博客

  • Looksmaxxing influencer Clavicular charged over alleged alligator shooting

    Looksmaxxing influencer Clavicular charged over alleged alligator shooting

    A prominent 20-year-old social media influencer known to millions of followers as Clavicular has been hit with criminal charges tied to an alleged alligator shooting captured live on camera in Florida’s Everglades, adding to a growing list of legal troubles for the creator behind the extreme ‘looksmaxxing’ trend.

    Braden Eric Peters, the creator’s legal name, faces a charge of unlawful firearm discharge at a protected wildlife sanctuary, stemming from the 26 March incident. Two additional co-defendants have also been charged in connection with the event, according to records from Miami-Dade County courts.

    Court filings outline that the alleged incident was broadcast live to Peters’ online audience, with footage showing multiple rounds fired from an airboat into the swamp waters of the Everglades Wildlife Management Area, located west of Miami. Shortly after the stream went live, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission confirmed it had launched an investigation into circulating footage showing individuals aboard an airboat firing at an alligator within the protected ecosystem. Neither the commission’s public statement nor court documents have explicitly confirmed that the video in question is Peters’, nor have they confirmed whether an alligator was injured or killed during the incident.

    The BBC reached out to Peters’ legal team for additional comment on the charges, while multiple U.S. media outlets have published a statement from his attorneys claiming Peters was acting on the direct instructions of a licensed airboat guide during the excursion, and that no people or animals were harmed over the course of the incident. Charges were formally filed against Peters and his two co-defendants just three days after the incident, on 29 March.

    Under Florida state law, the charge of unlawful firearm discharge in a public protected area carries a maximum penalty of up to one year in county jail and a $1,000 fine. This is not the first legal run-in for Peters this year: he was arrested separately in South Florida earlier in March on battery charges, accused of inciting a physical fight between two women via social media before posting footage of the altercation to his own channels.

    Peters has built a massive online following across major platforms including TikTok, Instagram, and streaming site Kick, where his extreme ‘looksmaxxing’ content—content focused on drastic, often dangerous measures to alter and improve physical appearance—regularly earns millions of views. His brand of extreme looksmaxxing, which he calls ‘hardmaxxing’, has included documented use of anabolic steroids and testosterone, as well as the dangerous practice of striking his own face with a hammer to reshape his jawline. Medical experts have repeatedly spoken out against this extreme form of looksmaxxing, warning that it causes permanent physical damage and has no credible scientific evidence to back up its claimed cosmetic benefits.

    Following the earlier battery charges, video platform YouTube terminated two of Peters’ channels on its site, cutting off one major source of his audience reach. Most recently, just last month, Peters was rushed to a local hospital after he collapsed during a live stream from a Miami nightclub, adding another high-profile incident to the string of controversies surrounding the influencer.

  • China has played key role in Iran war and will continue to do so

    China has played key role in Iran war and will continue to do so

    Just days after announcing “Project Freedom”—a U.S. military initiative designed to reestablish safe commercial navigation through the strategically critical Strait of Hormuz—former U.S. President Donald Trump announced a halt to the operation. In a social media statement, Trump explained the pause was intended to create space for U.S. diplomatic teams to negotiate a conflict-ending agreement with Iran.

    Iran’s state-run media quickly framed the suspension of the U.S. mission as a clear setback for Washington. This development comes on the heels of repeated Iranian threats to target any commercial or military vessels attempting to transit the waterway, followed by a series of missile and drone strikes against civilian commercial ships and targets in the United Arab Emirates. Today, the future trajectory of the conflict remains deeply uncertain, but one factor is widely agreed upon by global observers: China will play a decisive role in any eventual outcome.

    Over the opening two months of the ongoing conflict, China has served as the primary pillar sustaining Iran’s struggling economy. Even before the outbreak of hostilities, China absorbed as much as 90% of Iran’s total crude oil exports, purchasing more than one million barrels of Iranian oil daily. That steady flow of crude continued uninterrupted in the conflict’s early stages: CNBC data confirms that at least 11.7 million barrels of Iranian oil were shipped to Chinese buyers between February 28 and March 10.

    To bypass harsh U.S.-led Western sanctions that block Iran from accessing the U.S.-dominated SWIFT global payment network, payments for Iranian crude are processed through Chinese financial infrastructure, including Bank of Kunlun and China’s Cross-border Interbank Payment System (CIPS). These platforms allow for oil trade transactions to be settled in Chinese yuan, effectively keeping Iranian oil revenues beyond the reach of the U.S. Treasury Department and enabling Tehran to continue earning critical foreign currency despite international pressure.

    While the volume of Iranian oil flowing to China has declined since mid-April, when the U.S. enforced a naval blockade around Iranian export ports, China still maintains a limited but critical revenue lifeline for the Iranian government moving forward. On May 2, China’s Ministry of Commerce issued an official order directing Chinese companies not to comply with newly imposed U.S. sanctions targeting five Chinese refiners linked to the Iranian oil trade. This ruling allows these refiners to continue processing Iranian crude that arrives via overland rail routes or that was already stored in facilities outside the U.S. blockade zone. As of April 21, industry estimates indicate roughly 160 million barrels of Iranian crude were already in transit or held in floating storage at sea, much of it bound for Chinese markets.

    China’s sustained economic support for Iran has emerged as a major new point of diplomatic friction between Washington and Beijing, just ahead of a scheduled high-stakes summit between Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping. During a May 4 interview with Fox News, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent characterized China’s continued purchases of Iranian oil as equivalent to “funding global terrorism.”

    Despite rising U.S. criticism, China’s outsized economic influence over Iran also grants Beijing significant diplomatic leverage over Tehran, and available evidence suggests a negotiated end to the conflict aligns with China’s core strategic interests. Global energy price spikes triggered by the Hormuz disruption have already started to put downward pressure on China’s domestic economy, and brokering a peaceful resolution would also bolster Beijing’s goal of positioning itself as a responsible global power on the international stage.

    China has already played a substantial behind-the-scenes diplomatic role in de-escalating tensions. While Pakistan has served as an official public mediator between the U.S. and Iran, many independent analysts credit China as the primary driving force behind the temporary ceasefire reached in April. During that period, Iranian officials confirmed that China had publicly called on Tehran to demonstrate flexibility and work to reduce confrontational tensions.

    Beijing has continued its diplomatic push for negotiations in the weeks following the ceasefire. Mere hours after Trump announced the pause on Project Freedom, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi traveled to Beijing for talks with his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi—marking the first visit by Iran’s top diplomat to China since the conflict began. In an official statement released after the May 6 meeting, China’s foreign ministry reiterated that “a complete cessation of fighting must be achieved without delay … and that continuing to negotiate remains essential.” For his part, Araghchi confirmed Iran would defend its “legitimate rights and interests in the negotiations” while signaling openness to “accept a fair and comprehensive agreement.”

    At the same time, there are clear signs that China is hedging its strategic bets to account for multiple possible outcomes. A prolonged, draining conflict that ties down substantial U.S. military resources in the Middle East offers clear strategic benefits for China, most notably by diverting Washington’s attention and military assets away from the Asia-Pacific region. U.S. intelligence assessments indicate Beijing has actively considered providing direct military support to Iran if open hostilities resume. Multiple outlets, including CNN, reported in April that China has weighed transferring shoulder-fired anti-air missiles (Manpads) to Iran, potentially routing shipments through third countries to obscure Beijing’s direct involvement. China has repeatedly denied these claims, stating it “has never provided weapons to any party to the conflict.”

    Beyond potential arms transfers, Chinese technical assistance has already improved the operational capacity of Iran’s military since the conflict began. Since 2021, Iran has gradually integrated China’s BeiDou satellite navigation system, an alternative to the U.S.-run Global Positioning System (GPS). BeiDou has assisted in guiding Iranian missile strikes during the conflict and enabled more consistent monitoring of U.S. military deployments across the region.

    From the conflict’s opening weeks to the current diplomatic impasse, China has shaped the trajectory of hostilities in meaningful ways. Given its unique combination of economic, diplomatic and limited military influence over Iran, Beijing will remain a core determinant of whether the crisis moves toward a lasting negotiated settlement or reignites into open, large-scale conflict.

  • South Korean court reduces prison sentence for ex-prime minister in martial law case

    South Korean court reduces prison sentence for ex-prime minister in martial law case

    In a high-stakes legal ruling that caps another chapter of South Korea’s post-2024 political upheaval, the Seoul High Court has slashed the prison sentence of former prime minister Han Duck-soo, a key figure in ex-President Yoon Suk Yeol’s failed December 2024 martial law declaration that ultimately toppled Yoon’s administration.

    Han, a 76-year-old veteran career bureaucrat hand-picked by Yoon, originally received a 23-year prison term from a lower Seoul district court in January over his conviction on rebellion charges tied to the unconstitutional power grab. Yoon himself was sentenced to life in prison on the same rebellion charges just one month after Han’s initial conviction.

    Handing down its decision Thursday, the appellate court upheld nearly all of the guilty verdicts against Han, but adjusted his total sentence to 15 years behind bars. The ruling reaffirmed all core charges against the former prime minister, including that he took intentional steps to lend an air of legitimacy to Yoon’s illegal martial law decree by securing the measure’s endorsement at a formal Cabinet meeting. The court also upheld findings that Han participated in discussions to cut water and electricity access to major South Korean media outlets, falsified official documents related to the martial proclamation, ordered the original document destroyed, and committed perjury during investigation proceedings.

    In its ruling statement, the Seoul High Court emphasized the extreme severity of Han’s offenses, noting that as the second-highest ranking official in the Yoon administration, he betrayed the enormous public trust placed in his position and actively collaborated in the rebellion against South Korea’s constitutional order.

    Park SungBae, a prominent South Korean criminal law specialist, noted that both the lower district court and the appellate court have consistently framed Han’s crimes as exceptionally serious. Park explained that the revised 15-year sentence aligns with the broader sentencing pattern for other senior officials convicted in connection with the martial law plot: for example, Yoon’s former Interior Minister Lee Sang-min received a seven-year prison term for his role, a benchmark the appellate court likely considered when adjusting Han’s sentence.

    Park added that the special prosecutor handling the case actually requested a 15-year sentence for Han during the original trial at Seoul Central District Court. While the 23-year initial sentence handed down by the lower court was harsher than many legal observers anticipated, it still fell within the standard sentencing range for the gravity of Han’s crimes, Park noted.

    Both legal teams for Han and the office of the special prosecutor now have a seven-day window to file a further appeal to South Korea’s Supreme Court, the nation’s highest judicial body.

    A seasoned public servant with a four-decade career in government, Han has held the post of prime minister twice: first under liberal President Roh Moo-hyun from 2007 to 2008, and again under conservative Yoon starting in 2022. After Yoon was suspended from office following his martial law attempt, Han served as one of three interim caretaker leaders before the formal impeachment process concluded.

    The chain of events triggered by Yoon’s martial law declaration ultimately ended in his removal from power: South Korea’s National Assembly impeached Yoon, and the Constitutional Court formally ordered his permanent removal from office in April 2025. Liberal opposition leader Lee Jae Myung won a subsequent snap presidential election to succeed Yoon as the country’s head of state.

  • Australian schools, universities left scrambling after personal data of students compromised in massive breach

    Australian schools, universities left scrambling after personal data of students compromised in massive breach

    A massive global cybersecurity incident targeting U.S.-based education technology provider Instructure has sent shockwaves through Australia’s education sector, leaving schools, universities and regulatory bodies scrambling to assess damage and mitigate risks to students and staff.

    Instructure, the multinational firm behind widely used education platforms including Canvas and Queensland’s state government-run QLearn, confirmed last week that it had suffered a data breach that allowed unauthorized actors to access user information. Hackers have claimed they obtained sensitive data tied to more than 200 million users across over 9,000 educational institutions worldwide, with Australian users counting among those impacted.

    Queensland’s Education Minister John-Paul Langbroek released a public statement Thursday confirming that any student or staff member who has interacted with state-run Queensland schools via the QLearn online platform since 2020—when the system was rolled out by the previous state government—is potentially affected. As of initial assessments, compromised information is limited to names, email addresses, and affiliated school locations. Langbroek emphasized that investigators have not found any evidence that passwords, dates of birth, or financial records have been accessed by the bad actors behind the breach.

    The incident has triggered urgent concern among Australian education and safety officials, particularly for high-vulnerability groups. Priority support is being directed to families and educators who are registered with child safety authorities, as well as those currently experiencing family or domestic violence, whose exposed locations and contact details could put them at heightened risk. School principals across Queensland are currently contacting affected families and staff directly to inform them of the incident and available support.

    While the full scope of impact across Australia remains unclear, Queensland is far from the only region affected. Instructure’s other major platform Canvas, a learning management system adopted by most Australian tertiary institutions, has also confirmed potential data exposures. Flinders University in South Australia, the University of Melbourne, and Tasmania’s Technical and Further Education (TAFE) institution have all publicly confirmed that they received notifications from Instructure about unauthorized third-party access to data held on their Canvas systems. A Flinders University spokesperson told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that staff and student data hosted on the platform “may have been impacted.”

    Instructure has responded publicly to the incident, claiming that the breach has already been contained. In a final status update posted to its website Wednesday, the company stated that all Canvas systems remain fully operational, and no ongoing unauthorized activity has been detected on its networks. In an earlier statement from Chief Information Security Officer Steve Proud, the company reiterated that while investigations are ongoing, only limited identifying information has been exposed, with no evidence that sensitive data such as government IDs, passwords or financial details was accessed. The company has not yet issued additional comment responding to specific questions about the scope of impact in Australia.

  • Iran will control Strait of Hormuz ‘forever’, former senior US official says

    Iran will control Strait of Hormuz ‘forever’, former senior US official says

    On Tuesday, a former high-ranking US official made a stark prediction about long-term control of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, arguing that Iran will retain dominance of the critical waterway indefinitely—no matter what provisions any eventual US-Iran peace deal includes. This outlook, he says, is already pushing vulnerable Gulf Arab states to accelerate the construction of alternative oil and gas export infrastructure to escape Iran’s strategic chokehold over the world’s most important energy chokepoint.

    Amos Hochstein, who served as a senior energy and Middle East policy advisor to former US President Joe Biden, laid out his assessment in an interview with Bloomberg. When asked about ongoing negotiations between the Trump administration and Iran aimed at ending the ongoing US-Israeli military campaign against the Islamic Republic, Hochstein left little room for ambiguity: “The Strait of Hormuz is under Iranian control forever — basically for the foreseeable future. Nobody in the market should look at what the deal says eventually and believe it on [the] straits. Iran will control the straits.”

    Hochstein noted that while political leaders in Washington may accept any language about reopening the strait in a final agreement, regional Gulf states understand full well that Iran will hold de facto power over access to the waterway moving forward. “Everybody in Washington will believe it. Nobody in the Gulf,” he said. “They know the Iranians are now going to control this.”

    The strategic waterway has emerged as the central sticking point in the current US-Iran peace negotiations, with both sides imposing blockades to assert territorial and military control. Iran has been blocked from moving its own oil tankers out of the Strait of Hormuz and the adjacent Gulf of Oman, but Tehran has in turn blocked exports from neighboring Gulf Arab states through the waterway. Tensions have escalated sharply in recent days: earlier this week, Iran announced it had struck a US warship that attempted to breach its blockade, and also launched drone and missile attacks targeting the United Arab Emirates, in what was widely interpreted as a response to US naval activity in the region.

    Following the Trump administration’s rejection of an Iranian proposal to reopen the strait in exchange for a ceasefire and a delay to negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, Iran confirmed Wednesday it is reviewing a new peace proposal put forward by the US. For his part, Trump said Wednesday he believes a final agreement with Iran is “very possible,” but issued a blunt threat to resume large-scale bombardment of the country if talks collapse, adding that the US will only accept nothing less than Iran’s “surrender.”

    Against this backdrop of uncertainty, Hochstein says Gulf states have already begun moving forward to build new pipeline infrastructure that bypasses the Strait entirely. Smaller Gulf nations including Kuwait and Bahrain have been completely cut off from their traditional export routes through the waterway, and Qatar’s liquefied natural gas exports have been brought to a complete halt, forcing the country to extend force majeure on LNG shipments through June.

    Larger regional players that already had partial bypass infrastructure in place have fared far better. Saudi Arabia, for example, continues to export roughly five million barrels of crude per day via its East-West Pipeline, which moves oil from Gulf production fields to the Red Sea for export. The UAE operates a pipeline to the Indian Ocean port of Fujairah, allowing it to maintain exports at roughly half of pre-war levels. Iraq, another major oil exporter heavily reliant on the Strait, is also rushing to develop alternative routes: this week, Baghdad launched its first crude oil exports via the al-Yarubiya-Rabia border crossing with Syria, with 70 tanker trucks carrying crude north for export out of Mediterranean ports. Iraq is also working to expand the capacity of an existing oil pipeline running north to Turkey to boost alternative exports.

    Far from being a prohibitive investment, Hochstein argued that the cost of new bypass infrastructure is relatively modest given the scale of energy exports from the region: “It’s not even that expensive. A few billion dollars. But a few billion dollars in what we’re talking about doesn’t cost very much.”

    Beyond the geopolitical shift, the disruption to Strait of Hormuz shipping has already created massive dislocations in global energy pricing, with huge gaps between benchmark futures prices and the actual physical cost of crude. Hochstein pointed out that benchmark prices quoted on global markets do not reflect actual trading costs, noting: “$110 of Brent oil is only available on a Bloomberg terminal. You can’t buy that barrel. That barrel of Brent oil is selling for $150. $145 some days, $155, even $170.”

    This discrepancy is not new: HSBC CEO Georges Elhedery noted last month that extreme price disparities exist across different markets, with the most severe impacts hitting energy-importing low-income nations with no domestic oil production. Elhedery reported that spot crude prices have reached as high as $286 per barrel in Sri Lanka. Hochstein warned that this supply shortage will not stay confined to vulnerable low-income countries: “We have physical shortage already, but it’s just in countries we don’t care about. But then it will go to middle-income countries, like Vietnam and Thailand, then it goes to Japan and Korea, and then it comes here.”

  • Russia is ramping up its attempts to kill opponents in Europe, intelligence officials say

    Russia is ramping up its attempts to kill opponents in Europe, intelligence officials say

    For Russian opposition activist Vladimir Osechkin, even routine daily tasks like dropping his children at school or picking up groceries require a call to local law enforcement. Since 2022, he has lived under constant French police protection after authorities concluded the Kremlin was plotting to kill him, and new unsealed court documents obtained exclusively by the Associated Press reveal how close that plot came to execution.

    In April 2025, a four-man team of Russian nationals staked out Osechkin’s home in the southwestern French seaside resort of Biarritz for hours, capturing detailed photos and video of the property as pre-operational surveillance for a planned assassination, the documents confirm. This is not an isolated incident: Osechkin recalls years earlier, a telltale red dot, consistent with a firearm’s laser sight, appeared on the interior wall of his residence, an early warning of the danger closing in.

    Osechkin’s case is just one thread in a far broader pattern of targeted violence and plots stretching across the European continent. Over the past two years alone, European security officials have disrupted multiple planned attacks: Lithuanian authorities foiled two separate assassination plots last year targeting a pro-Ukraine Lithuanian citizen and a Russian opposition activist; German security services broke up two plots, one aimed at the chief executive of a German arms manufacturer supplying Kyiv and another targeting a senior Ukrainian military official; Polish authorities arrested a suspect in 2024 over a plan to assassinate Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a visit to the country; and that same year, a defected Russian helicopter pilot was shot and killed in Spain, with Russian intelligence operatives identified as the prime suspects.

    Three senior Western intelligence officials from separate countries confirmed to AP that what was once a sporadic program to eliminate Kremlin opponents abroad has exploded into a systematic, widely expanded campaign of targeted killings following Vladimir Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence matters, all three officials agreed that Russian security services have grown dramatically bolder in their selection of targets, expanding beyond the traditional list of defectors and double agents to include opposition activists, independent regional campaigners, and even foreign citizens who openly support Ukraine’s war effort. One senior European intelligence official stressed that the campaign is not random: “There is political authorization.”

    Intelligence analysts, senior counterterrorism officials, and Lithuanian prosecutors link this stepped-up campaign to Russia’s broader asymmetric war against European nations that back Ukraine. Since the invasion began, AP has mapped more than 191 confirmed acts of sabotage, arson, and disruptive attacks across Europe that Western officials attribute to Russian actors. In most of these incidents, Russian intelligence relies on low-cost local proxies rather than deploying its own trained officers — a model Moscow has now adapted for its assassination campaign, according to court documents and official briefings.

    When contacted by AP for comment on the reports, Putin’s spokesperson Dmitry Peskov declined to comment, saying he saw “no need” to address the claims. Russian officials have consistently denied any involvement in targeted killings of opponents abroad.

    Digging into the details of the plot against Osechkin, court records show three of the four detained suspects traveled to Biarritz specifically to surveil the activist, with the explicit goal of killing Osechkin to intimidate all anti-Kremlin opponents residing in France. All four suspects were born in Russia’s Dagestan region; one has a long record of violent criminal convictions, while another told investigators he fled Russia after being arrested by the Federal Security Service (FSB) to avoid being forcibly conscripted and deployed to fight in Ukraine. Osechkin, who founded a prominent human rights organization focused on exposing abuse in Russia’s prison system, said threats against him escalated sharply after he expanded his work to document Russian war crimes in Ukraine and help Russian soldiers defect to avoid combat. He relocated to France in 2015 and entered police protection in 2022 after intelligence confirmed his life was in immediate danger. “If it weren’t for them, I probably would have been killed,” Osechkin told AP.

    Half a continent away in Lithuania, another target, Ruslan Gabbasov, an activist campaigning for independence for Russia’s Bashkortostan region, survived a 2025 plot after a lucky discovery. Gabbasov found an Apple AirTag tracking device hidden on the undercarriage of his car in February 2025. Lithuanian police left the device in place and tracked the surveillance team back to their network. Weeks later, as Gabbasov attended a national independence day celebration with his wife and five-year-old son, police called and warned him not to return home. The next day, investigators told him a gunman had been waiting outside his residence overnight, ready to kill him on his return. Lithuanian authorities offered Gabbasov a chance to enter witness protection: to change his name, relocate, and abandon his political activism entirely. He refused, noting that he is seen as a leading voice for independence aspirations in his resource-rich home region, which has sent thousands of men to fight in Ukraine. “I can’t betray them all by simply disappearing, especially out of fear,” Gabbasov said. “If I stop my work or hide, that’s exactly what the Kremlin wants — that’s their win.”

    Lithuanian pro-Ukraine activist Valdas Bartkevičius was also offered the same deal after authorities uncovered a plot to plant a bomb in his home mailbox in March 2025. He also rejected going into hiding, saying that withdrawing from public life would amount to “social death.” Bartkevičius, who has gained attention for his high-profile anti-Russia actions, including a protest at a Soviet war memorial, said he will not stop his work fundraising for Ukraine’s military.

    To date, Lithuanian prosecutors have charged 13 people from at least seven countries in connection with the two plots against Gabbasov and Bartkevičius, part of a group of at least 20 suspects detained, charged, or identified across Europe in assassination-linked cases over the past 12 months. Prosecutors confirm the suspects were acting on direct orders from Russian military intelligence, and many have ties to Russian organized crime networks that have also been linked to arson and espionage plots across the European Union.

    Security analysts say the shift to using proxies stems from a major change after the 2018 poisoning of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal in Salisbury, England. That attack, which the UK government proved was carried out by Russian military intelligence officers, prompted Western nations to expel more than 300 Russian diplomats, most of whom were covert intelligence officers operating under diplomatic cover. That mass expulsion made it far riskier and more difficult for Russian intelligence officers to operate openly on European territory, according to Cmdr. Dominic Murphy, former head of counterterrorism at London’s Metropolitan Police and lead investigator on the Skripal case.

    While most publicly reported plots since 2022 have been foiled by European security services, one senior Western intelligence official noted that proxy operatives are generally less skilled and less resourced than trained Russian intelligence officers, which contributes to the higher rate of failed attacks. Even so, the official explained, the plots achieve key Russian goals even when they fail: they intimidate opponents into self-censorship, force European law enforcement to devote massive ongoing resources to protecting potential targets, and signal the Kremlin’s willingness to punish dissent anywhere in the world.

    Pointing to the 2024 killing of defector Maxim Kuzminov in Spain, who was publicly threatened by masked Russian servicemen on state-controlled television before his death, the official said it is clear that when the Kremlin prioritizes a target, it can still carry out an assassination in Europe despite the increased security pressure. For this reason, potential targets will never be fully safe, the official warned: “Even if you thwart an operation once, you still need to be ready in case they strike again.”

  • AFL 2026: Carlton coach Michael Voss has recalled George Hewett for Brisbane on Friday

    AFL 2026: Carlton coach Michael Voss has recalled George Hewett for Brisbane on Friday

    In a high-stakes selection reversal that has caught AFL circles by surprise, Carlton Blues have announced that star inside midfielder George Hewett – the club’s reigning best and fairest winner – will return to the senior lineup for Friday night’s clash against the Brisbane Lions at the Gabba. The recall comes just five weeks after coach Michael Voss made the controversial call to drop Hewett following Carlton’s shocking Good Friday defeat to North Melbourne.

    After being sent to the Victorian Football League (VFL), Carlton’s reserve competition, Hewett refused to let the setback derail his form. Over the course of a month-long wait for a senior recall, the ball-winning specialist put in a string of dominant performances at the lower level, notching no fewer than 24 disposals in each of his five VFL outings. His standout display came last weekend against St Kilda, where Hewett racked up 31 possessions and kicked two goals to force the selection hand of Carlton’s coaching panel.

    Speaking ahead of the crucial round clash, Voss made it clear that Hewett’s specific skill set is exactly what the Blues need to counteract the Lions’ vaunted midfield unit. “He’ll play; he’s been really strong over the last couple of weeks,” Voss told reporters. “He’s added a couple more things into his game in the last few weeks which we’ll hopefully see in this game. He’s been a really valuable teammate for us, you bang the door down to selection through form and he’s certainly done that. We know what we get with George, he’s very reliable. You’ve got to factor in what our balance is looking like (and) he brings a strong contest game. When we talk about Brisbane, they’re strong around stoppages and we’ve got to get our hands on the ball first.”

    The recall comes amid one of the most turbulent opening stretches to a season in recent Carlton history, with off-field controversy and on-field inconsistency plaguing Voss and his playing group. The club has faced intense public scrutiny following the ongoing Elijah Hollands saga, while repeated second-half collapses in senior matches have left the Blues languishing with underwhelming early-season results. Last week’s late fade-out, in particular, left Voss frustrated and demanding improvement from his entire squad.

    Voss acknowledged that a upset win over the high-flying Lions at the Gabba would provide a massive boost to his side’s flagging morale, but stressed the team cannot afford to look past the process of putting together a full four-quarter performance. “It’d be pretty large, but you don’t think about outcome, that’s stating the absolute obvious about what we’re trying to do here,” he said. “What we do have to focus on is getting our game together, we have to stay connected throughout the whole game to give ourselves the best chance to win. This is a pretty tough environment to win in, they’re a very good side (and) we’re going to have to do a lot right.”

    Addressing the team’s recent struggles, Voss admitted the slow start to the season has been frustrating, but framed the setbacks as an opportunity for the group to grow and refine their game plan. “It’s been frustrating, but at the same time, we’ve used those moments to find marginal gains to get better. That’s where we’re at as a team, and you’re living on that knife’s edge a little bit in terms of performance. To have a quarter like we did last week, it’s extremely disappointing. You’ve got to go to work on your game, we let ourselves down defensively. We’ve got to be better, and we have to ask more from one another throughout this game.”

  • Westpac economist urges government to cut ‘life admin’ burden on women

    Westpac economist urges government to cut ‘life admin’ burden on women

    Ahead of the upcoming Australian federal budget, Westpac’s top economist has sounded a sharp warning about growing government overreach and called for sweeping policy reforms to unlock economic potential for Australian women and older workers. In a high-profile address to the National Press Club, chief economist Luci Ellis made a targeted case for rolling back unnecessary bureaucratic complexity, arguing that ballooning regulation and administrative burdens are disproportionately holding back Australian women, while breeding a culture of “learned helplessness” across the community.

    Ellis pointed to the rapid, unplanned expansion of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) as a defining example of well-intentioned policy gone awry. Launched with the core mission of supporting Australians living with permanent, severe disabilities, the scheme has since expanded to cover a far broader range of services, creating layers of unnecessary administrative work that falls heaviest on family members — most of whom are women. Even well-meaning additional regulation, she emphasized, ultimately adds unnecessary complexity to daily household life.

    “Policy circles are seeing a growing expectation that government must step in to solve every problem, and that expectation has driven exponential growth in the size and scope of the public sector,” Ellis explained in her speech. She highlighted the tangible downstream impacts of this shift: a growing share of household income going toward taxes, an ever-expanding regulatory footprint across industries, and a mounting “life admin” burden that falls disproportionately on women.

    Ellis drew on a wide range of examples to illustrate the scope of regulatory bloat, from the multiple layers of approval developers must secure from overlapping government agencies to the ever-expanding length of Australia’s Income Tax Assessment Act. In a memorable, lighthearted jab at the growing complexity of public policy, she referenced a lyric from iconic feminist artist Avril Lavigne: “why did you have to go and make things so complicated.”

    Beyond regulatory bloat, Ellis warned that constant government intervention every time a challenge arises risks creating a state of “learned helplessness” across the community. She also called out outdated misconceptions about women’s workforce participation and population ageing that continue to hold back Australia’s economy, arguing that current policy is built on flawed assumptions that do not reflect modern demographic and labor market trends.

    “If the government wants to harness the full economic opportunity of an ageing population and a workforce that includes more older workers and more women, it should prioritize removing barriers to women entering, re-entering, and remaining in the workforce for as long as they choose and are able,” Ellis said.

    She emphasized that getting the NDIS back on a sustainable footing and refocusing it on its core mission of supporting severely disabled people would go a long way toward reducing the unpaid care burden falling on Australian women, who currently carry a disproportionate share of responsibility for both caring for children and ageing parents. As an alternative to the current NDIS model, Ellis suggested that well-funded school-based support, with training for both teachers and parents, could better support many children currently on the scheme, without adding layers of extra administrative work that require parents to attend multiple provider appointments.

    Ellis added that reducing administrative burdens for families should be a non-negotiable core principle guiding all federal and state government initiatives, not just disability policy. She also called for targeted overhauls of tax and retirement policy to better support women who take career breaks for caregiving, noting that much of Australia’s existing economic policy framework is built on the outdated assumption that an ageing population will automatically lead to a shrinking workforce.

    “Budgets, intergenerational reviews, and all types of public policy should be revised to reflect actual demographic and labor market trends, rather than outdated first-generation assumptions about ageing,” she said. The Labor government is set to unveil its fifth federal budget on May 12, with policymakers facing growing pressure to address cost-of-living pressures and unlock long-term economic growth.

  • Victory in Iran is nothing short of finishing it off

    Victory in Iran is nothing short of finishing it off

    In the volatile geopolitical landscape of the Middle East centered on Iran, there is an old, unwritten rule: if you have to publicly explain that you have achieved victory, you have already suffered a quiet defeat. That unforgiving standard now applies to President Donald Trump’s stunning last-minute reversal: just one day after launching Operation Freedom, a U.S. Navy escort initiative for commercial cargo transiting the Strait of Hormuz, the president announced he was putting the mission on hold. The sudden policy shift has left observers baffled, as has Trump’s claim that a breakthrough peace deal with Tehran’s ruling regime is within close reach.

    It is worth noting that fixating on the president’s frequent policy shifts can quickly become disorienting. No external observer has access to the full scope of classified intelligence that Trump reviews daily; only the president himself knows his ultimate strategic objectives and the path he intends to take to reach them. That said, retired U.S. Marine Colonel Grant Newsham, author of *When China Attacks: A Warning to America*, draws a parallel between this moment and several landmark missteps in recent U.S. foreign policy history—ones that have echoed through global security for decades.

    Newsham compares the early halt to the Hormuz mission to 1991, when President George H.W. Bush ended the first Gulf War just 72 hours too soon, leaving Saddam Hussein’s regime intact and setting the stage for decades of conflict and a second U.S. invasion a dozen years later. The same ominous feeling arose in 2001, when President George W. Bush allowed Osama bin Laden to escape the Tora Bora mountains in Afghanistan rather than closing the net and eliminating the al-Qaeda leader. A similar missed opportunity played out in the 1990s, when the U.S. had a clear opening to halt the Kim family regime’s nuclear weapons program in North Korea, but President Bill Clinton declined to act—with backing from former President Jimmy Carter, who infamously declared Kim Il Sung “a good man we can do business with.”

    More recently, Newsham points to missteps during Trump’s first term that fit the same pattern. When Chinese telecommunications giants Huawei and ZTE—widely accused of functioning as arms of Beijing’s intelligence apparatus—were on the brink of collapse from U.S. sanctions, Trump stepped in to relieve pressure and allow the firms to rebuild. The same goes for TikTok, the popular short-video app repeatedly flagged as a continuous Chinese intelligence collection and influence operation, which the first Trump administration ultimately failed to ban or force a sale of.

    Across these cases, Newsham argues, American leaders have lost the ability to follow through on defeating adversaries, instead choosing to redefine “victory” to match incomplete, half-finished policy outcomes.

    A particularly troubling element of the current shift, Newsham notes, is the Trump administration’s reported willingness to allow Pakistan to mediate any future deal with Iran. Pakistan, he argues, has long been firmly aligned with Beijing, taking strategic direction from China on key regional issues. This dynamic is analogous to the Biden administration relying on Russia to mediate U.S.-Iran talks—a move that ignores basic geopolitical realities: it is critical to correctly identify which nations are genuine allies and which are not.

    Pakistan has a long track record of double-dealing that undermines U.S. interests, from its duplicitous behavior throughout the 20-year U.S. campaign in Afghanistan to its decade-long hosting of Osama bin Laden after his 2001 escape. Islamabad has also waged a sustained terror campaign against India for years, a campaign that rivals the destructive activities of Iran’s Quds Force. Newsham questions why a nation with this track record would be trusted to mediate a deal critical to U.S. national security.

    To be fair, Newsham acknowledges that the president has access to intelligence that outside commentators do not, and there could be sound justifications for pausing Operation Freedom. Perhaps the U.S. is facing a shortage of interceptor missiles, and leaders fear Iranian strikes on critical desalination plants operated by Gulf Cooperation Council nations. Maybe the United Arab Emirates, which has already suffered Iranian attacks on its oil infrastructure, intervened to request a hold on military escalation.

    Even so, the sudden about-face defies explanation: less than 12 hours before the pause, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Michael Cain publicly announced plans for a multi-layered defense “Red, White and Blue Dome” to protect shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. That proposal was abruptly pulled off the table within a single day.

    Another possible explanation is that Trump believes he can reach a favorable deal with self-identified “moderates” within the Iranian regime. But Newsham pushes back on this: nearly 50 years of dealing with the Islamic Republic should have taught U.S. leaders that genuine moderates do not hold power in Tehran—most Iranians who favor liberalization live in exile abroad. The ruling regime that just brutally suppressed domestic unrest, killing an estimated 40,000 protestors, has not changed its core ideological or strategic goals.

    Geopolitical windows of opportunity do not stay open forever, Newsham warns, and this moment to neutralize Iran’s nuclear and regional threat may be closing—closing at the hands of the U.S. itself. Even if a deal is reached, Tehran has a long track record of breaking its international commitments. The regime will almost certainly rebuild its military capabilities, continue its push for a nuclear weapon, reactivate its network of regional proxy militant groups, and brutally eliminate all domestic opposition—the same opposition that Trump publicly promised “help is on the way.”

    The regional and global ripple effects of this reversal are already taking shape, Newsham argues. Chinese leader Xi Jinping had been thrown off balance by the strong U.S. military display and demonstrated political will during recent operations in Venezuela and the opening stages of the Iran conflict. Now, Xi will have little reason to fear U.S. resolve. He will learn that the U.S. rarely follows through on its threats, and that Beijing only needs to hold out and outwait American political will.

    For U.S. allies across the Middle East and Indo-Pacific that counted on Washington to see the mission through and confront aggressive regional powers, this reversal will sow deep uncertainty and mistrust. In the end, Newsham concludes, it will not take long for the outcome of this policy shift to become clear. If the Trump administration finds itself having to convince the world that it won in Iran, that old unwritten rule still holds: the explanation itself is proof of defeat.

  • Tokyo leads Asia stock surge on growing Mideast peace hopes

    Tokyo leads Asia stock surge on growing Mideast peace hopes

    A sweeping risk-on rally swept through Asian equity markets on Thursday, with Tokyo’s benchmark index leading sharp gains across the region as two key catalysts — rising hopes for a negotiated end to the US-Iran conflict and a resurgent wave of artificial intelligence investment — lifted investor sentiment to multi-week highs.

    The upward momentum followed a dramatic shift in geopolitical tone earlier this week, after US President Donald Trump announced that a deal to end hostilities between Washington and Tehran was within reach. Speaking to reporters Wednesday, Trump confirmed that constructive talks had taken place over the preceding 24 hours, noting that “it’s very possible that we’ll make a deal.” If Iran agrees to the terms already outlined, he said, the war would end immediately; a rejection would see US bombing resume at “a much higher level and intensity.”

    US-based news outlet Axios later reported, citing two unnamed senior US officials, that both negotiating teams have edged close to finalizing a concise one-page memorandum of understanding. The draft agreement would end active hostilities, reopen the critical Strait of Hormuz, and establish a framework for follow-up negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. The Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint that handles roughly one-fifth of the world’s daily crude oil supplies, has been effectively closed to commercial shipping since early March, tightening global energy markets and pushing oil prices sharply higher.

    Iran has not yet formally accepted the US proposal. Foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei told local Iranian media that the offer remains “still under review,” while parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf — who has led Iran’s negotiation team — warned that Washington’s approach amounted to an attempt to “force us to surrender.” Still, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who mediated early exploratory talks hosted in Islamabad last month, said he remained “very hopeful” that a breakthrough could be reached.

    The rising prospect of de-escalation triggered sharp swings across global commodity and financial markets this week. Oil prices, which fell roughly 10% over the preceding two trading days on hopes of the Hormuz strait reopening, held steady on Thursday: West Texas Intermediate traded flat at $95.08 per barrel, while Brent North Sea Crude edged up 0.1% to $101.32 per barrel. Lower energy price expectations have also eased persistent inflation concerns, lifting gold prices more than 3% in Wednesday’s session and driving a broad rally in bonds.

    In equity markets, the positive geopolitical shift aligned with a fresh wave of investor enthusiasm for AI-related assets, building on record gains from Wall Street in the prior session. Strong quarterly earnings from leading US tech giants including Microsoft, Apple and Alphabet reignited buying pressure for technology stocks across Asia, amplifying the risk-on rally.

    Tokyo’s Nikkei 225 led regional gains, surging 5.7% to close at 62,915.87 as Japanese investors returned from an extended public holiday. SoftBank, Japan’s leading technology investment firm, rocketed more than 15% on the day, while key chip industry players Tokyo Electron and Advantest notched double-digit gains. In Seoul, the benchmark Kospi extended the prior day’s rally to close above the 7,000-point milestone for the first time in history, with Samsung continuing its upward march after recently crossing the $1 trillion market capitalization threshold. Major markets across Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sydney, Singapore, Taipei, Wellington, Manila and Jakarta all posted solid gains on the day.

    Stephen Innes, managing partner at SPI Asset Management, noted that the confluence of positive catalysts created near-perfect conditions for a broad market rally. “Traders aggressively embraced the idea that the Iran war may finally be shifting from missile trajectories to negotiation tables, while the AI frenzy simultaneously poured jet fuel onto the risk rally,” he said. “The result was one of those rare sessions where nearly every macro domino fell in perfect sequence. Oil collapsed, bonds rallied, the dollar sank, gold exploded higher, and stocks surged.”

    Japanese investors also remained focused on currency movements this week, amid persistent speculation that Japanese authorities have intervened in foreign exchange markets to prop up the yen, which has faced downward pressure from surging oil prices and safe-haven flows into the US dollar. The yen hit a 10-month high against the greenback on Wednesday, fuelling rumors of official support. Local Japanese media reported last week that the government spent between $32 billion and $38 billion buying yen in the market, citing data from the Bank of Japan. Atsushi Mimura, Japan’s top currency official, declined to comment on the speculation when asked by reporters Thursday. The dollar traded at 156.23 yen on Thursday, down slightly from 156.39 yen at the close of Wednesday’s session.