vision

March 3 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s three major telecom operators laid out competing but converging visions for the artificial intelligence era at the Mobile World Congress in Spain, redefining themselves not as simple network providers but as designers of AI infrastructure.

At MWC 2026, themed “IQ Era,” executives from SK Telecom, KT and LG Uplus emphasized that telecommunications networks will serve as the core platform enabling AI ecosystems.

LG Uplus: Human-centered AI

Hong Beom-sik, chief executive of LG Uplus, took the stage as the only Korean telecom CEO to deliver an opening keynote at MWC 2026. He introduced a voice-based AI call agent, “ixi-O,” positioning it as a human-centered interface in an age crowded with AI devices and services.

Hong said voice will remain the most intuitive and human interface. The company combines on-device AI with large language model technology to balance privacy protection and personalized user experiences. He called for global cooperation to establish common standards for voice-based AI services.

SK Telecom: Sovereign AI package

SK Telecom framed telecom operators as “designers and drivers” of AI infrastructure. CEO Jung Jae-heon unveiled a “Sovereign AI Package” strategy integrating AI data centers, a proprietary AI model known as A.X K1 and industry-focused AI services.

The approach aims to build domestically controlled infrastructure that integrates foundation models and industrial services, strengthening data sovereignty while supporting industrial innovation. During MWC, SK Telecom met with telecom operators from Europe, the Middle East and Asia to expand what it described as an AI cooperation belt across regions.

KT: 6G as integrated AI infrastructure

KT presented its vision for 6G as an integrated infrastructure capable of ensuring stable AI operations. The company described 6G competition not as a race over individual technologies but as a contest in integrated architecture combining AI, satellite, optical networks, security and operations.

KT said it plans to apply AI to network management while guaranteeing the ultra-low latency and high reliability required by AI services. It outlined concepts including three-dimensional coverage across land, sea and air, network slicing, photonic-based end-to-end ultra-low latency structures, quantum-safe security and autonomous networks.

From carrier to orchestrator

Across their presentations, the three telecom leaders delivered a shared message: in the AI era, telecom companies must evolve from data carriers into infrastructure orchestrators that design and operate the entire ecosystem.

Their blueprints also reflect a broader industry shift. Amid recent security and network stability concerns, executives suggested that the next phase of AI competition will hinge less on speed alone and more on reliability, control and integrated system design.

— 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=20260304010000736

March 2 (UPI) — In a recent interview with journalists from several Korean media outlets, Dr. Hyun Jin Preston Moon, Chairman of the Global Peace Foundation and author of The Korean Dream, warned that Korea stands at a pivotal crossroads where the decisions made and actions taken will determine the fate of the Korean Peninsula and the future direction of the Korean people for generations to come. With Washington focused on numerous global crises and lacking a clear policy towards North Korea, he said, it is precisely now that the Korean people must assert themselves in support of a free and unified homeland.

The interview took place amid deepening inter-Korean tensions. At the end of 2023, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un formally abandoned the goal of unification which had existed since the formation of North Korea under his grandfather Kim Il Sung’s rule. He designated the two Koreas as “hostile states” and ordered revision of the DPRK constitution to remove reunification as a national objective.

Moon defined North Korea’s formal adoption of the “two hostile states” doctrine as a structural turning point, one that exposes the fragility of the Kim regime. He said the situation demands strategic clarity rather than reliance on past engagement models, and requires that a compelling alternative vision to be placed on the table before this window of opportunity closes.

Conciliatory approaches, he said, carry meaning only when both sides share the goal of unification. When one side formally abandons that goal and redefines the other as an enemy, the entire strategic framework must be fundamentally reconsidered. Clinging to outdated models, he warned, is not diplomacy – it is self-delusion.

At the core of the alternative he is presenting is the Korean Dream – a comprehensive national vision rooted in Korea’s civilizational heritage spanning five millennia and grounded in democratic governance, economic opportunity, and fundamental human rights and freedoms for all its citizens. Rather than reacting to Pyongyang’s provocations, Moon argues, South Korea must define the peninsula’s future on its own terms. He noted that the previous Korean administration had already accepted the Korean Dream framework in principle; during the 2023 Camp David Summit, the U.S. and Japan agreed to support South Korea in its pursuit of a free and unified Korea. Moon also called for a non-governmental advisory committee to replace the current Ministry of Unification to allow for institutional continuity in how South Korea’s administration relates to North Korea, noting that the ideological reversals with each consecutive administration have long undermined inter-Korean policy.

Central to the Korean Dream vision is Hongik Ingan – the founding Korean ethos, roughly translated as “to broadly benefit humanity.” Moon describes this as the spiritual and historical bedrock of Korean identity. He emphasized that it is not an abstract ideal but a living principle that has been passed from generation to generation as part of the Korean people’s heritage and infuses unification with a high-minded purpose. Koreans must rediscover this founding spirit, he said, and see themselves not as passive pawns of geopolitical forces but as active agents with a civilizational mission.

On economic concerns, Moon was direct. Unification is not a burden but an opportunity of historic scale, he said, particularly for Korea’s younger generation. A unified Korea would integrate the more than 25 million North Korean residents into a new domestic market, rebalance its export-dependent economy, and spur large-scale infrastructure development, industrial restructuring, and expanded regional influence.

Moon drew parallels of the potential economic transformation that unification could unleash to China’s wealthy coastal cities that burgeoned with its historic shift from a centrally planned to a market economy. For the Korean Peninsula, he continued, such changes could fuel what he called a second Miracle on the Han River. The generation that seizes this moment, he said, will not merely inherit a problem but will open a new chapter of flourishing for Korean civilization.

The decisive factor shaping the Peninsula’s future, Moon argued, is neither military posture nor diplomatic maneuvering – it is public consciousness. If South Korean youth come to see unification not as a financial burden inherited from their predecessors but as a civilizational mission rooted in Hongik Ingan, that shift in public imagination will become the most powerful engine for change on the Korean Peninsula.

He pointed to North Korea’s growing internal vulnerabilities as evidence that the window for shaping the arc of history is narrowing. Rising defection rates – including among senior officials- and the regime’s deepening economic fragility suggest that the structures sustaining Kim Jong Un’s control are under mounting pressure. Moon said Kim is likely reassessing his long-term strategic options as he observes the dramatic upheaval unfolding in Iran.

“The regime’s current two-state posture is not necessarily permanent,” Moon said. “What matters is whether the right alternative is on the table.” He urged the South Korean administration to adopt the Korean Dream vision and offered to support and advise the U.S. administration as it further develops its strategy and approach to the Koreas.

The 2026 Annual Sessions of the National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), known as the “Lianghui,” are a pivotal event. They will witness the official launch and final adoption of China’s 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-2030). This plan serves as a roadmap not only for China but also for countries of the Global South, focusing on the shift from quantitative growth to “new qualitative productive forces” based on innovation and technology. It is worth noting that formulating medium- and long-term plans to guide China’s economic and social development is a crucial method of governance employed by the Communist Party of China.

The “Two Sessions” meetings (National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference) in China in 2026 represent a strategic focal point for the Global South, outlining the 15th Five-Year Plan, supporting high-quality development through new productive forces, and strengthening trade partnerships, particularly in the areas of energy, transportation, and the digital economy. Its importance to the Global South lies in China’s leadership of economic integration. China aims to promote openness and cooperation, providing an opportunity for the Global South to benefit from the growth of the world’s second-largest economy. Here, (The Global South’s benefit from China’s innovative development models): During the Two Sessions in March 2026, China will present a model of governance and technological innovation that developing countries and countries of the Global South can utilize to achieve sustainable development and digital transformation. Additionally, China’s 15th Five-Year Plan and the Two Sessions in March 2026 will strengthen the foundations for trade between China and the Global South in particular: These meetings will pave the way for China to enhance trade with countries of the Global South in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, supporting infrastructure and economic growth in the Global South under China’s leadership. Most importantly, the Two Sessions in March 2026 and China’s 15th Five-Year Plan will support the Asia-Pacific region and the Belt and Road Initiative. China’s Vision 2026 focuses on “building a community with a shared future,” promoting investment projects and economic exchanges with developing countries. Therefore, the upcoming two-day meeting in China in March 2026 is crucial in guiding the Chinese economy towards domestic consumption and innovation, opening new markets and opportunities for developing countries in the Global South.

This tenth five-year plan represents China’s economic and social roadmap for the second half of the current decade, emphasizing “high-quality development” and technological innovation that will benefit developing countries in the Global South. Thus, during the 2026 meetings, China will work to “promote the joint construction of the Belt and Road Initiative with high quality.” This “Chinese-style modernization” will contribute to creating more development opportunities for countries around the world, especially those in the Global South, in accordance with President Xi Jinping’s principles of a shared future for mankind, win-win cooperation, and mutual benefit for all, particularly developing countries. The developing world. It aims to achieve the goal of General Secretary of the Communist Party of China Xi Jinping of doubling the size of China’s national economy by 2030. To this end, the State Council of China held a plenary meeting on February 6, 2026, to review the draft government work report and the draft 15th Five-Year Plan before submitting them to parliament during the joint sessions of the two councils in March 2026. The annual session of the National People’s Congress (NPC) to discuss the draft 15th Five-Year Plan is scheduled to begin on March 5, 2026, while the session of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) will commence on March 4, 2026.

The meetings of the National People’s Congress (NPC) in March 2026 are of exceptional importance, as they mark the official launch of the 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-2030). These meetings, known as the “Two Sessions,” will chart China’s economic and political course for the second half of the current decade, with a focus on transitioning to “new productive forces.” The strategic significance of the Two Sessions in China in 2026 stems from adopting the Decade Roadmap: The 15th Five-Year Plan serves as a crucial link in achieving China’s goal of socialist modernization by 2035. Furthermore, the meetings will address how China will respond to global challenges: These meetings come at a time when China is facing a slowdown in global growth, geopolitical tensions, and internal structural pressures. With a discussion of the (mechanisms and plans for transforming China’s economic model): The upcoming meetings of the Two Sessions in March 2026 aim to shift the Chinese economy from reliance on traditional manufacturing to an innovation- and technology-driven economy. Emphasis will also be placed on further modernizing the state’s governance system and capacity, raising the level of social civilization, enhancing cultural confidence, continuously improving the quality of life for the Chinese people, achieving new progress in providing sufficient and high-quality employment, making significant new strides in building a “beautiful China,” establishing a green lifestyle and production model, strengthening national security, and effectively promoting the construction of a “safe China” at a higher level.

The Chinese political leadership is currently laying the groundwork for the Two Sessions in March 2026, which will determine the contours of the country’s social and economic development over the next five years. Chinese President Xi Jinping held meetings with senior officials to discuss the key priorities of the new Five-Year Plan (2026-2030), while Chinese state media launched a nationwide campaign to gather public feedback. During a symposium held in April 2025 to discuss the 15th Five-Year Plan, President Xi Jinping, in his capacity as General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, emphasized that “in planning economic and social development for this period, it is essential to proactively assess the impact of changes in the international landscape on China and adapt to them by adjusting and improving the country’s economic structure.” President Xi highlighted several key areas, including ensuring economic stability by stabilizing employment, supporting businesses, and continuing China’s broad-based economic opening-up. During his speech at the April 2025 symposium to discuss China’s 15th Five-Year Plan, Xi Jinping strongly emphasized scientific and technological development. He specifically called for new, high-quality productive forces to play a more prominent role in the country’s economic revitalization. He also called for strengthening the transformation and upgrading of traditional industries, developing emerging industries, and accelerating the construction of a modern industrial system.

In a speech published in the Communist Party’s magazine “Qiushi” in July 2025, President Xi Jinping stated that “the world is undergoing changes unseen in a century, making the technological revolution and competition among major powers increasingly intertwined.” He urged the Chinese nation to consolidate its strategic advantage in the global technology race.

Herein lies the most important strategic dimension of the 15th Five-Year Plan and its impact on the Global South, through leading the technological transformation. The plan aims to achieve “self-reliance” in advanced technology fields such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and semiconductors. For countries in the Global South, this represents an opportunity to break the Western monopoly on technology and gain access to advanced Chinese technological alternatives. Furthermore, China offers a “high-quality development model” during the 15th Five-Year Plan period, transitioning from labor-intensive industries to smart and green manufacturing. This approach provides the Global South with an inspiring model for integrating environmental sustainability with economic growth, particularly in the areas of solar energy and electric vehicles. Finally, the plan promotes “dual-cycle development” by focusing on reducing dependence on foreign markets and boosting domestic consumption. This transformation could lead to a reshaping of global supply chains, opening new horizons for countries in the Global South to export their products to the massive Chinese market, which is expected to reach $20 trillion by 2026. Furthermore, the timing of the launch and discussion of China’s 15th Five-Year Plan presents an opportunity to enhance regional and multilateral cooperation, coinciding with China’s hosting of the APEC summit.

  In 2026, the 15th Five-Year Plan will focus on (strengthening economic integration with Asia-Pacific and Global South countries), emphasizing the digital economy, transportation, and energy. Beyond its strategic security and resource implications for the Global South, the 15th Five-Year Plan includes new strategies for marine resource exploitation and deep-sea innovation, a vital area for many coastal developing countries seeking to develop their “blue economy,” drawing on China’s experience in this field.

The 15th Five-Year Plan, covering the period from 2026 to 2030, is expected to focus on enhancing economic resilience and strengthening China’s technological and innovative capabilities. It will be adopted during a plenary session of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. Chinese Five-Year Plans are the country’s most important policy blueprints, outlining strategic goals for economic and social development over a five-year period. These plans began with the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949. They define national priorities, particularly in the areas of economic growth, industrial development, education, and social development, and serve as binding guidelines for all local, regional, and national governments. China, a leading force and supporter of the Global South, draws upon its experience.

As for the main topics of discussion during the 15th Five-Year Plan, which will take place during the 2026 Two Sessions in China, legislative and political deliberations will focus on several key pillars, most importantly: how China can achieve technological independence and self-reliance. This will be accomplished by discussing mechanisms and plans for achieving “Chinese self-reliance” in critical technologies, such as advanced semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and biotechnology. This will be achieved by studying and discussing ways to strengthen scientific and technological capabilities to achieve self-sufficiency in vital industries through advanced manufacturing and artificial intelligence, transforming the manufacturing sector towards smart technologies to enhance innovation. Emphasis will be placed on China’s firm commitment to the “Made in China policy,” aiming to propel China to the forefront of a range of high-tech industries, including aerospace, electric vehicles, robotics, and communications. The discussions will also explore ways to achieve common prosperity and well-being for the Chinese people by improving living standards and ensuring a more equitable distribution of the fruits of modernization.

The 2026 meetings of the Joint Conference will also focus on structural reforms, implementing over 300 reform measures to enhance the efficiency of the Chinese national economy within a complex international environment. This year’s meetings in China will also address the “green transition,” continuing to support clean technologies such as solar power and electric vehicles, and promoting renewable energy (solar and wind) to achieve peak carbon emissions by 2030. Furthermore, they will discuss boosting domestic demand by exploring ways to encourage household consumption as a primary driver of growth, rather than relying excessively on foreign investment. The meetings will also address strengthening national security, exploring ways to bolster industrial supply chains, and ensuring water and food security for Chinese society, including the modernization of 700,000 kilometers of pipeline infrastructure. Finally, they will discuss achieving maritime development by utilizing marine resources and innovating in deep-sea technology as part of balanced regional growth.

From the preceding analysis, we understand that the two sessions of the Global Summit in China in March 2026 represent a strategic pivotal point for reshaping globalization and the developments of the Global South under China’s leadership. This will lead to a more inclusive and multipolar world, moving away from traditional economic dependence, thus strengthening China’s position as a leader and key driver of development in the Global South in the coming decade.

China officially announced in late January 2026 its refusal to join the Board of Peace at the “International Peace Council for the Administration of the Gaza Strip.” This council, proposed by the United States under the leadership of Donald Trump, is a new international entity launched by the US president as an alternative to traditional UN mechanisms. China confirmed in January 2026 that it had received a formal invitation from the United States to join the “International Peace Council” for Gaza, launched by President “Trump” as a global initiative to resolve the conflict. China’s stance toward this council is characterized by caution and a demand for further details while adhering to its established principles.

The reasons for China’s rejection of the US-sponsored peace council for the Gaza Strip are based on several strategic and legal justifications, the most important of which is the marginalization of the UN’s role by the International Peace Council, sponsored by Washington. Beijing believes that the council seeks to replace the role of the United Nations and the Security Council, and it affirms its commitment to an international system centered on the United Nations and based on international law. Regarding China’s criticism of the lack of Palestinian representation within the International Peace Council, China criticized the Council’s charter for failing to mention the Palestinians or respect their will, asserting that any arrangements for the future of Gaza must be based on the principle of “Palestinians governing Palestine.” Furthermore, (China’s concerns about “American dominance” over the International Peace Council): Beijing warned that the Council could be a tool for Washington to impose “control” or establish military bases in the Gaza envelope area under the guise of reconstruction. Also, (China’s rejection of the financial membership criteria within the International Peace Council): The Council requires substantial financial contributions (up to one billion dollars for permanent membership), which China views as transforming peace into a “deal” driven by financial power rather than the legal rights of the Palestinians.

At the same time, China is demanding structural clarity regarding the resolution establishing the International Peace Council and its actual feasibility. China, through its Permanent Representative to the United Nations, “Fu Cong,” expressed concern that the resolution establishing the council lacks essential details, particularly concerning its structure, composition, and terms of reference, as well as the nature of the proposed “international stabilization force” in Gaza. Therefore, Beijing insisted on the UN’s authority in this matter, maintaining that any future arrangements for Gaza must be made under the auspices of UN Security Council resolutions and with broad participation including Palestinian parties and Arab states. China rejected any “closed” or “unilateral” mechanisms that could marginalize the UN’s role. Furthermore, China categorically emphasized the principle of “Palestinian governance of Gaza,” considering the Gaza Strip an integral part of Palestinian territory. China rejects any plans aimed at imposing external trusteeship or control over its administration, affirming that the principle of “Palestinians governing Palestine” is the foundation for any post-conflict governance. China has supported Arab initiatives on post-war management of the Gaza Strip, explicitly endorsing reconstruction and peace plans proposed by Egypt and other Arab states, deeming them consistent with the aspirations of the Palestinian people. China firmly adheres to the two-state solution, maintaining that any peace efforts must ultimately lead to a two-state solution and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

Therefore, the motives behind China’s rejection of the American request to join the International Peace Council on Gaza can be summarized as follows: China’s insistence on upholding the international legitimacy of the United Nations and its deep suspicions regarding the security and political objectives behind the council’s formation and Washington’s enthusiasm for it. The main reasons for China’s rejection of the International Peace Council on Gaza are China’s desire to protect the UN system. Beijing believes the proposed council seeks to replace or marginalize the role of the United Nations. The Chinese Foreign Ministry affirmed its commitment to an international system centered on the United Nations and based on its Charter and international law, rejecting any “alternative frameworks” outside of this scope. (Ambiguity in structure and tasks): The Chinese representative to the United Nations, “Fu Cong,” criticized the draft resolution concerning the council (Resolution 2803) for its lack of clear details regarding its structure, composition, and criteria for participation, describing it as “worrying.” In addition to China’s security concerns regarding the Gaza issue: Chinese intelligence reports indicate that one of the hidden objectives of the Washington-sponsored International Peace Council in Gaza is to destroy Hamas tunnels under the guise of “reconstruction,” which Beijing considers a “provocative and extremely dangerous” foreign military intervention. Furthermore, (China rejects American unilateralism in dealing with regional and global issues): China views the American International Peace Council initiative in Gaza as part of Washington’s attempts to impose “unilateralism” and exacerbate confrontation between blocs, which contradicts the “Global Governance Initiative” championed by Chinese President “Xi Jinping. ”.

Herein lies China’s alternative vision to the American initiative to form the International Peace Council: China, in its alternative to joining the Council, calls for the activation of the two-state solution as the only way to guarantee lasting peace in the Middle East and the implementation of the Beijing Declaration to support Palestinian national unity and strengthen the legitimacy of the Palestinian state. (UN Reform): Instead of creating parallel initiatives, Beijing calls for making the Security Council more responsive to the expectations of the world’s people on its 80th anniversary.

China proposes a different vision for managing the Gaza and Middle East issues, based on the following pillars: (Security Council Authority): This involves full adherence to UN Security Council resolutions as the sole basis for international legitimacy in Gaza. The Chinese call for (the principle of self-governance in the Gaza Strip): This involves China’s insistence that post-war administration of Gaza must be in the hands of the Palestinians themselves, rejecting any plans for forced displacement or external trusteeship. The Chinese call for a broad international peace conference on Gaza: Beijing calls for a more inclusive and credible international peace conference under UN auspices, with the aim of concretely implementing the two-state solution within a defined timeframe. With China prioritizing land routes over sea routes or temporary docks, as proposed by the US, China rejects maritime alternatives or “temporary docks” as substitutes for land corridors, viewing them as attempts to circumvent international obligations regarding humanitarian relief in the Gaza Strip.

From the preceding analysis, we understand that China considers itself a “positive stabilizing force” seeking to end the ongoing conflict in the Gaza Strip through comprehensive dialogue, in contrast to what it describes as the “unilateral” US approach, which it believes could deepen regional divisions. In short, while China does not reject participation in international dialogue on Gaza, it stipulates that the international peace council, sponsored by Washington, should be an instrument for strengthening international legitimacy, not a replacement for it, while preserving full Palestinian sovereignty over Gaza.

A strange quirk at San Quentin state prison is that most of those incarcerated behind its towering walls are unable to see the San Francisco Bay that literally laps at the shore a few yards away.

That changed recently with the completion of new buildings — holding among other accouterments a self-serve kitchen, a library, a cafe and a film studio — and third-floor classrooms that look out over that beautiful blue expanse, long a symbol of freedom and possibility.

In the new San Quentin Rehabilitation Center, along with learning job skills and earning degrees, incarcerated men can do their own laundry, make their own meals, and interact with guards as mentors and colleagues of sorts, once a taboo kind of relationship in the us-and-them world of incarceration.

“You want to clothes wash? You wash them,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom, debuting the new facilities, including laundry machines, for reporters last week. “You want to get something to eat. You can do it, whenever.”

“All of a sudden, it’s like you’re starting to make decisions for yourself,” he said. “It’s called life.”

Listen closely, and one can almost hear President Trump’s brain exploding with glee and outrage as his favorite Democratic foil seemingly coddles criminals. A cafe? C’mon. Bring on the midterms!

March 2024 of the East Block of San Quentin’s former death row.

(Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times)

But what Newsom has done inside California’s most notorious prison, once home to the largest death row in the Western Hemisphere, is nothing short of a remarkable shift of thinking, culture and implementation around what it means to take away someone’s freedom — and eventually give it back. Adapted from European models, it’s a vision of incarceration that is meant to deal with the reality that 95% of people who go to prison are eventually released. That’s more than 30,000 people each year in California alone.

“What kind of neighbors do you want them to be?” Newsom asked. “Are they coming back broken? Are they coming back better? Are they coming back more enlivened, more capable? Are they coming back into prison over and over?”

When it comes to reforming criminals, “success looks like more and more people gravitating to their own journey, their own personal reform,” Newsom said, sounding more like a lifestyle influencer than a presidential contender. “It’s not forced on you, because then it’s fake, man. If it’s coerced, I don’t buy it.”

Of course, coming back better should be the goal — because better people commit fewer crimes, and that benefits us all. But coming back over and over has become the norm.

Traditional incarceration, a lock-’em-up and watch-them-suffer approach, has dramatically failed not only our communities and public safety writ large, but also inmates and even those who guard them.

Incarcerated people come out of prison too often in California (and across the country) with addictions and emotional troubles still firmly in place, and no job or educational skills to help them muddle through a crime-free life. That means they often commit more crimes, create more victims and cycle back into this failed, expensive, tough-on-crime system.

Still, it’s a favorite trope of Trump, and the justification for both his immigration roundups and his deployment of National Guard troops in Democratic cities, that policies such as Newsom’s are weak on crime and have led to the decline of American society.

This narrative of fear and grievance goes back decades, recycled every election by the so-called law-and-order party because it’s effective — voters crave safety, especially in a chaotic world. And locking people up seems safe, at least until we let them go again.

But, as Chance Andes, the warden of San Quentin, pointed out last week, “Humanity is safety,” and treating incarcerated people like, well, people, actually makes them want to behave better.

Here’s where the tough-on-crime folks will begin composing their angry emails. Why are we paying for killers to have a view? Why should I care if a rapist has a good book to read? Our budget is bleeding red, why are tax dollars being used for prison lattes? (To be fair, I do not know whether they actually have lattes.)

But consider this: The prison guards back Newsom.

“Done right, it improves working conditions for our officers and strengthens public safety,” said Steve Adney, executive vice president of the California Correctional Peace Officers Assn., the union that represents guards, of the California model, as Newsom calls his vision.

Faced with high rates of suicide and other ills such as addiction, corrections officers have long been concerned about the stress and violence of their jobs. A few years ago, some union members traveled to Norway to see prisons there. I tagged along.

A correctional officer at Halden prison in Norway checks out the ice cream freezer in the grocery store inside the facility.

(Javad Parsa/For The Times)

The American officers were shocked to see Norwegian prisoners access kitchen knives and power tools, but even more shocked that the guards had built relationships with these criminals that allowed them to do their jobs with far less fear.

Rather than jailers, these corrections officers were more like social workers or guides to a better way of living. Of course, the corrections officers aren’t dumb. That only works with vetted inmates, such as those at San Quentin, who have proved they want to change.

But when you have officers and incarcerated people who are able to coexist with respect and maybe a dash of kindness, you get a different outcome for both sides.

“If we are capable of building this at San Quentin, then we are capable of making the workplace safe for every officer who walks in the gates,” said CCPOA President Neil Flood, a startling statement in favor of radical reform from a law enforcement officer.

But in a moment when most Democrats with ambitions for national office (or even an eye on replacing Newsom) are backing away from criminal justice reform, it would be naive to think the California model won’t be used to bludgeon Newsom in a presidential race, and provide further fuel to the dumpster-fire narrative about the state.

Soon — before the midterms — many expect Congress to move forward on Trump’s expressed desire for a crime bill that would empower police with even greater immunity for wrongdoing, create longer sentences for crimes including those involving drugs and further erode criminal justice reform in the name of public safety.

Trump is going hard in the opposite direction, toward more punishment, always the easier and more understandable route for voters fed up with crime (even though crime rates have been declining since President Biden was in office).

The California model is “a political liability in this environment,” said Tinisch Hollins, a victims advocate who worked on the San Quentin transition and heads Californians for Safety and Justice.

But she retains faith that “the majority of people don’t believe that shoving everyone into prison is how we resolve the problem.”

Newsom deserves credit for standing by that position, when simply backing away and dropping the California model would have been the simpler and safer route — it’s complicated and messy and oh-so-easy to make it sound dumb.

I refer you back to the cafe. If construction had been cut at San Quentin, the budget cited as the reason, no one would have noticed and few would have complained.

Instead, sounding a bit like Trump, Newsom said he “threatened the hell out of them if they didn’t get it done before I was gone.”

“This is not left or right,” he said. “This is just being smart and pragmatic and you know, I just … I believe people are not the worst thing they’ve done.”

Politically at least, San Quentin is a legacy for Newsom now, the best or worst thing he’s done on crime, depending on your personal views of second chances.

But it is undeniably a vision of public safety starkly at odds with Trump, one Newsom will carry into his next political fight — where it is certain to cause him some pain.

SAN FRANCISCO — While united against a common political enemy in the White House, the California Democratic Party remains deeply divided over how to address the state’s affordability crisis and who is best suited to lead the state in this turbulent era of President Trump.

Those fractures revealed themselves during the party’s annual convention in California’s liberal epicenter, San Francisco, where a slate of Democrats running to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom pitched very different visions for the state.

Former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter and wealthy financier Tom Steyer were among the top candidates who swung left, with Porter vowing to enact free childcare and tuition-free college and Steyer backing a proposed new tax on billionaires. Both candidates also support universal healthcare.

San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, the newest major candidate to enter the race, hewed toward partisan middle ground, chastising leaders in Sacramento for allowing the state budget to balloon without tangible improvements to housing affordability, homelessness and public schools.

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin), a vociferous critic and constant target of the Trump administration, emerged from the convention with the greatest momentum after receiving the most votes for the California Democratic Party’s endorsement, with 24% of delegates backing him.

“The next governor has two jobs: one, to keep Donald Trump and ICE out of our streets and out of our lives, and two, to lower your costs on healthcare, on housing, on utilities,” Swalwell said. “Californians need a fighter and protector, and for the last 10 years, I’ve gone on offense against the worst president ever.”

Still, none of the top Democrats running for governor received the 60% vote needed to capture the endorsement, indicating just how uncertain the race remains just months away from the June primary.

Betty Yee, a former state controller and party vice chair, placed second in the endorsement vote with 17%; former U.S. Health and Human Services Sec. Xavier Becerra had 14%; and Steyer had 13%. The remaining candidates had single-digit levels of support from among the more than 2,300 delegates who cast endorsement votes.

Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) takes a selfie with supporters during the California Democratic Party’s annual convention at the Moscone Center in San Francisco on Saturday.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Despite anxiety and infighting over the governor’s race, many in the party agreed that the most effective way to fight Trump is to win back control of the House in November’s midterm elections.

“We’re going to win the House. There’s absolutely no question we will win the House,” said former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) at a Young Dems event on Friday evening. “We’re going to protect the election, we’re going to win the election, and we’re going to tell people the difference that we will make.”

Thousands of delegates, party allies and guests attended the weekend California Democratic Party convention at Moscone Center in the South of Market neighborhood. The gathering included a tribute to Pelosi as she serves her final term.

Party leaders did coalesce behind one of the Democrats running to replace Pelosi, Scott Wiener, a liberal state senator who is vying be the first openly gay person to represent San Francisco in Congress.

The convention comes as party members and leaders continue to soul search after Trump’s second election. California remains a stronghold of opposition to the president, but its next governor will also have to face a growing cost-of-living crisis in a state where utility costs keep climbing and the median single-family home price is more than double what it is nationally.

Under growing pressure, the candidates for governor went on the offensive at the party gathering. Candidates sniped at each other — though rarely by name — for being too rich, too beholden to special interests or for voting in the past in support of ICE and border wall funding.

While largely panned by delegates who tend to lean further left than the typical California Democratic voter, Mahan has jolted the race by quickly raising millions from tech industry leaders and targeting moderate voters with a message of getting the state “back to basics.”

“We are at risk of losing the trust of the people of California if we don’t hold ourselves accountable for delivering better results on public education, home building, public safety,” Mahan said. “We’re not getting the outcomes we need for the dollars we’re spending.”

Mahan has raised more than $7.3 million since entering the contest in late January, according to campaign finance disclosures of large contributions. Many of the donors are tied to the tech industry, such as Y Combinator, Doordash, Amazon and Thumbtack. Billionaire Los Angeles developer Rick Caruso has also contributed the maximum allowed to Mahan’s campaign.

Technology businessman Dennis Bress, from Newport Beach, wears a pin supporting Planned Parenthood and a Yes on Proposition 50 shirt at the California Democratic Party convention at the Moscone Center on Friday in San Francisco.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Other candidates have raised concerns about the cash infusion, particularly Steyer, who has already dropped more than $37 million into his self-funded campaign and is pitching himself as a “billionaire who will take on the billionaires.”

“Here’s the thing about big donors: If you take their money, you have to take their calls,” Steyer said during his floor speech.

Delegates and party leaders said California’s next governor will have to continue leading the state’s aggressive opposition to Trump while dealing with the issues at home.

“I think people want a fighter,” said Rep. Dave Min (D-Irvine), who represents Porter’s former congressional district and has endorsed her in the governor’s race. “They want someone who’s going to stand up to Donald Trump but also fight to help average people who feel like they’re getting a raw deal in today’s America.”

Several of the candidates made the case that they could do both.

During her speech, Porter held up a whiteboard — her signature prop when grilling CEOs and Trump administration officials while she served in Congress — with “F— Trump” written on it.

“I’ll stand up to Trump and his cronies just like I did in Congress,” she said. “But this election for governor is about far more than defeating Trump.”

Porter, a law professor at UC Irvine, called on Democrats to “send a message about democracy by rejecting billionaires and corporate-backed candidates.” She also rolled out a long list of “true affordability measures” including free child care, free tuition at public universities, and single-payer healthcare, though she did not specify how she would pay for them.

Fighting back against Trump is “the floor,” said 29-year-old Gregory Hutchins, an academic labor researcher from Riverside. “We need to go higher than the floor — what can you do for the people of California? We all recognize that this is a beautiful and wonderful state, but it is very difficult to afford living here.”

Even some delegates — often the most politically active members of a party — have yet to make up their minds in the governor’s race. Nearly 9% opted not to endorse a particular candidate at the convention.

“You want that perfect candidate. You want that like, yes, this is the person,” said Sean Frame, a school labor organizer from Sacramento who is running for state Senate. “And I don’t feel like there is one candidate for me that fits all that.”

For all the focus on affordability, there were undertones of growing frustration from even reliable Democratic allies over a lack of tangible results in a state where the median home price is more than $823,000. SEIU California president David Huerta said workers have “been deferring our power to elected leadership” for too long.

“I think we need to be the ones who set the agenda and hold them accountable to that agenda,” Huerta said. “And they need to be leading from the direction of working people.”

It’s a constant battle with Democrats at state and local levels to get fair pay, said Mary Grace Barrios, who left a career in insurance to take care of her disabled adult daughter.

Barrios makes $19 an hour as an in-home caregiver to other clients in Los Angeles County. When Newsom signed a law to raise wages for most healthcare workers to $25 an hour by 2030, in-home support staff like Barrios were not included.

“It’s so important that we be given the respect and pay we need to live because we can’t live on that amount,” she said, adding that it feels like a “constant attack by people in our own party that we supported, that forgot us.”

“As citizens, you get what you vote for, right? So we have to do it. We have to make the change.”

The U.S. Marine Corps is aiming to acquire a new single “capability” to fill gaps left by the retirement of its AV-8B Harrier jump jets, AH-1Z and UH-1Y helicopters, and legacy F/A-18C/D Hornet fighters. Dubbed the Future Attack Strike (FASt) plan, the current vision is to have the ability to attack targets kinetically and non-kinetically, and to work together with future uncrewed aircraft.

The first public mention of FASt appears to have come in the most recent annual Marine Corps Aviation Plan, released earlier this month. At this early stage, the Expeditionary and Maritime Aviation-Advanced Development Team (XMA-ADT), part of the U.S. Navy’s Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), has been leading the work to refine the FASt plan.

“FASt capability is being developed to provide long range fires and Close Air Support (CAS) to the ground force and to be a Joint Force kill web enabler. FASt continues to evolve through Weapons Integration Risk Reduction (WIRR) trade studies to drive innovation and experimentation,” per the 2026 Marine Aviation Plan. “Conceptual solutions are being analyzed to inform requirements and acquisition pathways. Enhanced capabilities such as kinetic/non-kinetic launched effects, long-range precision fires, advanced survivability, DI [digital interoperability], and EW [electronic warfare] will be further developed.”

“Future Attack Strike (FASt) is a capability being developed to fill a Marine Aviation attack & strike mission gap posed by sundowning F/A-18, AV-8B, AH-1Z, & UH-1Y aircraft, with an initial operating capability being fielded in the mid-2040s,” a Marine Corps spokesperson also told TWZ directly after we reached out for more information. “FASt will employ kinetic and non-kinetic weapons, be capable of Manned Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T), be interoperable with the Joint Force to close long-range kill chains in contested environments, and deliver offensive air support to affect all-domain threats.”

It should be noted here that the previously stated plan for replacing the AV-8B and F/A-18C/D fleets has been the acquisition of a mixture of short takeoff and vertical landing capable F-35B and carrier-based F-35C variants of the stealthy Joint Strike Fighter. We will come back to this later on.

Though not explicitly stated, supplanting the fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters mentioned above with a single platform would require a short, if not vertical takeoff and landing (S/VTOL) capable design. The Marine Corps has said in the past that it is at least monitoring U.S. Special Operations Command’s progress with its High-Speed Vertical Takeoff and Landing (HSVTOL) program. HSTVOL is paired with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s Speed and Runway Independent Technologies (SPRINT) effort.

Last year, DARPA selected Bell over Boeing subsidiary Aurora Flight Sciences to move to the next phase of SPRINT. The core goal of SPRINT is to demonstrate a concept for a VTOL aircraft that can cruise at speeds between 400 and 450 knots. Bell’s design centers on wingtip proprotors with blades that fold away after the transition from hover to level flight, as you can read more about here.

HSVTOL Sled Transition Test

HSVTOL and SPRINT have both focused heavily on designs capable of transporting cargo and personnel, but Bell says its design concept is scalable. The company has shown renderings of multiple crewed and uncrewed variations, including types that could be configured for missions more in line with FASt.

The Marine Corps could look to other emerging S/VTOL designs for FASt, as well. The possibility of a Marine Corps derivative of Bell’s V-280 Valor tiltrotor, which serves as the basis for the U.S. Army’s new MV-75, has been put forward in the past. The company’s uncrewed V-247 Vigilant tiltrotor was aimed originally at a Marine requirement, as well. FASt could also end up intertwined with a separate Marine Corps plan to replace its MV-22 Osprey tiltrotors, currently called the Next Generation Assault Support (NGAS) platform.

Speed and range, on top of runway independence, will be key considerations for the Marines when it comes to FASt. The service’s current core vision for future conflicts centers on hub-and-spoke-type expeditionary and distributed deployments with forces positioned at far-flung sites across a broad area. Those units are expected to be able to rapidly deploy and redeploy from one operating location to another, which could be within range of enemy standoff strikes, to disrupt an opponent’s targeting cycles and reduce vulnerability. Island-hopping in the Pacific during a high-end fight with China is a principal scenario.

This all has raised questions, in particular, about the future utility of slower, lower-flying, and shorter-ranged helicopters like the AH-1Z and UH-1Y, and, by extension, how to fill the gaps in close air support and other capabilities they provide. The Marine Corps has already slashed the size of its AH-1Z and UH-1Y fleets, but is also taking steps to ensure the continued relevance of the remaining helicopters. This includes the acquisition of a new standoff strike capability for the AH-1Z in the form of L3Harris’ Red Wolf miniature cruise missile. The UH-1Y is regularly used as an electronic warfare platform when paired with the podded Intrepid Tiger II system, and other future roles for those armed utility helicopters are still being explored.

AH-1/UH-1 “investments also inform Future Attack Strike (FASt) capability development, which will help fill critical gaps in Marine Aviation’s future ACE [air combat element of the Marine Air Ground Task Force],” the 2026 Marine Aviation Plan notes.

“Coming back to that interoperability, it’s multiple pathways and multiple waveforms. I don’t think we say kill chains anymore, because it’s not a linkage of nodes, it’s a linkage of webs,” Col. Nathan Marvel, then commander of Marine Aircraft Group 39 (MAG-39) based at Marine Corps Air Station Camp Pendleton in California, told TWZ in an interview back in 2023. “We may very well be an enabler where you’re pushing data through us via voice and or data, and we may very well be the end of that kill web or that kill chain enabler as well. We may tell someone where something is so they can go kill it or we maintain custody, or someone may tell us where something is so we can go kill it like we have traditionally done. Interoperability is a huge focus for us.”

Col. Marvel had outlined a case to us for the continued relevance of the AH-1Z, as well as the UH-1Y, in a future major fight in the Pacific, which you can find here. Much of what he detailed at the time is in line with how the Marine Corps is now talking about FASt.

“We are going to be able to carry a potpourri of weapons. It would not be unheard of to hang some exquisite fixed-wing fighter weapons on the wing-stub of a Cobra and bring that to a fight,” Marvel also told us last year. “It may be a loitering weapon or maybe an exquisite pod that does only certain things that we’re used to seeing on fixed-wing aircraft and bring that to the fight and put that down at the rotor wing level to enable the battlespace commander and the maneuver element commander to do things that they may or may not have thought they could do before. So that’s kind of where we are with capabilities buildup.”

The expectation that FASt will fill gaps left by the retirement of the AV-8B and the F/A-18C/D may also point to new interest in a future high-low capability mix. As mentioned, the Marine’s primary plan has been to replace both of these types with variants of the F-35, and this looks to still be the case, at least in part. However, FASt could offer a valuable lower-tier companion to the F-35s, which are highly capable, but also very expensive and complicated to operate and maintain, especially in more austere locales. Just in general, the Marines have many day-to-day tactical aviation requirements that do not demand a very costly high-end fighter, as well. TWZ has highlighted the value of high-low mixes in the context of future U.S. Air Force tactical force structure plans on several occasions in the past.

F-35B

With the explicit mention of MUM-T capabilities for FASt, that platform also looks set to benefit from Marine efforts now to acquire fleets of Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) type drones. The first Marine CCAs will be variants of Kratos’ stealthy XQ-58 Valkryie configured for operations from traditional runways, as well as at least runway-independent launches, as you can learn more about here.

The service is also looking at future ‘spiral’ development cycles that could result in purchases of different uncrewed aircraft designs. The Corps just recently announced plans to use General Atomics’ YFQ-42A, one of two drones now in development under the first phase of the U.S. Air Force’s CCA program, as at least a surrogate for future uncrewed tactical aviation capabilities.

It is possible that FASt could turn out to be a family of systems that itself includes uncrewed capabilities in the end, as well. Shield AI has notably been describing its runway-independent X-BAT stealthy jet-powered ‘autonomous fighter,’ which TWZ was first to report on last October, in terms that could be of interest to the Marines for this emerging requirement.

X-BAT: Earth Is Our Runway

All this being said, the 2040s timeline outlined for FASt now means that this platform, however it might evolve, will not be an immediate replacement for the AV-8s or the F/A-18C/Ds. Marine Harriers are set to fly their last sorties in June of this year. The service’s goal now is for the legacy Hornets to be retired around the end of the decade. The AH-1Zs and UH-1Ys are currently expected to serve into the 2040s.

Regardless, the vision the Marines have laid out for FASt points to a very different-looking tactical aviation ecosystem now on the service’s horizon.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Islamabad, Pakistan – The sister of former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan has told Al Jazeera that the family has rejected a government board’s claims that the cricketer-turned-politician’s eyesight has improved since a court report last week said he had lost most vision in one eye.

A government-appointed medical board examining the jailed ex-leader reported a significant improvement in his eyesight after weeks of controversy over his deteriorating vision. Its medical report, seen by Al Jazeera, claims that Khan’s vision in his right eye has improved from 6/36 to 6/9. His left eye remains at 6/6 vision with the use of glasses.

In ophthalmic terms, 6/6 vision means the person’s eyesight is fine. A 6/9 reading means the person can see at 6 metres (20 feet) what someone with normal vision sees at 9 metres (30 ft).

The assessment was carried out on Sunday by a two-member board comprising doctors Nadeem Qureshi and Muhammad Arif Khan. The specialists conducted a detailed examination at Adiala jail in Rawalpindi, where the 73-year-old founder of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party has been imprisoned since August 2023.

But Khan’s family said it had “no trust” in the authorities.

His sister, Aleema Khan, described it as “extremely concerning and unacceptable” that the government had resisted allowing Khan’s personal doctor and a family representative to be present during the examination and treatment.

“Without the physical presence of both his personal doctor and family representative, we categorically reject any claims made by the government regarding his examination, treatment or medical condition,” Aleema told Al Jazeera.

Aasim Yusuf, chief medical officer of the Imran Khan-founded Shaukat Khanum Memorial Hospital and one of Khan’s personal physicians, said in a video message that he had held a 40-minute conversation with the two doctors who examined Khan on February 15.

In the video, shared by the PTI on social media, Yusuf said the visiting doctors briefed him on the treatment and future plan of care, adding that according to their latest assessment, “Khan had shown significant improvement as a result of treatment and his vision had improved significantly as well”.

“I would be extremely happy if I was able to confirm that this was the case. Unfortunately, because I have not seen him myself and have not been able to participate in his care or to talk to him, I am unable to either confirm or deny the veracity of what we have been told,” Yusuf said.

Disputed diagnosis

The latest examination comes after reports last month that authorities had taken Khan late at night to a government facility for a medical procedure without informing his family. Following the outcry, Pakistan’s Supreme Court appointed Barrister Salman Safdar as amicus curiae to meet Khan and assess his condition.

In a seven-page report filed last week, Safdar painted a troubling picture. He wrote that Khan had suffered rapid and substantial vision loss over the past three months and that despite repeated complaints of persistent blurred and hazy vision, “no action was taken by the jail authorities to address these complaints”.

Safdar quoted Khan as saying that “only 15 percent” vision remained in his right eye.

PTI General Secretary Salman Akram Raja told reporters in Islamabad on Monday that the two doctors, one of whom was recommended after consultations with Yusuf, confirmed that Khan’s vision had improved.

“The two doctors who met him in jail said that Khan confirmed to them that he was unable to see the clock on the wall for a few weeks, [but] can now not only see that, but also the clock hands. According to doctors, this was an incredible improvement in his vision,” Raja said.

Aleema, however, insisted that the family could not accept any medical report until Khan’s physician examined him in person. She renewed the demand that he be transferred to Shifa International Hospital in Islamabad.

She accused the government of repeatedly misleading the family about Khan’s health.

“After our protest and Salman Safdar’s report, we were told that he would be taken to Shifa International Hospital, along with [the] presence of his physician as well as a family member, but then, abruptly, they [the government] changed the plan. How can we be suddenly denied?” she asked.

Aleema said authorities had asked the family to provide the names of doctors and relatives who could accompany Khan, only to reject each proposal.

“There have been repeated back-and-forth phone calls. We gave them the names of his personal doctors, including Dr Aasim. Another name we gave was our sister, Uzma Khan, to represent the family. But the response from the government was that no sister will be allowed to meet him,” she claimed.

She added that her brother had no underlying medical conditions, such as diabetes or high blood pressure, and described him as a political prisoner.

“Our hearts are breaking, and we are so frustrated. This is deliberate. When Salman Safdar went there and came back, he told us the story, and we cried hearing about Khan’s current situation. This is not just criminal negligence, this is outright criminal and deliberate,” she said.

Standoff over medical access

The PTI and its allies, who are holding a sit-in outside parliament, have promised to continue their protest until their demands are met, including access to Khan and his transfer to Shifa International Hospital.

Sheikh Waqas Akram, the party’s central information secretary, said the demand was straightforward and focused on securing “specialised treatment” for Khan.

“When you deny the family access, or the physicians recommended by the family, and when you break promises, how can we trust? We don’t even know what they have done with him. We believe the government is certainly hiding something,” he told Al Jazeera.

Aleema said she would hold a news conference on Tuesday outside Adiala jail and added that the family had not sought any concessions from authorities beyond medical access.

“Imran’s sons have been trying to visit Pakistan since last year and have applied several times, but their visa has not been processed. It is in limbo, they do not get a denial, nor an approval,” she said, referring to Kasim and Suleman, Khan’s two sons, who are nationals of the United Kingdom.

The sons were born during Khan’s first marriage to Jemima Goldsmith. The couple divorced in 2004 after nine years of marriage. Both sons are based in London.

Government rejects negligence claims

The government, meanwhile, has defended the medical board’s work. Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar said the treatment provided to Khan had led to improvement and that the specialist team had expressed satisfaction with his progress.

Speaking at a public event on Monday, Tarar said opposition leaders and Khan’s personal doctors had been briefed.

Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Tariq Fazal Chaudhry also said the examination inside the jail was conducted “in accordance with government directives and with complete transparency”.

“The government provided every necessary facility on site to ensure no question of any negligence arises,” Chaudhry wrote on social media, adding that Gohar Ali Khan, the PTI chairman in Khan’s absence, had been kept informed.

Imran Khan, a former Pakistan cricket captain who led Pakistan to its 1992 World Cup victory, became prime minister in 2018.

He was removed in 2022 through a parliamentary no-confidence vote, which he said was orchestrated by the military in collusion with Washington and his political rivals. Both the military and the United States have denied the allegations.

Since his ouster, Khan has blamed Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir for his legal and political troubles and has repeatedly urged supporters to protest.

In June 2024, a United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded that Khan’s detention “had no legal basis and appears to have been intended to disqualify him from running [for] political office”.

The man I’m talking to tells me he has no name.

“Hey” is what he responds to, and he says he can be best described as a “travel agent,” a designation said with a sly smile to clearly indicate it’s code for something more illicit.

About eight of us are crammed with him into a tiny area tucked in the corner of a nightclub. Normally, perhaps, this is a make-up room, but tonight it’s a hideaway where he’ll feed us psychedelics (they’re just mints) to escape the brutalities of the world. It’s also loud, as the sounds of a rambunctious funk band next door work to penetrate the space.

Celeste Butler Clayton as Ursa Major and Ari Herstand as Copper Jones lead a group of theater attendees in a pre-show ritual.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones / For The Times)

”Close your eyes,” I’m told. I let the mint begin to melt while trying to pretend it’s a gateway to a dream state. The more that mint peddler talks, the more it becomes clear he’s suffering from PTSD from his days in Vietnam. But the mood isn’t somber. We don’t need any make-believe substances to catch his drift, particularly his belief that, even if music may not change the world, at least it can provide some much-needed comfort from it.

“Brassroots District: LA ’74” is part concert, part participatory theater and part experiment, attempting to intermix an evening of dancing and jubilation with high-stakes drama. How it plays out is up to each audience member. Follow the cast, and uncover war tales and visions of how the underground music scene became a refuge for the LGBTQ+ community. Watch the band, and witness a concert almost torn apart as a group on the verge of releasing its debut album weighs community versus cold commerce. Or ignore it all to play dress-up and get a groove on to the music that never stops.

Audience members are encouraged to partake in a “Soul Train”-style dance exhibition.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones / For The Times)

Now running at Catch One, “Brassroots District” aims to concoct a fantasy vision of 1974, but creators Ari Herstand and Andrew Leib aren’t after pure nostalgia. The fictional band at the heart of the show, for instance, is clearly a nod to Sly and the Family Stone, a group whose musical vision of unity and perseverance through social upheaval still feels ahead of its time. “Brassroots District” also directly taps into the history of Catch One, with a character modeled after the club’s pioneering founder Jewel Thais-Williams, a vital figure on the L.A. music scene who envisioned a sanctuary for Black queer women and men as well as trans, gay and musically adventurous revelers.

“This is the era of Watergate and Nixon and a corrupt president,” Herstand says, noting that the year of 1974 was chosen intentionally. “There’s very clear political parallels from the early ‘70s to 2026. We don’t want to smack anyone in the face over it, but we want to ask the questions about where we’ve come from.”

This isn’t the first time a version of “Brassroots District” has been staged. Herstand, a musician and author, and Leib, an artist manager, have been honing the concept for a decade. It began as an idea that came to Herstand while he spent time staying with extended family in New Orleans to work on his book, “How to Make it in the New Music Business.” And it initially started as just a band, and perhaps a way to create an excitement around a new group.

Ari Herstand as musician Copper Jones in an intimate moment with the audience.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones / For The Times)

Celeste Butler Clayton (Ursa Major), from left, Ari Herstand (Copper Jones), Bryan Daniel Porter (Donny) and Marqell Edward Clayton (Gil) in a tense moment.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones/For The Times)

Yet as the pair became smitten with immersive theater — a term that typically implies some form of active involvement on the part of the audience, most often via interacting and improvising with actors — Brassroots District the band gradually became “Brassroots District” the show. Like many in the space, Herstand credits the long-running New York production “Sleep No More” with hipping him to the scene.

“It’s really about an alternative experience to a traditional proscenium show, giving the audience autonomy to explore,” Herstand says.

Eleven actors perform in the show, directed by DeMone Seraphin and written with input from L.A. immersive veterans Chris Porter (the Speakeasy Society) and Lauren Ludwig (Capital W). I interacted with only a handful of them, but “Brassroots District” builds to a participatory finale that aims to get the whole audience moving when the band jumps into the crowd for a group dance. The night is one of wish fulfillment for music fans, offering the promise of behind-the-stage action as well as an idealized vision of funk’s communal power.

Working in the favor of “Brassroots District” is that, ultimately, it is a concert. Brassroots District, the group, released its debut “Welcome to the Brassroots District” at the top of this year, and audience members who may not want to hunt down or chase actors can lean back and watch the show, likely still picking up on its broad storyline of a band weighing a new recording contract with a potentially sleazy record executive. Yet Herstand and Leib estimate that about half of those in attendance want to dig a little deeper.

At the show’s opening weekend this past Saturday, I may even wager it was higher than that. When a mid-concert split happens that forces the band’s two co-leaders — Herstand as Copper Jones and Celeste Butler Clayton as Ursa Major — to bolt from the stage, the audience immediately knew to follow them into the other room, even as the backing band played on. Leib, borrowing a term from the video game world, describes these as “side quests,” moments in which the audience can better get to know the performers, the club owner and the act’s manager.

“Brassroots District: LA ‘74” is wish fulfillment for music fans, providing, for instance, backstage-like access to artists. Here, Celeste Butler Clayton performs as musician Ursa Major and is surrounded by ticket-goers.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones / For The Times)

An audience member’s costume.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones / For The Times)

Yet those who stay in the main stage will still get some show moments, as here is where a journalist will confront a record executive. Both will linger around the floor and chat with willing guests, perhaps even offering them a business card with a number to call after the show to further the storyline beyond the confines of the club. If all goes according to plan, the audience will start to feel like performers. In fact, the central drama of “Brassroots District” is often kicked off by an attendee finding some purposely left-behind props that allude to the group’s record label drama. Actors, say Herstand, will “loosely guide” players to the right spot, if need be.

“The point is,” says Leib, “that you as an audience member are also kind of putting on a character. You can stir the spot.” And with much of the crowd in their ‘70s best and smartphones strictly forbidden — they are placed in bags prior to the show beginning — you may need a moment to figure out who the actors are, but a microphone usually gives it a way.

“They’re a heightened version of themselves,” Herstand says of the audience’s penchant to come in costumes to “Brassroots District,” although it is not necessary.

“Brassroots District,” which is about two hours in length, is currently slated to run through the end of March, but Herstand and Leib hope it becomes a long-running performance. Previous iterations with different storylines ran outdoors, as it was first staged in the months following the worst days of the pandemic. Inside, at places such as Catch One, was always the goal, the pair say, and the two leaned into the venue’s history.

“It’s in the bones of the building that this was a respite for queer men and the Black community,” Leib says. “There’s a bit of like, this is a safe space to be yourself. We’re baking in some of these themes in the show. It’s resistance through art and music.”

Such a message comes through in song. One of the band’s central tunes is “Together,” an allusion to Sly and the Family Stone’s “Everyday People.” It’s a light-stepping number built around finger snaps and the vision of a better world.

“We are stronger when we unite,” Herstand says. “That is the hook of the song, and what we’re really trying to do is bring people together. That is how we feel we actually can change society.”

And on this night, that’s exactly what progress looks like — an exuberant party that extends a hand for everyone to dance with a neighbor.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom is heading to a conference of world leaders in Germany later this week as part of his ongoing effort to use the global stage to urge investment in California’s climate-related initiatives and challenge President Trump’s isolationist policies.

Newsom will appear at the Munich Security Conference to talk about trade and jobs and tell foreign leaders that “California is a stable and reliable partner,” he said Tuesday during an unrelated event.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is leading the official U.S. delegation to the conference, while Democratic leaders Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York are also expected, according to news reports.

The three-day event focuses on the intersections of trade, economics, security and foreign policy, and is expected to draw business leaders and heads of state.

Vice President JD Vance’s appearance at last year’s gathering caused a stir after he argued that European’s immigration policies are too relaxed and European nations are too reliant on the United States.

Ahead of the gathering, conference organizers released a report Monday that found that the “world has entered a period of wrecking-ball politics. Sweeping destruction — rather than careful reforms and policy corrections — is the order of the day.”

Newsom told reporters that he will appear on several panels, and suggested he will focus in part on staying competitive with China when it comes to new technologies and job growth.

“China is cleaning our clock as it relates to low-carbon green growth. They are cleaning our clock in terms of not just electric vehicles, because it’s not about electric power, it’s about economic power,” he said.

“It’s about exports, manufacturing, jobs — and this country is walking away,” he continued. “We are walking away from science and we are walking away from common sense.”

“Gavin Newscum is traveling to another international conference to whine about climate policies instead of doing his job as the governor of California?” said White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers, using President Trump’s derogatory nickname for the governor. “Nothing new to see here.”

Newsom is in his last year as California governor and is considering running for president in 2028. He last month traveled to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where he criticized world leaders for not challenging Trump’s aggressive posture when it comes to his threats to acquire Greenland, as well as his tariffs.

Newsom also attended the U.N. climate policy summit in Belém, Brazil, in November.

Feb. 8 (Asia Today) — Leaders of a newly launched civic group advocating Korean unification said they plan to support private broadcasts to North Korea that emphasize what they call a “unification vision,” arguing that entertainment alone will not change attitudes in the North.

The Citizens’ Solidarity for One Korea, inaugurated Feb. 4, is promoting “Korea Link,” a global fundraising campaign to support broadcasting and related content distribution. Organizers said participants pledged about 80 million won (about $60,000) at the launch ceremony.

Co-representatives Seo In-taek and Kenneth Bae spoke with Asia Today about why they are pushing the initiative and how they plan to deliver content to North Korean residents.

Q: Why launch a private broadcasting push now?

Seo In-taek: “The government has halted broadcasts to North Korea, and the United States has also stopped funding Voice of America and Radio Free Asia. With balloon launches and maritime information activities also suspended, private broadcasts are effectively the only remaining way to deliver information to North Koreans.”

Kenneth Bae: “The immediate priority is to revitalize existing private broadcasts to North Korea. We need to strengthen what is already operating and broaden its reach.”

Q: What is ‘Korea Link’ and what is the core goal?

Seo: “‘Korea Link’ is not about simply sending outside information or South Korean dramas. The goal is to deliver a ‘unification vision’ – to present alternatives so North Korean residents can have choices.”

Bae: “The fund should first be used to support existing broadcasts, then to develop better content and expand the base so broadcasting becomes sustainable.”

Q: What format will the broadcasts take?

Bae: “I plan to appear on Far East Broadcasting to take part in broadcasts aimed at the North. We will start with shortwave radio, but we want to expand to medium-wave and internet-based broadcasting over time.”

Seo: “Shortwave is a start, but we should also look at practical ways to deliver content more widely, including digital storage methods.”

Q: How would you deliver content if internet access is restricted?

Seo: “There are several ways. Digital storage devices can be effective for information inflow, and we want to use such tools not only to deliver information but also to convey a unification vision. To do this consistently, we need a nationwide fundraising campaign.”

Q: How will raised funds be managed?

Seo: “If funds are secured, we plan to establish an operating committee to ensure the money is used transparently and effectively.”

Bae: “Funding should be tied to measurable improvements – stronger broadcasts, better content and broader distribution.”

Q: What kind of content do you want to send?

Seo: “Simply providing outside information is not enough. A unification vision is needed. South Korean dramas are mostly ‘chaebol stories.’ That kind of content alone will not change North Korea.”

Bae: “We need content that can stimulate interest in unification and keep that message consistent. If we keep producing and sending it, it can help widen support for unification.”

Q: Beyond broadcasting, what else do you plan to do?

Bae: “We will also advocate internationally for North Koreans’ right to know and right to access information.”

— 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=20260209010002891