Suspect in Brown University Shooting Found Dead, Police Confirm

December 20, 2025

Brown University shooting suspect found dead — Police on scene at the Extra Space Storage facility where the Brown University shooting suspect was found dead

When Silence Falls on Campus: Two Cities, Two Universities, One Night That Changed Everything

There are nights in New England when the air feels like a held breath—cold, thin, and full of small sounds. On one of those nights, a rifle’s report broke the hush at Brown University, a place famed for its red-brick quads and late-night study sessions. Within hours, the reverberations crossed state lines, touching a quiet Boston neighborhood where a physicist would be found dead. By morning, a man believed responsible lay dead in a storage unit in New Hampshire. The small compass of communities—students, neighbors, professors—was forever altered.

A brief timeline that felt impossibly long

On Saturday, amid finals and the nervous scratching of pencils, an armed intruder entered a Brown campus building and opened fire. Two students were killed: Ella Cook, known on campus as a spirited leader of Brown’s Republican association, and Mukhammad Aziz Umurzokov, a young man from Uzbekistan who dreamed of becoming a neurosurgeon.

Authorities later said they believed that the same man was responsible for the killing of a physicist at his Boston home on the same night. Police in Providence named the suspect as 48-year-old Claudio Neves-Valente, a Portuguese national who had been studying at Brown. He was found dead inside a New Hampshire storage unit along with two firearms. Providence Police Chief Oscar Perez would tell reporters plainly: “He took his own life tonight.”

Providence Mayor Brett Smiley, speaking with the weary relief of civic leaders who have just watched a manhunt end, said, “Tonight, our Providence neighbors can finally breathe a little bit easier.” Yet that breath carries grief, questions, and a residue of fear.

Faces in the crowd: grief, memory, and a city that gathers

Outside Brown’s Engineering Research Center, a memorial has grown into a small forest of candles and notes. A worn sweatshirt, a stack of sticky notes, and clusters of tulips mark a place where a life was ended far too soon.

“Ella was relentless, in the best way possible,” said Maya Ortiz, a classmate and friend. “She’d argue until she was blue in the face about policy and then hand you a tea when you’d had enough.”

“Aziz wanted to be a surgeon. He used to bring study guides to the library and sit near the big windows, always smiling,” said Ksenia, who remembered him from anatomy lab. “He spoke about his family back in Tashkent like a map he’d never stop tracing.”

These intimate recollections are a kind of first aid for a community trying to stitch itself back together. They are also a reminder that headlines collapse complex lives into a few clipped lines—students, a physicist, a suspect—when what remains is nuanced and human.

From Providence to Boston to New Hampshire: a thread of investigation

For days, investigators pressed forward with little to show. They released images of a person of interest and circulated sightings. They held press conferences with a cadence that, to many, felt like watching a searchlight sweep the night. Officials detained a man briefly; then they released him. Frustration built into the narrative as families waited for answers.

Then the case “blew open,” as one federal law enforcement official later put it, when law enforcement traced the suspect to a storage unit. The presence of two firearms in that unit was confirmed; there was no immediate indication of a motive.

We live now in an era where the logistics of a manhunt can span three states in little more than a day. Cellphone metadata, surveillance footage, witness interviews and old-fashioned legwork are braided together in a race to tell victims’ families what happened—and why.

What the cameras didn’t catch

In the wake of the shootings, attention turned to campus security. Brown University revealed that none of its roughly 1,200 security cameras were linked directly to the city police surveillance system—an omission that prompted public scrutiny and questions from figures as high-profile as former President Donald Trump.

“We must always ask if we did all we could to prevent this,” said Professor Elena Ruiz, who teaches criminal justice at a nearby university. “But cameras are a tool, not a cure. They can help after the fact; they do not stop every violent act.”

Students have asked for more than cameras. They want mental health services that are accessible, threat-assessment teams that are trusted, and an open line of communication between university security and local police—all without feeling surveilled in their daily lives.

On the ground: what people are saying

“I keep replaying the fire alarm,” said Ibrahim Khan, a junior who was taking an exam in an adjacent building. “That sound will be with me for a long time. It’s so ordinary, and then it became a signal of something awful.”

At a vigil, a neighbor from Dorchester described the Boston scene in quieter tones. “We all know somebody who works at MIT,” she said. “To see the calm of that neighborhood broken—it’s like someone made permanent a bruise on the city.”

A country wrestling with a pattern

This year alone there have been more than 300 mass shootings in the United States, according to the Gun Violence Archive, which counts any incident in which four or more people are shot. That statistic lands like a ledger: a tally of moments where ordinary life became extraordinary in the worst possible way.

Attempts to change the laws around firearms remain politically fraught. Congressional gridlock is familiar terrain; state-level shifts have been patchy and uneven. Meanwhile, universities and cities attempt ad hoc policies—some expand mental health services, others rethink access control—while grappling with what feels like a national malaise.

What we are left to ask

How do we mourn and protect at the same time? How do safe spaces stay safe without becoming cages? And what should the balance be between privacy, liberty, and public security when a rifle can dissolve a lecture hall’s sanctity?

These questions are not new. But each new shooting makes them more urgent, more personal. They force us to look at our institutions—their strengths and their blind spots—and to ask whether being safer requires not only better cameras and patrols, but deeper investments in community care, in mental health, and in a politics that can design common-sense solutions without stripping away civil rights.

Closing in, but not closed

Claudio Neves-Valente’s death brings an end to an immediate manhunt. It does not end the ache left in dorm rooms, lecture halls, and dining commons. It does not answer “why.” For that, families and communities will wait, and investigators will piece together a fuller account.

For now, Brown students speak of chapel candles, of late-night study groups that split into hushed conversations, of an unmistakable sense of vulnerability. “We keep trying to go back to classes,” a sophomore said, “because that’s what they would have wanted. But going back isn’t putting things back together. It’s the start of rebuilding.”

As readers, as neighbors, as citizens of places both near and far from Providence and Boston, we are invited to hold two truths: that grief is acutely local, and that its roots reach into national debates about policy, prevention, and public life. How will we answer that invitation? What can we do, in our own corners of the world, to stop these reckonings from repeating?

Australia launches nationwide gun buyback program after Bondi attack

hanad

December 20, 2025

Australia announces gun buyback scheme after Bondi attack — Anthony Albanese vowed to toughen Australia's gun laws

Morning at Bondi: Salt, Silence and the Slow Turning of a Community

The dawn came soft and pale over Bondi Beach, a wash of pink and grey that made the waves look like a blanket folded and smoothed at the shore. But there was nothing ordinary about the morning. Hundreds of people — surfers, swimmers, grandparents, teenagers in wetsuits — paddled out into the cool Pacific and formed a trembling circle.

They bobbed in the swell and held hands, or touched boards, or cupped candles in plastic tubs. They sang a few verses, shouted into the wind, or simply stayed quiet. The ocean took the sound and threw it back in a slow, endless echo. For a place famous for beach parties and postcard sun, Bondi felt like the center of a country trying to catch its breath.

“They tried to take our joy,” said Jason Carr, a 53-year-old security consultant and lifelong Bondi swimmer, his voice thick with salt and grief. “So today I’m going back out there. We’re restoring the light, one wave at a time.”

What Happened — And What Comes Next

Just a week earlier, the beach had been the scene of a horror that has stunned Australia and the world. During a Jewish festival on the sand, two men opened fire. Fifteen people were killed, and the nation has been left reeling. Authorities say the main suspect, 50-year-old Sajid Akram, was killed in a shootout with police; his 24-year-old son Naveed has been charged with 15 counts of murder, terrorism-related offences and other serious crimes.

Investigators are piecing together a grim picture: reports that the pair may have been inspired by the Islamic State group, and inquiries into whether they met extremists abroad during a recent trip to the Philippines. In the days following the attack, police arrested seven men on a tip they could be planning a violent act at Bondi — a reminder that fear and vigilance moved quickly through the city’s veins.

“We are in a new, painful chapter,” said Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon, reflecting the strain law enforcement faces balancing urgent action and careful investigation. “We will examine every lead. We will protect our communities.” He has also said there was no established link between the seven arrests and the Bondi suspects — a nuance that underlines how quickly rumours can feed fear in a city already on edge.

Community Heroes, Public Grief

Among the victims were neighbors who tried to stop the attackers. Boris and Sofia Gurman, a married couple known in Bondi as warm hosts and tireless volunteers, were laid to rest at a Jewish funeral home this week. Rabbi Yehoram Ulman praised them as “heroes” who faced their final moments with “courage, selflessness and love.”

“Their loss felt personal to everyone who ever had tea at their kitchen table,” said Miriam Katz, who moved to Bondi two decades ago and sat among the mourners. “They are the people who held our street together — now there’s a hole that will not stitch up easy.”

A Nation Rethinks Guns: The Biggest Buyback Since 1996

In Canberra, the political response was swift and consequential. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced a sweeping national buyback scheme designed to “get guns off our streets” — an intent to buy back surplus, newly banned and illegal firearms. The government frames the move as the largest firearms buyback since the one following the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, when about 650,000 guns were surrendered and nationwide restrictions were tightened under the National Firearms Agreement.

“There is no reason someone living in the suburbs of Sydney needed this many guns,” Mr Albanese told reporters, underscoring the shock many Australians felt on learning a suburban resident could lawfully hold multiple high-powered rifles.

The proposed buyback has practical elements — payment to surrendering owners, expanded licensing checks and tighter controls on high-capacity weapons — but it is also a moral argument about safety, community and what freedom looks like in practice. Will the promise of fewer guns on the streets make Australians feel safer? And at what cost to people who see firearms as part of rural life or personal liberty?

Details, Numbers and the Hard Work Ahead

15 people killed in the Bondi attack; suspects are a father and son, with the father killed and the son charged.
1996 Port Arthur massacre claimed 35 lives — the watershed that led to the last major national buyback and sweeping gun reforms.
About 650,000 firearms were surrendered in the 1996-1997 buyback (approximate figure cited in historical accounts).

These are not just statistics; they are the outlines of decisions that will shape Australian life. The 1996 program is widely credited with cutting mass-shooting rates in the country, and even conservative public opinion shifted rapidly in the wake of that earlier tragedy. But the politics of a buyback today will encounter a different landscape — online radicalisation, globalised extremist networks, and a more fragmented media environment.

Bondi’s Rituals: Candles, Circles and the Work of Mourning

Prime Minister Albanese called for a national day of reflection and asked Australians to light candles at 6.47pm local time — the minute marking one week since the attack unfolded. Around Bondi, candles flickered in windows and small memorials grew by the lifeguard tower: a pair of sunglasses, a worn surf leash, floral bouquets, handwritten notes.

“It’s how we cope,” said Carole Schlessinger, a 58-year-old chief executive who joined the ocean circle. “To be together is such an important way of trying to deal with what’s going on. I’m numb. I’m angry. But I’m also proud of how people are reaching across divides.”

There is local color in these rituals: the lifeguards who keep watch in orange and yellow, the cafés that have clipped wreaths to their doors, the Hebrew prayers whispered alongside Australian psalms. Bondi has always been a place of collision — tourists and locals, surf culture and cosmopolitan tastes. Now it has become a place where global tensions play out on a shoreline of sand and salt.

Questions for a Global Moment

When a beach in Sydney becomes a flashpoint of violence and policy, it forces a broader reckoning. How do communities stay open when terror strikes public, joyful spaces? How do nations balance rights with safety in an era where ideology and weaponry are cheapened and amplified by global networks?

These are not questions with easy answers, but they are questions worth asking. Across the world, societies are watching. Gun policy in Australia has often been held up as an example of decisive reform; now the nation’s lawmakers are preparing to test that legacy again.

And you, reader — what does safety mean where you live? How far should a society go to prevent the next Bondi? When do preventative policies protect the many at the expense of the few, and when do they erode freedoms that feel fundamental? These conversations are rarely tidy, but the surf circle at Bondi suggests a start: communities will choose to gather, to remember, and to press for change together.

Closing: A Shoreline of Resolve

Back on the sand, the circle broke at last. People paddled toward shore and hugged, dripping and salt-stung, and someone began to clap — a hesitant staccato of hands that grew into a rhythm. It was not triumph so much as a promise: to grieve, to act, to keep showing up.

“We will remember them,” said a young lifeguard who had been scraping names into the sand and then letting the tide gently erase them again. “But we will also do something about this. That is the only thing that feels right.”

The tide comes in and out. So does grief. And in the spaces between, democracy and community make their choices. Bondi — and Australia — are choosing now how to answer.

U.S. Justice Department Unveils New Trove of Jeffrey Epstein Documents

hanad

December 20, 2025

US Justice Department releases new cache of Epstein files — This image of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell was among the files released by the US Justice Department

The Day the Papers Came Down: Inside the Release of 300,000 Pages on Epstein

It began as a digital avalanche. On a bland government webpage, links to more than 300,000 pages of federal records suddenly appeared — a mammoth trove of interviews, memos, photographs and redaction marks telling a story about wealth, secrecy and harm that has refused to fade from public view since 2019.

For survivors, journalists and conspiracy-minded corners of the internet alike, the files were both a promise and a provocation. Who else would be named? What had been hidden? What still needed protection? The Justice Department’s terse note on the page — that “all reasonable efforts have been made” to redact victims’ personal information, but that some details could be revealed inadvertently — read like a warning and an invitation at once.

Paper Trails and Poolside Pictures

Among the mass of documents were images that quickly became focal points online: photos of a former US president pictured alongside people who moved in Jeffrey Epstein’s orbit. One such picture shows a man identified as Bill Clinton in a swimming pool next to Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s associate and later-convicted co-defendant. The faces and shadows of power, frozen in grainy JPEGs, have a way of feeling personal even when they’re years old.

“Images like that are destabilizing,” said Hannah Reed, a legal scholar who studies institutional responses to sexual violence. “They don’t prove criminality on their own, but they unravel the tidy narratives elites prefer — that reputation and access are the same as innocence.”

Why Now: Law, Politics and Pressure

The release was hardly accidental. Lawmakers from both parties pushed a new law that forced the Justice Department’s hand, and the administration, after initial reluctance, complied. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told Congress the department had posted hundreds of thousands of pages and was still reviewing additional material; he expected another fortnight of work to complete the sweep.

Politics threaded through the whole moment. President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly denied wrongdoing or knowledge of Epstein’s crimes, had initially urged his party to resist the law. Critics accused his administration of shielding allies and obscuring the circumstances around Epstein’s 2019 death in a Manhattan jail — a death the city medical examiner ruled a suicide.

“Transparency shouldn’t be partisan,” said Maria Alvarez, co-director of Victim Voices, an advocacy group. “But too often, disclosure feels like a political bargaining chip. For victims, every delay is another setback in the long march toward recognition.”

What’s in the Files — And What Isn’t

Parsing 300,000 pages is a job for teams of lawyers, reporters and researchers. Early tallies provided some ground: more than 1,200 names were identified as victims or relatives in the documents; other materials were withheld because they would jeopardize active investigations or endanger privacy. The law that compelled the release expressly allowed the Justice Department to keep information about victims and ongoing probes secret.

Still, even fragments can have outsized effects. Congressional releases last month — separate from the Justice Department dump — included emails from Epstein’s estate. One note, blunt and chilling, had Epstein writing that a now-prominent political figure “knew about the girls,” an assertion that sparked immediate headlines and denunciations, and which the president dismissed as a partisan “hoax.”

Key facts from the releases

More than 300,000 pages of Justice Department records were posted online.
Over 1,200 people were identified in the documents as victims or family members.
Photographs surfaced showing public figures associated with Epstein’s circle; some photos were redacted.
Additional documents remain under review and could be released within weeks, according to the DOJ.
JPMorgan paid roughly $290 million in 2023 to settle claims related to Epstein’s activities.

Voices in the Wake

On the streets outside the federal courthouse in Manhattan, reactions were raw and varied. A tourist from Buenos Aires, holding a coffee and phone, shook her head. “It’s about the arrogance of the rich,” she said. “They think they can do anything. Seeing the paperwork makes it real.”

A former prosecutor in Florida, speaking on background, emphasized the limits of what documents reveal. “Records are a starting point. They’re pieces of evidence, but they don’t replace courtroom proof,” she said. “Still, for historians and victims, these pages are breadcrumbs and lifelines.”

Victim advocates were more blunt. “We’ve been waiting for institutional recognition for a decade,” said Jamal Green, who works with survivors of trafficking. “This release is overdue. But full accountability means prosecutions, corporate responsibility, and a cultural reckoning about who we protect.”

Big Names, Big Questions

The files revive uncomfortable questions about the institutions that surrounded Epstein: banks for whom he remained a client after convictions, universities where he corresponded with influential figures, and members of the international elite who visited properties on private islands and sprawling estates.

Some outcomes are already public. British royal Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor lost military titles after scrutiny of his ties to Epstein. JPMorgan in 2023 settled claims with some victims for about $290 million after allegations that the bank looked the other way. And Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted in 2021 for her role in recruiting and grooming victims.

“This isn’t just a story about one man,” said Dr. Chitra Nair, a sociologist focused on power and impunity. “It’s a narrative about how wealth creates networks that shield wrongdoing and how difficult it is for victims to be heard when power is arrayed against them.”

Global Echoes

Around the world, the Epstein saga has become shorthand for questions about the wealthy and accountability. In Latin America and Europe, public debates about elite immunity and the role of banks and enablers mirror those in the United States. In emerging economies, activists often point to similar patterns: influential figures leveraging resources to evade scrutiny.

“People see this as a universal problem,” said Ana Pereira, a human-rights campaigner in Lisbon. “When elites operate transnationally, you need transnational tools of accountability. Otherwise, justice is fragmented.”

What Comes Next — And What Should We Expect?

More pages may come. Investigations may continue. Lawsuits will likely multiply. But there are limits to what document dumps can achieve. Privacy risks linger for victims, and political uses of the files are inevitable — they’ll be brandished in hearings, campaign ads and social feeds.

So what should citizens demand? Greater protections for victims, transparent redaction processes, and independent oversight of the way sensitive files are released. And perhaps most importantly: a long, patient focus on institutional change — bank regulations, better reporting mechanisms, and robust support systems for survivors.

“Transparency without context can become voyeurism,” said Reed. “We need careful journalism, responsible governance and real support for those harmed. Otherwise, pages will pile up and nothing will change.”

A Final Thought

As you scroll through the documents, or read select headlines plucked from them, consider this: how do we, as a society, balance the hunger for disclosure with the imperative to protect those who’ve already been harmed? How do we ensure that revelations translate into justice, not just spectacle?

These are questions worth asking, not only for the United States but for every nation wrestling with wealth, power and accountability. The 300,000 pages are more than paper. They are a mirror. The real work begins after we stop staring at our reflections.

U.S. halts green card lottery after recent deadly shootings

hanad

December 19, 2025

US suspends green card lottery after shootings — Homeland security chief Kristi Noem said the DV1 visa programme would be paused

When Campuses Stumble: A Quiet New England Town, Two Ivy Schools, and a Country Asking Why

The shock didn’t arrive as a headline so much as a slow, hollowing realization. On a mild autumn morning in Providence, the familiar brick and elms of Brown University—places of coffee cups, late-night study sessions and arguments that string into dawn—were suddenly a crime scene. Two students were dead, nine wounded. Two days later, an eminent researcher was found shot inside his home across the Charles River in Brookline. The man accused of both attacks, police say, was a 48-year-old Portuguese national named Claudio Neves Valente. He was found dead by suicide in a storage unit in New Hampshire, two firearms beside him.

For anyone with ties to these campuses, the questions piled up faster than answers. How did this happen here, in neighborhoods where faculty walk their dogs at dusk and graduate students bike to the lab? Why did a pattern of gun violence, a national scourge, reach into institutions meant to foster safe debate and learning?

What Officials Say

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem publicly linked the accused to the U.S. diversity visa lottery—commonly called the green card lottery— saying he “entered the United States through the diversity lottery immigrant visa program (DV1) in 2017 and was granted a green card.” Secretary Noem called Neves Valente a “heinous individual” who “should never have been allowed in our country,” and announced, at President Trump’s direction, an immediate pause to the DV1 program.

The DV lottery, managed by the State Department, makes up to 55,000 permanent-resident visas available annually to nationals of countries with lower historic rates of immigration to the U.S. Ireland, and by extension citizens of Portugal through reciprocal eligibility lines in some years, are typically among those eligible. The program’s defenders call it a long-standing route for diversity and opportunity; its critics, long skeptical, now cite tragedies such as this as proof of the need to re-evaluate.

At a press briefing, U.S. Attorney Leah Foley provided some of the case’s timeline: Neves Valente received an F1 student visa to study at Brown around the turn of the century, returned to Portugal for additional study and later obtained permanent resident status. She also noted that he and MIT professor Nuno Loureiro shared an academic program in Portugal years earlier. But Foley stopped short of offering a motive. “We still do not have a clear explanation,” she said, and authorities cautioned against speculation as the investigation continued.

Names, Faces, and Lives Cut Short

Among the dead were two Brown students whose lives were just beginning to fan outward in different directions. Ella Cook, a campus leader who served as vice president of the university’s Republican association, was remembered by classmates as “quietly fierce.” Mukhammad Aziz Umurzokov, originally from Uzbekistan, was described by friends as one of those students who always carried a stethoscope: he hoped to become a neurosurgeon.

At MIT, the slain professor, Nuno Loureiro, was a respected mind in his field—an academic both colleagues and graduate students said combined warmth with exacting rigor. “He pushed you hard but he was always the first to bring coffee for the team,” a former student recalled. In Brookline, neighbors left flowers and little notes on a stoop where lights still burned late into the night.

How the Manhunt Unfolded

The search for Neves Valente stretched from Providence to Boston to New Hampshire, producing days of anxiety and false leads. At one point investigators detained another individual who was later released. Police say the case was ultimately cracked by a combination of surveillance footage and a trail of financial data.

“The groundwork started in the city of Providence,” Providence Police Chief Oscar Perez told reporters. He credited careful detective work: license plates switched on a rental car, a phone that was hard to trace, video clips pieced together. “It wasn’t flashy. It was methodical.”

Campus Security and the Limits of Surveillance

As the dust of the investigation settled, attention turned to institutional preparedness. Brown disclosed that none of its roughly 1,200 campus security cameras were linked into the city’s police surveillance system—a detail that raised alarms and prompted angry questions from public figures, including former President Trump. Students and parents asked bluntly: could this have been prevented, or at least stopped sooner?

Security experts say the answer isn’t simple. “Cameras are only as effective as the systems and people behind them,” said Jenna Morales, a campus safety consultant who has worked with universities across the U.S. “You need real-time monitoring, clear protocols about who can tap footage and how you coordinate with municipalities. Even then, mass acts of violence are chaotic and fast; they often unfold before an effective response can be mounted.”

Numbers That Don’t Sit Well

The shootings arrived against a grim national backdrop. According to the Gun Violence Archive, which defines a mass shooting as an incident where four or more people are shot, there have already been hundreds of mass shootings in the United States this year. Attempts to pass tighter gun restrictions remain mired in deep political divide, leaving communities to grapple with the aftermath over and over again.

“We’re seeing a policy malaise in the face of a public-health crisis,” said Dr. Aisha Karim, a sociologist who studies gun violence. “Universities are microcosms of society. When lawmakers and institutions fail to act on upstream causes—access to firearms, mental-health infrastructure, community cohesion—the consequences arrive here.”

Voices from the Ground

On the Brown campus, a candlelight vigil gathered hundreds. “We came here not just to mourn, but to hold each other up,” said Malik Thompson, an undergraduate studying literature, his voice cracking. “I keep thinking about a guy I knew from anatomy lab—Mukhammad—who would ask everyone their favorite food to break the ice. He was always making plans.”

A Brookline neighbor, Helen Santos, described Loureiro as “the kind of professor you saw on the green playing with his kids on the weekends.” She sighed. “It feels like our small, quiet place was breached.”

Beyond the Headlines: What Comes Next?

There are procedural answers—security audits, improved data-sharing between campuses and police, pauses to specific immigration programs—but there are also deeper questions pulsing under the surface. How do we balance the openness that universities require with the security they need? How should a nation reconcile a long tradition of offering refuge and opportunity with the legitimate desire to prevent violence?

University president Christina Paxson, grappling with the grief in her community, said simply: “Nothing can fully bring closure to the lives that have been shattered by last weekend’s gun violence. Now, however, our community has the opportunity to move forward and begin a path of repair, recovery and healing.”

What would healing mean here, and across America? It will mean policy conversations that communities can participate in, investments in mental-health care and campus safety that don’t rely solely on cameras, and the slow, steady work of restoring trust. It will also mean remembering the people whose paths were cut short: a student with a stethoscope, a professor with coffee for his team, a campus where people argued fiercely but also laughed together.

As you read this, ask yourself: what would safety look like where you live or work, and what are we willing to change to get there? The answers will define the campuses—and the country—we build next.

Harrison Ford to Receive Lifetime Achievement Award Honoring His Acting Career

hanad

December 19, 2025

Harrison Ford to receive lifetime acting award — Harrison Ford to receive the the SAG-AFTRA Life Achievement Award

A Quiet Carpenter Who Became an Epic Hero: Why Harrison Ford Is Getting a Lifetime Tribute

There are few faces in modern cinema that can stop a room the way Harrison Ford’s does. Weathered, human, stubbornly real — his presence on screen feels less like performance and more like an old friend turning up when you need him most. This spring, the actors’ union SAG-AFTRA will hand Ford its Life Achievement Award at the newly rebranded Actor Awards, a moment that feels both inevitable and oddly tender.

“Harrison Ford is a singular presence in American life; an actor whose iconic characters have shaped world culture,” SAG-AFTRA President Sean Astin said in announcing the honor. “His career has been endlessly exciting, always returning to his love of acting. We are honoured to celebrate a legend whose impact on our craft is indelible.”

From Carpentry to Cosmos: The Backstory

Ford’s path to legend didn’t come wrapped in special-effects smoke. Born in Chicago and raised in the American Midwest, he learned a kind of practical craft long before he ever learned camera angles. He worked as a carpenter — literally building the world he would later inhabit on screen — and landed early, modest roles until a string of collaborations with young directors catapulted him into public life.

George Lucas cast him as Bob Falfa in American Graffiti (1973), then a few years later, Ford roared into the cultural bloodstream as Han Solo in Star Wars (1977). Indiana Jones arrived with that fedora and whip in 1981, and the rest is cinematic scaffolding you can still climb: Blade Runner (1982), where he played Rick Deckard, and decades later reprised the role in Blade Runner 2049, bridging two filmic eras.

“To be acknowledged by my fellow actors means a great deal to me,” Ford said upon learning of the award. “I’ve spent most of my life on film sets, working alongside incredible actors and crews, and I’ve always felt grateful to be part of this community.”

Why This Award Matters

The SAG-AFTRA Life Achievement Award is not a trophy for box office or Instagram counts. It’s given to performers who “embody the finest ideals of the acting profession” — a phrase that suggests stewardship, longevity, and an ethical grounding in craft and collaboration. The union itself represents more than 160,000 performers, an organization that survived and reshaped itself through strikes, negotiations, and shifting media landscapes since the 2012 merger of SAG and AFTRA.

Previous recipients read like a canon: Robert De Niro, Jane Fonda, Morgan Freeman, Elizabeth Taylor. Their work spans eras, styles, and politics. Ford, now in his eighties, sits comfortably among them because his career is one of rare continuity: blockbuster thrills, intimate dramas, television turns in 1923 and Shrinking, and a consistent presence as someone who could sell both long shots and human close-ups.

Iconography and Intimacy

There’s a paradox to Ford’s appeal. He’s become an icon — a hat and a jacket that millions can recognize — but his acting is stubbornly, often disarmingly, intimate. He rarely plays the flawless hero. Han Solo is cocky and selfish; Indiana Jones is brave and terrified; Deckard is exhausted and morally murky. That moral complexity is why a line, a look, a careful pause from Ford can feel like a moral pivot for the audience.

Voices from the Streets and Sets

Ask a barista on the Sunset Strip, a film historian at a small college, or a veteran prop-master in a Burbank lot, and you’ll get different takes that add up to the same thing: respect. “He’s the kind of actor who makes you forget you’re watching acting,” said Maria Alvarez, a barista who’s worked near studios for years. “People in town don’t talk about his awards so much as the way he makes a scene feel true.”

Dr. Kevin Tran, a film studies lecturer, pointed out the cultural scale: “Ford’s characters have become shorthand for certain American myths — the reluctant hero, the grizzled winner — but he’s also managed to peel back those myths and reveal the person underneath. That’s rare in actors who have been so commercially successful.”

On social media and at conventions, fans speak in terms more sentimental than analytical. “When I was a kid, Han Solo was my rebellion,” wrote one attendee of a recent Comic-Con panel. “As an adult, Indy is how I want to be — flawed but trying.” Those notes of affection multiply into something like cultural weather: Ford’s work is familiar as sunlight and old as a family story.

What It Says About Hollywood Now

Honoring Ford at the Actor Awards — streamed live on Netflix on March 1 — also tells a story about the industry’s present priorities. After years of labor disputes, streaming upheaval, and debates about representation, Hollywood is looking to anchor itself in legacies that cross platforms. Ford’s career cuts across studio movies, indie-spirited auteurs, and television serial storytelling. He is, in many ways, the bridge figure for an industry in flux.

Consider these facts: Ford’s biggest franchises grossed billions at the box office worldwide; Blade Runner’s cultural afterlife has influenced everything from architecture to AI ethics debates; his television roles have introduced him to new, younger audiences at a time when streaming platforms prize recognizable faces to build subscriber trust. These are not mere trivia points. They are a map of how star power adapts to technology, not just resists it.

Context and Cultural Threads

Ford’s recognition is not only about nostalgia. It’s also a moment to reflect on how stories endure. In an era where tentpole films and serialized TV coexist with short-form content and AI-generated art, the longevity of a human performer — someone who can change a scene with a look — becomes a kind of counterargument to disposability.

What are we choosing to remember? What sorts of performances do we save for our grandchildren’s playlists? When a union representing hundreds of thousands of actors gives its lifetime award, it is choosing a set of values: craftsmanship, collaboration, and a commitment to the art of inhabiting other lives. Those choices ripple outward.

Closing: A Moment to Watch

On March 1, when the Actor Awards stream, viewers will see a man whose face carries decades of stories accept a recognition shaped by his peers. Whether you grew up with Raiders of the Lost Ark on VHS, discovered Blade Runner in a film class, or caught Ford’s quieter recent turns on television, the award asks a simple question: what do we value in storytelling?

As you watch, think about the actors who taught you how to feel, or taught you to ask a better question about a character’s motive. Who, among the performers living now, will still be shaping global imagination decades hence? Ford’s career offers a model — not immaculate, but resilient — of how a life in movies can both mirror and shape the human stories we keep returning to.

Will the next generation pick up the hat and the whip, or will they invent new artifacts entirely? The answer will tell us as much about the future of storytelling as any award ever could.

Zelensky Arrives in Warsaw for Talks with Poland’s President

hanad

December 19, 2025

Zelensky in Warsaw for meeting with Polish president — The visit is Volodymyr Zelensky's first official visit to Poland since Karol Nawrocki, left, was sworn in as Polish president

In Warsaw’s winter light: a meeting that smells of history and urgency

It was the kind of crisp morning in Warsaw that makes the city seem older than the sum of its stones — the Vistula moving slow and grey, tram bells punctuating the cold, and the smell of strong coffee drifting from street kiosks. Into that scene stepped Volodymyr Zelensky, a leader who for nearly three years has been cast in the acute drama of his nation’s survival. He had come to see Poland’s newly sworn president, Karol Nawrocki, not as a ceremonial courtesy but as part of a fragile, complicated conversation about war, memory, and Europe’s future.

“We are not asking for charity,” a close aide to Zelensky told me as the delegation arrived. “We are asking for a partner capable of holding the line with us.” The line, in this case, is literal and figurative — the frontlines in Ukraine, and the fragile frontiers of European unity in a year that has already tested alliances.

What’s on the table: security, money, and the ghosts of the past

The talks in Warsaw were scheduled to cover three heavy themes: European security, the latest push to end the war in Ukraine, and an undeniably sensitive chapter of shared history. The timing was no accident. Zelensky had flown from Brussels, where he spent a consequential day lobbying EU leaders to convert frozen Russian assets into direct support for Ukraine’s budget and defense over the next two years.

Those appeals yielded a different result than he sought. Rather than tapping frozen assets, EU leaders agreed in the early hours to raise a €90 billion loan facility intended to back Kyiv at a time when its ledger looks perilous: officials estimate Ukraine faces a budget gap of around €38 billion next year.

“Loans are important,” said a European diplomat familiar with the deliberations, “but they are not the same as grants or assets that could be freed immediately. Loans add pressure on a state already under siege.”

Numbers that matter

Poland’s reported material and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine exceeds €25 billion, according to Polish government figures released in October.
Polish military support is valued at over €4 billion since the full-scale invasion began in February 2022.
Civil society and grassroots contributions from Poland are estimated at an additional €5 billion.
There are more than 1.5 million Ukrainians living in Poland today, roughly 1 million of them classified as war refugees.

Those are impressive numbers, but they do not erase the strains. A recent poll showed many Polish citizens worried about the cost and social impact of refugee support — half of respondents thought benefit payments to Ukrainians were too high, while 58% agreed that Ukrainians who work and pay taxes should access healthcare and child benefits. These ambivalences are the social backdrop to the state-to-state choreography unfolding in Warsaw.

Between diplomacy and domestic politics: Nawrocki’s guarded welcome

Karol Nawrocki, a conservative historian known for his nationalist leanings and controversial appetite for revisiting painful episodes of the 20th century, received Zelensky with a posture that mixed support for Ukraine’s independence and a firm insistence on redressing old wounds. “Poland will not abandon Ukraine,” Nawrocki told a Polish outlet in recent days, “but friendship must be built on mutual respect and historical clarity.”

“Mutual respect” here has real-world implications — demands for the exhumation and identification of Poles killed in the Volhynia massacres of 1943–45, a dark episode in which historians estimate up to 100,000 ethnic Poles were murdered in areas that are now western Ukraine. Nawrocki has said these “historical issues” will be discussed in his talks with Zelensky. For many Poles, these are not abstractions but family traces: names on memorial plaques, vanished villages, graves without markers.

“My grandmother told me stories about Volhynia until the day she died,” said Anna Kowalczyk, a retired teacher from Lublin who came to the parliament precinct to watch the motorcade. “We want truth. But we also want peace. Can you have both?”

Scenes from the city: refugees, cafes, and quiet resilience

On a café terrace not far from the Sejm, the lower house of parliament, a Ukrainian couple sat with a sleeping toddler. He works in construction; she teaches English online. They arrived in 2022 and speak with the calm pragmatism of people who have learned the language of persistence. “Poland opened its doors when it mattered,” the man said. “But life goes on — bills, school, the future. We need long-term plans, not just emergency aid.”

A street vendor near the parliament, a man named Piotr who has sold sausages there for thirty years, shrugged when I asked how he viewed the political theater. “We helped, we still help,” he said. “But every shopkeeper worries about tomorrow. You can be proud and frightened at the same time.”

What the meeting could mean for Europe

At its most optimistic, the Warsaw talks could stitch tighter the seams of an uneasy alliance: Poland’s material and societal support, combined with EU and NATO backing, shapes the resistance Ukraine mounts against a far larger adversary. Yet cracks are visible. Nawrocki opposes a fast-track route to EU membership for Ukraine and has voiced reservations about future NATO accession — positions that diverge from the Polish government’s formal stance and complicate Kyiv’s long-range strategic planning.

“This meeting is a reminder that solidarity is not a single, steady current,” said Dr. Natalia Szymanska, a central European historian at the University of Warsaw. “It is a stream that can change direction depending on memory politics, domestic pressures, and geopolitical fatigue. How Poland and Ukraine navigate historical reckoning while coordinating defense policy will be watched across the continent.”

Questions to sit with

Can countries reconcile painful historical memories without letting those memories undermine urgent strategic partnerships?
Are loans sufficient to sustain a country at war, or does Europe need bolder fiscal imagination?
How will host societies integrate refugees in ways that balance fairness with social cohesion?

Those questions are not meant to be rhetorical. They are, quite literally, matters of policy and human survival — and they will shape the contours of Europe for years to come.

Where things go from here

Later in the afternoon, Zelensky was expected to meet the speakers of both houses of the Polish parliament and perhaps Prime Minister Donald Tusk. Whether he will address parliament from the rostrum is uncertain. What is certain is that when leaders talk about budgets, borders, and histories, people are listening in kitchens and classrooms and on long commutes.

As the sun slid toward early evening and the city lights blinked on, a small group of young Ukrainians gathered near the embassy, holding candles and hand-painted signs. “For our brothers,” one read in Polish and Ukrainian. “For our future,” another declared. The scene was quiet but eloquent: an intimate reminder that behind the numbers and high-stakes diplomacy are ordinary lives — lives that, for now, depend on decisions made in rooms like the ones Zelensky and Nawrocki entered in Warsaw.

So ask yourself, reader: what kind of Europe do you want to live in — one that looks inward, guarding its histories like closed chests, or one that finds ways to reconcile memory with solidarity and builds institutions capable of sustaining both justice and peace? The answers are being negotiated now, in cold halls and warm kitchens alike.

Bondi Good Samaritan Receives €1.4m Raised by Supporters

hanad

December 19, 2025

'Bondi Hero' handed €1.4m collected from fundraising

Bondi’s Quiet Hero: How One Man’s Instincts Turned a Celebration into a Lifeline

On a warm evening when Bondi Beach should have been all candlelight and laughter, a handful of seconds split the world for dozens of families. Voices rose in terror. Sand turned to chaos. And in the middle of it all, a tobacco shop owner with two children tucked under his jacket became, for a beat, the difference between life and death.

His name is Ahmed al Ahmed. He did not expect to be a hero. He didn’t train for headlines or interviews. He left his hometown in Idlib, Syria, nearly two decades ago for work and a future in Australia. He runs a small shop. He’s a father. And he is now, unmistakably, a symbol — of courage, of the migrant contribution to civic life, and of a community’s fierce need to heal.

A moment that changed everything

It was Hanukkah, a festival of lights. Families had gathered near the famous curve of sand and surf that is Bondi, candles flickering, children bundled against a chill wind. Then gunfire ripped through the air. Two men, police later said, opened fire on the crowd. By the time it was over, 15 people were dead and dozens more wounded — a statistic that has stunned a nation where such mass violence is painfully uncommon.

Ahmed’s response was instinctive. Videos and eyewitness accounts show him ducking behind parked cars, then charging. He tackled one of the assailants from behind, wrenching the weapon free and bringing the man to the sand. Another gunman then apparently fired, striking Mr Ahmed. He was rushed to St George Hospital, where he underwent surgery and remained in recovery as communities and leaders visited to pay their respects.

“When I saved the people I did it from the heart,” Ahmed later told visitors at his bedside. “It was a nice day, everyone enjoying… they deserve to enjoy.” He raised his uninjured fist and added, almost defiantly, “This country is the best country in the world… God protect Australia. Aussie, Aussie, Aussie.”

The oversized cheque and a global outpouring

Within days, tens of thousands of strangers had decided that a man they had never met deserved more than applause. A GoFundMe campaign set up by social media organiser Zachery Dereniowski quickly became an avalanche of donations. More than 43,000 people from around the world contributed, sending messages of thanks, solidarity, grief and hope.

The fundraiser passed A$2.5 million — enough to stop anyone from pretending the moment was forgettable. Billionaire investor Bill Ackman donated A$99,999 and shared the campaign with his followers, fueling a wave of international support.

At Ahmed’s hospital bed, Mr Dereniowski presented an oversized cheque in a quiet scene that played out like a modern fable: a stranger’s bravery, the internet’s pocketbook, community generosity. “I deserve it?” Ahmed asked, incredulous. “Every penny,” Mr Dereniowski replied.

Quick facts

Casualties: 15 people killed; dozens wounded.
Donors: Over 43,000 contributors to the GoFundMe campaign.
Funds raised: More than A$2.5 million (≈€1.4 million).
Notable donor: Bill Ackman donated A$99,999 and shared the page online.
Suspected attackers: A 50-year-old man, shot dead by police, and his 24-year-old son, critically wounded.

Voices from Bondi

In the days after the attack, the beach — an icon of sun and surf, avocado toast and lifeguards orange flags flying — pulsed with a different kind of energy: grief, bewilderment and a fierce tenderness.

“I’ve worked in Bondi for 12 years. You think you know every sound of this place — the gulls, the waves, kids’ laughter,” said Maria Santos, who runs a small café a block from the sand. “To hear shots here… it felt unreal. But then I saw Ahmed’s face on the news and I thought, there’s our neighbour. That man is us.”

A local lifeguard, who asked not to be named, described how the rescue felt like choreography gone wrong: “We switched from sunscreen to triage. Lifeboat crews became stretcher teams. People were calling for their parents. It was a moment when everyone did what they could.”

What this moment says about Australia

Australia’s modern identity includes the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, an event that reshaped gun policy and national conscience. In the years since, sweeping firearms reforms dramatically reduced the frequency of mass shootings — a rarity that has made this latest attack all the more shocking.

And yet the response to Ahmed’s courage reveals another thread in the nation’s fabric: community solidarity. Thousands donated not because they expected to solve structural problems overnight but because they wanted to give a tangible thank-you to the man who ran toward danger to protect strangers.

“It isn’t just charity,” said a social policy researcher who studies migration and civic participation. “It’s a signal that Australians value bravery and civic action — and that they see migrants, like Ahmed, as integral to the social glue.”

Questions we can’t ignore

How do societies balance the shock of rare violence with long-term prevention? What measures can protect public spaces without smothering the very freedoms they aim to preserve? And perhaps most poignantly: how do we honor acts of courage without reducing people to symbols?

Ahmed himself sidesteps heroics. When asked what he would say to donors, he offered a simple appeal: “To stand with each other, all human beings. And forget everything bad … and keep going to save life.”

That plea is worth sitting with. So much of our public life is now mediated through screens and algorithms. Yet a hospital room in Sydney became the scene of something starkly human — someone wounded, someone thanking strangers, a community pooling resources.

Where do we go from here?

Small acts accumulate. Vigils will be held; legal and security reviews will follow; politicians will make statements and promises. But the more intimate work — the healing, the remembering — will happen in cafés, in schools, on the sand where children will one day run again.

Would you know what to do if terror erupted where you were? How would your community respond? These are uncomfortable questions, but the story of what happened at Bondi — and the man who leapt into danger — offers an answer of sorts: when ordinary people act, they can rewrite fate, if only for a few seconds that mean everything.

Ahmed has not yet said how he will use the money. For now, he remains in hospital, recovering and surrounded by messages and visitors. Across the city, a new chorus has begun: outrage at what happened; gratitude toward those who intervened; and the quiet work of stitching a wounded community back together.

Bondi will return to its rhythm of surf and sun. But it will not forget the night the lights went out, nor the man who chose to charge toward them. In that choice lives a stubborn reminder: human courage is often unspectacular, born of love and habit and the simple desire to protect a stranger’s child. It is, in the end, what binds us.

EU Backs €90bn Ukraine Loan, Rules Out Using Russian Assets

hanad

December 19, 2025

EU agrees €90bn Ukraine loan without using Russian assets — European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen (R) speaks as European Council President Antonio Costa (C) and Denmark's Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen listen

In the sleeping heart of Europe, a deal that was almost different was made

It was past midnight in Brussels when the final papers were signed — or, more precisely, when tired leaders nodded and staffers began to type the language that will be parsed for months to come.

For more than a day, negotiators at the European Council huddled, argued, and ran legal scenarios late into the night. The outcome: a €90 billion loan package to keep Ukraine running through 2026–27. What did not happen is almost as important as what did. The summit stopped short of the bold, politically fraught option of underwriting long-term Ukrainian reconstruction using tens of billions in immobilized Russian assets sitting in European accounts.

Two pathways to the same urgent problem

When the summit opened, the math was stark and simple: the EU estimates Ukraine will need roughly €135 billion over the next two years to keep its government, social services and defense functioning. A cash crunch could begin as early as April. Leaders were wrestling with two paths to avert that cliff.

Option one: raise debt on international markets, a joint EU loan backed by untapped funds from the EU’s seven‑year budget framework.
Option two: repurpose frozen Russian assets — estimated by EU officials at up to €210 billion — as a kind of capital pool to underwrite Ukraine’s long-term financing.

Both choices carried political and legal landmines. Calling on frozen Russian securities would have answered a visceral, moral argument: Russia’s aggression has generated the damage — why should Russian capital remain untouched while Ukraine pays the bill? But it would also create a legal minefield: could a future arbitration award in favour of Russia be enforced against EU member states or the entities that hold those assets, such as Euroclear in Belgium?

Belgium, Euroclear and the legal question

Belgium, which hosts Euroclear — the securities depository that holds the bulk of these frozen Russian bonds and equities — insisted on iron‑clad guarantees. “We cannot expose our institutions to a catastrophic legal liability,” an EU official confided. “Belgium wanted a guarantee that if some improbable legal reversal happened, they would not be left holding the bag.”

Technical teams worked through the night to draft indemnities and contingency clauses. They dreamed up insurance schemes, legal shields and backstops. Yet the essential problem remained: you cannot entirely rule out a determined legal challenge from Moscow, and Brussels was not willing to take open‑ended fiscal exposure for a single member state.

Compromise: money now, complicated questions later

In the end the leaders pivoted back to the route they could agree on immediately — a €90 billion loan raised by joint EU borrowing backed by unused resources in the multiannual financial framework. That required concessions. A handful of countries that have been more conciliatory toward Moscow — including Hungary, Slovakia and, late in the day, the Czech Republic — agreed not to block the measure on the condition they would not be party to the joint debt mechanism itself.

“It’s messy, but it’s real money when real money is needed,” said an EU finance minister after the meeting. “We preserved the assets in frozen state and we agreed a mechanism where Ukraine is supported without putting a single EU treasury at unnecessary legal risk.”

Crucially, leaders also insisted the freeze remains firm. The phrasing is tight: the assets will stay immobilized, and if, in a post‑war settlement, Russia is required to pay reparations and does not, then Ukraine could use those funds as a means to repay the EU loan. That conditionality was deliberately engineered — a political signal that the assets are not being simply returned to Russia’s use.

Voices from Kyiv, Brussels and a café in the EU quarter

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky thanked EU leaders in a post on X (formerly Twitter), writing that the €90 billion decision “strengthens our resilience” and that keeping Russian assets immobilized was “important”. He had lobbied hard for a direct use of those assets, arguing it was “moral, fair and legal” to use Russian resources to rebuild what Russian bombs destroyed.

An aid worker from Kharkiv reached via video call said the deal was both relief and frustration. “This buys us time to keep hospitals open and salaries paid,” she said, voice low. “But we still feel the weight of the question: who pays for rebuilding lives, streets, schools? That’s not a technical question — it’s about justice.”

Outside the summit, a barista at a small café by the Berlaymont building folded his arms and shrugged. “I don’t want other countries’ money to be used as if it were free. If Russia destroyed it, they should be the ones to pay—but I’m glad we didn’t get into a legal mess,” he said.

German pressure, American timing

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz had been one of the leading voices pushing to make the asset option happen. “A decisive move would have sent a strong signal to Moscow,” he told colleagues, according to people in the room. Even so, Merz described the final agreement as “a clear signal” to President Vladimir Putin that Europe will not withdraw support from Kyiv.

Complicating the calculus were parallel diplomatic efforts in Washington. U.S. President Donald Trump has been pushing for a quick breakthrough and has publicly urged Kyiv to move quickly toward an agreement he hopes will end the war. Trump’s comments — “I hope Ukraine moves quickly” — were alternatingly perceived as pressure to hurry and as a reminder of how geopolitics is shaping the timetable for both diplomacy and finance.

Legal precedents, moral stakes, and the economics of war

We are watching an unsettled new frontier: what happens to frozen sovereign assets when a state is accused of waging war? There are practical considerations — how will future investors view the safety of assets held in the EU? There are legal questions — can an occupier or aggressor ever win back frozen assets through arbitration? And there are moral dilemmas — is using frozen assets to rebuild the damage the right, and if so, how to do it without undermining the rule of law?

Experts warned that a reckless use of frozen assets could set a dangerous precedent. “Seizure or repurposing of sovereign assets needs an exceptionally robust legal foundation,” said a professor of international law in Brussels. “Otherwise you open the door to tit‑for‑tat seizures down the line.”

What does this mean for the coming months?

The immediate effect is practical: Kyiv receives a lifeline that pushes the worst of the fiscal cliff further out. The longer story is still being written. Will the EU convert this loan into grants later? Will the immobilized assets become the core of a future reparations mechanism? And how will the United States’ own negotiations with Ukraine — now intensifying in Washington and Miami — intersect with Europe’s approach?

As leaders dispersed — some to planes, others to domestic politics — you could feel a rare mix of unity and unease. The deal shows a Europe capable of moving when pressed; it also underscores the hard trade‑offs that modern geopolitics forces democracies to make.

So, what do you think? Is this a cautious, responsible compromise — or a missed moral opportunity to make Russia directly pay for destruction? The answer depends on whether you value legal certainty over moral symmetry, and whether you believe that keeping the rules intact now strengthens the possibility of justice later.

For a people living under bombardment, the technicalities are less abstract: salaries paid, food on shelves, lights in hospitals. For the 27 member states, the calculus is about precedent, unity and the long shadow that the war will cast over European institutions for years to come.

Either way, Brussels will remain a stage where legal theory, moral outrage and raw political power meet — usually after midnight.

12 3...184 Page 1 of 184