All News

Ukraine has launched a renewed cross-border offensive in Russia’s Kursk region, aiming to bolster its territorial gains ahead of potential peace negotiations. This escalation comes as U.S. President-elect Donald Trump reiterates his intention to end the conflict swiftly once he takes office.

Reports of the offensive began circulating over the weekend, with unverified footage shared by Russian military bloggers showing a convoy of Ukrainian tanks and armoured vehicles advancing toward the village of Berdin. This village lies just beyond the territory currently controlled by Ukraine in the Kursk region.

Kyiv has not officially confirmed the new operation. However, Andriy Yermak, head of the Ukrainian presidential office, hinted at progress, stating, “Kursk region, good news. Russia is getting what it deserves.” Meanwhile, Andrii Kovalenko, head of Ukraine’s Centre for Countering Disinformation, confirmed that Ukrainian forces had launched coordinated attacks on multiple fronts within Kursk.

Russian military bloggers, often privy to frontline realities, acknowledged the Ukrainian offensive with concern. Yuri Podolyaka, a prominent blogger, wrote on Telegram, “The morning in the Kursk region starts worryingly again. Yesterday’s failure won’t deter the enemy from trying again today.”

The U.S.-based Institute for the Study of War (ISW) confirmed that Ukrainian forces had advanced into the southern outskirts of Berdin. The village lies northeast of Sudzha, the largest area captured by Ukraine during its initial incursion five months ago. The ISW reported that Ukraine’s forces were attacking in at least three areas: toward Berdin, toward Pushkarnoye to the east, and around Korenevo to the west.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in his nightly address on Saturday, highlighted the heavy casualties inflicted on Russian and North Korean forces near the village of Makhnovka, southeast of Sudzha. Citing General Oleksandr Syrskyi, he stated that hundreds of Russian and allied troops had been killed in the battle.

Other reports from Russian military sources indicated that Ukraine’s offensive involved hundreds of troops in a heavily mechanized assault. Analysts suggest that Kyiv’s actions could be aimed at diverting Russian forces from their gradual advance in eastern Ukraine, particularly in Donetsk. On Monday, Russia’s defence ministry announced its capture of Kurakhove in Donetsk after prolonged fighting.

Ukraine’s ability to maintain control over parts of Kursk is seen as a strategic advantage in upcoming peace talks. Russia still holds about 20% of Ukrainian territory after nearly three years of conflict. Securing a foothold in Russian territory strengthens Kyiv’s negotiating position as both sides prepare for diplomacy.

Both nations are racing to secure battlefield advantages before Trump’s inauguration on January 20. The incoming U.S. president has repeatedly pledged to end the war within 24 hours of taking office, though he has yet to outline his specific plan.

Since Ukraine’s daring cross-border assault on August 6 last year, Russian forces, aided by approximately 11,000 North Korean troops, have steadily pushed back Kyiv’s gains in Kursk. However, recent Ukrainian advancements suggest a renewed effort to solidify control over the contested region.

During a visit to South Korea over the weekend, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken emphasized the strategic importance of Ukraine’s hold on parts of Kursk. “The positions of Ukraine’s armed forces in the Kursk region are crucial for any future negotiations,” Blinken stated, underscoring the significance of Kyiv’s territorial gains ahead of diplomatic discussions.

As the conflict intensifies, both Ukraine and Russia appear focused on shaping the battlefield in their favour, setting the stage for high-stakes negotiations in the coming months.

Uncover the shocking secrets of Lord Mountbatten in this revealing video. Learn more about Louis Mountbatten and the tragic assassination that shocked the world. The assassination of Louis Mountbatten was described as one of the most tragic deaths in British history. As the years passed, this man became one of the royal family’s most notable characters. His brilliance, decisiveness and hard work set him in a formidable light. But he also had a darker side, ending sadly with an untimed departure when the IRA killed him in 1979. Join me now as we discover the resilient story of Lord Louis Mountbatten.

Photo: The Bruce Highway is notorious for the bad condition of its road surface. (ABC News: Russel Talbot/Facebook)

The Albanese government has announced a $7.2 billion investment to improve safety and resilience along the Bruce Highway, which connects key regional centres such as Bundaberg, Rockhampton, Mackay, and Townsville. This critical route supports around 62 per cent of Queensland’s population and underpins the state’s economic and social connectivity.

The federal government says the funds will ensure priority sections of the highway meet a minimum three-star safety rating under the international road assessment system. Currently, nearly half the highway is rated at just two stars, posing significant safety risks to motorists.

Key sections targeted for upgrades include Maryborough to Benaraby, Rockhampton to St Lawrence, Bowen to Townsville, and Ingham to Innisfail. The funding will focus on installing safety barriers, widening road shoulders, creating additional overtaking lanes, and improving rest areas. Audible tactile line markings and wider centre lines will also be introduced to reduce head-on collisions by providing drivers with immediate feedback if they veer out of their lane.

In response to Queensland’s harsh weather conditions, the project will also prioritise resealing and rehabilitating sections of the highway damaged by floods and storms. These upgrades aim to make the Bruce Highway more resilient to future weather events and reduce costly disruptions.

Federal Infrastructure Minister Catherine King highlighted the importance of the project, stating, “This historic investment answers the call of Queenslanders to bring the Bruce Highway up to a three-star safety rating, so Australians stop losing their loved ones on this road.”

Critics have pointed out that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is using taxpayer-funded infrastructure projects to bolster his political campaign in Queensland, where road safety is a key issue. Despite earlier calls from the federal government for a 50:50 funding split, Labor will cover 80 per cent of the costs for these upgrades.

“Queensland deserves a long-term plan, and that is what my government is delivering,” Mr Albanese said, framing the investment as a critical step toward modernising one of the state’s most vital transport routes. While the upgrades are expected to save lives, the political debate over funding arrangements continues.

Aussie taxpayers have shelled out more than $450,000 over the past two years for government departments to host Welcome to Country ceremonies — an expenditure that raises serious questions about priorities. With Aboriginal health outcomes still lagging significantly behind non-Indigenous Australians, it’s time to ask if these funds are being spent wisely.

Freedom of Information requests reveal that the Infrastructure Department spent $35,618 on Welcomes, while the Industry, Science, and Resources Department allocated $30,896. In total, 33 ceremonies from various agencies drained hundreds of thousands of dollars from the public purse. Opposition waste reduction spokesman James Stevens called the amount “staggering.”

It’s essential to respect and acknowledge Indigenous culture, but has Welcome to Country become more about optics than outcomes? Critics, including Shadow Indigenous Australians Minister Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, argue that the ceremonies have evolved into a commercial product rather than a genuine cultural expression. Ms. Price has pointed out that some individuals make their entire livelihood from delivering these ceremonies, turning cultural acknowledgment into a money-making enterprise.

Meanwhile, pressing issues in Indigenous communities remain unaddressed. Poor health outcomes, limited access to education, and inadequate housing continue to plague remote areas. The money spent on Welcome to Country ceremonies could be better directed toward real solutions that improve lives and close the gap.

Even within Indigenous communities, discontent is growing. The Juru people of north Queensland recently banned Welcome to Country ceremonies on their ancestral land, citing overuse and misuse by individuals with little connection to the area. Juru spokesperson Randall Ross labelled the practice an “insult” to traditional owners.

Australians don’t need to be welcomed to their own country. What they need is accountability for how taxpayer money is spent. Let’s prioritise practical, lasting change over symbolic gestures.

Is an invasion of Australia by China possible? Rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific, military buildups, and fears over Taiwan have Australians on edge. Experts warn Australia could be dragged into a U.S.-China conflict—or face direct threats from Beijing. This video dives into the risks, military comparisons, and the strategic stakes for both nations. Is Australia ready for such a challenge?

The Straits Times

A local fisherman reportedly discovered a mysterious underwater drone near San Pascual, Masbate, on December 30. The device, marked HY-119, was later identified as a Chinese-made underwater navigation and communication system. Police Brigadier General Andre Dizon confirmed the origin and purpose of the device, noting that it was sent to the Philippine Navy forces stationed on Luzon Island for further examination.

The yellow drone’s presence in Philippine waters raises immediate concerns about potential espionage or surveillance activities, given the ongoing territorial disputes between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea.

The discovery of this drone adds fuel to an already volatile situation. China claims nearly all of the South China Sea, including areas that fall within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ). These claims have led to numerous conflicts between the two nations.

Since taking office in 2022, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has been vocal in resisting Chinese maritime aggression. Clashes over disputed territories, such as the Spratly Islands, have escalated in recent years. Chinese coast guard vessels have used increasingly aggressive tactics to assert their control, including ramming Philippine government ships and deploying water cannons to drive them away from contested waters.

The presence of the drone in Philippine waters raises significant national security concerns. According to a police report, while the drone appears to be unarmed, its capabilities for underwater monitoring and reconnaissance are troubling.

This incident follows the appearance of China’s CCG 5901, the world’s largest coast guard ship, at Scarborough Shoal—another highly contested area in the South China Sea. Scarborough Shoal has long been a flashpoint for tense standoffs between Chinese and Philippine forces.

The discovery of the drone suggests that China is continuing to expand its maritime presence and technological capabilities in the region, further destabilizing the already tense situation.

Given the ongoing territorial disputes, China is unlikely to reduce its heavy maritime presence in the South China Sea. The Philippines, under President Marcos Jr., is expected to maintain its defiant stance against China’s sweeping claims.

However, President Marcos Jr. has expressed a preference for avoiding military escalation. He has stated that he would refrain from deploying naval warships to contested areas to prevent further conflict. Instead, the Philippines may focus on diplomatic pressure and strengthening alliances with other nations, such as the United States, to counter China’s influence in the region.

The discovery of the Chinese underwater drone serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing geopolitical struggle in the South China Sea and the complexities surrounding maritime sovereignty and national security in Southeast Asia.

The Times

Switzerland has taken a decisive step to uphold its cultural values and bolster public safety by officially implementing a ban on burqas, niqabs, and other forms of face coverings in public spaces from January 1. This move, which stems from a 2021 referendum where 51.2% of Swiss voters approved the proposal, reflects a growing trend across Europe to restrict face veils in public settings.

Support for the Ban

1. Enhancing Security

One of the primary arguments in favour of the ban is the enhancement of public security. By prohibiting face coverings, authorities can more easily identify individuals, reducing the risk of criminal activities and promoting a sense of safety in public spaces. Supporters claim that the ban makes it harder for individuals to conceal their identities during protests or while committing crimes.

2. Promoting Integration and Social Cohesion

Proponents believe that banning face coverings fosters greater social interaction and integration. In public spaces, open communication is essential for building trust and understanding within communities. Face coverings, they argue, create barriers to social cohesion and hinder effective communication.

3. Protecting Women’s Rights

Supporters of the ban also emphasize that it protects women’s rights by preventing practices that they see as oppressive. They argue that some women may be forced to wear face coverings by family or community members, and the ban offers them a degree of freedom and empowerment.

4. Preserving Swiss Cultural Values

For many supporters, the ban is about more than just security or women’s rights—it is a reflection of Swiss cultural values and traditions. Switzerland has long prided itself on its open, liberal society, where transparency and direct communication are key. The ban reinforces these cultural norms and sends a message that practices perceived as incompatible with Swiss values will not be tolerated.

A European Context

Switzerland’s ban is not an isolated case. Several European countries have introduced similar laws in recent years, reflecting a broader shift toward restricting face coverings in public spaces.

• France: In 2011, France became the first European country to implement a nationwide ban on full-face veils in public spaces. The law has been upheld by the European Court of Human Rights despite ongoing criticism.
• The Netherlands: The Dutch government implemented a partial ban on face coverings in public buildings, such as schools, hospitals, and public transport, in 2019.
• Denmark: Denmark introduced a ban on face veils in 2018, citing similar concerns about security and social integration.
• Austria and Bulgaria: Both countries have also enacted bans on face coverings, citing cultural and security concerns.

These measures across Europe indicate a growing concern over the balance between individual freedoms and societal values. While the bans are often framed as security measures, they also reflect deeper cultural anxieties about identity, integration, and the preservation of national traditions.

Conclusion

The implementation of Switzerland’s anti-burqa law marks a significant moment in the country’s ongoing debate over national identity, security, and cultural values. Supporters argue that the law is a necessary step to ensure public safety, promote social cohesion, protect women’s rights, and uphold Swiss traditions. Opponents, however, warn that the ban risks infringing on individual freedoms and further marginalizing Muslim communities.

As Switzerland joins a growing list of European countries with similar bans, the conversation about the balance between cultural values and personal freedoms continues to evolve. Whatever one’s stance on the issue, the majority vote in favour of the law underscores the importance that many Swiss citizens place on preserving their country’s cultural identity and security.

The Times

President Joe Biden is reportedly considering a high stakes move: a potential U.S. military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. This consideration comes amid growing concerns over Tehran’s accelerating nuclear program. Although the discussions were meant to remain confidential, the news has leaked, raising questions about the timing, implications, and risks involved.

Secret Meeting at the White House

Sources indicate that Biden and his national security team held a secret meeting about a month ago to discuss potential strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites. The meeting reflects mounting anxiety within the administration over Iran’s nuclear advancements.

Key points from the meeting include:

• No final decision has been made by President Biden.
• The administration is carefully weighing the potential repercussions of such a strike.
• If Biden intends to proceed with military action, he must act swiftly, as time is running out before the next presidential inauguration.

Why This Decision Matters

A U.S. strike on Iran’s nuclear program would be a major gamble for President Biden. The stakes are high, and the consequences could reverberate globally.

Promises and Risks

• Biden’s Promise: Throughout his presidency, Biden has emphasized that he will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.
• Potential Conflict: Launching a strike could embroil the U.S. in a fresh conflict, complicating the transition to the next administration if former President Donald Trump returns to office.

The Case for Striking Now

Some of Biden’s closest advisers argue that now is the ideal time to consider military action. Their reasoning centres on Iran’s current vulnerabilities:

• Iran’s Nuclear Advancements: Tehran has significantly advanced its nuclear program, bringing it closer to weapons-grade enrichment.
• Regional Context: Iran and its proxy forces have been weakened by their ongoing conflict with Israel, making them less capable of retaliating effectively.

As one senior official put it, “A snake’s last wriggle can be the most dangerous.” This metaphor highlights the unpredictability of Iran’s actions in its weakened state.

The State of Iran’s Nuclear Program

Under Biden’s tenure, Iran’s nuclear capabilities have progressed alarmingly:

• Iran has enriched uranium to 60%, just shy of the 90% needed for a nuclear weapon.
• The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports that Iran possesses enough 60%-enriched uranium to build four nuclear bombs.

Reality Check

Despite these advancements, intelligence assessments suggest that Iran is not yet ready to deploy a functional nuclear weapon.

• Israeli Intelligence: Experts believe it would take Iran at least a year to develop a nuclear explosive device.
• Recent Setbacks: An Israeli airstrike in October reportedly destroyed critical equipment needed for Iran to design and test a nuclear device.

Final Thoughts

President Biden is facing a pivotal decision with far-reaching consequences. Striking Iran’s nuclear facilities could reaffirm America’s commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation. However, it also risks igniting a broader conflict in the Middle East.

As the clock ticks toward the end of his term, Biden must carefully weigh the benefits of taking decisive action against the potential fallout of engaging in yet another military conflict. For now, the world waits to see whether the U.S. will act to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions or leave the challenge for the next administration.

The 7th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment (7RAR) was formed on 1 September 1965 as part of Australia’s expansion of forces during the Vietnam War. The battalion deployed to Vietnam twice — from 1967 to 1968 and again from 1970 to 1971 — conducting operations in Phuoc Tuy Province. It played a key role in counter-insurgency missions, including ambushes, patrols, and village pacification.

After Vietnam, 7RAR was amalgamated with 5RAR in 1973, forming 5/7RAR, before being re-raised as a separate unit in 2006. Since then, it has been deployed to Iraq, Afghanistan, and East Timor, contributing to peacekeeping and combat operations.

Australian Army 7th Battalion, The Royal Australian Regiment with Military Police in support