In the new print issue of Esses, a quarterly print magazine covering motorsports and the culture around it, Duncan Fyfe writes about the most bizarre Formula One video game ever made. Centered around Gerhard Berger, a former racing driver from Austria who competed in F1 from 1984 to 1997, Gerhard Berger’s Formula 1 Quiz is a quirky video game from 1993 that raises more questions than it asks. Fyfe digs into the mystery, investigating the quiz’s grammatically awkward questions and the game’s developer, Austria Soft, whose existence is questionable. (Esses subscription may be required—consider becoming a member.)

THE REAL QUIZ, it soon becomes clear, is not a test of one’s F1 knowledge, but figuring out what the game expects to hear. This only becomes more difficult, and even sinister. Question nine: FROM WHAT COUNTRY IS JEAN ALESI REALLY? The answer is not France, where Alesi was born and grew up, and under whose flag Alesi competed for over a decade. To progress in the quiz, the game forces one to submit that Alesi was born to Italian parents, and thus is “really” from Italy.

The game’s questions all have correct answers that cannot be submitted, and yet they are less difficult to answer than these ones: Who made this game? Why? And what was Gerhard Berger thinking?

Joël Kyaviro is a professional cyclist from the Democratic Republic of the Congo who has risen above government instability, war, violence, poverty, and Ebola, overcoming every “tack in his path” to become the first rider from the DRC to win a Union Cycliste International race. What’s more, he’s used his success to get the next generation of kids interested in the sport by founding Tumaini Academy, “a cycling program aimed at transcending war by getting Goméen kids on bikes and in school.”

He rolled into the finish zone alone, a full ten seconds ahead, the cushion so big that he was able to victoriously throw his arms in the air. He coasted the last few meters no hands, grinning ear to ear, as his old club president, Charles Guy Makongo, leapt up and down on the sidelines.

Makongo’s sneakers got soaked in the puddles, but he did not care. In the entire 126-year run of the Union Cycliste International, no Congolese rider had ever won a UCI race. On Instagram that night, a picture of Joël ran with a banner header reading, “A historic moment in Congolese cycling.” Posting on an African cycling forum, Makongo proclaimed, “Today’s victory is much more than a sporting result.” It showed, he said, “that talent can flourish even in the most challenging environments.”

A total of 4,793 people remain missing, including 853 foreign nationals, according to authorities.

The post Nepal-China border floods kill 919, leave nearly 4,800 missing appeared first on BOL News.

The Gripen fighter jet came in low over the medieval rooftops of Visby, stood on its tail and climbed vertically out of sight. Hundreds of hands went up holding phones. Every late June, all Swedish party leaders gather for Almedalen Week in this town on Gotland, the Baltic Sea’s most strategic island. This year, the military display drew the only unanimous reaction of the week.

Sweden holds a general election on September 13th, but defence has barely featured in the campaign. All parties take the Russia threat seriously, and all want to face it as one. The election is being fought instead over welfare, migration, crime, climate and the economy—and on many of those, the government parties are losing.

Ulf Kristersson’s centre-right Moderates have held the prime minister’s office for four years, after an agreement in 2022 secured them the support of the far-right Sweden Democrats in exchange for a hard line on migration and crime. The so-called Tidö agreement—named after the castle where it was negotiated—broke a taboo: for the first time the Sweden Democrats had formal influence over a government, though it stopped short of joining the cabinet. Now the four parties supporting Kristersson’s government are trailing the opposition in the polls. The Liberal Party, currently in government, has suffered the most from the cooperation with the Sweden Democrats and is now polling below the 4% threshold to get into parliament.

Many analysts therefore expect Magdalena Andersson of the Social Democratic Party to return as prime minister. Her party governed Sweden for most of the 20th century and again between 2014 and 2022, when the country abandoned centuries of military non-alignment to join NATO. What would an Andersson government mean for Sweden’s foreign policy and its role in the EU? Based on several conversations with key people in the opposition parties, in Almedalen and elsewhere: not a dramatic change. But look closer and the differences start to show.

The maths

The political course will partly depend on the majority Andersson can assemble. A deal with the formerly communist Left Party, which is still formally committed to leaving NATO, would create a different government from one built with the market-liberal Centre Party and perhaps the Christian Democrats—and getting all them into the same majority would require political magic. The Green Party is likely to be part of the coalition either way, although senior figures say the case for being in government is still hotly debated internally.

The most likely outcome is that Andersson will lead a red-green coalition, assembled over months of difficult negotiations. The Greens and the Left would push for a less restrictive migration policy than the Social Democrats are ready to accept, having themselves tightened asylum rules when they were in power. For its part, the Centre Party would press for deregulation and other market liberal reforms Swedish business wants—against the trade unions as well as the Greens and the Left.

If Andersson struggles to hold a red-green government together, a grand coalition between the Social Democrats and the Moderates also cannot be ruled out. But that would require a serious external crisis and a significant change within the Moderates.

Names circulating for foreign ministers or “sherpa” for the prime minister are Paula Carvalho, Morgan Johansson, Ylva Johansson, Ann Linde, Kerstin Lundgren, and Oscar Stenström. Peter Hultqvist is likely to return as defence minister.

What will not change

On many key issues, a government led by the Social Democrats would continue Sweden’s current course, regardless of coalition partners. Support for Ukraine is strong across the Riksdag. NATO membership will not be reopened: the security situation and strong public support for NATO membership discourage the Left Party from pushing its formal position, and the Social Democrats would refuse if it tried.

Sweden rejected the euro in a referendum in 2003 and will not revisit it in the coming four years unless there is a deep economic crisis, although the Centre Party may extract a report on the topic. The country’s dependence on exports keeps every party in favour of open trade. Sweden will also remain one of the EU’s most frugal members in negotiations of the next Multiannual Financial Framework.

‘Magda will be Magda’

Elsewhere, the change will be real. A centre-left government will focus more on relations with the global south and gradually increase aid spending. The Social Democrats have a long tradition of cooperating with countries such as South Africa and Brazil and have deepened those ties while in opposition. If Lula da Silva is re-elected, Andersson will be well-placed to strengthen EU-Brazil engagement. The Social Democrats also want closer relations with African states and OECD countries such as Canada, where Andersson has built a strong rapport with Mark Carney.

This agenda includes climate politics—all red-green parties want greater ambition at home and in Europe. For the Social Democrats, green industrial policy is the way to keep workers on side in the green transition, a view shared by trade unions and many industrial leaders. The Green Party might get the development and environment portfolios back, but they would have to fight with the Centre Party for climate and energy.

Middle East policy would also shift. In 2014, a Social Democratic-led government recognised Palestine, the first EU member state in Western Europe to do so, to loud criticism by the centre-right. An Andersson-led government is more likely to criticise Israel’s actions while also condemning terrorism. The complication is Ebba Busch: her Christian Democrats are strongly pro-Israel, and if they join the coalition, Middle East policy will become more complicated.

Andersson would champion a strong UN and revive the “feminist foreign policy” of Margot Wallström and Ann Linde. But in an EU dominated by the European People’s Party, she would find few allies for traditional social democratic causes. The Nordic and Baltic countries are her natural bloc. Beyond them, only a re-elected Pedro Sánchez in Spain—a big if—would give the Party of European Socialists a large member state. However, leading Social Democrats are keen to avoid comparisons with Sánchez or Denmark’s Mette Fredriksen. “Magda will be Magda”, says one. On other topics, such as support to Ukraine, Sweden will continue to be part of coalitions of the willing.

A rapid increase of defence spending would continue with either Kristersson or Andersson as prime minister, with the Social Democrats also advocating additional resources for civil defence.

The consensus on security policy runs deep. In the all-party Defence Commission’s report this summer, the Social Democrats fully agreed with the government’s assessment of the security situation. A rapid increase in defence spending would continue with either Kristersson or Andersson as prime minister, with the Social Democrats also advocating additional resources for civil defence.

However, a centre-left coalition could face internal conflicts over the envisaged rotating presence of French nuclear-capable aircraft in Sweden or cooperation with Turkey on intelligence and anti-terrorism, both of which the Left Party would resist. Rather than fight it, the coalition might just pay them off. “Magda will buy them out,” says a prominent Social Democrat, comparing to how Fredriksen made a deal with the left-ish Enhedslisten in Denmark, giving them social reforms in exchange for staying out of her cabinet.

And while the Social Democrats accept the role of nuclear weapons in NATO strategy, they press harder than the Moderates on global non-proliferation.

Biting their tongue on Trump

Although senior Social Democrats are highly critical of US president Donald Trump in private, and Andersson expressed solidarity with Denmark when he threatened Greenland, the party will not pick a public fight. It agreed with the conclusions of the Defence Commission, such as the importance of the American security partnership, and even in background talks Social Democrats decline to discuss alternatives to NATO command structures for large military operations. “We presume that SACEUR is responsible”, says one senior figure, referring to NATO’s commander in Europe, who has always been an American. Sweden’s reliance on American aircraft, interceptors and satellites in the sensitive Baltic Sea area leaves Andersson far less room than Sánchez has in Madrid.

If Kristersson survives

None of this is settled. ECFR’s New Politics research shows how volatile European electorates have become, and a late swing could leave Kristersson in office—this time with Sweden Democrats in ministerial posts, as the Moderates have promised.

That would hand the far-right party real power this time. Given its size, it will likely take influential portfolios, such as representing Sweden in EU negotiations on migration policy and home affairs, and perhaps finance and competitiveness too, like the Finns Party in Finland.

Even more importantly, the Sweden Democrats would fully participate in foreign and security policy decisions. In Sweden, ministers make government decisions collectively and are briefed on sensitive intelligence matters at cabinet meetings. While the party has been vocal in criticising Vladimir Putin since its links to Moscow were exposed, the opposition still sees them as a security risk.

***

A new government will bring more of a tilt than a dramatic change in Sweden’s foreign and European policy. This will be important in the decisive year of 2029, when a new president of the European Commission will be chosen—and in a political landscape that might include far-right leadership in France, Italy and Poland. The Gripen will keep flying over Visby whoever wins in September. What changes is Sweden’s place in an EPP-dominated Europe.

Source

Authorities made shocking findings in an Airbnb apartment in Kypseli district of Athens on Monday:the “frozen” body of an infant inside a container stuck in a suitcase. Three minors aged 9, 12 and 15 with the latter to be pregnant. At least one of the minors, a boy, and the pregnant girl were found positive […]

The post Horror in Athens: Infant stabbed to death, body kept in the freezer appeared first on Keep Talking Greece.

Running with Rachel Entrekin must be pretty wild—she encourages competitors and stops mid-race to pet dogs. But her personality is even bigger off the course. Tough and empathetic, her running success has come after 13 years of hard work and a battle to transform an addictive, perfectionist past into a healthier relationship with food, rest, and herself. And even as success came and ultramarathons were won, she watched opportunities go to her male competitors. Gloria Liu honors the incredible achievement of “smashing records while battling impostor syndrome and the fragility of your own self-worth in a world enamored with men, and their accomplishments.”

The key word, however, is average. As any female runner who’s ever passed a dude working himself into a froth to stay ahead of her on the trail knows, women beat men on an individual basis daily. And as athletes like Entrekin and Dauwalter have shown, they do so, occasionally and spectacularly, even at the elite level. We have an understandable reflex to point to categorical advantages that might explain why women can do this, Malcolm says: “It’s inherently feel good, the David and Goliath aspect of a woman winning outright.”

But in searching for the advantages we hope all women have, we may be missing a simpler truth: Most men are faster than most women, but some women still beat most men. The point is not that we have any advantage. The point is that they have almost every advantage—and we still win.

Weak moist currents and a westerly system are expected to bring showers, thunderstorms and strong winds through Sept. 6.

The post PMD forecasts rain across northern Pakistan appeared first on BOL News.

Berlin; late August: when politics normally stirs into life after the holiday lull. But this year, the lull never came.

German chancellor Friedrich Merz is beset by approval levels plumbing the depths of the depleted Rhine and Danube. His governing conservative CDU party spent the summer at war with itself over pension reform (not helped by a botched cabinet reshuffle). Some of the chancellor’s staunchest supporters are even openly wondering whether he is still up to the job. To get out of the hole they are in, Merz and his ministers now want to project a sense of Aufbruchstimmung—a feeling of renewal and restart.

Whether they succeed will determine Europe’s future.

Germany’s economy has endured six years of paltry growth. Its traditionally strong industries are screaming for protection against China, US tariffs and energy price shocks (and against their own past decisions). Strong end-of-the-republic vibes suffuse dark political commentary, “mainstream” parties oscillate between panic and despair, and resignation has set in among voters. What until recently seemed little more than a media talking point on an “Andy Burnham moment”—meaning the possibility of Hendrik Wüst, North Rhine-Westphalia’s minister-president, succeeding Merz as chancellor this autumn—could yet become reality.

For decades, Germany was Europe’s byword for political stability and predictability. Today, it is hard to overstate how little is now unthinkable in German politics. All bets are off. Decision-makers elsewhere in Europe should get ready for the possibility of a new kind of Germany: no longer boring, no longer stable—and no longer rich.

Why the Angst is now real

Germany is days away from elections in three eastern states which could shake the government in Berlin to its foundations. First up is Saxony-Anhalt, where on September 6th the far-right populist Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) could rewrite German post-war history and turn the decades-long mantra of “never again” into “actually, maybe”. Polling suggests even an absolute majority for the party is within reach. The AfD, the CDU and the Left could be the only parties to clear the 5% threshold for the state parliament. Two weeks after that possible momentous result, the states of Berlin and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern will also elect new parliaments.

While the situation for the political centre looks a little less dire in the latter two places, complicated three-party coalitions are the likely outcome in both. This will have a compounding effect on the stability of the federal government. The CDU leadership under Merz remains adamant that the “firewall” must hold, ruling out any coalition or cooperation with the AfD. Yet this position is increasingly being questioned by local politicians and by conservative thinkers within and around the party. Many in the CDU are frustrated by what they see as the strategic price of the firewall. With their preferred coalition partner, the liberal Free Democrats, now struggling to clear the 5% threshold almost anywhere, ruling out the AfD leaves the CDU ever-more dependent on centre-left coalitions. In critics’ view, this deprives the party of options and leaves it hostage to the remaining potential coalition partners.

An AfD minister-president would be a brutal demonstration of the political establishment’s inability to provide a convincing vision for the country

An AfD minister-president in one of Germany’s states would be more than a striking political development. It would be a brutal demonstration of the political establishment’s inability to provide a convincing vision for the country’s economic, political and social future. In recent years, German leaders have made more reform announcements than actual reforms. The previous government tried to adapt to the Zeitenwende without imposing any hardship on Germans—and failed. Now, the Merz government seems equally unable to muster the political strength for major reform.

Instead, it has too often looked to the past for answers: back to the combustion engine, back to looser labour rights, back to family values. The only policy area where the government now seems readier to change course is on China, where it has said it will push through a more active European position on protecting markets and punishing China’s predatory economic behaviour. In a revealing commentary, however, Merz himself announced this was enabled, not by his decisive political leadership, but by the altered posture of the German car industry.

This vacuum in dealing with the implications of the changing global environment leaves huge room for the political fringes, especially from the far-right. The AfD’s offer is revisionist—drastically curb immigration and asylum, reverse key elements of the energy transition, challenge European integration, end the euro and pursue a distinctly nationalist approach to foreign policy. All this is deeply unsettling to the political establishment, but resonates with a growing constituency of voters united by restrictive stances on migration and cultural issues.  

The strength of the AfD is a symptom, not a cause. It did not rise to prominence overnight and has been part of Germany’s political landscape now for more than a decade. But the party is now within striking distance of actual political power at a time when the country’s political and economic foundations are starting to crumble. The war in Ukraine, volatility in America and conflict over the Strait of Hormuz are stretching the limits of German leaders’ attention as well as the country’s fiscal space. Germany’s long-term trade relationship with China is now a liability and an epic drought has shrivelled what little hope remained for Germany’s economic recovery. Berlin is not only forced to reckon with the failures and missed opportunities of the past decade on everything, everywhere, all at once; but the politicians seem unprepared either to put up a real fight for survival or even adjust to this new reality in a form of managed decline.

No time for Schadenfreude

Germany is hardly the first European country to experience a radical reshaping of its party system and the rise of the far-right; Italy and France have been through similar upheavals. And Germany itself, amid deep economic problems, was called “the sick man of Europe” back in 1999, only to recover and to become the continent’s exporting powerhouse. Why should the rest of Europe now worry so much about Germany’s malaise?

The answer is: because a German crisis is a European crisis. Germany is too economically and politically important to fail. Its economic weight, role at the heart of the EU and position as Europe’s most populous member state mean this would be more than just another episode of national political turbulence. A Germany that is oozing 15,000 industrial jobs each month, becoming even more dependent on technology imports and increasingly incapable of internal reform risks dragging Europe towards fragmentation and exploitation.

Unless political leaders come up with something new, a German pall will blot all major items on the EU’s agenda: the next multiannual financial framework; the future of the bloc’s industrial policy; European efforts to rearm and build resilience; a more autonomous capacity on emerging technologies and the economic muscle to create international leverage behind a new global trading agenda. That is not to mention the serious consequences of a German disengagement for Europe’s continued support for Ukraine.

“German leadership is not optional”, Sweden’s defence minister said at a public event this month, attended by one of the authors. German political elites seem to disagree. Theirs is the third largest economy in the world, sitting at the core of the world’s largest single market, boasting leading international companies and building up one of the largest defence budgets anywhere. Yet they appear to lack any sense of their own domestic, let alone global, agency. The three upcoming state elections may give them their last chance and some momentum to turn things around. But if Berlin becomes entirely enfeebled under the ensuing political fallout, the rest of Europe is likely to suffer in the same way.

Source

The US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) decision to allow 20 ZYN nicotine pouch products to carry a specific reduced-risk claim has created a striking contrast with the direction of European Union policy, as Brussels prepares new product rules and proposes EU-wide taxation of nicotine pouches.

The United States Food and Drug Administration has authorised 20 ZYN nicotine pouch products to be marketed with a statement informing adult smokers that completely replacing cigarettes with the pouches can reduce the risk of several serious diseases.

The decision, issued on 30 June 2026, represents the first time that the FDA has granted Modified Risk Tobacco Product orders to nicotine pouches.

The authorised wording states:

“Using ZYN instead of cigarettes puts you at a lower risk of mouth cancer, heart disease, lung cancer, stroke, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis.”

The orders cover ten varieties of ZYN, each sold in nicotine strengths of 3mg and 6mg. The products include Chill, Cinnamon, Citrus, Coffee, Cool Mint, Menthol, Peppermint, Smooth, Spearmint and Wintergreen.

The manufacturer, Swedish Match USA, is owned by Philip Morris International. The products had already received FDA authorisation to remain on the US market in January 2025, but the new decision goes considerably further by permitting a specific comparative health claim.

The FDA said its decision followed an extensive scientific review and was intended to give adult tobacco users accurate information about differences in risk between products.

“FDA’s review of modified risk products is intended to ensure that adult users have clear, science-based information about the relative harms of tobacco products, so they can make informed choices,” said Bret Koplow, acting director of the FDA’s Centre for Tobacco Products.

The ruling does not mean that ZYN is harmless, nor does it approve the products as medicines or smoking-cessation treatments. Nicotine is addictive, and the FDA continues to advise people who do not currently use tobacco or nicotine not to begin.

The significance of the decision lies instead in the regulator’s formal recognition that nicotine products can present very different levels of risk.

Switching, rather than dual use

A crucial qualification is contained in the phrase “instead of cigarettes”. The authorised claim applies to smokers who replace cigarettes with ZYN. It does not promise the same reduction in risk to consumers who use nicotine pouches while continuing to smoke.

Cigarettes burn tobacco, creating smoke containing toxic substances responsible for most smoking-related cancers, cardiovascular disease and respiratory illness. Nicotine pouches deliver nicotine through the lining of the mouth without burning tobacco or producing smoke.

This difference is central to the principle of tobacco harm reduction: smokers who cannot or do not wish to stop using nicotine may nevertheless reduce their health risks by moving away from combustible products.

The FDA’s decision therefore recognises an important distinction that is frequently blurred in political debate. A product can be addictive and unsuitable for non-users while still being substantially less dangerous than smoking.

UK-based public health commentator Clive Bates, a former director of Action on Smoking and Health, has argued that nicotine pouches could deliver benefits comparable to those associated with the use of Swedish snus in Scandinavia.

“Tobacco-free nicotine pouches with a consumer acceptable nicotine content have the potential to benefit public health in the same way that is documented for Swedish snus in Scandinavia, that is, by serving as a low-risk alternative to cigarettes”, Bates said.

“The European Commission should pay close attention to FDA’s exhaustive process and extensive reasoning. It’s unusual to have anything good to say about the Federal government these days, but this is an important exception, where the right answer has been reached for the right reasons”, he added.

Bates has also argued that poorly designed regulation, including excessively low nicotine limits, could make pouches less effective as substitutes for cigarettes and unintentionally protect the market for combustible tobacco.

Why the FDA decision matters for Europe

The American ruling comes at a particularly important moment for the European Union.

The European Commission is simultaneously advancing a formal proposal to overhaul tobacco taxation (TED) and preparing a broader revision of the EU legislation governing tobacco and nicotine products, their presentation, sale, advertising and promotion.

Nicotine pouches are not comprehensively regulated at EU level under the current Tobacco Products Directive (TPD). Because they contain nicotine but no tobacco, they fall outside many of the harmonised provisions that apply to cigarettes, roll-your-own tobacco, heated tobacco and electronic cigarettes. The result is a fragmented European market.

Some member states permit nicotine pouches subject to national restrictions. Others have introduced nicotine limits, packaging and warning requirements or advertising controls, while France has pursued a prohibition.

Different national rules create uncertainty for consumers and manufacturers and complicate enforcement across the EU’s internal market.

The Commission’s April 2026 evaluation of the European tobacco-control framework identified the rapid growth of nicotine pouches, electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products as one of the main challenges that existing EU legislation is no longer adequately equipped to address.

The evaluation concluded that EU rules had contributed to falling smoking rates and smoking-related deaths but were failing to keep pace with changes in products, marketing practices and consumer behaviour.

The EC is particularly concerned about the use of novel nicotine products among children, adolescents and young adults. However, the FDA decision introduces an additional issue that EU policymakers will now find difficult to avoid: whether new EU rules should recognise differences in risk between combustible cigarettes and smoke-free nicotine products.

Two contrasting regulatory philosophies

The emerging difference between Washington and Brussels is not simply that one jurisdiction is permissive and the other restrictive.

The FDA subjects nicotine products to an exceptionally demanding premarket review. Products must receive authorisation before they can legally be marketed, and separate evidence is required before a manufacturer may make a modified-risk claim.

The FDA can impose marketing conditions, require post-market surveillance and withdraw an order if later evidence shows that the product no longer benefits public health.

Its approach nevertheless accepts that consumers should be told when credible evidence shows that completely switching from one product to another reduces disease risk.

The Commission’s current approach places greater emphasis on reducing the overall attractiveness and consumption of tobacco-related and nicotine products. Its taxation proposal explicitly presents nicotine pouches as products that can prolong addiction or act as substitutes for cigarettes, especially among young people.

These positions are not necessarily irreconcilable.

The EU could impose age controls, marketing restrictions, ingredient standards and proportionate nicotine limits while still recognising that adult smokers may benefit from switching completely away from cigarettes.

It could also prohibit unsubstantiated commercial claims while creating an evidence-based process through which manufacturers could apply for permission to communicate verified differences in risk.

The alternative would be to impose increasingly similar taxation, warnings and advertising rules on products with significantly different health consequences.

A test for evidence-based policymaking

The EC ran a public consultation on revisions to both the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) and the Tobacco Advertising Directive (TAD) from 22 May to 14 August this year. The consultation, is intended to inform a revision of the legislative framework planned before the end of 2026.

It creates an opportunity to consider evidence that was not available when the current Tobacco Products Directive was adopted in 2014.

Nicotine pouches were then a marginal product. They now represent a rapidly expanding category, and national governments are adopting increasingly divergent responses.

The FDA decision does not compel Europe to follow the US model. The EU has different legal structures, public-health priorities and attitudes towards commercial nicotine.

It does, however, establish a significant regulatory precedent.

One of the world’s most influential public-health authorities has concluded that there is sufficient evidence to tell adult smokers that completely switching to specified nicotine pouches reduces their risk of mouth cancer, heart disease, lung cancer, stroke, emphysema and chronic bronchitis.

That finding sits uneasily with any policy or public communication suggesting that cigarettes and smoke-free nicotine products are essentially equivalent.

The issue is particularly relevant to the Commission’s tax proposal. Taxation affects consumer behaviour partly by changing the relative prices of products. If pouches are taxed so heavily that the economic advantage over cigarettes is substantially reduced, smokers may have less incentive to switch.

Conversely, setting taxes too low could increase affordability and use among young people who have never smoked.

The task for EU legislators is therefore not simply to choose between regulation and deregulation. It is to develop a framework that calibrates restrictions, taxation and consumer information according to evidence about risk, behaviour and population-level effects.

Europe’s choice

While Washington is recognising that adults deserve accurate information about lower-risk alternatives, Brussels is looking for ways to restrict, tax or ban them.

Meanwhile, the EU is failing to control illegal disposable vapes, banned flavours, excessive nicotine levels and unauthorised devices moving through black-market channels. Regulated products are demonised, while illegal and unregulated products keep reaching consumers, including young people.

The forthcoming EU debate will test whether Brussels can reconcile its tobacco-free objective with the potential role of lower-risk alternatives.

The FDA decision makes three points that are likely to shape that discussion.

First, nicotine pouches are not harmless and should not be promoted to children or people who do not use nicotine.

Second, the absence of combustion means that their risks can differ substantially from those associated with cigarettes.

Third, the greatest potential benefit arises when smokers switch completely rather than using pouches alongside continued smoking.

The Commission is right to address gaps in the existing legislation and fragmentation between member states. Common product standards, youth protections and enforcement rules may be necessary for the Single Market to function properly.

But regulation that fails to acknowledge relative risk could also have unintended consequences.

Clive Bates and other harm-reduction advocates argue that treating all nicotine products as though they are similarly dangerous can preserve smoking by discouraging consumers from moving to safer alternatives. European health campaigners respond that the growth of commercially marketed nicotine products could create a new generation of dependent users.

The revised Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) will need to address both concerns.

As the EC completes its consultation and develops its legislative proposal, the American decision gives European policymakers a concrete case study rather than a theoretical argument.

The question is no longer whether a regulator could authorise a carefully limited reduced-risk claim for a nicotine pouch. The FDA has now done so.

The question for Europe is whether its forthcoming legislation will allow comparable scientific evidence to influence regulation, taxation and communication — or whether nicotine pouches will be treated principally as another product to be restricted, irrespective of their potential role in moving smokers away from cigarettes.

The blue economy is no longer limited to traditional activities such as fishing, shipping, or offshore energy. A new generation of startups is applying climate technology, AI, robotics, biotechnology, and advanced water treatment to make the use of oceans and water resources cleaner, safer, and more efficient.

EU-Startups’ 2026 coverage shows Europe’s blue economy attracting capital across a widening range of technologies and business models. Among the larger disclosed rounds were €17 million for cargo.one alongside its acquisition of ocean-freight platform Cargofive or €10 million for marine-biofuel developer Kvasir Technologies.

These deals form part of a broader funding landscape in which startups are tackling an increasingly diverse set of challenges linked to how Europe uses, manages and protects its water and marine resources.

From restoring coastal ecosystems and generating tidal power to removing hazardous pollutants, improving wastewater treatment, supporting aquaculture, automating maritime operations, and digitalising shipping workflows. The 10 startups featured below, founded between 2020 and 2026, show how innovation is reshaping the sector, in alphabetical order.

Apolownia is a Paris-based ClimateTech startup committed to making the world more environmentally responsible. It develops end-to-end coastal ecosystem restoration and blue carbon projects, including mangroves and seagrass, which help absorb carbon, reduce coastal flooding and erosion, improve water quality, and provide vital habitats for fish and other marine life.

Its projects use satellite imagery, drones, field data and AI to monitor ecosystem recovery, estimate carbon capture and verify environmental results in a clear, data-driven way. Founded in 2024, it has raised €1 million in funding.

Headquartered in Heidelberg, Blue Activity develops sustainable water treatment solutions for industrial cooling systems. Its technology replaces toxic biocides with natural microorganisms and uses biopolymer-based additives, supported by digital monitoring. This reduces chemical use, water and energy consumption, maintenance needs, and operating costs.

They promote cleaner industrial water use and reduce harmful substances discharged into the environment, contributing to healthier water resources and more sustainable industry. Founded in 2021, Blue Activity secured €8.5 million in funding.

Launched in 2024 in Oxford, Caudal Energy takes a bio-inspired approach to tidal power, using ocean currents to generate predictable renewable electricity. Its system replaces conventional rotating turbines with moving fins inspired by marine animals, offering a lower-impact solution with simpler installation and maintenance.

This activity matters because tidal energy provides a more predictable source of renewable power than solar and wind, which are more dependent on weather conditions. By harnessing ocean currents, Caudal Energy can support the transition away from fossil fuels while making sustainable use of marine resources. Its innovative approach has enabled them to raise €6.43 million in total funding.

Heidelberg-based Enzo focuses on preventing water damage before it becomes costly. Its one-drop sensor attaches to a building’s main water pipe. The startup uses AI to identify unusual water-use patterns and small leaks in real time, allowing homeowners, property managers, and insurers to act before major damage occurs.

Its activity is especially useful as early leak detection can prevent water waste, expensive repairs, and unnecessary use of materials and energy, contributing to more sustainable water management. Launched in 2021, Enzo raised €6.3 million in funding.

Lir Labs develops an AI-powered microscopy for wastewater treatment, turning microscopic activity in water into real-time operational insights. Its automated sensors use deep-learning models to identify changes in microorganisms and particles, allowing treatment plants to detect problems earlier and adjust processes before they become costly or disruptive.

Their approach to better wastewater monitoring can reduce pollution, unnecessary energy and chemical use, and the risk of poorly treated water reaching natural ecosystems. Founded in 2025 in London, Lir Labs raised €245k in funding.

Mirai Robotics is a Maritime Technology startup building AI-powered systems that allow boats and other maritime vehicles to operate with little or no human control. Its technology can guide vessels, process data from onboard sensors, and make real-time decisions during activities such as sea patrols, inspections, monitoring, and transport.

Its activity is relevant to the blue economy because it can make maritime operations safer, faster, and more efficient, particularly in remote or hazardous areas where deploying human crews can be costly or risky. Launched in 2025 in Bari, this innovative approach to maritime automation and safety has helped Mirai Robotics secure €3.6 million in funding.

Founded in 2023 in Ireland, Nernst Electric develops on-site oxygen generation for aquaculture. Its technology uses ceramic membranes to separate high-purity oxygen directly from the surrounding air, allowing fish farms to produce oxygen where it is needed instead of relying on costly deliveries. A reliable oxygen supply is essential for maintaining healthy fish and productive farming conditions, particularly at remote sites.

Its efficient way of producing oxygen can make aquaculture more reliable, cost-effective, and sustainable while reducing energy use and dependence on transported liquid oxygen. Nernst Electric has a total funding of €1.7 million.

NPHarvest has developed a new hardware solution for the collection and recycling of nutrients from wastewater, turning them into valuable ingredients for fertilisers. Installed at wastewater, biogas, and agricultural facilities, its system captures nitrogen and phosphorus that would otherwise be lost as waste and converts them into reusable resources. The technology can recover up to 90% of these nutrients while operating with relatively low energy use.

As excesses of nitrogen and phosphorus can pollute waterways and contribute to eutrophication, managing levels in the water is important. By recovering these nutrients before they reach the environment, NPHarvest supports cleaner aquatic ecosystems while creating a circular source of fertiliser. Founded in 2023 in Espoo, they raised €3.4 million in total funding.

Zürich-based Oxyle tackles some of the hardest-to-remove pollutants in water, particularly PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals”. Rather than simply filtering these substances out, the company’s treatment systems break them down at the molecular level, preventing them from being transferred into another waste stream. The technology is designed for contaminated groundwater and industrial wastewater across sectors such as chemicals, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and waste management.

Removing hazardous chemicals from wastewater helps prevent them from reaching rivers, groundwater, and marine ecosystems, supporting cleaner and safer water resources. Founded in 2020, Oxyle has raised €19 million in funding.

Founded in 2021 in Berlin, Tilla is a MaritimeTech startup bringing greater efficiency to crew changes in the shipping industry. Its digital platform brings voyage schedules, crew information, port services, flights, and travel requirements into one place, allowing shipping companies to plan and manage crew movements with fewer manual tasks, lower costs, and better coordination.

By digitalising a process still heavily dependent on spreadsheets, emails, and manual coordination, Tilla supports more efficient maritime operations and improves the working experience of seafarers. The company raised €4 million in total funding.

China carries a major share of the global lung cancer burden.

The post Lung cancer deaths in China to reach 760,000 by 2030 appeared first on BOL News.

Thirty-five years after Kazakhstan closed one of the most notorious nuclear weapons testing grounds in history, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has used the anniversary to deliver a pointed message to the world’s nuclear powers: resume dialogue, strengthen arms control and ensure that nuclear testing never returns.

At a time when the international security order is under growing pressure and some of the agreements that helped contain nuclear rivalry after the Cold War have weakened, Kazakhstan is seeking to turn its own traumatic nuclear history into a renewed diplomatic argument for disarmament.

Marking the International Day against Nuclear Tests on 29 August, Tokayev called on nuclear-armed states to return to negotiations and urged the earliest possible entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, or CTBT.

“Our country’s position as one of the leaders of the global anti-nuclear movement remains unchanged,” Tokayev said, according to Kazakhstan's presidential administration.

He called for negotiations between nuclear powers and “decisive multilateral action to eliminate the threat of nuclear weapons use”.

For Kazakhstan, the date carries significance far beyond diplomatic symbolism.

On 29 August 1991, the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site in north-eastern Kazakhstan was closed. It had been the Soviet Union's principal nuclear weapons testing ground and the location of 456 nuclear tests between 1949 and 1989, including atmospheric and underground detonations.

The consequences extended far beyond the perimeter of the test site. The United Nations has estimated that nearly 1.5 million people were affected by nuclear testing, while extensive areas were contaminated by radiation.

That history gives Kazakhstan a distinctive voice in the international nuclear debate.

Tokayev described the closure of Semipalatinsk as a warning that should continue to resonate worldwide.

“Thirty-five years later, this date will serve as a reminder to all humanity of the tragic consequences of nuclear tests and as a call to prevent them from ever happening again,” he said.

A country that gave up nuclear weapons

Kazakhstan's argument is strengthened by another remarkable chapter of its post-Soviet history.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, Kazakhstan found itself with a huge nuclear weapons infrastructure on its territory. Rather than retain the capability, the newly independent country chose to relinquish the weapons and establish itself internationally as a non-nuclear state.

Tokayev described that decision as a deliberate choice in favour of peace and long-term security.

“By voluntarily renouncing the fourth-largest nuclear arsenal on the planet, Kazakhstan made a historic choice in favor of peace, security and sustainable development,” he said.

It has subsequently made nuclear non-proliferation one of the defining elements of its foreign policy.

Kazakhstan was also responsible for proposing the creation of the International Day against Nuclear Tests, an initiative unanimously supported by the UN General Assembly. The first international observance took place in 2010.

This history matters because Tokayev's appeal comes at an increasingly uncertain moment for nuclear arms control.

An unfinished treaty

The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty was opened for signature in 1996 with a simple but profound objective: to prohibit nuclear test explosions anywhere in the world.

Thirty years later, however, the treaty has still not formally entered into force.

The CTBT currently has 188 signatories and 179 ratifications, demonstrating overwhelming international support. But its provisions require ratification by a specified group of 44 states possessing nuclear technology when the treaty was negotiated before it can become legally binding.

Nine of those states have yet to ratify: China, Egypt, India, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia and the United States.

India, North Korea and Pakistan have not signed it.

Russia had ratified the treaty but revoked its ratification in November 2023. China and the United States signed it in 1996 but have never completed ratification.

The treaty nevertheless represents one of the more successful international norms of the post-Cold War period.

More than 2,000 nuclear tests were carried out during the five decades before the CTBT opened for signature. Since 1996, nuclear tests have occurred on only ten occasions, according to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, and North Korea is the only country to have conducted nuclear explosive tests during the 21st century.

Tokayev's warning is therefore also a defence of a system that has largely succeeded in suppressing nuclear testing — but whose legal foundations remain incomplete.

Nuclear weapons and nuclear energy are not the same debate

There is another important dimension to Kazakhstan's position.

Tokayev's opposition to nuclear weapons does not translate into opposition to nuclear technology.

On the contrary, Kazakhstan is now moving towards the development of civilian nuclear power. Tokayev emphasised that nuclear energy should be used for “exclusively peaceful and constructive purposes”, presenting civilian nuclear development as compatible with the country's anti-nuclear weapons philosophy.

This distinction has particular relevance for Europe.

Kazakhstan is already an important part of Europe's nuclear energy supply chain. According to the Euratom Supply Agency, Kazakhstan supplied 20.31% of the natural uranium delivered to EU utilities in 2025, making it the EU's second-largest source after Canada.

The connection became even more politically significant during Tokayev's visit to Brussels in June.

Following meetings with European Council President António Costa and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on 23 June 2026, the EU and Kazakhstan specifically identified energy security as an area for deeper strategic cooperation.

Their joint statement recognised Kazakhstan as an important supplier of oil and uranium to Europe and highlighted the potential for increased cooperation in both renewable energy and civil nuclear energy.

That places Kazakhstan in an unusual position.

It is simultaneously one of the world's most prominent advocates of nuclear disarmament and one of the most important suppliers of the raw material on which civilian nuclear power depends.

Rather than regarding those positions as contradictory, Astana's policy is increasingly built around distinguishing sharply between the destructive and peaceful uses of atomic technology.

Europe has a stake in the argument

For the European Union, Tokayev's intervention is therefore not an abstract diplomatic message from a distant Central Asian state.

Kazakhstan has become increasingly significant to Europe's efforts to diversify energy supplies and strategic raw materials, particularly as Brussels attempts to reduce potentially dangerous dependencies.

EU-Kazakhstan relations have also expanded far beyond energy.

During Tokayev's June visit to Brussels, European and Kazakh leaders agreed to deepen their strategic partnership in critical raw materials, transport, digitalisation and emerging technologies. They also reaffirmed their commitment to strengthening the international disarmament and non-proliferation regime.

Kazakhstan's geopolitical position adds another dimension.

It shares a vast border with Russia and another with China, while simultaneously developing closer political and economic relationships with the European Union and maintaining partnerships with the United States and other Western countries.

That makes Astana one of a relatively small number of governments able to maintain meaningful dialogue across increasingly divided geopolitical blocs.

In an era when communication between major powers has become more difficult, that may make Kazakhstan's diplomatic role increasingly relevant.

A warning written into the landscape

The ruins of Semipalatinsk remain a stark physical reminder of what the nuclear arms race once meant.

Between 1949 and 1989, explosions equivalent collectively to thousands of Hiroshima-sized bombs were detonated at the site, according to UN documentation. Communities surrounding the testing ground were exposed to radioactive fallout whose health and environmental effects endured long after the final explosion.

Kazakhstan has sought to transform that legacy from one of victimhood into one of diplomacy.

Semipalatinsk's closure was followed by the relinquishment of nuclear weapons, Kazakhstan's participation in the Central Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone and its persistent advocacy of nuclear disarmament.

But Tokayev's latest message contains an uncomfortable implication.

The political assumptions that allowed the world to move progressively away from nuclear testing after the Cold War cannot simply be taken for granted.

The CTBT is now 30 years old and still awaits entry into force. Relations between the major nuclear powers are deeply strained. Nuclear weapons have again assumed a conspicuous place in geopolitical confrontation.

Against that background, Kazakhstan's argument has an unusual moral force.

Few countries have experienced nuclear testing on the scale Kazakhstan did. Fewer still subsequently possessed nuclear weapons and voluntarily relinquished them.

Thirty-five years after the gates of Semipalatinsk were closed, Tokayev is effectively asking the world's nuclear powers to remember why they were closed in the first place.

The message from Astana is straightforward: nuclear deterrence may remain part of international politics, but nuclear testing does not have to be — and dialogue between nuclear powers is more essential when relations are deteriorating, not less.

For Europe, confronting war on its eastern frontier while simultaneously reconsidering energy security and strategic autonomy, that is a message worth hearing.

Experiências de etnobotânica, polinizadores, investigação comunitária e atividades para famílias marcam a temporada de Outono do programa cultural da Cooperativa QRER que alia natureza e cultura no interior do Algarve.

A Cooperativa QRER dá continuidade ao programa Convite ao Interior, que chega à sua 3ª edição com um conjunto de atividades diversificadas a decorrer entre Setembro e Novembro, e estreia uma nova plataforma para divulgação e inscrição.

O programa deste Outono organiza-se em torno de sete eixos temáticos:  Artes e Ofícios da Paisagem; Atividades Artísticas para Famílias; Paisagens Rurais e os seus Polinizadores; Algarve, Spoken; Cocriação do Mapa das Hortas, Pomares e Cultivos de Querença; Rodas de Conexão e Finais de Tarde no Jardim. Reúne propostas que vão desde percursos na natureza para reconhecer plantas, polinizadores e ecossistemas locais, as missões de investigação comunitária para iniciar um mapa das hortas e pomares de Querença, oficinas artísticas para famílias e ainda um curso de português para estrangeiros, a partir da vida e da cultura local.  

Entre os principais destaques a acontecer brevemente está a atividade “Etnobotânica do Barrocal: Paisagem, plantas e usos”, na Fonte Filipe em Querença e inclui uma prova de produtos locais, e o workshop “Construir Bio-alojamentos para Polinizadores”, no jardim junto à sede da QRER, ambas a 19 de Setembro, ou a saída de campo à Benémola para descobrir “O que vive à volta da água”, assim como o arranque do “Algarve, Spoken: Learn Portuguese through local life”, um curso com 6 módulos, de português para estrangeiros que vivem no Algarve e querem desenvolver a aprendizagem de português ao mesmo tempo que aprofundam o conhecimento da cultura local.

Os meses seguintes trazem novas saídas de campo, atividades de etnobotânica e o arranque da missão de investigação comunitária para a cocriação do Mapa das Hortas e Pomares de Querença, com intervenção entre os sítios do Pombal e da Adega, a 3 de Outubro. Haverá ainda outras novidades e ciclos temáticos a apresentar em breve.

As atividades são coorganizadas por cooperadores da QRER e envolvem convidados especialistas de diferentes áreas e membros da comunidade local. Os preços variam entre os 10€ e os 20€, com exceção do curso de português para estrangeiros que, pela sua natureza e dimensão tem um valor mais elevado. Já as atividades da missão de investigação comunitária não têm custos de participação, na medida em convidam quem se inscreve a dar um contributo concreto para a cocriação do Mapa das Hortas, Pomares e Cultivos de Querença.

Informações para Inscrição:

A programação completa, preços e inscrições estão disponíveis na nova plataforma www.convite.qrer.pt .

O Convite ao Interior é um programa anual cofinanciado pelo Município de Loulé, através do Apoio ao Movimento Associativo Cultural e Recreativo, e pela CCDR Algarve, através do Programa de Apoio a Iniciativas Culturais Regionais de Carácter Não Profissional.

Sobre a Cooperativa QRER

A QRER, Cooperativa para o Desenvolvimento dos Territórios de Baixa Densidade desenvolve projetos de valorização do património natural e cultural do interior do Algarve. O Convite ao Interior é um programa cultural pensado para afirmar o interior do Algarve como um espaço de cultura e criatividade e para dar a conhecer este território através de quem nele vive e trabalha.

The long-lost belongings were preserved in glacial ice high in the Austrian mountains, but its melting led to their discovery last month by a hiker.

The long-lost belongings were preserved in glacial ice high in the Austrian mountains, but its melting led to their discovery last month by a hiker.

Iftikhar Gilani said Pakistan is incomplete without Kashmir and Kashmir is also incomplete without Pakistan.

The post Iftikhar Gilani takes oath as AJK’s 17th Prime Minister appeared first on BOL News.

England were bowled out for 290 in their first innings on the second day of the Lord’s Test.

The post Imam-ul-Haq’s further participation in England Test hinges on fitness appeared first on BOL News.

In this edition: Bad medicine, imperfect sound forever, know when to fold ’em, brainiacs, and a call of the wild.

EU Reporter journalist Derya Soysal was among the members of the press given direct access to President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in Astana after he cast his vote in Kazakhstan’s first elections to the newly established Kurultai — an opportunity that offered a rare first-hand insight into the President’s thinking on political reform, government, youth, artificial intelligence and the country’s future direction.

For a journalist covering the rapidly changing political landscape of Central Asia, there are moments when being in the room matters.

For EU Reporter journalist Derya Soysal (pictured with President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev) Kazakhstan’s historic Kurultai election provided precisely such an opportunity.

After President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev cast his vote in the country’s first election to the newly established Kurultai, Soysal was among the journalists with privileged access to the President during the press briefing that followed.

It gave EU Reporter a first-hand opportunity to hear Tokayev address some of the most important questions facing Kazakhstan as the country enters a new political chapter.

The exchanges went far beyond election day itself.

Questions ranged from the consequences of constitutional reform and the creation of the Vice Presidency to the future composition of the government, the role of younger politicians and the increasingly important place of artificial intelligence in Kazakhstan’s economic and social development.

The result was a revealing picture of how Tokayev sees the next phase of his country’s transformation.

A historic political moment

Tokayev himself described the election as a historic milestone and the beginning of a new stage in Kazakhstan’s development.

The establishment of the Kurultai forms part of a much broader restructuring of the country’s political institutions.

During the briefing, the President was questioned about what ordinary citizens should expect from the constitutional reforms, how the newly created Vice Presidency would operate and what role the Kazakhstan People’s Council would play.

Tokayev portrayed the changes as essential components of a renewed political system.

He stressed the importance of the Vice Presidency as an institution capable of supporting effective governance during difficult periods, while describing the Kazakhstan People’s Council as a mechanism intended to strengthen public participation and national cohesion.

But the President’s vision was not restricted to political architecture.

He also pointed to ambitious infrastructure and development programmes encompassing healthcare facilities, rehabilitation centres, urban modernisation and environmental projects.

The question everyone wanted answered

Among the most politically sensitive questions put to Tokayev concerned his own future.

Could he stand again for President?

Following recent constitutional developments concerning his eligibility for a future presidential election, journalists pressed Tokayev on whether he intended to seek another term.

His response was deliberately cautious.

While acknowledging that the legal possibility exists, Tokayev rejected speculation about a future campaign as premature.

Instead, he argued that Kazakhstan should be concentrating on the immediate challenges of modernisation, economic growth, social development and stability in an increasingly unpredictable international environment.

It was a response that sought to move attention away from political succession and back towards the governing agenda.

What kind of politicians does Kazakhstan need?

Soysal’s access to the presidential briefing also provided an opportunity to hear Tokayev set out his expectations of the people who will serve in the new political institutions.

Asked what qualities Kurultai deputies should possess, the President emphasised responsibility and accountability.

Members, he said, should be judged by the quality of the legislation they adopt, whether they fulfil promises made to voters and whether the programmes they pursue genuinely contribute to Kazakhstan’s development.

A recurring theme throughout the briefing was generational change.

Tokayev again argued that Kazakhstan needs younger people to play a greater role in public life.

New faces and new thinking, he suggested, will be essential if the country is to maintain momentum in the years ahead.

A new government — but not change for change’s sake

The creation of the Kurultai also has consequences for the government.

Journalists therefore questioned Tokayev about the future administration and whether Kazakhstan should expect major personnel changes.

The President praised the work of the existing government but confirmed that changes would come.

At the same time, he cautioned against replacing officials simply to create the appearance of political renewal.

For Tokayev, modernisation appears to mean continuous institutional renewal rather than political theatre: bringing in new energy and expertise where necessary while retaining effective administration.

Was the election genuinely competitive?

Another important exchange concerned political competition.

Asked whether the campaign had demonstrated genuine competition, Tokayev pointed to televised debates, public engagement and particularly strong interest among younger voters.

He characterised the electoral process as another milestone in Kazakhstan’s continuing political modernisation and said the campaign had brought new political voices and new ideas into public debate.

For an international audience, however, the question of political pluralism remains one of the key issues against which Kazakhstan’s reforms will ultimately be judged.

The significance of the new institutions will therefore depend not only upon their constitutional design, but on how independently and effectively they operate in practice.

The generation that will inherit Kazakhstan

Young people repeatedly returned to the centre of the discussion.

With a significant number of younger candidates participating in the electoral process, Tokayev was asked whether this generation could genuinely transform the country’s political system.

His answer was notable for combining optimism with a measure of realism.

He acknowledged that not every young official promoted into senior positions in recent years had been successful.

Nevertheless, Tokayev insisted that Kazakhstan must continue putting its confidence in younger generations.

For a country with a comparatively young population, he suggested, long-term success will depend heavily upon the responsibility, engagement and leadership of its youth.

Politics is also about culture

Some of the most revealing exchanges witnessed by Soysal moved beyond constitutions and elections.

Tokayev was questioned about his repeated calls for greater civic responsibility, discipline, respect and public ethics.

The President argued that national modernisation cannot be measured solely in economic growth rates or institutional reforms.

It also requires changes in behaviour and public culture.

He connected those ideas with the Taza Kazakhstan initiative, explaining that cleanliness should be understood both literally and symbolically — encompassing respect for public spaces but also ideas of dignity, moral responsibility and civic consciousness.

From smartphones to artificial intelligence

Perhaps the most forward-looking discussion concerned Kazakhstan’s digital ambitions.

Artificial intelligence has become a central part of Tokayev’s political and economic agenda.

Asked to assess progress in digitalisation, the President argued that Kazakhstan had already completed an important first stage in constructing a digital state by making electronic public services widely accessible.

Citizens can now carry out administrative tasks from home that once required lengthy bureaucratic procedures.

But Tokayev made clear that he regards this as only the beginning.

The next challenge, he said, is to move artificial intelligence and digital technology beyond conferences, presentations and policy documents and turn them into instruments that deliver practical economic benefits.

He highlighted entrepreneurs, farmers and regional communities as groups that should increasingly be able to use technology to improve productivity and generate income.

His message was strikingly simple: the smartphone should no longer be regarded merely as an entertainment device but as an instrument of economic opportunity.

The value of being in the room

For EU Reporter, Soysal’s participation in the presidential briefing provided something increasingly valuable in international reporting: direct access to the political decision-maker at the centre of the story.

Rather than interpreting Tokayev’s position through official statements alone, she was able to witness at first hand how the President responded when confronted with questions about political succession, institutional change, government performance and the expectations of Kazakhstan’s younger generation.

Soysal’s access is particularly significant at a moment when Kazakhstan is seeking to redefine both its domestic political institutions and its place internationally.

The country occupies an increasingly important strategic position between Europe and Asia, while its economic, energy and diplomatic relationships with the European Union continue to develop.

Understanding the direction Kazakhstan takes therefore matters well beyond its own borders.

A country debating what comes next

What emerged from the presidential exchange in Astana was not simply a discussion about one election.

It was a debate about what kind of Kazakhstan should emerge from the reforms now under way.

How much influence will the new institutions exercise?

Will younger politicians genuinely reshape public life?

Can artificial intelligence translate into economic opportunity outside Kazakhstan’s major cities?

And how far will political modernisation alter the relationship between the state and its citizens?

Those questions will not be answered by one election or one presidential press briefing.

But Derya Soysal’s privileged position inside that briefing gave EU Reporter readers a valuable first-hand view of how Kazakhstan’s President himself answers them.

As the first Kurultai begins its work, the importance of the election may ultimately be judged not by the symbolism of its creation, but by what Kazakhstan’s new political institutions actually deliver.

For the moment, however, one thing is clear: the country has entered a new phase, and the political conversation about what comes next has already begun.

Derya Soysal is an EU Reporter journalist covering European and international affairs. She attended President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev’s press briefing in Astana following his vote in Kazakhstan’s first Kurultai elections.

The king was admitted to Oslo University Hospital on August 17 with hemolytic anemia.

The post King Harald V battling blood disorder and infection in Oslo Hospital appeared first on BOL News.