NEWS

KEY POINT:

–        The contemporary importance of the aerospace sector stems from its complex technological structure, its diverse applications, and balanced public and private investment, which contribute to security in competitive environments.

–        The 2001 United Nations Convention on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space illustrates the conflict between space militarization and technological security. Modern competition increasingly intertwines military and economic aspects, as demonstrated by advances in electronic warfare and communication systems.

–        As space becomes a battleground for military dominance, it is essential to ensure peaceful development in this race. The challenges lie in managing military interests while promoting civilian innovations, revealing the complexities of international law and the prospects for disarmament in an evolving geopolitical landscape.

–        In contemplating treaties, there is a risk of being seen as naive, as demonstrated by the decline of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. This highlights the need to avoid the militarization of space. Alternatives include maintaining secrecy over space defense technologies or promoting strategic alliances for technology sharing.

–        A coalition between the United States, the European Union, and Russia could counterbalance the military advances of China and India. Investment in aerospace technology is key to gaining a competitive advantage, while trade agreements could guide the distribution of dual-use technologies, ultimately influencing global power dynamics and social transformations.

Why write about investing in the space sector today? Because it is an area of intervention that has the following structural characteristics: a) it is a complex combination of technologies, as was the case with the cas and , in its early days, the laptop computer; b) it offers a wide range of multiple application to other mature non-space technologies, c) it optimizes the combination of public and private investment, as has been the case with all other investments in technology that have changed the entire production system, and finally d) it guarantees the security of technologies and, therefore, of investments, which are covered in the eyes of competitors for military or security reasons.

For “mature” technologies, this is not possible. [1]

The issue of the militarization of space is essential to understanding the applicability of new aerospace technologies to non-military production.

In 2001, the UN General Assembly approved a Convention on the prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space, signe by all major countries interested in space technologies.

But here too there is a logical contradiction between the non-militarization of space and the security of technologies, which must be covered by international competition in order to produce sufficiently attractive economic returns in a timely manner. [2]

Furthermore, there is a concept that could also be described as economy, albeit in a broad sense: if a State or alliance acquires a competitive edge in a weapons system, it also acquires maximum deterrence at minimum cost.

Competition between weapons system reduces their effectiveness and increases their structural costs, while also limiting their application cycles to civilian production, where global competitors can enter the market.

This is an application of Michael Porter’s thesis on the “global competitive advantage” [3].

It is therefore not surprising that space is the scene of competition that, in addition to being economic and application-based, is increasingly military in nature.

Just think, for example, of laser countermeasures for enemy missile systems and advanced electronic jamming and message distortion techniques that can be directed from space to Earth or, more simply, between space weapons themselves. [4]

The Chinese have already affirmed, in their theoretical and strategic models, the absolute importance of electronic warfare from space and, therefore, of incapacitating the enemy by abolishing its strategic and tactical communication networks. [5]

This is a modern reinterpretation of Sun Tsu’s concept that, in the best tradition of Chinese Zen, victory is achieved by forcing the enemy to move.

The strategic application of the esoteric Buddhist concept of wu wei, “moving without moving.”

Therefore, the more the space economy becomes central to the definition of the next models of globalized development, a technological-productive development in which many non-European and non-Western people will participate for the first time in human history, the more we should expect a “space war” perhaps managed according to the criteria of the Cold War, i.e. a conflict that never reaches the final clash but still makes it credibile and probable.[6]

But let’s see how and what the scientific and technological market of space can become.

According to a British forecast, the return on investment in space is expected to increase in 2007 to USD 140 billion [7], with a differentiation of services as follows: international direct-to-home services, 32%; radio, 6%; fixed satellites, 18%; mobile satellites, 3%; and direct-to-home in the US, 32%.

Total investment is expected to be USD 60 billion. [8]

So, first of all, telecommunications, which is not coincidentally the backbone of current and, above all, future weapons systems.

The ESA, the European Space Agency of which Italy is naturally a member, has drawn up a development plan up to 2010 in which the following are optimized for the communication sector: the size of satellite payloads, the application of military-derived Ku Band technology to civilian networks, and the development of fixed networks for Earth observation for economic, agricultural, and land traffic management purposes [9].

In other words, the aim here is to make investment in aerospace sustainable in order to optimize communication networks, according to the classic model of the “service society” developed in the mid-1980s [10].

But are we sure that the “computerization” and materialization of society and production systems are still a model capable of explaining the world and, above all, of predicting and changing it, according to Karl Marx’s old idea of ideas that “transform” rather than reflect reality?

Today’s aerospace technologies are not so clear-cut in their alignment with the “third wave” model.

Think, for example, of biology and pharmacological and therapeutic experiments or the production of new materials in the absence of gravity.

In the short term, the Great Transformation hypothesized by Karl Polanyi for old industrial capitalism is not only about communication or process innovation but also and above all about old traditional product innovation.

The US NASA has sent two flowers donated by International Flavors & Fragrances into space on the Shuttle Columbia to see whether the absence of gravity would change their scents to produce new essences.

The Russians have signed a contract with US television producer Burnett to organize a “reality show” in space.

In short, the amount of innovative non-communication technologies generated in space is increasing, according to the author’s calculations, by 36% per year for public investment and, as can be seen, private investment. [11]

Therefore, there is nothing to prevent these techologies and new materials from being used in a possible multilateral conflict for space management in the context of future space utilization, including for military purposes.

It is true that, to use a cliché and state the obvious, “space is immense,” but it is the orbits closest to Earth that are most useful both technologically and for telecommunications and, of course, for military purposes. Therefore, military and security control of these orbits will allow for the optimization of public and private investment in aerospace, both civil and military.

Here too, to paraphrase Von Clausewitz, we will be dealing with a cold war by other means.

Meanwhile, defense and security spending allows for the exclusivity of technologies, which cannot be copied or “cloned,” thus guaranteeing the predictability of expected economic returns.

Furthermore, security and defense produce maximum innovation because they are forced to find the competitive or strategic “gap” to exploit for as long as possible against potential enemies.

Finally, space investment in the security-defense area allows for the confidentiality of civilian applications when the time comes.

But when it comes to aerospace, there is more: the possibility of controlling wide areas of the Earth from above allows for an epoch-making strategic transformation: maximum deterrence combined with retaliatory power.

This is a far cry from the atomic strategy, when the aim, from Beaufre to Paul Nitze, was to inflict maximum damage to make it impossible for the enemy to respond and thus force them into classic unconditional surrender.

The development of military space allows for the immediate elimination of defenses and complete blindness to subsequent waves of attack, whether nuclear or conventional.

The new Global Space Strategic allows the fusion of direct and indirect strategy, because the communicative, political, cultural, social, and productive structures are annihilated by the same series of salvos from space that nullify the defenses and response potential of the target state [12].

So the question that arises is this: how can we avoid the strategies that fall out of the “space race” and use aerospace and its innovative technologies only in ways that guarantee peaceful, participatory, and optimal development?

The issue is more difficult than it seems. In fact, much of the public investor’s interest is military, given that the “weaponization” of space allows, with well-planned civilian spin-offs, weapon system such as the atomic weapon of the Cold war, i.e. a high potential for a winning strike, absolute brevity of military actions, and maximum success.

Furthermore, the techniques used in the 1970s to force most countries to abandon nuclear weapons through the Non-Proliferation Treaty have proved ineffective.

On the military front, the so-called “third world” countries now all have the real or short-term possibility of producing atomic weapons.

Weapons “cannot be uninvented,” as General Carlo Jean said years ago.

Furthermore, believing that signing a series of pieces of paper is enough to force a state to change its national strategy or, perhaps, to accept Manzonian proclamations against its neighbors who have instead switched to military nuclear power is a belief of absolute naivety.

There are no treaties that can prevent a state from achieving what it considers to be its national interest. Machiavelli’s saying that words do not govern states also applies to international law.

To believe in the power of treaties is to run the risk of being written, according to Guicciardini’s brutal formula in the Book of Fools.

Finally, the inglorious end of the Non-Proliferation Treaty should prevent us from repeating the path towards the militarization of space, as described by Manzoni.

Let us consider the other possibilities: a) absolute secrecy surrounding space defense technologies, leaving the competitors in this new Cold War in doubt as to what technology and doctrine are actually being used. Difficult, but it can be attempted.

Or, within the framework of a clear and strategic alliance, not simply an assembly of Hegelian “beautiful souls,” we could push for effective sharing of space technologies, including those with dual military-civilian use, within the framework of a shared defense doctrine.

Of course, this requires strategic thinking and, above all, serious identification of the enemy, without which there can be no strategy or tactics.

For example, one could think of an alliance between the Russian Federation, Europe, and the US against the strategy and military development of the China-India complex, which would quickly render many technologies obsolete and enjoy a very long “development window” before wages and prices are adjusted to Euro-American standards. [13].

Or a mixture of results that are effective in terms of cost-efficiency (in the sense that it would cost more for any state to wage space war to obtain them on its own) that could stabilize China itself, which could develop its dual-use space technologies also in accordance with a global agreement with Europe and the US to secure Western commercial expansion in Central and South Asia.

At this point, it would be a matter of finding a balance between Western and Eastern Technologies, but above all it would be necessary to verify whether our long term development programs envisage an expansion of European trade routes towards Asia, which would make this global strategy entirely reasonable.

If, on the other hand, China and India wanted to manage their “near abroad” on their own, strategy number one, that of an alliance on the militarization of space between the US, the EU, and the Russian Federation, would be more useful.

In short, we need to know and decide where we want to go and then shape our security and space warfare strategies accordingly, without hoping that other areas of the planet will do us the favor of standing still.

On the contrary, as far as we can predict, I suppose that a set of commercial and financial rules, rather than legal ones, could be defined for dual-use space technologies, based on the excellent experience of NATO’s COCOM throughout the Cold War.

From there, we can establish a division of labor in global space technology: there is no point in investing where others have done so before and better; it is better to define sharing rules (with competitive prices) to buy what is unnecessary to develop internally and perhaps resell on the global market those technologies in which a country or technological alliance has proven unbeatable.

Consider, in this case, the technologies for propellant chemistry, which Italy has developed with a high rate of innovation in recent years.

If this global market becomes optimal, then the force of circumstances will prevent the establishment of complete national technologies for the militarization of space. The global economy could become the Machiavellian reality of the situation.

In the meantime, it is absolutely necessary to invest in aerospace in order to acquire that “competitive edge” in cutting-edge technologies, which often have military and space origins, and which will allow us to continue to have: a) a highly differentiated production system, b) a high productivity margin that is competitive with our global competitors.

Reducing labor costs is a limited strategy, and, in any case, it clashes with the cost of living and therefore with a wage bill that is ultimately inelastic. The lower the wage, the worse the productivity per unit of output.

So, we need to invest immediately in advanced aerospace technologies, which will be the source of the next technological clusters that will determine who wins and who loses in the global division of labor.

In conclusion, albeit briefly, I have attempted to outline that we are closely linked to a highly complex set of developments in the technological, military, and economic sectors.

But above all, in that sector where scientific achievements produce deep transformations in the lives of individuals, which in turn change societies. This is the duty of those in science, politics, and business who have the task of questioning the future as a challenge for development and an opportunity for future progress.

Giancarlo Elia Valori

[1] V. Arms Control, Militarization of Outer Space, in www.globalissues.org, accessed on June 12, 2006

[2] V. NBER, Business Cycles Indicators, NBER, University of Chicago, Chicago 2001

[3] V. Michael Porter, Harvard University, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, On Competition, Harvard University Press, 2002

[4] Lt. Col. Bruce M. Deblois, USAF, Space Sanctuary, a Viable National Strategy, Aerospace Power Journal, Winter 1998.

[5] See defenselink.org, Report to Congress, Washington, D.C., January 2005.

[6] See The National Security Archive, The Master of the Game, Paul Nitze and US Cold War Strategy, from Truman to Reagan, Washington, D.C., October 2004.

[7] UK STRATEGY 2003-2006 AND BEYOND, British Government, 2004

[8] State of the Space Industry, 2004, International Space Business Council, March 2004

[9] BR-256, October 2005, ESA, the Telecommunications Long-Term Plan 2006-2010, Noordwijk, Holland, 2005

[10] Alvin Toffler, The Third Wave, Bantam Books, 1984

[11] Commercial Alert, NASA shifts strategy for selling outer space, Washington Post, Ariana Eunjung Cha, March 2005

[12] Stephen M. Younger, Nuclear Weapons in the Twenty-First Century, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 27 Giugno 2000

[13] See  HEARTHLAND review, Number entitled The atomic Rush, n. 1 2006

Ukraine has proposed to hold a new round of peace talks with Russia next week after negotiations stalled last month.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed on Saturday that Defence Council secretary Rustem Umerov made the offer of a meeting with Russian negotiators for next week.

“Everything should be done to achieve a ceasefire,” Zelenskyy said in his evening address to the nation. “The Russian side should stop hiding from decisions.”

Ukraine’s leader also reiterated his readiness to have a face-to-face sit-down with Putin. “A meeting at the leadership level is needed to truly ensure peace – lasting peace,” he said.

There was no immediate response from Russia.

Secretary of the NSDC proposed a new meeting with Russia next week. They must stop hiding from decisions. Ceasefire. Prisoner exchanges. Return of children. End to the killings. And a meeting at the level of leaders is needed to truly ensure a lasting peace. Ukraine is ready. pic.twitter.com/ksH7FzxnAE

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) July 19, 2025

Umerov, a former defence minister, was appointed last week as the head of the National Security and Defence Council and tasked with adding more momentum to the negotiations.

He headed his country’s delegation in two previous rounds of talks in Turkiye earlier this year, which yielded little more than an agreement to exchange prisoners and soldiers’ remains.

In previous rounds, Russia outlined a list of hardline demands that were not acceptable to Ukraine, calling on it to cede four Ukrainian regions it claims as its own and reject Western military support.

However, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov on Friday indicated that Moscow agreed with a statement by Zelenskyy that peace efforts needed “more momentum”.

The shift came after United States President Donald Trump, who initially appeared to adopt a conciliatory approach towards Russia after entering office, upped the pressure on Moscow.

This week, Trump set a 50-day deadline for Moscow to reach a ceasefire in Ukraine or face “100 percent tariffs” and the prospect of secondary sanctions being imposed on countries that buy Russian oil.

He also promised to ramp up arms shipments to the war-battered country.

Maria Zakharova, a spokesperson for the ministry, said on Thursday that Russia would not accept the “blackmail” of Washington’s sanctions ultimatum, and the decision to resume weapons deliveries was a signal to Ukraine to “abandon the peace process”.

Ongoing exchange of fire

Kyiv extended its invitation for more talks with Moscow after Russian forces staged a massive drone attack on the Ukrainian Black Sea port city of Odesa early on Saturday, killing at least one resident and injuring six others, according to Zelenskyy.

Posting on X on Saturday, the Ukrainian president said Russia launched more than 30 missiles and 300 drones during its overnight assault that affected 10 regions of the country.

Russia, meanwhile, had to suspend trains for about four hours overnight in the southern Rostov region when it came under a Ukrainian drone attack, which injured one railway worker.

On Saturday, Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin said on Telegram that Russian air defence systems shot down three drones en route to the city.

Two Moscow airports – Vnukovo and Domodedovo – suspended arrivals and departures for safety reasons, but later resumed operations, Russian aviation watchdog Rosaviatsia said.

The Russian Defence Ministry said its air defence systems intercepted and destroyed 27 Ukrainian drones in total from 3pm to 7pm Moscow time (12:00-16:00 GMT).

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 has led to Europe’s bloodiest conflict since World War II, with estimates suggesting 1.2 million people have been wounded or killed.

Thirty people have been injured after a vehicle drove into a crowd queuing to get into a nightclub in Los Angeles.

Seven were critically injured and six were in a serious condition after the crash in East Hollywood, the LA Fire Department (LAFD) said.

A line of mostly women were waiting to enter the Vermont Hollywood music venue when the car struck at 02:00 local time (09:00 GMT) on Saturday.

The Los Angeles Police Department is investigating the crash as an intentional act because the driver made a U-turn before ramming through the crowd, according to the BBC’s US partner CBS News.

The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) said that when officers arrived, bystanders had dragged the driver out of the Nissan Versa and were attacking him. One assailant had shot the driver.

The driver was taken to hospital for surgery, the LAPD added. His condition is unknown.

The vehicle drove through a taco stand, through a valet podium, and then into the crowd, said police.

Pictures from the scene show a grey car on a pavement with debris strewn on the ground, and a large police presence.

The nightclub was hosting a reggae/hip hop event at the time, according to its website.

A law enforcement official told CNN the driver is believed to have been intoxicated.

Police have described the suspect who opened fire during the melee before fleeing on foot as a bald Hispanic man. He was wearing a blue jersey and potentially armed with a silver-coloured revolver.

In a statement, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the incident a “heartbreaking tragedy”.

“The hearts of Angelenos are with all of the victims impacted this morning – a full investigation into what happened is under way,” she said.

The victims have all been taken to hospitals or trauma centres, LAFD Captain Adam VanGerpen told reporters at the scene.

“It was a very chaotic scene,” Capt VanGerpen said, adding that “a lot of bystanders by the club came out to help people”.

The specter of global food insecurity looms larger than ever, with 783 million people facing chronic hunger and 18 hunger hotspots—spanning Central America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and conflict zones like Sudan and Syria—teetering on the brink of famine. From a progressive perspective, acute food shortages are not merely logistical failures but symptoms of deep-seated inequities rooted in colonialism, neoliberal trade policies, and inadequate global governance. Diplomacy, when wielded with a commitment to justice and solidarity, can be a powerful tool to address these crises. By prioritizing multilateral cooperation, dismantling systemic barriers, and centering the needs of the Global South, progressive diplomacy can pave the way for sustainable solutions to food insecurity.

Hunger is not an isolated issue but a consequence of structural injustices. Decades of extractive economic policies, driven by wealthy nations and multinational corporations, have left low-income countries vulnerable to food crises. In Sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, reliance on cash-crop exports, often mandated by IMF and World Bank structural adjustment programs, has undermined local food sovereignty. Climate change, disproportionately caused by industrialized nations, exacerbates droughts and floods, devastating smallholder farmers who feed much of the world. Conflicts in regions like Sudan, where 12 million people are displaced, and Gaza, where 96% of the population faces acute food insecurity, are compounded by sanctions and blockades that restrict aid flows. These are interconnected crises requiring diplomacy that challenges power imbalances rather than perpetuating them.

Multinational efforts to improve the situation on the ground must prioritize multilateral frameworks to ensure food security is treated as a global public good. The United Nations, despite its imperfections, remains a critical platform for coordinating responses. The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Food Programme (WFP) must lead efforts to scale up emergency food aid, but they require robust funding and political support. Diplomats must push for increased contributions to the WFP, which faces a $4.5 billion funding gap for its humanitarian operations. Wealthy nations, particularly G7 members, should commit to doubling their pledges, redirecting funds from military budgets to humanitarian aid—a move aligned with progressive values of prioritizing human welfare over militarism.

Moreover, diplomacy should reform global trade rules that disadvantage poorer nations. The World Trade Organization (WTO) must address subsidies that allow Western agribusiness to flood markets with cheap imports, undercutting local farmers. A well-planned diplomatic agenda would advocate for trade agreements that protect smallholder agriculture, promote agroecology, and ensure fair pricing for producers in the Global South. For example, negotiations at the WTO’s 2026 ministerial conference could prioritize exemptions for food security programs, allowing countries like India to maintain public stockholding for staple crops without facing punitive measures.

Conflict is a primary driver of acute food shortages, and progressive diplomacy must focus on peacebuilding to ensure aid reaches those in need. In Syria, where sanctions have crippled food and medical supply chains post-Assad, diplomats should negotiate humanitarian exemptions to facilitate aid delivery. The U.S. and EU, often quick to impose sanctions, must adopt a human-centered approach, prioritizing civilian access to food over geopolitical leverage. Similarly, in Sudan, where 25.6 million people face acute hunger, regional diplomacy through the African Union can mediate ceasefires and establish safe corridors for aid distribution. Diplomats should amplify the voices of local civil society, ensuring that peace processes are inclusive and address root causes like resource inequity.

Climate change, a crisis disproportionately affecting the Global South, demands diplomatic efforts rooted in justice. At COP30 in Brazil, diplomats must advocate for a $300 billion climate finance package, with a significant portion allocated to adaptation for smallholder farmers. This includes funding for drought-resistant crops, irrigation systems, and community-led seed banks. Wealthy nations, responsible for 80% of historical emissions, owe a moral and financial debt to vulnerable countries. Diplomacy should also push for technology transfers, enabling poorer nations to adopt sustainable farming practices without reliance on corporate-controlled inputs like genetically modified seeds.

A decisive diplomatic approach centers the agency of food-insecure regions. Initiatives like the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) offer opportunities to strengthen regional food systems, reducing dependence on volatile global markets. Diplomats should support capacity-building programs that empower local farmers, particularly women, who produce up to 80% of food in some African nations. By facilitating South-South cooperation, such as knowledge-sharing between Latin American and African cooperatives, diplomacy can foster resilient, self-sufficient food systems.

Acute food shortages are a moral and political failure, but coordination among nations offers a path forward. By reforming global trade, prioritizing humanitarian exemptions in conflict zones, securing climate finance, and empowering the Global South, diplomats are able to address the root causes of hunger. This requires a rejection of failed policies that prioritize profit over people and a commitment to equity, solidarity, and systemic change. In 2025, the world cannot afford half-measures—diplomacy must be bold, inclusive, and unwavering in its pursuit of a hunger-free future.

The Moroccan Sahara dispute is one of the most persistent and complex regional conflicts in North Africa, lasting over forty years. This ongoing disagreement involves the Kingdom of Morocco and the Polisario Front, which is supported by Algeria. The conflict centers on sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national identity, making it a highly sensitive and crucial issue for regional stability.

In this ongoing dispute, China’s role as an emerging global power and a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council is particularly significant. China’s involvement is strategically important due to its increasing influence in international affairs and its promotion of a multilateral approach to global stability. As a result, China’s position on the Sahara issue holds critical strategic importance, not only for Morocco but also for the broader regional and international community.

Recently, Moroccan scholars and researchers have been actively examining and questioning China’s stance on the Sahara conflict. They ask whether China recognizes the autonomy plan proposed by Morocco in 2007 as a valid political solution. There is also an ongoing debate about whether the Chinese Communist Party holds a neutral position or leans toward supporting one side. These questions are important because they influence how Morocco and its allies perceive China’s diplomatic approach.

Furthermore, experts are eager to determine China’s official stance on Morocco’s sovereignty over its southern territories. Given China’s foreign policy focus on non-interference and respect for territorial integrity, the analysis assesses whether China follows these principles in this situation or if its actions suggest a departure. Overall, China’s changing position in this dispute has significant implications for regional stability and the future diplomatic landscape of North Africa.  

First: The evolving strategic landscape of Moroccan-Chinese relations

Since the announcement of the strategic partnership between Morocco and China in May 2016, bilateral relations have experienced significant growth across various sectors. These include the economy, infrastructure development, energy projects, technological progress, and higher education initiatives. Morocco also actively participated in China’s ambitious “Belt and Road” initiative, which aims to enhance connectivity and foster economic cooperation among participating countries. Through this involvement, Morocco has established itself as a key financial partner for Beijing in North and West Africa, strengthening regional ties.

This expanding cooperation and engagement have transformed Morocco into a strategic launchpad for China’s broader strategy in Africa. The partnership has enhanced the country’s international reputation, presenting Morocco as a stable, open, and welcoming partner for foreign investment and diplomacy. Furthermore, this strengthened relationship has indirectly influenced China’s stance on the Moroccan Sahara issue, where China has adopted a more cautious, pragmatic, and balanced approach, demonstrating a deeper diplomatic understanding and respect for regional sensitivities.

Second: China’s stance on the Moroccan Sahara issue

China’s official position at the United Nations is neutral, consistent with its traditional foreign policy principles of non-interference and respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity.

During discussions on extending the MINURSO mission’s mandate, China emphasizes the need for a realistic, lasting, and mutually acceptable political solution. It advocates for the “continuation of dialogue” between the involved parties, refrains from harsh language toward Morocco, and seeks to maintain a balanced tone while not recognizing the Polisario Front as a sovereign state. Although this position seems “neutral,” it implicitly supports Morocco’s sovereignty.

Third: China’s position on the Moroccan autonomy proposal

In 2007, Morocco proposed its autonomy initiative as a practical political solution within the framework of national sovereignty for the ongoing conflict, and this initiative gained support from many major countries in Africa, as well as in the Arab and Western worlds, including France, the United States, Britain, Germany, and Spain.

Regarding China, it did not explicitly support or oppose the initiative but expressed indirect approval, noting that it “contributes positively to international efforts to find a solution to the conflict.” Since then, China has not opposed the Moroccan proposal but has shown tacit acceptance, especially when calling for “realistic and viable” solutions.

Fourth: Factors Affecting China’s Position

Many key factors and influences shape China’s stance on the Moroccan Sahara issue.

The principle of sovereignty and national territorial integrity: China rejects any efforts at secession, as it faces similar challenges within its territory, such as those in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Tibet. Therefore, it tends to support countries that uphold their territorial integrity, although it has not explicitly stated this.

Relations with Algeria: Despite the increasing closeness between China and Morocco, Algeria remains a key energy partner for China, especially in the gas sector. This leads China to carefully balance its diplomatic efforts to protect its interests with both countries. Investing in regional stability: China believes that regional stability benefits its economic interests, so it prefers peaceful and stable solutions to disputes without supporting separatist movements that could cause chaos or armed conflicts.           

Fifth: Is China’s stance shifting?

This question poses a challenge for researchers and those interested in the Moroccan Sahara conflict, as increasing signs suggest a possible gradual shift in China’s stance in the years to come.

– Growing Chinese trade and investments in Morocco, including the Mohammed VI Smart City project, the Atlantic port in Nador, and solar energy initiatives.

– Enhancing strategic visits and high-level diplomatic meetings between China and Morocco.

– China’s diplomatic language, like “realistic solution” and “viable political solution,” hints at autonomy and is a key reference for the Moroccan autonomy proposal.

– China’s ties with the West, especially the U.S., are weakening, pushing China to build and diversify its alliances in the Global South, including with Morocco.

In conclusion, it can be said that the Chinese Communist Party’s approach to the Moroccan Sahara issue is marked by a kind of “thought-out neutrality,” balancing core principles of Chinese foreign policy with increasing strategic interests in Morocco. Despite China’s public commitment to the policy of “neutrality,” its diplomatic and economic actions imply implicit support for Morocco’s sovereignty over its deserts, or at least a practical acceptance of the autonomy initiative. Therefore, in light of international geopolitical shifts, Morocco has a strategic opportunity to strengthen its ties with Beijing and convince it that supporting the autonomy proposal does not conflict with its political and diplomatic principles but aligns with its vision of global stability.  

Democratic members of Congress who saw Florida’s new immigration detention centre, Alligator Alcatraz, said they witnessed dozens of people in metal enclosures, bugs and mosquitos in bunk areas, indoor temperatures above 80 degrees and people screaming for help.

Republicans who also toured the facility tell a different story, describing the space as safe, clean and well-run. The federal Homeland Security Department, which oversees immigration detention, has called characterisations of inadequate conditions at the state-run Alligator Alcatraz “false”.

Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem was asked about Democrats’ accounts during a July 13 interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press”. She said the Florida-run facility is “held to the highest levels of what the federal government requires for detention facilities”.

“Our detention centres at the federal level are held to a higher standard than most local or state centres and even federal prisons,” Noem said. “The standards are extremely high.”

White House border tsar Tom Homan also touted the nation’s immigration detention standards as being a cut above those for prisons and jails.

When a reporter asked Homan about a 75-year-old Cuban man who had been living in the US for 60 years before he died in detention in Miami in June, Homan defended federal facilities.

“People die in ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] custody,” he said, before saying ICE has “the highest detention standards in the industry. I’ll compare an ICE detention facility against any state prison against any federal facility. I’ll go head-to-head with any of them. … People say, ‘The detention centres are horrendous.’ Go look for yourself then come back and talk to me.”

Isidro Perez was the 11th person to die in ICE custody, almost six months into Trump’s second term. Twelve people died during former President Joe Biden’s last fiscal year in office.

ICE detention centres have standards akin to prisons. But it’s difficult to assess blanket statements about the standards of immigration detention compared with state, local or other federal facilities for a few reasons.

• ICE detention standards aren’t codified into law, so it’s difficult to enforce them.
• Different ICE detention centres are upheld to different standards based on the terms of their individual contracts.
• There isn’t one set of standards for local, state and federal prisons and jails. Some standards are mandatory or codified into law, others aren’t.

Several government watchdog agencies, advocacy organisations and news reports have long documented inadequate conditions at immigration detention centres.

In May, human rights group Amnesty International reported “physical abuse by guards, use of solitary confinement, unsanitary and overcrowded living spaces including dysfunctional toilets, inadequate medical care and poor-quality, expired food” at an El Paso detention centre.

Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein, a Duke University associate professor who studies the health impacts of the criminal legal system, called Homan’s statement “very misleading”.

“In most respects, ICE facilities operate with less consistent oversight and legal accountability than state or federal prisons or local jails,” Brinkley-Rubinstein said. “ICE detention facilities and people that run them tend to be much less transparent about their operations.”

ICE has detention standards, but they aren’t set in law or universally applied

Several federal agencies and private companies run immigration detention facilities. ICE, the main agency tasked with immigration detention, has standards that all its detention centres are supposed to abide by.

For example, facilities have to be sanitary and have potable water. Detainees must have access to medical and mental healthcare, including getting prescription medications. Physical force should only be used when “necessary and reasonable” and not as a punishment. And detainees must be able to meet with their attorneys confidentially.

There are different sets of standards for facilities that hold immigrant detainees and other non-immigration-related detainees, such as local prisons, and for facilities that exclusively hold immigrants.

The standards for centres that also hold non-immigrant detainees “were based on jail standards in use by many jails”, University of Michigan law professor Margo Schlanger said, describing them as “the most stripped down version of jail standards”.

It’s unclear what standards Alligator Alcatraz is held to. The centre is state-run even though courts have repeatedly held that immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility. However, in a court declaration, Thomas P Giles, an ICE official, said the agency had toured the facility “to ensure compliance with ICE detention standards”.

Both sets of immigration standards are periodically updated, but there’s no timing coordination between ICE standards’ updates and other facilities’ updates. Standards are individually negotiated and implemented in separate contracts leading “to varying degrees of protection across detention facilities”, a 2021 Harvard Law Review article about immigration detention said.

Additionally, detention standards aren’t codified into law, making their enforcement difficult. Detainees’ complaints about the facilities’ conditions have little legal support to stand on because the industry is largely self-regulated, one immigration scholar argued.

“Standards are often merely guidelines and largely unenforceable. They are pliable and weak,” David Hernández, a professor at Mount Holyoke College who specialises in detention and deportation policy, said. “Very few facilities lose their contracts due to failing standards, or even deaths of detainees.”

Government watchdogs, nonprofit organisation, news reports detail inadequate conditions at detention centres

The Homeland Security Department is largely responsible for conducting inspections to ensure detention centres are meeting ICE’s standards. However, for years, government watchdog agencies and advocacy organisations have questioned the efficacy of these investigations, pointing to several instances of facilities not complying with ICE standards.

In 2020, Congress created the Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman to conduct unauthorised investigations of detention centres and to allow immigrants to file individual complaints for the office to review.

In March, the Trump administration tried to close the office. A civil rights group sued the administration. In response, DHS said in a declaration that the office would stay open but with a smaller staff. Immigration experts said this decision has severely limited oversight of detention centres.

News outlets and advocacy organisations have warned of inadequate immigration detention conditions, including overcrowding. The Trump administration is currently detaining about 60,000 people – that’s 20,000 more people than it has congressional funding to detain.

The external reports describe detainees in different locations being denied medical care, being placed in solitary confinement after complaining about conditions, not having access to legal resources and being targeted for being Venezuelan. Catholic University immigration law professor Stacy Brustin said these stories “mirror accounts” she and her students witnessed when visiting several detention centres.

“We heard shocking descriptions of overcrowding, sewage leaks, inoperable toilets, water running down cell block walls, insufficient access to water, spoiled or inedible food, inability to move freely in cell blocks for prolonged periods, and substandard medical care for individuals with serious, life-threatening conditions,” Brustin said. “All of these conditions violate ICE detention standards.”

For example, ICE standards say centres must provide detainees “a nutritionally balanced diet that is prepared and presented in a sanitary and hygienic”. Spoiled food is a violation.

Differences between ICE detention and prison standards

Some states have codified standards that their detention facilities are required to follow, others don’t. Some facilities are accredited by the American Correctional Association, which has its own set of standards.

All facilities have to comply with the US Constitution – particularly the 8th Amendment prohibiting “cruel and unusual punishments” in criminal cases and the 14th Amendment protecting people against deprivation of “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”. Prisons and jails must also abide by federal laws related to sexual violence, inmates’ access to religious facilities, and people with disabilities.

“Courts have ruled that people who are incarcerated in these facilities have the right to care, safety, and humane treatment,” Brinkley-Rubinstein said.

Generally, prison and jail standards have similar provisions to the ones for immigration detention, such as access to healthcare and legal resources and having sanitary facilities.

Oversight practices also vary based on the facility. Some places are subject to independent oversight; others rely only on internal oversight.

The consequences for prisons and jails that don’t follow standards also vary.

“If the facility is under a consent decree and court supervision, the judge may require regular reports, appoint an independent monitor or a manager or even a receiver to operate all aspects of the facility,” said Andrea Armstrong, Loyola University New Orleans professor and prison conditions expert.

Some places may lose their contracts depending on the severity of the situation, Schlanger said. In other cases, facilities may face lawsuits.

Immigrants have more restrictions when trying to access courts to claim detention facilities are not upholding their standards. That’s because immigration detention is a civil rather than criminal form of detention.

That classification “creates a dangerous loophole where people can be held in carceral conditions without the constitutional protections that apply to those in the criminal legal system,” Brinkley-Rubinstein said.

Former president has been indicted on additional charges as a special prosecutor continues investigations.

Disgraced former South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol has been indicted over his declaration of martial law last year as investigators widened an insurrection probe.

The prosecution indicted Yoon on charges including abuse of power and obstruction of special official duties, prosecutor Park Ji-young told reporters on Saturday.

Park said Yoon also did not follow the required procedure to declare martial law, including holding a meeting with all government cabinet members.

He was also charged with “drafting and discarding a false document” that stated the prime minister and defence minister endorsed martial law.

Yoon has denied all wrongdoing.

He plunged South Korea into a political crisis when he sought to subvert civilian rule in December, sending troops to parliament in a bid to prevent lawmakers from voting down his declaration of martial law.

Yoon became the first sitting president in the country to be taken into custody when he was detained in January after resisting arrest for weeks, using his presidential security detail to thwart investigators.

He was released on procedural grounds in March even as his trial on insurrection charges continued.

Last week, he was detained again after an arrest warrant was issued over concerns he might destroy evidence in the case.

Yoon appeared in court on Friday at a hearing to argue for his arrest warrant to be cancelled.

The ex-president’s legal team told reporters Yoon defended himself for more than 30 minutes and noted his “limited physical mobility and the challenges he was facing”.

The court denied the request.

State prosecutors have already indicted Yoon on other criminal charges, including masterminding a rebellion, a charge with conviction carrying only two sentences — capital punishment or life imprisonment.

Meanwhile, a demonstration with thousands attending took place in the South Korean capital, Seoul, as well as other parts of the country against the policies of current President Lee Jae-myung.

Lee won a snap election in June after Yoon was removed from office.

Many South Koreans are angry because they believe the new government has not addressed their concerns in its reform plans.

Earlier this summer Spanish champions Barcelona had looked set to sign Spain winger Nico Williams.

However, the 22-year-old signed a new 10-year contract at Athletic Bilbao.

Rashford spent the second half of last season on loan at Aston Villa where he made 17 appearances across all competitions, scoring four goals and providing six assists.

He is one of five United players – and the highest paid – told to train separately from Amorim’s squad amid a stand-off over their futures.

The 27-year-old does not believe he will play for United again while Amorim is at the club.

If the deal to Barcelona does go through, it would be a massive positive for United as they look to strengthen Amorim’s squad.

With over £130m committed to signing Matheus Cunha and Bryan Mbeumo, further deals have to be funded through departures.

Even if Rashford’s exit was initially on loan, the saving off the wage bill would be significant given only Casemiro earns more than his £325,000-a-week salary.

*Alfred Silas just turned 18. 

He has been in commercial farming for five years. Working on people’s farms for daily wages from the age of 13, he prides himself on a recent promotion to farm manager, one that comes with many responsibilities and a higher wage. 

Lately, he wakes up by 6:00 a.m., hangs his hoe on his shoulder, and strolls to the farm while his younger ones prepare for school. 

A resident of Imburu village in Adamawa State, northeastern Nigeria, Alfred is a final-year student at the Government Day Secondary School, Imburu. While his schoolmates all over the country are preparing for the West African Examination Council (WAEC) and the National Examination Council (NECO) that will qualify them for admission into a university, Alfred hasn’t been in school for about a month now. 

He will also stay out of school for months to come because a different path has been paved for him, a path he accepts with honour. 

Unlike many teenagers in his community who abscond from school to engage in farm labour for quick cash, Alfred was pressed into commercial farming by the weight of family responsibility. From the start of every rainy season in June to the harvest period in September, an average of three months, he stays out of school to work in rice fields. 

“I put school on hold during every farming season so that I can work on people’s farms, earn money, and contribute to household expenses, and besides, my younger siblings are relying on me to take care of them,” he told HumAngle with a distant smile.

Alfred believes his parents don’t make enough money, so when they brought the idea of commercial farming five years ago, he jumped at the offer and has since grown into it. He explained that he had been contributing to household expenses from the age of 13, and now that he is older and has assumed the role of a farm manager, his contribution to household expenses has doubled. 

If he weren’t doing this work, Alfred said, he would like to be in school so he could study to become a doctor like he always wanted. 

While his hard work yields fruits to make ends meet, HumAngle observed that the wages are little compared to what he and many children from other rural communities in Adamawa deserve. 

Farming between lessons 

Seventeen-year-old *Philip Pwanidi is also a final-year student at the Government Day Secondary School in Imburu. 

Philip wakes up as early as 4:00 a.m., and then treks for about 30 minutes from home to the outskirts of the community where the farm he labours on is located. 

“I try my best to balance commercial farming with school,” he told HumAngle. 

“The first thing I do when I get there is turn on the generator so that it can power the water pump, then I head back home and dress for school.”

He stays in school for an average of two hours (8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.). The school grants an hour of refreshment break from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m., so Philip rushes back to the farm in his uniform. There, he changes into his work clothes and carries on with farm labour. 

HumAngle spoke to another teen who does commercial farming in a neighbouring community called Zangun, a fertile land under the Numan Local Government Area (LGA) where urban dwellers come to set up farms and hire locals to manage and cultivate. Fifteen-year-old *Betty Godwin is a junior student at the Government Secondary School in this community. 

She has just been contracted to work in a rice field alongside some older women. Betty comes to the farm around 7:00 a.m., works for five hours and takes a break at noon. Then she resumes around 1:00 p.m. and finishes by 3:00 p.m. 

Currently, her work involves transplanting rice in a waterlogged field, and payment is made daily, at the end of every working hour. 

More work, less pay 

It’s been a year since Alfred became a farm manager for his contractor, who doesn’t live in Imburu. While he supervises other young workers in cultivating the lands, he also works. 

Alfred explained that he went to work on the contractor’s rice farm at least five times a week last year, from 5:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 

He didn’t get a dime until after three months. 

“My contractor said he was going to pay me at the end of the harvest season, and I agreed. So the planting season to harvest season took three months, and that was when I got my pay,” he said.

Alfred received the sum of ₦100,000 and a bag of rice as compensation for his three months’ labour of over 10 hours daily.

“We harvested over 100 bags of rice. The farm is big, as you can see,” he said,  pointing at the vast land surrounding him. 

He also added that during the harvest, he stayed on the farm for over three days without bathing. He ate there and had to keep awake because his role also included serving as a farm guard.

The harvest period lasted for three and a half days, after which Alfred went home. Now, he has been contracted for the same job with the same terms. He commenced his 10-hour daily labour in June and will be settled in September. 

Philip and other children who are into commercial farming in Imburu are paid ₦1,000 or ₦1,500 per rice bed. 

“If you’re working on two beds a day, that’s ₦2,000 or ₦3,000,” he said.  

Philip explained that as children, they don’t get the chance to negotiate because their payment is fixed. He stressed that it’s nearly impossible for him and the other kids to work on two or more beds in a day, so they mostly do one bed.

He said it takes an average of five hours to cultivate one bed due to its size, and since he’s farming between lessons, he cultivates a bed daily.  

“Sometimes, I come here around 10:00 a.m. and leave by 4:00 p.m. I take out ₦500 from my daily earnings to buy food, and then I go home with ₦1,000, but it’s not even up to that amount all the time because the work always leaves us fatigued, so we buy pain killers, which cost like ₦200, and then go home with ₦800,” Philip said. 

Philip also stated that it’s quite difficult to work daily. “I get tired, so I skip a day or two,” he said. He shows up an average of four times a week and makes about ₦6,000. If he takes out the ₦500 he spends on feeding daily, he smiles home with ₦4,000 a week. He is proud of his earnings, and he is saving them as pocket money.

For adult commercial farmers, the situation is different. In Imburu, HumAngle gathered that adults are paid an average of ₦3,000 daily despite cultivating the same bed size as the children. 

Children like Philip are worried by the pay gap, but he says he has no choice but to accept what he gets.  

“There are so many of us [children] lining up to do this work, and sometimes, if you don’t show up on time, there’s always someone to take up your place. The contractors don’t negotiate. You take it or leave it,” he said, emphasising how competitive it can be. 

Most of the large-scale farmers who are the contractors come from urban centres like Ngbalang, Numan, and Yola. 

Despite working the same 10 hours as older women on the same rice farm in Zangun, Betty is paid ₦1,000, while the women get triple the amount. For instance, 35-year-old Pwataksino Hakuri, Betty’s co-worker and commercial farmer with four years of experience, told HumAngle that she receives ₦3,500 at the end of every successful day. This shows a disturbing wage gap. 

The Child Rights ACT of 2023, a legislation that protects children and young adults in Nigeria, frowns at the engagement of children in any form of labour that is harmful to their development. While the minimum age for employment is 15 years, it was stated that the work must not interfere with the children’s education.

The ACT also condemns all forms of exploitative labour, as some of the provisions state that no child must be employed as a domestic help outside the home or domestic environment. No child must lift or move anything heavy that might affect their physical health or social development, and no child must be employed in an industrial setting that is not registered as a technical school or similar approved institutions.

While the lack of implementation of the Child Rights Act is a major concern, inflation and poverty, among other reasons, were identified as reasons for the growing child labour and continuous exploitation of children in Nigeria.

HumAngle interviewed Joniel Yannam Gregory, a large-scale farmer in Adamawa State. With a major focus on rice farming, he has grown maize, cotton, guinea corn, sweet potato, and soya beans on a large scale across several local government areas in the last four years. 

Speaking on the exploitation that children face from large-scale farmers, Joniel said, “They are cost-friendly. I mean, children can accept whatever pay that is given to them at the end of the day without complaints.” He also added that children give less trouble to the farmers and demand less welfare, as they are not fed on-site by the contractors like adults.

“Children can also work and agree to receive their pay at a much later date than adults who have bills to pay and will want their payment instantly,” Joniel said. 

Addressing the pay gap, Joniel said it’s mainly due to the absence of a definite payment plan between farm contractors, labourers, and managers.

“However, it is also pertinent to note that, even if there are no definite payment plans, the amount of work done by the labourers and the size of land worked on are strong determinants of how a person is paid, whether he’s a child or not,” he said.

Despite the wage gap, Betty is satisfied with her payment. “I live with my grandmother. She’s old and can’t do anything to generate income, so at the end of every day, I take what I make to her,” she said. But she wants to be in school.

“I want to be a nurse. I don’t like this work. I don’t like missing school, but I have no choice,” she said, emphasising the strain of survival. 

But education is free

At the Government Day Secondary School in Imburu, the school administrators are worried about the declining number of students during every farming season. In an interview with HumAngle, Satina Phineas, the school principal, said the situation is worsening. 

“Before, the students in this community usually skip school during every rainy season, but now that irrigation farming is becoming a trend, they also skip school during the dry season,” she said.

Satina said the hustle for quick cash has caused a lot of children to derail from school despite the government’s provision of free education in the state. 

In  2019, Ahmadu Fintiri, the Governor of Adamawa State, announced free education across all public schools in the state. This has since taken effect. Students across primary and secondary schools only pay a token as a parent-teacher association (PTA) levy. Even WAEC and NECO fees are sorted by the government. 

According to the principal, students pay the sum of ₦640 per term as PTA levy, which amounts to ₦1920 each school year.  “The government has cleared their fees. The teachers are here, but they don’t show up,” she lamented.

She also stressed that some of the students get dressed from home but don’t go to school. They go to the commercial farms, then change into their work clothes when their parents think they are in school. She added that the school sanctions defaulters, but despite continuous efforts, the situation remains the same. 

In Zangun Primary and Secondary School, the classes are scanty. 

Onisimun Myakpado, the assistant head teacher at the primary school, explained that the management went as far as organising a workshop to sensitise parents in the community about the relevance of education. 

“The parents contribute to the absence of children from the school because some of them send the children to go and work on these farms,” he said. 

A fact sheet on Nigeria’s education, developed in 2023 by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), shows how rural and poor children in Nigeria at all levels have below-average school completion rates in comparison to urban and wealthier children, whose completion rate is above average. The report further states that while 90 per cent of children from the wealthiest quintile complete senior secondary education, less than 16 per cent of children from the poorest quintile do so.

“Education is the only thing parents can give their children as a lifetime inheritance,” said Satina. “If these parents don’t support their children to take advantage of the free education scheme, then they are cheating themselves.”

Esther Simon* is a 41-year-old woman from Imburu. Some of her teenage children are into commercial farming. According to her, commercial farming is an option for the children in her household who have no passion for education and don’t do well at school.

“It’s better if they go to the farm and hustle for money since they don’t do well in school,” she told HumAngle.

Esther also has little faith in the educational system and is worried about the unemployment rate in the country. “I know people who drop their certificates and venture into farming because there is no work, so it’s not entirely a bad thing if the children are into commercial farming,” she said.

However, she acknowledged that formal education and commercial farming combined will equip one for a better future.

“It will be great if we have a system here that allows the children to go to school during the day and then do commercial farming in the evening or during weekends,” she added. 

*The asterisked names are pseudonyms we have used to protect the identities of the sources.

Indonesia is apparently seeking a secure position in an unstable world situation. It fosters cooperation through partnerships for this purpose. In this situation, Indonesia’s President Prabowo Subianto has recently engaged in dialogue and cooperation with world powers. Last weekend, on 6-7 July 2025, Prabowo went to the summit in the BRICS meeting. They discussed economic orientation and a few of the members’ common interests. They called an emerging power against the old power that had ruled the world for decades. Indonesia seems to join the cooperation to get a huge benefit since it is the largest economy in the world, namely China, Russia, and India. As the 10th member of BRICS, Indonesia clearly focuses on economic development through cooperation among countries.

This is not just stopping there. Just a week later, on Sunday, 13 July 2025, Prabowo met and discussed in front of journalists cooperation between Indonesia and the EU in developing Indonesia’s economy. Not only for the economy but also for geopolitical reasons. Indonesia’s effort to make agreements, dialogue, and meetings with actors who highlight global issues recently seems to secure its position.

“We found out that Indonesia’s motto is ‘unity and diversity’; one of our core sentences in the European Union is ‘united in diversity.’” Ursula von der Leyen said they share common sense.

In the EU-Indonesia joint presser to officially announce their strategic partnership in an uncertain economy and a confusing world. The partnership between them is not only for their economic interest but also as a depiction of what countries should do amid the instability and confusing situation.

Europe favors this cooperation first to strengthen the supply chain of critical raw materials, which Indonesia has abundant resources for. Europe is also seeking power for the clean and digital transition. Moreover, Europe would like to set a goal on geopolitics and security, particularly in ASEAN. Indonesia clearly says that the European Union is a significant partner for Indonesia’s economy and geopolitical stability in the global situation right now.

“Partnership between Europe and Indonesia, also being a large part of ASEAN, I think will be a very important contribution to economic and geopolitical stability in the world. We consider Europe to be very important for us. That’s why we would like to see more European presence and more European participation in our economy,” said Prabowo Subianto.

Future action of this agreement EU-Indonesia, it potentially massive investment in mining since the EU mentions critical raw materials in Indonesia. Indonesia will please welcome the EU to invest in this sector to leverage economic development. Despite this future prediction, Indonesian societies will have easier access to Europe as Ursula von der Leyen said,

“I’m pleased to announce that the European Commission has adopted a decision on a visa cascade. It means that from now on, Indonesian nationals visiting the European Union for a second time will be eligible for a multi-entry Schengen visa. This will make it easier to visit, but also to invest, to study, and to connect.”

Both of them have a beneficial partnership with a long-term goal. It seems Indonesia does not want to lose its investor and 5th market for commodities. Also, Europe does not want to lose its core country to secure its position in Southeast Asia and its supply chain of raw materials, obviously for its goal of energy transition. To secure a position in an uncertain world is one of the most important things for the EU to maintain its leadership, especially in the energy transition.

To conclude, Indonesia’s action in making cooperation with the EU one of its strategies in this uncertain world. We can see that prior to this agreement, Indonesia had met the BRICS countries in a summit with the same purpose of economic development. This action is a reflection of Indonesia’s principle of action in foreign policy, called “bebas-aktif.” Bebas means “free” in English, which is the right of Indonesia to act however they want without relying on one side; aktif means “active.” Is Indonesia actively promoting peace throughout the world? We can see Indonesia’s effort, which is one reflection of this principle.

At half past eight on the morning of Friday, July 21, 1967, following a quick breakfast with his wife, Chief Albert Luthuli set out from his home in Groutville, about 70km (45 miles) from Durban in the KwaZulu-Natal Province of South Africa, on his normal daily routine.

The 69-year-old leader of the African National Congress (ANC) would “walk three kilometres to open the family’s general store in Nonhlevu, proceed to his three plots of sugarcane fields, and return to close the shop before going back home”, his daughter-in-law, Wilhelmina May Luthuli, now 77, told a new inquest into his death at Pietermaritzburg High Court in May this year. The current justice minister has reopened the inquests into several suspicious apartheid-era deaths.

Luthuli reached the store by 9:30am and set off again to check on his sugar cane fields about half an hour later.

This much is not in dispute.

The only witness

Train driver Stephanus Lategan told a 1967 inquest into Luthuli’s death that at 10:36am, as his 760-tonne train approached the Umvoti River Bridge, he noticed a pedestrian walking across the bridge and sounded his whistle. “The Bantu [the official and derogatory term for Black people at the time] did not appear to take any notice whatsoever … He had walked about … 15 or 16 paces when my engine commenced to overtake him … He made no attempt to step towards the side or turn his body sideways.”

While the bridge was not designed for pedestrian traffic, Luthuli and the rest of his family often crossed it. His son, Edgar Sibusiso Luthuli, explained that when using the bridge, his father was “very, very careful. When a train was coming, he would stand, not even walk, and hold onto the railings tightly. The space was big enough for the train to pass you on the bridge”.

But, according to Lategan, Luthuli did no such thing that morning. The train driver told the inquest that while the front of the train narrowly missed Luthuli, “the corner of the cab struck him on the right shoulder and this caused him to be spun around and I saw him lose his balance and fall between the right-hand side of the bridge and the moving train.”

Lategan was the only witness to the collision. According to his testimony, when he realised he had hit Luthuli, he stopped the train as fast as he could.

Luthuli was still breathing but unconscious and bleeding from the mouth when Lategan said he reached him. He asked the station foreman and station master to call an ambulance, which took Luthuli to the nearest “Bantu” hospital.

Fifty-eight years later – nearly another lifetime for Luthuli – a new inquest opened earlier this year. Experts testifying cast serious doubt on Lategan’s version of events.

Police crime scene analyst Brenden Burgess was part of a team that used evidence from the first inquest to reconstruct the crash scene.

“The possibility of an accident scenario occurring as described by Mr Lategan is highly unlikely,” testified Burgess. “Taking into account the stopping distance required to stop the locomotive where it came to rest at the scene … the brakes to the train would have to have been applied at least 170 metres before the entrance to the northern side of the bridge … The probability of the point of impact being on the southern side of the bridge is highly unlikely.”

In fact, experts say, it is likely that Luthuli was not walking along the bridge at all.

Steam train expert Lesley Charles Labuschagne went further. By his estimation, “Luthuli was assaulted and his body taken to a railway track so it would look like he was hit by a train,” according to a Business Day article about his testimony, published in May.

Citing “gaps relating to description of trauma, in terms of size as well as characterisation of injuries”, forensic pathologist Dr Sibusiso Ntsele told the 2025 inquest that Luthuli’s post-mortem report was “substandard to say the least”. Ntsele concluded his testimony: “I don’t have enough to say he was hit by a train … What I have suggests that he is likely to have been assaulted.”

The inquest has been adjourned until October, when Judge Qondeni Radebe will rule on Luthuli’s cause of death.

‘Quietly, as a teacher’

There is no formal record of his birth, but it is known that Albert John Mvumbi Luthuli was born sometime in 1898 in Bulawayo, Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), where his father worked as an interpreter for missionaries from the Congregational Church in America. This instilled in Luthuli a deep and lifelong faith and, according to the writer Nadine Gordimer, a way of speaking “with a distinct American intonation”.

When Mvumbi (his preferred name, meaning “continuous rain”) was about 10 years old, his family moved back to South Africa and he was sent to live with his uncle, the chief of Groutville, so that he could attend school.

By 1914, Luthuli was 16 and had progressed as far as he could at the small school in Groutville. He spent a year at the Ohlange Institute, the first high school in South Africa founded and run by a Black person, John Dube, the first president of the ANC. That was followed by several years at Edendale, a Methodist mission school where, for the first time, Luthuli was taught by white teachers. In his autobiography, Luthuli refuted the accusation that mission schools produced “black Englishmen”. Instead, he argued, “two cultures met, and both Africans and Europeans were affected by the meeting. Both profited and both survived enriched.”

After graduating from Edendale with a teaching qualification, he accepted a post as principal (and sole employee) of a tiny Blacks-only intermediate school in the outpost of Blaauwbosch, where – under the mentorship of a local pastor – his Christian faith deepened.

Luthuli’s performance at Blaauwbosch earned him a scholarship to Adams College, one of the most important centres for Black education in South Africa, just south of Durban.

Luthuli arrived at Adams with no political aspirations: “I took it for granted that I would spend my days quietly, as a teacher,” he wrote in his autobiography, Let My People Go. But the influence of ZK Matthews (the principal of the high school at Adams, who would go on to become an influential ANC leader and academic) and some of the other teachers gradually opened his eyes to a political world of resistance.

Luthuli stayed at Adams College for 15 years. Only in 1935 did he succumb to pressure from the people of Groutville, who wanted him to return home to take up the chieftainship (his uncle had been “fired” by the white government).

Becoming a chief – a salaried position, which meant he could be fired by the apartheid regime if he stepped too far out of line – meant taking a significant pay cut, but Luthuli saw it as a calling. Administering the needs of the 5,000 Zulu people of the Umvoti Mission Reserve, which had been founded by American missionary Reverend Aldin Grout from the Congressional Church in 1844, opened his eyes to the reality of life in South Africa: “Now I saw, almost as though for the first time, the naked poverty of my people, the daily hurt to human beings.” As the chief explained in his autobiography: “In Groutville, as all over the country, a major part of the problem is land – thirteen percent of the land for seventy percent of the people, and almost always inferior land…When I became chief I was confronted as never before by the destitution of the housewife, the smashing of families because of economic pressures, and the inability of the old way of life to meet the contemporary onslaught.”

Called to activism

Luthuli entered formal politics relatively late in life compared with others, only joining the ANC at the age of 46 in 1944, four years before apartheid officially began. Nelson Mandela, 20 years his junior, joined in the same year. Both men arrived at a time when the party was in dire need of new blood. The older generation of Black leaders was seen as too polite and accepting of the status quo to fight the increasingly draconian white minority government, with its rapidly restrictive legislation governing the lives of Black people.

But while Mandela and a few of his contemporaries shook up the national conversation with a more brash and confrontational style, Luthuli brought a more moderate brand of leadership to the Natal branch of the ANC. He was elected to the provincial executive less than a year after joining the party, and as president of the Natal branch in 1951.

Luthuli shot to national prominence as the chief volunteer of the 1952 Defiance Campaign, which saw thousands of people all around the country offering themselves up for arrest for contravening apartheid laws by doing things like sitting on whites-only benches and travelling on whites-only buses.

“He was duly stripped of his position as chief by the apartheid government, before being elected ANC president on the back of the youth vote that December,” explains Professor Thula Simpson of the University of Pretoria, one of the leading historians of the ANC. “Luthuli was seen as a bridge between old and young. But he and Moses Kotane [secretary general of the communist SACP for 39 years] became the old guard when Mandela and co started agitating for violence.”

Luthuli’s stance against violence

Mandela first publicly called for violent resistance in June 1953, telling a crowd in Sophiatown that, as he wrote in his autobiography, “violence was the only weapon that would destroy apartheid and we must be prepared, in the near future, to use that weapon.” This did not align with Luthuli’s approach.

In his autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom, Mandela wrote of being “severely reprimanded” by Luthuli and the ANC’s National Executive, “for advocating such a radical departure from accepted policy [never, ever condoning violence]… Such speeches could provoke the enemy to crush the organisation entirely while the enemy was strong and we were as yet still weak. I accepted the censure, and thereafter faithfully defended the policy of nonviolence in public. But in my heart, I knew that nonviolence was not the answer.”

Luthuli was actually in court, giving evidence about the ANC’s commitment to non-violent struggle, on March 21, 1960, when white police officers opened fire on a crowd of peaceful Black protesters at Sharpeville, killing at least 91 people. After Sharpeville, the calls for violent protest within the ANC grew louder and – despite Luthuli’s opposition – in June 1961, Mandela was given permission to set up Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), the party’s military wing.

MK’s founding document is “the strangest declaration of war in the history of insurgency”, says Simpson, with its focus on sabotaging government infrastructure but avoiding loss of life at all costs.

1961 was also the year Luthuli became the first African to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. “The citation from the committee noted that he had consistently stood for non-violence,” says Simpson. “But the irony is that he was aware that his movement had committed to forming a sabotage squad, even if he personally had acquiesced to the decision without enthusiasm.”

The apartheid government initially prevented Luthuli from travelling to Oslo to receive the award, but eventually relented with a condition: He could not make overt mention of South African politics during his speech. He followed this restriction (he didn’t say the word “apartheid” once) but made a clear statement by wearing traditional Zulu attire.

By sheer coincidence, Luthuli’s route back from Oslo saw him arrive in Durban on 15 December: The exact evening that MK began its operations.

Despite their differences, says Simpson, “Mandela liked and respected Luthuli and felt the need to consult with him. Mandela wanted the older man’s consent, authorisation and approval…”

This close relationship would lead to Mandela’s arrest and imprisonment for 27 years. In 1961, after the banning of the ANC, Mandela went undercover. Dubbed the Black Pimpernel, he was the most wanted man in the country. In August 1962, posing as the chauffeur of white playwright and activist Cecil Williams, Mandela drove to Groutville to brief Luthuli about a military training trip he’d taken to other African countries. One of the people Mandela met on that trip was a police informant, and on their way back to Johannesburg, Mandela and Williams were ambushed by police. “I knew in that instant that my life on the run was over,” Mandela later recalled.

Rewriting history

Many anti-apartheid leaders died in suspicious circumstances over the 46 years that the apartheid regime survived. Perhaps the most famous of these was Steve Biko, who died following police torture in 1977. The official inquest into Biko’s death absolved the police, finding that he could not have died “by any act or omission involving an offence by any person”. Despite a local and international outcry, the truth would only come out at the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in 1999, after apartheid had ended. Presided over by Desmond Tutu (himself a Nobel peace laureate), the TRC held more than 2,500 hearings between 1996 and 2002.

Controversially, the TRC had the power to grant full amnesty for politically motivated crimes, provided the perpetrators made honest and complete confessions. Four security policemen admitted to the killing of Biko at TRC hearings. But the commanding officer, Gideon Nieuwoudt, was denied amnesty on the grounds that he did not prove that his crime was politically motivated. Nieuwoudt was convicted for his role in the murder of the “Motherwell four” – four Black policemen who had been leaking information to the ANC and were killed in a car bomb planted by the authorities but died in 2005 before he was sentenced.

Since the TRC concluded, there have been other inquests into mysterious deaths, most notably the 2017 inquest into Ahmed Timol’s 1971 death. According to police reports at the time, Timol had jumped from the 10th floor of the Johannesburg Central Police Station after being overcome with shame at disclosing sensitive information about his colleagues during interrogation. A 1972 inquest ruled that he died by suicide. “To accept anything other than that the deceased jumped out of the window and fell to the ground can only be seen as ludicrous,” ruled Magistrate JL de Villiers. “Although he was questioned for long hours, he was treated in a civilised and humane manner.”

Timol’s death shone a light on the many (73 in total) mysterious deaths of activists in police custody during apartheid. These were the inspiration for Chris van Wyk’s satirical poem “In Detention”:

He fell from the ninth floor
He hanged himself
He slipped on a piece of soap while washing
He hanged himself
He slipped on a piece of soap while washing
He fell from the ninth floor
He hanged himself while washing
He slipped from the ninth floor
He hung from the ninth floor
He slipped on the ninth floor while washing
He fell from a piece of soap while slipping
He hung from the ninth floor
He washed from the ninth floor while slipping
He hung from a piece of soap while washing.

The TRC found that there was a “strong possibility that at least some of those detainees who allegedly committed suicide by jumping out of the window were either accidentally dropped or thrown”. This was not enough for the Timol family, however, and, in 2017, they succeeded in having the 1972 inquest reopened.

On October 12, 2017, Judge Billy Mothle set a historic precedent by overturning the first inquest’s findings. Mothle ruled that “Timol’s death was brought about by an act of having been pushed from the tenth floor or the roof” of the building, and that there was a prima facie case of murder against the two policemen who interrogated Timol on the day he was pushed to his death. The policemen in question had already died, but a third – Joao Rodrigues – was charged as an accessory to the murder. Rodrigues died before his case went to trial.

Seeking a motive

The Luthuli family hope to receive similar vindication when the inquest into his death reaches its conclusion in October this year. But, looking at the case objectively, Simpson is hard-pressed to find a motive for the murder. While Luthuli was the ANC’s official leader at the time of his death in 1967, a combination of ill-health, government banning orders and his opposition to violence had rendered him something of a figurehead without much political clout by the mid-1960s.

“There’s no clear motive for his murder,” says Simpson. “He’d ceased to be a threat to the regime. If anything, his funeral was an opportunity for protest.” Of course, Simpson adds, “If there was a conspiracy, the 1967 inquest would never have found it. Even if Luthuli’s death was accidental, there’s loads of reason to doubt the apartheid government’s version.”

In 2025, Justice Minister Ronald Lamola has been on something of a mission to expose apartheid-era cover-ups. On the same day that the Luthuli inquest was reopened, he announced plans to reopen the inquests into the deaths of Mlungisi Griffiths Mxenge in 1981 (a civil rights lawyer who was stabbed 45 times by a police “death squad”) and Booi Mantyi, who was shot dead for allegedly throwing stones at police in 1985. Last month, the inquest into the 1985 murder of the “Cradock Four” was reopened.

While most of the perpetrators of apartheid-era crimes are now dead (or very old), Lamola is pressing ahead. “With these inquests, we open very real wounds which are more difficult to open 30 years into our democracy,” he said. “But nonetheless, the interest of justice can never be bound by time…the truth must prevail.”

Uncovering the truth is especially important for Luthuli’s family. “It’s a very exciting moment for us,” said Sandile Luthuli, the chief’s grandson and CEO of the Social Housing Regulatory Authority. Now in his early 50s, Sandile doesn’t have memories of his grandfather, but talks about Luthuli being deeply religious: “He conducted church services on his own.” He also highlights the role that Luthuli’s wife, Nokukhanya, played in “keeping the home fires burning”.

While Sandile does admit to “some anxiety” about the outcome of the inquest, he is confident it will finally set the record straight. “This is the moment that we have been waiting for as a family … to really peel the layers of … his untimely assassination at the hands of the apartheid government.”

The inquest has also reminded the nation of South Africa and the world at large of Luthuli’s incredible legacy. As Martin Luther King Jr wrote in a letter to Luthuli in 1959: “You have stood amid persecution, abuse, and oppression with a dignity and calmness of spirit seldom paralleled in human history. One day all of Africa will be proud of your achievements.”

Some 1,500 students are scheduled to sit their end-of-school exams, despite Israel’s genocidal war.

Hundreds of Palestinian students in Gaza are taking a crucial end-of-secondary-school exam organised by the besieged enclave’s Ministry of Education in the hope of entering university studies.

Earlier this month, the ministry announced Saturday’s exam, which will be the first since Israel began its genocidal war on Gaza after the Hamas-led attack in southern Israel in October 2023.

The ministry confirmed that about 1,500 students are registered to take the exam, which will be conducted electronically using specialised software, adding that all necessary technical preparations have been carried out to ensure smooth administration.

Some students are sitting the online exam at home, while others are taking it at venues depending on the region they are in, with safety considerations in mind, given the daily Israeli bombardment.

Al Jazeera’s Tareq Abu Azzoum, reporting from Deir el-Balah, stressed that for Palestinian students, the exam is a critical gateway to higher education, scholarships and a future beyond the Israeli blockade.

He said: “Even in a warzone, with no classrooms, no books and barely any internet, Gaza’s students are showing up, logging in and sitting their final exam, refusing to let war erase their future.”

After the war started, the education of many students in Gaza has been put on hold, and the results of Saturday’s exam will allow them to continue their studies at university.

Many should have been at university by now, but remained at the high school level due to the war, as Israeli attacks have devastated Gaza’s education system, along with the rest of the territory’s civilian infrastructure.

In response, Gaza’s Education Ministry has launched an online platform – the first of its kind in Gaza – to enable high school seniors to take their final exam.

“Students have downloaded the app to take their exam, but they face many challenges,” Morad al-Agha, the exams director of the Central Gaza Governorate, told Al Jazeera.

“We have raised these concerns with the ministry to make sure they’re resolved, so students can sit for their exams without disruption.”

‘It is so difficult’

Students log in from cafes, tents and shelters – wherever they can find a charged device and a working internet connection.

Before the final exam, they have completed a mock test, designed not only to test their knowledge but also the system’s stability.

However, students tell Al Jazeera that going digital in Gaza has not been easy.

“We are taking exams online, but it is so difficult,” student Doha Khatab said. “The internet is weak, many of us do not have devices and there is no safe space to take the test. We also lost our books in the bombardment.”

To support them, a few teachers have reopened damaged classrooms and are offering in-person guidance.

“It is the first time the ministry has done this online and students are confused, so we’re trying to guide them step by step,” teacher Enam Abu Slisa told Al Jazeera.

The war in Gaza and the destruction of 95 percent of educational infrastructure have left more than 660,000 children out of school – nearly all of Gaza’s school-aged population, according to the United Nations.

Many former UN-run schools are now being used as shelters for displaced people and also face relentless, deadly Israeli attacks.

A report to the UN Human Rights Council found that Israeli forces systematically destroyed education infrastructure in Gaza. The report described these actions as potential war crimes.

BREAKINGBREAKING,

The declaration has been agreed on by representatives from both sides in Doha weeks after talks in Washington.

The Democratic Republic of Congo and the M23 rebel group have signed a declaration of principles in Qatar to end fighting in eastern Congo.

The declaration was signed on Saturday between representatives from both sides in Doha.

The DRC and Rwanda-backed M23 rebels have been engaged in heavy fighting, spurred by M23’s bloody January assault and capture of the DRC’s two largest cities.

The decades-long conflict has roots in the 1994 Rwandan genocide, with M23 made up primarily of ethnic Tutsi fighters.

The fighting has killed thousands and displaced hundreds of thousands more this year while escalating the risk of a full-blown regional war.

Several of Congo’s neighbours already have troops deployed in the volatile region.

In March Qatar brokered a surprise meeting between Congolese President Felix Tshisekedi and his Rwandan counterpart Paul Kagame during which they called for an “immediate and unconditional” ceasefire.

That led to direct talks, also in Doha, between Congo and M23.

DR Congo had previously rejected the idea of holding talks with M23, branding it a “terrorist group”, but in April, both sides pledged to work towards a ceasefire.

Talks in the US

Washington has also hosted talks between Congo and Rwanda in June.

On June 27 the two countries’ foreign ministers signed a peace deal and met with US President Donald Trump at the White House. Trump warned of “very severe penalties, financial and otherwise” if the deal is violated.

Trump also invited Tshisekedi and Kagame to Washington to sign a package of deals that Boulos dubbed the “Washington Accord”.

Speaking to reporters on July 2, Boulos said the Trump administration would “love” to hold that meeting at the end of July.

But he also said US officials hope to have a deal in Doha finalised by then.

DR Congo, the United Nations and Western powers say Rwanda is supporting M23 by sending troops and arms.

Rwanda has long denied helping M23 and says its forces are acting in self-defence against DR Congo’s army and ethnic Hutu fighters linked to the 1994 Rwandan genocide, including the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR).

In June more than 100 of Britain’s most renowned athletes wrote an open letter to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer urging the government to back London’s bid to host the World Athletics Championships.

It came after concerns that a bid could be at risk, with uncertainty over the estimated £45m that government was being asked for amid spending cuts, despite claims that the event would deliver £400m of economic impact.

The championships were not referenced when ministers unveiled half a billion pounds of investment into sporting events in a spending review last month.

However, talks have been taking place with UK Athletics and UK Sport, and Starmer said he is “delighted to support the bid”.

“Bringing the World Athletics Championships to the UK would be a moment of great national pride, building on our global reputation for hosting memorable sporting events that showcase the very best talent,” he said.

“Hosting these championships would not only unlock opportunities for UK athletes, but it would inspire the next generation to get involved and pursue their ambitions.

“The event would provide a boost for UK businesses and support jobs as well as bring our communities together.”

Jack Buckner, CEO of UK Athletics, said: “After superb medal hauls over the last few years on the world, Olympic and Paralympic stage, athletics in the UK is on an upward trajectory, with new partners, record participation and sold-out stadia. This support will drive the sport on to new heights.”

Josh Kerr, 1500m world champion and double Olympic medallist, said: “London 2017 was my first senior World Championships and it lit a fire in me.

“Being part of a home team in that kind of atmosphere was incredible – it made me hungrier than ever to become a world champion and chase Olympic medals.

“Having the government support to bid for 2029 and potentially bring that experience back to London would be massive.

“It would inspire so many young athletes and give the sport the platform it deserves.

“I’m proud to support the bid and hope we get the chance to show the world what we can do on home soil.”

Globalization is generally understood as a characteristic feature of the contemporary world, and there is no unified definition of this phenomenon that can be given. What it basically comes down to is that globalization is a complex of processes that have successfully rearranged economic, political, and social ties across the borders, creating high-density interregional and intercontinental webs. Although the importance of globalization to enhance technological advancement, economic integration, and cultural exchange is commonly hailed, it has also put states at new and advanced vulnerabilities, especially in the cyberspace sector. In spite of the claims that it is an ineluctable side product of human innovation, the rate of globalization has advanced considerably due to improved digital communication and transportation technology. Other researchers advance the idea that its origin can be traced to ancient migration and trade networks, and the interconnectedness is the property of human evolution. The digital age has, however, increased this connectivity to the extent that it is no longer what it was. The advent of the internet and instant communication has transformed relations and life in the world, raising the living standards of the developed countries and also bringing in developed forms of threats. Among these, the most urgent is the so-called cyber warfare one, as a brand-new area that breaks the inner paradigms of national security and national sovereignty.

In the modern world characterized by hyperconnectivity, the global digital networks have the capacity to enable the state and non-state actors to dictate cyber operations that are cross-border with far-reaching consequences. The chain of modern society, including the financial system, healthcare, energy, and military communication systems, is both a strength and a weak point to take advantage of. An attack on a single node may spread horizontally across systems and into borders of different countries, endangering social equilibrium. This necessitates the need to comprehend the motives, what they can do, and the strategies they are likely to use, and to develop adaptive national security models that can adapt to this changing environment. Technology is the powerful aspect that can present change in almost all spheres of life. The spread of the use of smartphones, the construction of smart cities, and the implementation of blockchain systems indicate the high rate of transformation of personal life and institutional life, as well as their digitalization. This digital transformation, however, also came with an abundance of cyber risks. Not only is the new threat environment vigilant, but it is advanced enough to require precedent defense. Such qualities of cyberspace as anonymity, easy accessibility, legal confusion, and unequal distribution of power make the latter a beneficial environment for conflicts, spying, and interference by an extended number of opponents.

The changes of cyber threats have been gradual yet far-reaching. The history of cybersecurity could be established back in the early 1970s when the Creeper and its antivirus Reaper became the first self-replicating and antivirus applications, respectively. Commercial Antivirus software was introduced in the 1980s, the same decade that the 90s witnessed a boom of online crime since more people got access to the internet worldwide. Cybercrime was being organized and more technologically advanced in the early 2000s, with state-sponsored cyber manipulation starting to take shape. By 2026, the worldwide cybersecurity market is expected to exceed 345 billion, which can be seen as a way of demonstrating the magnitude of the problem and the necessity to take measures in preventing it. Cyber capabilities are being more and more incorporated as part of the greater strategic arsenals of states. Hybrid warfare, the idea of a combination of conventional military methods and digital warfare, has turned out to be one of the central concepts of modern combat. Of particular interest is the use, in 2010, of the Stuxnet malware, apparently by the United States and Israel, to destroy nuclear centrifuges in Iran. These cyber operations have the potential to create strategic disruption to adversaries at no political or humanitarian cost of direct warfare, and they can be covered behind the plausible deniability of it. This is because the Russian-Ukraine conflict presents one of the most vivid examples of the practicality of cyber warfare. Beginning in 2013, Russia has carried out a series of cyberattacks on Ukrainian infrastructure that grew in intensity in the run-up to its full-scale invasion in 2022. The malware was used to carry out operations like attacks using destructive malware referred to as the Acid Rain, which interfered with satellite communications and even the monitoring of wind turbines, as well as the internet being cut off through parts of Europe and even North Africa. Such cyberattacks were not isolated maneuvers but rather a part of Russia’s broad hybrid warfare policy. They wanted to disrupt Ukrainian rule, create disinformation, disorient people, and tear the society apart without the specificity of any military attack.

The non-state actors have also become substantial sources of cyber menace. The organizations and groups that operate in the cyberspace now include the hacktivist groups and criminal syndicates, terrorist organizations and inclusion of corporate groups as well. They have different motives. Their motives could be as varied as financial gain, ideological expression, or strategic disruption, but their capability to cause harm is real. In 2007, there were Estonian cyberattacks, largely blamed on Russian patriotic hackers, that led to the paralysis of banking systems, ministerial websites, and media houses. The incident was not scientifically connected to the Russian state, but it revealed the nature of destruction of non-state actors. At least, these groups are involved in cyber espionage and/or sabotage with or without official state sponsorship to make it more difficult to attribute culpability and strike back. The consequences upon national security are enormous and extremely troubling. Hacking is capable of bringing the most vital services to their knees, stealing classified information, and undermining democratic efforts in the minds of a citizenry. A case in point is the Ghostnet which was found out in 2009 and had penetrated networks in over 100 countries expressly posing a challenge of digital sovereignty and spying. In a similar vein, in 2016 Russia was charged with influencing the US presidential election race via cyber incursion, disinformation, and explorations of electoral infrastructure, which was a move designed to discredit democracy as well as geopolitical stability. With cyber warfare still being in development, the boundary between the peaceful and aggressive becomes more grey. Digital battlefield involves situations where attacks cannot be tracked and consequently acknowledged, where it is difficult to ascribe such an attack, and where effects, though sometimes silent, are vast. The necessity of taking good care of cybersecurity is pressing and hard to exaggerate. In order to combat such threats, the states have to invest in integrated cybersecurity systems. Not just firewalls, intrusion and detection systems, and encrypting data, but more sophisticated threat intelligence using the technology of artificial intelligence and machine learning. The critical systems have to be secured through proactive monitoring, protocols of quick responses and regular vulnerability checks.

Nevertheless, system-based countermeasures are not enough. It is also crucial to have a subtle perception of how humans conduct themselves online. Behavioral science insights have to be involved in cybersecurity strategies in order to predict, prevent, and respond to internal and external threats more effectively. The high security levels of cyber resilience can be achieved through awareness campaigns, psychological profiling of threat actors, and an education program for both users and professionals. The other pillar of success in cybersecurity is international cooperation. No nation can take on these threats independently because of the nature of the internet, which is borderless. International rules and conventions, codes of ethics, and laws have to be developed to govern cyberspace behavior and punish the violators. Moreover, the worldwide issue of cybersecurity talent shortage will require making large investments both in learning and educating the current generation of cybersecurity experts and investing in innovative approaches like gamified learning, virtual labs, and outreach strategies to appeal to people of different backgrounds and interests to the industry. Globalization has finally facilitated and strengthened the emergence of cyber threats. Though interconnectedness may be one of the most effective drivers of economic and social development, it also ensures the spawning of fresh opportunities through which dangerous outcomes may be realized should it be left unchecked, acting devastatingly to malicious parties. It is not cybersecurity and only a technical need; it is a national need that is necessary to protect sovereignty, stability, and the democratic order in the twenty-first century.

International public opinion continues to turn against Israel for its war on Gaza, with more governments slowly beginning to reflect those voices and increase their own condemnation of the country.

In the last few weeks, Israeli government ministers have been sanctioned by several Western countries, with the United Kingdom, France and Canada issuing a joint statement condemning the “intolerable” level of “human suffering” in Gaza.

Earlier this week, a number of countries from the Global South, “The Hague Group”, collectively agreed on a number of measures that they say will “restrain Israel’s assault on the Occupied Palestinian Territories”.

Across the world, and in increasing numbers, the public, politicians and, following an Israeli strike on a Catholic church in Gaza, religious leaders are speaking out against Israel’s killings in Gaza.

So, are world powers getting any closer to putting enough pressure on Israel for it to stop?

Here’s what we know.

What is the Hague Group?

According to its website, the Hague Group is a global bloc of states committed to “coordinated legal and diplomatic measures” in defence of international law and solidarity with the people of Palestine.

Made up of eight nations; South Africa, Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, Honduras, Malaysia, Namibia and Senegal, the group has set itself the mission of upholding international law, and safeguarding the principles set out in the Charter of the United Nations, principally “the responsibility of all nations to uphold the inalienable rights, including the right to self-determination, that it enshrines for all peoples”.

Earlier this week, the Hague Group hosted a meeting of some 30 nations, including China, Spain and Qatar, in the Colombian capital of Bogota. Also attending the meeting was UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, who characterised the meeting as “the most significant political development in the past 20 months”.

Albanese was recently sanctioned by the United States for her criticism of its ally, Israel.

At the end of the two-day meeting, 12 of the countries in attendance agreed to six measures to limit Israel’s actions in Gaza. Included in those measures were blocks on supplying arms to Israel, a ban on ships transporting weapons and a review of public contracts for any possible links to companies benefiting from Israel’s occupation of Palestine.

Have any other governments taken action?

More and more.

On Wednesday, Slovenia barred far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and ultranationalist Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich from entering its territory after the wider European Union failed to agree on measures to address charges of widespread human rights abuses against Israel.

Slovenia’s ban on the two government ministers builds upon earlier sanctions imposed upon Smotrich and Ben-Gvir in June by Australia, Canada, New Zealand, UK and Norway over their “incitement to violence”. The two men have been among the most vocal Israeli ministers in rejecting any compromise in negotiations with Palestinians, and pushing for the Jewish settlement of Gaza, as well as the increased building of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.

In May, the UK, France, and Canada issued a joint statement describing Israel’s escalation of its campaign against Gaza as “wholly disproportionate” and promising “concrete actions” against Israel if it did not halt its offensive.

Later that month, the UK followed through on its warning, announcing sanctions on a handful of settler organisations and announcing a “pause” in free trade negotiations with Israel.

Also in May, Turkiye announced that it would block all trade with Israel until the humanitarian situation in Gaza was resolved.

South Africa first launched a case for genocide against Israel at the International Court of Justice in late December 2023, and has since been supported by other countries, including Colombia, Chile, Spain, Ireland, and Turkiye.

In January of 2024, the ICJ issued its provisional ruling, finding what it termed a “plausible” case for genocide and instructing Israel to undertake emergency measures, including the provision of the aid that its government has effectively blocked since March of this year.

What other criticism of Israel has there been?

Israel’s bombing on Thursday of the Holy Family Church in Gaza City, killing three people, drew a rare rebuke from Israel’s most stalwart ally, the United States.

Following what was reported to be an “angry” phone call from US President Trump after the bombing, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office issued a statement expressing its “deep regret” over the attack.

To date, Israel has killed more than 58,000 people in Gaza, the majority women and children.

Has the tide turned internationally?

Mass public protests against Israel’s war on Gaza have continued around the world throughout its duration.

And there are clear signs of growing anger over the brutality of the war and the toll it is taking on Palestinians in Gaza.

In Western Europe, a survey carried out by the polling company YouGov in June found that net favourability towards Israel had reached its lowest ebb since tracking began.

A similar poll produced by CNN this week found similar results among the American public, with only 23 percent of respondents agreeing Israel’s actions in Gaza were fully justified, down from 50 percent in October 2023.

Public anger has also found voice at high-profile public events, including music festivals such as Germany’s Fusion Festival, Poland’s Open’er Festival and the UK’s Glastonbury festival, where both artists and their supporters used their platforms to denounce the war on Gaza.

Has anything changed in Israel?

Protests against the war remain small but are growing, with organisations, such as Standing Together, bringing together Israeli and Palestinian activists to protest the war.

There has also been a growing number of reservists refusing to show up for duty. In April, the Israeli magazine +972 reported that more than 100,000 reservists had refused to show up for duty, with open letters from within the military protesting the war growing in number since.

Will it make any difference?

Netanyahu’s hard-right coalition has been pursuing its war on Gaza despite its domestic and international unpopularity for some time.

The government’s most recent proposal, that all of Gaza’s population be confined into what it calls a “humanitarian city”, but has been likened to a concentration camp and has been taken by many of its critics as evidence that it no longer cares about either international law or global opinion.

Internationally, despite its recent criticism of Israel for its bombing of Gaza’s one Catholic church, US support for Israel remains resolute. For many in Israel, the continued support of the US, and President Donald Trump in particular, remains the one diplomatic absolute they can rely upon to weather whatever diplomatic storms their actions in Gaza may provoke.

In addition to that support, which includes diplomatic guarantees through the use of the US veto in the United Nations Security Council and military support via its extensive arsenal, is the US use of sanctions against Israel’s critics, such as the International Criminal Court, whose members were sanctioned in June after it issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant on war crimes charges.

That means, in the short term, Israel ultimately feels protected as long as it has US support. But as it becomes more of an international pariah, economic and diplomatic isolation may become more difficult to handle.

Many women and children were reportedly abducted in the deadly attack in northwestern Zamfara State.

At least nine people have been reported killed and many abducted following an attack in Nigeria’s northwest, residents and local officials said, amid increasing violence against farmers by what have been described as “bandit” gangs.

The deadly attack on Friday took place in Zamfara state, the epicentre of attacks by heavily armed men known locally as bandits who have been wreaking havoc across Nigeria’s northwest in recent years, kidnapping thousands, killing hundreds and making it unsafe to travel by road.

Hamisu Faru, a local lawmaker, confirmed the attack to the Reuters news agency, saying the assailants took “no fewer than 100 people, including women and children”.

“As I’m speaking to you right now, they are searching house-to-house, abducting people,” Faru said by phone.

Yahaya Yari Abubakar, political administrator of Talata Mafara district, where the attack was carried out, told the AFP news agency that nine people were killed in total and at least 15 local people were abducted.

Abu Zaki, a resident of the district’s Jangebe village, said the victims included the head of the village’s vigilante self-defence group and his five colleagues, along with three residents.

“Everybody is now afraid of going to the farm for fear of being attacked,” said another resident, Bello Ahmadu, who corroborated the reported death toll.

Jangebe village was the scene in 2021 of the mass abduction of almost 300 female students from a boarding school. The girls were freed days later after authorities made a ransom payment.

Another resident in the area, Mohammed Usman, told Reuters that the attackers laid siege to the town for nearly two hours before taking their captives. Thousands of residents have now fled the village, he said.

Zamfara police did not immediately respond to requests for comments.

Nigeria’s bandits maintain camps in a huge forest straddling Zamfara, Katsina, Kaduna and Niger states, in unrest that has evolved from clashes between herders and farmers over land and resources into a broader conflict fuelled by arms trafficking.

Zamfara’s state government has recruited vigilantes and armed militias to assist the military in fighting the bandits.

Last month, vigilantes, with the aid of Nigeria’s secret police, killed about 100 people when they raided the enclave of a gang kingpin in the state’s Shinkafi district, according to officials.

Here are the key events on day 1,241 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.

How things stand on Saturday, July 19:

Fighting

• Russian drones and glide bombs killed several people in Ukraine on Friday, officials said, including a 52-year-old train driver in the Dnipropetrovsk region, a 66-year-old woman killed in her home in Kostiantynivka, and a 64-year-old man killed in a glide bomb attack on a building site in the Zaporizhia region.
• Russian forces have staged a mass drone attack on the Ukrainian Black Sea port of Odesa, setting fire to at least one multistorey apartment building, the city’s mayor, Gennadiy Trukhanov, said early on Saturday. At least 20 drones converged on the city in the early hours of this morning.
• Russian air defences intercepted or destroyed 10 Ukrainian drones headed for Moscow overnight on Friday, the city’s mayor, Sergei Sobyanin, said.
• Ukraine’s top military commander, Oleksandr Syrskii, said his forces are standing firm in defending the city of Pokrovsk, a logistics hub in the eastern Donetsk region that has weathered months of Russian attacks, and the Novopavlivka settlement in the Zaporizhia region.
• Praising the troops defending Pokrovsk, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Russian forces “trying to advance and enter Ukrainian cities and villages” will not have “a chance of survival”.
• Authorities in Russian-controlled Crimea have introduced an information blackout designed to counter Ukrainian drone, missile and sabotage attacks. Sergei Aksyonov, the Russian-installed head of Crimea, said he signed a decree banning media outlets and social media users from publishing photos, video or other content that revealed the location of Russian forces or details of Ukrainian attacks on the Black Sea peninsula.

Military aid

• Australia’s government said it delivered M1A1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine as part of a 245 million Australian dollar ($160m) package to help the country defend itself against Russia in their ongoing war.
• The United States has moved Germany ahead of Switzerland to receive the next Patriot air defence systems to come off production lines in the US. The expedited delivery to Germany will allow Berlin to send two Patriot batteries it already has to Ukraine, according to a US media report.
• Leaders in Ukraine and Washington are in detailed talks on a deal involving US investment in Kyiv’s domestic drone production, Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko said. She added the deal would also lead to the US purchasing “a large batch of Ukrainian drones”.
• President Zelenskyy said he discussed missile supplies and funding for interceptor drones to counteract Russian attacks in a call with French President Emmanuel Macron. “I would especially like to highlight our agreement on pilot training for Mirage jets – France is ready to train additional pilots using additional aircraft,” Zelenskyy said on X.

Sanctions

• The European Union approved its 18th package of sanctions against Russia over its war in Ukraine, aimed at dealing further blows to Russia’s oil and energy industry.
• Eighteen officers working for Russian military intelligence, known as the GRU, along with three units, have been hit with sanctions by the United Kingdom over their role in a 2022 bomb attack on a theatre in southern Ukraine that killed hundreds of civilians. The officers were also accused of targeting the family of a former Russian spy who was later poisoned in the UK with a nerve agent.
• President Zelenskyy thanked the European Union for the latest sanctions targeting Russia and called for further punitive measures against Moscow. “This decision is essential and timely, especially now, as a response to the fact that Russia has intensified the brutality of the strikes on our cities and villages,” he said.
• Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said the Russian economy would withstand the EU sanctions package and said Moscow would intensify its strikes against Ukraine. India has said it does not support “unilateral sanctions” by the EU, after Brussels imposed penalties on Russia that included a Rosneft oil refinery in the western Indian state of Gujarat.
• Greek tanker operators involved in shipping approved Russian oil exports are expected to continue doing so despite the new wave of tougher sanctions by the EU that will further tighten restrictions, shipping sources told the Reuters news agency.
• WhatsApp should prepare to leave the Russian market, a lawmaker in Moscow who regulates the IT sector said on Friday, warning that the messaging app owned by Meta Platforms is very likely to be put on a list of restricted software in Russia.

Politics and diplomacy

• The Kremlin said that it did not believe the tougher stance that Donald Trump has adopted towards Russia over its war in Ukraine means the end of US-Russia talks aimed at reviving their battered ties.
• The Kremlin also said that it agreed with a statement by Zelenskyy that there needed to be more momentum around peace talks between the warring sides.
• Zelenskyy appointed former Defence Minister Rustem Umerov as the secretary of the country’s National Security and Defence Council, according to a decree published on Friday on the president’s website. Umerov’s appointment follows a reshuffle of the Ukrainian government and the appointment of a new prime minister.

• Russian President Vladimir Putin discussed Ukraine during a phone call with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Friday, the Kremlin press service said. Putin said Russia was “committed to a political and diplomatic settlement of the conflict in Ukraine” and thanked Erdogan for facilitating Russia-Ukraine bilateral talks.
• German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has cast doubt on the possibility of Ukraine joining the EU by 2034, saying accession was unlikely to come at a point affecting the bloc’s medium-term finance plans, which run to 2034. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had said Kyiv could join the EU before 2030 if the country continues its reforms.
• Russian courts sentenced 135 people to lengthy prison sentences in connection with a mass anti-Israel protest in October 2023 at an airport in the predominantly Muslim Dagestan region, the country’s Investigative Committee said on Friday. Hundreds of anti-Israel protesters stormed an airport in the city of Makhachkala, where a plane from Tel Aviv had just arrived, over Israel’s war on Gaza.

Regional security

• Russia views recent comments by a top US general about NATO’s ability to swiftly capture the Russian Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad as hostile, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said. General Christopher Donahue, the US Army Europe and Africa commander, said NATO could seize Kaliningrad “from the ground in a timeframe that is unheard of and faster than we’ve ever been able to do”, according to a report.
• Almost a third of Italians believe the country will be directly involved in a war within five years, but only 16 percent of those of fighting age would be willing to take up arms, a new survey shows.
• The survey by the Centre for Social Investment Studies showed 39 percent of Italians aged between 18 and 45 would declare themselves as pacifist conscientious objectors, 19 percent would try to evade conscription another way, and 26 percent would prefer Italy to hire foreign mercenaries.