warns

June 5 (UPI) — Artificial intelligence company Anthropic issued a warning about systems that can improve themselves and said that humans need a way to intervene when necessary.

AI systems will soon be able to better themselves — known as “full-recursive self-improvement” — and that has a lot of benefits, like for health care and science. But just like science fiction movies warn, it could cause serious risks to people, said Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark and leader of the Anthropic Institute Marina Favaro in a recent blog post.

“Full recursive self-improvement also might increase the risks of humans losing control over AI systems,” the blog said. “If systems are capable of fully building their own successors, the ways we secure them, monitor them, and shape their behavior all grow much more important.”

Clark called for the industry to give itself a “brake pedal” on CNN Thursday.

“When I look down at the car we’re driving, all I have is a gas pedal. I don’t have a brake pedal, and surely at some point in the future we might want that option,” he said. The inability to validate, verify and trust AI’s behavior is risky, he added.

Clark told CNN that countries have made similar changes in the past.

“We’ve done this before. In the height of the Cold War, under highly tense situations between rivalrous countries, they found ways to stabilize aspects of the nuclear arms race,” he said “All of this has been done before in other domains, and it may need to be something we do in the domain of AI.”

But critics say this talk of curbing AI is nothing new, even from Anthropic, which battled the Pentagon when it wanted full access to use its AI product.

In July 2025, Anthropic signed a $200 million contract with the U.S. Department of Defense. But CEO Dario Amodei said that Anthropic’s AI model Claude could not be used for mass surveillance in the United States or for autonomous weapons without human approval.

On Feb. 27, the Pentagon gave Anthropic a 5 p.m. deadline to comply with its demands that the government be able to use the service as it sees fit. Before the deadline, President Donald Trump announced that no government workers would be allowed to use Anthropic.

Then, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth labeled the company a supply-chain risk, which blocked it from any government contracts, but a judge struck it down in March.

“Anthropic might give the impression of being warm and fuzzy, but their definition of AI safety is narrow,” Steven Murdoch, a professor at University College London, told The Guardian. “Supporting U.S. authorities in the development of offensive capabilities has never been something they have spoken against.”

Murdoch said Anthropic’s blog left out evidence that AI is close to self-improvement.

“It is true that there’s some evidence that AI capabilities have increased and continue to increase with no limits becoming immediately clear,” he said. But, “I don’t think anything has fundamentally changed today that has caused Anthropic to publish this article.”

Murdoch pointed out that Athropic’s call for a pause on AI was similar to other proposals it has made in the past.

“It’s a reminder of what they are concerned about and have been concerned about for many years. I’m sure the attention is welcome, but again this isn’t a new thing,” Murdoch said. “Anthropic have been trying to get the attention of policymakers since they were founded.”

Anthropic is proposing that the world’s top artificial intelligence companies come up with a coordinated way to pause development of advanced AI systems, warning that the technology is improving so quickly that there’s a risk humans would lose control.

The company behind the Claude chatbot said in a blog post on Thursday that, as cutting-edge AI gets increasingly faster at carrying out tasks, “it would be good for the world to have the option to slow or temporarily pause” its development.

Anthropic said its internal research institute plans to explore the issue in collaboration with others and “take actions” to help build the systems for a credible slowdown or pause, without being more specific.

Anthropic rival OpenAI argued for a different approach in a report published on Wednesday, saying that “democratic governments — not private companies acting alone — must ultimately determine the rules, safeguards, and accountability mechanisms”.

“Our view is that decisions about the pace of AI innovation should not be left to any one lab, company, or special interest group,” it said.

AI models are getting faster, with rapid increases in how quickly they can carry out software tasks like coding on their own, Anthropic said in its post. Based on current trends and given enough computing power, an AI system could be able to design and develop its own successor, in what is known as “recursive self-improvement”.

Self-building AI would be a major technological milestone that would bring benefits in science, healthcare and other areas, Anthropic said, but it “also might increase the risks of humans losing control over AI systems”.

Some tech industry figures have long warned of such a scenario.

Anthropic’s post comes after a different warning this week from a team of researchers at the University of Toronto who showed how AI tools could be used to create a new kind of AI “worm” that adapts its hacking strategy as it spreads from device to device and takes over a vast computing network.

“I think it’s really important that people understand that it’s not just the biggest, most powerful language models that pose the security concerns,” lead researcher Nicolas Papernot said in an interview.

The authors of the Anthropic post, company cofounder Jack Clark and Marina Favaro, head of its research institute, said the pause would be used to enable “societal structures and alignment research” to keep up with AI advances. Alignment is industry shorthand for making sure the technology matches human values and intentions.

The proposed coordination would let advanced AI labs verify that global rivals have actually stopped or slowed their work, “and that a bad actor could not use the auspices of a coordinated slowdown to jump ahead in secret”.

The company said a coordinated global mechanism is needed because, without it, a slowdown in AI development could let the “least cautious” players catch up and add to pressure on companies and governments as they make tough choices about AI safety.

Fears that advanced AI systems may get out of human control and cause societal harm have risen as the technology becomes increasingly capable. Anthropic’s own Mythos model sent shockwaves through industries, including banking and software, earlier this year with its ability to find vulnerabilities in existing code.

But regulation has been slow, especially in the US, where most leading AI labs are based. A Trump administration executive order earlier this week put the onus on the labs themselves, asking them to voluntarily submit their most capable models for government cybersecurity testing before public release.

Safety focus

AI researchers have also urged a pause before, but have had little success. Elon Musk, who owns AI lab xAI, was among the backers of a 2023 push by the non-profit Future of Life Institute to halt AI development for six months to allow time for safety guardrails.

Anthropic has long positioned itself as a safety-focused AI lab. Earlier this year, it refused to let the US military use its models for domestic surveillance and fully autonomous weapons, prompting backlash from the government, which put it on a national security blacklist, set to take effect later in 2026.

Anthropic’s post comes as the company and ChatGPT-maker OpenAI race to sell shares on the stock market, in an IPO that could value Anthropic at nearly a trillion dollars.

Papernot notified Canadian cybersecurity authorities prior to releasing his report, which shows how researchers developed the worm in a laboratory by using an “open-source” AI tool that is easy for software developers to cheaply access and modify.

“In the past, cyber attackers would focus on targets that are very high value,” he said. “Banking systems, hospitals, electricity grids, water treatment systems, schools.”

Papernot agreed that there should be more collaboration between companies, government agencies and academic researchers to develop countermeasures as AI-powered hacking tools supercharge the search for computer vulnerabilities.

“That old laptop you have in your basement that you don’t check on regularly doesn’t seem like a very high-value target, but it can be used as a launch pad to attack these higher-value targets,” he said. “Anything connected to the internet is now at risk because of how low the cost has become to mount these cyberattacks.”

“Society’s response was to come up with a sensible policy and regulatory framework that gave people confidence in oil and the benefits that oil could provide to the world, and meant that you didn’t have to worry about the personalities of the people leading the companies”, Clark said. “That’s clearly where we end up here.”

June 3 (Asia Today) — Wu’er Kaixi, a former student leader of China’s 1989 Tiananmen pro-democracy movement, warned South Koreans on Wednesday not to view North Korea only as a country of the same ethnic people.

“North Koreans are certainly Koreans. They speak the same language and eat the same food,” Wu’er said at a news conference at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan in Tokyo, one day before the anniversary of the June 4 Tiananmen crackdown. “But they have been affected by the disease of communism, and that influence has seeped into their bones and DNA.”

Wu’er, also known as Uerkesh Davlet, was listed by the club as a former student leader of the 1989 Tiananmen movement for its Wednesday news conference, titled “Tiananmen 37 Years Later.”

Asia Today asked Wu’er about the future of China and what it could mean for the Korean Peninsula, noting China’s influence on the Korean War, the division of the peninsula and North Korea’s nuclear issue.

Wu’er responded by directly addressing North Korea.

“I understand that Koreans dream of unification,” he said. “But that is not simply a matter of meeting lost brothers and sisters again. It is the process of rebuilding half of a country that has been affected by communism.”

Wu’er expressed concern about what he described as a nationalist approach within parts of South Korean society.

“When I talk with friends in Seoul, I often sense conservative and nationalist sentiment,” he said. “I fully understand such feelings because South Korea has faced North Korea’s military threat directly.”

“But South Koreans who enjoy liberal democracy should have a mindset of using that freedom for the freedom of North Koreans,” he said.

Wu’er also warned against accepting North Korean propaganda at face value.

“North Korea’s military threats are calculated actions,” he said. “You should not be misled by the nationalist slogans they put forward.”

He said propaganda is used to control hungry citizens.

“North Koreans are still hungry, but they are ruled by regime propaganda,” Wu’er said.

“North Korea is no longer the North Korea we think of,” he said. “If one day South Koreans have the chance to embrace North Koreans, they will realize they are no longer the brothers and sisters they remember from the past.”

“They may be closer to Russians or Chinese,” he said. “You have to understand how a communist system changes human beings and society.”

Wu’er said South Korea’s government and people should understand the nature of the Chinese Communist Party system when considering North Korea.

During the news conference, Wu’er sharply criticized the Chinese Communist Party, saying many people mistakenly view China as a state driven by nationalism or communist ideology.

“The Chinese Communist Party is simply a criminal group,” he said. “They are not pursuing the interests of the state or the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. They are only interested in maintaining their own power and wealth.”

He dismissed Chinese President Xi Jinping’s slogan of “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” as propaganda meant to deceive the Chinese people.

“The Chinese Communist Party is driven more by interests than ideology,” Wu’er said. “Like a criminal organization seeking more profits, it endlessly tries to expand power and control.”

“To understand China, ask a criminologist rather than an international politics scholar,” he said. “If you approach it through the behavior of a criminal group, you can understand China’s foreign policy much more accurately.”

Wu’er said the Chinese Communist Party “is never satisfied” and urged liberal democracies to respond firmly as Beijing seeks to expand its control and influence.

— 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=20260603010001047

Jerome Powell says the US central bank is undergoing a ‘stress test’ like other institutions in the current era.

Former US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has warned against the politicisation of monetary policy amid President Donald Trump’s repeated attacks on the independence of the central bank.

In a speech at an awards ceremony in Boston on Sunday, Powell said that the Fed had been undergoing a “stress test” like many other institutions in the Trump era.

Powell said the US Congress had “wisely” chosen to insulate the central bank from political pressure and that all other advanced economies had similar norms upholding the independence of monetary policy.

“These protections have served the public well, and administrations from both parties have respected them,” Powell said after accepting the 2026 John F Kennedy Profile in Courage Award.

“If any administration finds a way to remove Fed officials over policy differences, then future administrations will do so as well,” Powell said.

“The public would lose faith that the central bank will make decisions based only on what’s best for all Americans.”

Powell, who stepped down as the head of the central bank last month, said that the Fed’s credibility would be “lost” in such a scenario.

“That credibility enables the Fed to support a strong and stable economy for the benefit of American families and businesses,” he said.

“Our credibility has been built and sustained over many decades, and we have a duty to safeguard that priceless asset for our fellow citizens and for generations to come.”

Powell, who made the usual decision to stay on as one of the seven members of the Fed’s Board of Governors after stepping down as chair, also offered a broader defence of democratic institutions generally.

“Partisan political differences are normal – indeed essential – in a thriving democracy. But we ought to be united in our commitment to the higher principles that define our nation,” Powell said.

“Chief among them is respect for the rule of law. As John Adams wrote, ours is ‘a government of laws and not of men’. Our public institutions carry us forward through change. These institutions embody our commitment to freedom, democracy, and service of the public good.”

While Powell did not mention Trump by name, the US president has waged a sustained pressure campaign against the central bank for not heeding his demands to cut interest rates more sharply.

Trump repeatedly threatened Powell with dismissal during his tenure, while Trump appointee and ally Jeanine Pirro opened a short-lived criminal investigation into Powell’s congressional testimony about ongoing renovation works at the Fed’s headquarters.

Trump also ordered the removal of Fed governor Lisa Cook over unproven claims of mortgage fraud, though the Supreme Court has ruled that she can remain in her position while it considers a legal challenge against her firing.

Under the Federal Reserve Act, the US president must demonstrate “cause”, widely interpreted to mean malfeasance, to remove any of the Federal Reserve’s governors.

The John F Kennedy Profile in Courage Award was created in 1989 to honour those who demonstrate courage in public service without regard to professional or personal consequences.

Past winners of the award, which is named after Kennedy’s Pulitzer-winning book Profiles in Courage, include former US President Barack Obama, then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, and then-UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

Egypt races to salvage Gaza ceasefire as Israeli attacks and displacement threats push deal to the brink of collapse.

Egypt has launched an urgent diplomatic intervention to rescue a fragile Gaza ceasefire agreement that is on the brink of collapse.

The government warned Israel against expanding its occupation in Gaza, which would undermine efforts to end the war amid of wave of deadly air strikes.

According to an Egyptian intelligence official who spoke to Al Jazeera, Egypt has also invited a senior Hamas delegation, led by chief negotiator Khalil al-Hayya, for urgent talks to salvage the peace process.

The source described contacts between the parties as intense, saying Cairo was racing to arrange negotiations before the end of the week in order to prevent all-out war in Gaza.

The diplomatic moves come in the wake of renewed Israeli military attacks on Gaza and statements from top Israeli officials that threaten to unravel months of diplomacy.

At least 141 Palestinians have been killed in the last two weeks in an intensification of Israeli attacks.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday issued a directive ordering the military to expand the area under its control from 53% to 70%.

This fundamentally violates the US-brokered comprehensive peace plan signed in October 2025 under the Trump administration, mediators say.

Compounding the crisis, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz also triggered regional outrage by publicly reviving a blueprint for the “voluntary migration” of Palestinians out of the enclave.

Speaking during an announcement confirming the assassination of Hamas’s newly appointed military chief, Mohammed Odeh, Katz asserted that the forced displacement scheme would be implemented “at the right time and in the right manner”.

Cairo sent a warning to the Israeli government, rejecting any measures designed to push Gaza’s residents towards voluntary emigration or direct Palestinians towards the Rafah crossing with Egypt.

Egypt has been coordinating with mediators in Qatar and Turkiye, as well as US officials, to return the process to a negotiating track, including revisions to the addendum of the original Gaza peace plan, designed to reduce violence.

The source said Egypt and its fellow mediators were aware that Netanyahu’s recent statements on expanding Israel’s occupation of Gaza, as well as attacks that killed Hamas military figures Izz al-Din al-Haddad and Mohammed Odeh, were driven by electoral calculations and compounded by difficulties Netanyahu faces in Lebanon.

Egypt has contacted United States officials to ask President Donald Trump to urgently restrain Netanyahu, given the recent Israeli escalations in Gaza, the source said.

A senior Hamas official abroad told Al Jazeera that Hamas had received Egyptian communications aimed at containing the escalation and preventing talks from collapsing, suggesting a meeting in Cairo was expected within days.

Hamas said the ceasefire was on the brink of collapse due to repeated Israeli violations, and called on the US and guarantor countries to take “serious and urgent” steps to compel Israel to honour its commitments.

Israel and Hamas agreed to a ceasefire in October to end two years of fighting, which had seen more than 72,000 Palestinians killed and the vast majority of Gaza’s population made homeless.

Despite a ceasefire still being in place, at least 929 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli attacks since October.

May 29 (UPI) — Ukraine on Friday evening said that it expects Russia to launch ‘big attacks’ against it sometime on Friday or Saturday, and warned its citizens to take cover.

Ukrainian President Volodymir Zelynsky told CBS News on Friday evening that it expects Russia to launch new attacks at the country in the next 24 to 48 hours, and advised his citizens to take cover.

“Our people have to be very, very careful, cautious and children – they have to use bomb shelters,” he told the news organization.

“Today, at night or tomorrow night, high percent – of course, nobody knows 100% – but there is high percent,” he said.

Russia on Friday evening already launched missiles toward Ukraine, with explosions reported in Kyiv and nearby regions, among other parts of the country, The Kyiv Post reported.

“We have intel that Russia is preparing a new massive attack,” Zelensky said in the post.

“Please pay attention to air raid alerts and stay safe,” he said.

The warnings follow an alleged drone hitting the roof of an apartment building in Romania, which was reportedly aimed at nearby location in Ukraine, which is neighbors the country.

New research from the European Central Bank suggests that the economic impact of the Iran war may be affecting euro zone consumers more deeply and rapidly than previous geopolitical crises, raising concerns about inflation, slowing growth, and long term economic uncertainty across Europe.

According to ECB economists, European consumers appear to be reacting more sensitively to rising prices and economic instability because many households are still psychologically affected by the financial stress caused by the Russia Ukraine war and the energy crisis that followed in 2022.

The latest conflict involving Iran, triggered after United States and Israeli airstrikes earlier this year, caused major disruptions to global energy supplies and reignited fears of another inflation shock throughout Europe.

ECB researchers found that consumers quickly became more attentive to price increases even while inflation remained close to the central bank’s 2 percent target. Economists believe this reaction reflects growing public anxiety over repeated geopolitical and economic disruptions.

Why It Matters

The findings raise serious concerns for Europe’s economic recovery because consumer confidence plays a critical role in spending, investment, and overall growth.

When households become highly sensitive to inflation and uncertainty, they often reduce spending, delay purchases, and increase savings out of caution. This behavior can weaken economic activity and slow recovery across key sectors including retail, manufacturing, housing, and services.

ECB researchers warned that Europe may now face the risk of a more persistent stagflation environment, where inflation remains elevated while economic growth slows simultaneously.

The Iran war also exposed Europe’s continuing vulnerability to global energy shocks. Despite efforts to reduce dependence on Russian energy after the Ukraine conflict, Europe remains heavily exposed to disruptions in global oil and gas markets.

Although oil prices have recently eased amid hopes for diplomacy, they surged sharply earlier this year during the height of the Iran conflict, intensifying inflationary pressure across the euro zone.

Key Stakeholders

Several major stakeholders are directly affected by the growing economic uncertainty surrounding the Iran war and Europe’s inflation outlook.

European Central Bank

The ECB faces increasing pressure to balance inflation control with economic stability. Policymakers are now widely expected to continue raising interest rates in an effort to prevent inflation expectations from becoming entrenched among consumers and businesses.

European Consumers

Households across Europe remain at the center of the crisis. Rising living costs, energy prices, and borrowing expenses continue placing pressure on disposable incomes and consumer confidence.

Businesses and Industries

European businesses, particularly energy intensive industries, face higher operating costs and weaker consumer demand. Continued uncertainty may reduce investment activity and slow hiring across multiple sectors.

Energy Markets

Global oil and gas markets remain highly sensitive to developments in the Middle East. Any renewed escalation involving Iran could rapidly push energy prices higher again, directly affecting inflation and economic stability in Europe.

Governments Across Europe

European governments may face growing political pressure if inflation remains persistent while economic growth weakens. Policymakers could be forced to increase public spending or introduce additional support measures for households and industries.

Future Outlook

The coming months are likely to become a critical period for the euro zone economy as European policymakers attempt to manage the combined effects of geopolitical instability, inflation concerns, and slowing growth.

Much will depend on whether tensions in the Middle East continue easing or whether new disruptions emerge in global energy markets. A stable diplomatic environment could help reduce inflationary pressure and restore consumer confidence gradually.

However, ECB researchers warn that the psychological impact of repeated crises may continue shaping consumer behavior long after energy prices stabilize. Many Europeans who experienced financial stress during the Ukraine war now appear quicker to react to fears of inflation and economic instability.

The ECB is therefore expected to maintain a cautious but firm monetary stance in the near term, with additional interest rate increases remaining highly likely.

If inflation remains elevated while economic growth weakens, Europe could face a prolonged period of economic stagnation combined with reduced consumer spending and higher borrowing costs.

The situation highlights how modern geopolitical conflicts increasingly influence not only energy and security policy but also consumer psychology, market behavior, and long term economic confidence across global economies.

With information from Reuters.

Bolivia’s president has warned protesters “time is running out” amid a weeks-long standoff over the country’s economic and political crisis. President Rodrigo Paz has secured powers to declare a State of Emergency, but protesters remain unmoved.

A new report warns that Britain is undergoing a “deeply troubling transformation” in how it treats political protest as climate activists and pro-Palestine campaigners increasingly face lengthy prison sentences, sweeping legal restrictions and months in jail before trial.

The report, Britain’s Political Prisoners, copublished by researchers at the Centre for Climate Crime and Climate Justice at Queen Mary University of London and the campaign group Defend Our Juries, said the UK has “witnessed an increase in anti-protest powers granted to the police and the courts through legislation” that has “created a significantly more repressive legal terrain for activists engaging in civil disobedience and direct action”.

It traces the shift from crackdowns on protests by Extinction Rebellion, Black Lives Matter, Insulate Britain and Just Stop Oil to more recent prosecutions linked to Palestine solidarity actions, including campaigns targeting British factories operated by Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer.

The report, released on Tuesday, found that a combination of new laws, broader police powers and increasingly punitive court tactics has reshaped Britain’s protest landscape since 2019.

The United Kingdom has witnessed numerous mass protests and direct actions by activists to pressure the government to stop selling arms to Israel during its genocidal war on Gaza, in which more than 72,000 Palestinians have been killed, including more than 40,000 women, children and elderly.

So what does Britain’s shifting stance on protests mean for civil rights, and what’s behind the legal clampdown on climate and pro-Palestine protests?

How Britain’s legal system has changed since 2019

The report painted a stark picture of how Britain’s legal system has changed in response to climate and pro-Palestine direct action campaigns through a mix of new laws, expanded police powers and what campaigners describe as increasingly punitive court tactics. What this means for protesters is longer jail sentences, stricter bail conditions and harsher treatment in the courts than was once typical for acts of civil disobedience, according to the report.

At the centre of that shift are two major laws introduced after waves of demonstrations by groups such as Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil, two environmental groups that employ nonviolent civil disobedience tactics to pressure governments to address the climate crisis.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 transformed the old common law offence of “public nuisance” into a formal criminal offence carrying a sentence of up to 10 years in prison. This means actions that seriously disrupt the public – such as blocking roads, stopping traffic or shutting down infrastructure – can now lead to far more severe criminal penalties than before because the offence was never previously codified into legislation. Campaigners said the law has given prosecutors a powerful new tool to pursue long prison sentences against protesters.

The Public Order Act 2023 introduced a series of protest-specific offences in May of that year, largely in response to climate protests by groups including Just Stop Oil, Insulate Britain and Extinction Rebellion, whose actions included blocking motorways, occupying oil terminals and targeting infrastructure projects in an attempt to pressure the government to halt new oil and gas extraction.

Such offences under the act included “locking on”, in which protesters attach themselves to roads, buildings, vehicles or each other using chains, glue or other devices to make removal difficult. The law also criminalised tunnelling, a tactic used by some activists to delay infrastructure projects, and introduced offences for disrupting major transport networks, oil terminals and other nationally important infrastructure. 

The legislation also significantly widened police powers whereby officers may now place restrictions on even one-person protests if they are deemed disruptive. Police were also granted powers to carry out stop-and-search operations in designated protest zones without needing reasonable suspicion that someone has committed an offence – a significant expansion of police authority criticised by civil liberties groups.

But the report argued the crackdown extends beyond parliament and into the courts.

One of its central findings is the growing use of civil injunctions and contempt of court proceedings against activists.

Oil companies, arms manufacturers, councils and universities have increasingly obtained court orders banning protests near their sites, the report said.

The report identified contempt of court as the most common route to imprisonment among the 249 protest-related cases it analysed. Contempt of court usually refers to someone disobeying a judge’s order or behaving in a way the court says interferes with justice. In protest cases, it has increasingly been used against activists who ignore injunctions or refuse to follow restrictions imposed during trials.

Because contempt proceedings are handled directly by judges rather than juries, campaigners argued they allow courts to imprison protesters more quickly and with fewer legal safeguards.

Researchers also highlighted what campaigners described as the “gagging” of defendants. Judges have increasingly stopped protesters from mentioning climate concerns, Gaza, international law or their political motivations in front of juries.

Courts have often argued that juries should focus only on whether a defendant broke the law, not on the political or moral reasons behind their actions. Critics said those restrictions prevent activists from fully explaining why they protested in the first place.

Campaigners also said the legal shift reflects a broader political change, driven in part by corporate lobbying under successive Conservative governments and continuing under Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government. They argued that peaceful protest is increasingly being criminalised to protect corporate interests, regardless of wider ethical concerns about the supply of arms to Israel during its war on Gaza or opposing fossil fuel projects linked to the climate crisis.

Perhaps most controversially, the report pointed to the growing use of lengthy pretrial detention. That means protesters being held in prison before they have been convicted of any crime.

According to the findings, many activists spend months on remand awaiting trial while some Palestine Action defendants have been held for more than a year before their cases are heard in court.

In 60 percent of the cases studied, the final sentence handed down was shorter than the time defendants had already spent in custody awaiting trial.

Are lobbyists influencing the crackdown?

Tim Crosland, director of Defend Our Juries, said the findings challenge Britain’s claims of ensuring democratic protections.

“This report strips away the illusion that Britain remains committed to democratic principles,” Crosland said.

“It reveals that peaceful protesters are being jailed in ever-increasing numbers under pressure from the oil and arms industries, the Israeli government and their lobbyists.”

The report pointed to what it described as growing political and corporate pressure behind Britain’s crackdown on protest movements.

Researchers cited reports that parts of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act may have originated in proposals from the right-wing think tank Policy Exchange. According to the investigative news site Open Democracy, Policy Exchange has previously received funding from ExxonMobil. The think tank had earlier published a report titled Extremism Rebellion, which called for new laws targeting Extinction Rebellion activists.

Al Jazeera could not independently verify the links between the think tank and the legislation.

The report further alleged that British officials came under pressure from both Elbit Systems and the Israeli government to take a tougher approach towards Palestine Action protests targeting Elbit’s UK factories.

According to correspondence quoted by the researchers, the British government said in 2022 that it had “expressed our support in recognising the attacks and boycott on Elbit UK”. The report said the issue was later raised directly with then-Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab during a visit to Israel, where he reportedly “declared that the British government is committed to stopping the attacks”.

Zoe Blackler, founding director of the London events space Kairos, said: “In the face of this clampdown on the right to peaceful protest, we need to come together in solidarity and defiance.”

Which are the cases at the centre of Britain’s protest crackdown?

The report traced Britain’s hardening response to the protests through a series of landmark cases involving climate activists and Palestine solidarity campaigners, many of whom received lengthy prison sentences or spent months behind bars before trial.

Among the most high-profile is the case of the Whole Truth Five, a group of Just Stop Oil activists jailed in July 2024 over a Zoom call discussing plans to disrupt the M25 motorway. The five were convicted of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance and initially sentenced to between four and five years in prison.

The report described the case as one of the clearest examples of the tougher approach now being taken towards protest movements. Campaigners argued the sentences were extraordinary because the activists were punished largely for planning disruptive action rather than carrying it out. Prosecutors relied on conspiracy laws, which allow people to be charged for agreeing to commit an offence even if the planned action never ultimately happens.

Four Palestine Action activists were also sentenced to between 23 and 27 months for conspiring to damage an Israeli-linked arms factory in Wales. Meanwhile, four Just Stop Oil activists received prison terms of up to 30 months over plans to disrupt Manchester Airport despite never reaching the site. A fifth defendant, Noah Crane, spent almost a year in jail on remand before later being acquitted.

Another major case involved the Filton 24, Palestine Action activists prosecuted after a protest at an Elbit Systems factory in Bristol. Some defendants were held on remand for up to 18 months before trial.

After several activists were acquitted of aggravated burglary charges, most were eventually granted bail.

The report said the case raises “serious concerns” that prosecutors used unusually serious charges to justify holding defendants in prison for long periods before trial.

The report also highlighted the Brize Norton Five, activists accused of spray-painting air force planes in protest against Britain’s military links to Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. According to the report, the group has remained on remand since August and is not expected to stand trial until 2027, meaning some could spend close to two years in jail before a verdict is reached.

Other cases revealed the growing use of judicial “gagging orders”.

During the retrial of the Filton 6, a separate trial from the Filton 24, the judge barred defendants from mentioning Gaza, Elbit’s role in supplying weapons to Israel and their political motivations for protesting. Critics argued such restrictions make it harder for juries to hear the broader context behind direct action campaigns.

In another case, three Insulate Britain activists were imprisoned for contempt of court after defying a judge’s order not to mention the “climate crisis” or “fuel poverty” before a jury.

Despite the legal restrictions, several juries continued to acquit activists. The report pointed to acquittals involving Just Stop Oil protesters, Extinction Rebellion activists and a hung jury in the first Filton 6 trial as evidence that some jurors remained unconvinced by the increasingly aggressive prosecution of protest movements.

Kerry Moscogiuri, Amnesty International UK CEO, told Al Jazeera that “the right to protest is being eroded before our eyes.”

“We’re seeing a worrying shift where the state is using remand, sweeping injunctions and contempt proceedings to lock people up or silence them before they’ve even stood trial.

“The broader legal implications here are concerning. It’s not just about one group of activists; it’s about a systemic attempt to shut down dissent, something we’ve been ringing the alarm on for a long time.

“By replacing the presumption of liberty with preemptive legal intimidation, it creates a chilling effect, undermines the rule of law and flies in the face of basic human rights.”

Western governments are pouring tens of billions of dollars into critical minerals projects as they attempt to reduce dependence on China for materials essential to clean energy, defence technology and advanced manufacturing.

But industry executives, analysts and investors are increasingly warning that poorly coordinated state-backed investment could create severe oversupply problems similar to past commodity booms that ended in market crashes.

The concerns come as countries including the United States, Australia, European Union and Japan accelerate efforts to build strategic reserves and expand production of rare earths and other critical minerals.

Governments Ramp Up Critical Minerals Spending

The United States has committed more than $20 billion toward critical minerals development through multiple financing programmes, including Project Vault, a strategic stockpiling initiative worth around $10 billion.

Australia has also allocated at least A$13 billion to support critical minerals projects and reserves through several government-backed programmes.

These investments are designed to secure supplies of metals used in electric vehicles, semiconductors, renewable energy systems, aerospace equipment and military technologies.

Particular attention has focused on rare earth elements, a group of 17 metals essential for producing powerful magnets used in advanced defence systems and high-tech manufacturing.

Although the global rare earths market was valued at only about $6.4 billion in 2024, combined Western financial commitments to rare earth projects have already exceeded that figure.

Fears Grow Over Potential Oversupply

Mining executives and analysts warn that aggressive subsidies and overlapping national strategies could eventually flood global markets with excess supply.

Brett Beatty of Resource Capital Funds said the biggest danger lies in governments pursuing independent strategies without coordination.

According to Beatty, simultaneous efforts to rapidly increase production could create volumes far beyond global demand, ultimately crushing prices and undermining the very industries governments are trying to build.

Analysts drew comparisons to historical commodity gluts, including Europe’s “butter mountains” of the 1980s, Russian aluminium oversupply and Australia’s wool crisis, where subsidies and state support distorted markets and triggered sharp price collapses.

Rare Earth Market Could Face Surplus Pressures

Consultancy Project Blue warned that several rare earth markets are already on track to move into surplus over the coming years due to expanding state-backed production.

However, analyst David Merriman said governments may still be able to avoid major imbalances if they carefully adjust subsidies, stockpiling programmes and guaranteed purchasing arrangements.

Industry leaders say current stockpiles remain relatively small, limiting immediate risks of market disruption.

Lynas Rare Earths CEO Amanda Lacaze recently said rare earth stockpiles around the world remain modest and are not yet large enough to destabilise markets.

Australian Resources Minister Madeleine King also argued that today’s critical minerals policies differ significantly from past commodity intervention failures because they are more targeted and linked to long-term industrial supply chains.

Global Coordination Emerging Among Western Allies

Concerns about duplication and oversupply are pushing Western governments toward greater policy coordination.

The Group of Seven is reportedly discussing the creation of a permanent secretariat focused on coordinating critical mineral strategies and ensuring continuity between rotating national presidencies.

Industry experts say such coordination could help prevent destructive competition between allied nations while supporting more stable investment planning.

Lessons From Congo and Indonesia

Governments outside the West have already experimented with aggressive intervention in mineral markets.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo boosted cobalt prices by introducing export quotas and stockpiling measures designed to increase mining revenues.

While the policy initially lifted prices, analysts warn prolonged restrictions could encourage manufacturers to seek alternative materials or suppliers.

Similarly, Indonesia dramatically expanded its dominance in nickel production after banning exports of raw nickel ore in 2020 to force domestic processing investment.

Indonesia’s production surged within just a few years, but authorities have since struggled with falling prices and oversupply, forcing Jakarta to tighten mining quotas and centralise export controls.

These examples highlight the difficulty governments face in balancing national industrial ambitions with long-term market stability.

Analysis

The global race for critical minerals is increasingly becoming a strategic contest shaped as much by geopolitics as by economics.

Western governments view supply chain independence as essential after years of relying heavily on China for processing capacity and rare earth production. The push is not simply about commercial competition — it is tied directly to national security, technological leadership and energy transition goals.

However, the very scale of state intervention now unfolding raises the risk of creating distorted markets. If multiple governments simultaneously subsidise production, guarantee prices and build stockpiles without coordination, supply could rapidly outpace actual industrial demand.

That scenario would likely trigger sharp price declines, weaken private investment and potentially create another boom-and-bust cycle in the mining sector.

At the same time, the market dynamics of critical minerals differ from traditional commodities. Many of these materials are essential for emerging technologies, and demand is expected to rise significantly over the next two decades as countries expand renewable energy infrastructure, battery production and semiconductor manufacturing.

This means governments are not only competing to secure supply today but also positioning themselves for future industrial dominance.

Another key challenge is that refining and processing capabilities remain heavily concentrated in China. Even if Western countries succeed in expanding mining output, they may still depend on Chinese infrastructure unless domestic processing networks are developed alongside extraction projects.

The growing emphasis on “friend-shoring” and allied supply chains reflects an attempt to address this vulnerability.

Industry experts also point to a more sustainable model emerging through byproduct extraction. Instead of building entirely new mines based purely on high prices, companies are increasingly looking to recover critical minerals from existing industrial operations, reducing the risk of uncontrolled supply growth.

Projects involving Alcoa, Sojitz and Trafigura illustrate how governments and corporations are experimenting with lower-risk approaches to expanding supply.

Ultimately, the success of Western critical minerals strategies may depend less on how much money governments spend and more on whether they can coordinate policies, manage supply carefully and build integrated processing ecosystems capable of competing with China over the long term.

With information from Reuters.

May 25 (UPI) — Russia on Monday warned the United States it will continue targeting “decision-making centers” in Kyiv and advised Washington to evacuate its personnel from Ukrainian capital as it ratcheted up pressure in the conflict.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a phone conversation the Russian Armed Forces are now launching “systematic and consistent strikes against facilities in Kyiv used by the Ukrainian Armed Forces and against the relevant decision-making centers,” according to a readout supplied by the Kremlin.

The Russian assault is in response to “the Kyiv regime’s ongoing terrorist attacks against civilians and civilian objects on Russian territory,” the statement said.

Lavrov also warned Rubio that the United States, “along with other states with missions in Kyiv, ensure the evacuation of their diplomatic personnel and other citizens from the Ukrainian capital.”

Earlier Monday, Moscow decried what it called “a bloody drone attack” on a college dormitory on Friday in Luhansk, a part of Ukraine occupied by Russian forces and claimed as a “people’s republic.”

Twenty-one people, including children, were killed and 42 others injured in strike, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed while calling it a deliberate “terrorist strike.”

Ukraine, however, described it as an attack on the headquarters of Russia’s Rubicon drone military unit in Starobilsk, Luhansk.

That incident was followed by Russia’s largest-ever drone and missile attack on Kyiv overnight from Saturday into Sunday, in which two were killed more than 80 injured.

Strikes were recorded in almost every district of the city, hitting cultural targets such as The National Art Museum, the Chornobyl Museum, the National Philharmonic, the Ukrainian National Academy of Music and the Kyiv Opera Theater, the Kyiv Independent reported.

Julie Davis, the chargé d’affaires at the U.S. embassy in Kyiv, condemned the overnight strikes on Monday, calling them “deliberate strikes on civilian populations and civilian infrastructure” which she deemed “unacceptable.

“As President Trump has stated before, this war must end. We extend our deepest condolences to all those affected by this horrific tragedy.”

Such strikes in the capital are set to continue, Russia warned Monday, although insisting they are aimed at military rather than civilian targets.

“All this has exhausted our patience In this situation,” the Foreign Ministry said. “The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation are beginning to launch consistent and systemic strikes at enterprises of the Ukrainian defense industry in Kiev, including specific facilities for designing, manufacturing and programming drones and preparing them for operation.”

The strikes “will target decision-making centers and command posts,” Moscow claimed.

May 24 (UPI) — President Donald Trump on Sunday urged his negotiators “not to rush into a deal” with Iran because “time is on our side.”

He made the comments in a post on Truth Social that also took aim at the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the so-called Iran nuclear deal created in 2015 and which Trump withdrew from in 2018. In his post, Trump called it “one of the worst deals ever made by our country” and blamed former President Barack Obama and his administration.

“It was a direct path to Iran developing a Nuclear Weapon,” Trump wrote. “Not so with the transaction currently being negotiated with Iran by the Trump Administration – THE EXACT OPPOSITE, in fact!”

Trump said Saturday the deal with Iran had been “largely negotiated” and that final aspects were being worked out. On Sunday, he added that talks were “proceeding in an orderly and constructive manner.

“I have informed by representatives not to rush into a deal in that time is on our side,” he wrote.

“Both sides must take their time and get it right. There can be no mistakes!”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio also said Sunday that “significant progress” had been made and hinted that Trump may make an announcement on the issue “a little bit later today,” The New York Times reported.

“Suffice it to say some progress has been made, significant progress, although not final progress,” he said during a news conference in New Delhi.

May 22 (Asia Today) — The head of the U.S.-based Committee to Protect Journalists warned Friday that pressure on press freedom is not limited to imprisonment, killings or direct censorship, saying lawsuits, access restrictions and online attacks can also intimidate reporters and encourage self-censorship.

Jacob Weisberg, chairman of the Committee to Protect Journalists, made the remarks during a news conference at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan in Tokyo when asked about indirect pressure on journalists in democracies such as South Korea and Japan.

“The issue of reporters being prevented from doing their jobs or being punished in unofficial ways, and the issue of threats and self-censorship, are much more difficult matters,” Weisberg said.

Asia Today asked how the organization evaluates cases in which press freedom is restricted not through direct censorship but through exclusion, intimidation or loss of access, citing press corps-centered reporting restrictions, limits on access to government briefings, defamation lawsuits and online harassment.

Weisberg said the CPJ is still considering how to respond to such issues.

“That does not mean CPJ is not concerned about such issues, but to be fair, we are still thinking about how to deal with questions like that,” he said.

He said the group’s top priority remains helping journalists who face physical danger.

“CPJ’s first obligation is to help journalists who are in physical danger,” he said. “We first deal with cases involving journalists who are imprisoned, abused, tortured or killed.”

But he stressed that this does not mean the organization is unconcerned about more subtle and complicated issues surrounding press freedom.

Weisberg also addressed Japan’s press club system. While saying he did not know enough about Japan, he said he had often heard about the country’s press clubs and the inherent limits of that system.

He said reporters outside press clubs may not have the same access to information and that the system can function as an exclusive channel through which information is delivered.

Weisberg did not equate the issue with censorship seen in authoritarian countries.

“It is not censorship, but it is a lower-level problem than that,” he said.

He also cited the United States, saying there have been no confirmed recent cases of journalists being jailed or killed there, but that the environment for reporters has worsened and become more dangerous in several ways.

He mentioned “media capture,” in which government approval or corporate merger issues can be used as leverage over broadcasters and media companies, as well as concerns over lawsuits and self-censorship.

Referring to the Trump administration, Weisberg also raised concerns about restrictions on White House access for certain media outlets and limits on access to Pentagon briefings.

Restricting government access to the press because of political views is “illegal and unconstitutional,” he said.

On Asia, Weisberg expressed more direct concern. He said that as of May 13, CPJ counted 103 journalists imprisoned across Asia. China had the largest number, with 51, followed by Myanmar with 18 and Vietnam with 16.

Weisberg also said that while Japan has no recorded cases of journalists being imprisoned or killed, worsening press freedom across Asia affects the safety, movement and reporting ability of Japanese journalists working abroad.

He cited the case of NHK Tehran bureau chief Shinnosuke Kawashima, who was arrested in Iran and later released but has not yet been able to return to Japan.

Weisberg said Japan could play a more active diplomatic role in defending press freedom in Asia.

His remarks suggested that press freedom debates in South Korea and Japan should move beyond the question of whether censorship exists and ask who monopolizes information, who loses the right to ask questions and who is pressured into silence.

— 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=20260522010006683

The first-ever winner of Britain’s Got Talent has spoken out about the ITV show’s format and says it needs to change to survive.

Britain’s Got Talent winner Paul Potts has spoken out about the iconic talent show and its current format.

The 55-year-old, who claimed the inaugural title on the ITV programme back in 2007, has voiced his concerns about international acts who have already reached the semi-final stages on other Got Talent franchises subsequently competing in the British version.

While making clear he has “no problem” with overseas performers appearing on the show, Paul insisted the programme must “adapt” to remain relevant.

Speaking exclusively to Sky Vegas, he said: “I’ve got no problem with international acts because British people have won America’s Got Talent before. Paul Zerdin won America’s Got Talent, so it works both ways. Some of the international acts this year have been fantastic and they bring real quality to the competition.”

He continued: “But I don’t think people who’ve already made a Got Talent final anywhere in the world should then be allowed to compete in another regular Got Talent series. Otherwise, it just becomes the same people endlessly auditioning across the franchise.”

“For me, if somebody has already reached a live semi-final, they should maybe get one more shot and that’s it. It’s not just meant for amateurs and complete novices. Professionals can absolutely compete, but it can’t just become a revolving door of career talent show contestants.”

Paul also suggested that the programme needs to venture across the UK in search of potential performers. He went on: “The format of Britain’s Got Talent needs to adapt.

“I think they need to start going around the country again like they used to instead of concentrating everything into one or two locations. Go out to seven or eight cities and really search for more homegrown talent. That would encourage more people from around the UK to audition.

“They also need to focus purely on quality once it gets to the semi-finals and finals. Bring novelty acts back to perform in the live shows for entertainment, but don’t have them there as actual semi-finalists because it feels a little disrespectful to the contestants who genuinely have a realistic chance of winning.”

Paul further noted that he believes the Golden Buzzer is ineffective in the semi-finals and that Piers Morgan ought to make a comeback to the programme, reports the Daily Star.

He continued: “I think it’s good to have diversity on the panel. KSI brings energy, and I don’t think there’s really anything wrong with the judging panel itself. The issue for me is more about the structure – you either need one more judge or one fewer judge, so you don’t keep ending up in deadlock situations.

“If they were going to add another judge, I’d say bring Piers Morgan back. I’m sure he’d shake things up a bit. I’m not sure he’d do it again, but it would certainly make things interesting.”

Britain’s Got Talent continues Saturday, 23rd May at 7pm on ITV1.

Warning comes after Trump threatened military action against Iran and gave it ‘two to three days’ to strike a deal.

May 18 (UPI) — President Donald Trump has renewed his threats of mass violence against Iran, warning Tehran that “the Clock is Ticking” as the stalemate in talks to end the war shows no signs of ending.

In a statement on his Truth Social platform on Sunday night, Trump wrote: “For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them.”

“TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!”

The two-sentence statement echoed the scale of violence he threatened April 7, shortly before the cease-fire was announced, when he warned Iran to make an agreement to end the war or “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.”

Trump has been seeking an agreement with Iran to end the war since the conflict was halted April 8 with a cease-fire to permit negotiations.

Those negotiations have progressed little if at all since talks broke down in Islamabad in mid-April.

An Iranian proposal recently sent to the United States was rejected by Trump, who told reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday en route to Washington from China that he looked at it and found the first sentence unacceptable.

“Well, I looked at it, and if I don’t like the first sentence, I just throw it away,” Trump said.

Asked what the first sentence was, Trump replied, “An unacceptable sentence.”

Trump said he is seeking a lengthy suspension of Iran’s nuclear program, stating that two decades may comply with his demands but “it’s got to be a real 20 years.”

According to Iranian state media Press TV, Iran’s proposal calls for a comprehensive end to the war, full compensation from the United States for damages, the removal of sanctions, the release of frozen Iranian assets and recognition of Iran’s sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency reported the United States responded with five demands: no compensation, no unfreezing of assets, the handover of 881.8 pounds of uranium to the United States, only one nuclear facility remaining active and making a halt to the war on all fronts conditional on negotiations.

In response to Trump’s threat on Sunday, Brig. Gen. Abolfazl Shekarchi, senior spokesman for Iran’s Armed Forces, called Trump “delusional,” the Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

“Repeating any foolishness to compensate for America’s disgrace in the third imposed war against Iran will bring no consequence other than receiving more crushing and severe blows for that country,” Shekarchi said.

He warned Trump if the United States resumed its attacks, “the assets and decayed army of that country will face new, offensive, surprising and stormy scenarios.”

Iran to reveal its plan for Strait of Hormuz soon as Israel attacks Lebanon and Gaza, killing and wounding dozens.