How resilient is Britain? ft.trib.al/Bv78ZgH

RFE/RL takes apart a Russian Geran-4 drone to uncover what makes the jet-powered unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) faster, harder to intercept, and capable of operating deep inside Ukraine -- from its turbojet engine and advanced camera to foreign-made communications and navigation components. @cxemu @radiosvoboda

RFE/RL takes apart a Russian Geran-4 drone to uncover what makes the jet-powered unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) faster, harder to intercept, and capable of operating deep inside Ukraine -- from its turbojet engine and advanced camera to foreign-made communications and navigation components. @cxemu @radiosvoboda

In his latest unhinged rant, Russian propagandist Vladimir Solovyov says he has questions about why Britain is still allowed to exist He says Britain has given the world nothing of value other than Shakespeare and Dickens

This new @CFR_org "Expert Take" on student exchanges with China is so flawed I had to read it twice to find something nice to say. Here goes: At least the authors acknowledge that American students who travel to China need protection, and that the CCP should immediately release detained academics such as Min Zin and Youlin Chen. Small mercies. Beyond these pro forma nods to reality, the piece's omission of China-side context speaks volumes: --The authors effectively support the CCP's "50,000 in 5 years" drive to recruit US students without once mentioning it. Announced by Xi Jinping in 2023, this initiative has reportedly already reached its target but continues because its architects believe it provides such upside to the CCP. --Similarly, in 1,100-plus words, the authors manage not a single mention of the united front apparatus, which plays a critical role fronting for Chinese intelligence and conducting political warfare on the PRC side of educational exchanges. They do not mention the CCP emphasis on leveraging foreign students to advance propaganda and economic goals, including attracting other countries' capital and technology while encouraging their governments' complacency. --Finally, they find no occasion to mention the CCP's surveillance and transnational repression of Chinese students inside the United States, a growing threat not only to these students but also to US sovereignty. In fairness, the authors have to leave out these inconvenient details so they can advance their completely backward proposal. At a time when the CCP is energetically recruiting (or luring) American students in order to strengthen its position vis-a-vis the United States, the authors do NOT suggest cutting off these flows. Rather, they argue that President Trump should negotiate with General Secretary Xi to secure "implicit assurances" not to detain or surveil US students in China so that we can send even more students. As if today's CCP intelligence state, which is all too active even on US soil, might be willing to "insulate from competitive dynamics" programs on their own soil that allow them to surveil and shape some of the Americans they're most interested in surveilling and shaping. This is as shrewd as telling the car salesman that there's no other car for you than the one you test drove, the only thing it's missing is an extended warranty, and you feel like you've known him forever. Just astonishingly counter-strategic from a US perspective - but helpful to the CCP. Sadly, it's typical of the arguments that have gotten the United States to the place where we find ourselves, having ceded so many of our advantages to the CCP through compliant engagement over decades. In this case, compliant engagement includes hand-waving about "understanding" (citing the example of a scholar who visited, and left, China before the CCP took over as evidence for the need to be on the ground in 2026) and regurgitating CCP slogans such as "people-to-people diplomacy." All while avoiding the aforementioned grubby and impolite - but stubborn! - facts essential to even a basic understanding of the situation. It's not as if the authors don't know any better. One of them moderated a CFR event last year where the speaker said: "And then there’s research in China by Americans. It’s very difficult. First of all, we only have 900 American students in the whole country right now. Being a student in China is not easy. Being a scholar trying to do research, the kind I’ve had to do, I’ve been a resident fellow in six different Chinese Academy of Social Sciences institutes in my career—six, more than any other foreigner I’m aware of. Well, that’s not possible today. You can’t go be a resident fellow in the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, or any other place. And much less do interviews, archival research, libraries, field work. Just basic scholarly research. Can’t do it. That’s what I mean. Xi Jinping has securitized scholarship, amongst other things..." The other co-author - unsurprisingly - runs a non-profit that has for many years worked directly with CCP united front bodies, and lists a united front official as an advisor on its website. So... I will stand by for the inevitable exasperated sighs and ad feminam insults that seem to substitute for intelligent debate on this subject by defenders of the status quo. Cheers!

It looks and feels spontaneous, but is it? A video of Ed Miliband having an apparently impromptu chat with Feroz Khan, an American social media influencer, on the streets of New York Khan is an American social media influencer who has made a name for himself conducting seemingly impromptu interviews with people he stops in the street with a simple question: “What do you do for a living?” The Miliband clips has already had more than 1million views. But is it real? In fact it has been carefully staged There are several clues. The video shows Khan stopping Miliband in the street as he makes his way between engagements. “Excuse me, you have an amazing outfit,” he tells him. “What do you do for a living?” Rather than walk on Miliband, surprisingly, stops and turns to face the camera. His aides, meanwhile, keep on marching on without even looking back to check who he is talking to. They don’t wait for him, disappearing out of shot Even for a politician, Miliband appears to have rather well-rehearsed answers for Khan’s questions. “Hang on you’re that Feroz guy aren’t you,” he says. “You interviewed JLo once. What are you doing here?” Khan replies with a compliment: “I spread positivity on social media and I happened to come across you well dressed. What do you do for a living?” In a surreal exchange Miliband says he is the foreign secretary of Great Britain. “Please forgive me, I don’t know what that is,” Khan replies “I’m like the Marco Rubio of Great Britain,” Miliband says. What follows is an extraordinarily soft interview on any level. Khan, who sees his job as “spreading positivity”, says: “Nice to meet you. What makes your work so special?” The final clue is in the post itself. Khan posted it on his Instagram in direct “collaboration” with the Foreign Office and Britain’s UN mission, meaning it went up on their Instagram accounts at exactly the same time thetimes.com/article/fd04b25…