Social Media

In the stillness of an October night in 2022, a covert operation unfolded within the sacred confines of St Catherine’s Cathedral in Kherson. Russian specialist troops and officials, acting under orders from Vladimir Putin, exhumed the remains of Grigory Potemkin, a revered 18th-century Russian commander closely associated with Empress Catherine the Great. Potemkin's legacy is deeply intertwined with the annexation of Crimea in 1783, and his remains were spirited away to an undisclosed location—perhaps Moscow or Crimea. This seemingly symbolic act reveals a profound insight into the motivations of the Russian president. It is a stark reminder that Putin’s actions are deeply rooted in history and in Russia’s perceived place within it. Throughout the years leading up to the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, I found myself repeatedly challenging the national security establishment’s understanding of Putin. Despite the intelligence reports and the assurances of seasoned experts, I argued that Putin was not guided by rationality or a desire to transform Russia into a modern, outward-looking nation. Instead, he is driven by a complex blend of revenge, legacy, and romanticism. The former KGB officer, along with his inner circle of Siloviki—comprising current and former members of Russia’s security services—harbors a deep-seated belief that the West is responsible for the Soviet Union's downfall. In their view, they are not the architects of the Soviet Union’s demise but rather its victims, ensnared by a Western conspiracy. This belief distorts their perception of history, leading them to assert that, if not for the West's influence, Russia would have emerged as the sole victor of World War II. Moreover, they contend that the Cold War need never have occurred because Eastern Europe, including East Germany and Poland, would have willingly remained under Moscow’s control. This revisionist narrative is prominently featured in a peculiar essay penned by Putin in June 2021, titled *The Real Lessons of the 75th Anniversary of World War II*. The essay is a masterclass in historical distortion, presenting a version of events that glorifies Russia as the world’s savior. Putin goes so far as to claim that the Nazi-Soviet pact, which facilitated the invasion and partition of Poland, somehow benefited the United Kingdom. In his attempt to recast Russia's role in the Second World War, Putin places the blame squarely on Britain and France, while conveniently ignoring the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact’s true implications. He omits crucial historical atrocities, such as the 1940 Katyn massacre, in which the Red Army and Soviet secret police executed approximately 20,000 Polish nationals. Furthermore, he glosses over the fact that, prior to the invasion of Poland, the Soviet Union had engaged in joint military exercises with the Wehrmacht and supplied tanks to Nazi Germany. This essay, while offering little in terms of factual accuracy, provides invaluable insight into Putin’s worldview and the historical grievances that fuel his actions. Almost a year later, in July 2022, Putin authored another essay, *On the Historical Unity of Russia and Ukrainians*. This piece combines elements of ethnic nationalism and historical romanticism, reminiscent of both *Mein Kampf* and a Walter Scott novel. It would be easy to dismiss this essay as the ravings of a leader disconnected from reality, but to do so would be to overlook its significance. Within its pages lie the clues to Putin’s next moves and the ideological underpinnings of his aggressive foreign policy. Unfortunately, many so-called “Russian experts” within the Foreign Office, the Quai d’Orsay, and the US State Department failed to grasp the importance of these writings. The shadow of the Iraq War had rendered intelligence services overly cautious, with analysis often diluted by bureaucratic processes that removed the crucial “human factor.” As a result, key insights from mid-level intelligence officers, those who had spent decades studying the enemy, were often sidelined, depriving decision-makers of the nuanced understanding needed to anticipate Putin’s actions. The 2016 Chilcot Report on the Iraq War highlighted the pitfalls of over-reliance on sanitized intelligence, warning of the dangers of assessing adversaries through a lens shaped by our own motivations rather than theirs. But it is not just the job of intelligence analysts to understand the adversary; politicians, too, must possess the ability to read people and comprehend their motives. Leaders who fail to “feel” the currents of international relations are ill-suited for the responsibilities they bear. My own experience meeting with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and General Valery Gerasimov in the days leading up to the invasion of Ukraine reaffirmed the importance of this human understanding. I did not go to Moscow to merely deliver a prepared script; I went to gauge the character and intentions of my adversaries. I sought to uncover the extent of their deceptions, the size of their egos, and the dynamics within their inner circle. As I departed, I remarked to General Gerasimov that I had noticed a shift in Russian military doctrine, one that prioritized readiness and mobilization over sheer numbers. In response, another Russian general leaned in and added, “and ruthless intimidation.” In that moment, the mask slipped, revealing the true nature of the regime I was dealing with. The most telling exchange occurred as General Gerasimov walked me to the hallway and remarked, “Never again will we be humiliated. We used to be the fourth army in the world, now we are the first or second. It is us and the Americans.” These words encapsulate the mindset of Russia’s leadership—a leadership intent on rewriting history to erase the humiliations they associate with the end of the Cold War. For them, settling scores that have festered for centuries is not just a matter of national pride but a mission to restore Russia’s rightful place in the world. Yet, as Russia’s ongoing actions continue to isolate and degrade it on the international stage, it is clear that the regime’s efforts are only serving to further humiliate itself. However, in Putin’s distorted worldview, Britain, not the United States, stands at the heart of Russia’s perceived failures. From the Crimean War to the defeat of the Czars, from the rise of Hitler to the end of the Soviet Union, Britain is seen as the architect of Russia’s misfortunes. A senior member of the Russian Siloviki even went so far as to claim that “we know Britain is behind the invasion of Kursk”—a baseless assertion that nonetheless illustrates the extent of the paranoia that pervades the Kremlin. Make no mistake: Putin has set his sights on Britain. His belief that we are responsible for Russia’s historical grievances places us squarely in his crosshairs. The Kremlin’s war machine, driven by a desire for revenge and a twisted interpretation of history, will eventually turn its focus on us. We must be prepared for the inevitable. The signs are all there, and it would be a grave mistake to ignore them. As Putin continues to rewrite history, we must remain vigilant, ready to counter his moves and protect our nation from the threats that lie ahead. Rt Hon Ben Wallace is a former UK secretary of state for defence Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-08-28 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

China is on the brink of a new technological milestone that could have far-reaching implications for global internet governance. With the launch of the first satellites for its G60 mega-constellation on August 5, 2024, China is preparing to offer global satellite internet services. This initiative, spearheaded by Shanghai Spacecom Satellite Technology and supported by the Shanghai Municipal Government, is a direct challenge to SpaceX's Starlink in the commercial satellite internet market. The G60 aims to provide regional coverage by 2025 and global coverage by 2027, positioning China as a significant player in the satellite internet domain. The G60 is just one of three mega-constellations that China is planning. The other two, the Guowang project and the Honghu-3 constellation, are backed by state-owned China Satellite Services and Shanghai Lanjian Hongqing Technology Company, respectively. These projects are part of China's broader strategy to enhance its commercial space sector and rapidly expand its satellite internet capabilities. This year alone, China has made notable strides, including launching the world's first 6G test satellite into low-Earth orbit (LEO) and deploying satellite internet services in Thailand, marking the first time Chinese LEO satellite internet has been used abroad. In June, the company OneLinQ launched China’s first civilian domestic satellite internet service, with plans to expand to countries participating in China's Belt and Road Initiative. However, China’s ambitions in the satellite internet market extend far beyond commercial competition. Central to Beijing's strategy is the concept of cyber sovereignty, which asserts that each nation has the right to control its digital environment. In practice, China has used this principle to establish a heavily censored and surveilled internet system that bolsters the Chinese Communist Party’s power. This system, often referred to as the "Great Firewall," is widely criticized for violating human rights. By exporting its satellite internet services, China is not only securing its position in the global market but also potentially spreading its model of digital authoritarianism to other nations. Satellite internet, by its nature, is more susceptible to state control than traditional internet infrastructure. The centralization of satellite internet—where data is funneled through a limited number of ground stations or gateways—makes it easier for governments to monitor, block, and filter content. This contrasts with the decentralized nature of traditional internet infrastructure, which relies on a network of sub-sea cables and terrestrial connections managed by multiple stakeholders. This decentralization has historically made it difficult for any single entity to exert complete control over the internet. However, with satellite internet, countries using China's services could more easily replicate the Great Firewall, controlling what information their citizens can access, monitoring user activity, or even shutting down the internet during periods of unrest. While satellite internet has often been hailed as a tool for dissidents and activists to bypass restrictive regimes, the reality under China's model could be starkly different. Under this model, satellite internet could become a tool for authoritarian governments to tighten their grip on information flow, thereby curtailing freedom of speech and other human rights. China’s export of its digital authoritarianism is already evident in its Digital Silk Road initiative, which provides other countries with technologies and governance models that enable censorship, surveillance, and social control. The adoption of Chinese satellite internet services would likely accelerate this trend, empowering more governments to implement similar controls and further eroding global human rights. Beyond facilitating digital control, offering satellite internet on a global scale has other strategic benefits for Beijing. Countries that rely on China’s infrastructure for their internet connectivity may find themselves vulnerable to political pressure from Beijing. This could manifest in demands to censor content critical of China, share sensitive data, or suppress domestic dissent to align with China’s interests. For example, a journalist in a country dependent on Chinese satellite internet services might find their connection disrupted or severed when attempting to report on human rights abuses in China. Additionally, the centralized nature of satellite internet could make countries more susceptible to cyber espionage by the Chinese government or other malicious actors. Chinese satellite providers, like other companies operating under Chinese law, are subject to data localization policies such as the Cybersecurity Law, which mandates that data be stored within China and be accessible to the Chinese government. This raises the possibility that data transmitted through Chinese satellite internet services—ranging from communications and location data to internet activity—could be accessed by Chinese authorities, even if the users are outside of China. Although the global deployment of China's satellite internet services is still in its early stages and faces significant challenges, the implications are profound. If these services are widely adopted, the world could see the emergence of a new digital Iron Curtain extending from space, dividing the free flow of information and imposing state control on a global scale. This development would not only reshape the global internet landscape but also have far-reaching consequences for the future of digital freedom and human rights worldwide. Credit: Real Clear Defense 2024-08-28 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

Canada has announced a significant policy shift by imposing a 100% import tariff on electric vehicles (EVs) manufactured in China, following the lead of the United States and the European Union. This decision marks a pivotal moment in the global trade landscape, particularly concerning the automotive industry, as Western nations respond to what they perceive as unfair trade practices by China. The Canadian government also plans to introduce a 25% duty on Chinese steel and aluminum imports, further escalating trade tensions. These measures reflect broader concerns shared by Canada and its Western allies, who accuse China of heavily subsidizing its EV industry. These subsidies, they argue, provide Chinese car manufacturers with an undue advantage in the global market, undermining fair competition. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau emphasized the strategic importance of this move for Canada's future in the automotive sector. "We are transforming Canada's automotive sector to be a global leader in building the vehicles of tomorrow, but actors like China have chosen to give themselves an unfair advantage in the global marketplace," Trudeau stated. His remarks underscore Canada's determination to protect and promote its domestic industries in the face of what it views as aggressive and unfair economic practices by China. China, unsurprisingly, has strongly criticized Canada's decision, labeling it as "trade protectionism" and asserting that it violates World Trade Organization (WTO) rules. This response from China highlights the broader geopolitical and economic implications of such trade disputes, as countries grapple with the complexities of maintaining fair trade while protecting their national interests. The new tariffs on Chinese EVs are scheduled to take effect on October 1, while the duties on steel and aluminum will be implemented two weeks later, on October 15. This timeline gives Canadian importers and consumers some time to adjust to the impending changes, although the long-term impact on the market remains uncertain. This move by Canada follows closely on the heels of similar actions by the United States, which announced in May that it would quadruple its tariffs on Chinese EV imports, raising them to 100%. The European Union also joined the fray, revealing plans to impose duties of up to 36.3% on EVs manufactured in China. These coordinated actions by major Western economies signal a unified front against what they perceive as China's unfair trade practices, particularly in the rapidly growing and strategically important EV sector. Among the vehicles affected by Canada's new tariffs are those produced by Tesla at its Shanghai factory, a significant development given Tesla's prominent role in the global EV market. The inclusion of Tesla's Shanghai-made vehicles in the tariff measures indicates that Canada's policy is broad-reaching, targeting all Chinese-made EVs regardless of the brand's global standing. Despite these developments, Chinese car brands are still relatively rare in the Canadian market. However, companies like BYD, one of China's leading EV manufacturers, have made initial moves to enter the Canadian market. The imposition of these tariffs could complicate these efforts, potentially delaying or altering the strategies of Chinese automakers looking to expand their presence in Canada. The broader implications of this trade dispute are still unfolding, but it is clear that the global automotive industry is entering a new phase of competition, marked by increased protectionism and geopolitical tensions. As countries like Canada, the United States, and the European Union take steps to safeguard their industries from what they see as unfair competition, the future of global trade in the EV sector will likely be shaped by these and similar measures. Credit: BBC 2024-08-28 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

Another unatributed and unappoved graphic image from RT has been removed from the same poster, any more and it will be more than just the post removed.

The ongoing conflict in Gaza has ignited a fierce internal dispute within the Scottish National Party (SNP), a party already grappling with significant challenges as it strives to realize its long-held goal of Scottish independence. The latest crisis centers around a meeting between Angus Robertson, the SNP-led Scottish government’s minister for external affairs, and Daniela Grudsky, Israel’s deputy ambassador to the U.K. The encounter has enraged the party’s pro-Palestinian base, exposing deep divisions within a party that has prided itself on its progressive credentials. The controversy began on August 8, when Robertson met with Grudsky in Edinburgh at the request of the Israeli government. The meeting, which was sanctioned by Scottish First Minister John Swinney, might have passed without incident if not for a photo posted by Grudsky on the social media platform X. The image, showing Robertson with a restrained smile alongside Grudsky, quickly went viral, setting off a storm of criticism from within the SNP. The party’s pro-Palestinian members and supporters were incensed, viewing the meeting as a betrayal of the SNP’s stance on the Gaza conflict. Robertson’s meeting with Grudsky could not have come at a more sensitive time. The Gaza conflict has deeply polarized opinion around the world, with governments and political parties struggling to navigate the complex and emotionally charged situation. In Scotland, where the SNP has long positioned itself as a champion of Palestinian rights, the timing of the meeting was particularly problematic. The party has consistently called for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza, a position that stands in stark contrast to the more measured approach taken by the U.K. government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer. The fallout from the meeting has been swift and severe. Robertson has been widely criticized by fellow SNP members, senior officials, and the party’s vocal grassroots base. He has been accused of undermining the party’s pro-Gaza stance and betraying the trust of those who have supported the SNP’s position on the conflict. The backlash has been intense, with some members even calling for Robertson’s resignation. The controversy surrounding Robertson’s meeting with Grudsky also highlights the broader dilemma facing the SNP as it seeks to position itself as a serious contender on the international stage. While the party’s leadership has sought to engage with other nations and project itself as a future independent government, the backlash from its base over the Gaza conflict underscores the difficulties in balancing these aspirations with the expectations of its supporters. As the SNP’s annual conference approaches, the party faces a critical juncture. The internal divisions and public backlash over the Gaza conflict could have lasting implications for the party’s future. For those within the SNP who advocate for a more mature and pragmatic approach to foreign policy, the episode has been frustrating. One senior SNP politician, speaking anonymously, described the situation as “illustrative of the way the party needs to sharpen up its act,” lamenting the “sloppiness” and “laziness” in handling the controversy. The Gaza conflict has also underscored the broader challenges facing progressive governments in balancing public sentiment with the demands of diplomacy. As Evie Aspinall, chair of the British Foreign Policy Group, noted, the British public tends to hold strong views on foreign policy issues like Gaza, often seeing them in starkly black and white terms. This can make it difficult for politicians to navigate the nuances of diplomacy and maintain public support. For the SNP, the Gaza controversy has exposed deep-seated divisions that will be difficult to reconcile. As the party continues to grapple with its internal challenges and declining electoral fortunes, the fallout from Robertson’s meeting with Grudsky may be just the beginning of a broader crisis within Scotland’s independence movement. The party’s ability to navigate these challenges will be critical in determining its future as it seeks to achieve its ultimate goal of making Scotland an independent nation. Credit: Politico 2024-08-28 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

Troll post and unattributed image to an unapproved source removed @frank83628

Ukraine experienced one of the most extensive air attacks since the beginning of the Russian invasion. According to Mykola Oleshchuk, the head of Ukraine's air force, Russia launched a massive barrage of missiles and drones, marking a grim chapter in the ongoing conflict. "The most massive aerial attack" is how Oleshchuk described the assault, as 127 missiles and 109 attack drones targeted more than half of Ukraine's regions. Despite the scale of the attack, Ukraine's air defense forces managed to shoot down 102 missiles and 99 drones, showcasing their resilience amidst an onslaught designed to cripple the nation. At least six people were killed, and dozens more were wounded in the wake of these strikes. The attacks, which began overnight and continued into the morning, caused significant damage to Ukraine's power infrastructure, leading to widespread blackouts. The entire country was placed under air raid alert, with citizens urged to seek shelter. Russia confirmed the attacks, stating that it had targeted Ukraine's energy infrastructure—a long-term tactic aimed at debilitating the nation's critical systems. "All designated targets were hit," claimed the Russian defense ministry, boasting about the resulting power outages and disruption to the rail transport of weapons and ammunition to Ukraine's front lines. The scale of the attack not only aimed at physical destruction but also seemed to target the morale of the Ukrainian people. The recent successful incursion by Ukrainian forces into the Russian region of Kursk had boosted the spirits of the Ukrainian populace. However, with Monday's strikes, Russia sought to remind Ukraine and its Western allies of its capacity to inflict misery whenever it chose. The message from Moscow was clear: despite setbacks on the battlefield, Russia still holds the power to make life unbearable for ordinary Ukrainians. This devastating attack saw 15 regions of Ukraine targeted, with weapons ranging from drones to cruise missiles and supersonic missiles. Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmygal confirmed the widespread damage, stating on Telegram, "There are wounded and dead." Among the victims were a 69-year-old man and a 47-year-old man, both killed in separate attacks in the Dnipropetrovsk region. The regional governor, Sergiy Lysak, reported that several others were injured, including a 14-year-old girl. In the Zaporizhzhia region, a man lost his life when his house was struck by a missile. The mayor of Lutsk reported that one person was killed when an "infrastructure facility" was hit, leaving five others wounded and most of the city without running water. In Izyum, located in the Kharkiv region, another man was killed in a missile strike, and in the Zhytomyr region in western Ukraine, a woman died after homes and infrastructure were hit by missiles. The damage to Ukraine's infrastructure was severe, with power outages reported in many cities, including the capital, Kyiv, and water supplies disrupted. Among the targets was one of the remaining power stations, a hydroelectric plant north of Kyiv. The full extent of the damage to the plant and other facilities was still being assessed. The systematic targeting of Ukraine's energy infrastructure has been a consistent strategy for Russia since its full-scale invasion began in February 2022. In recent months, this campaign has intensified, with Russia focusing on Ukraine's power grid, leading to frequent and widespread blackouts across the country. In June, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky revealed that Russia had destroyed half of Ukraine's electricity-generating capacity since it began its concentrated attacks on energy facilities in late March. As a result, Ukraine has been forced to buy energy from the European Union, although this supply is insufficient to meet the nation's needs. Consequently, Ukraine has implemented planned nationwide blackouts to prioritize critical services such as hospitals and military installations. The recent attack not only highlights the ongoing struggles Ukraine faces in maintaining its energy infrastructure but also underscores the broader challenges it faces in the conflict. Over the past year, Ukraine has faced numerous setbacks on the battlefield, particularly in the eastern Donbas region, where Russia has made steady gains. There have been reports of issues with Ukrainian mobilization and concerns about a dwindling supply of manpower. However, Ukraine's recent incursion into the Kursk region provided a much-needed morale boost. Videos of Ukrainian soldiers raising their flag over captured Russian villages circulated widely, demonstrating Kyiv's capability to execute complex and successful military operations. These actions also sent a message to Western allies that Ukraine remains a formidable force capable of striking deep into Russian territory. Yet, the recent Russian air assault serves as a stark reminder of the challenges that lie ahead. In response to the latest wave of attacks, President Zelensky called on Western allies, including Britain, the United States, and France, to amend their rules and allow Ukraine to use their weapons to strike deeper inside Russia. Currently, Ukraine is permitted to use some Western-supplied weapons to target locations within Russia, but not long-range weapons. Zelensky emphasized that if European air forces collaborated more closely with Ukraine's air defense, "we could do much more to protect lives." The conflict is not limited to Ukraine's borders. During the attack, NATO member Poland reported that an "object," likely a drone, entered its territory. Polish army spokesman Jacek Goryszewski stated, "Most likely it was a drone and we assume so, because the trajectory of the flight and the speed indicate that it was definitely not a missile." NATO spokesperson Farah Dakhlallah condemned the Russian attacks on Ukraine, labeling any breach of NATO airspace by Russia as "irresponsible and potentially dangerous." The situation remains tense, with reports that Ukraine attempted to attack an oil refinery in Yaroslavl, a city northeast of Moscow, on Monday. The regional governor reported no casualties or damage from the attempted strike. Additionally, Russia's defense ministry claimed to have destroyed nine drones over its Saratov region, located some 560 miles from the Ukrainian border. As the conflict drags on, the human cost continues to mount, with both sides engaged in a brutal struggle for control and survival. Monday's air assault on Ukraine is a grim reminder of the destructive power Russia still wields and the precarious position Ukraine finds itself in as it continues to defend its sovereignty and the lives of its people. Credit: BBC 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

The BBC has come under intense scrutiny following its description of Hamas suicide bomb attacks, which claimed the lives of dozens of civilians in Israel, as "military operations." This characterization, particularly by the BBC’s Arabic channel, has led to accusations of whitewashing the actions of Hamas and lacking impartiality in its coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict. The controversy erupted after the BBC Arabic channel reported that Mohammed Deif, a senior military leader of Hamas, had orchestrated a series of "military operations" against Israel, culminating in an attack on October 7th. Critics, including Camera (the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis), argue that the BBC's reporting implied that these attacks were directed primarily at Israeli soldiers rather than civilians, thereby diminishing the severity of the actions and their impact on non-combatants. Camera pointed out that the death toll from the attacks planned by Deif was 93, with a staggering 80 of those victims being civilians, ranging in age from 13 to 83. Only 13 of the deceased were soldiers or other security personnel. This stark contrast between civilian and military casualties has fueled accusations that the BBC Arabic’s terminology effectively whitewashes the true nature of Hamas's actions. In its reporting on Deif's assassination by Israeli forces, BBC Arabic noted that he had been wanted for years by the Israeli government for his involvement in terrorist activities. However, the channel repeatedly referred to these actions as "military operations" rather than labeling them as terror attacks. This language, critics argue, obscures the reality of the violence and its impact on civilians. In a background story about Deif’s death, BBC Arabic’s website stated, "For approximately 30 years, [Deif] took part in several military operations against Israel, starting from kidnapping soldiers and rocket attacks, passing through military operations and culminating in the October 7th, 2023 attack." This description, which fails to explicitly condemn the targeting of civilians, has been a focal point for those accusing the BBC of bias. Camera, which advocates for balanced media coverage of Israel, has been particularly vocal in its criticism. The organization stated, "Downplaying Palestinian groups’ responsibility for targeting innocent civilians as mere ‘accusations’, which only Israel and the US supposedly aim at them, has been a BBC Arabic habit for years. Even when the Palestinian groups themselves boast about similar murders, BBC Arabic reporters would often use their own voice to falsely describe them as ‘military operations’ carried out against ‘soldiers’ or ‘gunmen’." Mohammed Deif’s legacy as a Hamas military leader is marked by a history of violence, including the killing of at least 70 civilians in suicide bombings in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv during the 1990s. Additional fatalities occurred in Israeli settlements within the Gaza Strip throughout the 2000s. Despite this, when BBC Arabic reported on Deif’s death in an Israeli strike on a refugee camp in southern Gaza on July 14, the coverage included images of the bus bomb attacks and other violent acts organized by Deif, yet still referred to his actions as "military operations." The BBC has defended its coverage amid the backlash. A spokesperson for the corporation told The Telegraph, "BBC News Arabic has made clear throughout our coverage that Muhammad Deif was listed as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist by the US and the EU. We quoted the Israeli military describing Deif as a terrorist and that they hold him responsible for the murder of Israelis, and we referenced the serious accusations he faced around the 1996 attacks. Our audiences were in no doubt about Deif’s actions and the fact that he had been called a terrorist, including by Israel." The BBC’s defense highlights its effort to maintain what it views as a balanced approach in its reporting. However, the choice of language in such sensitive contexts continues to spark debate about the role of media in shaping public perception of global conflicts. The accusations against the BBC underscore the broader challenges that media organizations face in covering contentious issues, where word choice can carry significant weight in influencing public understanding and sentiment. As the situation evolves, the BBC may continue to face scrutiny over its coverage, particularly as the Israel-Hamas conflict remains a highly charged and polarizing issue. The debate over how media outlets describe and contextualize acts of violence by groups like Hamas is likely to persist, with significant implications for both journalistic integrity and public perception. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

In cybersecurity, a penetration test mimics an actual attack on a system's defenses, employing the very tactics and tools that a real adversary would use. This method is commonly used by governments and corporations alike, with banks, for instance, routinely hiring experts to breach their systems, steal login credentials, and transfer funds illicitly. Upon completion, these experts report their findings, offering solutions to strengthen security. This decade, humanity itself faced a massive, real-world penetration test: the COVID-19 pandemic. This virus, an unthinking enemy, exposed the world's vulnerabilities in combating new pathogens. By the time the virus had run its course, it was painfully evident that humanity had failed the test. COVID-19 infiltrated every corner of the globe, from remote Antarctic research outposts to isolated Amazonian tribes, wreaking havoc in nursing homes, military vessels, and among both the powerless and the powerful—striking down frontline workers and heads of state alike. The harsh lockdowns enforced by autocracies and the rapid development of vaccines in democracies managed to slow the virus's spread but could not stop it. By the end of 2022, a staggering three-quarters of Americans had been infected at least once, and when China finally abandoned its “zero COVID” policy in December, over one billion of its citizens were infected within six weeks. The relatively low mortality rate of the pandemic was not due to successful containment efforts but rather because the virus was only moderately lethal. In the end, COVID-19 primarily burned itself out. This failure against COVID-19 serves as a sobering reminder of the growing biological threats that the world faces, both natural and human-made. While some threats, like avian flu, arise from nature, others emerge from the rapid advancements in science. Over the past 60 years, scientists have gained profound insights into both molecular and human biology, leading to the development of highly lethal and effective pathogens. They have mastered techniques to create viruses that can evade immunity, engineer them to spread more efficiently through the air, and even increase their deadliness. Although the origins of COVID-19 remain uncertain—whether from a lab or wildlife—it is clear that modern biological technology, now enhanced by artificial intelligence, has made it easier than ever to produce devastating diseases. Should a synthetic pathogen escape or be deliberately released, the consequences could be catastrophic, potentially killing far more people and causing greater economic damage than COVID-19. In the worst-case scenario, such a pathogen could claim more lives than the Black Death, which decimated one-third of Europe’s population. To prevent such a disaster, world leaders must prioritize the strengthening of defenses against human-made pathogens. This task is as complex as managing nuclear weapons and addressing climate change, two of the early Anthropocene's other grand challenges. To combat this danger, nations will need to fortify their societies against synthetic pathogens. This includes developing early-warning systems capable of detecting engineered diseases, ramping up the production of personal protective equipment, and significantly improving its effectiveness. They will also need to reduce the time required to develop and distribute vaccines and antiviral drugs from months to mere days. Furthermore, there is an urgent need to regulate the technologies used to create and manipulate viruses. And all of this must happen quickly. The Double-Edged Sword of Biological Progress For more than a century, biology has been viewed as a force for progress. By the early 21st century, vaccines had eradicated smallpox and rinderpest and nearly eliminated polio. While many infectious diseases remain incurable, and total eradication of pathogens is rare, the advances have been undeniable. The qualified nature of humanity's accomplishments is perhaps best exemplified by the HIV pandemic. Once a near-certain death sentence, HIV now infects millions annually, but thanks to scientific innovation, it has been transformed into a manageable condition through antiretroviral drugs that prevent viral replication. This kind of medical progress depends on distinct yet loosely coordinated efforts in healthcare delivery, public health management, and scientific research. However, this progress is not without its dangers. The same scientific understanding of microbiology that has led to remarkable advances in human health has also enabled efforts to undermine it. During World War I, the Allies explored the use of bacterial weapons, and German military intelligence used such pathogens to attack animals used by the Allies for transport. These efforts included infecting horses and mules in France and Romania, and in Norway, attempting to infect reindeer that were used by the Sami to deliver weapons to Russian forces. German operatives even managed to infect stables in the United States filled with animals destined for Europe. By World War II, these initiatives had evolved into weapons intended to kill humans. In Japanese-occupied Manchuria, military officer Shiro Ishii oversaw Unit 731, a nightmarish facility where biological weapons were tested on human subjects. Thousands of prisoners were killed through exposure to anthrax, typhoid, glanders, dysentery, and the bubonic plague. Toward the end of the war, Ishii proposed a large-scale biological warfare operation, codenamed "Cherry Blossoms at Night," which involved dispersing plague-infested fleas over major U.S. West Coast cities. However, the plan was vetoed by Japan’s army chief of staff, who feared that such an operation would escalate the war to a never-ending battle between humanity and bacteria. Despite this caution, other nations continued to develop biological weapons. In the 1960s, the U.S. Department of Defense launched Project 112, experimenting with ways to mass-distribute pathogens. The U.S. military dispersed spores in the New York City subway tunnels, released bacteria from boats in San Francisco Bay, and sprayed chemicals from aircraft over vast areas, from the Rockies to the Atlantic and from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. These weapons were intended as a backup plan in case of a Soviet nuclear strike, providing a means to retaliate with biological devastation. By the mid-1960s, government scientists were producing significant quantities of lethal bacteria and toxins designed to "confound diagnosis and frustrate treatment," according to microbiologist Riley Housewright. These developments alarmed civilian researchers, who successfully lobbied against Washington's plans. President Richard Nixon, influenced by these concerns, halted the U.S. biological weapons program in 1969 and called for an international treaty to ban such weapons. Nobel Prize-winning biologist Joshua Lederberg supported this move, warning Congress that biological weapons could be as deadly as nuclear ones but easier to develop. Unlike nuclear weapons, which had been monopolized by the great powers and sustained a balance of deterrence, "germ power will work just the other way," Lederberg cautioned. However, the Soviet Union remained unconvinced. In 1971, as negotiations for a treaty were underway, the Soviets released a weaponized strain of the smallpox virus on an island in the Aral Sea, causing an outbreak in present-day Kazakhstan. The outbreak was contained due to the region's sparse population and widespread vaccination, but it highlighted the dangers of biological weapons. Later that year, the Soviet Union and the United States agreed to the Biological Weapons Convention, a treaty banning biological weapons, which was widely praised and signed in 1972. Despite this, the Soviets continued their biological weapons program in secret until the collapse of the Soviet Union, with some 60,000 people employed at its peak. Credit: Foreign Affairs 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

As the war in Gaza dominates global headlines, another conflict—less visible but equally significant—continues to unfold behind closed doors. This is the quiet war waged over cutting off Hezbollah, the powerful Shiite militia, from the lifeblood that sustains its operations: Iranian petrodollars. While the world’s gaze is fixed on Gaza and the escalating skirmishes between Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah, diplomats are increasingly alarmed that this tension could spark a wider conflict. Simultaneously, a battle over Iranian terror financing has been simmering in the shadows, poised to reach a critical juncture in the coming weeks. This conflict, involving several Arab nations, Europe, and the U.S., centers on whether Lebanon will be penalized for its role in facilitating Hezbollah’s financial operations. This pivotal decision lies in the hands of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the global body dedicated to combating money laundering. Founded by the G7 in 1989, FATF has grown to include numerous member countries worldwide. While FATF lacks formal enforcement power, its evaluations carry significant weight in international finance, potentially crippling a nation’s ability to operate within the global financial system. As FATF prepares to place Lebanon on its “gray list” of jurisdictions with weak anti-money laundering measures, the world is watching closely. Lebanon could face severe consequences if it fails to implement necessary reforms, potentially moving from the gray list to the dreaded “blacklist,” a designation that would further isolate the country financially. The recent Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7 served as a harsh reminder of the dangers posed by unchecked financial flows to terrorist organizations. Israel, the U.S., and other Western governments have previously tolerated the millions of dollars flowing to groups like Hamas from Qatar and Iran, believing that such funds would help stabilize Gaza. However, this strategy has backfired, prompting Western security officials to push for a more stringent approach to combating money laundering and terror financing in Lebanon, particularly those involving Hezbollah-affiliated entities. Sources familiar with FATF’s investigation suggest that the case against Lebanon is straightforward, given the overwhelming evidence of money laundering and terror financing within the country. However, the situation is complicated by Hezbollah’s deep-rooted influence over Lebanon’s institutions, which hampers the government’s ability to enforce international financial norms. Adding to the complexity, several regional players, including Bahrain and Libya, have aligned themselves with Lebanon, resisting international efforts to crack down on Hezbollah’s illicit financial activities. FATF’s current deliberations are not focused on whether Lebanon should be placed on the gray list but rather on the conditions Lebanon must meet to be removed from the list after a two-year review period. Central to this discussion is the role of Hezbollah in Lebanon’s banking system, which poses significant challenges to reform efforts. Hezbollah’s financial operations are heavily supported by Iran, a relationship that dates back to the 1980s. Iran’s financial backing has enabled Hezbollah to establish a powerful “state within a state” in Lebanon, positioning the group as a formidable adversary to Israel. Despite Hezbollah’s dominance in Lebanon’s political and economic landscape, the organization remains heavily reliant on Iranian funding. A significant portion of this funding is funneled through a Hezbollah-controlled financial entity known as the al-Qard al-Hasan Association (AQAH). AQAH functions like a bank, despite lacking a banking license and operating outside of regulatory oversight. It is a vital instrument for Hezbollah, enabling the group to pay its fighters and officials and provide financial services to local communities. Amid the political and economic turmoil that has plagued Lebanon in recent years, AQAH has expanded its operations, becoming one of the country’s largest financial institutions, with deposits reportedly reaching billions of dollars. What sets AQAH apart from other Lebanese banks is its designation as a non-profit organization by the Lebanese government. This status exempts AQAH from paying taxes, further entrenching its role in Hezbollah’s financial ecosystem. The U.S. government, which sanctioned AQAH in 2007, describes the organization as “a cover to manage [Hezbollah’s] financial activities and gain access to the international financial system.” Despite these sanctions, AQAH has continued to thrive, conducting its operations with little difficulty in Lebanon and across the broader Middle East. In fact, AQAH’s cross-border activities may become even easier following the Arab League’s decision in June to stop labeling Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. This shift in the Arab League’s stance has sparked controversy, particularly within FATF, where the question of Hezbollah’s terror designation remains a contentious issue. The debate over Hezbollah’s classification contributed to a significant delay in FATF’s report on Lebanon, which was finally published in December. Instead of directly naming Hezbollah, the report referred to the group as “a major local paramilitary organization with a well-documented track record of committing terrorist acts.” The report urged Lebanon to assess the risks of money laundering and terror financing associated with this organization and to implement measures to mitigate these risks. Hezbollah has been responsible for numerous terrorist attacks since the 1980s, including car bombings, suicide attacks, and drone strikes that have claimed hundreds of lives, including those of Americans, Israelis, and other civilians. Today, Hezbollah is considered one of the world’s largest private armies, with an estimated 50,000 fighters. The U.S., the European Union, and numerous other countries have designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, largely due to its ties to Iran. Western diplomats argue that a strong stance by FATF is essential to curbing Hezbollah’s financial activities. Without such a stance, Lebanon is unlikely to crack down on AQAH, allowing Iranian funds to continue flowing to Hezbollah unchecked. Moreover, these diplomats contend that a tougher evaluation by FATF could serve as a catalyst for reform within Lebanon, potentially attracting the foreign investment the country desperately needs. However, without assurances that Lebanon is not a haven for money laundering and terror financing, international investors are likely to stay away. One Western diplomat emphasized the potential benefits of a rigorous evaluation, stating, “A tough evaluation would actually help the Lebanese get out of this situation.” This sentiment reflects the broader hope among Western diplomats that FATF’s actions could help stabilize Lebanon’s economy by curbing Hezbollah’s influence and restoring confidence in the country’s financial system. As the global community awaits FATF’s decision, the outcome will have far-reaching implications not only for Lebanon but for the broader Middle East. The battle against Iran’s terror financing is not just a regional issue; it is a global one, with stakes that extend far beyond the borders of Lebanon. The decisions made in the coming weeks could either tighten the financial noose around Hezbollah or allow the group to continue its operations unabated, with consequences that could reverberate across the region and beyond. Credit: Politico 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

Jermaine Jenas, a former Premier League footballer and BBC presenter, has issued a heartfelt apology to his female colleagues after being dismissed from his roles at the broadcaster. The 41-year-old, who had been a familiar face on programs like "Match of the Day" and "The One Show," was let go after a female colleague raised concerns about inappropriate messages he had sent. In the aftermath of his dismissal, Jenas initially expressed his regret, describing himself as "ashamed" and "deeply sorry" for his actions. However, he has now taken the opportunity to directly address the women involved, acknowledging the impact of his behavior. "I always thought it was consensual and a two-way thing," Jenas said in an interview with The Sun on Sunday. Despite his belief at the time that the interactions were mutual, he has since come to realize the gravity of his actions and the distress they caused. Jenas has strongly denied any criminal wrongdoing but expressed frustration at being unable to apologize to the women personally due to legal constraints. "When it was all unfolding and I knew I was losing my job, I asked HR if I could contact the two women directly and apologize to both of them," he explained. "But because of the legal process, I wasn't allowed. I didn't get the opportunity to say sorry to them at that particular point when I really wanted to apologize." His regret is evident as he continued, "I really want to apologize from the bottom of my heart in terms of what I've put them through." Addressing the women directly, Jenas said, "I'm genuinely sorry for what I've done to you. I always thought it was consensual and a two-way thing." These words highlight his struggle to reconcile his perception of the interactions with the reality of the pain he caused. Jenas, who has been married to model Ellie Penfold for 13 years and is a father of four, revealed that he is currently receiving therapy to address what he describes as a "self-destructive streak" in his relationships. He admitted, "I'm not proud of what I wrote and what I said. And I do consider it cheating, yes, although nothing physical ever happened." He acknowledged his responsibility as a public figure and a representative of the BBC, stating, "This is all on me and I fully accept there is a level of responsibility that needs to be upheld when you're a member of the BBC. And I fell below those standards. I must take the responsibility." The BBC confirmed Jenas's departure, with a spokesperson stating, "We can confirm that he is no longer part of our presenting line-up." However, Jenas has expressed dissatisfaction with the way the BBC handled his sacking and indicated that he would be consulting with his lawyers regarding the situation. Official figures published last year showed that Jenas earned between £190,000 to £194,999 for his work on programs like the FA Cup, "Match of the Day," and the World Cup. His salary for "The One Show," produced by BBC Studios, was not publicly disclosed. The situation has added to the challenges facing the BBC, which is still dealing with the fallout from other recent scandals. The broadcaster has been under scrutiny following allegations of abuse on the set of one of its biggest shows, "Strictly Come Dancing," and the controversy surrounding former newsreader Huw Edwards. In another candid interview with The Sun, Jenas shared that his wife Ellie was "raging" after he informed her of his dismissal due to the messages. He also revealed that he had to have "difficult conversations" with his two eldest children, aged 11 and 16, about the situation. "They’re obviously of an age where they’re aware of social media... that’s been hard," he said, acknowledging the wider impact of his actions on his family. "I’ve let everyone down," Jenas admitted. "Even my dog looked at me disappointed." This moment of vulnerability underscores the depth of his remorse. He recognized that it was "time to own" his mistakes, adding, "I have been behaving in a certain way that’s just not been acceptable within our marriage. Ellie is completely innocent within all this. All she’s doing is at home, working her heart out, looking after my children." As he reflected on the consequences of his actions, Jenas concluded, "The overriding factor is just how sorry I am to everybody." His apology, while perhaps belated, is a clear attempt to make amends for the pain he has caused, not only to the women involved but also to his family and those who looked up to him as a public figure. Credit: The Independent 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

Kamala Harris is gearing up for a 71-day sprint toward the November 5th election, with a strategy designed to outpace Donald Trump, dominate news coverage, and make inroads in key battleground states. Her campaign is structured around a few critical objectives: to outwork her opponent, maintain a strong media presence, and focus her efforts on states that could expand her paths to victory. Harris' determination is evident as she intensifies her campaign efforts this week. Her schedule is packed, starting with a bus tour through southern Georgia—a state that has recently shown potential for Democratic gains. This tour marks the beginning of a relentless push to engage voters and increase her visibility across the nation. In addition to the bus tour, Harris is set to participate in her first interview as a presidential candidate, a significant milestone that underscores her growing presence in the race. Moreover, her team is ramping up preparations for the highly anticipated September 10th debate against Donald Trump, which is expected to be a pivotal moment in the campaign. Harris’ campaign is riding a wave of positive momentum following the Democratic convention, with polls showing encouraging signs. Her team is keen to maintain this momentum by keeping the pressure on Trump and promoting Harris’ message of optimism, which contrasts sharply with Trump's divisive rhetoric. The vice president's strategy is not just about winning votes; it's about offering a clear alternative to Trump’s vision, one that resonates with a broad spectrum of Americans who are looking for leadership that embodies strength, decency, the rule of law, and individual freedom. Although Harris has introduced several policy proposals aimed at supporting first-time homeowners, the working class, and other key demographics, her senior advisers are cautious about unveiling fully developed policy plans before Election Day. The rationale behind this decision is rooted in the reality of Harris' late entry into the race, which has forced her team to prioritize certain aspects of the campaign. With limited time before the election, Harris and her advisers believe that focusing on broad, aspirational themes will be more effective in countering Trump than getting bogged down in the specifics of policy debates. A key element of Harris’ strategy is to maximize media coverage without relying solely on paid advertisements. This approach is evident in her busy schedule, which is designed to generate news coverage that keeps her in the public eye. Nonetheless, her team has allocated a significant budget—$370 million—for TV and digital ads that will be deployed between Labor Day and Election Day, ensuring that her message reaches as many voters as possible. One of the most anticipated events in Harris' campaign is the upcoming debate against Donald Trump, which will be hosted by ABC News. This debate is seen as a critical moment that could potentially alter the course of the election. Harris' team is well aware of the stakes and has been working tirelessly to prepare her for the onslaught of falsehoods they expect from Trump. The vice president has already participated in a mock debate at Howard University prior to the Democratic convention and plans to engage in several more practice sessions before the real showdown. A small, dedicated group of aides, including policy advisers Brian Nelson and Rohini Kosoglu, along with Harris' White House and campaign chiefs of staff Sheila Nix and Lorraine Voles, are assisting her in these preparations. The debate is not just an opportunity for Harris to showcase her skills; it's a chance to solidify her position as a viable contender in the eyes of the electorate. Both campaigns recognize the importance of this event—Trump’s team hopes for a misstep from Harris that could go viral, while Harris' team knows that a strong, steady performance is crucial to reinforcing the belief that she can win in November. Acknowledging the criticism that she has been in office for 3½ years, Harris' team understands the need to effectively address this line of attack, which Republicans have used to link her to the perceived shortcomings of the Biden administration. In parallel with preparing for the debate, Harris’ campaign is also focused on expanding its reach in swing states. Dan Kanninen, the Harris campaign's battleground states director, emphasized the importance of building momentum following the Democratic convention. "It's important to have a place to put that energy," Kanninen noted, highlighting the ongoing efforts to bolster the campaign’s team and voter outreach in key states that could tip the balance in the election. Harris' campaign has been proactive in responding to Trump's false statements, but the strategy for the debate may involve a more measured approach. "I would let Trump be Trump," said Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro when asked what advice he would give Harris for her debate against the former president. Shapiro believes that Harris has the opportunity to remind voters of Trump’s past actions and the risks he poses for the future. "She is a skilled debater. She will do that effectively," he added, expressing confidence in Harris' ability to handle the high-pressure situation. As the election draws nearer, Harris’ campaign is clearly in full throttle, with a well-defined strategy aimed at securing victory. Whether through relentless campaigning, strategic media engagement, or meticulous debate preparation, Kamala Harris is making her case to the American people, positioning herself as the leader who can guide the nation forward in a time of division and uncertainty. The next 71 days will be crucial, and Harris is leaving nothing to chance in her bid to win the presidency. Credit: AXIOS 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

Gideon Brosowsky had always imagined glaciers to be immense, awe-inspiring masses of ice, the kind he had seen in movies like “Titanic.” But when the incoming high school junior arrived at Alaska’s Juneau Icefield during a family cruise in August, reality struck him with a wave of disappointment. Expecting to see something colossal, he found himself staring at what he described as a “small, dinky piece of ice” perched on a mountain. He had trouble even recognizing it as a glacier, especially after seeing historical photographs in local museums that painted a much more dramatic picture of the landscape just two decades ago. “I was in disbelief,” Brosowsky recalled. “I was assuming global warming is starting to eat away at these glaciers little by little, [but the pace was] a lot faster than I expected.” The thought that this once-majestic glacier might disappear entirely within a few decades left him stunned. Unbeknownst to Brosowsky, while he lamented the shrinking glacier before him, at least 64 other glaciers in the Juneau Icefield had already melted away since 2005. For years, scientists have been warning that glaciers are melting, a visible consequence of our warming planet. But now, many glaciers have already vanished. Venezuela, for instance, became glacier-free this year after losing its last glacier. New Zealand has seen at least 264 glaciers disappear. In the western United States, about 400 glaciers have been lost since the mid-20th century. In Switzerland, researchers have counted more than 1,000 small glaciers that have melted away. East Africa now has less than two square kilometers of glacial ice left. Throughout history, glaciers have occasionally disappeared, particularly in mountainous regions, but the rate of glacier loss has skyrocketed in recent decades. This rapid acceleration has melted many small, often nameless glaciers, leading scientists to grapple with a critical question: When does a glacier lose its label as a glacier? The disappearance of these glaciers signals the onset of a long-dreaded phase of global warming: glacial collapse. Much like cataloging extinct species, scientists are now, for the first time, mapping the glaciers that have vanished worldwide due to climate change. This effort has resulted in a living list of dead glaciers, a grim reminder of the ongoing effects of global warming. In August 2019, around 100 people made a two-hour trek to the top of an Icelandic volcano to attend a funeral. The glacier they came to mourn, Okjökull, had once been known as the "Ok glacier." It had reduced to a thin, stagnant piece of ice five years earlier, becoming the first glacier in Iceland to disappear because of climate change. Despite its significance, there was little recognition at the time. Years later, however, some people wanted to commemorate its loss in a more visible way. Dominic Boyer, a cultural anthropologist at Rice University, co-produced a documentary about Okjökull and helped organize the glacier’s funeral with his colleague Cymene Howe. Boyer was intrigued by the paradox that Iceland, a country named for its ice, was now losing its glaciers. The mourners said their goodbyes with moments of silence, poetry, and speeches about the need to combat climate change. Children at the site installed a memorial plaque that recorded the atmospheric carbon dioxide level at the time: 415 parts per million, about 20 percent higher than in 1979. The plaque also carried a message for future generations: "This moment is to acknowledge that we know what is happening and what needs to be done. Only you know if we did it." A few weeks after the Okjökull funeral, another group of 250 people gathered in Switzerland’s Glarus Alps for a similar event. They had come to mourn the Pizol Glacier. Swiss glaciologist Matthias Huss, who had visited the Pizol Glacier more than 50 times, saw the glacier begin to fragment after a particularly warm year in 2018. By 2019, he no longer considered it a glacier. While it’s uncommon for glaciologists to attend funerals for their subjects of study, Huss acknowledged that the event, organized by the Swiss Association for Climate Protection, was an “interesting ceremony to commemorate the disappearance of this glacier that also [brought] quite some public interest.” These ceremonies served not only as a way for communities to connect with the frozen relics of their past but also as a wake-up call for scientists, prompting them to start documenting these extinct glaciers. The funeral in Iceland, for example, inspired glaciologists to go beyond merely assessing glacier retreat. It pushed them to begin counting dead glaciers as well, said Howe, an anthropologist and professor at Rice University. While scientists don’t know exactly how many glaciers have disappeared across the globe, some groups have begun creating inventories to get a better understanding. Last year, the Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS) database, a premier resource for tracking glaciers, added an “extinct layer” that includes a little more than 150 extinct glaciers, primarily in the United States and Europe. In August, Howe and Boyer launched a Global Glacier Casualty List, which displays 15 extinct and endangered glaciers around the world, including in South America, Asia, and India. Some of these glaciers aren’t even included in the GLIMS map. Andrew Fountain, a glaciologist at Portland State University, started the first inventory of glaciers in the western United States and estimated that at least 400 glaciers have disappeared since the mid-20th century. Huss, who estimated that 1,000 glaciers have been lost in Switzerland alone, extrapolated that perhaps 10,000 glaciers might have been lost globally. Chinese glaciologists estimate that their country has lost more than 8,000 glaciers by itself. As scientists work to track these changes, they must also determine when a glacier ceases to exist. During his family cruise in Alaska, Brosowsky listened as his guide pointed out slabs of ice around Glacier Bay. Some were unmistakably large, magnificent glaciers, but others appeared to be mere ribbons of ice. “It’s kind of rude to the real glaciers, in my opinion, if we’re calling everything a glacier like that,” Brosowsky joked. Not all ice qualifies as a glacier. By definition, a glacier is essentially a moving river of ice formed from years of snow compaction. The movement of this ice, flowing downhill, is often too subtle for a person walking over it to notice, but scientists can measure the flow with instruments, according to Fountain. If a glacier becomes too small and stops moving, it’s no longer considered a glacier. The scientific term for such stagnant ice is “dead.” When an entire glacier is declared dead varies depending on the region, with size and flow thresholds differing across countries. Technicalities aside, there are more obvious signs that glaciers are starting to fall apart before our eyes. For the past 41 years, glaciologist Mauri Pelto has visited the Ice Worm Glacier in the Mount Daniel-Mount Hinman complex in Washington every year, witnessing its decline firsthand. The small glacier lost mass gradually until around 2015, a year marked by a warm summer and relatively low snowfall. Starting in 2021, however, an unprecedented series of warm years accelerated the glacier’s decline. Pelto began to see rock appearing at the bottom of the glacier, with holes forming in the ice, resembling Swiss cheese. In 2023, he declared that it was no longer a glacier. Just a year earlier, he had witnessed the disappearance of the larger Hinman Glacier — after thousands of years, all that remained were a few patches of snow and ice. “The end happened so fast,” said Pelto, a professor at Nichols College. “Whether it’s a pet or a person, they get near the end, a lot of things can happen really fast.” Pelto has personally witnessed the disappearance of 31 glaciers in the Pacific Northwest, although he believes there are many more that have gone undocumented. He expects another glacier in the Mount Daniel-Mount Hinman complex, the Foss Glacier, to lose its status as a glacier this year or next. For scientists, documenting extinct glaciers often feels existential. “A thought occurred to me that in a few decades’ time, nobody will read my papers because why bother? There are no glaciers,” said Fountain, comparing glacier inventory work to documenting dinosaurs. “I’m documenting what was.” While it’s theoretically possible for extinct glaciers to grow back, the reality is far less hopeful. In the Pacific Northwest, Pelto explained that snowfall would need to increase by at least 20 percent on average for many years, coupled with cooler summers, to reverse the trend. Considering that Earth has been experiencing record-breaking heat for over a year, such a scenario seems unlikely. “The ongoing disappearance of the smallest glaciers is not something we can just turn around, even if we stop [carbon dioxide] emissions today,” Huss said. “It’s too late for the small glaciers.” However, he added, it might not be too late for the bigger ones. Credit: W.P. 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has vowed to take decisive action following a tragic stabbing incident in Solingen that left three people dead. The attack, allegedly perpetrated by a Syrian asylum seeker, has reignited the country's ongoing debate over migration and the policies surrounding it. Scholz made his intentions clear during a visit to the western town of Solingen, where the attack occurred, stating that irregular migration into Germany "must go down." He underscored the gravity of the situation by labeling the incident as an act of terrorism, saying, "This was terrorism, terrorism against us all." Scholz's remarks reflect the growing political pressure in Germany to address issues related to migration and public safety. He emphasized the need for his government to do "everything we can to ensure that those who cannot and should not stay here in Germany are repatriated and deported." He also promised that deportations would be expedited if necessary to prevent such tragedies in the future. In addition to accelerating deportations, Scholz pledged to tighten laws on weapons ownership "very quickly," signaling a comprehensive approach to enhancing security. The political ramifications of the Solingen stabbings were immediate and far-reaching. The suspect, identified as 26-year-old Issa Al H., a Syrian refugee, has been linked to the terror organization Islamic State. This connection has fueled an already heated debate on migration in Germany. Conservative opposition leader Friedrich Merz quickly called for an end to accepting refugees from Syria and Afghanistan, arguing that stricter border controls were necessary. His position, while controversial, reflects a growing sentiment among certain political factions in Germany that the country needs to reevaluate its immigration policies. Alice Weidel, the leader of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), took an even more extreme stance, advocating for a complete halt to all migration. The AfD has long been critical of Germany's immigration policies, and Weidel's call for a total stop to migration represents the party's most extreme position yet. However, experts caution that such measures are neither feasible nor compatible with German and European Union law, which requires member states to honor their legal and humanitarian commitments to those fleeing persecution. Despite the intense political pressure, Scholz's governing center-left SPD party has reiterated Germany's commitment to helping those in need. The party maintains that Germany must uphold its obligations to asylum seekers while also ensuring that those who pose a threat to public safety are deported. The government has pledged to deport migrants who have committed serious crimes or whose asylum applications have been rejected. The Solingen suspect's case has raised questions about the effectiveness of Germany's deportation system. Issa Al H. arrived in Germany in 2022 as a Syrian refugee, a group that typically has a strong chance of being granted asylum. However, his application was rejected, and he was ordered to be deported to Bulgaria, the country where he had initially registered for asylum. Despite this order, authorities were unable to locate him for deportation, allowing him to remain in Germany. The failure to deport him has sparked a heated debate over who was responsible for the oversight. Germany's deportation policies are complicated by international law and humanitarian concerns. The country generally does not deport people to unsafe countries or war zones, such as Syria or Afghanistan. Doing so would require negotiations with regimes like the Taliban in Afghanistan, a prospect that is both politically and practically challenging. Nevertheless, there are increasing calls within Germany to revisit these policies in light of recent events. The ongoing debate over migration has been a contentious issue in Germany for years. Local councils frequently report that their budgets are strained by the influx of refugees, and there are ongoing discussions about how to improve the asylum process. Some advocates argue that allowing refugees to work sooner would help them integrate more effectively into German society, thereby reducing the strain on public resources. Despite these challenges, Germany has generally managed to cope well with the large numbers of refugees it takes in each year. In 2023 alone, over 350,000 people applied for asylum in Germany. Additionally, since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, around 1.2 million Ukrainians have sought refuge in Germany. These numbers highlight the country's significant role in providing sanctuary to those fleeing conflict and persecution. Despite this large influx, terror attacks linked to asylum seekers in Germany are relatively rare. The last major incident occurred in 2016 when an Islamist extremist drove a lorry into a Christmas market in Berlin, killing 12 people. However, the recent attack in Solingen is likely to have a substantial political impact. With key regional elections approaching in Saxony and Thuringia, the AfD is already using the attack as a rallying point for its campaign. The party, which has gained traction in parts of eastern Germany, is hoping to capitalize on public fear and dissatisfaction with current immigration policies. Within hours of the stabbing, the AfD posted a video on social media featuring the party's regional leader in Thuringia, Björn Höcke, with the caption "Höcke or Solingen," a stark and provocative message intended to resonate with voters. The political landscape in Germany is likely to shift as the country grapples with the implications of the Solingen attack. While Scholz's government is committed to upholding Germany's humanitarian obligations, it also faces mounting pressure to enhance security and control over migration. The balance between these competing priorities will shape Germany's policies in the coming months and could have lasting effects on the nation's approach to immigration and public safety. Credit: BBC 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

In a historic decision, the Federal Court of Australia has ruled that a transgender woman, Roxanne Tickle, was subjected to "indirect gender discrimination" when she was removed from the female-only social media platform, Giggle for Girls. The ruling marks the first time the court has addressed gender identity discrimination since the Sex Discrimination Act was amended in 2013 to include protections for sexual orientation, gender identity, and intersex status. Roxanne Tickle, a transgender woman from New South Wales, had filed a lawsuit against Giggle for Girls and its founder, Sally Grover, in 2022, alleging unlawful gender identity discrimination after she was blocked from the platform in 2021. Tickle claimed that her account was revoked after Grover saw her photo and "considered her to be male." The case brought attention to the issue of how transgender individuals are treated on platforms designed exclusively for women. Judge Robert Bromwich, who presided over the case, ruled that although Tickle was not directly discriminated against, her claim of indirect discrimination was upheld. He concluded that using the Giggle App required Tickle "to have the appearance of a cisgender woman," thereby subjecting her to indirect discrimination. As a result, the court ordered Giggle for Girls and Grover to pay Tickle $10,000 (approximately £5,142) in general compensation, along with covering her legal costs. While Tickle’s claim for an apology from the platform was denied, with the judge deeming it "futile and inappropriate to require an inevitably insincere apology," the ruling was nonetheless a significant victory for Tickle and for transgender rights in Australia. Outside the court, Tickle expressed her relief and satisfaction with the outcome, describing the verdict as "healing." She emphasized the broader implications of the case, noting, "There is so much hate and bile cast on trans and gender diverse people simply because of who we are." The case has generated considerable attention and debate, particularly in light of Grover's stance on the issue. Grover, who founded Giggle for Girls as a platform for women, expressed her disappointment with the ruling, stating on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), "Unfortunately, we got the judgment we anticipated. The fight for women's rights continues." Grover has since launched a fundraiser to appeal the decision, indicating that the legal battle may not be over. Tickle, who has lived as a woman since 2017 and underwent gender-affirming surgery in 2019, is legally recognized as a woman and is identified as female in the Queensland Register. Her case against Giggle for Girls centered on the platform’s requirement for users to upload a selfie for verification, a process overseen by artificial intelligence to confirm the user’s gender as female. Although the AI initially identified Tickle as a woman when she signed up in February 2021, her access to the app was later restricted and eventually revoked. Tickle alleged that this occurred after Grover saw her photo, although Judge Bromwich noted that "there is no firm basis" to conclude that Grover was aware of Tickle’s gender identity at the time. In his ruling, Judge Bromwich addressed the complexities of the case, acknowledging that while there was no direct evidence proving Tickle was excluded due to her gender identity, it was "possible that this was the real but unproven reason." He further highlighted Grover’s views on sex and gender, which were made clear during the trial. When asked if she would accept a transgender woman as female if they had medically transitioned and were legally recognized as such, Grover stated that she "would not view that person as a woman." The judge also criticized Grover's conduct during the trial, particularly her behavior when she was seen "laughing, in the course of her oral evidence, at a demeaning caricature of Ms Tickle." He dismissed her explanation that the laughter was "funny in the context of the courtroom," calling it "obviously disingenuous" and labeling her behavior as "offensive and belittling." Judge Bromwich made it clear that such conduct had "no legitimate place" in the respondents' case. The ruling has set a significant precedent in Australian law, affirming the rights of transgender individuals against discrimination, particularly in contexts where gender identity intersects with access to female-only spaces. As the case continues to unfold, with Grover’s anticipated appeal, it will likely remain a focal point in the ongoing discourse on gender identity and discrimination in Australia. Credit: Sky News 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has escalated his regime's focus on military technology by calling for the accelerated development of suicide drones, a move that further highlights his determination to bolster North Korea's war readiness. During a recent inspection of the Drone Institute at the Academy of Defence Sciences, Kim underscored the importance of creating a diverse array of suicide drones, which he views as essential for the tactical and strategic operations of North Korea's military forces. "It is necessary to develop and produce more suicide drones of various types to be used in tactical infantry and special operation units, as well as strategic reconnaissance and multi-purpose attack drones," Kim Jong-un was quoted as saying by North Korea's state newswire, KCNA. His statement reflects a clear directive to enhance the country’s drone capabilities across multiple military domains. During the weekend visit, Kim Jong-un personally observed the performance of these new drones, which included watching as they successfully targeted and destroyed designated objects, such as a mock tank, after navigating preset flight paths. The spectacle was meant to demonstrate the effectiveness of these "suicide drones," which are designed to crash into their targets with explosive force. Kim emphasized that these drones should be incorporated into both tactical infantry and special operation units, including underwater suicide attack drones, to expand the scope of their military application. He also urged the development of artificial intelligence to further advance the capabilities of unmanned vehicles, signaling a broader ambition to integrate AI into North Korea’s military strategy. The concept of loitering munitions, which are drones that hover in the air while searching for a specific target before crashing into it with a warhead, has already seen widespread use in conflicts such as those in Ukraine and the Middle East. North Korea's pursuit of similar technology is part of a broader trend in modern warfare, where drones play an increasingly significant role in both offensive and defensive operations. State media released photographs of Kim Jong-un during the inspection, depicting him dressed in a loose-fitting all-white outfit and cap. The images show Kim inspecting blurred-out drones and appearing to provide instructions to senior officials, a visual representation of his hands-on approach to military innovation. Local reports have identified at least four different types of drones being developed, some of which were launched with small rocket engines, indicating the variety of drone technologies North Korea is exploring. This development is likely to cause concern in neighboring South Korea, particularly given the recent vulnerabilities exposed in its airspace security. South Korea has already experienced airspace incursions from the North, a reminder of the ongoing tension between the two countries, which remain technically at war since the Korean Peninsula was divided after the 1950-53 conflict ended with an armistice rather than a peace treaty. North Korea has previously used small commercial drones to infiltrate areas around South Korea’s capital, Seoul, including a notable incident in December 2022 when five North Korean drones crossed into South Korean airspace. In response, the South Korean military fired warning shots and deployed fighter jets, though none of the UAVs were brought down. In light of the recent developments in North Korea, South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) has called for further analysis to determine the similarities between the newly unveiled North Korean drones and other models such as Russia’s ZALA Lancet and the Iranian-designed Shahed. The connection between North Korea and these countries has raised eyebrows, especially given the recent pledges for increased military cooperation between Kim Jong-un and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Pyongyang has been accused by the United States and South Korea of supplying munitions to Russia for its war in Ukraine, allegedly in exchange for advanced military technology. "We understand that some gifts (drones) were given in an exchange between North Korea and Russia in the past… We need to analyze various measures to see if those have improved performance," a JCS spokesperson stated during a briefing, highlighting the ongoing concern about the potential technological advancements North Korea could gain from its partnerships. In response to the growing threat posed by North Korea’s drone capabilities, South Korea has taken steps to strengthen its defenses. Last month, South Korea’s National Defence Acquisition Programme Administration (DAPA) announced plans to deploy new laser weapons, often referred to as "Star Wars" lasers, designed to neutralize drones dispatched from the North. These laser systems are expected to be operational by the end of the year and are intended to destroy drones by melting their surfaces, causing the internal components to ignite and rendering the drones inoperable. As North Korea continues to push the boundaries of its military technology, particularly in the realm of suicide drones, the regional security landscape is becoming increasingly complex. Kim Jong-un's relentless pursuit of advanced warfare capabilities is a stark reminder of the ongoing tensions on the Korean Peninsula and the broader implications for global security. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

In a season marked by controversy and debate, the Flying Bats FC, a Sydney-based women’s soccer team, clinched the Women's Premier League grand final, capping off an undefeated season that has sparked discussions around the world. The team, which includes five transgender players, has become a focal point in the ongoing debate over transgender athletes’ participation in women’s sports. The Flying Bats’ dominance throughout the season was evident as they won all 16 of their regular-season matches, scoring 65 goals while conceding just four. Their path to the grand final was punctuated by multiple forfeits from opposing teams, including both semi-final fixtures, due to objections over the presence of transgender players on the team. Despite these challenges, the Flying Bats emerged victorious, winning the grand final with a tight 5-4 scoreline against West Pennant Hills Cherrybrook Football Club. The grand final, held at Christie Park under tight security, reflected the intense scrutiny the team has faced. Security guards were present to discourage professional photography and monitor the crowd, highlighting the sensitivity surrounding the match. The scores were level at 3-3 by halftime, but the Flying Bats managed to pull ahead in the second half, thanks to strategic substitutions and a determined effort from their players. One of the transgender players was issued a yellow card during the match, and another was named best on the ground after the final whistle. The controversy surrounding the Flying Bats has attracted significant attention, with critics arguing that the inclusion of transgender players in women’s sports is unfair to cisgender female athletes. High-profile figures like JK Rowling and sports commentator Lucy Zelic have been vocal in their opposition, with Zelic describing the Flying Bats’ victory as a “crime against women” and calling for a deeper examination of the policies that allow transgender women to compete in female sports leagues. Zelic, who has been a consistent critic of the team, expressed her disappointment after the grand final, emphasizing the need to protect women’s sports from what she views as an erosion of fairness. “Somehow, this is supposed to represent progress. Somewhere, the custodians of our game don’t care,” Zelic posted online, echoing concerns from various quarters about the implications of the Flying Bats’ success. The West Pennant Hills Cherrybrook Football Club, who narrowly lost the grand final, described the defeat as “heartbreaking” but praised their players for their resilience and determination. “Our Premier League Women’s team have left everything on Christie Park this afternoon... We could not be prouder of you girls,” the club posted on social media, capturing the emotional toll of the match on their players and supporters. Throughout the season, six of the Flying Bats’ victories were the result of forfeits by opposing teams, reflecting the broader controversy surrounding their participation in the league. Reports suggest that sports governing bodies warned clubs against forfeiting their matches against the Flying Bats, highlighting the complex dynamics at play. The issue of transgender athletes in women’s sports is not just a local concern but a global one. The Flying Bats FC, which describes itself as the largest LGBTQIA+ women’s and non-binary football club in the world, has become a symbol of the broader debate over inclusion, fairness, and the future of women’s sports. Club president Jennifer Peden has been a staunch defender of the team’s inclusion policies, emphasizing the importance of providing a safe and supportive environment for all players, regardless of gender identity. “As a club, the Flying Bats FC stand strongly for inclusion, and pride ourselves on safe, respectful and fair play,” Peden stated in April. She pointed to the Australian Human Rights Commission’s guidelines, which prohibit discrimination against transgender players in sport under the federal Sex Discrimination Act of 1984. These guidelines emphasize that sporting organizations cannot discriminate against transgender individuals, either directly or indirectly. For example, refusing a transgender woman’s application for membership or requiring a birth certificate to verify gender would be considered discriminatory under these rules. The guidelines have informed the gender inclusion policies of Football Australia, Football NSW, and the North West Sydney Football Association, which governs the league in which the Flying Bats compete. Despite the backlash, supporters of the Flying Bats argue that the inclusion of transgender players is a matter of human rights and equality. The LGBTI Rights Australia Facebook group congratulated the team on their victory, criticizing the opposition as an exploitation of sports for political purposes. “Transgender women have been proudly part of the Bats for 20 YEARS... yet it took terf N@zi$ up until this week to take notice,” the group posted, celebrating the team’s success and calling out the critics. As the Flying Bats FC basks in their hard-earned victory, the debate over their place in women’s sports is far from settled. The team’s success has intensified discussions about the intersection of gender identity, fairness, and inclusion in sport, raising questions that resonate well beyond the soccer field. While the Flying Bats have proven their prowess on the pitch, their season has also highlighted the need for a broader societal conversation about the future of women’s sports in an increasingly diverse world. Credit: Daily Mail 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

Off topic response removed. Please ensure that if making any claims and asked for a link, you provide it to a credible source. Wiki and its sources are generally credible.

Links and quotes to Paywall articles removed along with a reply.

A 32-year-old woman is fighting for her life in a London hospital after being stabbed during the Notting Hill Carnival, an event traditionally known for its vibrant celebration of Caribbean culture. The woman was one of three victims stabbed at the West London festival on Sunday, an incident that has cast a shadow over what is usually a joyous occasion. According to the Metropolitan Police, the woman’s condition is life-threatening, a stark contrast to the typically festive atmosphere of the carnival. The other two stabbing victims include a 29-year-old man who was also hospitalized, though his injuries are not considered life-threatening, and a 24-year-old man whose condition remains unknown. The stabbings occurred amidst the bustling crowds that had gathered to celebrate the carnival, which is Europe's largest street party and is billed by organizers as “the greatest community-led event on the planet.” In response to the violence, the Metropolitan Police issued a Section 60 order, granting officers enhanced search powers to prevent further incidents. This order is a measure that allows police to stop and search individuals without the usual requirement of reasonable suspicion, aimed at curbing the potential for more violence in the wake of the stabbings. A police spokesperson expressed regret that the carnival had been marred by such violence, noting, "Hundreds of thousands of people came to Notting Hill Carnival today to enjoy a fantastic celebration. Our officers have been on duty working to keep them safe as part of a very carefully planned policing operation. Regrettably, a minority came to commit crime and engage in violence." Despite the extensive planning and policing efforts, the carnival has seen a concerning number of arrests. So far, the police have made 90 arrests, including for possession of offensive weapons, assaults on emergency workers, and possession with intent to supply drugs. Other arrests have been made for offenses such as assault, theft, sexual offenses, possession of drugs, and robbery. In addition to the arrests, the Metropolitan Police reported that fifteen officers had been assaulted during the event, underscoring the challenges faced by law enforcement in managing the large crowds and ensuring public safety. The carnival, which has been an annual celebration of Caribbean heritage, arts, and culture for more than 50 years, typically draws around a million attendees over the bank holiday weekend. The event, which spans two days, is a vibrant display of music, dance, and colorful costumes. The streets of West London come alive with the sounds of steel drums and calypso, as well as the sight of elaborate costumes, reflecting the rich cultural traditions of the Caribbean. The celebration includes a variety of events, with Sunday traditionally designated as Children and Families’ Day, where youngsters parade through the streets in bright, intricate costumes, adding to the carnival’s festive spirit. However, the violence that has occurred this year has prompted concern and criticism. The police have emphasized that the Section 60 order not only allows them to conduct stop-and-search operations but also gives them the authority to demand the removal of face coverings used to conceal a person’s identity. Refusal to comply with this order can result in arrest. This measure is intended to prevent individuals from using face coverings to evade identification while engaging in criminal activity. As the carnival continues, with the main parade scheduled for Monday, described by organizers as the climax of the event with “party vibes,” there is an underlying tension due to the recent violence. The event, which is supposed to be a celebration of community and culture, is now being scrutinized for the safety concerns it poses. The criticism of how the carnival is policed is not new. Mike Neville, a retired Scotland Yard detective chief inspector, has alleged that officers are sometimes hesitant to make arrests for fear of being labeled racist. This claim highlights the complex dynamics at play in policing large, diverse events like the Notting Hill Carnival, where the need for security must be balanced with sensitivity to cultural and racial issues. As the Notting Hill Carnival continues, the hope is that the remaining festivities will proceed without further incident. However, the stabbing of the 32-year-old woman serves as a tragic reminder of the potential for violence, even in settings meant to celebrate community and culture. The thoughts of many are with the victims of these senseless acts of violence, particularly the woman now fighting for her life, as the community grapples with the impact of these events on what should be a time of joy and celebration. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

Vice President Kamala Harris has seen a notable increase in her polling numbers against former President Donald Trump among registered voters, according to fresh polling data released during the Democratic National Convention (DNC). The survey, conducted by the Angus Reid Institute between August 19 and August 23, coincides with the Democratic Party's formal nomination of Harris as its presidential candidate. The national poll illustrates a widening generational and demographic divide in voter preferences. Harris enjoys a strong lead among younger voters, particularly those aged 18 to 34, with 59 percent supporting Harris compared to 30 percent for Trump. This lead is even more pronounced among Black voters, where Harris has 67 percent support compared to Trump’s 16 percent, and among Hispanic voters, where she leads 57 percent to 33 percent. However, Trump continues to resonate with older and white voters, holding the preference of 49 percent of voters over 54 years old, compared to 40 percent for Harris. Among white voters, Trump leads Harris 51 percent to 39 percent. The Harris campaign's adept use of social media has been credited with generating what analysts have described as an "extended honeymoon period" for the candidate. Memes and viral content have helped to energize younger voters, though this strategy presents the challenge of converting online enthusiasm into actual votes in November. When reached for comment, both the Harris and Trump campaigns were contacted via email by Newsweek on Saturday afternoon. While youth voter turnout in 2020 reached a record high, it still only slightly exceeded 50 percent, considerably lower than the participation rates among older demographics. The Angus Reid survey also sheds light on the challenges Harris might face as she strives to become the first woman elected to the presidency. A striking 74 percent of respondents believe that it is more difficult for a woman to be elected to high political office, even though 59 percent of those surveyed said there is "no difference" between genders in terms of competently performing the job once in office. The poll also explored voters' emotional responses to the candidates. Notably, 71 percent of Harris supporters expressed that her potential victory makes them feel "hopeful," while 63 percent of Trump supporters expressed the same sentiment about a possible second term for the former president. The prospect of the opposing candidate winning, however, elicited worry and fear from both camps, with Trump supporters showing slightly higher levels of concern (57 percent worry, 38 percent fear) compared to Harris supporters (47 percent worry, 45 percent fear). When asked to describe the candidates, voters most frequently characterized Harris as "dishonest" (36 percent), "strong" (36 percent), "corrupt" (32 percent), "inspiring" (31 percent), and "strategic" (29 percent). Trump, on the other hand, was predominantly described as "arrogant" (62 percent), a "bully" (48 percent), "corrupt" (45 percent), "dishonest" (45 percent), and "strong" (38 percent). The Angus Reid survey identified the cost of living as the most pressing issue facing the United States, with 58 percent of voters citing it as their primary concern. This was followed by broader economic concerns (28 percent), border security (27 percent), healthcare (25 percent), and reproductive rights (23 percent). In addition to the Angus Reid survey, a national poll from Fairleigh Dickinson University (FDU) and Braun Research shows Harris leading Trump by a 7-point margin. The poll, which surveyed 801 registered voters between August 17 and 20, found that 50 percent of voters support Harris, while 43 percent support Trump. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. The poll also revealed a deep partisan divide: 95 percent of Democrats, 38 percent of independents, and 2 percent of Republicans back Harris, while 33 percent of independents, 95 percent of Republicans, and 3 percent of Democrats support Trump. In contrast to the FDU poll, a Rasmussen Reports poll released Thursday found Trump leading Harris by 3 percentage points, 49 percent to 46 percent. This survey, which included 1,893 likely voters, was conducted on August 15 and between August 18 and 21, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. Most national aggregate polls currently place Harris in the lead, with RealClearPolitics showing her ahead by 1.5 percentage points, 48.4 percent to Trump's 46.9 percent, and The New York Times aggregate showing Harris with a 2-percentage point advantage, 49 percent to 47 percent. Other aggregates, such as FiveThirtyEight, show larger margins, with Harris leading by 3.6 percentage points, 47.2 percent to 43.6 percent. Nate Silver's Silver Bulletin also reports Harris leading, with 48 percent compared to Trump's 43.7 percent. The race has been further complicated by the recent withdrawal of independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who had been drawing about 5 percent in national polls. Kennedy officially dropped out on Friday and endorsed Trump, adding another layer of complexity to the already intense competition. As the campaign moves into its post-convention phase, both candidates face significant challenges. For Harris, the task will be to maintain her momentum and convert her current polling advantage into Electoral College votes. Trump, on the other hand, must work to broaden his appeal beyond his base and address the concerns of swing voters who may be apprehensive about a second Trump term. With just over two months remaining until Election Day, the race remains highly competitive as both campaigns zero in on the crucial swing states. While Harris appears to have benefited from a convention bounce, the true test will come in the weeks ahead as voters engage more deeply with the candidates and their platforms. As is often the case in American presidential politics, this race is likely to be closely contested right up until November. Credit: Newsweek 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

Two NASA astronauts, initially slated for a routine return to Earth, are now set to journey home aboard a SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft early next year. This decision comes after a series of malfunctions plagued the Boeing Starliner, the spacecraft that was supposed to bring them back. Commander Barry “Butch” Wilmore and pilot Sunita “Suni” Williams, both seasoned former military test pilots, found themselves in an unexpected predicament after becoming the first crew to ride the Starliner to the International Space Station (ISS) on June 5. Their mission, originally planned as an eight-day test, has now turned into an extended stay due to the technical challenges Starliner faced during its journey. The issues with Starliner began almost immediately after launch. Within the first 24 hours of the flight, the propulsion system of the spacecraft experienced several glitches that led to months of delays. The situation worsened as five of the 28 thrusters failed, and the spacecraft also suffered from helium leaks, a critical issue since helium is used to pressurize the thrusters. These malfunctions raised significant concerns about the spacecraft's safety and reliability, prompting NASA to reconsider its original plan. In a highly unusual move for NASA, the two astronauts are now scheduled to return to Earth in February 2025 aboard a SpaceX Crew Dragon. This spacecraft is set to launch next month as part of a routine astronaut rotation mission, and NASA has deemed it a safer option for bringing Wilmore and Williams back home. The decision to switch to SpaceX, Boeing's main competitor in spaceflight, is one of NASA’s most significant and consequential in recent years. The implications for Boeing are profound. The company had pinned its hopes on the Starliner mission as a way to redeem the program after years of development issues and over $1.6 billion in budget overruns since 2016. Boeing, already dealing with quality issues in the production of its commercial airplanes, now faces additional challenges in its space division. The Crew Dragon spacecraft that will bring the astronauts home will have two of its four seats reserved for Wilmore and Williams. The Starliner, on the other hand, will attempt to undock from the ISS without a crew and return to Earth as originally intended. This uncrewed return will be a crucial test for the spacecraft, which has struggled to prove its reliability. Boeing's efforts to develop the Starliner have been fraught with difficulties. The capsule, designed to compete with SpaceX's Crew Dragon, has had a troubled history. In 2019, an uncrewed test flight to the ISS ended in failure, although a 2022 reattempt was more successful, albeit not without its own issues, including further thruster problems. The June mission, which carried its first crew, was supposed to pave the way for NASA to certify Starliner for regular flights. However, the recent setbacks have thrown the capsule's certification process into disarray. Since Starliner docked with the ISS in June, Boeing has been working tirelessly to determine the causes of the thruster failures and helium leaks. The company has conducted extensive tests and simulations on Earth in an attempt to convince NASA that Starliner is still a viable option for human spaceflight. Despite these efforts, the results have raised more questions than answers, and NASA's confidence in the spacecraft's ability to safely return its crew to Earth has been shaken. NASA's decision to opt for the SpaceX Crew Dragon instead of the Starliner is a significant blow to Boeing. It also adds to the growing list of crises facing Kelly Ortberg, Boeing's newly appointed CEO, who took on the role earlier this month. Ortberg's primary goal is to rebuild Boeing’s reputation, which has been severely tarnished by recent events, including a dramatic incident in January when a door panel blew off a 737 MAX passenger jet in midair. The path forward for Starliner remains uncertain. While the spacecraft will still attempt an uncrewed return to Earth, the future of its certification for crewed missions is now in doubt. Boeing will need to address the engineering challenges that have plagued the program and restore confidence in its ability to safely carry astronauts. Meanwhile, NASA's decision to rely on SpaceX for the safe return of its astronauts highlights the growing importance of the Crew Dragon spacecraft in the agency's human spaceflight program. As the two astronauts prepare for their return to Earth, their journey underscores the inherent risks and challenges of space exploration. The lessons learned from the Starliner mission will undoubtedly shape the future of NASA's partnerships with private companies and the ongoing efforts to push the boundaries of human spaceflight. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

The Islamic State has claimed responsibility for a brutal knife attack that occurred at a festival in Solingen, Germany, leaving three people dead and eight others injured. The attack, which unfolded amidst the celebrations of the "Festival of Diversity," has plunged the city into mourning and raised alarms about the persistent threat of extremist violence in Europe. Multiple knives were discovered near the scene, suggesting a premeditated and meticulously planned attack. Police Chief Markus Röhrl confirmed that the investigation is ongoing, with authorities working tirelessly to uncover the full extent of the plot and any potential accomplices. The Solingen community has been left reeling from the tragedy. Mayor Tim Kurzbach expressed the collective grief and shock felt by the city's residents in a heartfelt message on Facebook. "This evening, we in Solingen are all in shock. We all wanted to celebrate our city’s anniversary together and now have dead and wounded to lament," he wrote. "It breaks my heart that an attack on our city happened." In response to the attack, organizers of the "Festival of Diversity" canceled the remaining events out of respect for the victims and their families. This horrifying incident in Solingen occurred less than a day before another attack in southern France, where an individual set two cars on fire outside a synagogue, an act that has been widely condemned as antisemitic. The proximity of these two events has heightened concerns about the spread of extremist ideologies and the growing threat they pose to public safety across Europe. As investigations continue, the people of Solingen and the wider world are left to grapple with the devastating impact of this senseless act of violence. The attack serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing challenges in combating extremism and the importance of vigilance in the face of such threats. UPDATE: A 26-year-old man has given himself up and confessed to a mass knife attack at a street festival in Germany, police said on Sunday. "The man we’ve really been looking for the whole day has just been taken into custody," Herbert Reul, the interior minister of North Rhine-Westphalia state, told ARD public TV late on Saturday. Germany's Bild and Spiegel news websites reported that the suspect surrendered himself in dirty blood-stained clothes. Police described him as Syrian, and German media reported that he arrived in Germany in December 2022, after leaving the war-torn country. Bild reported that special task force (SEK) officers stormed a refugee centre the suspect was associated with, detaining another person there. Credit: NYP | Sky News | BBC 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

Starbucks has extended a lucrative offer to its new CEO, Brian Niccol, by providing him with a corporate jet to commute from his southern California residence to the company’s Seattle headquarters. The decision, revealed in Niccol’s offer letter, allows the new leader to maintain a “small remote office” at his Newport Beach home, eliminating the need for a permanent move to Seattle, approximately 1,000 miles away. This arrangement underscores Starbucks' commitment to accommodating its top executive, despite potential concerns about environmental impacts. Niccol’s appointment has been met with confidence from the company, with a Starbucks spokesperson stating, "Brian Niccol has proven himself to be one of the most effective leaders in our industry, generating significant financial returns over many years." The spokesperson added, "We’re confident in his experience and ability to serve as the leader of our global business and brand, delivering long-term, enduring value for our partners, customers, and shareholders." These remarks reflect the company’s belief in Niccol’s ability to drive continued success at Starbucks, a global brand with significant market influence. The details of Niccol's compensation package further highlight the company’s investment in its new CEO. According to the contract, Niccol is eligible to use Starbucks' company plane for both business-related and personal travel, with an annual cap of $250,000 based on the aggregate incremental cost to the company. This provision suggests that while Niccol will primarily operate from the company’s Seattle headquarters, his frequent flights between the West Coast locations will be a regular part of his routine. Niccol's role will indeed require substantial travel, as Starbucks operates 39,000 locations worldwide. A company representative noted, “Brian’s primary office and a majority of his time will be spent in our Seattle Support Center or visiting partners and customers in our stores, roasteries, roasting facilities, and offices around the world.” This statement indicates that Niccol will be actively involved in overseeing the company’s vast operations, necessitating his presence across various locations globally. However, the arrangement has raised eyebrows, particularly in light of Starbucks' commitment to sustainability. The company has publicly set ambitious goals to reduce its environmental impact, including a transition to entirely reusable, recyclable, or compostable packaging by 2030 and a 50% reduction in waste. The provision of a private jet for Niccol’s commute seems at odds with these green initiatives, especially considering the environmental toll of jet travel. Jet travel, whether commercial or personal, contributes significantly to global carbon emissions. According to the International Energy Agency, it accounts for around 800 million tons of carbon dioxide annually, which is more than 2% of total global energy-related emissions. Private jets, while representing a small fraction of overall air traffic, are particularly inefficient, burning 10 times more fuel per passenger mile traveled compared to commercial planes. These figures, highlighted in a report by the Institute for Policy Studies, underscore the environmental concerns associated with private jet use. On Friday, these concerns were echoed by Greenpeace, an environmental activist group, which called for a complete ban on private jets. This appeal aligns with growing global awareness and activism aimed at reducing carbon footprints, particularly among corporate entities. The juxtaposition of Starbucks' sustainability goals with Niccol's private jet usage could lead to increased scrutiny from environmental groups and the public. Financially, Niccol stands to earn a substantial sum as the new CEO of Starbucks. His compensation package includes a base salary of $1.6 million, a $10 million signing bonus, and the potential to earn millions more depending on the company’s annual performance. This lucrative package reflects the company’s determination to secure Niccol’s leadership following his successful tenure at Chipotle Mexican Grill, where he was credited with revitalizing the brand. Niccol’s appointment comes after the departure of Laxman Narasimhan, who served as Starbucks' CEO for less than two years. The decision to lure Niccol from Chipotle, a company known for its rapid growth and strong market presence under his leadership, suggests that Starbucks is seeking to inject new energy and strategy into its operations. As Niccol settles into his new role, the balance between his leadership and the company’s environmental commitments will likely be a focal point of discussion. Starbucks, a brand that has built much of its identity on sustainability and social responsibility, may find itself navigating the complexities of reconciling its green image with the practicalities of corporate leadership in a global business landscape. Credit: NYP 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe

A group of climate activists, led by the prominent Swedish environmentalist Greta Thunberg, took part in a daring protest on Saturday at the Karsto gas and oil processing plant in southwest Norway. The demonstration, organized by members of Extinction Rebellion, aimed to disrupt the operations of the plant, which is one of Europe's largest facilities of its kind. Extinction Rebellion Norway made an announcement on social media, revealing that the protest involved eight kayaks and three motorboats entering a restricted security zone around the Karsto processing plant. The intention was to "prevent the normal operation of tankers" and raise awareness about the environmental impact of continued fossil fuel extraction. On land, other activists, including Thunberg, stood resolutely at the facility's gates, attempting to block access and send a strong message against the ongoing reliance on fossil fuels. Thunberg, known for her uncompromising stance on climate change, was quoted in Extinction Rebellion's post, emphasizing the urgency of their actions. "We cannot stand idly by as the fossil fuel industry robs people of their lives and destabilizes our life support systems," she declared, reinforcing her commitment to the fight against the fossil fuel industry and its effects on the planet. The Karsto plant, operated by Norway's state-controlled energy company Equinor, plays a crucial role in the European energy market. According to Equinor, the facility processes oil and gas from around 30 different fields, making it a significant hub for the region's energy supply. Despite the activists' efforts to disrupt operations, a spokeswoman for Equinor confirmed that the plant continued to function normally during the protest. "A group of activists have gathered outside parts of the facility, but at this stage, the plant is operating as normal," she stated. This protest is part of a broader movement aimed at holding governments and corporations accountable for their role in the climate crisis. Thunberg, who has inspired millions worldwide through her activism, continues to be a leading voice in this struggle. Her participation in such direct actions highlights the increasing frustration among climate activists with the slow pace of change and the continued investment in fossil fuel infrastructure. As the global climate crisis intensifies, protests like the one at Karsto serve as a reminder of the growing resistance to fossil fuel dependency. Activists are calling for an urgent transition to renewable energy sources, warning that the continued exploitation of oil and gas reserves poses an existential threat to humanity and the planet. The actions of Thunberg and her fellow protesters at the Karsto plant underscore the deepening divide between the fossil fuel industry's interests and the demands of the climate justice movement. As more people join the call for a sustainable future, the pressure on governments and corporations to act decisively on climate change will only continue to grow. Credit: Barrons 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe