Finland and Sweden are a step closer to full NATO membership after all thirty NATO allies signed an accession protocol.
It will be NATO’s biggest expansion in decades – but it likely won’t happen in full for at least a year.
NATO allies signed an accession protocol for Finland and Sweden to join the military alliance in Brussels on Tuesday (July 5).
An historic day for Euro-Atlantic security as all 30 #NATO Allies sign the Accession Protocols for #Finland & #Sweden. With 32 nations around the table, we will be stronger and safer, as we face a more dangerous world. pic.twitter.com/Mu0jjK9IuF
— Jens Stoltenberg (@jensstoltenberg) July 5, 2022
Ankara had previously threatened to scupper their chances of joining.
Both Nordic countries gave assurances to Turkey in response that they would do more to fight terrorism – and Turkey backed down.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg hailed the historic move,
This is truly an historic moment […] with 32 nations around the table, we will be even stronger.
JENS StOLTENBERG, NATO SECRETARY GENERAL
This protocol allows Helsinki and Stockholm to take part in NATO meetings, and have greater access to intelligence.
But the ratification process can take up to a year or more.
Neither country will be protected by NATO’s defence clause – where an attack on one is considered an attack on all during that time.
THE DUMA IS RUSSIA’S PARLIAMENT
Meanwhile, Russia’s Duma announced two bills that would put Russia onto a more aggressive wartime economy.
The first bill would allow Russia’s government to demand businesses supply the military with goods.
The second bill would oblige employees to be available to work overtime, nights, and forego additional pay in support of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The bills need a second and third reading, approval by Russia’s upper house, and be signed by Vladimir Putin before they would become law
Simon is a ticker NEWS corespondent in London.
Simon started his career in his hometown of Sydney as a news video producer for NineMSN, then moved to the UK with Good Morning Britain on ITV, followed by a TV reporter for a local news service in Manchester in England’s north. Simon joins ticker News after several years in the London headquarters of ITN Productions as a news producer, and as an assistant news editor for ITV News.
Rise in parents purchasing homes for adult children sparks concerns
A growing trend of parents buying houses for their adult children is causing a stir, raising questions about the potential downsides of such arrangements. While the gesture may seem benevolent, experts warn of the pitfalls associated with this practice.
Financial advisors express concerns about the impact on both generations’ financial independence. By providing ready-made homes, parents might inadvertently hinder their children’s ability to learn crucial financial lessons, such as budgeting, mortgage management, and property ownership responsibilities.
The trend also sparks debates on the long-term implications for the housing market. Critics argue that such parental interventions can distort property prices and exacerbate existing affordability challenges, particularly for younger individuals aspiring to enter the property market independently.
There’s a call for a broader societal discussion on the balance between parental support and fostering financial autonomy. While the intention is often rooted in care, the unintended consequences of sheltering adult children from financial realities are prompting a reassessment of this well-meaning practice.
Victoria’s Secret is facing backlash after issuing an apology to a transgender woman who had a negative experience while trying on bras at one of their stores.
The incident has ignited a debate about inclusivity and sensitivity in the fashion industry.
The controversy began when the trans woman, who remains anonymous, visited a Victoria’s Secret store to shop for bras. She reported feeling uncomfortable and discriminated against by store staff.
In response to her complaint, Victoria’s Secret issued an apology, acknowledging the incident and expressing their commitment to diversity and inclusion.
However, the apology itself has come under fire from both supporters and critics.
Some argue that the brand’s apology is insincere and merely an attempt to save face, while others believe it is a step in the right direction towards a more inclusive shopping experience for all customers.
The incident raises important questions about how brands should handle situations involving discrimination and whether their apologies are genuine or performative.
It also highlights the ongoing challenges faced by transgender individuals when accessing spaces traditionally designed for cisgender customers.
As the fashion industry continues to evolve, many are calling for a deeper examination of inclusivity and sensitivity, not just in policies but in practice.