Category: MIL-OSI

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Rabia Akhtar, Associate of Managing the Atom, Belfer Center, Harvard Kennedy School; University of Lahore

A weekslong war between Pakistan and Afghanistan was paused on March 18, 2026, to mark the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr. But that does not mean the conflict is over.

Neither side showed any indication that the planned five-day cessation of operations would be anything other than temporary, and they warned that any violation would be met with reciprocal strikes.

Already the conflict has seen hundreds killed, with a blast at a drug rehabilitation center in Kabul on March 16, 2026, killing more than 400 people, according to Afghanistan’s Taliban government.

The conflict has been largely kept off the front pages by the war in Iran. But as an expert on Pakistan’s foreign policy and security, I believe the fighting has the potential to further destabilize the region.

Why are Pakistan and Afghanistan fighting now?

The current conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan is not a sudden rupture of relations between the two countries, which share a 1,640-mile (2,640 km) border called the Durand Line.

Rather, the flare-up is a result of an intensification of long-simmering, historical security concerns along the Durand Line. The immediate trigger lies in Pakistan’s growing concern over cross-border militant activity, particularly from groups such as the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, which Islamabad believes operate from sanctuaries inside Afghanistan.

After the Taliban’s return to power in Kabul in 2021, Pakistan had anticipated a more cooperative security environment, based on earlier experiences in the 1990s.

However, that did not materialize. Instead, there was a perceptible rise in militant attacks within Pakistan, accompanied by Kabul’s reluctance or inability to decisively act against Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan.

Complicating this landscape further is the evolving character of the threat environment for Pakistan. In 2025, Pakistan was involved in a short war with historical rival India – the most intense fighting between the two countries for nearly 30 years.

The use of suspected Indian-made drones by the Afghan Taliban in recent attacks inside Pakistani territory adds an additional regional element to the fighting – Islamabad will be wary of any Indian interference in Afghanistan.

In response, Pakistan has reportedly undertaken countermeasures, including airstrikes targeting drone infrastructure linked to militant networks inside Afghanistan.

All this points to a widening battlespace, where new technologies make it easier to escalate in indirect and deniable ways.

This is not merely a bilateral border crisis but a layered security contest shaped by cross-border militancy, emerging technologies and competing threat narratives.

The convergence of Pakistan’s growing willingness to respond with physical force, the Afghan Taliban’s assertion of sovereignty and the absence of a mutually agreed framework for border management continues to drive episodic escalation rooted in structural mistrust.

What is the broader history of Pakistan-Afghanistan relations?

Historically, Pakistan-Afghanistan relations have often oscillated between uneasy cooperation and strategic suspicion toward each other – all shaped by unresolved territorial, ideological and geopolitical dynamics.

At the heart of it lies a dispute over the Durand Line, which Afghanistan has never formally recognized as an international border. This has resulted in a sustained and persistent tension in their bilateral relations since Pakistan’s independence in 1947.

During the Cold War, these tensions were overlaid by competing alignments. Pakistan was embedded in the U.S.-led security framework, while Afghanistan maintained closer ties with the Soviet Union at various points.

However, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 marked a critical turning point. Pakistan became a front-line state supporting the Afghan jihad against invading Soviet forces.

This entrenched cross-border militant networks and blurred the boundary between state policy and nonstate actors, resulting in dynamics that continue to shape the region.

The post-2001 period was marked by fraught relationships between Pakistan and successive U.S.-backed Afghan governments, particularly over allegations of Pakistan’s alleged proxy support for Islamist groups in Afghanistan.

Many thought the Afghan Taliban’s return to power in 2021 would resolve this tension. But instead, it reconfigured it.

While ideological affinities continue to exist between the two nations, they have not translated into any sort of strategic alignment – especially on questions of militancy and border control.

What are the implications of the conflict for the region?

The implications of Pakistan-Afghanistan tensions are significant and extend well beyond bilateral frictions. They intersect with broader questions of regional stability, militancy and great power competition.

I believe there are four direct implications:

• First, the persistence of ungoverned or contested spaces along the Pakistan-Afghan border risks creating an enabling environment for transnational militant groups. This has real implications not only for Pakistan’s internal security but also for regional actors concerned about spillover effects.

• Second, instability along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border complicates regional connectivity and economic integration initiatives, including projects linked to broader Central and South Asia. A volatile western frontier constrains Pakistan’s ability to act as a regional stabilizer and a safe conduit for regional trade and energy corridors.

• Third, for outside interested parties like the U.S., the situation underscores the limits of disengagement from Afghanistan. While Washington’s military withdrawal marked the end of direct involvement, the persistence of militancy and the risk of regional destabilization ensure that Afghanistan remains strategically relevant not only for the U.S. but for other major powers as well.

• Finally, I see these tensions as highlighting a broader pattern: The post-2021 Afghanistan remains internally consolidated but externally contested. Its relationships with neighbors, particularly Pakistan, will be central in determining whether the region moves toward managed stability or recurring cycles of escalation.

Rabia Akhtar does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Pakistan-Afghanistan conflict is rooted in local border dispute – but the risks extend across the region – https://theconversation.com/pakistan-afghanistan-conflict-is-rooted-in-local-border-dispute-but-the-risks-extend-across-the-region-278740

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Sara Webb, Course Director, Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology

As an astrophysicist, my world revolves around the wonders of space and the mysteries of the universe. This means I can be a tough critic of science fiction books and films that explore these topics.

But when I walked out of a recent preview screening of the film adaptation of Andy Weir’s 2021 science fiction novel Project Hail Mary, I had tears of joy in my eyes. The filmmakers had done justice not just to the original story, but also to the science at the heart of it.

The story revolves around Ryland Grace, played by Ryan Gosling, who awakes from a coma with no memory and no idea why he’s on a space ship 11.9 light years away from Earth. As his memories slowly start to return, the truth becomes clear. The Sun is dying, and he is our only saving grace.

So here are the science facts – as well as the science fiction – of the film, which is in cinemas in Australia and New Zealand from today.

A dying sun

In Project Hail Mary the Sun is dying due to an alien organism that has spread around our part of the Milky Way.

Firstly, could an organism spread from one solar system to another? According to some scientists, yes. It’s a theory called panspermia.

We have no hard evidence to prove it right now. But the theory isn’t completely wild. We know material from solar systems can be transported great distances – we ourselves have witnessed as least three interstellar visitors enter and fly through our Solar System.

If life forms could survive the harshness of space and live on such rocky bodies, it’s possible this is how life could spread. But that life would likely be basic organisms.

As for the organism at the centre of this movie, astrophage, its mechanics and behaviour sit rightly in the wonderful world of science fiction.

The size of space

The idea of humans travelling between stars feels like an almost impossible challenge.

In our galaxy alone there are more than 400 billion stars, but only roughly 100 of them are within 20 light years of Earth.

Project Hail Mary focuses it’s attention on one of those systems, known as Tau Ceti, sitting 11.9 light years away.

If we were to travel to this star with the fastest spacecraft humans have ever flown in, the Apollo 10 module, travelling at more than 39,900 kilometres per hour, it would take us 320,000 years. In a story where the Sun is dying now, there is no time for that. So how does Project Hail Mary overcome this problem?

Enter special relativity.

Special relativity is one of the most paradigm-shifting theories of modern history. Developed by Albert Einstein in 1905, it equated mass and energy as one and the same. It best known by the famous E = mc² formula.

What Einstein was able to work our mathematically, and we’ve later proved observationally, is that the closer to the speed of light something travels, the slower the time it experiences in its reference frame.

It’s called a Lorentz transformation – and it allows us to determine the time experienced in a reference frame different to our own, say travelling close to the speed of light.

The movie doesn’t give a full physics lesson on this, but rather uses visual cues, including correct mathematics worked out by Grace on a whiteboard to demonstrate this time change.

What Grace determines is that he’s only been in a coma for four years due to the effects of time dilation on a ship travelling that fast. Which is scientifically spot on.

We have to talk about the aliens

While on the mission to save our world, Grace meets another being trying to do the same – Rocky.

We (us astronomers at least) do believe aliens exist somewhere in the universe. This belief isn’t based on crop circles or UFOs; it’s based on statistical chances.

In the Milky Way alone we estimate there are at least 100 billion planets. If life was able to form, evolve and thrive on Earth, there are many reasons why astronomers believe that could be true in other systems.

A lot of our confidence relates to the essential building blocks of life as we know it. All life on Earth is carbon based. But if we break down our existence even more, we find one thing: amino acids. These organic compounds are the foundation of our DNA.

What’s most exciting is that we’ve identified these in space. Samples from asteroids and fallen meteorites have confirmed many of the amino acids needed for life on Earth also exist on other objects in our Solar System.

Alien earths beyond our own

The film allows audiences to see what other planets might look like.

When Andy Weir originally wrote this novel, it was scientific consensus that alien worlds likely existed around Tau Ceti and the home planet of our new friend Rocky, 40 Eridani A.

But in recent years science has progressed and new data suggests both of these systems appear to have had false detections of planets.

So at least for now, Rocky’s home doesn’t exist – but thousands of others do. As of March 2026 astronomers have confirmed 6,100 exoplanets. These are worlds that exist beyond our own solar system, around distant stars, and can be either rocky or gaseous.

One place Grace and Rocky need to explore on their adventure to save the stars is a theoretical planet orbiting Tau Ceti. Here we see stunning hues of green and red, and distinctive swirls of gases mixing in the atmosphere.

It’s reminiscent of the gas giant of our own Solar System, Jupiter.

Project Hail Mary is more than just an epic adventure film with beautiful visuals. It’s a story that reminds us how important our world is – and how vital science is to our continued existence on it.

Sara Webb does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Project Hail Mary is packed with hard science. An astrophysicist breaks it down – https://theconversation.com/project-hail-mary-is-packed-with-hard-science-an-astrophysicist-breaks-it-down-278428

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Darius Sepehri, Doctoral Candidate, Comparative Literature, Religion and History of Philosophy, University of Sydney

Nowruz (meaning “new day” in the Persian language) is the Iranian, or Persian, festival celebrating the coming of spring – and the regeneration it brings. It is the first day of the year in the Iranian solar calendar (which began in 1079), marking the exact moment of the spring equinox. The date varies, between March 19 and 21 – this year, it’s March 21.

Within Iran, this year’s Nowruz will be especially emotionally charged, as its cities are under bombardment by Israel and the United States, leaving nearly 1,500 dead since February 28. By celebrating, Iranians will be reaffirming their unique identity and deep-rootedness in their homeland.

Rooted in the Middle East and Central Asia, Nowruz is celebrated in countries that were once part of Iranian empires: including Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, India, Pakistan and the Caucasus region, particularly Azerbaijan.

Iranian culture was absorbed and integrated into local cultures during the pre-modern period – and it often remained as these territories were gradually lost. This wider sphere of Iranian influence is called Iranzamin or “Greater Iran”.

When Nowruz was first established, during the early period of the pre-Islamic Sassanian dynasty (224–651 CE), it was celebrated throughout the Persian Empire.

In Iran, the span of Nowruz is two weeks, with a four-day national holiday. Happily for students, schools are closed. In some other countries that celebrate the festival, government and retail sectors are closed, and public ceremonies and gatherings are common.

Today, it is part of UNESCO’s list of intangible cultural heritage.

Origins, rituals and symbols

The origins of Nowruz are tied to the practices of Zoroastrianism, the religion of the ancient Persian world – and one of the world’s oldest living ones. It is based on the teachings of the prophet Zoroaster, believed to have lived around the 6th century BCE.

In the lead-up to the festival, people embark on vigorous spring cleaning (khaneh tekaani – literally, “shaking of the house”), participating symbolically in clearing, or sweeping away, the old – and any lingering negativity.

New clothes are often bought, and decorative dresses are prepared for the Nowruz festivities to come.

The last Wednesday of the year before Nowruz is Chaharshanbeh Soori, literally “Scarlet Wednesday”. Fire is a sacred element within Zoroastrianism. Chaharshanbeh Soori is an improvised ritual centred on purification by proximity to it. Small fires are lit in public places, fireworks are let off and decorative lights adorn the streets.

Special foods are prepared: rich soups, pastries and servings of dried nuts and fruits. Sometimes, young children go through the streets banging on pots and pans to drive out the “unlucky” Wednesday.

At the centre of Nowruz rituals is a decorative setting (sofreh), artfully arrayed on household tables – which are placed with the haft seen: seven items beginning with the letter s, or “seen” in Persian.

The seven items most often placed are: seeb (apple), sabzeh (shoots from wheat or lentils), serkeh (vinegar), samanou (a pudding made with wheat), senjed (a berry), sekkeh (a coin), and seer (garlic). Each item symbolises some aspect of living systems: birth, growth, health, beauty and wisdom.

The sabzeh grass, representing new growth, is grown in a flat dish, then placed outdoors on the 13th day of the New Year.

The central books of Irano–Islamic culture also feature. Readings are made from the Qur’an, and the collected poems (or The Divan) of beloved 14th-century Persian poet Hafez.

The first few days of the Nowruz festival are spent visiting family and friends. Presents are exchanged, with older family members giving small gifts of cash to younger ones. In Central Asia, athletic competitions may take place, such as traditional equestrian games in Kyrgyzstan. Public gatherings in town squares featuring treats and festive foods are common in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

Sizdah Bedar, also known as Nature Day, brings the Nowruz period to an end, 13 days after the equinox. People gather outdoors in a park or green space for a picnic lunch, to bring good luck for the year.

Politics, revolution and nationalism

Iranian monarchies used Nowruz to reinforce prestige for centuries: from the Safavid dynasty (1501–1736), which birthed the modern Iranian state, through the Qajar dynasty (1789–1925) and the Pahlavi dynasty – which ruled from 1925 and was ousted in the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The Shia Muslim clergy have long been a powerful faction within Iran. The Iranian monarchy embraced Nowruz and its non-Islamic roots to counterbalance the clergy’s power.

After the revolution, some Iranian authorities attempted to downplay Nowruz due to its non-Islamic character. But unsurprisingly, given the deep-rootedness of the festival, they failed. Today, Nowruz co-exists with Islamic festivals, highlighting the synthetic and dual nature of Iran’s culture.

The Soviet Union went much further than Iran: it outright banned the festival in Central Asian nations with Nowruz traditions. These traditions weren’t officially revived until post-Soviet independence in 1991.

Nowruz was a minor part of the Ottoman world, but it began to be revived at the end of World War I by the Turkish state, as part of Turkish political nationalism. At the same time, Kurds within Turkey embraced Nowruz more publicly, to promote the cause of Kurdish identity.

Nowruz in Iran in 2026

For many years, the US president has traditionally given a Nowruz message. But Donald Trump’s war against Iran and constant use of ultra-violent rhetoric against Iranians would sour any message he might give during this year’s Nowruz.

Similarly, this week Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu mentioned Nowruz while praising the destruction Israeli forces were carrying out in Iran. “Our aircraft are hitting the terror operatives on the grounds, in the crossroads, in the city squares,” he stated. “This is meant to enable the brave people of Iran to celebrate the Festival of Fire.” He ended with the threat: “We’re watching from above.”

This is all happening in the wake of attacks on Iran’s schools and hospitals, bombings of oil depots in Tehran releasing toxic elements into the atmosphere, and damage to dozens of Iran’s cultural heritage sites.

This year, Iranians’ Nowruz celebrations will signal their intent to stay together in the face of threats demanding, in Trump’s words, “unconditional surrender”.

The Nowruz focus on regrowth and regeneration will allow celebrants to look to something beyond destruction. To wish for new birth, health and flourishing of life.

“Nowruz Khosh Amad”: Welcome Nowruz, Nowruz has come joyously.

Darius Sepehri does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. What is Nowruz, the Iranian new year? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-nowruz-the-iranian-new-year-278779

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Lauren C. Hall, PhD Candidate in Psychology, University of Tasmania

As countries around the world look to follow Australia’s lead and implement a social media ban for kids, many are also considering fines as an enforcement mechanism.

This is part of the playbook when it comes to regulating big tech. For example, last month the United Kingdom’s data watchdog fined Reddit £14 million (A$26 million) for unlawfully using children’s data.

In April 2025, the European Commission fined Apple and Meta €500 million (A$820 million) and €200 million (A$329 million) respectively for breaching the Digital Markets Act. And in September, the commission fined Google nearly €3 billion (A$4.9 billion) for abusive practices in online advertising technology.

But fines don’t always work to encourage companies to follow the law. For some companies, “illegal with a fine” is interpreted as “legal for a price”. So what are some other, more effective methods to encourage good corporate behaviour?

Fines can backfire

If fines are not consistent, immediate, and severe, they can backfire. If they do, bad behaviour may increase.

For example, a 2000 study examined the effect of childcare centres in Israel introducing fines for parents who regularly picked their children up late. But instead, these fines actually increased late pick-ups by parents.

Even after fines were stopped, the number of late pick-ups stayed higher than before.

Why? Because when there were fines, they were small (not severe), and parents could wait a month to pay (not immediate). However, parents got the immediate benefit of longer childcare.

Similarly, technology companies may decide a fine is cheaper than the costs to make changes, or any loss in money from fewer users and ad sales. And this could lead to them continuing with business-as-usual.

Corporate fines often fail because it may be unclear who in the company is directly responsible. Fines can also sometimes be too small to stop bad behaviour by large companies.

For these reasons, corporate re-offending is frequent, even if companies have been fined in the past.

A fine equals forgiveness

After introducing fines, behaviours previously considered socially or morally unacceptable may also be seen as “forgiven” by payment. This can increase bad behaviour.

The importance of unwanted behaviours may also be judged by the size of the fine.

If fines are seen as “small”, violations may also be seen as small, and bad behaviours may rise. Corporations may also see “small” fines as just a cost-of-doing-business.

Importantly, fine size is closely linked to a company’s financial size. For a small company, a fine could seem huge. The same sized fine may seem tiny to a large company. If similarly sized fines are given to companies making different revenue amounts, the companies may respond differently.

Changing company practices can also cost more for some companies than others. This too may affect how they respond to fines.

Furthermore, companies outside a legislative jurisdiction, or that have refused regulators’ demands in the past, may ignore fines altogether.

For example, 4Chan refused to pay fines issued under the UK’s Online Safety Act, and X decided to legally challenge instead of pay a €120 million (A$197 million) fine issued by the European Commission.

Given the borderless nature of some digital harms such as child sexual exploitation and abuse, coordinated changes to corporate laws, and international cooperation are needed.

Pulling multiple levers at once

So if fines alone don’t stop big tech and other businesses behaving badly, what will?

Research shows monitoring companies, and better resourcing regulators, are more effective than fines alone. Consistent regulator inspections combined with education also work well.

A 2025 paper suggests making “stand-alone consumer tech safety research centres” focused on reducing digital harms. This may require technology companies making data and algorithms available to these centres for inspection.

Then, regulators can look at if companies are using important and best practice safety features. For example, checking the images on sites to make sure users do not see harmful content online.

Regulators can also share knowledge with companies about laws and digital safety measures to improve consumer protections.

This cooperative model has been shown to be more effective than fines alone.

A 2016 study about what works when it comes to corporate deterrence found using multiple levers at the same time, such as monitoring, accountability, auditing, and punitive action were the most effective at stopping bad corporate behaviour.

Unfortunately, understanding the scope of digital harms, and best responses, have been limited by not enough resources, or access to data.

A 2025 paper highlights that increased data transparency from corporations will also improve evidence-informed decisions, ensuring regulation is fit-for-purpose.

As companies continue to prioritise rapid rollouts, with problems found after launch, fines may continue to be ineffective.

To tackle this problem, online regulators must ensure fines are complemented with other policy levers – and that the punishment for bad corporate behaviour is consistent, immediate and severe.

Lauren C. Hall is a recipient of an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship to support Higher Degree Research training.

James Sauer has received funding from the Australian Institute of Criminology and the Internet Watch Foundation for projects looking to mitigate online harms,

María Yanotti receives grant funding from Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI). She is a member of the tax gap advisory group for the Australian Taxation Office (ATO). She is the Tasmanian Chair for the Women in Economics Network (WEN) and a committee member for the Economic Society of Australia (ESA) Tasmanian Branch. Maria is an associate editor for the Australian Economic Papers.

Christine Padgett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Fines alone won’t stop big tech behaving badly. Here’s what might work – https://theconversation.com/fines-alone-wont-stop-big-tech-behaving-badly-heres-what-might-work-276969