Social Media

London Marathon Upholds Trans Inclusivity Amid Legal Uncertainty and X Boycott The London Marathon will allow transgender women to compete in the mass participation race as females this weekend, even in the wake of a recent Supreme Court ruling that declared sex to be binary. Race director Hugh Brasher confirmed the decision, stating that participants will still be able to self-identify as male, female, or non-binary, regardless of their birth sex. Brasher emphasized that the marathon will continue to follow the legal framework as it develops, but until more clarity is provided, the current policy will remain in place. “We obviously will meet what the law says. But... there has to be that detail coming out of that commission and out of Sport England,” he said, referring to pending reports from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and Sport England that could shape future decisions. Pressed on what the marathon’s position would be if the EHRC deemed it legal, but not mandatory, to bar trans women from self-identifying as female, Brasher responded, “Look, it’s really difficult to predict what we would do. I’ve gone through loads of different scenario planning since the court delivered its verdict. But, honestly, we have to wait until the commission gives its report, until Sport England do. Because, otherwise, we’re just going on to what ifs, what ifs, what ifs. And yes, we plan an awful lot of things, and we can manoeuvre, but we want to wait for that report and then take a considered decision.” While transgender women can participate in the mass race as females, Brasher reiterated that only those assigned female at birth are eligible for the elite, championship, and good-for-age women’s events. The policy reflects a balance between inclusivity and fairness in competition. “We delight in being both inclusive but also protecting in-competition the rights of women, which is incredibly important,” he said. “Seb Coe, Lord Coe, and World Athletics have always led on that, and we absolutely look to continue doing that.” The marathon faced controversy two years ago when Glenique Frank, from Daventry, ran as a woman just months after competing as a man in the New York Marathon. Frank later apologized and urged race organizers to consider introducing a separate transgender category. Reflecting on the event’s ethos, Brasher said, “The London Marathon is about positivity.” In a separate but equally significant decision, London Marathon Events announced a boycott of Elon Musk’s social media platform, X, formerly known as Twitter. Despite maintaining a presence on the platform through its dormant @LondonMarathon account, the organization has ceased posting since January 17. “There are some social media channels that are particularly vitriolic and are descending into a gutter,” Brasher said. “And as a result of that, London Marathon Events have actually come off one of those channels, as a result of where we believe that channel has descended to.” Confirming that he was referring to X, Brasher added, “It is off the back of just looking at that channel and the vitriol. It was ceasing to be a rational conversation. It was ceasing to be a positive place to be. The London Marathon is about positivity.” Elon Musk, a vocal advocate for free speech and a staunch critic of what he views as censorship in the UK, has often spoken out against the inclusion of transgender women in female sports. However, Brasher was clear that the marathon would continue to prioritize inclusivity and community spirit. “One of the aims of my father and John Disley was to show that, on occasion, the family of humankind could be joyous together and celebrate together. That’s what the London Marathon is about. It is a force for good. And we didn’t feel that channel shared those values, and therefore we have come off that channel,” he said. Related Topics: Starmer U-turns on Gender Identity Following Supreme Court Ruling UK Supreme Court Rules ‘Woman’ Means Biological Female, in Landmark Decision Supreme Court Ruling Sparks Protests Wave of Threats and Backlash Amid Gender Rights Debate Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-04-25

Title: China Unveils Ambitious Plans for Nuclear-Powered Lunar Research Base China has officially announced its intention to build a nuclear power plant on the Moon, a move that will support a permanent research facility being developed in collaboration with Russia. The ambitious project, known as the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS), is scheduled for completion by 2035 and aims to become a fully operational base for lunar scientific exploration by 2050. This significant development was revealed during a briefing in Shanghai, where Chinese scientists presented the most comprehensive details to date to foreign governments and international organizations. The ILRS is envisioned as a permanently staffed base that will enable long-term research and exploration missions on the lunar surface. The concept of powering the lunar base with a nuclear plant was first floated in 2023 by Roscosmos, Russia’s space agency. However, it wasn't until now that Beijing officially confirmed its role in developing the nuclear facility. The power generated from the reactor will supplement solar panels and ensure a steady energy supply for research and habitation in the Moon’s harsh and variable environment. In addition to supporting lunar operations, China has promoted the ILRS as a platform for international cooperation and a potential stepping stone for human exploration of deeper space, including missions to other planets. Countries such as Azerbaijan, Belarus, Pakistan, South Africa, and Venezuela have signed on to participate in the initiative. China’s efforts are seen as part of a broader competition with the United States, which is working on its own lunar goals through NASA’s Artemis program. The U.S. plans to land astronauts on the Moon in 2027 and establish a base for scientific research and preparatory missions to Mars, possibly also relying on nuclear technology to power lunar outposts. President Xi Jinping has described China’s quest to become a major space power as the nation’s “eternal dream.” The country has made notable advances in recent years, including the construction of a crewed space station, the landing of a robotic rover on Mars, and becoming the first country to achieve a controlled landing on the far side of the Moon. Chinese scientists are also developing an ambitious astronomical project: a massive radio telescope array on the Moon’s far side. The planned installation would feature 7,200 butterfly-shaped wire antennas designed to detect faint cosmic signals, potentially offering new insights into the early universe. Russia, meanwhile, is developing complementary technologies for the ILRS. One of the standout projects is a nuclear-powered cargo spacecraft, dubbed a “space tugboat,” that could revolutionize orbital logistics. “This huge, cyclopean structure would be able, thanks to a nuclear reactor and high-power turbines, to transport large cargos from one orbit to another, collect space debris and engage in many other applications,” said Yury Borisov, the former head of Roscosmos. With this lunar initiative, China is not only looking to expand its scientific reach but also to assert its presence in the new era of space exploration, signaling that the next great leap may be fueled by international collaboration—and nuclear power. Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-04-25

An Irish Republican rap group known as Kneecap is at the center of a counter-terrorism investigation following the emergence of footage in which a member appears to praise proscribed terrorist groups. The group, which previously received £14,250 in UK taxpayer funds via the Music Export Growth Scheme, has sparked national outrage after its performance at the 2024 Coachella Festival in California and a separate live gig earlier in the year. During their Coachella appearance over Easter weekend, the group displayed the slogan “f--- Israel Free Palestine” as part of their stage visuals. Earlier footage from a different 2024 performance shows a Kneecap member draped in a flag associated with a terror group while apparently shouting “up Hamas, up Hezbollah.” Both Hamas and Hezbollah are designated as terrorist organizations under UK law. The Metropolitan Police confirmed on April 22 that the footage had been referred to the Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit, a national team operating within the Met’s Counter Terrorism Command. A spokesperson for the Met said: “We have been made aware of the video today (April 22) and it has been referred to the Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit for assessment and to determine whether any further police investigation may be required.” Under the Terrorism Act 2000, it is a criminal offence in the UK to invite support for any proscribed organisation, including Hamas and Hezbollah. The group’s actions have triggered widespread condemnation, particularly as they are scheduled to perform at Glastonbury Festival later this year. Sharon Osbourne, former X Factor judge, publicly criticized the group’s behavior, demanding that their right to perform in the United States be revoked. Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch echoed the criticism, accusing the band of “openly glorifying evil terror groups.” Despite their strong pro-Republican and controversial views, Kneecap successfully obtained public funding in 2023. Though Badenoch, then the business secretary, initially blocked their funding application, Labour declined to continue contesting the group's legal challenge. As a result, the group received a £14,250 payout through the government-backed scheme aimed at promoting UK musical acts abroad. Reacting on social media, Badenoch posted: “Labour should apologise for rolling over” during the legal proceedings. The band—comprising Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, Naoise Ó Caireallain, and JJ Ó Dochartaigh—is known for fusing humor with political commentary in their lyrics. However, their previous controversies have raised concern. In 2019, the group made headlines for commissioning a mural depicting a burning vehicle with the caption “the RUC [Royal Ulster Constabulary] are not welcome.” They have also led crowds in chants mocking the death of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. A spokesperson from the Department for Business and Trade stated: “This Government’s priority is to get on delivering the change we promised and protect the taxpayer from further expense, which is why we did not continue to contest Kneecap’s challenge as we did not believe it to be in the public interest.” As investigations proceed, questions continue to mount over how taxpayer money was allocated and whether freedom of expression crosses a legal line when it comes to praising or promoting proscribed terror groups. Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-04-25

In Defense of the Indefensible: Pete Hegseth and the Mirror of Our Moment Pete Hegseth’s tenure as Secretary of Defense has ignited a storm of criticism, with detractors calling him unqualified, undisciplined, and wholly unsuited to lead the world’s largest military force. Yet perhaps the sharpest indictment lies not in these accusations themselves, but in the eerie alignment between Hegseth’s personal flaws and the current state of the nation he serves. While others mock or condemn, I come not to bury Pete Hegseth, but to consider what his rise reveals about the country that elevated him. Here is a man who has made it to the uppermost echelon of government without showcasing talent, discipline, or intellect—an achievement of its own kind. Hegseth, once flagged by a fellow soldier as a potential “insider threat,” now holds sway over an institution once renowned for precision and structure. Whatever harm he may have posed as an individual pales in comparison to what he now wields on a national scale as the military’s second-in-command. Even the character references from his personal life read like cautionary tales. In one email, his own mother described him as an “abuser of women.” Hegseth has had two former wives. But whatever damage he may have caused in private life now echoes through the broader defense establishment, as he systematically removes competent women and people of color from positions of leadership. If the military’s purpose is, in part, lethality, then Hegseth has redefined it as a weapon turned inward. Former Pentagon spokesperson John Ullyot has described Hegseth’s reign as one of “total chaos”—a characterization that feels less like an accusation and more like a mission statement. After all, chaos is the environment where his patron, Donald Trump, thrives. The military, once a bastion of chain-of-command discipline, now resembles a political circus, where loyalty to the commander-in-chief eclipses duty to country. Classified war plans are shared like party favors with friends and family, while military leaders like the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs are shut out of decision-making processes. Is it governance or showmanship? Or, in Hegseth’s case, both? And still, he insists on his honor. “They take anonymous sources from disgruntled former employees, and then they try to slash and burn people and ruin their reputations. Not going to work with me,” Hegseth said defiantly at the White House Easter Egg Roll. In a way, he’s right. His reputation, already hardened like callus over scandal and bluster, remains unscathed in the eyes of those who matter most to him. Hegseth is far from alone. His name belongs on a roll call of men—Rubio, Lutnick, Navarro, Miller, Vance, Musk—each seemingly determined to reconstruct the United States in an image of their own making. They battle not to uphold the Constitution, but to overwrite it with a vision that lacks the restraint or empathy of the Framers. Their offenses are not just in what they do, but in the belief that they do it for our own good. These men are, in their own estimation, the tough-minded reformers needed for a country gone soft. But Hegseth has shown that courage without character leads to ruin. His legacy may be written not in policy or reform, but in the slow, steady dismantling of a once-proud institution. And in that, perhaps he does reflect this moment in America—loud, unchecked, and spiraling. So let the grave Pete Hegseth digs with every speech and leaked group chat be his alone. Let the military, and the country it defends, find a way to climb back out. Adpated by ASEAN Now from Daily Beast 2025-04-25

MPs Warn of National Risk as Chinese-Linked Firm Pursues Thames Water Acquisition The British government’s perceived complacency toward Chinese investment in vital infrastructure could leave London “brought to its knees,” a group of cross-party MPs has warned. The alarm was raised following a bid by CK Infrastructure Holdings (CKI) Ltd—a company with ties to the Chinese Communist Party—for Thames Water, the UK’s largest water utility serving 16 million people in London and the South. MPs are urging a full investigation into the bid under national security powers, warning that allowing CKI to gain further control over critical UK infrastructure could endanger not only public services but national sovereignty. “The trend is clear and alarming – Beijing is exerting ever greater direct control over CK Hutchison and related companies’ activities,” a letter from the group to Pat McFadden, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, stated. “Any activity not in Beijing’s interests is regarded as a hostile act and cause for state intervention.” CKI, based in Hong Kong, already holds a significant footprint in the UK, including ownership of the electricity distribution network in London, multiple gas networks across England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and Northumbrian Water. The consortium also owns a power station and 32 wind farms. Most recently, it secured a 49 percent stake in the Vodafone-Three merger, further expanding its influence in UK telecommunications. The MPs’ concerns were compounded by recent events surrounding Jingye, a Chinese company that owns British Steel in Scunthorpe. The Government had to pass emergency legislation to keep blast furnaces operational amid accusations of industrial sabotage intended to push the UK into dependency on Chinese steel. “Without power and safe drinking water, the capital would swiftly be brought to its knees,” the letter added, emphasizing the gravity of allowing CKI—already responsible for major utilities—to expand into Thames Water. “A national security assessment is particularly vital in the case of the capital, where the electricity distribution networks owned by CKI, and the water infrastructure CKI aspires to own through Thames Water, are both critical to the functioning of Government, the military and the security services.” Victor Li Tzar-kuoi, CKI’s chairman, is a member of the 14th national committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, a body under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. His father, Li Ka-shing, owns both CKI and CK Hutchison, which controls assets such as infrastructure in the Panama Canal. Beijing previously reprimanded the business over its attempt to sell those operations to Blackrock, following criticism from then-President Donald Trump regarding Chinese involvement in the strategic waterway. Despite these links, Ofwat, the UK’s water regulator, has indicated it would prefer CKI to remain part of Thames Water’s future discussions. However, the private equity firm KKR has already been named as the preferred bidder, meaning CKI’s role depends on that deal falling through. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds highlighted the underlying concern, stating: “For any major Chinese industrial company, there are always direct links to the Chinese Communist Party.” The MPs behind the letter—Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Labour’s Blair McDougall, SNP’s Chris Law, Liberal Democrat Layla Moran and Lord Alton of Liverpool—are pushing for the deal to be reviewed under the National Security and Investment Act. They cite CKI’s acquisitions since 2020, including Phoenix Energy and numerous renewable energy projects, as potentially threatening the resilience of UK infrastructure. The letter comes amid the government’s efforts to bolster cybersecurity and infrastructure defences through the new Cyber Security and Resilience Bill. The National Cyber Security Centre recently labeled China as a “highly sophisticated and capable threat actor,” underscoring the broader strategic risks of such foreign ownership in Britain’s most critical services. Related Topics: Beijing's Influence: The Hidden Reach of China in Britain's Core Infrastructure Reeves Warns Against Cutting Ties with China, Advocates for Stronger Economic Links China accuses UK politicians of ‘arrogance’ in British Steel row Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-04-24

Jordan’s Crackdown on Muslim Brotherhood Signals Major Political Shift In a move that could reshape the political landscape of Jordan, authorities announced a sweeping ban on the Muslim Brotherhood, accusing the Islamist group of plotting attacks and threatening national stability. This unprecedented step could dismantle the Islamic Action Front, the country's largest opposition party, which has long been affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. The decision follows heightened tensions in the region and comes amid widespread protests over Israel’s ongoing war with Hamas. Although the Muslim Brotherhood was officially banned a decade ago, Jordan had continued to tolerate the Islamic Action Front, a licensed political wing, while curbing its activities. Now, even that tolerance appears to be evaporating. Security forces raided the Islamic Action Front’s headquarters following the announcement, seizing boxes of documents as part of an escalating crackdown. The Interior Ministry declared the Brotherhood an illegal organization and ordered the closure of its offices, an end to all political activities tied to it, and an acceleration of efforts to confiscate its assets. “It has been proven that members of the group operate in the dark and engage in activities that could destabilize the country,” the ministry said. “Members of the dissolved Muslim Brotherhood have tampered with security and national unity, and disrupted security and public order.” In a particularly serious allegation, the ministry claimed that the son of a Brotherhood leader had participated in an attempt to manufacture and test explosives intended for use against security forces. This follows the arrest of 16 individuals last week, whom the government accused of making short-range missiles, stockpiling explosives and automatic weapons, and training recruits for illegal armed activities. The accused were linked to what the government termed “unlicensed groups,” a label widely interpreted to include the Brotherhood. Despite these accusations, the Muslim Brotherhood has denied any involvement in subversive activities and insisted it remains committed to the country's stability. “We always declare that we are committed to order, the law, and the provisions of the constitution,” said Wael Al-Saqqa, Secretary-General of the Islamic Action Front. He rejected claims of an organizational relationship with the Brotherhood and expressed surprise at the raid on the party’s offices. “It had no relationship with any other organizational body, whatever it may be,” he added. The crackdown may mark the end of a long, uneasy relationship between the Jordanian monarchy and the Brotherhood. “When the state chose to publicize the alleged plot, it signaled an irreversible shift — maintaining the status quo was no longer viable,” said Amer Sabaileh, a political analyst based in Jordan. “This marks a pivotal moment for Jordan. The relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood has fundamentally changed and will not return to its previous state.” Jordan, a key Western ally and perceived island of calm in a volatile region, borders Israel, the occupied West Bank, Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. It hosts hundreds of thousands of refugees and plays a vital geopolitical role. Founded nearly 100 years ago in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood has chapters across the globe. While its leaders assert that the movement renounced violence decades ago in favor of achieving Islamic governance through elections and peaceful advocacy, many governments across the Middle East view it as a destabilizing threat. With this latest move, Jordan appears to be joining the ranks of those countries that see no place for the Brotherhood in their political systems. Related Topic: Jordan Uncovers Muslim Brotherhood Cell Plotting Rocket and Drone Attacks Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Hill 2025-04-25

In a significant stride toward a quantum internet, scientists have successfully transmitted quantum information over 158 miles using ordinary computers and existing fiber-optic cables. This milestone marks the first time coherent quantum communication—an ultra-secure form of data transmission—has been achieved through conventional telecommunications infrastructure without the need for costly cryogenic cooling. “Our equipment was running alongside the fibers that we use for regular communication literally buried underneath the roads and train stations,” explained Mirko Pittaluga, a physicist and lead author of the study published in Nature. Pittaluga and his colleagues at Toshiba Europe achieved this breakthrough by integrating largely off-the-shelf components into a setup that allowed them to relay quantum messages between the German cities of Kehl and Frankfurt via a midpoint detector in Kirchfeld. This real-world configuration demonstrates that quantum communication no longer needs to be confined to laboratory conditions. “This is about as real-world as one could imagine,” remarked David Awschalom, a professor of physics and molecular engineering at the University of Chicago, who was not involved in the study. “It’s an impressive, quite beautiful demonstration.” Unlike traditional digital data, which travels as bits valued at 0 or 1, quantum information is transmitted in qubits. Qubits can represent multiple values simultaneously, providing a more secure channel for communication. The experiment's success points toward a future where secure quantum messaging could be deployed across metropolitan areas, benefiting industries such as banking, healthcare, and government. With quantum computers becoming increasingly powerful, traditional encryption methods are growing vulnerable. Sensitive online data—ranging from medical records to financial information—is currently protected by mathematical encryption keys. While these are tough for classical computers to break, quantum machines could eventually render them obsolete. “Anything meaningful that’s over the internet can be tapped, recorded and saved for the next decade, and can be decrypted years later,” warned Prem Kumar, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at Northwestern University. “It’s what’s called harvest now and decrypt later.” Quantum cryptography offers a solution by generating encryption keys based on the immutable laws of quantum physics rather than mathematical complexity. “The likelihood of them being able to reverse engineer a quantum key, which is the number you would need to decrypt your information, is vanishingly small,” Awschalom noted. The challenge has been distributing those keys over meaningful distances. Unlike classical information, which is sent as pulses of light containing millions of photons, quantum data is carried by single photons. Detecting these photons typically requires superconducting sensors cooled to temperatures below minus 454 degrees Fahrenheit—a method that is both costly and incompatible with today’s communication networks. Pittaluga’s team circumvented this limitation by employing avalanche photodiodes, inexpensive detectors that can operate at or near room temperature. These detectors had not previously been used for coherent quantum communication due to issues such as lower photon detection efficiency and susceptibility to afterpulsing—residual noise from earlier transmissions that distorts current readings. To combat this, the researchers deployed two sets of detectors: one to capture the signal and the other to filter out environmental noise. This innovative setup paved the way for a more affordable and scalable approach to quantum messaging. Pittaluga believes this development brings society a step closer to the realization of a quantum internet. “The goal of this setup is to bring us one step closer to a quantum internet, with incredibly secure information,” he said. Despite its promise, quantum communication still faces hurdles in cost and complexity when compared to traditional encryption systems. Yet optimism remains. “My personal view is that we’ll be seeing quantum encryption of data sets and metropolitan scale quantum networks within a decade,” said Awschalom. Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Washington Post 2025-04-25

Fetterman Rejects Diplomacy, Urges Trump Administration to Strike Iran’s Nuclear Sites Senator John Fetterman has made an unambiguous call for the Trump administration to abandon nuclear negotiations with Iran and instead launch a direct military strike on the country’s nuclear facilities. The Pennsylvania Democrat said, “Waste that s–t,” expressing his frustration with ongoing talks and his belief that military action is the only viable course. The Trump administration is currently preparing for a third round of negotiations with Iranian officials, aimed at dismantling Tehran’s nuclear program and averting a possible military conflict. Fetterman, however, dismissed the effort, stating, “You’re never going to be able to negotiate with that kind of regime that has been destabilizing the region for decades already, and now we have an incredible window, I believe, to do that, to strike and destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities.” Fetterman also disregarded warnings from foreign policy analysts, many of whom caution that a military strike could trigger widespread instability or even a regional war. “So-called experts” have been wrong before, he argued, citing past concerns about the capabilities of Iran’s proxy groups. “You know, they’ve been saying for years and years Hezbollah was the ultimate badass that kept Israel in check, and we can’t move on anything beyond that,” Fetterman said. He added that in his view, these groups were overrated militarily. “And Hamas, literally, are just a bunch of tunnel rats with junkie rockets in the back of a Toyota truck. And now the Houthis have been effectively neutered as well. So what’s left? You have Iran, and they have a nuclear facility, and it’s clearly only for weapons.” The senator’s remarks come as Special Presidential Envoy Steve Witkoff is trying to craft a diplomatic framework with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. The two sides are expected to meet Saturday in Oman—a country maintaining friendly ties with both the U.S. and Iran—following a week of indirect discussions that were reportedly cordial and productive. Despite some optimism from both American and Iranian officials about the potential for peaceful resolution, Fetterman remains adamant that negotiations are not the answer. “Years ago, I completely understood why Trump withdrew from the Obama deal,” he said. “Today, I can’t understand why Trump would negotiate with this diseased regime. The negotiations should be comprised of 30,000-pound bombs and the IDF.” Meanwhile, Israel is said to be considering its own limited military strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, which could require less involvement from the United States if carried out. While Trump officials continue to favor diplomacy, Fetterman’s comments highlight the growing divide among U.S. policymakers over how to confront Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Adpated by ASEAN Now from NYP 2025-04-25

Why Zelensky Won’t Bargain Away Crimea — No Matter the Pressure The fate of Crimea has surged back into the heart of global diplomacy, becoming a defining obstacle in former President Donald Trump’s emerging peace plan for Ukraine. As speculation grows that Trump’s strategy could involve officially recognizing Crimea as part of Russia, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has drawn an unambiguous red line: he will not, and cannot, concede the peninsula. Although the full details of Trump’s proposal remain under wraps, reports suggest that his plan includes U.S. recognition of Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, giving Moscow de jure — or legal — control over the region. “It was lost years ago,” Trump has reportedly said, brushing off the peninsula as “not even a part of discussion” in ongoing peace efforts. For Zelensky, however, Crimea is not a bargaining chip. It is an inseparable part of Ukraine — politically, constitutionally, and emotionally. The suggestion that the U.S. might legitimize Russia’s landgrab is more than just an affront to Ukrainian sovereignty; it’s a direct challenge to the very idea of international law. “There’s nothing to talk about here,” Zelensky declared. “This is against our constitution.” That constitution is crystal clear. Article 2 proclaims that Ukrainian sovereignty “extends throughout its entire territory” and that this territory is “indivisible and inviolable.” Any attempt to alter Ukraine’s borders must be approved by a national referendum, itself requiring the consent of Ukraine’s parliament. For Zelensky, who has repeatedly vowed to uphold the law of his nation, relinquishing Crimea would not only be unconstitutional — it would be unthinkable. He has also reminded the world that this stance isn’t new. In 2018, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued the “Crimea Declaration,” firmly rejecting Russia’s claim. Zelensky now points to that moment as evidence that the U.S. once stood solidly behind Ukraine on Crimea — and should continue to do so. For Kyiv, any reversal by Washington would represent a dangerous precedent: that force can be rewarded with legitimacy. Although it’s true, as Trump asserts, that Ukraine has little chance of regaining Crimea in the immediate future, acknowledging Russia’s claim legally would be a drastic and symbolic shift. The reality on the ground — the de facto control by Moscow — does not mean the world should accept it as lawful. In the early stages of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, negotiators in Istanbul floated the idea of “parking” the Crimea issue, leaving it unresolved for 10 to 15 years while focusing on more immediate matters. While that idea failed to gain traction, it reflected an international consensus that Crimea remains a thorny, long-term issue, not something to be solved hastily. In Washington, the Biden administration had chosen a path of strategic ambiguity. Officials had repeatedly dodged direct questions on whether the U.S. would support Ukraine’s efforts to militarily retake Crimea. The goal, according to analysts, may habe been to keep the pressure on Russia without completely slamming the door on future negotiations. “They may believed that there is value in holding Crimea at risk in order to put pressure on the Russians to come to the negotiating table,” said Chris Chivvis, a former U.S. national intelligence officer and current director of the American Statecraft Program at the Carnegie Endowment. “It’s possible that that’s driving their policy… Even if they don’t actually believe that it’s likely that Crimea will be returned to Ukraine militarily.” Still, that strategy was never enough for lawmakers pushing for a clearer stance. But for Zelensky, the matter is not one of geopolitical calculation — it’s about principle, law, and the identity of a nation that refuses to forget what was taken. As he sees it, Crimea is not lost — and never will be. Adpated by ASEAN Now from BBC | Hill 2025-04-25

A post with highly antisemitic slurs has been removed, @Somjot Topic: BBC Faces Backlash Over Use of Term ‘Revert’ in Islam Coverage

//Closed// Topic is already running here:

Longstanding Mistranslation Problem: The Consequences of Getting “Yahud” Wrong The BBC has long struggled with accuracy in its reporting on the Israel-Palestine conflict, but few issues illustrate this better than its repeated mistranslation of the Arabic word Yahud. Despite clear dictionary definitions and linguistic consensus that Yahud translates to “Jew,” the BBC has consistently rendered it as “Israeli” in its coverage. This seemingly minor word choice has significant consequences, both for journalistic integrity and public understanding. The controversy resurfaced most pointedly following the airing of Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone, a BBC documentary that came under fire for serious lapses in editorial standards. It was later revealed that one of the individuals featured was the son of a Hamas minister, and his family had received payment for his participation. Among the many concerns raised was the documentary’s treatment of the word Yahud, which was altered five times from “Jews” to “Israeli forces.” In one particular scene, a speaker expressed admiration for Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar and praised “jihad against the Jews.” The BBC translated this as “fighting Israeli forces.” Critics argue this substitution fundamentally misrepresents the speaker’s intent and diminishes the overtly racist nature of such statements. Anti-Semitism, some argue, was diluted to soften the portrayal of Palestinian interviewees and redirect attention toward Israel. “Anti-Semitism was ‘triaged’ by the broadcaster to make it more palatable and Palestinian interviewees more sympathetic,” reads one critique. This, critics say, obstructs an honest engagement with the genocidal ideology expressed by Hamas and its supporters, particularly in the context of the October 7 attacks, where victims were targeted not based on nationality, but religion. “When Hamas terrorists attacked families on October 7 their intention was not to kill Israelis. It was to kill Jews whether they were men, women, grandmothers or tiny babies.” Despite pledging to address the issue, the BBC has yet to reach a definitive conclusion two months after the documentary aired. The Arabic-English translation of Yahud is not ambiguous. Veteran Arab-Israeli journalist Khaled Abu Toameh stated, “When I speak to Palestinians and they say ‘Yahud’ I will write it in English as ‘Jew’. This is the accurate translation. If the BBC or any other media organisation are subtitling it as ‘Israeli’ they are misleading viewers.” This issue isn't new. As far back as 2013, a viewer raised concerns about the same mistranslation, only to be met with bureaucratic resistance. The corporation’s complaints system has too often been used not to seek truth or transparency, but to protect the BBC from criticism. As a result, a policy of mistranslation was effectively institutionalized, obscuring the racist intent of certain statements for more than a decade. This editorial failure points to deeper issues in the BBC’s reporting on Israel. Critics argue that the broadcaster has repeatedly minimized or ignored anti-Semitism when Jews are the targets. “Not for the first time did the BBC ignore racism because its target was Jewish people,” the critique continues, echoing frustration from many in the Jewish community who feel their concerns have been systematically disregarded. There is a growing consensus that if the BBC is to retain credibility on issues involving anti-Semitism and the Israel-Palestine conflict, it must start with something as fundamental as accurate translation. “Only a clear-cut translation as Jew can be accurate,” the piece concludes. The pressing question for BBC Director General Tim Davie remains: when it comes to language, who should we trust—professional translators and dictionaries, or the BBC’s own editorial discretion? Related Topics: BBC Doc Features Son Of Hamas Leader but Fails to Disclose to Viewers BBC Faces Backlash Over Use of Term ‘Revert’ in Islam Coverage BBC Faces More Serious Accusations of Bias in Gaza Hostage Release Coverage "Controversy Surrounds BBC Arabic's Coverage of Israel-Gaza Conflict" BBC uses account of journalist working for Iran-backed news agency in Gaza deaths article MPs demand inquiry Gaza doctors at centre of harrowing BBC report are Hamas supporters BBC criticized For failing To Disclose Affiliations of Palestinian Journalists Hamas Ties BBC Faces Backlash Over Terminology in Hamas Coverage BBC Chairman Calls For a Thorough Review of Israel-Hamas War Bias BBC Accused of Bias in Israel-Hamas Coverage: Over 1,500 Breaches of Guidelines Jeremy Bowen Defends BBC Amid Allegations of Bias Over Israel-Hamas Coverage New Report from former BBC Director Criticizes Coverage of Israel-Hamas Conflict Whistleblower Alleges Normalized Anti-Semitism at the BBC Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-04-24

UK to Launch Solar Dimming Experiments in Effort to Curb Climate Crisis The UK Government is preparing to approve a groundbreaking series of outdoor experiments aimed at dimming sunlight to slow global warming. Backed by £50 million in funding from Aria, the Government’s Advanced Research and Invention Agency, these experiments represent a significant step toward potentially deploying solar geoengineering to combat climate change. Within weeks, Aria is expected to unveil a range of funded projects exploring various sunlight reflection techniques. These may include injecting aerosols into the atmosphere or brightening clouds over the ocean to reflect more sunlight away from Earth. Such strategies fall under the umbrella of Sunlight Reflection Methods (SRM), which aim to prevent runaway climate change by artificially cooling the planet. Prof Mark Symes, programme director for Aria, confirmed the agency’s cautious yet determined approach. “We will be announcing who we have given funding to in a few weeks and when we do so we will be making clear when any outdoor experiments might be taking place,” he said. “One of the missing pieces in this debate was physical data from the real world. Models can only tell us so much.” Symes emphasized that safety and environmental responsibility are central to the planned trials. “Everything we do is going to be safe by design. We’re absolutely committed to responsible research, including responsible outdoor research,” he said. “We have strong requirements around the length of time experiments can run for and their reversibility and we won’t be funding the release of any toxic substances to the environment.” While solar geoengineering has long been a contentious topic, it is gaining traction as scientists grow increasingly alarmed that carbon dioxide reductions alone may not be enough to avert catastrophic climate shifts. Critics have voiced concerns that such interventions might produce unintended side effects and serve as a distraction from efforts to cut emissions. Nonetheless, many experts argue that further research is essential given the urgent nature of the climate crisis. One of the most discussed techniques is Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI), in which fine particles are released into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight. Another is Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB), which involves spraying sea salt particles into the air to increase the reflectivity of low-lying clouds. The science behind MCB is grounded in decades of atmospheric observation. Prof Jim Haywood, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Exeter, explained, “If you inject small particles into clouds you can brighten them hence reflecting more sunlight back out to space.” He added, “How do we know this could work? Well there are a couple of very strong pieces of evidence. Ship emissions from the smoke stack into the marine environment lead to bright lines in clouds over the ocean. Then there was a volcanic eruption in Iceland in 2014 which spilled out a lot of sulphur dioxide. What this does is it brightens clouds and cools the planet. What we need to do is some form of field experiments.” Beyond brightening clouds, researchers are also investigating the potential of altering cirrus clouds, which typically trap heat in the atmosphere. By thinning these wispy high-altitude clouds, scientists hope to allow more heat to escape into space. Dr Sebastian Eastham, senior lecturer in Sustainable Aviation at Imperial College London, noted, “Every time you fly, sulphur, which is naturally present in jet fuel, is emitted into the lower most stratosphere causing a small cooling effect. Similarly, aircraft contrails cause accidental cirrus cloud modification but in this case accidentally causing, rather than preventing or thinning, cirrus clouds. This points to the fact that it’s theoretically possible (to cool the planet) with current day technology but there are many practical questions that would need to be answered before they could be done at scale.” Alongside the outdoor experiments, Aria will also support modelling studies, lab-based tests, climate monitoring initiatives, and research into public perception of geoengineering. If successful, scientists hope these efforts could pave the way for scalable solutions within the next decade. Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-04-24

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has publicly altered his position on gender identity, confirming that he no longer believes trans women are women. The change comes in the wake of a significant Supreme Court ruling which stated that, for the purposes of the Equality Act, the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex. In 2022, Starmer had said to The Times, “A woman is a female adult, and in addition to that trans women are women, and that is not just my view — that is actually the law.” However, following the court’s recent clarification, Starmer has shifted his stance. His official spokesman, when asked directly if the Prime Minister still believed that a trans woman was a woman, replied: “No.” Starmer himself expressed satisfaction with the legal outcome. “I think the Supreme Court has answered that question,” he said when asked if he would still describe trans women as women. Speaking to ITV West Country, he reiterated, “A woman is an adult female, and the court has made that absolutely clear. I actually welcome the judgment because I think it gives real clarity. It allows those that have got to draw up guidance to be really clear about what that guidance should say. So I think it’s important that we see the judgment for what it is. It’s a welcome step forward. It’s real clarity in an area where we did need clarity — I’m pleased it’s come about. We need to … make sure that we now ensure that all guidance is in the right place according to that judgment.” The ruling has reignited a long-standing debate over gender identity and women’s rights within the Labour Party and across the UK political spectrum. Starmer has been repeatedly questioned about his views since becoming Labour leader, particularly as public concern over the implications for single-sex spaces has grown. In a 2023 interview with The Sunday Times, he remarked that for “99.9%” of women “of course they haven’t got a penis.” Later that year, on BBC Radio 5 Live, he said, “Firstly, a woman is an adult female, so let’s clear that one up.” In April 2024, he affirmed support for former Labour MP Rosie Duffield’s statement that “only women have a cervix,” telling ITV, “Biologically, she of course is right about that.” Bridget Phillipson, Minister for Women and Equalities and the current Education Secretary, also voiced support for the ruling while carefully navigating the issue of practical application. “That should be on the basis of biological sex. That would apply right across the board to all single-sex provision,” she said on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. She promised updated guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission to help organisations implement the ruling. Though Phillipson stopped short of explicitly stating that trans women should use male toilets, her comments indicated a shift in the government's stance. “Many businesses have moved towards unisex provision, or separate cubicles that can be used by anyone … going to your local café, a local family café, chances are you’ll have one cubicle that’s self-contained, that can be used by anyone,” she explained. Phillipson also reflected on her own experience managing a women’s refuge before becoming an MP. “I know more than most how important it is that women — especially those who have experienced male violence, sexual violence and trauma — are able to access safe, therapeutic spaces,” she said. “I think it is important and welcome that the Supreme Court have put beyond doubt that providers can make sure that’s done on the basis of biological sex, because I do believe it is important that when … women have experienced abuse, male violence, that they are able to heal.” In response to growing unrest from activists, some of whom vandalized statues in Parliament Square and carried threatening placards, Phillipson condemned the protests as “completely unacceptable.” Meanwhile, WhatsApp messages leaked over the weekend revealed that some senior Labour figures, including Dame Angela Eagle and Sir Chris Bryant, are critical of the ruling. Despite internal divisions, the Prime Minister’s spokesperson stated that all government departments, public institutions, and private entities must now comply with the court’s decision. “We’ve been clear: when it comes to sport, biology matters,” he added. Phillipson is expected to address Parliament soon to give MPs the opportunity to debate the implications of the Supreme Court judgment, which she acknowledged carries “far-reaching” consequences for everything from toilets and changing rooms to hospitals and rape crisis centres. Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-04-24

Trump’s Immigration Crackdown Leads to 655% Rise in Terrorist Arrests, Including India’s Most Wanted In a dramatic shift from previous immigration policy, the Trump administration has overseen a significant surge in the arrest of suspected terrorists within the United States. Since President Donald Trump’s inauguration on January 20, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has taken into custody 219 individuals identified as known or suspected terrorists. This marks a staggering 655% increase compared to the same period under former President Joe Biden’s administration, which saw just 29 similar arrests, according to newly obtained data from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Among those apprehended is Harpreet Singh, an Indian national listed as one of India’s “most wanted” fugitives. Singh, who is linked to a notorious Pakistan-based terrorist organization, Babbar Khalsa International (BKI), allegedly played a leading role in a grenade attack on a police station and the residence of a retired Punjab police officer. The attacks, according to DHS, were meant “to kill and instill fear among law enforcement officers.” Singh illegally entered the United States on January 27, 2022, by crossing the border from Mexico into Arizona. Despite being detained by Border Patrol agents, he was subsequently released into the country with a scheduled future court date. “The Biden administration not only let a wanted terrorist into our country, but after he was arrested by Border Patrol agents, they released him into the interior of our country,” said DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. “While shocking, it’s not surprising given the Biden administration routinely released unvetted terrorists and criminals into American communities,” she added. According to DHS, Singh has also been involved in violent extortion schemes and other threatening activities in India. Authorities there believe he has close ties to Harwinder Singh Rinda, a high-ranking figure within Babbar Khalsa International — a group the U.S. officially designated as a foreign terrorist organization in 2002. BKI, which originated in the late 1970s, has a long history of orchestrating assassinations, armed attacks, and bombings rooted in religious extremism. It remains unclear whether U.S. border officials were aware of Singh’s connections to terrorism when they released him in 2022. However, federal agents were eventually able to track him down in Sacramento, California, last week. “He had been evading capture by using untraceable burner phones and encrypted applications,” the FBI revealed in a statement regarding his arrest. With this latest arrest and the sharp increase in terrorism-related detentions, the Trump administration is vowing to stay aggressive in rooting out dangerous individuals within the U.S. “Under President Trump and Secretary Noem’s leadership, ICE is unleashed to remove these violent criminals from America’s streets and put an end to catch and release,” said McLaughlin. She emphasized that the administration remains committed to targeting terrorists “who have operated with impunity on American soil.” Adpated by ASEAN Now from The NYP 2025-04-24

Starmer Edges Toward Landmark EU Defence Deal Amid Fishing Concessions Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer is nearing a significant agreement with the European Union that would open the door for British defence companies to compete for a slice of the EU’s €150 billion defence fund. The move, designed to reset relations with Brussels, could prove a financial windfall for the UK’s arms industry—but it comes at a controversial cost to the nation’s fishing sector. The landmark deal is expected to be formally discussed during the UK-EU summit hosted by Starmer in London on May 19. In the lead-up to the event, British negotiators have reportedly made major concessions on fishing rights, a sticking point that has long hampered broader cooperation since Brexit. In return, the UK anticipates being included in the Security Action for Europe (Safe) fund, which finances purchases of ammunition, air defences, rocket launchers, and drones across the continent. Until now, British firms such as BAE Systems and Babcock have been excluded from bidding for Safe contracts, despite countries like Norway, Japan, and even Moldova being granted access. Their exclusion stemmed from the UK’s lack of a formal defence and security pact with the EU, and pressure from France and other member states to uphold a “Buy European” policy. President Emmanuel Macron has been vocal in promoting French defence exports, urging EU allies to favour homegrown systems like the Franco-Italian SAMP/T over American alternatives such as the Patriot or F-35. “Those who buy Patriot should be offered the new-generation Franco-Italian SAMP/T. Those who buy the F-35 should be offered the Rafale,” Macron said. However, amid increasing Anglo-French cooperation over Ukraine, there is growing optimism in Downing Street that a defence pact is imminent. “The mood music is good,” a British defence industry source commented. Starmer’s outreach includes talks with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store. Downing Street noted Starmer had “reiterated his iron-clad support for Ukraine” during these conversations. A spokesperson added that he and Store “agreed there can be no let-up in their support for Ukraine” and stressed the importance of “keeping up economic pressure on Russia to ensure that they engage seriously in talks.” On broader trade matters, Starmer emphasized “a cool and calm approach,” stating that “a trade war is in nobody’s interests.” The path to defence cooperation, however, has been smoothed by a notable shift on fishing rights. Despite initial resistance, British negotiators are believed to have accepted a multi-year fishing agreement, as opposed to annual negotiations. This compromise appeases France, which had linked the two issues, but has raised eyebrows in eastern Europe. “I think Kaja was speaking for all of us,” one British source said in reference to Estonian diplomat Kaja Kallas, who remarked, “I was surprised at how important the fish are.” Under the current deal, set to expire in 2026, European access to British waters was cut to 75% of pre-Brexit levels. Yet reports have shown much of the UK’s quota is controlled by foreign-owned vessels flying the British flag. In 2021, the BBC revealed that £160 million worth—55% of the total quota in 2019—was held by firms in Iceland, Spain, and the Netherlands. The National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations has criticized the arrangement as a “neocolonial relationship with the EU.” Now, Britain appears willing to lock in a new multi-year agreement with the EU, potentially freezing quotas rather than further reducing European access. Meanwhile, Starmer has also agreed to dynamic alignment with EU standards on food and carbon emissions, removing certain trade frictions at key ports and harmonizing with the Emissions Trading Scheme. “There is a maturity that was not there in the Brexit negotiations,” an EU diplomat observed. Cabinet Office Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds confirmed earlier that “having something that is more stable would be in our interests going forward.” Still unresolved is the question of youth mobility. Brussels is pushing for a scheme allowing 18 to 30-year-olds to temporarily live and work in the UK. While Home Secretary Yvette Cooper wants tight limits to avoid immigration spikes, Chancellor Rachel Reeves supports the idea, citing economic benefits. “The European Commission is confident there is a deal to be done,” said a European diplomat. A UK government spokesman added, “We have always been clear we will protect the interests of our fisheries,” while affirming the UK’s readiness to negotiate a comprehensive defence and security pact with the EU. Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-04-24

Before Harvard University emerged as a vocal opponent of the Trump administration’s demands, the prestigious institution had been quietly trying to broker a deal behind closed doors. While the university is now celebrated by some for standing firm against federal pressure, internal efforts to engage the administration were extensive—and not without controversy. Harvard’s transformation into a perceived bulwark against President Trump’s agenda began with an April 11 letter from the White House outlining demands that included reducing faculty influence and allowing government audits of university data. The Harvard Corporation, the school’s powerful and secretive governing board, declared those conditions untenable and broke off discussions. Days later, Harvard filed a lawsuit against the administration, challenging threats to cut billions in federal funding. div class="post-ads"> But that public defiance followed weeks of backchannel negotiations. Motivated in part by mounting pressure from major donors and the growing political influence of the Trump administration, Harvard had been scrambling to avoid a confrontation. The university even retained the same lawyer used by the firm Paul Weiss in its own dealings with Trump, signaling serious intent to reach a compromise. Dr. Alan Garber, Harvard’s president, sought multiple paths to the White House. According to people familiar with the matter, he contacted Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and a Harvard alumnus, to request help facilitating a meeting with the president. Kushner declined. Garber also turned to billionaire donor John Paulson, once considered for Treasury Secretary under Trump, asking for his assistance in arranging a meeting. That, too, never came to fruition. Despite Harvard’s eventual hardline stance, the internal debate was far from settled. Many prominent donors urged the university to resume talks with the White House. During a call last Thursday with Dr. Garber and Harvard Corporation’s senior fellow Penny Pritzker, several donors—including Paulson and hedge fund CEO William A. Ackman—encouraged negotiation over litigation. “Productive discussions” were needed, Paulson reportedly said. In a statement, Pritzker attempted to balance Harvard’s opposition to federal overreach with a nod to needed reform. “Harvard’s opposition to government overreach should not be seen as a lack of commitment to making the changes Harvard needs to make,” she said. “We remain firmly committed to our efforts to combat antisemitism and create a community that is strengthened by viewpoint diversity.” Some donors remained skeptical, especially in the wake of the 2023 crisis that led to the resignation of former president Claudine Gay. Wealthy contributors like Len Blavatnik, a Trump supporter, paused their giving and voiced their displeasure with the school’s response to antisemitism. While Blavatnik has since resumed some donations, his frustration reflects wider unease among Harvard’s elite backers. Former Harvard president and Treasury Secretary Larry Summers also expressed concern about the administration’s handling of campus antisemitism and the shifting national climate. Amid growing conservative criticism, Harvard made some concessions. The university announced the departure of the director of its Center for Middle Eastern Studies—a move long demanded by conservative voices who accused the center of fostering antisemitic rhetoric. Dr. Garber later acknowledged that the White House had raised valid concerns. “We agree with a lot of what is in the government’s letter,” he said during a recent donor call. Despite the university’s lawsuit and assertive public posture, his comments suggested an openness to recalibration. Harvard’s future approach remains uncertain, caught between preserving academic independence and maintaining critical federal funding. What’s clear is that before the university became a symbol of defiance, it first sought reconciliation—only to discover that the political and donor landscape left little room for quiet compromise. Adpated by ASEAN Now from New York Times 2025-04-24

Laser-Equipped US Spy Drone Unveiled as Game-Changer in Modern Warfare In a bold technological leap amid rising fears of a potential global conflict, a U.S. defense company has unveiled a revolutionary weapon: a drone-mounted laser capable of melting missiles mid-air. General Atomics introduced this first-of-its-kind defense system at the Sea Air Space 2025 event in National Harbor, Maryland, revealing its integration with the MQ-9B SkyGuardian — an advanced autonomous intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) drone. The laser currently operates at an output of 25 kilowatts, enough to neutralize or destroy small airborne threats, particularly swarms of low-cost, disposable drones. But General Atomics claims the system’s capabilities are far from capped. The technology could be scaled up to 300 kilowatts, allowing it to take down much larger and more dangerous targets such as cruise missiles and enemy aircraft by melting through critical structural components. This new laser system is designed for both pulsed and continuous operation, and is capable of functioning in all kinds of environmental conditions, making it versatile for modern battlefield demands. During the event, General Atomics showcased video footage of the MQ-9B laser targeting and neutralizing drones modeled after Iran’s Shahed 'kamikaze' drones — the same type of weapon used in recent global conflicts — as they approached a navy vessel. Beyond its futuristic appeal, the laser represents a significant cost-saving measure for the military. Traditionally, incoming drones or missiles are intercepted with expensive and non-reusable missiles. In contrast, laser beams are immune to direct destruction and can continue delivering damage as long as the drone’s power supply holds. “A laser beam can't be directly destroyed, and it will keep inflicting damage as long as it has power,” a company representative explained. However, the primary limitation remains the power supply. While the MQ-9B SkyGuardian can stay airborne for over 40 hours, the addition of a high-energy laser could reduce its operational endurance. General Atomics has not yet disclosed the extent of this reduction, leaving questions about sustained deployment in high-intensity combat zones. Nevertheless, this development is a milestone in the U.S. military’s pursuit of airborne high-energy laser (HEL) systems. The journey has not been smooth — the U.S. Air Force’s SHiELD program, once intended to shield aircraft from missile threats, was terminated in 2024 without producing a functional prototype or conducting any test flights. Despite this, the Air Force Research Lab maintained that the initiative had achieved “significant advances in the readiness of airborne HEL technology.” It's possible these advances contributed indirectly to General Atomics’ breakthrough, though the company emphasizes its system was developed independently. The timing of this innovation couldn't be more critical. Swarming drone attacks and kamikaze-style aerial strikes, like those witnessed in Ukraine and across the Middle East, have become increasingly frequent and affordable. Between August 1, 2024, and March 1, 2025, Ukraine recorded 15,011 Shahed-type drones launched by Russia, many aimed at civilian targets, according to the Institute for Science and International Security. Traditional missile-based defense mechanisms are proving too costly and sluggish to address the growing tide of small, fast-moving aerial threats. A laser-equipped drone like the MQ-9B could offer a much-needed solution — rapid, accurate, and economically sustainable. As the global security landscape grows ever more volatile, innovations like this may very well redefine how nations defend themselves in the skies. Adpated by ASEAN Now from Daily Mail 2025-04-24

Trump Blames Zelensky’s Stance for Stalling Ukraine Peace Talks Former U.S. President Donald Trump has sharply criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, claiming that Zelensky’s recent remarks about Crimea are damaging the prospects for peace in Ukraine. Trump’s comments came after Zelensky made it clear that Kyiv would never recognize Russia’s control over Crimea, the territory illegally annexed by Moscow in 2014. During a press conference on Tuesday, Zelensky reaffirmed his government's uncompromising position, saying, “There’s nothing to talk about here. This is against our constitution,” in reference to any potential recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea. The firm stance was quickly met with disapproval from Trump, who took to his social media platform Truth Social to voice his concerns. “This statement is very harmful to the peace negotiations with Russia,” Trump said, warning that such language would only prolong the ongoing bloodshed. He added, “It’s inflammatory statements like Zelensky’s that makes it so difficult to settle this war.” JD Vance: “The Ukrainians and the Russians are both gonna have to give up some of the territories they currently own…the only way for the killing to stop is that both armies put down their weapons.”

Tentative Signals of Peace as Putin Opens Door to Talks Amid Renewed Strikes In a rare shift in tone, Russian President Vladimir Putin has indicated a potential openness to direct negotiations with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, marking the first such signal since the early days of the full-scale invasion that began in February 2022. Despite this overture, Russia continued a series of deadly strikes across Ukraine just hours after Putin’s remarks, casting doubt on the sincerity or viability of renewed diplomatic efforts. In an interview broadcast by Russian state television on Monday, Putin said, “We have always looked positively on any peace initiatives. We hope that representatives of the Kyiv regime will feel the same way.” His comments appeared to reference Ukraine's recent appeal for a temporary truce and its ongoing call to avoid targeting civilians. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov later clarified the Russian leader’s position, suggesting that Putin’s statement reflected a readiness to engage in direct talks with Ukraine specifically about limiting or ending strikes on civilian areas. “When the president said that it was possible to discuss the issue of not striking civilian targets, including bilaterally, the president had in mind negotiations and discussions with the Ukrainian side,” Peskov told Interfax news agency. However, any optimism generated by Putin's comments was quickly undercut by a new wave of Russian attacks across multiple Ukrainian regions on Tuesday. In the southern city of Zaporizhzhia, a missile strike on a residential apartment building left one woman dead and injured at least 20 others, including four children. Farther east, in Kharkiv, local officials reported that a daytime drone assault wounded seven people. Additional strikes were confirmed in Odesa, Sumy, Donetsk, and Kherson. A Monday night attack on a five-storey apartment block in Odesa left three people injured, according to local media. President Zelensky condemned the surge of violence, calling it “deliberate Russian terror” and asserting that it could be halted “by a single order.” In his nightly video address, Zelensky stressed that Ukraine had proposed to prolong a ceasefire observed briefly during Easter, when no Russian airstrikes were reported. “This was proven by the short-lived Easter truce on Saturday, when there were no airstrikes in Ukraine,” he wrote on Telegram. He reiterated a proposal, first introduced over the weekend, calling for a 30-day cessation of strikes using long-range drones and missiles on civilian infrastructure. “If Russia does not agree to such a step, it will be proof that it wants to continue doing only things that destroy people’s lives and continue the war,” Zelensky stated. There have been no official direct talks between Russia and Ukraine since the early weeks of the war. Whether Putin’s latest remarks represent a genuine turning point or are merely rhetorical remains to be seen. For now, the ongoing strikes continue to blur the line between diplomatic possibility and the grim realities of a war with no clear end. Adpated by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-04-24

Abbas Condemns Hamas in Blistering Speech, Demands Hostage Release and Gaza Control In a rare and explosive outburst, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas harshly condemned Hamas, calling its members "sons of dogs" and demanding they release all hostages, disarm, and relinquish control of Gaza to the Palestinian Authority. The remarks came during a heated address to the Palestinian Central Council in Ramallah, marking Abbas’s strongest public denunciation of Hamas since the start of the Gaza war 18 months ago. New Topic Here.

Abbas Condemns Hamas in Blistering Speech, Demands Hostage Release and Gaza Control In a rare and explosive outburst, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas harshly condemned Hamas, calling its members "sons of dogs" and demanding they release all hostages, disarm, and relinquish control of Gaza to the Palestinian Authority. The remarks came during a heated address to the Palestinian Central Council in Ramallah, marking Abbas’s strongest public denunciation of Hamas since the start of the Gaza war 18 months ago. "Hamas has given the criminal occupation [Israel] excuses to commit its crimes in the Gaza Strip, the most prominent being the holding of hostages," Abbas said. “Sons of dogs, just release whoever you're holding and be done with it. Shut down their excuses and spare us.” The Palestinian president’s speech reflects growing frustration within the Palestinian Authority as the war continues to devastate Gaza and diplomatic efforts to end the conflict repeatedly falter. Abbas insisted Hamas must “hand over” responsibility for Gaza, including its arsenal, and transform itself into a political party. He argued that Hamas’s ongoing military control of the territory has prolonged the war and increased Palestinian suffering. Last week, the group rejected an Israeli proposal for a new ceasefire in Gaza, which included a demand to disarm in return for a six-week pause in hostilities and the release of 10 of the 59 remaining hostages. The PA, based in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, has consistently said it is prepared to assume leadership in Gaza once hostilities end. However, many Palestinians have criticized the PA for its perceived passivity and lack of tangible support for Gaza’s population during the conflict. Bassem Naim, a senior member of Hamas, responded with disapproval to Abbas's comments, saying the Palestinian leader had insulted "a significant and integral part of his own people." Naim's remarks were reported by AFP news agency. Meanwhile, Hamas released a video on Wednesday showing Omri Miran, a 48-year-old Israel-Hungarian hostage, held in what appeared to be an underground tunnel. The video’s release came on the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day in Israel, further intensifying emotions surrounding the conflict. Israel has continued its offensive in Gaza, citing Hamas’s refusal to release hostages and disarm as justification. After cutting off all aid and commercial shipments into Gaza on March 2, Israel resumed military operations two weeks later, saying the pressure was intended to force Hamas’s hand. In a joint statement, the foreign ministers of the United Kingdom, France, and Germany urged Israel to end the blockade, describing the situation as "intolerable." Israel’s foreign ministry swiftly rejected those criticisms, stating, “There is no shortage of aid in Gaza,” and pointing to the 25,000 aid trucks that had entered the territory during the previous two-month ceasefire. “Israel is fighting Hamas, which steals humanitarian aid, uses it to rebuild its war machine, and hides behind civilians,” the statement read. “Hamas started this war, and Hamas is responsible for its continuation and for the suffering of both Palestinians and Israelis. The war can end tomorrow if the hostages are released and Hamas lays down its weapons.” As international pressure mounts and divisions among Palestinian leadership grow more public, the path to ending the Gaza war remains fraught with challenges, mistrust, and high stakes for all involved. Adpated by ASEAN Now from BBC | AFP 2025-04-24

@Jeff the Chef a way off topic article has been removed along with reponses to it. No further attempts to hijack the topic please Israel Vows to Keep Troops in Security Zones Across Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria

Off topic denial claims about Hitler and his intentions have been removed @Cameroni

Boise to Host “Heterosexual Awesomeness Fest” During Pride Month, Stirring National Debate As LGBTQ+ Pride Month approaches, a new and controversial event is drawing national attention. A group called Hetero Awesome has announced plans to host the “Heterosexual Awesomeness Fest” in downtown Boise, Idaho, on June 20 and 21, 2025. The timing—during a month traditionally dedicated to honoring LGBTQ+ history and rights—has ignited discussion across the country. According to a press release, the two-day festival will include “live music, food trucks, kid-friendly chaos, and hard-hitting talks.” On its website, the group emphasizes a strong ideological stance, stating, “This ain't your limp-wristed woke fest; it's a full-on celebration of family values with guts.” Although few logistical details or partnerships have been confirmed, organizers appear committed to making a cultural and political statement during a period that has come to symbolize the fight for LGBTQ+ rights. The choice to hold the event in June is significant. Pride Month honors the Stonewall Inn riots of 1969, a pivotal moment in the LGBTQ+ rights movement. It is a time when parades, festivals, and events are held nationwide to celebrate identity and push back against discrimination. GLAAD, an LGBTQ+ media advocacy organization, recently reported that in 2024 there were an average of 2.5 anti-LGBTQ+ incidents per day, a rise attributed to the wave of new legislation targeting LGBTQ+ rights across several states. Supporters of Pride Month argue that straight pride events are unnecessary, since heterosexual individuals do not face systemic discrimination based on their sexual orientation. “Pride exists because LGBTQ+ people have had to fight to be seen, heard, and treated equally,” said one advocate responding to the announcement online. “This sort of event completely misses the point.” Critics of Pride, however, argue that the celebrations are exclusionary or politically driven. In recent years, companies like Bud Light and Target have faced backlash from conservative groups for participating in Pride Month campaigns. The announcement of a festival specifically for heterosexual pride echoes similar controversies seen in other parts of the country, though such events have often met with both protests and limited turnout. Hetero Awesome describes its mission as aiming to “expose the anti-family agendas tearing at society’s core, arm the masses with clarity, and rally the brave to stand tall. No grift, no fancy cars, no padded pockets—just pure, unfiltered truth.” At present, it is unclear whether counter-protests or demonstrations are being planned in response to the Boise event. Notably, Boise’s official Pride festival is not held in June but rather in September, meaning the Heterosexual Awesomeness Fest will not overlap with it directly. Still, the proximity to national Pride Month lends the event an undeniably provocative edge, one that is likely to continue fueling debate about free speech, inclusion, and the current cultural divide in the United States. As Pride Month kicks off on June 1, 2025, the spotlight on LGBTQ+ rights—and the challenges facing the community—will remain sharp. Whether the Hetero Awesome event will gain traction or fizzle out remains to be seen, but the conversations it has sparked are unlikely to fade anytime soon. Adpated by ASEAN Now from Newsweek 2025-04-23