shutterstock

    Is it true that male animals are dominant over females? Previous studies have often found male-biased power in primates and other mammals.

    A new study, investigating physical encounters between members of the same species in 121 primates (around a quarter of all primate species) found that half of all aggressive contests were between males and females. But males won these contests in only 17% of primate populations, with females dominating in 13% – making it almost as likely for females to dominate males.

    The remaining 70% of primate populations showed no clear-cut dominance of one sex over the other. This study may have shown different results to previous research because it assessed individual contests rather than categorising species based on their social structure and physical attributes.


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


    The new study found male dominance, where males have a greater ability to influence the behaviour of the opposite sex, to be prevalent in primate species where the males are much larger than the females. This enables males to gain dominance through physical force or coercion. It was also widespread in species where males have weapons and mate with lots of females.

    This is typical of African and Asian monkeys and the great apes, such as gorillas. Weighing in at around 200kg, a silverback male can be twice the size of the females within his troop. Male gorillas also have large canine teeth that can seriously injure or even kill other gorillas.

    Male dominance often twins with weapons throughout the animal kingdom, – horns, antlers, claws or tusks. The largest antlers ever known were those of the now extinct Irish elk, spanning lengths up to 3.5m.

    The Irish elk is extinct but once had huge antlers.
    Fotokon/Shutterstock

    Female dominance

    Female power was seen in primate species that had a scarcity of females, one exclusive sexual partner, similar sized males and females but did not have bodily weapons, according to the new study. These are all factors that give females more choice over who to mate with.

    Female dominance was also seen in species where fighting with a male was less risky for the dependent offspring of females. For example, some primates “park” their young on their own in nests while foraging, rather than carrying them around. If a mother is holding her baby when she’s attacked, she may submit to protect her young.

    Finally, matriarchal societies were common in species that live primarily in trees, which makes it easier to flee an attacker.

    Female-dominated species were more likely in lorises, galagos and lemurs. So, contrary to the film Madagascar where King Julien is the king of the lemurs, females are, in fact, in charge. In the ring-tailed lemurs, females control access to food and mates, and maintain the dominance hierarchy where males are often at the bottom.

    This is also true of bonobos, the closest relatives of humans. Although male bonobos are larger, females form coalitions to overcome the physical power of the males and force them into submission. This show of solidarity has also been shown in humans.

    Think of how the suffragettes campaigned for women’s rights to vote in the UK. Or more recently, how women demanded new safety measures after Sarah Everard was murdered by Metropolitan Police officer Wayne Couzens in 2021.

    Galagos, also known as bushbabies, tend to live in female dominant societies.
    Jurgens Potgieter/Shutterstock

    Although female dominance has been documented less often in the wider animal kingdom, there are some examples that defy expectations. Spotted hyenas have a matriarchal society where females dominate the clans. They even have a pseudo-penis that they erect to indicate submission to more dominant individuals.




    Read more:
    Sex and power in the animal kingdom: seven animals that will make you reconsider what you think you know


    Naked mole rats have a queen that gives birth to all of the young while her offspring find food and defend the nest. The males are subordinate to the queen, but so too are the other females. In fact, the queen bullies the other members of her colony so much that the females are all rendered sterile through stress.

    But what about the 70% of primate species that were found to show no dominant sex bias in the new study? These were largely the South American monkeys such as marmosets, tamarins and capuchins, that are generally small, live in trees, are social and omnivorous.

    They also tended to have a prehensile tail that helps them grasp things. The ecology of these species fall in the middle of the male and female dominated species, with size difference and weapons being neither extreme nor absent, mating systems being neither polygamous nor monogamous, and the frequency of females being nether abundant nor rare.

    The absence of a definitive sex-bias in dominance found in the majority of primate species may be a result of the rarity of contests between males and females, or because males and females were both equally likely to win. Nevertheless, dominance varied within species. For example the percentage of intersexual contests won by female patas monkeys ranged from 0% to 61%, depending on the population studied.

    What does this mean for humans?

    Human traits are not skewed towards those of male-dominated societies in other primates. We may not live in trees but males do not have natural weapons. Males are not always bigger than females, females do not tend to outnumber males and our sexual habits are varied.

    Humans are actually more aligned to the 70% of species that show no clear distinction in sex biases, where species of either sex can become dominant. Let’s see which way evolution takes us.

    Louise Gentle works for Nottingham Trent University.

    ref. Alpha males are surprisingly rare among primates – new research – https://theconversation.com/alpha-males-are-surprisingly-rare-among-primates-new-research-260472

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Measles isn’t just dangerous – it may erase your immune system

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Antony Black, Lecturer, Life Sciences, University of Westminster

    INSAGO/Shutterstock

    Blindness, pneumonia, severe diarrhoea and even death – measles virus infections, especially in children, can have devastating consequences. Fortunately, we have a safe and effective defence. Measles vaccines are estimated to have averted more than 60 million deaths between 2000 and 2023.

    Yet despite this success, measles cases are rising sharply in the UK and around the world. This global surge is the result of several factors, from vaccine hesitancy to missed immunisation campaigns, leaving many children unprotected and vulnerable.

    But there’s more at stake than just measles itself. Emerging research suggests that the measles vaccination may offer surprising additional health benefits. Children who receive the vaccine have been shown to have a significantly lower risk of infections from diseases unrelated to measles.


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


    One explanation for this broader benefit is the idea of “measles amnesia.” This refers to the ability of the measles virus to erase parts of the body’s immune memory.

    Our immune system contains various cells that protect us from infections. Some produce antibodies that neutralise viruses, while others detect and destroy infected cells. Immune memory allows the body to “remember” past infections and mount faster responses in the future.

    However, measles infection may reduce the number and diversity of these memory cells – leaving children vulnerable to a wide range of diseases they had previously developed immunity to. In other words, the virus doesn’t just make children ill in the short term, it may also undo years of immune protection.

    In one study, researchers found that between 11% and 73% of antibodies targeting other diseases were lost after a measles infection in unvaccinated children. This immune depletion was not observed in children who had received the vaccine, suggesting that vaccination protects against this damaging effect.

    This broad loss of immune protection may explain why measles outbreaks are often followed by spikes in other infectious diseases. Ongoing studies are exploring the impact of measles amnesia in regions such as West Africa, where measles and other infections remain widespread.

    A vaccine that does more?

    Another theory for the vaccine’s broader benefit is known as the “non-specific effect”. Unlike measles amnesia, which explains how the virus weakens immunity, the non-specific effect suggests that the measles vaccine actively strengthens the immune system against a wide range of pathogens.

    Recent research has shown that measles vaccination may enhance the function of certain immune cells, making them more effective at fighting off other diseases. Some scientists believe this effect, rather than protection against amnesia alone, could be the primary reason why vaccinated children have better overall health outcomes.

    The measles vaccine is a live attenuated vaccine, which means it uses a weakened version of the virus to stimulate a strong immune response. Live vaccines, including the BCG vaccine for tuberculosis, are known to provide broad immune training effects, which may explain this non-specific protection.

    Forgotten the dangers

    In the 1960s, before widespread vaccination, measles caused around 2.6 million deaths per year. It’s hard to imagine today, but that’s partly the problem.

    As measles became rare, society began to forget how serious it is. We forgot how contagious it is (one infected person can spread the virus to up to 90% of nearby unvaccinated people) and we forgot how effective vaccination is (two doses provide more than 90% long-term protection).

    And in some circles, this fading memory has been replaced by something more dangerous: mistrust. Misinformation, vaccine myths, and anti-vaccine rhetoric are spreading, just like the virus itself.

    So, whether the additional protection offered by the vaccine is due to prevention of immune amnesia, a non-specific immune boost, or both, the takeaway is the same: Vaccinate children against measles. Because when we protect them from measles, we may also be protecting them from so much more.

    Antony Black 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. Measles isn’t just dangerous – it may erase your immune system – https://theconversation.com/measles-isnt-just-dangerous-it-may-erase-your-immune-system-261136

    MIL OSI Analysis