Category: MIL-OSI

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor, The Conversation

This article was first published in The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email newsletter. Sign up to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.

---

As the world waits for what remains of the Hamas leadership to respond to Donald Trump’s 20-point peace deal – which the US president says they had better accept or “pay in hell” – it’s important to remember that there’s no certainty that the deal, as published this week, will make it past Netanyahu’s cabinet either.

Trump announced on September 29 that the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, had agreed to the terms of the deal, which includes what on the face of it appears to be a highly conditional reference to Palestinian self-determination. “While Gaza re-development advances and when the PA reform programme is faithfully carried out, the conditions may finally be in place [my italics] for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood, which we recognise as the aspiration of the Palestinian people.”

As they thrash out each clause of this, Hamas negotiators will be mindful of the fact that, on his return to Israel, Netanyahu said he had not agreed to a Palestinian state. He posted on social media saying that a promise of statehood was not written anywhere in the agreement and that Israel would “forcibly resist” such an outcome.

They will also note that according to the terms of the deal, their organisation is supposed to disband and disarm and they will be excluded, as representative of Hamas at least, from taking any further part in the governance of Gaza or indeed a Palestinian state.

Meanwhile, in the West Bank, Hamas’s counterpart Fatah, which runs the Palestinian Authority (PA), has lost the support of most Palestinians (a recent poll found just 6% would vote for Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, the PA president). Abbas is 89 years old and has surrounded himself with elderly supporters. The PA has been dogged by corruption scandals for years.

It’s clear that to have any chance of forming a coherent and credible government for a future Palestinian state, a new generation of leaders will be needed. The man who many think should lead that government is currently serving five life sentences in an Israeli jail.

Marwan Barghouti has been called “Palestine’s Mandela”. This is clearly partly for his lengthy spell of incarceration. But it’s also a reference to his preference for peaceful resistance – although, to be clear, he has not renounced violence as a means to political ends, either. Barghouti is respected by both Palestinian secularists and Islamist leaders, many of whom he has become friendly with in prison. Last year, the former head of the Israeli intelligence agency Shin Bet, Ami Ayalon, said releasing Barghouti would be a meaningful step towards constructive negotiations.

But as Leonie Fleischmann notes, powerful people want to keep him locked up. Fleischmann, an expert in Middle East conflict from City St Georges, University of London, says that the PA leadership has repeatedly opposed his release in prisoner swaps. And Netanyahu said, in response to an op-ed by Barghouti that was printed by the New York Times, that: “Calling imprisoned Fatah leader, Marwan Barghouti, a Palestinian leader and parliamentarian is like calling Syrian president, Bashar Assad, a paediatrician.”

---

Read more:
As Hamas considers a peace deal, the man most Palestinians want to lead them sits in an Israeli jail

---

It was interesting that, while the peace deal was largely pulled together in the fringes of the recent United Nations general assembly meeting in New York, representatives of the Palestinian authority were not there as the US had cancelled their US visas.

It’s not the first time that the US has undermined the ability of the PA to represent its people. And the irony, as Anne Irfan points out, is that the PA was actually set up as part of the Oslo Accords, the settlement famously signed at the White House by PLO chief Yasser Arafat and Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, with Bill Clinton presiding.

As Irfan, a historian of the Middle East from UCL, observes that not only did the accords favour Israel, giving Palestinians limited scope for self-governance, the summit that followed at Camp David was stage-managed to ensure a failure to reach an agreement. Successive US administrations, says Irfan, have undermined the ability of the PA to exercise leadership.

---

Read more:
How America helped create the Palestinian Authority – only to undermine it ever since

---

Still, the deal as presented – flawed as it is – does offer Palestinians some significant concessions. The violence will stop and the flow of aid into Gaza will resume – significantly, overseen by the UN and the Red Crescent rather than the widely discredited Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). The GHF has been running the system of aid distribution, which has seen so many Palestinians killed as they wait to get food for their families.

Israel has pledged not to annex Gaza or the West Bank. Nobody will be forced to leave. And the deal offers amnesty to Hamas members who give up their weapons and renounce violence. Julie Norman believes Hamas would be well advised to accept the deal. First, if they don’t, Trump has given the green light to Israel to “finish the job” in Gaza.

Norman, an expert in the Middle East and National Security at UCL and the Royal United Services Institute, also believes this is the best offer Hamas is going to get. As she observes: “Gazans are desperate for the devastation to end.” They may not react well to Hamas prolonging the violence for its own ends.

---

Read more:
Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza is deeply flawed but it may be the best offer Hamas can expect

---

A regional perspective

A big factor in all this is what appears to be an enthusiastic buy-in from Israel’s Arab neighbours. As Scott Lucas says, they also want the killing to stop. There is a considerable economic upside in ending the conflict and pushing for further normalisation with Israel. There will also be money to be made in the reconstruction of post-war Gaza.

But at the same time, they will be aware of the need not to antagonise their own people, who are largely sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Bringing an end to the violence in Gaza will ease those tensions while at the same time offering the chance to restore a measure of calm to a region that has been riddled with violence over the past two years.

Lucas, an expert in Middle East politics at University College Dublin, thinks that it will take time and the rebuilding of trust for normalisation to resume. But there is no chance of that at all while the killing continues in Gaza.

---

Read more:
Where does the Arab and Muslim world stand on Trump’s Gaza peace plan? Expert Q&A

---

Good news from Moldova

There were serious concerns ahead of last weekend’s election in Moldova that Russian interference might affect the result of the poll, which pitted pro-EU president, Maia Sandu, against the pro-Russian Patriotic Electoral Bloc led by Igor Dodon.

In the end, despite reports of widespread attempts to sway voters towards Russia (including recruiting Russian Orthodox clergy to try to persuade their flock to cast their votes for Dodon) it wasn’t even close. Sandu’s Party of Action (PAS) and Solidarity won with more than 50% of the votes cast, compared to the Patriotic Electoral Bloc’s 28.14%.

Stefan Wolff, an expert in international security at the University of Birmingham, pointed to the low turnout and the fact that the vast majority of votes cast by Moldova’s sizeable diaspora in Europe were for PAS is an indication of how deeply divided the country remains over its future direction.

---

Read more:
Moldova: pro-EU party wins majority in election dominated by Russian interference

---

Maga’s Viking obsession

There’s been a degree of hilarity over words uttered by the FBI boss, Kash Patel, at a press conference to announce that a suspect in the shooting of the rightwing influencer Charlie Kirk had been apprehended. Assuring Kirk that his work would continue, Patel signed off with the words: “I’ll see you in Valhalla.”

Some of those commenting thought it weird to eulogise a Christian nationalist with a reference to a pagan afterlife. Others pointed out that Viking mythology has long been an obsession with far-right movements and was an important part of Nazi iconography.

Tom Birkett, a professor of Old English and Old Norse at University College Cork, explains where the idea of Valhalla fits within Nordic myth systems and recounts the way it has subsequently been colonised by the far-right. He believes it’s far more likely that Patel was using the reference to elevate Kirk to hero warrior status than sending any kind of coded message to America’s far-right extremists.

---

Read more:
‘See you in Valhalla’: how the FBI director waded into the far-right’s obsession with the Vikings

---

---

Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.

---

– ref. The man who could lead an independent Palestine – https://theconversation.com/the-man-who-could-lead-an-independent-palestine-266523

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Colin Mason, Emeritus Professor of Entrepreneurship and Honorary Senior Research Fellow, Adam Smith Business School, University of Glasgow

Regional inequality is a long-standing problem in the UK that successive governments haven’t been able to get to grips with. The Labour government is aiming for economic growth, but this will only happen by boosting the UK’s regions and nations along with London and south-east England.

The UK’s economy is the most regionally imbalanced in the industrialised world. This has a damaging effect on productivity and economic performance, both key enablers of rising living standards.

Although “levelling up” is not part of the government’s vocabulary, reducing the wide economic divide between London and the rest of the UK remains high on its agenda. However, levelling-up policies have been criticised for being fragmented and lacking coherence, particularly because of the emphasis on large infrastructure investments. Infrastructure is only one of many factors that play into the long-term productivity differences in the UK.

Entrepreneurship and innovation are also central to regional economic competitiveness. But business start-up and scale-up rates are significantly higher in London and the south of England, particularly along the M4 and M3 corridors. These geographical variations are persistent over time.

The lack of high-growth start-ups in the rest of the UK is particularly important. These businesses are mainly located in and around London, with only a thin spread across the rest of the country. In a list of the UK’s 100 fastest-growing companies, 36 are in London, with a further 15 in south-east England.

These rapidly growing companies make a disproportionate contribution to job creation, innovation and economic growth. A 2009 report found that 6% of high-growth firms create more than 50% of jobs. This proportion has remained stable over the years, even during times of recession.

Entrepreneurship needs the right environment to thrive – places that offer a “fertile soil” with support, talent, finance, markets and connections to start and grow companies. As such, entrepreneur-led levelling up needs an approach that develops these “ecosystems” in the parts of the UK that have fallen behind more prosperous areas.

Entrepreneurial ecosystems are environments that bring together not only those who want to start businesses but also the people and institutions who support them. They need mentors with expertise and experience, employees with the right skills, investors who take calculated risks and intermediaries who can make connections.

Nurturing new businesses

So what does it take to build all of this? Our research on the emergence and maturing of ecosystems offers some important lessons.

It needs foundations. Particularly important are educational institutions that equip students with an entrepreneurial mindset. They support enterprise creation and companies that attract and nurture skilled employees – the kind of people who may be future entrepreneurs or early hires in high-growth companies.

But it takes time. The foundations of today’s successful ecosystems were laid more than a decade ago. Progress is often slow and hard to measure because elements in the ecosystem interact and evolve in unpredictable ways. As such, it is important to focus on long-term indicators of success. This includes those that are difficult to capture – things like willingness to pursue business opportunities despite the risk of failure, for example.

Thriving entrepreneurial ecosystems are characterised by virtuous circles, with success creating the ingredients that drive further success. Successful entrepreneurs, managers and investors frequently reinvest their wealth and experience in their local ecosystem as serial entrepreneurs, business angels, mentors or board members.

And even business failures can have positive effects on the ecosystem. Failures can trigger a recycling process as former employees are hired by other local companies.

Recognising that it takes an ecosystem to raise a start-up means that collaboration is vital. Outcomes will be limited if ecosystem players – companies, investors, experienced entrepreneurs, support organisations and so on – focus only on their own narrow interests. But if they connect and work together for the wider benefit of the ecosystem then everyone can gain from the successes.

Many of the features that underpin successful ecosystems are about building culture and relationships. This includes events, mentoring and networks that enable peer-to-peer learning and celebrate role models.

And it’s not always about having a local focus. Some activities to support high-growth entrepreneurs benefit from being delivered at the national or regional level. For example, public sector venture capital funds (government money that’s invested in start-ups that might struggle to source private investment) are more effective if delivered at scale. Ecosystems also need to develop links with other locations to tap into their knowledge, skills and resources.

As successful ecosystems are typically based around large cities, it is essential that they develop strong connections with the smaller communities around them to prevent inequalities emerging within regions.

Ultimately, building ecosystems requires government funding but not government management. For example, the Scottish government’s Ecosystem Fund provides financial support for grassroots initiatives that may otherwise struggle to get off the ground.

Successful systems are built from the ground up, with community members – typically successful entrepreneurs – taking on the leadership role. The role of government should be funding it, not running it. Public funding can give ecosystems momentum to drive the growth that narrows the UK’s regional inequalities.

Colin Mason received funding from The Regional Studies Association to undertake some of the research on Atlantic Canada’s entrepreneurial ecosystem.

Dr Michaela Hruskova has previously received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council for research underpinning insights in this article.

– ref. The UK has a regional inequality problem – levelling the playing field for entrepreneurs could help – https://theconversation.com/the-uk-has-a-regional-inequality-problem-levelling-the-playing-field-for-entrepreneurs-could-help-261822

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Fabrizio Alberti, Associate Professor in Life Sciences, University of Warwick

Magic mushrooms have been used in traditional ceremonies and for recreational purposes for thousands of years. However, a new study has found that mushrooms evolved the ability to make the same psychoactive substance twice. The discovery has important implications for both our understanding of these mushrooms’ role in nature and their medical potential.

Magic mushrooms produce psilocybin, which your body converts into its active form, psilocin, when you ingest it. Psilocybin rose in popularity in the 1960s and was eventually classed as a Schedule 1 drug in the US in 1970, and as a Class A drug in 1971 in the UK, the designations given to drugs that have high potential for abuse and no accepted medical use. This put a stop to research on the medical use of psilocybin for decades.

But recent clinical trials have shown that psilocybin can reduce depression severity, suicidal thoughts and chronic anxiety. Given its potential for medical treatments, there is renewed interest in understanding how psilocybin is made in nature and how we can produce it sustainably.

The new study, led by pharmaceutical microbiology researcher Dirk Hoffmeister, from Friedrich Schiller University Jena, discovered that mushrooms can make psilocybin in two different ways, using different types of enzymes. This also helped the researchers discover a new way to make psilocybin in a lab.

Based on the work led by Hoffmeister, enzymes from two types of unrelated mushrooms under study appear to have evolved independently from each other and take different routes to create the exact same compound.

This is a process known as convergent evolution, which means that unrelated living organisms evolve two distinct ways to produce the same trait. One example is that of caffeine, where different plants including coffee, tea, cacao and guaraná have independently evolved the ability to produce the stimulant.

This is the first time that convergent evolution has been observed in two organisms that belong to the fungal kingdom. Interestingly, the two mushrooms in question have very different lifestyles. Inocybe corydalina, also known as the greenflush fibrecap and the object of Hoffmeister’s study, grows in association with the roots of different kinds of trees. Psilocybe mushrooms, on the other hand, traditionally known as magic mushrooms, live on nutrients that they acquire by decomposing dead organic matter, such as decaying wood, grass, roots, or dung.

The observation that mushrooms that inhabit two different niches make the same psychedelic compound raises questions regarding the ecological role of this molecule. A possible explanation as to why both mushrooms produce psilocybin could be that it is intended to deter predators, such as insects, that may be tempted to eat their fruiting bodies. This would be similar to the role of caffeine, which is also known to act as a natural pesticide, deterring insects and other pests from feeding on certain plants.

Turning discovery into opportunity

This study may provide scientists with additional tools to produce psilocybin to use for medical purposes. Mushrooms tend to grow slowly both in nature and in the laboratory. Psilocybe (magic mushrooms) take about two months to grow from spores to mature mushrooms.

If large amounts of psilocybin are needed for testing in clinical trials or for future medical use, quick and sustainable ways of producing it should be investigated. Currently, psilocybin is produced using synthetic material because it is faster than extracting the compound from mushrooms and has higher yields. This has its drawbacks though. The current synthetic extraction methods that scientists use generate hazardous waste and include key steps that can only be carried out on a small scale.

In a separate study published in April 2025, Hoffmeister and his coworkers came up with a new approach to produce psilocybin. His team used enzymes derived from fungi to catalyse the reactions to make psilocybin, rather than a fully synthetic approach, which uses lab-made materials and catalysts. This approach can be carried out on a larger scale than the usual, fully synthetic method. The immobilised enzymes they used are also reusable, making the process more sustainable.

Enzymes are inherently more sustainable than non-biological catalysts because they generally operate in mild conditions (such as low temperature and neutral pH) and are easier to purify, which reduces energy consumption and waste. Also, enzymes are biodegradable, which helps decrease the environmental impact of industrial processes.

Hoffmeisters’ most recent work provides the scientific community with additional enzymes that can be used to make psilocybin.

While we can only speculate as to why different mushrooms would come
up with alternative ways of making the same psychedelic compound, this discovery
opens new avenues for the large-scale production of a promising candidate drug.

Fabrizio Alberti receives funding from UKRI through grants MR/V022334/1, BB/X018369/1 and EP/X039587/1, and from the British Council through grant 1203466293.

– ref. How different mushrooms learned the same psychedelic trick – https://theconversation.com/how-different-mushrooms-learned-the-same-psychedelic-trick-266401

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natalia Levina, Professor, Department of Information Systems Management & Analytics, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick; New York University

Being able to instantly and accurately predict the trajectory of a person’s health in the years to come has long been seen as the pinnacle of medicine. This kind of information would have a profound effect on healthcare systems as a whole – shifting care from treatment to prevention.

According to the findings of a recently published paper, researchers are promising just that. Using cutting-edge artificial intelligence (AI) technology, the researchers built Delphi-2M. This tool is seeking to predict a person’s next health event and when it’s likely to happen in the next 20 years. The model does this for a thousand different diseases including cancer, diabetes and heart disease.

To develop Delphi-2M, the European research team used data from nearly 403,000 people from the UK Biobank as an input into the AI model.

In the final trained AI model, Delphi-2M predicted the next disease and when it would occur based on a person’s sex at birth, their body mass index, whether they smoked or drank alcohol, and their timeline of prior diseases.

It was able to make these predictions with a 0.7 AUC (area under the curve). AUC aggregates false positive and false negative rates, so can be used as a proxy for accuracy in a theoretical setting. This means the model’s predictions could be interpreted to have about 70% accuracy across all disease categories – although the accuracy of these predictions have not yet been tested in terms of real-world outcomes.

They then applied the model to Danish Biobank data to see whether it was still effective. It was able to predict health outcomes with similar theoretical accuracy rates.

AI tools

The purpose of the paper wasn’t to suggest the Delphi-2M is ready to be used by doctors or in the medical field. Rather, it was to illustrate the power of the team’s proposed AI architecture, and the benefit it could have in analysing medical data.

Delphi-2M uses a “transformer network” to make its predictions. This is the same technology architecture that powers ChatGPT. The researchers modified the GPT2 transformer architecture to use time and disease features to predict when and what will happen.

Although other health prediction models have used transformer networks in the past, these were only designed to make predictions about a person’s risk of developing a single disease. Plus, they were primarily used on smaller-scale hospital record data.

But transformer networks are particularly well-suited for predicting a person’s risk of multiple diseases. This is because they can adapt their focus easily and are able to work out complex interactions between many different diseases from multiple distinct data points.

Delphi-2M has also proven to be slightly more accurate than other multi-disease prediction models which use a different architecture.

For example, Milton uses a combination of standard machine learning techniques and applied them to the same UK Biobank data. This model showed somewhat lower predictive power for most diseases compared with Delphi-2M – and needed to use more data to do so.

Moreover, non-transformer models are hard for others to improve by adding more data layers. This means these models cannot be as easily adapted and improved upon as transformer models for use in different contexts and studies.

What’s special about the Delphi-2M model is that it can be released to the public as an open-source model without compromising patients’ privacy. The authors were able to create synthetic data that mimics the UK Biobank data while removing personally identifiable information – all without a significant drop in predictive power. Moreover, Delphi-2M requires less computing resources to train than typical AI transformer models.

This will allow other researchers to train the model from scratch and possibly tailor the model and information for their needs. This is important for the advancement of open science and is generally difficult to do in medical settings.

Still too early

Whether or not Delphi-2M becomes the foundation model for AI tools that are designed to predict a patient’s future health risks, it demonstrates that models such as this are on the way.

Due to its layered architecture and open-source nature, future models similar to Delphi-2M will continue to evolve by incorporating even richer data – such as electronic health records, medical images, wearable technologies and location data. This would improve its predictive powers and accuracy over time.

But while the ability to prevent diseases and provide early diagnosis holds great promise, there are a few key caveats when it comes to this predictive tool.

First, there are numerous data-related concerns associated with such tools. As we have written before, the quality of data and training that an AI tool receives makes or breaks its predictions.

The UK Biobank dataset used to create Delphi-2M didn’t have sufficient data on diverse races and ethnic groups to allow for in-depth training and performance analysis.

While some analysis was performed by the Delphi-2M researchers to show that adding ethnicity and race didn’t sway the results too much, there was still insufficient data in many categories to even conduct the assessment.

If ever used in the real world, personal healthcare data will probably be used and layered on top of foundation models such as Delphi-2M. While the inclusion of this personal data will improve prediction accuracy, it also comes with risks – for example, around personal data security and out-of-context use of the data.

It may also be difficult to scale the model to countries whose healthcare systems differ from those that are used to design the dataset. For instance, it may be harder to apply Delphi-2M to the US context, where healthcare data is spread around multiple hospital systems and private clinics.

At present, it’s too early for Delphi-2M to be used by patients or doctors. While Delphi-2M provided generalised predictions based on the data that was used to train it, it’s too early to use these predictions for personalised health recommendations for an individual patient.

But hopefully, with continued investment into researching and building Delphi-2M-style models, it will someday be possible to input a patient’s personal health data into the model and get a personalised prediction.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. An AI tool is trying to predict your risk of getting many diseases years in advance – here’s how it works – https://theconversation.com/an-ai-tool-is-trying-to-predict-your-risk-of-getting-many-diseases-years-in-advance-heres-how-it-works-265909