15.7 C
London
Thursday, June 4, 2026
Subscribe
Home Blog

Kyrgyzstan’s UN upset signals Eurasia’s quiet rise

By
IwPost
-
0
kyrgyzstan’s-un-upset-signals-eurasia’s-quiet-rise
Kyrgyzstan’s UN upset signals Eurasia’s quiet rise

Kyrgyzstan representatives cheer after winning vote to become a rotational UN Security Council member. Image: X Screengrab

On Wednesday (June 3), Kyrgyzstan secured an upset victory over the Philippines to win a seat on the United Nations Security Council for the 2027-2028 term.

After taking a surprising 105-85 lead in the first ballot, the Central Asian nation went on to win decisively, 142-49, in a fourth round of voting. Kyrgyzstan was one of 59 countries that had never served on the Council. Its election marks only the second time a Central Asian country has held a seat, following Kazakhstan in 2017-2018.

An elated Kyrgyz delegation – some wearing traditional ak-kalpak hats – celebrated in the General Assembly Hall, exchanging handshakes and smiles with a long line of well-wishers.

The scale of the final vote was striking. That such a decisive margin favored a Central Asian candidate over a US-aligned Indo-Pacific one challenges conventional assumptions about where the center of global geopolitical gravity is shifting.

On paper, the Philippines appeared the obvious choice. A US treaty ally and founding member of ASEAN, it has deep diplomatic ties across the Global South and has served on the Security Council four times. Its strategic location — on the front lines of tensions with China and near Taiwan — only reinforced its relevance.

In April, the United States and the Philippines held their largest-ever “Balikatan” joint military drills, including in areas near Taiwan. More than 17,000 troops from seven countries participated in the 19-day exercise.

At the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on May 30, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth praised President Ferdinand Marcos Jr for boosting defense spending by 12% this year, highlighting Manila’s push to build a “modern, technologically advanced and interoperable force” capable of operating alongside US forces.

Yet, Wednesday’s vote suggested that many countries in the Global South gave a collective shrug to this US-centric narrative. Rather than lining up behind alliance structures or strategic alignments, many countries in the General Assembly appeared willing to back a different kind of candidate.

Kyrgyzstan’s campaign leaned into that contrast. Its messaging — “The voice of Central Asia,” “Mountain nation, global vision,” and “Landlocked, ocean-minded” — emphasized representation and perspective over power politics.

Ahead of the vote, a senior Philippine diplomat had expressed confidence that countries such as the US and Japan would support Manila’s bid. The diplomat noted Kyrgyzstan’s backing from China and Russia, and argued it was clear which candidate stood on “the right side of history.”

The outcome, however, suggests that framing did not resonate. For years, the dominant narrative in global strategy has been the rise of the Indo-Pacific – a framework centered on maritime trade, naval power and US-China competition at sea.

By that logic, a country like the Philippines should have been the natural choice. But the General Assembly chose differently. Kyrgyzstan’s victory suggests that another map is beginning to matter: the Eurasian interior.

This region is increasingly a theater of strategic competition. Russia’s influence in Central Asia and South Caucasus is waning as it remains consumed by the war in Ukraine.

China, meanwhile, is expanding overland energy and infrastructure networks across Eurasia, as it seeks to reduce reliance on maritime routes vulnerable to disruption, particularly in the event of an armed conflict with the US.

At the same time, countries such as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan have pursued multivector foreign policies, avoiding overdependence on any single power and a balancing act that has kept them engaged with multiple partners, including the US.

Washington has always struggled to categorize Central Asia – variously grouping it with Europe, the Middle East or Asia. Often treated as a space between more important regions, it is now emerging as a geopolitical arena in its own right — defined not by sea lanes, but by corridors, energy routes and common Turkic heritage.

None of this means that countries are necessarily siding with Russia and China over the US. Nor does it diminish the importance of the Indo-Pacific. And the Philippines will obviously remain central to US strategy vis-à-vis China.

But the vote does suggest something more subtle: a growing appetite for new narratives and a recognition that military buildup may not be the only path to credible deterrence. It also reflects an emerging new geopolitical map with Eurasia increasingly at its center.

Ken Moriyasu, a former correspondent for the Japanese newspaper Nikkei, is a senior fellow at Hudson Institute.

Male bowerbirds prefer to dazzle females with bright human-made items

By
IwPost
-
0
male-bowerbirds-prefer-to-dazzle-females-with-bright-human-made-items
Male bowerbirds prefer to dazzle females with bright human-made items

Male bowerbirds are notorious for their complex mating rituals. They build intricate tunnels out of twigs—the bowers from which they get their name—and then decorate them with random colorful items gleaned from the environment. When a female of the species shows up to check out a male’s fancy digs, the male tosses his shiniest objects in her direction and shows off his plumage in hopes of impressing her.

According to a new paper published in the journal Royal Society Open Science by University of Exeter scientists, urbanization and the associated growing availability of brightly colored human-made items have had a significant impact on courtship display behavior in Australian male bowerbirds. There are marked differences in the choice of decorations for bowerbirds in urban versus rural environments. This might be because urban birds simply have greater access to the items than their rural counterparts, since birds in both environments show a marked preference for human items.

The University of Exeter researchers monitored the bowers of 61 male great bowerbirds in two sites in Australia’s northern Queensland—the rural Dreghorn Cattle Station and the urban Townsville City—during the prime breeding season (September–December 2023). Then they photographed the bower decorations in situ from above in both visible and UV light (bowerbirds can see in the UV range), using an umbrella to create diffuse lighting.

Next, they selected the 10 decorations closest to the bower entrance, since these were the most likely to be used by the male bird for his displays. These were also photographed and marked to identify the original source. Then the team removed all existing decorations from each bower and created a mixed slush pile of 10 randomly selected urban bowers and 10 randomly selected rural bowers, and they left the site alone for three days. Males were never offered any items from their own bower.

When the team returned to the sites, they determined which decorations had been selected from the slush pile and moved to a bower, and whether it came from an urban or rural source. After recording the data, all the original decorations were returned to their bowers.

Green glass and red wire

A male great bowerbird in a rural environment displaying to a female great bowerbird. Credit: Caitlin Evans

The subsequent analysis revealed that rural bowerbirds most often used green glass and green leaves or seeds for decoration, while urban birds preferred green glass and red wire. Plastic items were also popular, although “we also found items including a pair of handcuffs, medicine jars at bowers near a hospital, and fluorescent mouth guards from a site near an Australian Rules football ground,” said University of Exeter co-author Caitlin Evans.

Urban bower decorations were more than 10 times more likely to be human-made than those of rural bowers, which had more natural items, such as fruit, seeds, leaves, and sticks. Urban bowers also had nearly five times as many decorations as rural ones, averaging 90 items per bower compared to 20 for the rural birds. One overachieving urban male gathered 300 items to decorate his bower. Both urban and rural male bowerbirds showed a strong preference for human items when given a choice of items sourced from each environment. And red decorations in urban bowers were more vivid, and the green items duller, than in rural bowers.

“Our results suggest that display produced by urban males may represent an adaptive change to a more attractive display and that rural males are restricted in their displays by the materials in their environment,” the authors wrote. Further, the ready availability of human items to urban birds “may reduce energetic costs and risks associated with leaving the bower unguarded.” Even rural birds manage to find some human items, most likely by raiding farm bins or garages.

A male great bowerbird in an urban environment displaying to a female great bowerbird. Credit: Caitlin Evans

The fact that urbanization appears to be altering the display traits of the great bowerbird might affect sexual selection, for example, by altering how females assess bowers when selecting a mate.  The current study did not measure differences in male mating success relative to the use of human-made materials, although prior research has indicated that there are higher male display and mating rates in urban versus rural environments. This may be due to other factors, such as higher population density. Nor is it clear if urban female bowerbirds have different preferences for courtship traits than rural females.

“Our study demonstrates that availability of human items—often glass and plastic—is affecting the behavior of bowerbirds,” said co-author Laura Kelley, also from the University of Exeter. “We don’t yet know whether this has any negative or positive impact on them, but it’s a reminder of how human activity is changing the natural world in unanticipated ways.”

Royal Society Open Science, 2026. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.260109 (About DOIs).

All EU members greenlight first step in accession talks, Ukraine PM says

By
IwPost
-
0
all-eu-members-greenlight-first-step-in-accession-talks,-ukraine-pm-says
All EU members greenlight first step in accession talks, Ukraine PM says


All members of the European Union agreed to open talks with Ukraine and ​Moldova on the first cluster of issues in their ‌accession talks, Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko said early on Thursday.

“Fantastic news,” she wrote on X. “We are one step closer to ​the EU membership: steadily moving towards our ​goal.”

Cyprus, which holds the rotating presidency of ⁠the EU, said on X it had starting ​preparing to formally open negotiation on the first ​group of negotiating chapters, which cover rule-of-law and democratic standards, with both countries.

“This marks a significant milestone in ​their European integration path, and sends a strong ​message of EU unity and determination,” it said.

The presidency said ‌it ⁠would work “towards finalising the discussions” for the formal opening.

Earlier, Hungarian Prime Minister Peter Magyar said his country and Ukraine had reached an agreement on ​the rights of ​the 100,000-strong ⁠Hungarian minority in Ukraine.

Magyar had previously said that agreement on the ​long-running dispute was essential if Budapest were ​to ⁠agree to Ukraine joining the EU.

Both Ukraine and Moldova are pressing for membership of the 27-member ⁠EU ​after more than four years ​of war pitting Kyiv against Moscow.

Source:  Reuters

Passengers Injured After Flight Takes Terrifying 3000ft Plunge

By
IwPost
-
0
passengers-injured-after-flight-takes-terrifying-3000ft-plunge
Passengers Injured After Flight Takes Terrifying 3000ft Plunge


A European passenger flight turned terrifying when a smaller jet suddenly dropped thousands of feet after flying into powerful “wake turbulence” reportedly left behind by an Emirates superjumbo jet nearly nine miles away.

Six people were injured in the frightening mid-air incident, including five passengers and one flight attendant, after Eurowings Flight 635 was hit by turbulence on Saturday, May 30.

The flight had taken off from Rhodes, Greece, and was headed for Cologne, Germany, when the ordinary trip suddenly turned into a nightmare in the skies.

According to FlightAware, the Eurowings plane left Rhodes Diagoras Airport around 10:30 a.m. local time. The aircraft, an Airbus A320-200, was carrying 157 passengers.

While flying over Bosnia and Herzegovina at about 36,000 feet, the crew was reportedly cleared to climb another 2,000 feet.

But ahead of the Eurowings jet was an Emirates Airbus A380-800, the massive double-decker plane known as the world’s largest passenger airliner.

The Emirates aircraft was flying from Dubai to London at 38,000 feet and was about 7.6 nautical miles, or roughly nine miles, in front of the Eurowings plane, according to The Aviation Herald.

Moments later, the Eurowings aircraft suddenly stopped climbing and began falling at a rate of about 3,000 feet per minute.

The plane eventually regained control at around 36,000 feet, but not before the terrifying drop left several people hurt.

A Eurowings spokesperson confirmed the incident and said the plane had encountered “brief wake turbulence.”

Wake turbulence is one of the hidden dangers of air travel. Every aircraft creates it, but larger planes can leave especially powerful invisible air currents behind them.

The Federal Aviation Administration says wake turbulence forms when strong rotating air vortices trail behind an aircraft. Those swirling forces are sometimes described as invisible tornadoes in the sky.

They can be especially dangerous for smaller aircraft flying behind a much larger jet.

The FAA says wake turbulence can cause “possible injury to occupants” of trailing aircraft and warns pilots to stay alert when flying behind another plane.

The strength of those invisible air currents depends on an aircraft’s weight, speed, wingspan, and wing shape. Planes classified as “heavy” or “super” require extra caution.

In this case, the Emirates A380 was the giant in the sky.

Even more unsettling, officials say the planes were apparently separated by more than the required minimum distance.

International Civil Aviation Organization guidelines state that aircraft should have at least seven nautical miles of lateral separation when one plane climbs or descends through the level of another.

The Eurowings aircraft was reportedly 7.6 nautical miles behind the Emirates jet.

That means the aircraft were operating within the guidelines, but the smaller plane was still shaken by the wake turbulence.

According to The Aviation Herald, one flight attendant was thrown against the cabin ceiling during the incident.

Despite the injuries, the Eurowings jet continued on to Cologne Bonn Airport.

When the plane landed, medical crews were waiting.

“The affected passengers and crew member were met and treated by medical personnel immediately after landing,” a Eurowings spokesperson said.

The airline added, “We regret the incident and wish those affected a speedy recovery.”

The German Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation confirmed the incident has been reported. Officials said they will work with authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, who are expected to lead the investigation.

Emirates has not yet publicly commented on the incident.

For passengers, the ordeal was a chilling reminder that not all turbulence comes from storms.

Sometimes, the danger is invisible — and left behind by a giant aircraft miles ahead.

Iran is losing the war but winning what comes next

By
IwPost
-
0
iran-is-losing-the-war-but-winning-what-comes-next
Iran is losing the war but winning what comes next

Iran is losing the war against the US and Israel by most visible measures. Its air defenses have been obliterated, its senior leadership dead, and its already flagging economy is on the verge of collapse, with its crucial oil and gas exports stuck behind a blockade.

Yet its core deterrents, namely an underground missile force and an enriched uranium stockpile, both motivations for Washington and Jerusalem to wage the war, are believed to be largely intact.

That means Tehran may not be winning on the battlefield, but could yet prevail in the postwar security architecture vis-a-vis the six Gulf states it has spent the last three months attacking in response to US and Israeli strikes.

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has dismissed the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Council’s barrage on Gulf allies as “indiscriminate targeting, flailing recklessly.” However, the targeting has been quite deliberate in hitting strategic and economic assets and has likely been more effective than Tehran anticipated.

Roughly 85% of Iran’s aerial campaign struck Gulf states that had explicitly refused to support America and Israel’s Operation Epic Fury. Airports, hotels, LNG terminals, refineries, desalination plants and data centers have all been targeted in Iran’s strikes.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has absorbed more Iranian missile and drone hits than any other country, including Israel.  

Across the Gulf, capitals face the same stark choice. Back Washington or stay nominally neutral and risk strikes on their refineries and other economic infrastructure anyway. Tehran is betting that hitting Gulf states will eventually cause Washington to back down.

If that’s indeed Iran’s strategy, it has not worked yet. A fragile ceasefire has held in name, though both sides have recently resumed attacks as they negotiate the terms of a bilateral agreement. Anger among Gulf states at Iran is seething, but the stakes are not the same on both sides.

Iran is fighting for nothing less than the survival of its Islamic regime; the Gulf’s ruling monarchies are not. For them, the main question is what new order prevails once the shooting stops. And the potential answer increasingly threatens to divide the Gulf straight down the middle.

The UAE, for one, has opted to escalate rather than cower. It has absorbed the heaviest Iranian barrage of any Gulf state and, in response, has tethered itself even more tightly to Washington and Jerusalem.

It has reportedly put Israel’s Iron Dome air defense batteries on its soil and, according to the Wall Street Journal, struck Iran dozens of times during the war and into the tentative truce.

Dubai’s economy has suffered while risking a bigger disaster – a drone fired from Iraq, where pro-Iran militias operate, was recently downed near the US$30 billion Barakah nuclear plant. The longer the UAE stays this close to Washington, the harder it will be to pull back later.

Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, has responded to direct attacks on its Petroline and Ras Tanura oil infrastructure by secretly striking Iranian launch sites while simultaneously initiating back-channel talks.

At the same time, Riyadh refused to cooperate with the US-led Project Freedom, which sought the use of its Prince Sultan Air Base to protect naval escorts through the Strait of Hormuz. Washington scrapped the initiative soon thereafter.

This two-pronged, if not contradictory, approach has led to fewer Iranian attacks on Saudi territory. Saudi Arabia has called for de-escalation in public while keeping the pressure on in private, putting in a perilous strategic middle ground.

It’s also creating cracks among Gulf states at a time when they would benefit from a more unified response. The Wall Street Journal reported that Riyadh has urged Washington to rein in the UAE’s strikes. That has reportedly angered the UAE’s leadership, who have carped that Saudi Arabia and Qatar have failed to coordinate a military response to Iran’s attacks.

Trump has kept the Abraham Accords and Saudi normalization with Israel on the table as a closing mechanism to a potential grand bargain. However, Riyadh cannot sell normalization with Israel at home while Iranian missiles hit Saudi refineries in response to a war Israel largely initiated.

Meanwhile, Qatar has kept a line to Tehran open throughout the war and is now the only Gulf capital through which either side will talk outside of the Pakistan channel. Kuwait, for its part, has taken Iranian missile hits and offered nothing. Neither will shape what comes next, though Qatar’s open line is the closest thing the Gulf has to a seat at the table.

The UAE is increasingly fused to the state that Iran considers its primary mortal enemy: Israel. Saudi Arabia has preserved its public restraint but is being written out of the talks.

Between them, the Gulf’s collective capacity to act as an independent principal has been undermined not only by their own choices but by what the war has done to each of them in turn.

The settlement now being negotiated between the US and Iran will thus be bilateral, with Gulf interests and security likely left to be handled in separate and later conversations. This is Iran’s win inside its military losses.

Tehran does not need the Gulf to surrender – it needs only a postwar settlement written without its participation. A bilateral deal with the US would likely leave Gulf security largely unaddressed and thus exposed to new rounds of Tehran’s pressure.

The bigger problem, however, reaches beyond the Gulf. By lifting the Hormuz blockade and allowing Iran to sell oil again, Washington’s main pressure point on Tehran’s nuclear file would narrow to one option: threatening another war, which will be harder to brandish convincingly as critical US midterm elections near.

Those who thus warn that a deal would favor Iran have the mechanism right and the victim wrong. A bilateral bargain that revives Iran’s economy and puts regional security off for a later date would mean the Gulf must fend for itself vis-à-vis Tehran.

A postwar order resting on American promises and Iranian goodwill — both shown to be unreliable in a time of war — will not translate into a new era of regional stability.

In say five years, the Gulf states will either have extracted binding security guarantees from whatever settlement emerges, or they will face a reconstituted Iran with less leverage than they hold today and no credible security architecture to contain it.

All told, Iran is losing the war but winning what comes after. None of this, of course, was by design. The Gulf’s wartime paralysis owes to its own divisions, leaving it without a voice in deciding what emerges from the conflict’s ashes.

Eric Alter is a non-resident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Middle East programs and a former UN civil servant. 

Israel and Lebanon Renew Truce; Establish Hezbollah-Free ‘Security Zones’ 

By
IwPost
-
0
israel-and-lebanon-renew-truce;-establish-hezbollah-free-‘security-zones’ 
Israel and Lebanon Renew Truce; Establish Hezbollah-Free ‘Security Zones’ 


Israel and Lebanon agreed Wednesday to renew their ceasefire and move forward with establishing pilot security zones in southern Lebanon, to be placed under the exclusive control of the Lebanese Armed Forces, as part of a US-backed effort to advance broader security arrangements between the two countries. 

In a joint statement, the parties said they would “swiftly advance the creation of pilot zones in which the Lebanese Armed Forces will take exclusive control of the territory to the exclusion of all non-state actors.” 

The initiative is intended to support progress toward a broader agreement between Jerusalem and Beirut: “These steps will enable progress toward a comprehensive peace and security agreement,” it said. 

The statement also emphasized that decisions regarding relations between Israel and Lebanon should be made by their respective governments: “All countries reaffirmed that the future of the relationship between Israel and Lebanon must be decided by the two sovereign governments. They rejected any attempt, by any state or non-state actor, to hold Lebanon’s future hostage.” The language appeared to reference Iran, which supports Hezbollah in Lebanon. 

Speaking to reporters at the White House, President Donald Trump said the United States is seeking to reduce Iran’s involvement in the Lebanon conflict: “We’re trying to separate Iran from the tensions in Lebanon.”  

He also disclosed direct contact with Hezbollah: “We spoke with Hezbollah, we didn’t know they speak – actually we spoke with them for the first time. Yesterday, they agreed that they won’t shoot.”  

The announcement came after continued tensions along the Israel-Lebanon border. Although there were reports that Israel Defense Forces (IDF) struck Lebanon after the ceasefire was announced,  Lebanese newspaper An-Nahar, which is not affiliated with Hezbollah, reported that Israeli airstrikes ceased immediately following publication of the joint ceasefire statement. 

Before the ceasefire renewal was announced, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir said Israeli forces would continue operating against threats in Lebanon. During a visit to the Haifa Naval Base on Wednesday, Zamir said, “there is no ceasefire for our forces.” 

“We are working to maximize the freedom of action that has been granted to us and will seize every opportunity to remove threats to the citizens of Israel and to our forces,” he said, according to remarks released by the IDF. 

Zamir’s statements were made prior to the announcement of the agreement.  

 

 

Trump plan to test AI models has a problem—US security teams were gutted by DOGE

By
IwPost
-
0
trump-plan-to-test-ai-models-has-a-problem—us-security-teams-were-gutted-by-doge
Trump plan to test AI models has a problem—US security teams were gutted by DOGE

On Tuesday, Donald Trump finally signed his executive order expanding the government’s efforts to conduct voluntary safety testing of frontier AI models. Now, critics are warning that the order may be short-sighted, offering only performative reassurances that the government is actively monitoring for AI risks, while changing very little about how and when models are deployed.

Last month, Trump abruptly canceled a signing event, where he had hoped to launch an earlier version of the EO with CEOs of leading AI firms in attendance. Invited at the last minute, several CEOs simply couldn’t make the signing but still signaled support for the order. Officially, Trump claimed he postponed the event because he worried that the EO might have gone too far and had become a “blocker” impeding AI innovation. Reports indicated there was infighting in his administration as cybersecurity experts clashed with officials committed to deregulating AI.

The watered-down EO that Trump signed promises not “to stifle this innovation with overly burdensome regulation” and establishes no requirements for AI firms. Instead, it sets up a voluntary process for companies to collaborate with the government on safety reviews that Trump’s EO claimed would “ensure that the best and most secure technology is deployed rapidly to confront any and all threats to our country.”

Under this order, Trump wrote, “we will continue to lead an America First cybersecurity effort that enhances both our national security and our global AI dominance.”

However, experts reviewing the EO suggest that not much changed between the leaked draft that prompted industry backlash and the order that Trump eventually signed without making a big event involving CEOs.

The biggest difference, sources told Politico, is the amount of time that the government will have to conduct voluntary testing. Trump’s scrapped EO would’ve sought access to models up to 90 days ahead of other trusted partners, giving the federal government a wider window to test for and patch up vulnerabilities. But Trump apparently felt such a wide window risked setting the US back in the AI race, so he pivoted to sign a version of the order that shortens the window to 30 days.

What does the EO say?

Under the order, Trump directed the National Security Agency to set up a classified benchmarking process to determine the threshold for designating an AI model as a “covered frontier model.” The NSA must also collaborate with the US Treasury Department and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to establish a “cybersecurity clearinghouse” to scan and patch vulnerabilities at scale, as well as a voluntary framework for AI developers to submit models for safety testing.

Critics have pointed out, however, that the text of the EO makes it clear how unprepared the government is to conduct meaningful safety testing in such short timeframes.

Trump wants these processes set up within 30 days, but it will seemingly take longer than that for the government to recruit talent and develop expertise to conduct the safety tests. The EO gives the Office of Personnel Management 60 days to “expand the United States Tech Force Information Cybersecurity Specialist hiring and placement pathways.”

The EO also suggests that funding may be a short-term problem, directing the Office of Management and Budget to “determine whether any Federal grant programs have available and relevant funding that can be directed toward applicants developing advanced AI vulnerability detection.”

As a seeming stopgap while the government scrambles to implement the program, Trump apparently plans to increase enforcement to intimidate people who might exploit untested AI models. The EO directs the attorney general to “prioritize enforcement against individuals who use AI to illegally access or damage computer systems, steal data, or facilitate other criminal activity,” a White House fact sheet said.

Trump’s fact sheet claimed the EO strikes “the right balance between innovation and security.” But critics are concerned that Trump’s order—which came in response to public concerns about the cybersecurity risks posed by Anthropic’s model Mythos—appears short-sighted and depends too much on AI firms’ goodwill to prioritize public safety over profits.

Some insiders likely also remain critical. Politico noted that one former Trump AI advisor, Dean Ball, posted on X that the benefits of the voluntary reviews seemed “barely articulable.”

“What, exactly, is the intelligence community going to do in 30 days to make the models safer?” Ball wrote.

DOGE cuts may set back safety testing

In a post picking apart Trump’s EO, two experts from the nonpartisan think tank the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) explained the significance of the order and what seem to be glaring flaws.

Matthew Ferren, an international affairs fellow in national security, suggested that the EO is “best understood as an attempt to engineer a cybersecurity window of opportunity” that “grants defenders preferential access to frontier cyber capabilities while attempting to delay adversary access.”

“The goal is for defenders to find and fix critical vulnerabilities faster than adversaries can exploit them, but that will likely prove difficult,” Ferren wrote.

While finding vulnerabilities may be easy, consistently patching critical government systems to protect against risks would likely be challenging, Ferren suggested, especially without a specialized team of government experts. Last year, CISA was one of the hardest-hit agencies during the Department of Government Efficiency cuts. The government’s top cybersecurity recruits were “decimated,” CBS News reported, as top officers were fired, the agency was gutted, and cybersecurity contracts were canceled, Time Magazine reported.

Ferren wrote that the steep cuts to CISA may be why Trump had to assign a “prominent operational role” to the Treasury Department, instead of to “more obvious parties” like CISA or the Office of the National Cyber Director. That “may reflect that it is one of the few places where institutional capacity remains,” Ferren said.

Trump EO may not block dangerous deployments

Although “who will test frontier models” remains an urgent question for the Trump administration, “the most difficult to execute” provision of the EO—according to Vinh Nguyen, a CFR senior fellow for AI— will be “defining what counts as a ‘covered frontier model.’” As Nguyen explained:

“Frontier AI systems are probabilistic, goal-directed, increasingly autonomous, and opaque. They do not have fixed capability ceilings. They exhibit emergent behaviors that shift with scale, fine-tuning, software support structures, and deployment context. A model that appears unremarkable in isolated testing could become a potent cyber tool when integrated into an autonomous pipeline with access to real-world digital infrastructure.”

According to Nguyen, the government must be cautious when deciding which models require safety testing, since it risks shipping models with “genuinely dangerous capabilities,” if the definition for a covered model is “too narrow.” But if it’s “too broad,” then the evaluation process risks exhausting “the limited talent available to do this work.”

Once covered models are defined, Nguyen then warned that the effectiveness of the safety testing will likely depend on whether AI firms are fully transparent and treat the process as a “genuine collaboration.”

“Underneath the definitional problem sits an observability problem,” Nguyen wrote. “The government cannot assess what it cannot see, and frontier capabilities are visible only to the labs that build them.”

Ferren suggested that “the window for erecting proper cyber defenses to new AI models may also close quickly,” and that even a well-designed government program may struggle to properly vet frontier models in such a short timeframe. “Even when well implemented, pre-deployment testing has limits,” Ferren said, noting that Google’s threat intelligence team has found state-aligned actors using frontier models to automate cyberattacks and “researchers have shown that Mythos-style vulnerability reasoning can be reproduced with open-weight systems.”

So while AI may voluntarily submit to testing, they may be financially motivated to seek a rubber-stamp, rather than work with the government to test known frontier capabilities to their fullest extent.

“It will likely prove difficult to develop models that are incapable of malicious hacking yet remain commercially compelling,” Ferren said.

He concluded that the EO “may yield short-term cybersecurity benefits,” but the “long-term effect” remains “unclear.”

Nguyen suggested the EO takes necessary steps to create “classified cyber benchmarking, voluntary prerelease evaluation, and coordinated vulnerability scanning” that “the national security community will need for decades” to “continuously evaluate systems that are probabilistic rather than deterministic, autonomous rather than directed, and whose capabilities change with every update.”

But the safety testing will have to evolve as fast as the technology does, Nguyen said, otherwise we risk assessing emerging models against “yesterday’s risks.”

That’s why, at its core, the process will depend on an honest exchange between stakeholders with deep technical expertise and confidential national security insights. It’s the only way to ensure the US focuses its energies on protecting the public from the most credible and consequential AI risks, rather than just providing “performative reassurances,” Nguyen wrote.

Can’t make sense of Dashlane’s vault theft notification? You’re not alone.

By
IwPost
-
0
can’t-make-sense-of-dashlane’s-vault-theft-notification?-you’re-not-alone.
Can’t make sense of Dashlane’s vault theft notification? You’re not alone.

There’s a lot that doesn’t add up in a security advisory password manager Dashlane published Monday, warning that attackers managed to obtain 20 encrypted user vaults.

“Starting on Sunday, May 31, 2026, an external party launched a brute force attack against certain Dashlane user accounts,” the company said. “The goal of the attack was to brute-force two-factor authentication (2FA) protections to allow the attacker to register new devices on existing user accounts.”

Hello, Dashlane, anybody home?

A Dashlane user who received such a 2FA request provided this screenshot of the notification, which arrived on Sunday.

The UK-based user was concerned and contacted Dashlane through a support bot. Ultimately the user got no information about why the notification was sent.

“Then [I] discovered this news from Mastodon infosec and not Dashlane themselves,” the user told me. “Currently trying to find out what has happened! Because how can you trigger a 2fa request if you haven’t got the password 1st? As a paying customer I think I should have known about this from Dashlane and not Mastodon infosec folks.”

Scores of social media discussions are filled with similar comments from users who also don’t understand the basic mechanics of this attack. Typically, 2FA protections take the form of a one-time password generated by an authentication app or sent by text or email. They’re typically six digits long and change every 45 or so seconds, although as the notification above indicates, the code remained valid for three hours.

Brute-forcing is a trial-and-error method that rapidly submits every possible combination until landing on the right one. Under these assumptions, there would be 1 million possible passcodes. A successful breach would require a statistically significant percentage of them to be entered within the three-hour window.

While the resources needed to bombard Dashlane servers with that volume of guesses in such a short period of time are possible, they’re not commonly found in usual brute-force attacks. Dashlane doesn’t explicitly say it placed a rate limit on the number of submissions a user can make, although it appears likely based on language in the advisory saying “Because of the high volume of attempts on user accounts, Dashlane’s security controls automatically locked accounts that were targeted by the attack.” Even assuming there was no rate limiting, it’s hard to imagine Dashlane servers not at least temporarily choking when receiving 150,000 or more submissions in an hour or so.

It’s possible that Dashlane’s reference to 2FA meant something else. Sometimes, 2FA can come in the form of push notifications. Once someone enters the correct account password, the notification is sent to the registered device. For the login to succeed, the user must press a button on their device that provides the second factor. A tactic known as 2FA fatigue attacking exploits the friction of this process. An attacker who has already broken the first authentication factor attempts to log in repeatedly, resulting in a push notification being sent to the target each time. After dozens or even hundreds of attempts, the target finally gives in and presses the approve button.

And of course, brute-force attacks on 2FA require the first authentication factor to already have been broken. Dashlane makes no mention of what this factor is or how it was broken.

It’s still further plausible that the attack exploited features that allow Dashlane users to enroll new devices in their accounts. Such techniques typically work by tricking the user into approving a request to approve a device owned by the attacker instead.

Dashlane said it has contacted fewer than 20 account holders whose encrypted vaults were obtained. “If you’re a Dashlane user and have not received a message from Dashlane specific to vault risk, there is no impact to your Dashlane account,” the company said. It also notes that without the master decryption password—which Dashlane never sees or stores—vault contents remain safe.

But without more information, we’re left with more questions than we should be. Dashlane has maintained silence for more than 48 hours since publishing the opaque advisory. Company representatives didn’t respond to an email seeking details.

Post updated to add details from a Dashlane user who received the notifcation.

29 arrested as law enforcement strikes criminal networks behind illegal streaming

By
IwPost
-
0
29-arrested-as-law-enforcement-strikes-criminal-networks-behind-illegal-streaming
29 arrested as law enforcement strikes criminal networks behind illegal streaming


Criminal networks making millions from illegal access to premium sports broadcasts, film and television channels have been targeted in a major international operation coordinated by Bulgaria with Europol’s support. The seven-month operation resulted in 29 arrests, the dismantling of nine organised crime groups and the removal of over 27 000 illegal streaming URLs.

Operation KRATOS 2 brought together law enforcement authorities from across Europe and beyond to target criminal groups profiting from the unauthorised distribution of copyrighted content through sophisticated online platforms. The operation ran between September 2025 and April 2026, focusing on the criminal infrastructure enabling illegal IPTV services and unauthorised streaming platforms to operate across jurisdictions.

Organised crime adapts to the digital environment

What appears to consumers as cheap access to premium content is powered by complex criminal enterprises. The groups behind illegal streaming services increasingly rely on complex technical infrastructure, separating customer-facing websites from the servers hosting the illegal content and distributing these services across several countries to avoid detection.

In addition to generating significant criminal revenue, these services expose users to cybersecurity risks, including malware infections, spyware, data theft and other forms of online exploitation.

Rather than focusing solely on taking down websites, investigators targeted the wider criminal ecosystem supporting these services. This approach enabled authorities to gather intelligence on the organised crime groups operating behind the platforms and identify key suspects involved in their management and technical operation.

Results of the operation

The coordinated actions led to:

  • 29 arrests
  • 86 suspects identified
  • 148 house searches
  • 9 organised crime groups dismantled
  • 59 cases referred to judicial authorities
  • 72 ongoing criminal investigations
  • 169 domains reported
  • 27 332 URLs removed
  • 722 961 infringing objects identified

The operation also benefited from extensive cooperation with private sector partners, whose intelligence contributed to the identification and disruption of criminal infrastructures linked to illegal streaming services.

Through this collaboration, authorities identified:

  • 4 370 new domains linked to piracy activities
  • 18 331 IP addresses associated with illegal services
  • 397 384 URLs reported for suspension or removal
  • 126 979 additional infringing objects

Rather than focusing solely on taking down websites, investigators targeted the wider criminal ecosystem supporting these services. This approach enabled authorities to gather intelligence on the organised crime groups operating behind the platforms and identify key suspects involved in their management and technical operation.

Europol’s support

Europol co-led the operational coordination alongside Bulgaria’s General Directorate Combating Organised Crime (GDBOP).
Throughout the operational phase, Europol facilitated intelligence exchange between participating countries, coordinated cross-border cooperation and provided operational and technical support to national authorities.

Information received from private sector partners was shared securely through Europol’s Secure Information Exchange Network Application (SIENA), enabling investigators to develop a comprehensive intelligence picture of the criminal ecosystem and coordinate action across multiple jurisdictions.

The Agency also supported the collection and analysis of operational results to identify emerging threats and support future investigations targeting digital piracy networks.

Participants

The operation involved authorities from Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Europol worked closely with strategic partners from the audiovisual and anti-piracy sectors, including AAPA, ACE/MPA, LALIGA, UEFA, Friend MTS, beIN Media Group and Irdeto.

Singapore Black Pepper Cauliflower with Spaghetti

By
IwPost
-
0
singapore-black-pepper-cauliflower-with-spaghetti
Singapore Black Pepper Cauliflower with Spaghetti

You are here: Home / All RECIPES / Singapore Black Pepper Cauliflower with Spaghetti

If you’re looking for a bold, flavorful meal inspired by the vibrant street food culture of Singapore, this Singapore Black Pepper Cauliflower with Spaghetti is a must-try. Crispy battered cauliflower is tossed in a rich black pepper sauce infused with curry leaves, garlic, shallots, and fermented bean paste, then served with perfectly cooked spaghetti that soaks up every drop of the savory sauce.

This plant-based version takes inspiration from Singapore’s famous black pepper crab, transforming those iconic flavors into a delicious vegan dish that’s hearty, spicy, and incredibly satisfying.

Why You’ll Love This Recipe

  • Packed with authentic Singapore-inspired flavors
  • Crispy battered cauliflower with a spicy pepper sauce
  • Completely vegan and dairy-free
  • Perfect balance of savory, sweet, and spicy
  • Easy to customize with your favorite protein alternatives
  • Restaurant-quality meal made at home

What Makes Singapore Black Pepper Sauce Special?

Unlike many black pepper sauces, the Singaporean version often includes fermented yellow bean paste (taucheo) and fragrant curry leaves. These ingredients create a deeper, more complex flavor profile that pairs beautifully with the bold heat of freshly toasted black pepper.

The result is a sauce that’s savory, aromatic, slightly sweet, and packed with character.

Ingredients

Main Ingredients

  • 1 1/2 cups cauliflower florets
  • 120g spaghetti

For the Batter

  • 1/4 cup cornstarch
  • 1/2 cup all-purpose flour
  • 3/4 cup water

For the Sauce

  • 1 1/2 tablespoons cracked black pepper
  • 1/2 tablespoon ground white pepper
  • 5 garlic cloves, finely chopped
  • 3 shallots, finely diced
  • 3 bird’s eye chilies, finely sliced (optional)
  • 10 curry leaves
  • 1 teaspoon fermented bean paste
  • 3 tablespoons vegan oyster sauce
  • 3 tablespoons soy sauce
  • 1 1/2 tablespoons sugar

Instructions

Step 1: Prepare the Cauliflower

Cut the cauliflower into medium-sized florets.

Step 2: Make the Batter

Whisk together the cornstarch, flour, and water until smooth and slightly thick, similar to a thin pancake batter.

Step 3: Fry the Cauliflower

Heat oil in a deep saucepan.

Dip each cauliflower floret into the batter and carefully place it into the hot oil.

Fry until lightly golden and crisp, then transfer to a paper towel-lined plate.

Set aside.

Step 4: Toast the Pepper

In a dry skillet over medium heat, toast the cracked black pepper and white pepper until fragrant.

Remove and set aside.

Step 5: Prepare the Sauce Mixture

In a small bowl, combine:

  • Vegan oyster sauce
  • Soy sauce
  • Sugar

Mix well and set aside.

Step 6: Cook the Spaghetti

Bring a large pot of salted water to a boil.

Cook the spaghetti according to package directions until al dente.

Drain and reserve.

Step 7: Build the Flavor Base

Heat 3 tablespoons of oil in a large skillet over medium heat.

Add the shallots and cook until softened.

Stir in the garlic and cook until fragrant.

Step 8: Create the Black Pepper Sauce

Add:

  • Fermented bean paste
  • Bird’s eye chilies
  • Curry leaves
  • Toasted pepper mixture

Cook for about 1 minute, stirring constantly.

The mixture should become intensely aromatic.

Step 9: Coat the Cauliflower

Add the crispy cauliflower back to the skillet.

Pour in half of the prepared sauce mixture and toss until evenly coated.

Step 10: Add the Pasta

Add the cooked spaghetti to the center of the skillet.

Pour the remaining sauce over the pasta and toss everything together until fully coated.

Step 11: Serve

Serve immediately while hot.

Garnish with extra curry leaves, sliced green onions, or lightly blanched vegetables if desired.

Tips for Success

  • Toasting the pepper enhances its flavor significantly.
  • Adjust the number of chilies based on your spice preference.
  • Don’t over-fry the cauliflower; a light golden color is ideal.
  • Use freshly cracked pepper for the best flavor.
  • Toss the spaghetti thoroughly so it absorbs all the sauce.

Variations

Tofu Version

Replace the cauliflower with crispy tofu cubes.

Mushroom Black Pepper

Use king oyster mushrooms or shiitake mushrooms for a meaty texture.

Seitan Alternative

Seitan works beautifully and absorbs the sauce exceptionally well.

Gluten-Free Option

Use gluten-free spaghetti and tamari instead of soy sauce.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is fermented bean paste?

Fermented yellow bean paste (taucheo) is a savory condiment commonly used in Southeast Asian cooking that adds depth and umami.

Can I skip the chilies?

Absolutely. The dish will still have plenty of flavor from the black pepper.

Can I bake the cauliflower instead of frying?

Yes. Bake battered cauliflower at 425°F (220°C) until crispy.

How spicy is this dish?

It has a medium heat level, but can easily be adjusted by reducing or increasing the chilies.

Recipe Summary

Prep Time: 20 minutes
Cook Time: 25 minutes
Total Time: 45 minutes
Servings: 2

This Singapore Black Pepper Cauliflower with Spaghetti is a bold and satisfying fusion of crispy vegetables, aromatic spices, and savory noodles. It’s a unique plant-based meal that brings the exciting flavors of Singapore straight to your dinner table.

123...513Page 1 of 513
0FansLike
0FollowersFollow
0FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
- Advertisement -
Google search engine

Recent Posts

POPULAR POSTS

POPULAR CATEGORY