Global

CME blamed the outage, which halted trading for more than 11 hours, on a cooling failure at a data centre in Chicago.

Global futures markets were thrown into chaos for several hours after CME Group, the world’s largest exchange operator, suffered one of its longest outages in years, halting trading across stocks, bonds, commodities and currencies.

By 13:35 GMT on Friday, trading in foreign exchange, stock and bond futures as well as other products had resumed, after having been knocked out for more than 11 hours because of an outage at an important data centre, according to LSEG data.

CME blamed the outage on a cooling failure at data centres run by CyrusOne, which said its Chicago-area facility had affected services for customers, including CME.

The disruption stopped trading in major currency pairs on CME’s EBS platform, as well as benchmark futures for West Texas Intermediate crude, Nasdaq 100, Nikkei, palm oil and gold, according to LSEG data.

‘A black eye’

Trading volumes have been thinned out this week by the United States Thanksgiving holiday, and with dealers looking to close positions for the end of the month, there was a risk of volatility picking up sharply later on, market participants said.

“It’s a black eye to the CME and probably an overdue reminder of the importance of market structure and how interconnected all these are,” Ben Laidler, head of equity strategy at Bradesco BBI, said.

“We complacently take for granted that much of the timing is frankly not great. It’s month-end, a lot of things get rebalanced.”

“Having said that, it could have been a lot worse; it’ll be a very low-volume day. If you’re going to have it, there would have been worse days to have a breakdown like this,” he said.

Futures are a mainstay of financial markets and are used by dealers, speculators and businesses wishing to hedge or hold positions in a wide range of underlying assets. Without these and other instruments, brokers were left flying blind, and many were reluctant to trade contracts with no live prices for hours on end.

“Beyond the immediate risk of traders being unable to close positions – and the potential costs that follow – the incident raises broader concerns about reliability,” said Axel Rudolph, senior technical analyst at trading platform IG.

A few European brokerages said earlier in the day they had been unable to offer trading in some products on certain futures contracts.

Biggest exchange operator

CME is the biggest exchange operator by market value and says it offers the widest range of benchmark products, spanning rates, equities, metals, energy, cryptocurrencies and agriculture.

Average daily derivatives volume was 26.3 million contracts in October, CME said earlier this month.

The CME outage on Friday comes more than a decade after the operator had to shut electronic trading for some agricultural contracts in April 2014 due to technical problems, which at the time sent traders back onto the floor.

More recently, in 2024, outages at LSEG and Switzerland’s exchange operator briefly interrupted markets.

CME’s own shares were up 0.4 percent in premarket trading.

The Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) began to restore trading on Friday after a technical issue disrupted operations on the Dow Jones Industrial Average, S&P 500, and Nasdaq.

The shutdown was triggered by a cooling system failure at a data centre in the Chicago area, according to the facility’s operator, CyrusOne.

Engineering teams have since restarted several chillers and installed temporary cooling equipment to stabilise conditions, a spokesperson told Bloomberg.

According to CME Group’s indications, trading in US equity futures should be restarting soon after a glitch knocked it out for several hours.

The CME, one of the world’s largest derivatives exchanges, hosts near-continuous trading in millions of contracts tied to the S&P 500, Dow Jones Industrial Average, and Nasdaq 100. Friday’s interruption left traders grappling with uncertainty as they awaited the restoration of the platforms that underpin much of global futures activity.

The outage halted trading of US Treasury futures, while European and UK bond markets that trade on a different exchange were reported unaffected.

Futures in individual stocks were not affected, either. Coinbase Global rose 2.6% in pre-market trading as Bitcoin stayed above $91,000.

Wall Street is operating on an abbreviated schedule on Friday after being closed for the Thanksgiving holiday. Stock trading will close at 1pm Eastern Time (7pm CET).

In European trading, Germany’s DAX rose 0.20% after the release of fresh inflation data.

Britain’s FTSE 100 edged up 0.23% on gains in energy and mining stocks. The CAC 40 in France rose 0.19%.

In other dealings, Brent crude, the international standard for pricing, rose 0.13% to $62.62 per barrel.

UNAIDS says millions across the world lost access to treatment and preventive care due to financial shortfalls.

The United Nations agency for combating AIDS has announced that global funding disruptions for treatment and prevention programmes are leaving millions of people without access to care.

In a report released on Tuesday, UNAIDS said the global response to the disease “immediately entered crisis mode” after the United States halted funding when President Donald Trump took office in January.

The Trump administration had suspended all new foreign aid funds on January 25, except for military assistance to Israel and Egypt.

Some of the HIV funding was restored in the second half of the year, but in the wake of Trump’s decision to dismantle the US Agency for International Development (USAID), certain programmes have not resumed.

UNAIDS said the cuts were compounded by “intensifying economic and financial pressures on many low and middle-income countries”.

The funding shortfalls, it added, are having “having profound, lasting effects” on the lives of people across the world.

“People living with HIV have died due to service disruptions, millions of people at high risk of acquiring HIV have lost access to the most effective prevention tools available, over 2 million adolescent girls and young women have been deprived of essential health services, and community-led organizations have been devastated, with many being forced to close their doors,” the report read.

Due to the funding cuts, the number of people using preventive HIV medication, known as PrEP, fell by 64 percent in Burundi, 38 percent in Uganda and 21 percent in Vietnam. Condom distribution in Nigeria dropped by 55 percent.

“The funding crisis has exposed the fragility of the progress we fought so hard to achieve,” said Winnie Byanyima, the executive director of UNAIDS.

“Behind every data point in this report are people … babies missed for HIV screening, young women cut off from prevention support, and communities suddenly left without services and care. We cannot abandon them.”

Despite the financial crisis, UNAIDS said there were some positive trends emerging, including national and regional initiatives to bolster health programmes and treat the disease.

“Communities are rallying to support each other and the AIDS response. Although the most impacted countries are also some of the most indebted, limiting their ability to invest in HIV, governments have taken swift action to increase domestic funding where they can,” the report read.

“As a result, some countries have maintained or even increased the number of people receiving HIV treatment.”

The report recommends restructuring the international debt of lower-income countries and pausing their payments until 2030 to allow them to direct more resources to HIV care and prevention.

It also called for “inspiring innovation with prizes instead of patents, and treating health innovations as global public goods in times of pandemics”.

On top of dwindling funds, the report highlighted another challenge in the fight against AIDS: “a growing human rights crisis”.

“In 2025, for the first time since UNAIDS began monitoring punitive laws in 2008, the number of countries criminalizing same-sex sexual activity and gender expression increased,” it said.

“Globally, anti-gender and anti-rights movements are growing in influence and geographic reach, jeopardizing gains made to date on the rights of women and girls, people living with HIV and LGBTIQ+ people.”

In a time of great shifts, it is of note that the global development financial system is also at a crossroads and in need of reform for reform. From the articles listed below, I observe four developing themes, whether explicitly or implicitly mentioned. I will describe them below and conclude that these are the four main realities that the new development financial system would need to be shaped around.

First, we see the emergence of a new class of “middle class” emerging markets with a greater stake in the multilateral system, greater global economic connections, a greater desire for agency and voice in engaging with the Global North, and a greater ability to navigate the myriad cross-border economic systems that have evolved in the past 60 years. Let’s broadly generalize these as middle-income countries, including ASEAN, countries in Latin America, Central Asia, parts of the Middle East, and perhaps parts of Africa. For these countries, Alldo Januardy aptly comments: “The Global South is no longer waiting to be included. It is building something of its own—shaped by necessity, grounded in local priorities, and driven by the hard lessons of dependency.” Perhaps it is these countries that are most able and well-suited to take advantage of decentralized funding models with greater autonomy and choice. Financial innovations relevant for these groups of countries include multilateral regional development banks (Setser) or programs of public-private financing (Mundy) and require financial liberalization for them to have more access to existing global capital markets. These countries have the foundations of economic activity and are ready to access a more diverse array of funding mechanisms to fund a more diverse array of activities.

Second, we also note a bifurcation in what used to be lumped together as emerging markets. For poor countries vulnerable to debt, especially if they are also vulnerable to climate change and conflict, we observe a slide backwards in their internal economic capacity. These countries have not been able to withstand the pressures of COVID on their own and in some cases have fallen into distress. Further, it seems that the recent shocks may have so stressed their systems that their rates of growth have been dampened in the medium to longer term. These countries need access to immediate financing and fundamental support. IMF President Kristalina Georgieva says that these countries need $440bn in additional financing over 5 years to prevent further crises. Furthermore, these countries face difficulties as funding for the IMF and WB by developed countries retreats. Ms. Georgieva suggests further contribution to the IMF’s PRGT facility, leveraging up the World Bank balance sheet. Personally, I think targeted support of the type described by The Economist in “The Demise of Foreign Aid Offers an Opportunity”—wherein capital is deployed in targeted areas and projects where governments and UN agencies have coordinating power in relation to global crises like climate change and where there exist positive spillover effects—is more relevant. On the other hand, Makhtar Diop described a new securitization model of combining various EM loans and selling them at a higher credit rating. For these assets, I think such an approach is misguided and risks landing existing asset managers with toxic assets in the future. Many of these countries do not have the economic nor governance capacity to participate in financial markets as a normal member.

Third, China has become the largest bilateral creditor to many developing countries with a different model of lending driven by different priorities. Speaking from knowledge derived outside of this class, its early expansion into the Belt and Road Policy more than a decade ago was driven by an opportunity to offload pressure from the accumulation of massive FX reserves and internal spare capacity in primary and infrastructure industries. Now, those priorities have transitioned to a more transactional, targeted approach targeting specific sectors. Furthermore, Chinese creditors often took on projects that would qualify for participation of traditional Paris Club lenders. All that is to say, there is quite a gap between the Chinese and traditional Paris Club lenders that needs to be bridged. Efforts to do this are already underway through the G20 Common Framework for Debt Treatments. The US desires China to become a “responsible creditor” on its own terms (Crebo-Rediker), which China does not desire to do as it has its own model and priorities. A more cohesive global consensus on global lending will require China’s participation and hence the ability of China and the US-led Paris Club to come to some sort of agreement.

Finally, all these realities are underpinned by the backdrop of the globalization, economic development, and innovation of the last 70 years in the Pax Americana. Economic models and industries are now more numerous and diverse than ever before, with many variations of interlinkages, creating a complex and intricate web of economic relationships. Furthermore, within the financial system itself, technologies like electronic trading, online retail participation, new financial products, and blockchain have made capital more transmutable than ever before. It is no surprise that we are at an exciting crossroad and in need of reform. In fact, the Bretton Woods model has done remarkably well to facilitate and accommodate the changes up to this point! I am inspired by the amount of work that has gone into creating this system and hope that the global community will again find its way forward.

Russia is framing artificial intelligence as a geopolitical technology on par with nuclear weapons, with Sberbank First Deputy CEO Alexander Vedyakhin warning that only nations capable of building their own large language models will hold real influence in the 21st century. Speaking at Moscow’s flagship AI Journey event, Vedyakhin said Russia considers it a strategic achievement to be among the few countries with home-grown AI and insists the state must rely exclusively on domestic models for sensitive sectors like public services, healthcare, and education. His comments echo President Vladimir Putin’s recent remarks that indigenous AI is essential for Russian sovereignty. While Sberbank and Yandex lead Russia’s push to compete with U.S. and Chinese AI giants, sanctions and limited computing power continue to restrain Moscow’s capability.

Why It Matters

Russia’s framing of AI as a sovereignty-defining technology signals a hardening global divide in the race for digital power. By likening AI to nuclear capability, Moscow is underscoring the strategic leverage it believes advanced models can confer over national security, economic competitiveness, and societal infrastructure. For Western policymakers, the statement highlights how AI is increasingly entwined with geopolitical rivalry, sanctions regimes, and technological self-reliance. For markets, the message is more nuanced: despite the rhetoric, Russia admits it cannot match global leaders in compute or scale, and it warns investors that AI infrastructure spending may not repay itself quickly, raising questions about the economic viability of high-intensity AI development.

Russia’s state institutions, security apparatus, and public-service sectors are central consumers of domestic AI models as Moscow seeks digital autonomy. Sberbank and Yandex are the primary corporate developers, tasked with building national-scale models under sanctions constraints. Western governments and AI firms remain part of the geopolitical backdrop, as Russia’s push for self-sufficiency follows restricted access to advanced chips and cloud hardware. Russian businesses, from healthcare to education providers, will increasingly rely on domestic AI systems while international partners watch how far Russia can expand its capabilities without global supply chains.

What’s Next

Russia aims to expand from one or two national AI systems to several independent models, but its development will remain limited by restricted access to high-performance computing. Moscow will continue steering AI regulation toward data sovereignty, banning foreign models from handling state or sensitive information. As Russia ramps its rhetoric around AI power, expect greater global pressure for technological blocs, digital “non-alignment,” and AI export controls. Meanwhile, the Kremlin’s caution about an “AI bubble” hints that its investments will be narrower and more state-directed than those in the U.S. or China, potentially slowing innovation but avoiding the risk of overextension.

With information from Reuters.

When South Africa opens the 2025 G20 Summit on November 22nd in Cape Town, the meeting will not simply be another high-level diplomatic gathering. It will be a test of what global leadership looks like in an era defined by debt crises, climate shocks, and geopolitical fragmentation. It will also be a summit shaped as much by who is present as by who is absent.

For the first time since leaders began to regularly attend the G20, the United States is not expected to attend at the presidential level. That absence will hang heavily over a summit built around three themes that South Africa has placed at the core of its G20 hosting: solidarity, equality, and sustainability. This is not symbolic branding. These are principles that directly challenge the structure and priorities of the current international system and America’s decision not to participate will only magnify their political weight.

South Africa’s Vision for a More Equal Order

South Africa has been clear about what it wants this G20 to represent. The country’s diplomats have framed the summit as an opportunity to “rebalance global governance” and restore trust between advanced economies and the Global South. That begins with solidarity, not as a moral appeal but as a practical necessity in a world where the gaps in competition are tightening across virtually every sector.

South African officials have emphasized that the world is too interconnected, through supply chains, energy markets, debt exposures, and climate shocks, for any nation to pursue growth alone. Solidarity, in their framing, means shared responsibility for global risks and shared input into global rules.

Expect to see debt restructuring as a key component of the weekend. Dozens of low and middle-income countries are approaching insolvency. Many see the G20 as the only venue capable of compelling creditors, including China, Western banks, and the IMF to negotiate jointly. South Africa intends to push for more predictable mechanisms, faster timelines, and deeper reductions of overall debt.

The theme of equality is expected to be even more pointed. Pretoria has argued that the international financial system remains structurally biased. Voting power at the IMF does not reflect modern economic reality. Climate finance packages distribute risk upward and accountability downward. Supply chain standards reflect the priorities of wealthy states far more than those of producing states.

South Africa wants this summit to pressure advanced economies to move beyond incrementalism and to recognize developing nations as cooperators, not beneficiaries, of global economic design.

Sustainability as an Economic Imperative

As noted in the central theme of the summit, sustainability is the key talking point of the weekend. South Africa is expected to focus on climate adaptation financing, food security resilience, renewable infrastructure gaps, green industrialization, and the economic displacement climate change is already causing.

Pretoria’s message is blunt: sustainability is not the environmental chapter of the global economy, it is the global economy. The safeguards nations build today will determine whether their populations can withstand the shocks of the coming decade.

The Symbolism of America’s Absence

While the summit’s themes are forward-looking, the headlines thus far are dominated by one glaring issue; The United States is boycotting the event, and not sending a single delegate.

This absence is certainly meant to be received as a bold statement. In a moment when most of the global agenda is being rewritten around solidarity, shared burdens, debt relief, and climate vulnerability, the United States is choosing not to stand at the table.

Many delegations will read this as confirmation of what they already suspected: that the U.S. is prioritizing bilateral leverage and transactional deals over multilateral governance. In other words, America is choosing power over partnership.

That decision will have ripple effects. If Washington is not present to influence the language of solidarity or the scope of sustainability targets, other powers will be. The U.S. forfeits not only visibility, but the ability to shape norms that will define the next phase of global cooperation. The strongman tactic will prove less effective as the world continues to accelerate towards a multipolar world, as opposed to a unipolar order where D.C. stands above the rest.

China and India Eager to Fill the Vacuum

China is expected to enter the summit with a confident posture, despite Xi Jinping not attending. Beijing has spent the past several years positioning itself as the Global South’s premier development partner. A G20 centered around equality and solidarity aligns perfectly with China’s messaging: that it represents a more inclusive, less conditional model of global cooperation. This message will be even more prominent with an absentee America. To capitalize on the overall theme of moving away from Western dominated structures, it would be reasonable to assume that many lending systems denominated in the Yuan will be discussed on the sidelines.

India, meanwhile, will frame itself as the democratic partner of choice for developing economies. Expect New Delhi to emphasize supply chain diversification, digital equality, and climate-resilient infrastructure. India will also push for greater representation of Global South nations in multilateral institutions, a message that will resonate strongly in Africa and Southeast Asia.

Europe Attempts to Lead

European leaders will arrive prepared to engage deeply on sustainability and climate finance, but without Washington their influence will be limited. Europe cannot match America’s financial firepower nor China’s development machinery.

While Europeans tend to embrace the rhetoric of solidarity, they remain cautious about large-scale debt forgiveness, new climate financing mandates, and reforms that would dilute their institutional voting power. That tension prevents Europe from presenting itself as the natural successor to U.S. leadership, but rather an extension of it in the eyes of many developing nations.

A Summit That Signals a Changing Global Order

If South Africa succeeds in shaping the weekend around solidarity, equality, and sustainability, the summit could represent the most significant shift in G20 philosophy since its creation.

Tomorrow’s G20 will not be remembered for dramatic breakthroughs. It will be remembered for something subtler but more consequential; a turning point in global governance where the United States stepped back and the rest of the world showed it could step forward.

Division marked the COP30 climate summit in Brazil as countries struggled to reach a consensus on several sticking points, including a push to phase out fossil fuels.

As the world seeks to address the climate crisis, experts say scientists, politicians, media and business all have a role to play in keeping the public engaged.

But are they succeeding?

Presenter: Neave Barker

Guests:

Professor John Sweeney – Contributor to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Nobel Peace Prize-winning assessment report

Professor Allam Ahmed – Leading scholar in sustainable development and the knowledge economy

Michael Shank – Climate communication expert and former director of media strategy at Climate Nexus

The impact of Machine Learning (ML) on the global Foreign Exchange (Forex) is growing day by day. This results in a profound transformation of the algorithmic landscape, leading to a decrease in the dominance of human intuition, quantitative models, and macroeconomic analysis. These changes impact the growth of market efficiency, shift risk management patterns, and affect the very nature of global currency flow.

The ML-Driven Revolution in Forex Trading

Machine Learning, as an essential subset of Artificial Intelligence (AI), helps computer systems learn from extended datasets, identify sophisticated models, and make predictions without any pre-programmed patterns. Human traders simply cannot match the edge ML provides because the very environment of the currency market is getting faster and more data-rich.

Enhancing Predictive Analysis

ML models process vast volumes of market data pretty successfully. Their performance ranges from simple tick-by-tick price movements and trading volumes to social media responses and global news feeds. That is why forecasting with unprecedented accuracy becomes a reality. All this deals with the following:

1. Real-time data synthesis. The algorithms analyze time-series data, learn from historical market volatility, and immediately adapt to new information. Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) and Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) are especially efficient for that.
2. Sentiment analysis. ML systems use Natural Language Processing (NLP). That allows them to scan thousands of new articles, economic reports, and political statements. Therefore, they never miss leading indicators based on market sentiment towards a specific currency.
3. Pattern recognition. ML can detect and observe subtle, non-linear relationships between disparate currency pairs and timeframes. In that way, they analyze all possible opportunities. 

Automation and Execution Speed

The most obvious impact of ML is observed in spreading algorithmic trading. Trades executed by automated systems are based on ML-driven insights. So, they are speedy, precise, and independent of human emotional bias.

Such automation is clearly observed in Expert Advisors (EAs), or trading bots. They can operate autonomously on various platforms, for example, on MetaTrader. The industry needs and is continuously introducing new top-rated Forex EAs. Their algorithms have already demonstrated perfect performance and resilience. These ML-powered EAs can manage such strategies as:

• High-Frequency Trading (HFT), processing thousands of trades per second;
• Adaptable trend following, used for adjusting stop-loss and take-profit levels to the shifts in real-time market schedules;
• Risk mitigation strategies, implemented through changes in hedging positions and reducing leverage according to predicted spikes in volatility.

Strategic Implications for Global Finance

ML integration into the Forex environment has far-reaching consequences. It affects international capital flows and requires enhanced risk management for financial institutions and states.

Redefining Currency Risk Management

ML provides high-quality tools for hedging and managing currency exposure. It is vital for multinational corporations and central banks. The significantly improved forecasting accuracy is crucial for optimizing forward contract planning and international payment strategies.

ML models can ensure dynamic hedging by continuous reassessment of risk-return profiles. They are capable of recommending dynamic adjustments to hedging ratios due to changing geopolitical or economic situations.

Moreover, advanced AI models can detect unusual trading patterns. That can diminish market abuse, like front-running or spoofing, much faster than conventional surveillance systems can. So, market integrity becomes better managed and more sustainable.

Geopolitical and Regulatory Challenges

So, we have examined the obvious benefits of the strategic deployment of ML. However, what about drawbacks? There are certain challenges here that require regulatory foresight and diplomatic engagement. They involve the following:

1. Algorithmic bias. An ML model may be trained on biased or incomplete historical data. That can cause systemic flaws and market instabilities, especially during unforeseen global events.
2. Concentration of power. Large hedge funds and financial institutions can concentrate large power in their hands. That may happen because the resources needed to develop, deploy, and maintain advanced ML infrastructure are hardly available beyond their authority. The need for specialized hardware and proprietary datasets may result in a systemic risk to market decentralization.
3. Need for explainability. All regulators require transparency. Complex neural networks cannot provide that due to their ‘black box’ nature. It creates a compliance hurdle that must be overcome with the help of explainable AI (XAI) frameworks.

Conclusion: A New Era of Algorithmic Diplomacy

We need to understand and accept that Machine Learning is not an additional helping tool but a superior new operating system for global currency exchange. It strategically impacts everything related to international trading. Its ability to extract the most actionable intelligence from gigantic data volumes can result in hyper-efficient, instantaneous, and emotionless trade operations.

The rise of complex algorithmic systems, including top-rated Forex EAs, requires a new form of ‘algorithmic diplomacy.’ That is why global financial institutions and regulators must keep in touch, and their collaboration should be aimed at ethical frameworks and technical standards development. That can help them enhance the stability, transparency, and fairness of the international trading market for the benefit of the entire global economy.

Annual military spending is rising globally at its steepest level since the Cold War.

And after a break of more than 30 years, the United States says it might restart testing nuclear weapons.

So if the global arms race is back on, who’s winning, how is war changing, and what’s the true cost of escalation?

Presenter: Neave Barker

Guests:

Michael Boyle – Professor of political science at Rutgers University–Camden

Elijah Magnier – Senior political risk analyst and a regional military expert

Fabrice Pothier – Former head of policy planning at NATO and a senior defence and strategy analyst

SEOUL, Nov. 20 (UPI) — Kenneth Bae, the Korean-American missionary who endured 735 days as a political prisoner in North Korea, is now leading a renewed international effort to realize a unified Korean Peninsula.

Bae, 57, a naturalized U.S. citizen, was the longest-held American citizen in North Korea since the Korean War — an experience he now views as a mission to become a “voice for the voiceless” North Korean people.

Bae’s ordeal began in 2012 when he was arrested while leading his 18th “Love DPRK Tour” group. He was charged with “conspiracy to overthrow the state” and sentenced to 15 years of hard labor. He became the first U.S. citizen to be confined to a North Korean kyohwaso, or re-education camp.

“The ultimate charge was that I had tried to overthrow the North Korean regime through prayer and worship,” Bae said in an interview. His unintentional mistake was bringing an external hard drive containing a documentary that showed the suffering of ordinary North Koreans, which became evidence for the regime’s accusations.

Before his arrest, the “Love DPRK Tour” was focused less on proselytizing and more on cultural exchange and prayer for the land. Bae took some 300 people from 17 countries over two years to engage in activities like making kimchi, learning traditional dance and simply “walking the land” while praying for the North Korean people.

He was released in 2014 after a high-level diplomatic intervention led by then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, an event that highlighted his strong, enduring ties to Washington policymakers.

New focus: from defector aid to unification

After his release, Bae initially established the Nehemiah Global Initiative in South Korea, primarily focusing on aiding North Korean defectors with settlement, education and even the financial support needed to rescue family members from third countries. Over eight years, NGI provided English education to about 800 young defectors.

In 2022, he rebranded the organization as the New Korea Foundation International, signaling a critical shift in focus. While support for defectors continues, the core mission is now actively preparing for reunification and the reconstruction of North Korea.

“Reunification is not an option; it is a necessity and a mission for our people,” Bae said, emphasizing the stark difference between his two years of captivity and the seven decades the North Korean populace has lived without freedom.

He insists on a South Korea-led unification that is welcomed by North Korean citizens and supported by the international community. He stresses that the true “target of unification” is the North Korean populace, not the Pyongyang regime.

Mobilizing global support: the “One Korea” campaign

The foundation launched the New Korea Unification Campaign under the slogan, “One State, One Nation, One Future, One Korea.” The campaign is a comprehensive, multi-faceted effort to build global consensus for a free and democratic unified Korea.

The campaign offers three primary ways to participate: sign, give and serve.

• It urges global citizens to join the Signature Campaign (Petition movement) to showcase worldwide support and to join the Nehemiah Prayer Pledge.

This prayer movement, originally launched by Bae’s founding organization, the Nehemiah Global Initiative, already has garnered 6,500 signatures from 75 countries to pray for the people of North Korea and for unification.

• The New Korea Gospel Broadcast is a cornerstone project, a planned U.S.-based AM Christian broadcast intended to reach North Koreans with information about the outside world and the Christian Gospel.

Recognizing the challenges and interruptions faced by official broadcasts like the Voice of America and Radio Free Asia, this private-sector effort aims to maintain a vital source of outside information.

The broadcast will share “letters of hope,” directly inspired by the hundreds of letters Bae received while imprisoned. To fund this critical initiative, the foundation is seeking 1,000 people to contribute $20 per month.

• Other core campaign projects include Raising the Reunification Reconstruction Fund to support relief for refugees, the Human Rights Advocacy Movement and the Nehemiah Scholarship for defectors.

Urgency of the three-year window

Bae views the current geopolitical climate as critical, warning against the danger of the peninsula’s division becoming permanent through the “Two States” theory. He believes that if the two-state narrative is allowed to solidify, it would be a moral “betrayal” of the North Korean people.

He strongly urges the younger generation in South Korea to reject the notion that unification is a financial burden, arguing instead that North Korea is a “land of opportunity.”

“With its natural resources and a combined population exceeding 80 million, a unified Korea would become a powerful and prosperous nation,” he asserted.

He sees the next three years as a crucial window to prevent the permanent entrenchment of the division. Bae is actively appealing to U.S. leaders and policymakers for their support of the Unification Campaign, emphasizing his strong personal connections to American officials and his belief that global consensus is paramount.

Bae believes that by focusing on creating interest, knowing the situation and action, the Korean people and the international community can ensure the path to a single, free Korea remains open.

For more information on the New Korea Unification Campaign, visit the New Korea Foundation International website: newkoreafi.org.

The sport betting scandal that took hold of the Turkish Football Federation this week has put a spotlight on an endemic issue.

Hundreds of players and referees have been accused of illegally placing bets.

Authorities are trying to understand the scale and impact of a situation they’re calling a “moral crisis”.

But it’s not just Turkiye, it’s not just football, and it’s not just the lower leagues.

Betting scandals are increasingly hitting major sports leagues around the world.

Fans are being bombarded with sports gambling advertisements, and betting regulations are easing.

So, is sport still about the love of the game, or just the rush of placing a bet?

What impact is gambling having on the pitch, and what can authorities do to keep the game honest?

Presenter: Nick Clark

Guests: 

Ali Emre Dedeoglu – Sports commentator

Tancredi Palmeri – International sports analyst

Jamie Allen – Football journalist and writer

European markets opened significantly lower on Friday, following a retreat in Asian shares in the morning and Wall Street’s tumble on Thursday, as investors reassessed the outlook for interest-rate cuts and questioned the lofty valuations of leading US technology and AI stocks.

“Markets are down across the board as investors fret about cracks in the narrative that’s driven the mother of all tech rallies over the past few years,” said Dan Coatsworth, head of markets at AJ Bell. The key concern is “about rich equity valuations and how billions of dollars are being spent on AI just at a time when the jobs market is looking fragile”, he added.

In Europe, sentiment was gloomy on Friday morning as UK government bond yields jumped following reports that Chancellor Rachel Reeves has abandoned plans to raise income tax rates in this month’s Autumn Budget. The ten-year gilt yield climbed above 4.54% before easing slightly. If confirmed, the chancellor’s move — first reported by the Financial Times — would leave a shortfall in the public finances.

London equities weakened, with bank shares among the worst performers on the FTSE 100 as investors digested the prospect of a tighter fiscal backdrop.

By around 11:00 CET, the FTSE 100 was down more than 1.1%, the European benchmark Stoxx 600 had lost nearly 1%, the DAX in Frankfurt dipped more than 0.7% and the CAC 40 in Paris fell nearly 0.7%. The Madrid and Milan indexes were down 1.2% and 1% respectively.

“Despite the doom and gloom, the scale of the market pullback wasn’t severe enough to suggest widespread panic,” said Coatsworth, adding that “a 1% decline in the FTSE 100 is not out of the ordinary for a one-day movement when markets are feeling grumpy”.

On the corporate front, luxury group Richemont was among the best performers, soaring 7.5% after beating forecast first-half results. Siemens Energy jumped more than 10% after the company raised its targets for the 2028 financial year. In other news, French Ubisoft delayed its financial report for the past six months; trading in its shares was suspended after an earlier drop of more than 8%.

Across the Atlantic, Wall Street endured one of its weakest sessions since April on Thursday, with the S&P 500 sliding 1.7% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average falling 1.7% from its record high set a day earlier. The tech-heavy Nasdaq dropped 2.3%.

Shares in major AI-linked companies came under heavy selling pressure, with Nvidia down 3.6%, Super Micro Computer off 7.4%, Palantir falling 6.5% and Broadcom losing 4.3%. Oracles lost more than 4%.

The sector’s extraordinary gains this year have prompted comparisons with the dot-com boom, fuelling doubts about how much further prices can rise.

Expectations for a further US interest-rate cut in December have also diminished, with market pricing now suggesting only a marginal chance the Federal Reserve will move again this year.

Asian markets mirrored the downbeat tone as fresh data showed China’s factory output grew at its slowest pace in 14 months in October, rising 4.9% year on year — down from 6.5% in September and missing expectations. Fixed-asset investment also weakened, dragged down by ongoing softness in the property sector.

South Korea’s Kospi led regional losses, tumbling 3.8% amid heavy selling of technology shares. Samsung Electronics dropped 5.5% and SK Hynix slid 8.5%, while LG Energy Solution lost 4.4%. Taiwan’s Taiex declined 1.8%.

Japan’s Nikkei 225 shed nearly 1.8%, reversing Thursday’s gains, with SoftBank Group plunging 6.6%. In China, Hong Kong’s Hang Seng fell 2% and the Shanghai Composite slipped 1%.

Meanwhile, oil prices strengthened. Brent crude rose nearly 1.6% to $63.99 a barrel, and West Texas Intermediate added 1.8% to $59.76. The dollar was slightly firmer at ¥154.55, while the euro traded at $1.1637.

Over the past decade, we have seen again how the suffering experienced by the people of Gaza continues in the midst of global political forces that are silent on the sidelines. The Global Sumud Flotilla (GSF) as a new form of global solidarity emerged and was formed to turn a blind eye to this injustice. This movement itself sails across the country’s borders carrying messages of humanity and peaceful resistance as a form of opposition to Israel’s blockade policy that closes Palestinian land, air, and sea access to the Gaza Strip (Global Sumud Flotilla, 2025). The failure of formal diplomacy to open humanitarian channels has led international civil society to take the initiative to take over the role to show the world that now geopolitical conditions no longer limit and bind global solidarity to take steps on humanitarian issues like this.

The author considers that the Global Sumud Flotilla movement is a real representation of the practice of transnationalism, where this movement is a network of cross-border communities that move together with the same goals and basic human values. The moral, social, and political dimensions are all combined into one in the GSF; this is a concrete example of the active role of global civil society in humanitarian issues in Palestine. For this reason, the author will focus this discussion on three main aspects, namely the origins and actors behind the formation of the GSF movement, the human values and transnational solidarity that underlie this movement, and its relevance in the era of globalization, which is a manifestation of transnational society.

Discussion

The history of the formation of the Global Sumud Flotilla movement is rooted in an international network that has also tried to penetrate the blockade of Gaza through the sea route since 2010, namely the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) movement. Based on information from the official website of GSF (2025), there are more than 30 organizations from various parts of the world that are involved in this initiative, including Europe, Latin America, and Asia. It is not because of the state’s agenda or political interests, but the reason they sail is because of the humanitarian mission they bring, namely “Break the siege, break the silence.” There are various actors who participate in this movement, ranging from humanitarian activists and civil society leaders to journalists anddoctors, so this proves that the global community can also collaborate or cooperate outside the state structure. Keck and Sikkink (1998) put forward the theory of transnational advocacy networks; within the framework of this theory can be a strong example of how this network of cross-border activism uses their moral solidarity to oppose state power.

The main value that underlies or is the foundation of this movement is an Arabic term, namely “Sumud,” which means constancy or fortitude. Well, in this Palestinian context, sumud reflects the determination of the Palestinian people who are trying to survive and protect their homeland even in the midst of the colonial siege and violence that constantly hits them. This value was then adopted by the global community that is a member of the GSF as a form of symbolic solidarity that underlies their movement so that it is not only the Palestinian people who have constancy but also the common spirit of humanity who are moving to oppose and reject the injustices that occur. GSF volunteers stated that in this mission they not only brought the issue of aid but also defended the dignity of humanity in the face of the ruling military power (Harakah Daily, 2025).

            The practice of transnationalism in the GSF is very clear, and we can see it in how this movement operates. All coordination is carried out in full by global civil society networks through various mechanisms, such as donations, digital campaigns, and international advocacy, so no single country is the main leader or sponsor in this movement. In breaking through the blockade of Gaza, global civil society faces various major challenges, but the presence of this GSF shows us all how this cross-border collaborative movement can suppress world public opinion. Every voyage they make can be used as an alternative space for diplomacy or citizen diplomacy, which emphasizes the position of the global community, which plays an important role in encouraging international humanitarian issues.

In addition to bringing physical aid, such as food, medical equipment, clothing, and so on, the GSF also plays a powerful symbolic role that is no less important. For example, when their ship was attacked by the Israeli navy, which occurred in October 2025, these volunteers did not show their fear of the Israeli navy (Kumparan, 2025). Instead, they showed and affirmed their determination to continue sailing to give freedom to the Palestinian people, especially in the Gaza Strip. The attitude shown by these volunteers reflects how the sense of transnational solidarity can transcend and eliminate their fear of repression. So, these people are actually not just volunteers but also a real form of global moral resistance to structural injustice.

The GSF movement also showed the world an important shift in international political practice. We can see that in humanitarian issues, which used to only move and become the realm of state diplomacy, it has now changed with the takeover by a global civil society network that has a common vision. The biggest challenge for the international community in dealing with this problem lies not only in the physical blockade of Gaza but also in the moral blockade that occurs here, which makes many countries reluctant to take action (Dall’Asta, 2025). For this reason, the GSF is here as the antithesis of state passivity, which shows countries and the whole world that if the citizens of the world unite and take collective action, then they can break through the global political impasse, as happened to the state.

From an academic point of view, the Sumud Flotilla has actually expanded the meaning of transnationalism, as explained by Scholte (2005) in his book entitled “Globalization: A Critical Introduction,” that social relations that cross national borders are built on the basis of shared values and goals, not because of national sovereignty. The GSF here affirms the existence of a global civil society that works in parallel with the nation-state system. In addition, this kind of cross-border solidarity can create a transnational form of humanity that is arguably more organic, so it means that the world community forms a network of collective action to deal with the ongoing global crisis.

Although this impact has not been able to end the blockade of Gaza, the existence of the GSF itself has had a great moral impact. This movement revived our awareness that in fact world politics does not only belong to the elite and the state but also belongs to all of us, belonging to the citizens of the world who care about it. Not only that, this movement also shows how a human value is able to penetrate walls or boundaries in geopolitics. This kind of initiative plays a very important role in building global awareness of what is happening in Palestine, that the struggle of the Palestinian people is a universal humanitarian struggle (Saleem & Khurshid, 2025).

Conclusion

The three arguments above, which focus on the origins and actors behind the GSF movement, the underlying and foundational humanitarian values, and its relevance as a manifestation of this transnational society, have shown that the Global Sumud Flotilla movement is a tangible form of cross-border solidarity on humanitarian issues in Palestine. This movement confirms to the world that the moral strength possessed by global civil society can be a real alternative to diplomacy that has repeatedly failed to uphold justice. Thus, we can conclude that the Global Sumud Flotilla is not only a symbol of humanitarian shipping but also a form of real representation of the birth of a transnational society that plays an active role in fighting for global humanity. And it also reminds us that true humanity does not know the state border but is something that is born or created from the collective consciousness to continue to sail against the injustice that exists in this world.

In a world where 3.4 billion people live in countries that spend more on debt interest than on health and education combined, the global financial system isn’t just flawed, it’s fundamentally unjust. This alarming reality formed the core of our conversation with Bodo Ellmers, Managing Director of Global Policy Forum Europe, following the recent UNCTAD 16 conference in Geneva. Against the backdrop of widening inequality and escalating debt distress across the Global South, Ellmers—a veteran policy expert with over two decades in the field—offered a stark diagnosis of the systemic failures in our international financial architecture and charted a path toward meaningful reform.

The Double Squeeze: How Debt Worsens Inequality

For Ellmers, the debt crisis represents a double-edged sword cutting through global development. “It squeezes fiscal space,” he explains, “constraining governments’ ability to finance public services and development.” This creates a vicious cycle where indebted nations must choose between servicing external debts and investing in their people’s well-being.

The impact manifests in two dimensions: nationally, through reduced spending on social protection, education, and healthcare; and internationally, as debt service payments flow from poor countries to rich creditors, effectively widening the gap between Global North and South.

An Architecture of Imbalance

When asked about characterizations of the international financial architecture as “neo-colonial,” Ellmers focuses on the concrete imbalances. The IMF and World Bank operate on a “one dollar, one vote” system that gives wealthy nations disproportionate power, with the US holding veto rights. Meanwhile, crucial financial regulation bodies like the OECD and Financial Stability Board exclude smaller developing countries entirely, despite setting rules with global impact.

The reform path remains blocked, Ellmers notes, because any meaningful redistribution of voting power would reduce US influence below its veto threshold. This impasse has forced regions to develop alternatives, from China’s new development banks to Africa’s proposed stability mechanism. Yet these solutions come with their own challenges, potentially creating new dependencies even as they offer welcome alternatives to traditional donors.

The Missing Piece: A Sovereign Debt Restructuring Mechanism

Perhaps the most glaring gap in the current system, according to Ellmers, is the absence of a fair sovereign debt restructuring process. Unlike corporate insolvency, where independent courts balance interests, indebted nations must negotiate from weakness with diverse creditors.

Ellmers advocates for a system that would prioritize human rights, ensuring that “a state needs to have the financial capacity to fulfill its human rights obligations towards citizens. This money cannot be touched by creditors.” This approach would fundamentally reorient debt negotiations from purely financial calculations to human-centered outcomes.

Climate Finance or Climate Debt?

The conversation turned to climate finance, where Ellmers describes a “scandal” in the making. Wealthy, high-polluting nations continue to provide climate finance primarily as loans rather than grants, pushing vulnerable countries deeper into debt while addressing climate challenges they did little to create.

While mechanisms like Special Drawing Rights offer temporary relief, Ellmers sees them as treating symptoms rather than root causes. The deeper issue remains the voluntary nature of climate finance commitments and the reluctance of wealthy nations to provide adequate grant-based funding.

A Path Forward: Protest and Policy

For activists and social movements seeking change, Ellmers emphasizes the need for dual strategies. The successful Jubilee campaign of the 1990s combined technical advocacy with mass mobilization, creating pressure that neither approach could achieve alone. This combination remains essential today, expert analysis must meet street-level mobilization to drive meaningful reform.

Conclusion: Reclaiming Sovereignty: The Unfinished Fight for Debt Justice

As Ellmers soberly concludes, “debt kills the SDGs.” With 3.4 billion people affected by this crisis, the need for structural reform transcends economic policy, it becomes a moral imperative for global justice and human dignity. The insights from our conversation paint an unambiguous picture: the current international financial architecture perpetuates inequality, undermines development, and fails to address interconnected crises from debt to climate change.

Yet within this challenging landscape, Ellmers’ analysis also reveals pathways for change. From institutional reforms that rebalance power toward Global South nations, to innovative mechanisms that protect human rights in debt restructuring, to the powerful synergy between grassroots mobilization and technical advocacy, the tools for transformation exist. What’s needed now is the political will to implement them.

Ellmers’ analysis leaves us with a crucial takeaway: the power to change this system lies in a combination of technical precision and unrelenting public pressure. The solutions—from a sovereign debt restructuring mechanism that protects human rights to shifting climate finance from loans to grants—are within reach. What has been missing is the political will to implement them. That will must be forged, and it must be forged now. The future of global justice, and the lives of billions, depend on it.

In a small win for California’s film and TV industry, mixed martial arts franchise Combate Global will relocate production from Miami to Burbank.

The franchise, which will air on Spanish-language network Estrella TV after a six-year run on Univision, will film 20 live events at Estrella’s new networks studio, starting in February. That space seats 500 people and has been used to film the talent competition show “Tengo Talento Mucho Talento.”

The franchise wanted to relocate to Southern California because of the bigger media market, said Campbell McLaren, chief executive of Combate Global and co-creator of the UFC.

The move is expected to create about 60 jobs, and is estimated to have an economic impact of more than $1 million on an annual basis for the 20 shows, which is up from the eight produced this year, he said.

“It’s a bigger market, access to more talent, access to more behind-the-camera talent, access to more on-camera talent,” McLaren said. “We feel we’re making a big, big step.”

The move also allows the franchise to target the large Mexican American market in L.A. — Combate Global currently has its largest viewership in Mexico — as well as others who have not been as exposed to the mixed martial arts events, such as the Korean community. The sport’s Japan vs. Mexico nights have also been popular and could find broad appeal in in L.A., McLaren said.

“It’s a move to super serve our core audience,” he said. “We’re going to have real audience traction.”

The news comes as California tries to lure film and television productions back to the Golden State after many have relocated to other states and countries in search of more lucrative tax incentives.

Over the summer, state legislators bulked up the state’s film and TV tax credit program and agreed to more than double the annual amount allocated to it. So far, dozens of projects have been awarded tax credits, including 22 series and 52 movies. (Combate Global did not receive a tax credit because sports do not qualify for the program.)

Obviously, the devasting Pol Pot regime plunged Cambodia into genocide, armed conflict, destruction and isolation during the dark period between 1970s to 1990s. This tragic history left Cambodia in social, economic and political ruins. As a war-torn country, despite these historical scars of the catastrophic decades, the government has implemented various policies and initiatives to reach national reconciliation and unity as well as to build peace and political stability, leading to economic growth and enhancement of living standards for its people. Prior to the pandemic, from 1998 to 2019, Cambodia’s economic growth remarkably flourished leading to the attainment of lower middle-income status in 2015, with the impressive average annual increase rate of 7.7 percent, making Cambodia one of the fastest-growing economies in the world.

Having seen the immense importance of regional integration and cooperation as the pivotal catalysts for national security, peace and sustainable development, Cambodia has actively engaged in the regional and international organizations such as the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN), Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM), the United Nations (UN) and other not mentioned international organizations and blocs. Noticeably, Cambodian foreign policy puts strong emphasis on the crucial role of ASEAN. Phnom Penh recognizes the key role of this regional bloc in safeguarding stability and peace in Southeast Asia and the broader Indo-Pacific region. Since its accession to ASEAN in 1999, Cambodia has assumed the role of ASEAN chair on three occasions—2002, 2012, and 2022, fostering regional cooperation, integration and solidarity for the sake of regional peace, stability and development.  

Additionally, since its membership in 2004, Cambodia has played a vital role in ASEM through its active participation in various discussions and initiatives, promoting cooperation and understanding between Asia and Europe. Noticeably, in spite of the pandemic, Cambodia successfully hosted the virtual 13^th Asia-Europe Meeting Summit in 2021, offering the platform for leaders from over 50 countries to have fruitful dialogues in order to explore ways and means to tackle regional and global issues for collective interest.

More importantly, one of the main aspirations of Cambodia’s foreign policy is to establish international peace on the basis of the principles of equality and rights for all people. In this sense, since 2006, notwithstanding the limited resources, Cambodia has emerged as an active participant in peacekeeping missions under the UN’s umbrella by transforming itself from being a host country of UNTAC (United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia) to a country that has contributed blue berets to 12 missions involving nine countries. These missions have involved 9,205 personnel, including 726 female peacekeepers. In fact, sending Cambodian peacekeeping forces to join the peace-keeping endeavors under the UN framework is also one of the priorities stipulated in Cambodia’s defence white paper 2022 for strengthening Cambodian armed forces’ capacities in the areas of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.

Furthermore, to promote the gender equality and women empowerment, Cambodia has acknowledged the women’s ability of performing tasks as capable as men. This acknowledgement has been concretely evidenced by their constant accomplishments. In this regard, Cambodia has enlarged the number of its female troops dispatched to all levels of UN peacekeeping operations. Consequently, for its participation in UN peacekeeping operations, the UN rated Cambodia third in ASEAN (after Indonesia and Malaysia) and 28^th out of 122 countries in the globe. In terms of deploying female peacekeepers overseas, Cambodia was placed 13^th in the world and second among ASEAN nations, behind Indonesia. This gender equality promotion is also in line with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.