adds

Economy passengers will continue to receive a complimentary beer or wine served with their main meal, but will now be required to pay if they want additional alcoholic beverages

A carrier has changed its rules concerning alcohol on board flights, leaving passengers with mixed responses.

TUI Airlines offers economy passengers up to three free alcoholic drinks on long-haul flights, but passengers will now have to pay for drinks from November 1.

Customers will continue to receive complimentary soft drinks throughout their flight as well as a complimentary beer or wine served with their main meal. However, they will now be required to pay for additional alcoholic beverages onboard.

Adults with existing bookings affected by the change will receive a £12.50 refund per flight, each way.

Passengers in the premium cabin will not be affected.

Passengers took to social media to respond to the change.

One Tiktok user said: “Good, I am glad. I sat on a 10-hour flight to Mexico last year, a wedding group of about 20 adults where absolutely pissed before even getting on.

“TUI still served them for about 7 hours. I was fuming; it was like a flight to Ibiza with 18-year-olds.”

Another user said: “All alcohol should be banned from airports and aeroplanes, it causes too much trouble.”

Others were angered by the change, with one Tiktok user saying: “TUI are dead to me.”

Another said: “It shouldn’t have to be a blanket ban for everyone. People just need to have more control. Many just enjoy one or two drinks, and I don’t see an issue with that.”

“Sadly, some people ruin it for everyone else.”

Earlier this year, Ryanair boss Michael O’Leary told The Times that airports should be banned from serving alcohol to passengers prior early flights to reduce disruption.

A Ryanair spokesperson subsequently told Metro: “The problem is not drinking on board one-hour flights; the excessive drinking occurs in airport terminals where no limits are placed on alcohol consumption, especially during flight delays.

“Ryanair have several processes in place to manage disruptive passengers onboard, including crew’s discretion to limit the number of drinks permitted to be purchased inflight.”

Ryanair introduced a €500 fine for disruptive passengers in June 2025.

Intoxication is a regular cause of trouble on aircrafts. Civil Aviation Authority statistics for 2019 showed that there were 390 occasions when airlines reported “difficulty in controlling intoxicated, violent or unruly passengers”.

By 2023, the number had risen to 1,245 incidents, and in 2024 it remained over 1,000.

Being drunk on a plane is a criminal offence and can be punished by a fine of up to £5,000 and two years’ imprisonment.

A devastating double earthquake hit Venezuela on June 24, leaving a trail of destruction and thousands dead. Dozens of buildings collapsed in coastal La Guaira State, the worst affected in the South American country.

The natural disaster followed two unnatural catastrophes: a decade-plus of US-led economic sanctions, and the January 3 US bombing attack and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro.

But rather than sympathize with the beleaguered country, the Western media establishment seized the opportunity to continue demonizing the Bolivarian Revolution—while whitewashing Washington’s economic terrorism and its present efforts to tighten its semi-colonial stranglehold on the country (FAIR.org, 2/27/26).

An assault on public housing

The ground had barely stopped shaking when corporate media oligopolies took aim at one of the most visible pillars of Hugo Chávez’s legacy: Venezuela’s Great Housing Mission (GMVV).

A Washington Post headline (6/27/26) declared: “These Homes Rose out of Venezuela’s Socialist Revolution. Now They’re Rubble.”

An architect was quoted claiming that the damaged apartments had been “constructed hastily” to “meet a political deadline.” Though the Post claimed Chávez launched the housing program to secure votes for the 2012 election, the only beneficiary the paper could find received her home in 2014.

AFP (6/29/26) singled out damage to a GMVV complex—“once touted as part of former strongman leader Hugo Chavez’s flagship housing program”—arguing that it “symbolize[d] the country’s dire situation.” Dozens of buildings geared toward tourism, including hotels and high-rises built for short-term rentals, in this neighborhood of Catia La Mar, were also flattened by the devastating tremors, but AFP made no effort to provide that context.

The New York Times (7/5/26) likewise attempted to besmirch what is one of the most ambitious public housing projects worldwide by repeating the unfounded claim that homes were assigned as a “reward for loyalty to Mr. Chávez.” However, the paper of record at least admitted that “Misión Vivienda buildings are far from the only apartments to have fallen.”

The Wall Street Journal (6/28/26) could not hide its elitism in describing how Chávez “rushed to provide apartments to the poor” in a town “beloved by the rich,” with a golf course and a “marina for yachts.” It went further by promoting a social media hoax that styrofoam found in damaged buildings meant that the housing mission used absurdly unsuitable materials in its construction. In reality, expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam is widely used to lighten the load on structures and for thermal insulation, a key factor in such a hot climate.

Venezuelan officials have called for a review of the collapsed structures and building codes, though they have claimed that the public housing buildings fared better than their privately constructed neighbors.

There is little evidence to suggest that GMVV buildings suffered a worse fate than their private sector counterparts. According to the open-source tool Terremoto Venezuela, only 11 out of 258 buildings reported as collapsed (“daño total”) belong to the housing mission.

The definitive figures will need to be put in perspective to see whether affected buildings and non-complicity with existing codes were prevalent in the GMVV developments or the recent tourist-driven real estate boom in La Guaira. But the media establishment immediately jumped to its politically motivated verdict before any thorough investigation had been conducted.

Whitewashing sanctions

While multiple outlets stressed that it is necessary to scrutinize whether authorities enforced the appropriate regulations in what is known to be vulnerable terrain (France 24, 6/29/26; Reuters, 6/29/26), no evaluation of the Venezuelan state’s record is accurate if it ignores the wide-reaching sanctions regime imposed by Washington.

Yet many Western journalists completely overlooked sanctions in their coverage of the earthquakes and the Venezuelan state’s capacity to respond to a natural catastrophe.

Corporate outlets like the Financial Times (6/28/26) wasted no time in proclaiming that the “legacy of ‘Chavismo’ hinder[ed] Venezuela’s earthquake response,” while AP (7/3/26) decreed that the government’s response was “slow” and the BBC (6/29/26) claimed survivors were “left to fend for themselves.”

None saw fit to even mention that Venezuela has been under economic coercive measures for years. NBC (6/25/26) avoided the kneejerk verdicts and offered lots of testimony on the natural disaster, but when concluding that “Venezuela already faced economic challenges and poverty,” chose not to name sanctions as a key economic challenge and poverty factor.

In other reports, the whitewashing of sanctions was more subtle. The Guardian (7/3/26) attributed the government’s “sluggish response” to “years of corruption, economic mismanagement and investment in political repression and domestic security rather than emergency services and healthcare.” As almost an afterthought, it added that sanctions “have further enfeebled the Venezuelan state.” The Washington Post‘s anti-public housing article (6/27/26) called Venezuela’s economic collapse “the result of mismanagement by the socialist government exacerbated by US-imposed economic sanctions.”

The New York Times (7/4/26) wrote that “Venezuela’s fragile infrastructure—including rail, electricity and healthcare systems that have suffered from years of corruption and mismanagement.” In a later section it added, “Venezuela is reeling from years of economic turmoil and crippling US sanctions.”

Over the years, Western media have pulled all the stops to legitimize Washington’s hybrid war on Caracas and conceal the murderous impact of sanctions (FAIR.org, 6/4/21, 6/13/22). There is no shortage of documentation on how these coercive measures represented collective punishment (CEPR, 4/25/19). In an extensive 2021 report, UN rapporteur Alena Douhan thoroughly discussed the impact of sanctions on Venezuelan public services and infrastructure.

The current framing  of earthquake coverage aims to separate US sanctions as much as possible from their direct consequences. Rail, electricity and healthcare systems became much more “fragile” because sanctions blocked the Venezuelan government from servicing equipment and importing spare parts, not to mention brain drain resulting from mass migration of qualified personnel largely trained in public universities. Similarly, the “economic turmoil” is a result of US sanctions, not a parallel phenomenon.

Indeed, economist Francisco Rodríguez, senior research fellow at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, dismisses arguments that the bulk of Venezuela’s economic decline preceded sanctions (CEPR, 5/19/26). Instead, the rate of GDP contraction nearly quadrupled following the US imposition of unilateral coercive measures in 2017.

And the need to conjure elaborate intermediation schemes in order to circumvent sanctions opened more avenues for corruption. To present the latter as an issue that uniquely and disproportionately plagues a government facing an economic blockade is disingenuous, to say the least.

Ignoring the semi-colonial straitjacket

In their recent coverage, most corporate media sources were quick to decree that the Venezuelan government’s response was “slow” (Financial Times, 6/27/26; Guardian, 6/29/26), “inadequate” (Reuters, 7/5/26), “faltering” (AP, 7/1/26) or “completely ineffective” (PBS, 7/2/26).

It is understandable that ordinary people would not sing the government’s praises after losing a relative or while looking for one trapped under rubble. But journalists have a responsibility to add context. In this case, a significant mitigating circumstance is that the tremors heavily hit the local authorities, which run civil protection and other services.

Acting President Delcy Rodríguez stated that nearly all the directors from the La Guaira regional government were lost in the tragedy. Coupled with a collapse of communications, this added more hurdles for response efforts.

Another overlooked element is just how rare and deadly this double earthquake was. The New York Times was a notable exception, with a thorough piece (7/3/26) explaining how the disaster unfolded and why it caused so much destruction.

But the most relevant element to understand Venezuela’s present constraints is, once again, the role played by the US government. Just like with sanctions, corporate news outlets whitewashed Washington’s current semi-colonial impositions on the South American nation.

Since the January 3 attacks, the Trump administration has seized control of Venezuelan export revenues, particularly from oil sales (Venezuelanalysis, 2/20/26). Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the Venezuelan government would need to submit a “budget request” to access its own funds held by the US Treasury (Venezuelanalysis, 1/29/26). Neither US nor Venezuelan authorities have offered any transparent information on the amounts collected and disbursed, including Washington’s intermediation fees.

Trump is not known for precision in his statements, but he has not been shy in boasting that the cost of the January 3 military operation has been paid “many times over” from oil profits (New York Times, 6/29/26; Guardian, 6/28/26; Al Jazeera, 6/24/26). While there is no information to verify the claims, economist Francisco Rodríguez, analyzing Venezuelan Central Bank data, concluded that there is at least a significant delay in the US disbursement of Venezuelan funds back to the country (Banca y Negocios, 6/22/26). The suspicious lack of transparency has even drawn questions from traditional foreign policy paladins like the Council on Foreign Relations.

With few exceptions (Reuters, 7/1/26; AP, 7/3/26; New York Times, 7/6/26), this key, semi-colonial constraint on the Venezuelan state is completely overlooked. Even worse, some outlets mistakenly stated that the White House has “lifted” or  authorized “relaxation” of sanctions (PBS, 7/2/26; Financial Times, 6/27/26). Actually it has only issued licenses for select Western corporations, and with the condition that proceeds be deposited in the US Treasury account. Following the recent natural disaster, the Trump administration issued a four-month waiver allowing earthquake relief-related transactions, but left all restrictions and asset freezes in place (Venezuelanalysis, 6/26/26).

Another ominous development has been the US forces’ takeover of operations at the Simón Bolívar International Airport, the country’s main air hub, and the La Guaira port. Despite regular Southern Command press releases, and even photographic evidence, the media establishment has paid little attention to this serious (further) encroachment on Venezuelan sovereignty.

The outlook is bleak for Venezuela, with this tragedy likely to increase dependency and semi-colonial plundering. But there is room for hope. The limits of US power are being exposed all over the world, and resorting to more and more violence will not stem this inevitable decline. Peoples in the Global South, including in Venezuela, will eventually (re)take control of their destinies. But they know that the corporate press barons are no allies in this struggle.

Source: FAIR

France has conducted live-fire tests of laser-guided rockets from its Rafale fighter, adding a low-cost anti-drone capability to the jet. Following the United States and the United Kingdom, this reflects a broader trend in modern air warfare, as air forces increasingly recognize that they need layered, cost-effective intercept options rather than relying exclusively on expensive missiles.

Today, the Directorate General of Armaments (DGA), the French government defense procurement and technology agency, announced the successful integration of the 68mm laser-guided rockets on the Rafale. The tests began in February. The DGA added that the integration work was conducted together with the French Air and Space Force’s Centre d’expertise aérienne militaire (CEAM, the French aerospace research and test center), supported by Dassault Aviation and Thales. The program is known as Lutte antidrone sur avion de combat (LADAC, or anti-drone capability for combat aircraft).

While LADAC is initially intended for French Rafales, flown by the air force and navy, it could also be provided to export Rafale customers, and potentially other combat jets.

Last October, the Chief of Staff of the French Air and Space Force, Gen. Jérôme Bellanger, told a parliamentary hearing that there was a need to provide laser-guided rockets for the Rafale and/or the Mirage 2000D RMV, to counter long-range one-way attack drones, such as the Iranian Shahed-136 and the Russian Geran series.

“Regarding airborne anti-drone operations, it is not sustainable to use MICA air-to-air missiles costing over a million euros to shoot down a drone worth a few thousand dollars,” Bellanger said. “We must develop our own low-cost firing capabilities or adapt our gun fire-control systems,” he added.

The Chief of Staff of the Air Force suggested that off-the-shelf solutions would most likely be used.

In the event, a primarily French solution has been adopted.

This involves 68mm rockets with laser guidance, loaded in 12-round Thales Telson JF12 rocket pods. These are used in conjunction with the Rafale’s RBE2 radar, which has undergone modifications for the role, as well as the Talios pod, used for target tracking and laser designation.

TELSON : INDUCTION ROCKET SYSTEM

The rocket itself is understood to be the Aculeus-LG, which has a stated range of 3.7 miles.

Development of the LADAC capability was begun last December 31 as a matter of urgency.

By the end of February, French Rafales were protecting the airspace of the United Arab Emirates against Iranian drone attacks during Operation Epic Fury. In the process, they fired several dozen MICA IR/EM missiles in only a few weeks.

In April, the French parliament was informed that a study was underway to equip the Rafale with rocket pods. The same month, unofficial imagery appeared showing a dedicated test Rafale carrying a pair of JF12 pods while flying from Istres-Le Tubé Air Base, home of the DGA.

As of April, it was suggested that the capability could be ready to be fielded this summer. This target will be achieved, with the LADAC capability rolled out to French Air and Space Force Rafales by the end of the month.

At this point, it’s unclear if the Rafales will also have their onboard 30mm cannons specifically modified for anti-drone work, as Bellanger had previously suggested. This would involve adaptation of the gun fire-control system to mitigate the risk posed by debris from the destroyed drones. As we have discussed many times in the past, firing a fighter’s gun against a small, low, and slow-moving target is inherently dangerous, due to a combination of speed and engagement dynamics, the risk of collision, shrapnel and other debris, plus the increased chances of collateral damage on the ground.

Le canon du #Rafale : le #30M791

The U.S. military took the lead in integrating laser-guided rockets on combat aircraft for anti-drone purposes.

The laser-guided 70mm Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) rocket with air-to-air capability has now been cleared for use by U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle, F-16C, and A-10 combat jets, and other types, like the U.S. Navy’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, are expected to receive it too.

In 2019, TWZ was first to report that the U.S. Air Force had begun to look at using APKWS as an air-to-air weapon against drones and cruise missiles, when it conducted a test of the weapon in that role from an F-16C. The first reports of the capability being used in combat came in 2024, when U.S. Air Force F-16s began using the rockets to shoot down drones launched by Iranian-backed Houthi militants in Iran, as TWZ was again first to report.

F-16C Viper Shoots Down Target Drone With Laser-Guided Rocket

Since then, U.S. Air Force F-15Es and F-16s have repeatedly called upon the rockets to deal with Iranian drone and missile attacks in the Middle East. In particular, the rocket-armed fighters were very actively involved in defending Israel from Iranian drones and missiles. The same encounters saw F-15E crews running out of missiles when faced by large barrages of drones and missiles, a problem that laser-guided rockets can help address.

The Eurofighter Typhoon became the next aircraft to add the air-to-air optimized variant of the laser-guided APKWS rocket to its armament options.

At the Paris Air Show in June 2025, Eurofighter CEO Jorge Tamarit Degenhardt confirmed that the counter-drone mission was of growing importance for Typhoon customers and that he “needs to now have that conversation” with Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom — the four Eurofighter partner nations that are responsible for developing, building, and sustaining the aircraft.

The U.K. Royal Air Force announced in May of this year that its Typhoons were now equipped with APKWS, “significantly enhancing their ability to counter emerging threats during operations in the Middle East.” 

Laser-guided rockets of all kinds offer some significant benefits for the counter-drone role, compared with traditional air-to-air missiles. Their performance parameters make them especially suitable for bringing down relatively steady flying, non-reactionary, low-performance targets, including drones and subsonic cruise missiles.

They also bring a major increase in ‘magazine depth,’ with each pod carrying several rounds, taking up a weapons pylon that would otherwise normally be loaded with just one air-to-air missile.

Above all, however, the requirement for these weapons has been driven by the huge mismatch in cost between the target and air-to-air missiles that would otherwise be used for the role. In a French context, a single MICA round reportedly costs around $2 million, significantly more than the latest variants of the AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM), which cost around $1 million each.

Meanwhile, a Shahed drone might come with a unit cost of around $50,000, as we have discussed in the past.

The cost of the Aculeus-LG is unclear, but is likely in the same region as the equivalent APKWS. Here, the laser guidance section costs between $15,000 and $20,000, with only a few thousand dollars more needed to provide the rocket motor and warhead.

It seems all but certain that the French Rafales will not be the only ones to get the new weapon.

There is a large Rafale operating community in the Middle East, with Qatar already flying them and the United Arab Emirates due to receive them soon. Both of these and others could benefit from these capabilities. Since these rockets were also eyed for the Mirage 2000 in the past, Ukrainian Mirages could also be a candidate for integration; the Ukrainian Air Force already uses APKWS on its F-16s.

With future conflicts likely to feature large salvos of one-way attack drones and cruise missiles, this type of capability is likely to become a more regular feature on modern combat aircraft.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

WASHINGTON — The campaign of U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner was buckling in Maine on Tuesday after he was accused of rape, injecting uncertainty into a contest that is central to determining which party wins Senate control in November’s midterms.

The situation set off swift debate about how state Democrats would choose Platner’s replacement if he were to withdraw, and which Maine figures might be best positioned to play off the progressive messaging he used to win over voters.

With Maine viewed by Democrats as a key seat to win in their long-shot bid for a Senate majority, the decision would be high stakes, analysts said. In the meantime, with uncertainty clouding the race, the shake-up could put additional pressure on the party to win Senate races in states seen as more difficult to flip.

Platner has denied the rape allegation, which came in a Politico report Monday from a woman who said Platner forced her to have sex with him when he was intoxicated. Platner said Monday that he would “reflect” on his candidacy but has not withdrawn.

“The calculation that almost everyone on the Democratic side is making is that with Platner in it, it is an unwinnable race,” said John Cluverius, director of survey research for the Center for Public Opinion at UMass Lowell, “and without Platner in it, they have a much better chance.”

An oyster farmer and Marine veteran, Platner had entered the race to challenge Republican Sen. Susan Collins as an outsider and was seen as riding an anti-establishment wave of support.

His candidacy highlighted the split within his party between progressives and establishment Democrats and represented a matchup between an older incumbent and a younger outsider candidate.

By Tuesday afternoon, Platner’s financial backing was disintegrating and prominent Democrats had withdrawn their support — including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a key endorser of Platner’s, who said Tuesday afternoon that he had told Platner to withdraw.

A spokesperson for Platner’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont), who had been one of Platner’s most visible backers, quickly withdrew his endorsement Monday.

“I’ve been very clear that sexual assault or violence against women is a red line. These allegations are very serious and credible,” Khanna, who has been a prominent supporter of victims of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, wrote on X.

The California congressman had been among progressives, including Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who previously stood by Platner. Khanna had rallied for Platner at a pre-primary event in June after a set of allegations about the candidate’s “unsettling” conduct from his exes reported by the New York Times and the revelation that he had sent sexually explicit messages to women outside his marriage.

Platner’s collapse comes after the fall of former California Rep. Eric Swalwell, whose ascendant campaign for governor was ended in April after he was accused of sexual assault.

As in Swalwell’s case, Platner’s support has unraveled quickly, leaving him with little path forward.

The Democrats’ formal Senate campaign arm and the Senate Majority PAC, which is aligned with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, both pulled investment from the race, their leaders said in statements. Swing Left, an organization working to flip seats for Democrats, removed Maine from its target Senate races for now.

“We continue to believe this seat is winnable if Platner is not on the ballot,” said Senate Majority PAC spokesperson Lauren French.

Under state law, Platner has until Monday to withdraw in order for the Maine Democratic Party to be able to nominate a replacement. The committee would have until July 27 to do so.

For Collins, facing a new candidate could make for a harder race than going up against Platner, analysts said.

The fifth-term senator has survived reelection repeatedly, including in 2020, when the state went blue in the presidential election, but drawn ire from some moderate and left-leaning voters who want her to push back more forcefully against President Trump.

Without Maine, Democrats would have to pick up an additional race in a state that went for Trump in 2024 in order to flip the four seats required to win a majority.

To get to four, the party needs to win some mix of Maine, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Iowa and must also retain its seats in Michigan, Georgia and New Hampshire.

That scenario could be within reach for Democrats but they face a steep climb, a New York Times/Siena poll released last week found.

“This does put enormous pressure on Democrats across the country with every viable race,” said David Niven, who teaches American politics at the University of Cincinnati. “The margin of error was already slim, and it’s approaching none.”

In Texas, a heated and expensive race has shaped up between Democrat James Talarico, a state representative who is facing Republican Ken Paxton, the state attorney general.

“I would suspect that Democrats are going to be relatively all-in on Texas simply because they can no longer rely on Maine in the way they thought they were going to be able to,” said Mark Jones, a political science professor at Rice University.

The Politico report came after a string of other controversies for Platner, who had successfully batted them away ahead of the state’s June primary.

His quick rise in the campaign excited Democrats looking for younger, non-establishment leaders. His primary opponent, Maine Gov. Janet Mills, suspended her campaign in late April, clearing his path.

But questions about the rushed vetting of Platner soon arose.

He faced scrutiny over a tattoo on his chest that was widely recognized as a Nazi symbol, which he then said he had covered up, and a tranche of deleted Reddit posts that he said were “stupid” comments from a time when he had post-traumatic stress disorder.

Ahead of the primary, the report of his extramarital texts and the allegations by exes about volatile behavior revived questions about his candidacy; Platner described them as politically motivated and privately assured Democratic leaders that nothing else was coming.

The situation “reinforce[s] the need for more careful vetting [of] first-time outsider candidates,” said Dan Schnur, who teaches political communications at USC, UC Berkeley and Pepperdine.

“Every political professional knows that the most important type of candidate research is not opposition research — it’s research on your own candidate,” Schnur said.

Progressive leaders on Monday sought to validate the success of Platner’s campaign in energizing Maine voters while disavowing Platner. They urged Democratic leaders to stick with a candidate who shares Platner’s working-class image if he withdraws — something Platner may hope to influence, the New York Times reported.

“To the Democratic establishment: this is not your opening,” Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of the progressive organization Our Revolution, said in a statement. “Whoever leads this movement forward must be someone who has actually lived the fight Graham Platner ran on.”

Some Democrats were already looking to the party’s gubernatorial primary candidates as possible replacements, including Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, former state Sen. Troy Jackson and former state health official Nirav D. Shah.

The July deadlines would leave enough time before November for Democrats to persuade voters of a new candidate, said Mark Brewer, a political science professor at the University of Maine, but how the party chose to select a replacement would probably be as important as whom it chose.

“Having a 100-person executive committee select it on their own would probably not sit well with Platner’s supporters,” Brewer said. “A caucus they could pull off; if they want to be as open and inclusive as possible, that’s probably their best option.”

McDaniel reported from Washington and Kwok from Los Angeles.

China has added 10 United States-based companies to its export control list and barred government procurement from nearly 50 US companies two weeks after the Pentagon blacklisted some of China’s best-known companies for their alleged ties to the Chinese military.

China’s Ministry of Commerce announced the export order on Monday, barring Chinese companies from exporting “dual-use” items that can be used for civilian or military purposes to the US firms.

The list of companies includes rare-earth mine operator MP Materials Corp, rare-earth magnet maker USA Rare Earths, and US defence contractors specialising in fields such as aerospace, drones, synthetic-aperture radar, and shipbuilding and repairs.

Under the order, “foreign institutions and individuals worldwide are also prohibited from transferring or providing Chinese dual-use goods to them” while ongoing export transactions must be suspended immediately.

The Commerce Ministry said the export ban had been issued to “safeguard national security and interests and fulfil international obligations such as non-proliferation”.

China’s Ministry of Finance on Monday separately barred Chinese government procurement from 46 companies, including subsidiaries of major US defence contractors like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Atomics and General Dynamics. US-funded, locally registered companies, however, have been given an exemption by the ministry.

Experts described Beijing’s orders as a retaliation, albeit a largely symbolic one, against the US after the Pentagon in early June added about 80 Chinese companies and their subsidiaries to its list of “Entities Identified as Chinese Military Companies Operating in the United States”.

The designation means the Pentagon either believes the companies are owned or controlled by the Chinese military or they are “military-civil fusion contributors”, a term for commercial companies that contribute to China’s military development despite their civilian status.

The updated list includes Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba Holdings, search engine giant Baidu and electric automaker BYD, some of China’s largest and best-known companies.

While the order does not bar US companies from doing business with them, it does impact US defence contractors and their future supply chains.

“We can interpret this as a tit-for-tat response, and that fits into China’s playbook any time we’ve seen escalation from the US side in terms of trade and investment tools,” said Nick Marro, global trade lead analyst at the Economist Intelligence Unit.

China-based supply chain consultant Cameron Johnson said the Commerce Ministry’s order mirrors US semiconductor export controls designed to keep the most advanced chips out of Chinese hands.

“They basically say it doesn’t matter where or who you are, you are bound by this regardless of circumstance,” said Johnson, who is also a senior partner at the Shanghai consultancy Tidal Wave Solutions. “Organisations or individuals in any country or region are prohibited from transferring dual-use materials that originated in China.”

He said Beijing’s orders in practice may be hard to enforce and many of the companies named in those orders have already moved their supply chains out of China or begun to “de-risk” their operations there.

Johnson said the wide scope of companies included in Washington’s and Beijing’s directives could be a sign of more to come and may signal a new front in the US-China trade war.

“This is probably just the beginning of the back and forth,” he said. Last year, after returning to the White House for a second term, US President Donald Trump reignited the US-China trade war, leading Washington and Beijing to impose escalating rounds of tariffs on each other.

Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to a trade truce in October, which was extended during a summit between the two leaders in Beijing in May.

Despite promises to “enhance economic cooperation” during the meeting, observers like Singapore-based geopolitical analyst Steve Okun predicted the goodwill may be short-lived.

“The US’s recent closure of chip export loopholes and China’s continuing addition to its export bans show the national security lane remains active in both capitals regardless of the diplomatic niceties at the recent Trump-Xi summit,” Okun told Al Jazeera.

“There is no ‘truce’ in the US-China trade war. Expect further actions from both sides as well on export controls and investment restrictions,” he said.

June 9 (Asia Today) — The U.S. Defense Department expanded its list of Chinese companies it says are linked to China’s military, adding about two dozen firms, including BYD, Alibaba, Baidu, WuXi AppTec and Unitree, according to U.S. media reports.

The annual list, known as the Section 1260H list of Chinese military companies, grew from last year as U.S. national security officials increased scrutiny of Beijing’s use of civilian technology to support military modernization.

The newly added companies span electric vehicles, e-commerce, cloud computing, artificial intelligence, biotechnology and robotics.

BYD is one of China’s leading electric vehicle makers. Alibaba operates e-commerce and cloud computing businesses, including in the United States. Baidu is active in internet search and artificial intelligence. WuXi AppTec is a major pharmaceutical and biotechnology services company, while Unitree is known for humanoid and quadruped robots.

The move shows the Trump administration is looking beyond semiconductors and AI chips as it assesses security risks tied to Chinese technology and industrial supply chains.

Chris McGuire, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and former official at the State Department and National Security Council, said the action shows Washington is increasingly attentive to security risks from Chinese products in industries beyond semiconductors and AI.

China objected to the move.

A spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington said the Defense Department was overstretching the concept of national security and creating a discriminatory list targeting Chinese companies.

The updated list drew attention because it comes as Washington and Beijing have recently appeared to ease some trade tensions.

The United States had reportedly held back some measures against Chinese companies, including sanctions, high tariffs and cyber-related actions. An earlier version of the list expected in February was withdrawn ahead of a U.S.-China summit, according to U.S. media reports.

The summit, held in Beijing last month, focused heavily on trade issues.

Still, the Pentagon continues to view China as the United States’ main military competitor.

Craig Singleton, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the trade atmosphere may have improved after the summit, but Washington’s basic assessment has not changed.

He said U.S. officials still believe major Chinese civilian technology companies are connected to China’s military modernization.

Companies placed on the list are barred from doing business with the U.S. military. The designation does not automatically impose broad sanctions, but it can create reputational risk, reduce access to U.S. government-related business and increase scrutiny from investors and regulators.

The commercial effect can vary by company.

SZ DJI Technology, the Chinese drone maker placed on the list in 2022, has continued to maintain a strong position in the U.S. consumer drone market despite its designation.

The latest additions show that Washington’s concerns about China’s military-civil fusion strategy are expanding from advanced chips and AI models into broader technology and manufacturing ecosystems.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260609010002864

June 9 (UPI) — The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday added bemotrizinol to the list of permitted active ingredients in over-the-counter sunscreens, the first addition to that list since the 1990s.

The Department of Health and Human Services “is advancing innovation by bringing a new sunscreen ingredient to the U.S. market for the first time in 20 years,” HHS Secretary Robert F.Kennedy Jr said. “Bemotrizinol has been used safely in Europe for decades, and FDA’s action will increase competition and consumer confidence in sunscreen products.

The FDA said the ingredient has low levels of absorption through the skin and into the body and is generally recognized as safe and effective for adults and children 6 months old and older.

The American Chemical Society said that BEMT blocks ultraviolet A and ultraviolet B light rays and was first used in sunscreens in the European Union in 2000, with Canada, Australia and some countries in Asia following suit soon after.

UV B rays have more energy, cause visible sunburns and are the ones blocked by most U.S. sunscreens today. However, UV A rays can also cause skin cancers, the American Cancer Society said. They also cause skin cells to age and can cause indirect damage to cells’ DNA. The ACS said about 95% of the UV rays that reach the ground are UV A rays.

The FDA said an over-the-counter monograph drug, such as a sunscreen product, can enter the market without an approved drug application if it meets certain requirements. DSM Nutritional Products LLC submitted an OTC monograph order request to add BEMT, at concentrations up to 6%, as a new active ingredient in the OTC monograph for sunscreens. The FDA proposed to add BEMT in December, and the public could submit comments through Jan. 26.

Israeli ambassador to the UN says Tel Aviv will cut ties with UN chief Antonio Guterres over the upcoming report.

The United Nations has “added Israel to the blacklist of sexual violence in conflict zones”, prompting Israel to cut ties with UN chief Antonio Guterres, the country’s ambassador to the UN says.

“We are done with this secretary-general,” Israeli ambassador Danny Danon added in a video posted on X on Thursday, denouncing the upcoming report from Guterres’s office.

The UN secretary-general’s annual report on conflict-related sexual violence is customarily presented to relevant states before publication. Last August, the report warned that Israel could be added to the list of parties suspected of, or responsible for, sexual violence in situations of armed conflict.

“The decision to blacklist Israel and accuse us of using sexual violence as a weapon of war is an outrageous decision,” Danon said.

“The secretary-general and his team continue to spread lies against Israel. To put us and Hamas terrorists on the same list, that’s unacceptable.”

The Israeli mission to the UN said in a statement that it will have no contact with the secretary-general’s office as long as Guterres serves as head of the organisation.

The country’s foreign ministry also expressed anger over the upcoming report.

“The shameful and absurd UN decision to include Israeli entities in the annex to the CRSV (conflict-related sexual violence) report is further proof of the UN’s true nature: a politicised and corrupt organisation that has abandoned its founding principles and systematically targets Israel as its primary mission,” Oren Marmorstein, a spokesperson for the Israeli foreign ministry, said on X.

Guterres’s spokesperson said they were aware of Danon’s remarks.

“For our part, the secretary-general’s door remains open,” Stephane Dujarric said.

Systematic pattern of abuse

Last August, the UN cited “credible information” regarding sexual violence committed by Israeli security forces against Palestinian detainees in prisons and other detention centres, and said UN inspectors had been denied access to the facilities.

“We invited the representative of the UN to come to Israel to check those ridiculous allegations. They chose not to come,” Danon said.

Palestinians detained in Israeli prisons, especially those taken from Gaza during Israel’s brutal war since 2023, have long revealed how they suffer dehumanising treatment by guards and soldiers, including torture and sexual violence. According to international human rights organisations, these testimonies are part of a broader and systematic pattern.

Furthermore, a report from the West Bank Protection Consortium last month found that sexual violence and other forms of gender-based abuse committed by Israeli settlers and soldiers are spurring Palestinians to leave the occupied West Bank.

Even foreigners, namely those on board a recent Gaza-bound aid flotilla, say that freed activists who were abducted from international waters faced abuse while in Israeli detention, including at least 15 separate cases of sexual assault or rape.

Earlier this month, Israel also rejected accusations of rape by its forces, which were detailed in a column by longtime New York Times journalist Nicholas Kristof. The Israeli government had responded to the report by stating that it would take the extraordinary step of suing the paper. Kristof’s reporting was based on the accounts of 14 male and female Palestinian victims.

Relations between the UN and Israel are fraught and have reached an all-time low since October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched an attack that preceded Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, which has killed more than 72,000 Palestinians.

Israeli authorities have criticised Guterres and other UN officials for their condemnation of its brutal conduct in Gaza. The UN chief was declared “persona non grata” in Israel in 2024.

Netflix picked up the rights to three more NFL contests amid government scrutiny over the migration of games from free TV to streaming.

The NFL’s first-ever regular season game in Melbourne, featuring the Los Angeles Rams and the San Francisco 49ers, will stream Sept. 10 on Netflix, the company announced Wednesday at its upfront presentation in New York. Netflix will present another NFL game first on Nov. 25 with a Thanksgiving eve game between the Rams and the Green Bay Packers at SoFi Stadium.

The streamer is also picking up a Saturday game in the final week of the regular season. With the Christmas double header Netflix has carried since 2024, the additions bring the total to five games next season.

The five games were a part of ESPN’s NFL package. ESPN relinquished the rights after the league took a 10% stake in the Walt Disney Co.-owned entity.

It was widely believed throughout the sports media business that all five games would go to streamers, split between Netflix and YouTube. But the other two will go to Fox, an international game that will air in the morning in the U.S., and NBC.

The two additional games are going to its traditional TV partners after politicians in Washington, including President Trump, raised concerns about the number of NFL contests that are moving off broadcast and behind streaming paywalls.

The Wall Street Journal reported last week that Fox Corp. Chairman Emeritus Rupert Murdoch visited Trump at the White House in February to warn how traditional TV networks could be priced out of the NFL due to competition from deep-pocketed streamers.

The Department of Justice has also inquired about whether the NFL is violating the antitrust status given to leagues when their teams collectively negotiate TV rights deals.

An NFL executive familiar with the deal who was not authorized to comment publicly said the added broadcast games are not related to the issues raised in Washington. “We always are looking for ways to increase reach at the benefit of our fans,” the executive said.

In recent years, the NFL has carved out a number of games from the broadcast packages to sell to Netflix and YouTube. Those games primarily come out of the regional Sunday afternoon games carried on Fox and CBS.

But the NFL makes the case that it offers 87% of its games on free over-the-air television than any other major sport. Games sold to streamers are still made available on the local TV stations in the local markets of the teams that are featured.

Questioned about his father’s meeting at the White House, Fox Corp. Executive Chairman Lachlan Murdoch told Wall Street analysts on Monday there is no tension between the league and his company, which has carried the NFL since 1994.

Murdoch also said there have been no new negotiations with the NFL, which has expressed a desire to redo its current media rights package that runs through the 2032-33 season but has an opt-out in 2030. Murdoch has previously said the company is paying fair market value in its current deal.

In addition to the international game in Week 10, Fox is getting an extra Saturday game in Week 15.

The NFL believes its product is undervalued in light of the massive $76-billion, 11-year contract the NBA entered with NBC, Amazon and ESPN last year. The NFL is in the middle of an 11-year deal that pays the league $110 billion for games that provide much higher ratings.

The league has also said the move to streaming in recent years — which includes putting the Thursday Night Football package on Amazon Prime Video — is necessary to reach younger viewers who are not watching traditional TV. The Thursday games are made available on free TV in the local markets of the teams featured.

The NFL does have the right to renegotiate with CBS before that opt-out due to the network’s transfer of ownership. CBS parent Paramount was acquired by Skydance Media last year.

The NFL and CBS are not close on the new deal. The league is looking to increase the network’s fee from $2.1 billion a year to $3 billion, according to people familiar with the discussions who were not authorized to comment.

The NFL is currently a break-even proposition for CBS at the current price.

But the NFL is at a significant advantage as the broadcast networks and their affiliated stations are dependent on the league, which provides a vast majority of the highest-rated programming on TV. NFL games give major leverage to TV station groups when they are negotiating new carriage deals from cable and satellite providers.