Category: Evening Report

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amin Saikal, Emeritus Professor of Middle Eastern Studies, Australian National University; The University of Western Australia; Victoria University

While the world is focused on the fate of a ruined Gaza, Israel has accelerated its creeping annexation of the West Bank.

Israeli legislative moves, security operations, settlement expansion and support of settlers’ violence are forcing the Palestinians out of their lands at an unprecedented rate.

US President Donald Trump has publicly opposed Israel’s annexation of the occupied territory, but he may not be able to stop it – unless he acts now and acts decisively.

Creeping annexation

Last July, the Israeli parliament (Knesset) passed a resolution in support of the annexation of the West Bank. It was non-binding, but clearly signalled where the legislative body stood on the issue.

Then, when US Vice President JD Vance was visiting Israel in October, the Knesset approved two bills calling for the formal annexation of the territory. Vance called the move a “very stupid political stunt” intended to embarrass him.

The bills were aligned with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s avowed opposition to the creation of an independent Palestinian state on his watch.

Then, earlier this month, the Israeli security cabinet approved a series of measures that furthered the de facto annexation of the West Bank.

The measures, pushed by the far-right finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, and Defence Minister Israel Katz, are designed to remove any “legal obstacles” to the expansion of Israeli power across the territory, in violation of international law.

The measures provide more immunity for Israelis – the settlers, in particular – to purchase and own land in the West Bank.

They also give the Israeli state control over some historical and religious sites and limit further the Palestinian Authority’s administrative functions in the zones that are supposed to be under its jurisdiction under the 1993 Oslo Accords.

Netanyahu’s broader ambitions

The moves came at a crucial time in US-Israel relations. In January, the Trump administration announced the start of phase two of the US-brokered ceasefire in Gaza. Immediately after the measures were approved, Netanyahu made his sixth visit to the United States in a year to ensure Trump remains aligned with his course of action.

Netanyahu wants the fate of the Gaza Strip to be shaped according to his vision of Israel’s interests. He has been very vocal about his ambition for a “Greater Israel” stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

Netanyahu also remains adamant Israel stays the most powerful actor in the region. Israel has already degraded the capabilities of Hamas and Hezbollah, the two main regional proxies of its chief adversary, the Islamic Republic of Iran. It has also widened its military footprint in both Lebanon and Syria.

Now, Netanyahu is determined to see a favourable regime change in Tehran. While Trump wants a deal with Iran over its nuclear program, Netanyahu is significantly less supportive of such an outcome.

He has repeatedly stressed the need for a US-led military campaign to not only dismantle Iran’s nuclear program, but also degrade its missile capability and force it to severe ties with its proxies.

He regards this as the only way to remove the “existential threat” posed by the Iranian regime.

What will Trump do?

The new Israeli measures in the West Bank will no doubt embolden settlers to engage in more violent acts against the Palestinians. The stories coming out of the territory show how Israel is rapidly slicing away the Palestinians’ territorial, social and cultural existence.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) says more than 37,000 Palestinians were displaced in the West Bank in 2025, with record-high levels of violence.

The United Nations and the European Union have strongly condemned the new Israeli measures and settler violence.

However, Netanyahu and his extremist ministers have, as usual, brushed aside international criticisms and ignored the illegality of Israeli occupation under international law.

They have instead accelerated efforts to make the internationally backed two-state solution an impossibility. The recent measures help establish deeper “facts on the ground” that render the annexation of the West Bank a fait accompli. This would give Trump no other option but to go along with it.

Yet, Trump has the power and leverage to restrain Netanyahu. And he can stand firm behind his own stated opposition to West Bank annexation.

As an unpredictable, transactional leader, the president may even go so far as to attack Iran on behalf of Netanyahu in return for Netanyahu holding back from formal annexation of the West Bank.

Trump now faces the biggest tests of his presidency. The first is how he will manage Netanyahu, whom he has praised as a “war hero”. The second is how he will settle the conflict with Iran – whether it will be a deal or yet another devastating war.

– ref. Israel is accelerating its creeping annexation of the West Bank. Can Donald Trump stop it? – https://theconversation.com/israel-is-accelerating-its-creeping-annexation-of-the-west-bank-can-donald-trump-stop-it-276074

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/19/israel-is-accelerating-its-creeping-annexation-of-the-west-bank-can-donald-trump-stop-it-276074/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Troy McEwan, Professor of Clinical and Forensic Psychology, Swinburne University of Technology

In 2024, 38 Australian women were murdered by a partner or ex-partner. Thankfully, new data show the number of women killed by intimate partners has reduced to 32 over the most recent reporting period. The annual rate to June 2025 was among the lowest on record.

Nonetheless, more needs to be done to get the number of intimate partner homicides to zero. Thanks to tireless advocacy by many, the federal government has a target to reduce female victims of homicide by 25% per year. It’s part of the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children.

One common way of trying to prevent intimate partner and family homicide is through risk assessment and management. Risk assessments are used by police, family violence sector agencies and others to prioritise cases where harm seems most likely.

Sadly, our new research, published in the Journal of Family Violence, suggests it’s almost impossible to use these risk assessments to accurately predict who will attempt to kill their partner.

How do we assess risk?

Completing a risk assessment involves identifying the presence of “risk factors” in a potential perpetrator: characteristics that are thought to be associated with increased risk of homicide.

Past research has found women who are killed by a partner are more likely than abused women generally to have experienced things like strangulation, stalking, controlling behaviour and threats to kill.

Because they are more common in homicide cases, many people believe these kinds of characteristics are risk factors that can help them predict future homicide. Unfortunately, that’s not true.

Homicide is (thankfully) extremely rare. In Victoria, there were about 18 family violence-related homicides for every 100,000 family violence reports made to police in 2024–25.

Because it’s so rare, it’s virtually impossible to predict who might be a victim of homicide, or who will commit a homicide, even when lots of risk factors are present.

Our research

Our recent research showed this in a population of nearly 40,000 family violence reports recorded by Victoria Police.

We followed every person for 12 months in police databases to see who was involved in a subsequent family violence homicide or an incident that could have resulted in death (such as a very serious assault).

We tested the most commonly identified risk factors for intimate partner homicide to see if any of them alone, or combined, could predict a fatal or near fatal outcome.

We found none of them could. More than 99% of people with these risk factors were not involved in a fatal or near fatal attack in the 12 months we followed them.

For example, police recorded that 7,337 people had, in the past, threatened their partner or family member with serious harm or death. Among those who did go on to very seriously harm or kill, about 22% had previously made such threats.

However, 99.84% of those who had made a threat did not kill or attempt to kill a partner or family member in the 12 months after the police risk assessment.

The same is true of those who used jealous and controlling behaviour towards a partner or family member. Police recorded 12,123 people as having done this, and of those who very seriously harmed or killed, 29% had a history of jealous and controlling behaviour.

But again, 99.87% of people with jealous and controlling behaviour at the time of the original police report did not go on to kill or seriously harm.

The same was true of strangulation, stalking, and other risk factors for homicide.

We then tested whether combinations of these risk factors could predict homicide, with similar outcomes. Whichever way we looked at the data, the result was the same – every previously assumed risk factor or combination of risk factors got it wrong more than 99% of the time.

It’s possible we could have made more accurate predictions if we followed people for a longer period, say ten years.

But, while more homicides would have occurred, the overall rate of lethal and near lethal violence would have still been extremely low. Even more importantly, the results would not mean much in practice because risk assessments tend to guide responses in the short to medium term, not over many years.

What’s behind this?

We got these results because fatal or near fatal violence is very rare. It was only present in 55 cases in our sample of nearly 40,000 police reports.

While 55 deaths are of course 55 too many, all the risk factors we examined were unfortunately much more common.

Access to firearms was the least common factor, recorded in about 1,300 family violence cases. The most common factor, the perpetrator having identified mental health problems, was present in around 13,500 family violence cases.

Together, this means that even when a risk factor is present, most of those with it do not go on to use fatal or near-fatal violence.

These results don’t mean we should stop paying attention to strangulation, stalking or threats to kill. They do mean we should stop thinking these behaviours can help us predict homicide.

Of course, we must respond when these awful behaviours are identified and prevent people who’ve done such things from causing further harm.

But risk management should not be based on the idea that all people who act in this way are likely to kill, when the reality is that the overwhelming majority will not.

In some circumstances, very intrusive risk management is warranted to ensure immediate safety (such as remanding the person who has been violent). But in most cases, the presence of these risk factors doesn’t indicate that a homicide is imminent.

Rather, they indicate the need for interventions that can reduce family violence and its harms. Examples include psychological treatments that can change emotions and thoughts linked to violence, mental health and substance use treatment where it is required, effective multi-service collaborations, and wrap-around victim support services.

The evidence suggests while prediction is not possible, prevention is. The best way forward is not to create a false expectation that we can ever know who will kill.

Instead, we must adopt evidence-based preventative strategies and fund them fully, so they are available to everyone who needs them. Perhaps then the goal of zero intimate partner or family homicides will be closer to a reality.

---

The National Sexual Assault, Family and Domestic Violence Counselling Line – 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) – is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week for any Australian who has experienced, or is at risk of, family and domestic violence and/or sexual assault.

– ref. Can we predict domestic homicide? New research suggests we can’t – https://theconversation.com/can-we-predict-domestic-homicide-new-research-suggests-we-cant-268290

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/19/can-we-predict-domestic-homicide-new-research-suggests-we-cant-268290/

ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on February 19, 2026.

Ads are coming to AI. Does that really have to be such a bad thing?
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ilayaraja Subramanian, Lecturer in Marketing, University of Canterbury American artificial intelligence (AI) company Anthropic this month attracted applause – and a surge in users – for clever advertisements poking fun at its competition. In the commercials, an AI assistant awkwardly breaks away mid-conversation to push products such

‘I feel I’m making a difference’: how Blak women are working to build safer workplaces
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharlene Leroy-Dyer, Director, Indigenous Business Hub, UQ Business School, The University of Queensland Blak women make up a growing part of the Australian workforce, with 57% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women aged 15 to 64 employed in 2022-23 (the latest figures we have). That’s a

Racing enjoys special treatment under NZ gambling laws. Why?
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Marriott, Professor of Taxation, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington Despite the harm it is known to cause to a significant number of New Zealanders, the gambling industry as a whole is commonly defended for its contribution back to the community. Lotto NZ, for

Gambling for children? Why Australia should consider regulating blind box toys like Labubu
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By César Albarrán-Torres, Associate professor, Swinburne University of Technology If you walk through any major shopping mall in Australia, chances are you’ll encounter products and experiences that are uncomfortably similar to gambling – yet they are available to anyone, including children. Our soon-to-be-published research has found claw machines,

Labour’s Chris Hipkins accuses Winston Peters of ‘pure racism’ in Parliament
By Craig McCulloch, RNZ News deputy political editor Winston Peters has been accused of “pure racism” in Parliament by Labour leader Chris Hipkins, who has called out National ministers for failing to combat or challenge it. The Greens say Peters is scapegoating migrants, while ACT’s David Seymour — his own Cabinet colleague — says Peters

Remembering Frederick Wiseman: the filmmaker who changed documentary cinema forever
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Thomas Moran, Lecturer in the Department of English, Creative Writing and Film, Adelaide University Frederick Wiseman, who died yesterday at the age of 96, was an American filmmaker whose carefully observed works changed documentary cinema forever, shedding light on institutions, individuals and everyday life. Born into a

Fiji’s president warns against sowing ‘seeds of fear’ ahead of elections
By Koroi Hawkins, RNZ Pacific editor Fiji President Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu has urged legislators not to sow seeds of “fear and division” as the country moves towards a general election later this year. Speaking at the opening of the fourth and final session of Parliament before the polls, Ratu Naiqama called on political leaders and

Real wages have gone backwards. Even earning $100,000 isn’t what it used to be
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Hoy, McKenzie Research Fellow, The University of Melbourne Figures released today by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) show that over the year to December, wages grew by 3.4%. For households, however, the number that really matters is what happened to wages after inflation. Over the

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/19/er-report-a-roundup-of-significant-articles-on-eveningreport-nz-for-february-19-2026/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ilayaraja Subramanian, Lecturer in Marketing, University of Canterbury

American artificial intelligence (AI) company Anthropic this month attracted applause – and a surge in users – for clever advertisements poking fun at its competition.

In the commercials, an AI assistant awkwardly breaks away mid-conversation to push products such as shoe insoles and dating services. “Ads are coming to AI”, the Super Bowl-tied spots warned, but not to Anthtropic’s own chatbot Claude.

The campaign quickly generated buzz because it played to peoples’ worries that inviting advertising into AI platforms which many of us now rely on – and confide in – risks blurring the line between helpful advice and paid influence.

But that anxiety, while understandable, overlooks how advertising already works across much of the digital world.

In many ways, ads based on our interactions with AI aren’t such a big leap from the kinds of targeted advertising that already dominate search engines, social media feeds and e-commerce platforms.

And if transparent and well-designed, the shift could help people complete tasks faster and keep these tools widely accessible.

AI’s access and equity headache

This month, OpenAI’s ChatGPT began testing adverts with users in the United States. The company assures us any ads will be clearly labelled, kept separate from answers and accompanied by privacy protections and user controls.

The stakes are high: ChatGPT now boasts 800 million weekly users and ranks as the internet’s fifth most visited website. It has operated largely ad-free since its launch three years ago and only about 5% of users pay a subscription.

With room to grow, OpenAI has strong incentives to find a sustainable model that protects trust without undermining what made the service so popular.

If indeed transparent and optional, its advertising could help solve a basic funding problem. In practice, a small paying group cannot carry the full burden forever.

[embedded content]

A light, clearly labelled ad model is one way the wider user base could contribute indirectly – much as they already do via television, YouTube, search engines and many news websites.

That matters for access. Around one in six people worldwide already use generative AI, but adoption is uneven and a digital divide is widening between richer and poorer countries.

If wealthier nations move faster, sustainable business models can help spread access by keeping costs down for students, job seekers and small organisations in emerging economies.

The convenience of ‘contextual’ advertising

For everyday ChatGPT users, the main upside of ads is that they can reflect what is needed in the moment, rather than what a tracker infers from past browsing.

Traditional digital ads use cookies and cross-site tracking to guess people’s interests over time. Contextual advertising, by contrast, targets what is happening on the page or in the moment and is often seen as a more privacy-friendly alternative.

OpenAI says ads will be matched to the conversation and may use past chats and ad interactions. Users will be able to dismiss ads, see why they were shown one and delete ad data.

If those controls work as promised, relevance would come from the question being asked, not from tracking across other websites. Imagine asking: “I’m hosting friends. What are two easy Mexican dishes, and what ingredients do I need?”.

ChatGPT could give the recipe guidance first, then show a clearly labelled ad option, such as a local supermarket delivery link for the exact ingredients, or a sponsored meal kit that fits the budget and dietary needs. Instead of jumping between tabs, the user moves straight from decision to action.

For consumers, that is convenience. For advertisers, it is also efficiency, because the ad appears at the moment of genuine intent rather than being sprayed across the internet.

Another benefit is smoother communication. Conversational ads have the potential to function more like a shop assistant than a static banner. Instead of clicking away, opening tabs and filling in forms, follow-up questions can be asked in the same chat and personalised details returned quickly.

OpenAI suggests this could include sponsored listings that users can interact with in the chat. For instance, while planning a trip, a sponsored accommodation option might appear, allowing questions about availability, cancellation, location and total cost for specific dates and group size to be handled in one place.

Done well, this could reduce frustration and curb misleading advertising, because people can challenge vague claims and ask for specifics before spending money.

Trust, transparency and limits

None of this removes the risks. Advertisements should not be allowed to change what a trusted AI tool such as ChatGPT recommends. And because ads are currently being tested with only a small group of users, the full extent of those risks cannot yet be observed or properly assessed.

That is why transparency and separation are not cosmetic. They are safeguards.

For now, it may be tempting to treat “ad-free” as the only ethical position, as Anthropic’s new campaign implies. But the world is still early in this shift. These systems should be judged by what happens in practice – especially on transparency, user control and real protections against manipulation.

If those guardrails hold, it is worth considering the upside too: ads in AI tools could support access, reduce friction and help more people benefit from this powerful technology.

– ref. Ads are coming to AI. Does that really have to be such a bad thing? – https://theconversation.com/ads-are-coming-to-ai-does-that-really-have-to-be-such-a-bad-thing-274955

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/19/ads-are-coming-to-ai-does-that-really-have-to-be-such-a-bad-thing-274955/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharlene Leroy-Dyer, Director, Indigenous Business Hub, UQ Business School, The University of Queensland

Blak women make up a growing part of the Australian workforce, with 57% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women aged 15 to 64 employed in 2022-23 (the latest figures we have). That’s a significant gain from 45% just four years earlier.

However, it’s still well below the Closing the Gap target of 62% employment. It’s also far short of the comparable non-Indigenous employment rate (79%).

My research in the new International Journal of Indigenous Business draws from interviews with almost 200 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees, 120 of them women.

They shared how Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women often carry additional responsibilities, which are unacknowledged in most workplaces. One Aboriginal woman in her 30s, working in regional New South Wales, told me how even after her organisation did cultural awareness training, her managers leaned on her for unpaid, unofficial staff management:

I’ve had leaders ring me and say, ‘I’ve got this problem with this employee, quick deal with it because they’re Blak.’ I can’t deal with it. I don’t have the authority […] It is all well and good for the organisation to have diversity initiatives, but if they don’t have good policies and practices in place, then those initiatives are useless and cause more harm to Blak women.

My new research shows how Blak women are driving change towards more culturally safe workplaces in Australia, even after experiencing workplace discrimination and harm.

What Blak women said about work

The 120 women I spoke to ranged in age from 18 to 65, from urban, rural and remote parts of Australia. They were at varying stages of their careers: trainees and early career workers, to mature aged workers, managers and senior leaders. They came from six large organisations, some with sizeable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workforces.

Being isolated and unsupported while facing multiple forms of discrimination were recurring themes. One mid-career woman in her 30s said:

Finding my place within a western workplace has been a struggle for me. As a younger person I worked for an organisation that racially and sexually discriminated against me. After a particular incident that left me mentally broken, with the assistance of my union, I gathered the strength to sue my employer [… Eventually they] settled out of court. The whole experience left me physically and mentally distraught.

These aren’t isolated stories. The 2020 Gari Yala (Speak the Truth) survey of 1,033 Indigenous peoples in Australia found:

• 59% had experienced racism

• 44% reported hearing racial slurs

• 38% reported being treated unfairly because of their Aboriginality

• 28% felt culturally unsafe at work.

Only one in three of those surveyed said they felt supported at work when reporting racism.

Reshaping work for the better

But my research found the woman in her 30s who took her former employer to court has since become a leader at a new workplace.

It planted in me the seed to want to change the system, to help others who were suffering in the same way. In my current workplace I am a union workplace delegate and every day I fight for rights to a culturally safe workplace.

Another woman, who described never fitting in as the sole Blak employee at work, got a different job. She reported:

I have been instrumental in creating positive change and a safer work environment, by surrounding myself with other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and creating something unique […] I feel that I am making a difference […] to grow the next generation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women leaders.

Why structural change matters

My research found multiple examples of how, even when Blak women were up against systemic barriers, they still found ways to change workplace cultures for the better. But what came through in talking to these women was that everyday racism is not small – it is structural.

My workspace is primarily First Nations Peoples […] I feel safe in this workplace, safer than I have felt in a very long time, and I feel valued and productive at work […] However, outside my immediate workspace, in the wider organisation I am reminded of how systematic racism permeates.

Real inclusion at work requires more than training or representation.

For a start, it means recognising “cultural load” as labour. For example, this means not expecting Indigenous women to be unpaid, unofficial managers of other Indigenous employees, among other things.

More fundamentally, real inclusion means putting structures in place for increased “Indigenous governance”. This is where Indigenous workers and communities have an actual say about what works on issues affecting them.

What difference can that make in practice?

In the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Northern Territory government sent body bags to remote Indigenous communities. The government’s assumption? Fatal outbreaks may be unavoidable.

In contrast, Aboriginal-controlled health services adopted an Indigenous governance-style approach. They worked with communities on locally responsive measures, including community-led lockdowns. There was also coordinated action in some regional public health units, such as in the Hunter region of New South Wales.

That structural community involvement in health services’ COVID responses drove higher-than-expected early vaccine uptake. While vaccine hesitancy grew over time, researchers found that early action avoided hundreds of predicted COVID cases and deaths.

From our hospitals to offices and board rooms, Indigenous women are not asking to be included in colonial systems at work and beyond. We are asserting our right to transform them.

– ref. ‘I feel I’m making a difference’: how Blak women are working to build safer workplaces – https://theconversation.com/i-feel-im-making-a-difference-how-blak-women-are-working-to-build-safer-workplaces-268283

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/19/i-feel-im-making-a-difference-how-blak-women-are-working-to-build-safer-workplaces-268283/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By César Albarrán-Torres, Associate professor, Swinburne University of Technology

If you walk through any major shopping mall in Australia, chances are you’ll encounter products and experiences that are uncomfortably similar to gambling – yet they are available to anyone, including children.

Our soon-to-be-published research has found claw machines, blind boxes and toy capsule machines have become pervasive in the spaces families frequent – from the shops, to the movies, to the pub.

We call these products and experiences gamble-play media. They rely on and profit from risk-taking, and encourage intense, continuous playful consumption in the quest to “win” a desired item.

While claw machines have been a part of Australia’s consumer culture for a long time, blind boxes are the most recent gamble-play media to become mainstream.

In Singapore, lawmakers and consumer advocates are pushing to regulate blind boxes due to the gambling inducement risks they carry, according to a written address to parliament from Home Affairs Minister Kasiviswanathan Shanmugam.

It may be time for Australia to contemplate a similar move, given our nation’s insidious gambling culture and tendency towards problem gambling.

Indeed, gambling among children has become a national crisis, with a report from the Australia Institute highlighting 30% of 12–17 year-olds gamble at least once per year.

The blind box phenomenon

Blind boxes are products (usually toys) sealed in opaque packaging. The contents can’t be revealed until after a box is purchased. Most are sold as part of larger collections, many of which contain coveted “rare” items. Buyers are enticed to pay for the chance to obtain these “high-value” items.

Globally, blind boxes are projected to reach annual profits of US$24.2 billion (about A$34 billion) by 2033.

Anyone who visits a major shopping precinct will likely see rows upon rows of boxes displaying Labubus (a multi billion-dollar obsession), Sanrio characters, and other collectibles from children’s or family franchises such as Sesame Street, Harry Potter, Toy Story and the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Japanese characters such as Mofusand and Sonny Angels are particularly appealing to Gen Z and Gen Alpha buyers.

Online, content creators use these products in “toy unboxing” videos, which have long been popular on platforms such as YouTube and TikTok. This content focuses on the tactile pleasures of unwrapping toys, particularly “surprise” toys – the crinkling of paper, the tapping of nails on boxes, and the caressing of the treasured item once it’s finally unveiled.

There are hundreds of thousands of videos of influencers unboxing blind box toys across YouTube, TikTok and Instagram, many of which help to generate hype around new products or high-profile collaborations.

Apart from major retailers such as Pop Mart and Miniso, blind boxes are also available in vending machines, and pop-up and bargain variety stores (which may stock knock-off versions).

Gambling for children?

The emotional states triggered by blind boxes are not dissimilar to those experienced by people who gamble on slot machines or pokies: anticipation, randomness, occasional joy and frequent disappointment. These experiences can become addictive.

Blind boxes are designed to offer a rush over the possibility of an (unlikely) big win, and the subsequent chasing of this feeling. As our research highlights, these are the dynamics of gamble-play.

There are preliminary indications that using gamble-play devices such as claw machines and coin pushers in the formative years can lead to problems with gambling in adulthood.

However, more research is needed to understand how children experience risk, randomness, and loss and reward mechanisms in the context of seemingly innocuous gamble-play products. Our ongoing research explores if and how gamble-play can be a gateway to adult gambling.

Some manufacturers list the odds of winning and age guidelines in small print on the boxes. For instance, they may include a label suggesting the product is not for children under 8, or under 12. But these labelling practices are inconsistent, unclear and unregulated.

The reason some blind boxes are labelled this way is because of industry guidelines in China, from where many of these products are imported. Since 2023, China has restricted the sale of blind boxes to children under 8. Nonetheless, concerns around blind box addiction among China’s children persist.

Singapore sets an example

Singaporean legislators and consumer advocates are moving to regulate blind boxes, arguing they are too similar to gambling.

The proposed laws are still being devised. It’s unclear whether they will fall under existing gambling laws or require new legislation – but they could include mandating that manufacturers clearly disclose the odds of getting each product, and apply and enforce age restrictions.

Blind boxes have even started making small waves in Australian politics. In June of last year, Victorian Legislative Council member Aiv Puglielli said:

instead of buying one, maybe you buy two or three, increasing your chances of securing the design that you want. It kind of sounds like gambling, because it is gambling.

Randomised rewards are not exclusive to the blind box market: they are also used as incentives by fast food chains and supermarkets. In some cases, items such as rare Woolworths’ Disney Ooshies can be resold for thousands.

Australian legislators have already moved to regulate and classify gambling-like content in video games, such as loot boxes and simulated gambling.

Blind boxes and other gamble-play media rely on the same mechanisms of seduction – and therefore also demand scrutiny.

– ref. Gambling for children? Why Australia should consider regulating blind box toys like Labubu – https://theconversation.com/gambling-for-children-why-australia-should-consider-regulating-blind-box-toys-like-labubu-276163

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/19/gambling-for-children-why-australia-should-consider-regulating-blind-box-toys-like-labubu-276163/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Marriott, Professor of Taxation, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Despite the harm it is known to cause to a significant number of New Zealanders, the gambling industry as a whole is commonly defended for its contribution back to the community.

Lotto NZ, for example, must redistribute all profits from Lotto in this way. Other forms of gambling are taxed or regulated differently, but most pay back a share of their profits in some form.

Critics counter that such redistribution of gambling revenue does not fully address the harmful effects of problem gambling, or the fact that gambling itself isn’t distributed evenly across society.

So, while 63% of electronic gambling machines – colloquially known as “pokies” – are located in areas of relatively high deprivation, just 12% of the proceeds from those machines go to those areas.

But the racing industry is permitted to return almost all its profits back to the industry itself. In fact, the sector – covering horse racing and, until recently, greyhound racing – benefits from unique treatment.

Largely self-regulating

The Gambling Act 2003 requires some minimum percentage of gambling proceeds to be returned to community organisations or other “authorised purposes”.

But it also states that one of those “authorised purposes” is “promoting, controlling, and conducting race meetings under the Racing Industry Act 2020, including the payment of stakes”.

The racing industry is the only sector with a specific provision in the act allowing it to return gambling proceeds to its own industry. This extends to most profits from electronic gaming machines located in TAB premises.

Of all the forms of gambling, electronic gaming machines are generally recognised as generating the most harm.

In 2025, the TAB’s monopoly on domestic, in-person betting on racing and sports was extended to cover online betting. This was intended to “maximise the financial returns to New Zealand’s racing industry and sports”.

Typically, industries that cause harm are regulated in an attempt to minimise that harm. But the racing sector, via the TAB, is now largely self-regulating.

Although a Racing Integrity Board regulates issues such as animal welfare, recent changes to the Racing Industry Act empowered horse and greyhound racers “to effectively govern their respective industries” and is “intended to provide the industry with independence from the Government”.

Tax and levy exemptions

The racing industry also does not pay income tax. Like other gambling entities, it does pay a problem gambling levy – in its case, 0.74% of betting profits or 1.24% of profits from gaming machines located in TAB outlets.

Other gaming attracts additional levies: Lotto faces a 5.5% lotteries duty, casino operators pay a duty worth 4% of casino wins, and the levy on gaming machine profits is 20% (also paid by the TAB on machines in TAB premises).

But the racing sector no longer has to pay such additional levies on racing. Until recently, a 4% “totalisator duty” was payable on all racing and sports betting, but this was repealed progressively to reach zero in 2021.

The savings to the two betting categories from repealing the duty was NZ$14.5 million in 2024, of which $11.5 million went to racing.

This saving for the industry is, of course, a direct cost to the Crown in the form of foregone tax revenues.

The justification for the repeal was to help the racing industry become more financially self-sufficient. But levies and taxes are usually based on the nature of an activity – in particular, the harms it causes – and not the level of profit (or loss) it makes.

Under the Racing Industry (Distribution from Betting Profits) Regulations 2021, the TAB must retain just 2.5% of betting profits for harm prevention and minimisation.

The remainder is distributed to Racing New Zealand and Sports and Recreation New Zealand, in proportion to the revenues generated by racing or sports betting.

In practice, this means most distributions accrue to the racing sector. For example, total distributions of racing and sports betting profits in 2024 were around $199 million, of which $195 million (98%) went to racing and $3.5 million (2%) went to community sports organisations.

Time for a rethink of the rules

For decades, ministers of racing have gone to great lengths to protect the industry. In the runup to the TAB getting its monopoly over online betting in 2025, official documents noted that “Ministerial expectations” were one of the reasons the changes must be “implemented as quickly as possible”.

Government support for the racing sector is often justified by claims of improved employment opportunities, benefits to provincial communities and increases in the industry’s overall economic contribution.

But these arguments could be made for most industries in New Zealand – industries that do not generate the harms gambling does. State support for the racing sector generally means there will be more gambling on racing. That in turn implies increased harm from gambling.

We argue it’s time for a wholesale review of the tax and regulatory privileges that have accrued to this industry without any convincing rationale.

– ref. Racing enjoys special treatment under NZ gambling laws. Why? – https://theconversation.com/racing-enjoys-special-treatment-under-nz-gambling-laws-why-275778

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/19/racing-enjoys-special-treatment-under-nz-gambling-laws-why-275778/

By Craig McCulloch, RNZ News deputy political editor

Winston Peters has been accused of “pure racism” in Parliament by Labour leader Chris Hipkins, who has called out National ministers for failing to combat or challenge it.

The Greens say Peters is scapegoating migrants, while ACT’s David Seymour — his own Cabinet colleague — says Peters is simply seeking attention.

The condemnation came following Parliament’s Question Time yesterday when the NZ First leader singled out a Green MP for his Rarotongan heritage.

Green MP Teanau Tuiono had used the word “Aotearoa” to refer to New Zealand while asking questions about climate aid in the Pacific.

It prompted Peters to interrupt: “Why is [the minister] answering a question from someone who comes from Rarotonga to a country called New Zealand . . . ”

Speaker Gerry Brownlee cut him off to object to noise from other MPs in the debating chamber.

Hipkins then leapt to his feet: “Members in this House are equal. For a member of the House to stand up and question whether someone is entitled to ask a question because of their country of origin is pure racism, and you should’ve stopped him in the beginning.”

Brownlee said he did not hear Peters’ remark, but would review the transcription later.

Peters then completed his question, asking why somebody from Rarotonga had decided “without any consultation with the New Zealand people” to change the country’s name.

In response, Brownlee said that was “not an acceptable question at all”.

“I want that to be the last time that those sort of questions are directed so personally at members of this House,” Brownlee said.

Tuiono has both Māori and Cook Islands Māori heritage but was born in New Zealand.

Hipkins calls out ‘ugly side’ to politics
In a speech to Parliament shortly later, Hipkins decried an “ugly side to New Zealand politics”, calling out “outright race-baiting” and “direct racism” being expressed in the debating chamber.

“Attacks on our Chinese and Asian communities in New Zealand, attacks on our Indian communities in New Zealand, and just today, attacks on whether those who have Pasifika heritage are entitled to ask questions in this house.

“And what have we heard from the government side on those attacks? Absolutely nothing.”

Hipkins said National ministers needed to “combat and challenge that racism” during this year’s election campaign, saying it was “totally unacceptable” for them to “say nothing and do nothing”.

“They are quite happy to stand by while members of their own government attack our Chinese community, our Indian community, our Pasifika community, migrants to New Zealand who work damn hard and contribute to New Zealand, and it’s an absolute disgrace.”

Hipkins said government ministers should celebrate diversity and not cast aspersions on it.

Speaking to reporters later, Hipkins said Peters’ behaviour “had no place in government and Parliament” — but he still would not say whether Labour would be prepared to work with NZ First after the election.

“I’m going make judgements about those things closer to the election, but I’ll call out bad behaviour when I see it.”

Greens call Peters ‘Temu Trump’
Addressing reporters outside Parliament, Tuiono said Peters was using “culture wars” to distract from the real harm he was causing New Zealanders.

“Just like Trump, he’s not very good with geography,” he said. “He just needs to get an atlas. A bilingual one preferably.”

His Green colleague Ricardo Menéndez March said Prime Minister Christopher Luxon had failed to show leadership by allowing Peters — “a Temu Trump” — to spread anti-migrant sentiment.

“It’s migrant scapegoating . . .  it’s emboldens people outside of these four walls who wish to cause harm on our migrant communities,” Menéndez March said.

Speaking afterwards, ACT leader and Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour said he would never make such comments but would leave others to judge them for themselves.

“Do I like those comments? No. Would I make those comments? No. But I think if we all go on a 2019-style witch-hunt, we’re actually just fuelling it,” he said.

“If we all get ourselves in a lather, giving them the attention that they want, then that’s just as bad.”

‘Utter nonsense’ claim
In response, Peters told reporters Hipkins was talking “utter nonsense” and he did not care about Seymour’s views.

“How can somebody from another country who’s come to New Zealand decide to change my country’s name?” Peters said.

When told that Tuiono was actually born in New Zealand, Peters said, regardless, the Green MP claimed to be a “Cook Islander”.

“I would never go to the Cook Islands and start changing their name, would I?”

Peters said he was regularly being “literally mobbed” by New Zealanders on matters like the use of the word Aotearoa.

“I’m not indulging fools here. Let me tell you something: stand back and watch the polls go.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/19/labours-chris-hipkins-accuses-winston-peters-of-pure-racism-in-parliament/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Thomas Moran, Lecturer in the Department of English, Creative Writing and Film, Adelaide University

Frederick Wiseman, who died yesterday at the age of 96, was an American filmmaker whose carefully observed works changed documentary cinema forever, shedding light on institutions, individuals and everyday life.

Born into a Jewish family in Boston in 1930, Wiseman studied law at Yale and then taught law at Boston University. At the same time, he was fascinated by documentary cinema, producing The Cool World in 1963, a film directed by Shirley Clarke about a youth gang in Harlem.

While teaching legal medicine, he came across the subject of his first documentary: the Bridgewater State Hospital for the “criminally insane”. This film would eventually become Titicut Follies, released in 1967.

With unflinching realism, the film depicts the stark cells of the inmates, the practises of force feeding and the bullying and apathy of the hospital staff. The film was banned in the United States for 20 years but was shown in Europe to critical acclaim.

Honing an observational style

Titicut Follies kicked off what Wiseman described as his ongoing “institutional series”, which focused on the inner world of American institutions, with films like High School (1968), Law and Order (1969), Hospital (1970) and Welfare (1975).

These films established Wiseman’s trademark approach: no voice-over narration, no interviews, no talking-heads experts, no music and no overt reflections by the filmmaker. Instead, he adopted an observational style, preferring to sit back and watch, allowing the film’s subject matter to emerge organically on camera.

His films were described by critics at the time as “Direct Cinema”, the American wing of the cinema verité movement, a French term meaning “truthful cinema”. He was compared to Direct Cinema filmmakers like Robert Drew – best known for his film Primary (1960), about the Democratic Party primary which elected John F. Kennedy – and D.A. Pennebaker, famous for Don’t Look Back (1967) about Bob Dylan.

While Wiseman rejected the Direct Cinema label, his films shared one very important similarity with this movement. He was deeply influenced by the freedom of using small, lightweight, hand-held cameras and portable sound-recording equipment. This relatively unobtrusive gear allowed Wiseman and his crew to shoot in high-school classrooms and hospital waiting rooms, establishing his trademark “fly on the wall” style.

Wiseman was always aware of the tension between fact and fiction in documentary filmmaking. He described his films as “reality fictions”, insisting his movies had “a dramatic sequence and structure”.

This dramatic structure emerged by paying close attention to what was happening around him when the film was being shot and later in the careful process of editing. “The principal that governs the shooting is chance”, he once said.

His crew would shoot 100 to 150 hours of footage, which was then edited into films often two or three hours long. In the editing room, Wiseman developed the subtle rhythm of his films, rewatching footage for details and connections.

This painstaking editing process often took nine to ten months.

The viewer creates meaning

For most viewers the drama of Wiseman’s films is subtle but enthralling.

In High School, we watch students and teachers go about their daily tasks in the classroom, in detention, and on the sports field. In the final sequence, a teacher reads out a letter from a former student now serving in Vietnam.

This connection between the school and the military-industrial complex is all the more devastating given Wiseman’s lack of overt narration. It is the viewer who makes the connections, creating meaning from the carefully witnessed scenes.

[embedded content]

Unlike many documentarians, like Michael Moore, whose films start out with an explicit agenda, Wiseman’s films have a disarming sense of neutrality.

He said:

“I don’t go in with a thesis I try to prove or disprove. The shooting of the film is the research. My response to that experience is what the final film is about.”

Yet his work has a deeply political core, driven by a commitment to questioning the power structures within institutions and investigating their role in shaping American life.

Welfare (1975), considered by many to be his masterpiece, is a deeply moving portrayal of New Yorkers living in poverty, depicting the daily indignities of trying to access benefits and food stamps in the face of a complex unfeeling bureaucracy.

[embedded content]

Over the course of more than 50 films, he documented everything from Central Park, the Neiman Marcus department store, the ski resort town of Aspen, and a boxing gym in Austin, Texas.

His final film, Menus-Plaisirs – Les Troisgros (2023), made when he was 93, films the French restaurant Le Bois sans feuilles.

His influence on documentary cinema has been enormous, with directors from all over the world citing Wiseman as an inspiration. Two of the most recent are Alice Diop, a French filmmaker who chronicles immigrant life in the Parisian suburbs, and Wang Bing, whose Youth trilogy follows migrant workers in China.

Wiseman’s oeuvre is a testament to the power of documentary cinema as an art of the real. He has left us a series of works whose artistry and ethos deserve careful study, the same kind of attention he gave to everything he worked on.

– ref. Remembering Frederick Wiseman: the filmmaker who changed documentary cinema forever – https://theconversation.com/remembering-frederick-wiseman-the-filmmaker-who-changed-documentary-cinema-forever-276267

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/18/remembering-frederick-wiseman-the-filmmaker-who-changed-documentary-cinema-forever-276267/

By Koroi Hawkins, RNZ Pacific editor

Fiji President Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu has urged legislators not to sow seeds of “fear and division” as the country moves towards a general election later this year.

Speaking at the opening of the fourth and final session of Parliament before the polls, Ratu Naiqama called on political leaders and their supporters to engage constructively and respect the rule of law before, during and after the elections.

Fijians are expected to head to the polls anytime between August 7 (earliest) this year and 6 February 2027 (latest).

In an almost hour-long speech, which mentioned the word “unity” 17 times and covered a wide range of topics, Ratu Naiqama also confirmed the coalition government had commenced a review of the 2013 Constitution.

“The Constitution Amendment Bill, like all other Bills, will be made public and undergo an extensive consultation process with robust public debate and input before it is tabled to Cabinet and Parliament,” he said.

AI will have ‘detrimental effect on governance’
Other topics focused from unity in diversity to climate change and the threats posed by artificial intelligence.

Ratu Naiqama said he was at pains to underline factors which created division, noting the threat of false information.

On media and artificial intelligence, he said information was being disseminated at unprecedented speed but with little regard for accuracy.

“The misuse of artificial intelligence is an emerging threat that will have a detrimental effect on governance, national unity and peace,” he said.

“While freedom of expression remains a cornerstone of our democracy, it carries with it a grave responsibility.”

Fiji’s multicultural society is one of its greatest strengths, he said. However, unity did not arise automatically from diversity, he added.

“Unity must be consciously built through fair laws, inclusive policies, respectful leadership, and a shared commitment to the common good.”

Flagged Truth Commission
Ratu Naiqama flagged the Truth and Reconciliation Commission process as important to fostering unity, inclusivity and mutual understanding across all communities, saying its “findings and recommendations should be approached with maturity, guiding practical measures that strengthen reconciliation, institutional learning, and lasting social cohesion”.

The president described climate change as “the defining challenge of our time” and that Fiji would remain a global leader in climate advocacy, “while acting decisively at home”.

Looking at the region, Ratu Naiqama said Pacific nations were navigating complex geostrategic dynamics, while striving to preserve peace, cooperation and their sovereignty.

He reiterated the importance of the Ocean of Peace concept reinvigorated by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka at last year’s Pacific Forum leaders’ summit.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/18/fijis-president-warns-against-sowing-seeds-of-fear-ahead-of-elections/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Hoy, McKenzie Research Fellow, The University of Melbourne

Figures released today by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) show that over the year to December, wages grew by 3.4%. For households, however, the number that really matters is what happened to wages after inflation.

Over the same period, the consumer price index (CPI) rose by 3.8%. This means real wages (wages after accounting for inflation) actually went backwards.

That’s just today’s story. The deeper story, which has now been playing out for several years, is the erosion of Australians’ sense of what a “good” wage is and how we think about wage inequality.

Many people are feeling the pinch of inflation when paying their rent, groceries, insurance, child care and other costs. That’s why even a decent pay rise can be underwhelming. Because inflation doesn’t just squeeze budgets. It quietly moves the goalposts.

Shifting benchmarks

Earning “six figures” – A$100,000 a year or more – is far from what it used to be.

For many people, cracking six figures once signalled you could live very comfortably.

Australians face a huge variety of circumstances, so it’s impossible to say a particular wage level is objectively “good”. But our estimates suggest that only around one in ten full-time workers in Australia earned $100,000 or more in 2010. By 2025, this had risen to almost one in two, at 45%.

Despite this, many households on that level of income don’t feel overly comfortable, especially in big cities where housing costs have risen sharply in recent years.

While wages have risen on average in recent years, they have not kept pace with inflation. To illustrate, if we adjust for CPI inflation, $100,000 today only has the purchasing power of about $67,000 in 2010.

So, when anyone today says “people earning six figures should be very comfortable”, they may be using an outdated benchmark given the new cost-of-living reality. That’s why many people may feel like they’re running to stand still, even on incomes that used to signal comfort.

What Australians think about wage inequality

A lot of the cost-of-living debate often mixes two different issues.

The first is whether typical living standards are rising (which is about real-wage growth).

The second is the issue of how wages are distributed across society (which is ultimately about inequality).

In my recent research with co-authors, we studied how people perceive wage inequality.

We asked a nationally representative sample of 1,500 Australians to estimate what share of full-time workers are actually on low, middle and high wages. Then, we asked what they think a fair distribution would be.

A clear pattern emerged: Australians systematically underestimate wage inequality.

The gap is bigger than we realise

Most respondents underestimated how “top-heavy” the distribution of wages is – that is, how a small group of workers at the top are earning so much more than everyone else.

This matters, because public perceptions shape policies.

If people think the wage distribution is more equal than it really is, they may be less likely to support policies aimed at narrowing gaps.

That’s not because they don’t care, but because they don’t realise the true size of the problem.

Australians want fewer workers earning lower wages

Almost all respondents in our research expressed a strong preference for fewer full-time workers to earn low wages. This desire exists across political lines and income levels.

Our results show when people are provided with accurate information about wage inequality, even far-right respondents become much more supportive of redistribution.

That’s a useful reality check, because public debate is often framed as “envy versus aspiration” or “us versus them”. Our research suggests many everyday Australians are more focused on ensuring workers are paid enough to live comfortably.

What today’s wage release doesn’t capture

Today’s numbers tell us whether real wages are rising right now.

If you want a clearer read on living standards than a single wage headline, here are three questions worth asking:

1. Are wages consistently beating inflation? Even three months of wage growth can’t undo years of lost ground when inflation rose sharply after the pandemic.

2. Where are the gains concentrated? Industry and sector and gender differences shape inequality.

3. Have we updated our mental benchmarks for how much money it takes to live comfortably?

The cost-of-living story isn’t just about today’s number; it’s about the benchmarks inflation has quietly rewritten.

– ref. Real wages have gone backwards. Even earning $100,000 isn’t what it used to be – https://theconversation.com/real-wages-have-gone-backwards-even-earning-100-000-isnt-what-it-used-to-be-276169

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/18/real-wages-have-gone-backwards-even-earning-100-000-isnt-what-it-used-to-be-276169/

ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on February 18, 2026.

PNG one step away from blacklist, warns global money laundering watchdog
By Kaya Selby, RNZ Pacific journalist Papua New Guinea is under a close watch for money laundering, running a risk of being abandoned by global investors. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has placed PNG on its “grey list” due to “strategic deficiencies” in government oversight. The grey-list means that watchdog officials are monitoring closely,

Hamas refuses to follow US-Israel calls to unilaterally disarm in Gaza, says senior official
Democracy Now! In Gaza, a senior Hamas leader involved in the ceasefire negotiations has told Drop Site News that Hamas will not agree to demands that it unilaterally disarm. Basem Naim also said that Hamas would not submit to Israel’s demand for a total demilitarisation of the Gaza Strip. This comes amid reports that President

Indigenous businesses are losing millions to fraudulent firms. We need stronger oversight
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gaala Watson, Lecturer, Indigenous Business Hub, UQ Business School, The University of Queensland Over the next five years, the federal government plans to buy more from Indigenous businesses, while cracking down on a practice known as “Black cladding”. That’s when non-Indigenous businesses fraudulently exaggerate or falsify Indigenous

Australia plans to sell off defence land to developers – but could it deliver homes instead?
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Sundermann, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning and Design, Monash University The federal government plans to sell A$3 billion of Department of Defence properties on prime land across Australia, including Paddington in Sydney, St Kilda in Melbourne and Victoria Barracks in Brisbane. The sales may help the

5 weird armours from history
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grace Waye-Harris, Early Career Researcher in History, Adelaide University For the medieval knight, armour was essential. It provided protection on the battlefield and signified status and rank. As the medieval period came to a close, Renaissance ideals of peace and diplomacy prevailed and the need for battle-hardened

How Israel won the Pacific – and its backing at the UN
Asia Pacific Report Several small Pacific countries regularly vote in support of Israel at the United Nations in spite of overwhelming opposition for the Zionist state in the Middle East over its genocide in Gaza. Why? In this AJ+ video short, senior presenter/producer Dena Takruri sets out to explain the Pacific backing for Tel Aviv,

Caitlin Johnstone: More shockingly honest confessions from the Empire managers
COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone US Empire managers have been making some surprisingly honest admissions in recent days, with Senator Lindsey Graham saying the wars of the future are being planned in Israel and Secretary of State Marco Rubio calling for a return to old-school Western colonialism. During a Monday press conference in Tel Aviv after

Eugene Doyle: Silencing Francesca Albanese – ‘Not in our name’ Gaza reflections
UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese is again at the heart of a witch hunt over a speech she made at the Al Jazeera Forum last week that was “doctored” by the pro-Israel and anti-United Nations NGO UN Watch to claim falsely that she described Israel as the “common enemy”. Albanese responded — as shown by

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/18/er-report-a-roundup-of-significant-articles-on-eveningreport-nz-for-february-18-2026/

By Kaya Selby, RNZ Pacific journalist

Papua New Guinea is under a close watch for money laundering, running a risk of being abandoned by global investors.

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has placed PNG on its “grey list” due to “strategic deficiencies” in government oversight.

The grey-list means that watchdog officials are monitoring closely, and that the government is time-bound to address their blind spots.

PNG is now one step away from the far more precarious “black list”, where other countries are compelled to stay away in order to protect the international financial system.

There are only three countries on the black list: North Korea, Iran, and Myanmar.

Prime Minister James Marape told local media outlet NBC that he accepted the conclusions of the FATF and welcomed their support.

“There is no point blaming the past. What has been identified, we will fix,” Marape said.

Need secure economy
“It is in our country’s interest to have a secure economy, not one with gaps that can be exploited.”

Marape said that investors could be assured the PNG government was doing all that is can ahead of elections in 2027.

“Our investors will not run away . . .  Papua New Guinea will work its way out of the grey-list and towards a trusted, credible financial standing,”

But as many as 30 banks have publicly ruled out the possibility of investing in Papua LNG, an Exxon-backed project in the Gulf of Papua, as reported by AAP.

The project owners, seeking to produce six million tonnes of LNG per annum for a predominantly Asian market, have yet to make a final decision on whether to move forward.

Far-reaching consequences
A note from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in November 2025 called PNG “a fragile state” noting an “unstable social and political environment”.

It’s a judgment of PNG’s institutions, weakened by conflict and poor governance, thus creating ideal conditions for money laundering and corruption to thrive.

Michael Kabuni, an anti-money laundering researcher at Australian National University, told RNZ Pacific the grey-listing sends a signal to overseas banks and investors that business in PNG is rife with danger.

“We were saying all along that PNG was going to be added to the grey list. The evidence points to it.”

PNG’s greatest vulnerability is the exposure of each MP, bureaucrat and public servant to bribes and corruption, Kabuni said.

The more powerful an individual, the more likely they are to be targeted by criminals, and the greater those incentives to bend the rules would be.

“There was the anti-corruption body that was set up in 2014 called the task force suite,” he noted.

“It did an impressive job in confiscating proceeds of crime, arresting, prosecuting and jailing those involved. But eventually they went after the Prime Minister, and that task force was disbanded.”

Kabuni noted that MPs are given 10 million kina (NZ$3.9 million) each year in the course of their work, but rarely is it all accounted for.

He said it was also common for less money to be allocated to “integrity agencies”, such as watchdogs and enforcement bodies, than they are actually budgeted.

“It’s a combination of factors, from political interference, whether it’s appointments or interference into the investigations, to capacity and resources,” he said.

In the case of Papua LNG, Kabuni said he “would think” that the bank boycott was motivated in large part by the grey-listing.

“Investors use the mutual evaluation reports as a risk matrix to determine whether this country is safe.”

“It’s going to be difficult to draw investors finances . . .  we’ve never actually had an investor come in during the grey-list period.”

Risks for New Zealand
The Reserve Bank of New Zealand said banks were required to assess the associated risks with the countries that they dealt with.

“This may mean that transactions to or from Papua New Guinea may be subject to greater scrutiny,” it said.

Meanwhile, the Department of Internal Affairs said all customers from PNG are considered “high risk” under the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009.

“This could be a PNG company operating in New Zealand or a non-resident individual (such as a person on a temporary work visa),” a spokesperson said.

“As a result, an enhanced level of customer due diligence must always be applied.”

Anti-money laundering expert Kerry Grass told RNZ Pacific that businesses dealings with PNG were inherently risky.

“Trade-based money laundering (trading value for value) is not captured as an activity under the AML/CFT Act for international reporting obligations of trade,” Grass said.

Escaping obligations
“Hence I can trade you a shipping container of car parts for 1kg of Cocaine hidden in a container of coconuts. That type of international trading is escaping obligations of reporting under the AML/CFT Act if no wire transfer is relied on.”

In an ideal world, Grass said, customs officials would be able to manage risk based on knowledge of the source, but this could be disguised.

Efforts to stop ill-gotten gains from PNG to NZ would depend on their ability to decipher this information.

“I don’t think New Zealand is actually operating at a jurisdiction level where these controls or knowledge are actually down to that level,” she said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/18/png-one-step-away-from-blacklist-warns-global-money-laundering-watchdog/

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/18/hamas-refuses-to-follow-us-israel-calls-to-unilaterally-disarm-in-gaza-says-senior-official/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gaala Watson, Lecturer, Indigenous Business Hub, UQ Business School, The University of Queensland

Over the next five years, the federal government plans to buy more from Indigenous businesses, while cracking down on a practice known as “Black cladding”. That’s when non-Indigenous businesses fraudulently exaggerate or falsify Indigenous people’s involvement in their firm to access opportunities meant for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-owned businesses.

The national Indigenous Procurement Policy was launched under the Abbott government in 2015. It was a recognition of past under-investment in Indigenous businesses.

Since then, it’s delivered more than A$12 billion in contracts for Indigenous businesses. Much of that procurement funding has supported thousands of genuine First Nations businesses.

But since the beginning of the scheme, Indigenous business owners and leaders have raised concerns about millions of dollars being lost to businesses misrepresenting themselves as Indigenous. When this happens, the chance to build livelihoods, skills and community strength is taken away.

The current federal government has pledged “zero tolerance for black cladding”. However, my new research published today has found its reforms – underway now and into 2026 – don’t go far enough.

What’s being done about it now?

Past Coalition governments and the current Labor government have acknowledged “Black cladding” is a problem under the Indigenous Procurement Policy.

There are some big shifts underway in how federal Indigenous procurement policy will be funded and run. Among the most significant are:

Increased spending: From July 1 this year, the Albanese government increased its Indigenous procurement target from 2.5% to 3% of its contracts for 2025–26. That will rise to 4% by 2030.

Stricter eligibility criteria: From July 1, 2026, businesses must be at least 51% Indigenous-owned and controlled – up from 50% now – or registered with the federal Office of the Registrar of Indigenous Corporations to qualify.

Tackling “Black cladding”: The National Indigenous Australians Agency plans to make it easier to report suspected companies misrepresenting themselves as Indigenous-led.

But a lot of the details are still being worked out. That’s why now is the time to talk about what hasn’t worked with the Indigenous Procurement Policy over the past decade – and fix it.

[embedded content]

We need better cross-checking and oversight

My new research, published in the first edition of the International Journal of Indigenous Business, finds the Indigenous Procurement Policy needs additional reforms. All of them come down to better oversight and public accountability.

Robust protections and penalties: At the moment, calling out Black cladding can come with personal or professional risk.

Many Indigenous business owners stay silent because there’s no safe way to report misconduct. Strong whistleblower protections and enforceable consequences are needed to make accountability real, not optional. With stronger protections, procurement contracts could also include clear penalties for misrepresentation.

Investigative infrastructure: There is no independent system to properly investigate fraudulent claims of Indigeneity or business structures designed to look Indigenous, but in fact are not.

In contrast, other areas of public spending – such as corporate reporting and taxation – are subject to rigorous external oversight. The lack of equivalent safeguards in Indigenous procurement makes it easier for fraud to thrive.

Too often, Black cladding is only exposed when community advocates intervene.

An investigative arm, staffed with cultural and commercial expertise, could follow up on suspicious structures and offer safe reporting pathways for those who spot misuse.

Indigenous oversight and cross-checking claims: Black cladding isn’t just a matter of a few fraudulent operators. Instead, it’s a predictable, systemic outcome of Indigenous procurement policy being designed around centralised compliance over genuine community knowledge.

Research published in November revealed that from 2015 to mid-2023, just 18 firms won 50% of federal Indigenous procurement spending, worth $A7 billion. It also mapped where the money went – showing businesses in Canberra won a shockingly large slice of the funds.

Despite Indigenous business leaders raising concerns for years, there’s still no process for cross-checking claims through community-controlled bodies or cultural authorities. Such independent checks on ownership structures and transparent reporting would provide better protection against Black clad fraud.

---

Read more: Just 18 firms won 50% of federal Indigenous procurement spending: new study

---

Beyond compliance, a different model of business success

Black cladding doesn’t only divert contracts; it erodes the identity and values of Indigenous enterprise.

Many Indigenous enterprises don’t exist solely to maximise profit. They work to meet community needs and aspirations, guided by culture, shared responsibility and custodianship of Country.

For example, some businesses prioritise training young people over short-term revenue. Others reinvest earnings into cultural programs, or community infrastructure.

When systems reward Western commercial models over those grounded in culture, the distinctiveness of Indigenous enterprise is erased, and its social and cultural value is lost in the process.

The solution is not to abandon the federal government’s procurement reforms. But we do need to transform those reforms, meaningfully, in genuine collaboration with Indigenous communities.

– ref. Indigenous businesses are losing millions to fraudulent firms. We need stronger oversight – https://theconversation.com/indigenous-businesses-are-losing-millions-to-fraudulent-firms-we-need-stronger-oversight-269368

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/18/indigenous-businesses-are-losing-millions-to-fraudulent-firms-we-need-stronger-oversight-269368/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grace Waye-Harris, Early Career Researcher in History, Adelaide University

For the medieval knight, armour was essential. It provided protection on the battlefield and signified status and rank.

As the medieval period came to a close, Renaissance ideals of peace and diplomacy prevailed and the need for battle-hardened knights disappeared. But armour remained an important symbol of elite masculinity, thanks to its association with chivalry, honour and knighthood.

Ceremonial armour became a requisite for noblemen and was worn at events such as tournaments and parade entries. Master craftsmen used techniques such as embossing, engraving and gilding to fashion pieces that wowed audiences and allowed the wearers to transform into heroic and divine beings.

Thankfully, many of these pieces survive – and their stories offer a glimpse into Renaissance society. Spoiler alert: it was a little weird.

Henry VIII’s horned helmet (circa 1512–14)

Of all the armour that survives from the Renaissance period, Henry VIII’s horned helmet is arguably the weirdest.

This helmet was a diplomatic gift from the Emperor Maximilian I in 1514. Its strange features – including a ram’s horns, a grotesque face and gold spectacles – have perplexed historians for centuries.

In Henry’s time, ram’s horns symbolised the devil or a cuckold (a man whose wife has slept with someone else). Grotesque faces and spectacles (or glasses) were associated with the appearance of a fool. Historians have not been able to explain why one monarch would gift such a piece to another.

However, my recent research shows that the strange features on Henry’s helmet are reflective of the Greek myth, Jason and the Golden Fleece, and the medieval chivalric order the myth inspired, the Order of the Golden Fleece.

When viewed through the lens of chivalry and humanism, Henry’s peculiar helmet goes from being something seemingly grotesque, to a highly valued object of kingly power and authority.

Not so weird after all.

The Lion Sallet (circa 1475–80)

This lion sallet is the oldest surviving example of all’antica (antique style) armour from the Renaissance.

It’s interesting because it demonstrates the new trend of zoomorphic or animalistic armour. These pieces depicted animals ranging from foxes, to roosters, to eagles, and dolphins. The wearer was given the opportunity to embody the virtues and power of the animal represented.

The lion was the most popular as it was associated with the Greek hero Hercules, and the virtues of courage, bravery and strength. When adorning the lion sallet, the wearer would figuratively transform into Hercules – the Renaissance version of “activating beast mode”.

The armour of Henry II’s horse (circa 1490–1500)

Zoomorphic armours weren’t just the preserve of warriors. Horses could also unlock beast mode with mystical armours such as this dragon-shaped shaffron. Shaffrons were an integral part of a horse’s armour and provided protection to their face and head.

Due to its symbolic significance, the dragon shaffron was likely used for tournaments or civic entries. Dragons were important creatures in Renaissance culture because they blended classical mythology with Christian theology. According to legend, St George famously defeated a dragon who was terrorising a town, before converting the townspeople to Christianity.

Dragons also held special value in French Renaissance literature with mythical creatures such as Guivre and Tarasque said to have been tamed by early Christian saints.

When worn, the dragon shaffron reflected the Henry II’s commitment to defend the Christian church.

Elephant Armour (circa 1600–1700)

If you aren’t from India or Asia, the idea of war elephants, or the “elephantry”, may seem strange. Yet elephants played an essential role in ancient and medieval warfare on the Asian continent. The elephant armour currently held by the Royal Armouries in Leeds is a poignant reminder of this.

This 17th century piece originates from India but was procured by Henriette Clive, the Countess of Powis, while her husband was Governor of Madras. The armour consists of a face and neck guard and body panels. It is also highly decorated (suggesting ceremonial use) with embossed lotus flowers, fish and peacocks – auspicious symbols in Indian culture.

Luckily for elephants, changes to warfare in the Early Modern Period meant their use in combat declined. Elephants were, however, still used by military forces as labour well into the 20th century, particularly during the first world war and the Vietnam War.

The Landsknecht costume armour (1523)

At first glance, this piece looks like a beautiful garment with puffed sleeves, slashed cloth and ornate embroidery. What makes it weird is that it’s entirely made of steel.

Little is known about the motive or making of the Landsknecht armour (so-called because it mimics the style of dress worn by german landsknecht mercenaries). Historians do know it dates to 1523 and is attributed to Kolman Helmschmid, a master armourer from Augsburg, in modern day Germany.

The armour itself tells us its owner, Austrian military commander Wilhelm von Rogendorf, must have been a giant. The suit fits someone well over 6 foot 3 inches which, in the 16th century, would have made him a formidable presence.

The piece is fashioned in the male style courtly dress, with Helmschmid skilfully emulating layers of voluminous textiles and tailoring techniques such as draping, slashing and embroidery, all from steel.

While peculiar to the modern eye, these pieces demonstrate the profound symbolic significance of armour in Renaissance society. Far from weird, armour was high culture, kingly power and fine art.

– ref. 5 weird armours from history – https://theconversation.com/5-weird-armours-from-history-273580

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/18/5-weird-armours-from-history-273580/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Sundermann, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning and Design, Monash University

The federal government plans to sell A$3 billion of Department of Defence properties on prime land across Australia, including Paddington in Sydney, St Kilda in Melbourne and Victoria Barracks in Brisbane.

The sales may help the budget in the short term, but at the time of a housing crisis, is this using public land in the best way?

Instead of selling these sites outright, the federal government could take a lead in redeveloping the land to deliver more affordable homes and long-term value for our cities.

It wouldn’t be the first time government has played this role. There are lessons to be learned from a 1990s urban redevelopment programme called Building Better Cities, which redeveloped Ultimo and Pyrmont in Sydney among other sites.

A quick fix, or a lost opportunity?

Australia’s housing crisis is one of the most urgent challenges facing federal and state governments. At the same time, the federal government plans to sell more than 60 publicly owned defence sites across the country.

Selling land can bring a quick boost to revenue. But public land is a limited resource, so we need to make sure we are getting public value from it. Once it is sold, governments lose control of how it is used in the future.

Many of the sites listed for private sale are located in capital cities, often close to jobs, public transport and services.

They range from the small, such as two office buildings on Grattan Street, Carlton, to the large, such as the 127-hectare Defence site in Maribyrnong, in Melbourne’s inner west. Locations like this are where homes are most needed. But redevelopment is not always easy, as the sites may have contaminated land or heritage buildings.

Selling these sites to private developers with limited conditions may maximise short-term revenue for defence purposes. Housing will likely be delivered.

But rather than selling land unrestricted to the private market, the government has other options to deliver better outcomes for current and future generations.

Government as master developer

One option is the federal government could transfer ownership of the sites to state governments, as long as they follow an agreed process. Government development agencies, such as Renewal SA or Hunter and Central Coast Development Corporation, would act as master developer.

These agencies work with the community to establish a vision for the future of each site. This could include social and affordable housing, employment and community uses and open space.

Then the federal and state governments would fund upfront any land remediation, public transport, streets and open spaces. This sets up what is required to make a liveable neighbourhood, and de-risks the process for private developers. Then smaller sites are sold to private developers or community housing providers at a higher value, with the government retaining that profit.

With government as custodians of the redevelopment process, high quality neighbourhoods are delivered, with more affordable housing. A project such as Bowden in Adelaide, led by Renewal SA, is a great example.

Back to the 1990s

If this level of government vision and coordination seems a stretch, it’s worth considering we have done it before. The Building Better Cities program of the 1990s invested federal and state money into 26 places around Australia, including Ultimo-Pyrmont in Sydney, Subiaco in Perth and Kensington Banks in Melbourne.

The program focused on improving the urban development process and the quality of urban life. It included the redevelopment of land no longer required by state and federal governments.

Not only did the program create high-quality places to live, it also improved Australia’s economic growth over the following decades. The $268 million investment in the transformation of industrial wasteland at Honeysuckle in Newcastle encouraged $768 million in private investment and led to over $2 billion in direct and indirect economic benefit by 2012.

Long-term leases

There are other ways for government to guide the transformation of these smaller sites in the defence portfolio. One option is to set up a long-term ground lease, to enable the delivery of homes but retain the land for future generations.

The Victorian government has shown the potential of this approach with its ground lease model, with the first neighbourhoods completed in 2024 on public housing land in Brighton, Flemington and Prahran.

Through a development agreement, private developers build affordable, social and private housing on public land. The land and buildings return to government after a 40-year period.

Alternatively, the federal government could set minimum affordable housing or sustainability requirements with the sale of sites, to support better outcomes.

Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has mentioned that sales will consider remediation, heritage and community impacts. But the focus is on achieving “market value” for the land, rather than any broader ambition.

What happens next?

Now that the defence land has been declared surplus to needs, it will go to the Department of Finance’s Property Clearing House.

This process allows other government departments to buy a site before it is sold on the open market.

Let’s hope the government sees the bigger social and economic benefits in leading the strategic transformation of these sites, rather than a short-term cash fix.

– ref. Australia plans to sell off defence land to developers – but could it deliver homes instead? – https://theconversation.com/australia-plans-to-sell-off-defence-land-to-developers-but-could-it-deliver-homes-instead-275796

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/18/australia-plans-to-sell-off-defence-land-to-developers-but-could-it-deliver-homes-instead-275796/

Asia Pacific Report

Several small Pacific countries regularly vote in support of Israel at the United Nations in spite of overwhelming opposition for the Zionist state in the Middle East over its genocide in Gaza.

Why?

In this AJ+ video short, senior presenter/producer Dena Takruri sets out to explain the Pacific backing for Tel Aviv, including from Fiji which is understood to be supplying peacekeepers for US President Donald Trump’s International Stabilisation Force (ISF) for Gaza due to be announced this week.

Israel has been building religious and diplomatic connections with the Pacific Islands, as six nations voted with it on the Gaza ceasefire issue.

“Israel is left standing alone with the backing of the US . . . and the South Pacific,” says Takruri.

“As Israeli’s biggest financial and military backer, the US makes sense.

“But why is a region in the Global South, on nearly the complete opposite side of the globe, co-signing genocide and apartheid?

Evangelical identity
“To understand the Pacific Islands countries, you have to understand the region’s identity. And that’s mostly Christian, like 90 percent Christian.

“And that’s because European missionaries in the 19th century focused on proselytising tribal leaders. Once their chiefs were swayed, their tribes would go with them.”

Christians in the Pacific took a very literal reading of the Bible, a feature of evangelicism.

For example, in Fiji, which has just opened an embassy in Jerusalem, one in four people identify as evangelicals – Christian Zionists.

To take advantage of this, Israel has deployed a special identity-based diplomatic “mythmaking” task force presenting Jews in Israel as being “indigenous” people returning to their “homeland”.

This notion clashes with the reality that Zionists settled in Palestine and expelled 750,000 Palestinians during the 1948 Nakba –  “the catastrophe” – at the founding of the state of Israel.

“It’s the latest example of the Global North using the Global South for its own gain,” concludes Takruri.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/18/how-israel-won-the-pacific-and-its-backing-at-the-un/

COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone

US Empire managers have been making some surprisingly honest admissions in recent days, with Senator Lindsey Graham saying the wars of the future are being planned in Israel and Secretary of State Marco Rubio calling for a return to old-school Western colonialism.

During a Monday press conference in Tel Aviv after a meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Graham said that “I’ve been coming here every two weeks whether I need to or not.”

Why is a South Carolina senator traveling to Israel every two weeks, rain or shine? The bloodthirsty warmonger answers this question in short order.

“The wars of the future are being planned here in Israel,” Graham said. “Because if you’re not one step ahead of the enemy, you suffer. The most clever, creative military forces on the planet are here in Israel.”

Sometimes, Senator Graham just puts it out in the plainest language:

“The wars of the future are being planned here in Israel.” pic.twitter.com/hs4MQGBK3n

— Trita Parsi (@tparsi) February 16, 2026

Graham salivated about the possibility of a US war with Iran, acknowledging that such a war could absolutely result in American troops in the region being struck by Iranian missiles but saying the US should go to war anyway.

“Could our soldiers be hit in the region? Absolutely, they could. Can Iran respond if we have an all-out attack? Absolutely, they can,” Graham said, arguing that “the risk associated with that is far less than the risk associated with blinking and pulling the plug and not helping the people as you promised.”

During a speech at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio took the mask all the way off in an unsettling rant about the need to return to the good old days when Western powers dominated the Global South without pretence or apology.

[embedded content]

“For five centuries, before the end of the Second World War, the West had been expanding — its missionaries, its pilgrims, its soldiers, its explorers pouring out from its shores to cross oceans, settle new continents, build vast empires extending out across the globe,” Rubio said.

“But in 1945, for the first time since the age of Columbus, it was contracting. Europe was in ruins. Half of it lived behind an Iron Curtain and the rest looked like it would soon follow. The great Western empires had entered into terminal decline, accelerated by godless communist revolutions and by anti-colonial uprisings that would transform the world and drape the red hammer and sickle across vast swaths of the map in the years to come.”

This is insane.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio just gave one of the most explicitly pro-colonialist speeches I have seen in the 21st century.

The US empire wants Europe to help it recolonize the Global South.

Rubio praised Western colonialists for “settl[ing] new… pic.twitter.com/tl4NojNdmP

— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) February 15, 2026

Rubio, a notoriously anti-communist gusano, is here admitting that socialism played a leading role in pushing back against the abusive colonialism and empire-building of the Western world in recent decades. A normal person would take this as a strong argument in favour of socialism, but Rubio says it like it’s a bad thing.

Rubio urged Europeans to join their white Christian brethren in the United States in re-conquering the brown-skinned communists and heathens who have been insisting upon their own sovereignty and the advancement of their own interests:

“Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization’s past.

“And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.

“For the United States and Europe, we belong together. America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before. The man who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.

“We are part of one civilisation — Western civilisation. We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilisation to which we have fallen heir.”

MARCO RUBIO CALLS FOR RETURN OF COLONIALISM

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio gave one of the most overtly colonial speeches at the Munich Security Conference in Germany on Saturday, 14th February, where he reminisced about 500 years of Western colonialism and how it expanded to… pic.twitter.com/uZqC5Y4pwS

— Sovereign Media (@sov_media) February 16, 2026

It takes a special kind of psychopath to look back with fondness upon five centuries of unchecked Western colonialism and imperialism and then advocate a return to those horrific days. Mass genocides across entire continents. The African slave trade. The violent subjugation and enslavement of entire populations.

That is what Rubio is looking back on and sighing with nostalgia.

And this is of course to say nothing of the savagery his beloved “Western civilisation” is perpetrating in the present day. This is the civilisation of the Gaza holocaust. The civilisation that cannot exist without constant war, exploitation and extraction. The civilisation that is presently strangling Cuba to death and preparing for war with Iran. The civilisation that still to this day violently subjugates and robs the Global South. The civilisation of ecocide. The civilisation of Epstein.

Western civilisation is the most depraved and abusive civilisation that has ever existed. It doesn’t need a return to its prime, it needs to be stopped in its tracks and made healthy. This is obvious from a glance at the deranged empire managers this civilisation has been elevating to positions of leadership.

Caitlin Johnstone is an Australian independent journalist and poet. Her articles include The UN Torture Report On Assange Is An Indictment Of Our Entire Society. She publishes a website and Caitlin’s Newsletter. This article is republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/17/caitlin-johnstone-more-shockingly-honest-confessions-from-the-empire-managers/

UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese is again at the heart of a witch hunt over a speech she made at the Al Jazeera Forum last week that was “doctored” by the pro-Israel and anti-United Nations NGO UN Watch to claim falsely that she described Israel as the “common enemy”. Albanese responded — as shown by the original speech recording — that she was referring to “the system that has enabled the genocide in Palestine” as the “common enemy”. Albanese did not make the fabricated statement in the address, but rather criticised Western inaction during the Gaza genocide. This is a flashback to when Asia Pacific Report contributor Eugene Doyle met Albanese in New Zealand in 2023.

COMMENTARY: By Eugene Doyle

It was with a sense of disgust rather than despair that I read in The Jerusalem Post today [February 2024]: “‘Antisemitic’ UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese banned from Israel.” We’re being gas-lighted again and this is a chance to push back against the narrative that to support victims of Israel is to somehow be antisemitic.

Back in November 2023 as the Israeli exterminations of Palestinians were ramping up, I had the privilege to hear and speak to Francesca Albanese, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

She visited Wellington as part of a long-scheduled visit to Australia and New Zealand and spoke to government ministers, relief organisations, journalists and packed halls of citizens who shared a sense of horror at what was playing out in Gaza.

Her speeches were filled with knowledge and forensic clarity, only matched by her decency and sense of humanity — which extended to great courtesy shown to a lone and agitated Israeli supporter at a meeting I attended.

In issuing the banning order, two Israeli ministers stated: “The era of Jews being silent is over. If the UN wants to return to being a relevant body, its leaders must publicly disavow the antisemitic words of the special envoy.”

This is of course a vulgar lie told by ministers actively pursuing genocide. These two indeed aren’t silent: the scream, roar and boom of their shells, missiles and snipers’ bullets have shouted to the world how far the Zionist state has descended into the bowels of depravity.

The Jewish diaspora are anything but silent too — I have been immensely impressed by the courage and persistence of Jewish people worldwide who have shunned the fiction that to be anti-Zionist is to be antisemitic. I hear them loud and clear chanting with righteous indignation, “Not in our name!”

[embedded content]
Francesca Albanese rejects false accusations            Video: Al Jazeera

Albanese’s riposte
What really steamed the ministers and momentarily deflected their attention from the slaughter of innocents was Albanese’s riposte to a casual lie by French President Emmanuel Macron: “October 7 was the largest antisemitic massacre of our century.”

Albanese responded, quite rightly, surely self-evidently: “The victims of 7/10 were not killed because of their Judaism but in response to Israel’s oppression.” She also stated her respect for the victims of the attack.

When courageous people are attacked by malign and powerful actors, it takes moral clarity and steely determination to walk into a sea of troubles and oppose the true villains. We all need to do that now — and not remain silent.

In the past couple of months Israel has, with the complicity of the white-dominated Western countries, tried to destroy UNRWA, the primary UN organisation providing relief to the Palestinian people, as they endure this genocidal siege.

Because of Israel’s powerful allies, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has kept mum and ignored the vast number of human rights atrocities committed by Israel. (Editor: The ICC subsequently issued arrest warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity on 21 November 2024).

The Israelis have also hoicked and spat out their contempt for the International Court of Justice. National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir commented, “Hague Smague — The ICJ has only proven what everyone already knew, that it is only seeking to prosecute the Jewish nation”.

Traducing the ICJ in this way is another attempt to gaslight us all. If we can do one decent thing it would be to get our governments to raise their voices in defence of the brutalised and besieged United Nations.

Stuck in settler colonial regime
Albanese told audiences on both sides of the Tasman: “When I speak of human rights, I speak of both the Palestinians and the Israelis, who are stuck in a settler colonial regime; this is what we have to solve together.”

She went on to say, “ I will always stand with the victim.”

There is good reason to try to silence Francesca Albanese. She is an authority in the detail of the dehumanisation inflicted on the Palestinians. She has seen the daily lack of proportionality, the discourse of genocide, the military and administrative controls, the deprivation of sanitary services, food and medicine, the surveillance technology, the casual killings, the financial chocking of a people, the way the Israelis are eating up Palestine inch by inch as the West looks the other way.

In short, more than most people she understands the structural system of oppression that is denying the Palestinians the right to exist as a people — culturally, economically, politically. She is a humanist and the exact opposite of an antisemite.

Albanese is one of legions of good people besieged by Israel and its allies. The racist white elites in Europe and the USA are more than happy to adopt a definition that conflates anti-semitism with criticism of Israel, using the recently-minted International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition as a tool to silence (that word again) defenders of Palestinian rights.

When the right-wing of UK Labour set to work to oust Jeremy Corbyn, they succeeded, deploying an antisemitic slur. By the time the purge had finished, thousands of Labour progressives had been eliminated from the party membership, including large numbers of Jewish progressives.

The Labour Files, a must-see Al Jazeera documentary, based on a data dump of internal Labour files, uncovered the astonishing statistic that if you were a Jewish member of the UK Labour party you were seven times more likely to be expelled for antisemitism than a non-Jew.

Dustbin of dirty tricks
It’s high time we kick this ghastly trope, this despicable manoeuvre equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism into the dustbin of dirty tricks. Jewish people have suffered persecution for their faith over the centuries. It does their memory a huge disservice — not least because now it is quite clear that genocide is the highest stage of Zionism.

For the record: I have Jewish friends who I invite to read and critique my articles before publication. They are not self-hating Jews, they are not antisemitic, and nor am I. We stand shoulder to shoulder with Jewish people worldwide who are appalled at what is being done in the name of Judaism.

Francesca Albanese said something else memorable that evening: “History is also made of watershed moments, when things change. Let’s make this one of them.”

Eugene Doyle is a community organiser based in Wellington, publisher of Solidarity and a contributor to Asia Pacific Report. His first demonstration was at the age of 12 against the Vietnam war. This article was first published by Scoop on 14 February 2024.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/02/17/eugene-doyle-silencing-francesca-albanese-not-in-our-name-gaza-reflections/