Finland Starts Process to Withdraw From Landmine Ban Treaty
Finland started the process of withdrawing from the Ottawa Convention, which bans anti-personnel landmines.
The government on Wednesday submitted a proposal to the parliament on the exit, according to a statement. A political decision on the step was taken in April to address the risks from a more aggressive Russia.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
38 minutes ago
- CNN
Behind the scenes of the week dominated by Trump's Big Beautiful Bill (and Musk)
Did you miss the feud between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump, and how it started? CNN's Kaitlan Collins reports from inside the White House with a week that started and ended with Trump's "big beautiful bill."
Car and Driver
43 minutes ago
- Car and Driver
President Trump Could Sell His Tesla Model S Amid Elon Musk Feud
In the midst of his feud with Elon Musk, President Donald Trump may sell his recently purchased Tesla Model S. U.S. presidents aren't actually allowed to drive, so the red Model S here is symbolic. Tesla's stock price is suffering due to the very public feud, and the storm isn't over yet. Where once the powerful feuded publicly in newspaper columns, social media has now enabled all sorts of angry outbursts to go very public, very quickly. Thus, the falling out between President Donald Trump and one-time ally Elon Musk involved a heated exchange that everyone with an internet connection was invited to. The rift has yet to heal, and now a White House official is indicating that President Trump might be selling off his red Tesla Model S. Ownership of this car is largely symbolic, as U.S. presidents and vice presidents are not actually allowed to drive on the public road (there have been some exceptions, notably Lyndon B. Johnson's love of speeding around Texas). However, the contrast between the livestreamed event in March, where Tesla models were lined up on the White House lawn, and the President selling off the Model S he bought at the time, shows how icy the relationship between the two powerful figures has become. getty images This feud is not really a surprise to anyone familiar with the behavior of either of the combatants in the past. The spark that lit the fuse was Musk posting on his social media network, X, that the upcoming public spending bill recently passed by the House was financially irresponsible. President Trump responded, expressing that he was disappointed in Musk's comments. Financially, the public squabble has been disastrous for Tesla's stock price, which tumbled 14 percent yesterday before slightly recovering today. SpaceX also relies heavily on government contracts, and one of Trump's threats on Thursday was to pull the funding for those contracts, which could also put that company in danger. Online, there's been plenty of both schadenfreude and chagrin, depending on where people fall on the political spectrum. Should the feud continue or worsen, there's the potential for plenty of damage to both men. Trump selling off his Tesla publicly might not quite be a canary-in-the-coal-mine moment, but it is another escalation. Certainly, neither figure here is short on ego, and neither is a stranger to airing their grievances. The fighting isn't over, and the arena couldn't be more public. Brendan McAleer Contributing Editor Brendan McAleer is a freelance writer and photographer based in North Vancouver, B.C., Canada. He grew up splitting his knuckles on British automobiles, came of age in the golden era of Japanese sport-compact performance, and began writing about cars and people in 2008. His particular interest is the intersection between humanity and machinery, whether it is the racing career of Walter Cronkite or Japanese animator Hayao Miyazaki's half-century obsession with the Citroën 2CV. He has taught both of his young daughters how to shift a manual transmission and is grateful for the excuse they provide to be perpetually buying Hot Wheels.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Who owns the news? It must not be a group of foreign powers
Who owns the news? Much of the Left has been obsessed with the issue for over a century. They have long railed against press barons and their supposed bias. So it is perhaps surprising that this Labour Government is taking such a lackadaisical approach to foreign states having substantial holdings in British newspapers. The last Conservative government back in December 2023 intervened to put on hold and scrutinise the proposed sale of The Telegraph to a company backed by Sheikh Mansour, the deputy prime minister of the United Arab Emirates. Columnists, including Charles Moore, The Telegraph's former editor, rightly argued that even if there was no actual interference in the newspaper's editorial line, there would be the perception that the paper would no longer be independent. This would fatally undermine the newspaper's standing by throwing away its reputation for fearless reporting, whatever the reality of the situation. The then government listened and last year, in the Digital, Media and Competitions Act, introduced a new regulatory regime to restrict foreign state ownership of newspapers and news magazines. But this Act only set out the broad principle, not the details of how it would be implemented. A total ban would come with its own problems. There would be little risk of editorial interference if, say, the sovereign wealth fund of Norway was a passive investor owning 3pc or 4pc in a UK-listed media company. During the consultations, it was proposed that a 5pc limit may be appropriate to allow for such holdings. Last month the new Government announced that the threshold would not be 5pc, but actually 15pc. I and many of my colleagues in the House of Lords have serious misgivings about this much higher limit, but it is one we can live with. However, there is another aspect of the draft regulations which is unacceptable. The 15pc threshold is not cumulative, it applies to each individual holding. This means that there would be nothing to stop multiple states each owning 15pc of a newspaper. It has been reported that after The Telegraph's proposed takeover by RedBird Capital, Sheikh Mansour intends to retain up to a 15pc stake in the newspaper. With the current proposals there would be nothing to stop, say, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Bahrain from each taking 15pc holdings. A cumulative 60pc of a British newspaper owned by foreign states is a very different proposition. The guarantees against foreign control would have evaporated. Has this potential scenario arisen as a result of an oversight by Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary? Alongside 50 of my fellow peers, I have written to Ms Nandy asking for clarification. Signatories include former chancellor Lord Lamont, former trade secretary Lord Lilley, long-time chairman of the 1922 committee Lord Brady, ex-director of public prosecutions Lord Macdonald and the current chairman of Ipso, the independent press regulator, Lord Faulks. Our fears could be easily assuaged by simply amending the proposed regulations to ensure that 15pc is a cap on total foreign ownership. If the move is deliberate, it raises serious questions about this Government's commitment to a free press. The statutory instrument implementing the Government's regulations has now been laid and will shortly come before both Houses of Parliament. If the proposals reach the Lords in their current form, I and many of my colleagues will not be able to support the measure. The Telegraph's ownership has been left in limbo for two years so far. It is time for the new regulatory framework to be put in place that will allow its smooth transfer to new owners. But this must be done in a way that entrenches the traditional freedoms of our press. The issues are much wider than the future of just one newspaper. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
