King approves new Great Seal of the Realm for signifying royal approval
The King has approved a new symbol of sovereign authority which depicts him seated on a throne.
The Great Seal of the Realm is traditionally affixed to official State documents to signify royal approval, with each monarch having their own unique seal created during their reign.
The engraving on the face of the seal is a depiction of Charles on a throne, while the reverse carries the Royal Arms designed by heraldic artist Timothy Noad.
The King approved the new Great Seal of the Realm and Counter Seal during a Privy Council meeting this week.
Tradition dictates that the old seal should be struck with a hammer by the new King in the Privy Council meeting, an act that is symbolic of its destruction.
The symbolically defaced seal is then preserved for historical record.
The approval of a new seal marks the final stage in the formal transition to the King's reign, adding to the suite of national symbols produced by The Royal Mint that includes the King's new effigy and coinage.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
5 hours ago
- Forbes
US-China Trade Talks: The Limits Of Diplomacy
Delegations of China and the U.S. pose for a group photo prior to the first meeting of the ... More China-U.S. economic and trade consultation mechanism in London, Britain, June 9, 2025. The meeting opened here on Monday. Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, attended the meeting with U.S. representatives. (Photo by Li Ying/Xinhua via Getty Images) In early June 2025, officials from the U.S. and China convened in an attempt to to prevent salvage economic ties from spiraling out of control and causing significant damage to both economies. Talks took place in London's historic Lancaster House, as they sought to rescue an earlier negotiated tariff truce and defuse escalating export controls. The negotiations aimed to extend the 90-day pause on punitive tariffs agreed in Geneva, revive cross-border trade flows, and hammer out a framework on rare-earth minerals and high-end technology exports. However, the talks ultimately accomplished few tangible benefits that President Trump sought to originally gain from the implementation of these tariffs, namely to stem the flow of fentanyl, motivate companies to reshore to the US, and close the trade deficit. Instead, he temporarily paused these measures by both sides and returned to the dynamics prior to his 'Liberation Day' and the imposition of tariffs globally. The June 9 to 10 London talks — led by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and USTR Jamieson Greer from the U.S. and China's Vice Premier He Lifeng and Commerce Minister Wang Wentao — were convened against a backdrop of deep mutual distrust. Since 2018, the two sides have imposed tit-for-tat duties, with U.S. tariffs on Chinese exports staying around 19-21% from the end of Trump's first term until the beginning of his second, and Beijing following suit with…. After Liberation Day, US tariffs reached a high of 145% before decreasing to 30%, while Beijing imposed a retaliatory tariff of 125% before settling at its current level of 10%.These actions have stifled more than $600 billion in bilateral trade and rattled global markets. At the same time, The Trumps' administration's erratic and inconsistent messaging has also allowed for Wall Street to start pricing in volatility. Moreover a new TACO theory emerged, 'TACO or Trump Always Chickens Out.' This asserts that despite Trumps tough trade policy rhetoric, when markets become too volatile Trump will always reverse course. US Reliance on Critical Rare Earth Metals US Reliance on Rare Earth Imports from China In April 2025, China further escalated tensions by instituting a requirement of export licenses for critical rare-earth minerals, resulting in a 20% year-on-year decrease in shipments to the U.S. and Europe. Due to China's dominance in rare earth exports to the US, this triggered alarms in various industries, most notably in the electric vehicle and aerospace sector. Meanwhile, Washington broadened its export curbs on advanced semiconductors, chip-making equipment, and aerospace components, with a particular intensification after the two countries' Geneva talks, amplifying China's sense of economic siege. Despite the high stakes, negotiators emerged from London with only a modest 'interim framework' rather than a sweeping accord. However, Trump still claimed in a Truth Social post that 'the relationship is excellent.' The enthusiasm from the president is in large part due to China agreeing to temporarily grant export licenses for rare-earth magnets and related components, enabling U.S. automakers such as Ford, GM, and Stellantis to replenish inventories after April's curbs. At the same time, the U.S. stopped short of lifting its tech export restrictions on AI chips and aerospace tools. Commerce Secretary Lutnick characterized the outcome as 'putting meat on the bones' of the May Geneva deal, while Ministry of Commerce spokesperson He Yidong stated the two sides reached a consensus framework to 'implement the important understandings' reached during the June 5 phone call between Trump and Xi. From an economic perspective, the London agreement delivered a short-lived reprieve. Following reports of the rare-earth license concession, global equity markets ticked higher, echoing relief seen after the Geneva truce. Yet core barriers remain firmly in place: U.S. base tariffs on Chinese goods remain near 30%, China's on U.S. exports linger around 10%, and neither side agreed to roll back its export-control regimes. Without a detailed enforcement mechanism or significant new commitments, the framework may merely defer a return to pre-Geneva duties once the 90-day window lapses in August. Current versus pre-Geneva Tariff Levels Geopolitical undercurrents will also further limit any long-term détente. In Washington, a bipartisan consensus has emerged around the need to 'de‐risk' critical supply chains, not merely as a commercial maneuver but as a national security imperative. Policymakers and industry leaders alike fear that overdependence on China for semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, rare‐earth minerals, and even basic manufacturing capacity leaves the United States dangerously exposed to coercive economic pressure or abrupt supply shocks. This conviction has translated into a suite of domestic incentives—ranging from the CHIPS and Science Act to expanded Defense Production Act authorities—designed to shore up American production of key inputs and diversify procurement to 'trusted' partners. On the other side of the Pacific, Chinese leadership interprets these U.S. measures as part of a long-standing containment strategy. Official rhetoric in Beijing routinely casts de-risking initiatives as destabilizing 'decoupling' efforts that threaten China's development model and tarnish the mutually beneficial aspects of economic integration. State media and senior diplomats argue that a sovereign nation, particularly one bearing the mantle of a developing‐country status, must safeguard its industrial base against foreign interference. Despite the rhetoric on economic self-reliance, both the U.S. and China have much to lose from a prolonged trade war. According to the military think tank RAND, 'roughly 40 percent of China's exports to the United States fall into categories where China supplies more than half of America's total imports.' Meanwhile, China is eager to gain access to GPUs and CPUs from American companies like NVIDIA and AMD to power its growing AI infrastructure. Even knowing this, leaders on both sides remain committed to showing strength and independence. Trump administration officials are wary of ceding control to China, while Beijing officials do not want to appear weak on the global stage. The talks, while cordial, still have not permanently de-escalated the trade war, with 30% and 10% baseline tariffs remaining on the American and Chinese sides, respectively. Furthermore, China has only agreed to a six-month license for American companies seeking to import rare earth minerals and magnets. Beyond the economic impact, the visa statuses of Chinese students in US universities will continue to remain uncertain as long as the trade war remains unresolved. As the two economic superpowers prepare for the current deadline on a comprehensive trade deal by August 10, the London talks underscore both the value and the limits of diplomacy: they bought time, but a durable resolution remains elusive. Special thanks to Jonah Kim, and Nathaniel Schochet, for their exceptional thought leadership, research, and editorial contributions to this article. Special thanks to Hanah Kim and Artem Valyaev Kunisky for assisting in providing info-graphics.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
5 key questions on Israel's strikes, Iran's response, and the risk of a wider war
Israel targeted nuclear and military sites in Iran in airstrikes early Friday morning. The strikes are a major escalation that threatens to expand into a wider regional conflict. These are five key questions in the wake of Israel's air war. Israel's widespread airstrikes on Iran effectively damaged the country's nuclear and ballistic missile programs, which officials said was a primary goal. The strikes hit over 100 targets, including Iran's air defense systems, missile launchers, and senior military leadership. Now, all eyes are on Tehran's response and the specter of a wider conflict. And there are questions over whether the US will get pulled into the fight. Here are some main questions stemming from the attacks. Iran initially responded to the attack by firing 100 drones at Israel on Friday, which the Israel Defense Forces said were mostly intercepted. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Israel "should anticipate a severe punishment" in response to the strikes, and that Iran "won't let them go unpunished." Hours later, the IDF said Iran had launched "dozens" of missiles at Israel in what appeared to be several waves. The military said its air defenses were actively intercepting threats, and video footage captured several impacts. "The Iranian response might be delayed or split into multiple phases," said Matthew Savill, the director of military sciences at the UK-based Royal United Services Institute think tank. "But their main weapon will be ballistic missiles," he added, "which have the best chance of inflicting damage on Israel, whereas drone and cruise missile attacks will face more extensive Israeli defences." It is not unprecedented for Iran to launch powerful weapons at Israel; Tehran fired hundreds of missiles and drones at its foe in April and October last year. However, those strikes were mostly intercepted by Israel and its allies, including the US. Beyond direct strikes, another way that Iran could retaliate is through the so-called "Axis of Resistance," a vast network of militias it is aligned with throughout the region, including Lebanon's Hezbollah and Yemen's Houthis. Israel has been battling these forces, and Hamas in Gaza, since the October 7, 2023, attacks. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long advocated for destroying Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran claims is for civilian purposes. The US, however, has been trying to reach a new deal with Iran (and has threatened violence if a deal isn't done). The strikes could derail those efforts and even goad Iran into racing to build a nuclear arsenal. Israel's strikes threaten to spark a wider regional conflict, analysts at London's Chatham House think tank warned Friday. "Far from being a preventive action, this strike risks triggering a broader regional escalation and may inadvertently bolster the Islamic Republic's domestic and international legitimacy," Sanam Vakil, Chatham House's Middle East and North Africa program director, said. Last year, Tehran reportedly threatened to target Gulf state oil facilities if they allowed Israel access to their airspace for strikes against Iran. It's unclear what routes Israeli aircraft used in the attacks, but there's been speculation Israel could exploit the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria to get its aircraft directly over Iraq for strikes. Russia is also a close ally of Iran, and the two have increased their defense cooperation since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. However, Nikita Smagin, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment, said in December that the Kremlin is unlikely to come to Iran's direct aid in order to avoid direct confrontations with Israel and the US. The US has helped arm and defend Israel, notably in the wake of Hamas' October 7 attacks. The world will be watching to see how President Donald Trump responds. Trump has sought to broker a new nuclear deal with Iran, and in the wake of the Israeli attacks overnight, warned of "even more brutal" strikes from Israel if Iran refuses a new agreement. Last year, the US Navy helped shoot down Iranian missiles fired at Israel in two major attacks, and it has rotated multiple aircraft carriers and many warships into the region since 2023, in a show of support for Israel and to deter its enemies, including Iran. The US and other NATO countries have also defended international shipping routes in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden from attacks by the Iran-backed Houthi militants in Yemen. The US has a substantial military presence in the Middle East, including naval forces, ground troops, and strike aircraft. A Navy spokesperson told BI that the Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group — consisting of an aircraft carrier, a cruiser, and three destroyers — is in the Arabian Sea. There are also three American destroyers in the Red Sea and another in the Eastern Mediterranean. All of these warships, and the carrier's dozens of embarked aircraft, are capable of carrying out air defense missions to defeat incoming drones and missiles. IDF spokesperson Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin said Israel's strikes "significantly harmed" Iran's main uranium enrichment site at Natanz. "For many years, the people of the Iranian regime made an effort to obtain nuclear arms in this facility," he said, adding that the site "has the necessary infrastructure to enrich uranium to a military grade." The International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed the site was struck, but the extent of the damage remains unverified. Satellite imagery appeared to show significant damage at the surface level. There was also a report Friday that Israel had struck Fordow, a nuclear fuel enrichment site guarded deep under a mountain. The IDF said that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps chief Hossein Salami and other senior military commanders were also killed in targeted strikes. Read the original article on Business Insider
Forbes
7 hours ago
- Forbes
British-American Billionaire In Talks For Investment In Telegraph Newspaper
Rita Ora and Len Blavatnik attend the Warner Music Pre-Grammy Party at the NoMad Hotel in 2019 in ... More Los Angeles, California. Billionaire Len Blavatnik has reportedly been approached by Redbird Capital Partners about making an investment in The Telegraph, one of U.K.'s most influential newspapers. Redbird Capital has initiated talks with Blavatnik about becoming a minority investor in The Telegraph, Sky News reported Thursday, citing two sources close to the situation. The report also stated that no agreement had been reached, and it remained unclear whether one would be. Redbird Capital declined to comment. A spokesperson for Blavatnik's investment firm Access Industries said, 'As a matter of principle, Sir Leonard does not comment on market speculation or on any conversations Access may or may not be having regarding potential investments.' Blavatnik's investments span a range of industries and countries. Forbes estimates his net worth at $25.6 billion, placing him at No. 80 on the Real-Time Billionaires List. He is probably best known these days for investments in businesses like Warner Music, streaming service DAZN, chemicals firm LyondellBassell and energy conglomerate Calpine. Blavatnik was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II for services to philanthropy in 2017. He has given or pledged more than $1 billion to philanthropic endeavors with a particular emphasis on supporting universities, including Harvard, Stanford and Yale. Last week, a cross-party group of parliamentarians urged the government to investigate how Redbird Capital is funding its takeover of the venerable British newspaper, according to a report in The Guardian. The group were said to have sent a letter to culture secretary, Lisa Nandy, expressing their concerns about the risk of 'potential Chinese state influence' within Redbird Capital. They MPs point out that the firm's chairman, John Thornton, has served on the advisory council of CIC, China's sovereign wealth fund, and had high-level meetings with Chinese Communist Party members in recent years. The MPs wrote in their letter there was a lack of transparency regarding the sources of funding for the £500 million ($674 million) acquisition, and they contend that it's 'conceivable, and increasingly likely, that funds could be sourced directly or indirectly from foreign state actors.' But sources close to Redbird Capital confirmed there were no Chinese state funds involved in the proposed acquisition. A consortium of U.K. and U.S. investors will form a new consortium for the deal, led by Redbird Capital. United Arab Emirates-based International Media Investments (IMI) is expected to be a minority investor, subject to new legislation that's currently progressing through parliament. The talks are still ongoing, the sources indicated, so no new deal structure has been put into place and submitted for government approval yet. The Telegraph had been the subject of a two-year takeover saga that began when the Conservative-leaning newspaper was seized by Lloyds bank after the Barclay family failed to repay debts of more than £1 billion. A joint venture between Redbird Capital and IMI effectively gained control of The Telegraph in 2023, after providing a £600 million loan to the Barclay family. But the Conservative government at the time blocked the deal when it adopted new regulations preventing foreign states from taking ownership of the press. Blavatnik is a dual citizen of the U.S. and the U.K. He was born in Ukraine and raised north of Moscow, before he immigrated to the U.S. in 1978. He studied computer science at Columbia University, and later earned an M.B.A. from Harvard. He started his New York-based investment company, Access Industries, in 1986. Blavatnik's fortune can be traced back to the chaotic post-Soviet days, when he made a series of shrewd investments through partnerships with various Russian moguls, including Viktor Vekselberg (net worth $9 billion) and Mikhail Fridman (net worth $14.9 billion). The billions he earned through privatized factories and oilfields was then used the proceeds to invest in companies and buy assets in the West. His most attention-grabbing acquisition was Warner Music, which he bought for $3.3 billion at the height of the industry's turmoil in 2011. He took the company public on the Nasdaq in June 2020 at quadruple the value.
