United

United can kick you off the flight for doing so

by

You’re so calm in your seat, and suddenly, you start to hear something nearby. It’s a TikTok video or a WhatsApp voice message that someone is playing at full volume. Because? Who knows. Maybe because that person wants everyone to enjoy that audio. Or maybe because he just doesn’t care. This habit of using your cell phone on speakerphone even when there are people around and you can be annoying is spreading like wildfire, but United Airlines has said enough is enough. If you want to use your cell phone, put on headphones. Until now it was a simple rule of elementary education, but at United Airlines they have turned it into a legal clause with drastic consequences. The American airline has updated their terms of service to make it clear that the use of headphones with a mobile phone, tablet or laptop in the cabin is no longer an option, but a safety requirement. Either you use them, or we kick you off the plane. The measure is not a suggestion from the company, but rather a novelty in its terms, according to which United Airlines reserves the right to deny transportation of a passenger, to expel them from the plane and even to permanently ban any passenger who refuses to use headphones while consuming audio or multimedia content. Now generating annoying noises is placed on the same level as serious infractions such as tobacco consumption. More and more connected in flight. United confirmed that update to its terms in a email to USA Todayand added that the inclusion of Wi-Fi connectivity on its flights already recommended the use of headphones. Now being connected to the internet on flights is more common, which means that passengers can consume content on streaming platforms or social networks, or use messaging apps normally. The key: Starlink. But now they are also beginning to offer additional connectivity through the Starlink satellite network. The more bandwidth, the greater the risk that the plane cabin will become chaos with WhatsApp audio or YouTube videos at full volume that can disturb the rest of the passengers. In fact, they explain in United: “With the expansion of Starlink, it seemed like a good time to make it even clearer by adding it to the transportation contract.” Legal support. On CBS Travel expert Scott Keyes indicated that he was not aware of other airlines having adopted this rule, but he saw it as reasonable. The update is specifically included under the “Security” section of your contract of carriage. By categorizing it this way, the company obtains solid legal support to act if this problem arises. Shapes matter. The rise of mobility and social networks has meant that little by little we have seen how in many spaces people use their mobile phones with speakers without worrying about whether or not they are disturbing other people around them. That’s common on public transportation like trains, subways and buses, and United Airlines’ move could set an interesting precedent for re-educating users and reminding them that, as Keyes says, “This is in line with the way the vast majority of travelers behave and the way they would like others to behave.” If you don’t have helmets, they give you some. At United Airlines they understand that some users may not have their own headphones, and in those cases they offer a simple solution: offer free ones that, although of low quality, will at least avoid inconvenience to the rest of the passengers and allow the affected person to comply with the regulations. We will see, of course, what types of headphones they provide, because nowadays mobile phones rarely include 3.5 mm connectors. No video calls. At United they already had rules in this regard: in their terms of use as well make it clear that it is prohibited for passengers to make video calls after the cabin doors are closed. With Starlink, these types of calls via WhatsApp or FaceTime, for example, are technically possible, but United prefers to “protect the silence.” Noise as a logistical challenge. This movement, we insist, could mark a before and after for the rest of the air transport industry, and perhaps also for other means of transport. Airlines know that entertainment screens can end up losing a lot of meaning if users can have an internet connection on their devices. That becomes quite a challenge, which makes a regulation so that we don’t bother each other seems reasonable. In Xataka | Ryanair has left Seville without many flights. In exchange he has given him 500 million euros to repair engines

why the United States needs the old continent more than it admits

by

That the United States is the absolute reference of the West is a reality that we have been seeing all our lives: American Way of Life from the 1950s to the hackneyed phrase “without us, you would all be speaking German” that Trump took it upon himself to remember in Davos and that we have seen countless times in war films. Spain has its own version of that story with Welcome, Mister Marshall. But Trump returned to the White House willing to fulfill his promise to “Make American Great Again” at any price: immigration management with ICE as the executing arm about their citizenship, threats to Greenland or tariffs as a tool of permanent pressure. His ways are more reminiscent of a school bully than of a leader running one of the most powerful countries on the planet. And Europe? Well, between caution, diplomacy and even turning the other cheek. The million-dollar question is whether Europe has as little room for maneuver as it appears. The answer, according to a recent analysis from the German institute Dezernat Zukunft, no. United States > Europe. In case it was necessary to remember the power of the United States in general, it has the largest GDP in the world according to the IMFit is also the country with more military spendingthe dollar It is the world reserve currency par excellence since 1945. Furthermore, leads in digital infrastructure and semiconductors (in design and sales), almost half the world share. In fact, as Dezernat Zukunft points outnot even the 10 largest European countries combined compete with those key indicators of material power. But power is not negotiating ability. The United States is the strongest in the yard, but Europe has the leverage. And here the game board changes. A close example: the gas key. Russia’s GDP It is less than the ninth part of the EUbut Russia has something that Europe needs: the gas required to heat in winter. Changing suppliers overnight was unfeasible. Europe is a succulent client. The magnificent seven (Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, Nvidia, Tesla, Meta) have an important part of their market in Europe. According to estimates by Dezernat Zukunftthese big tech companies generate more than $500 billion annually in Europe alone. If the old continent closes the market or fines them, their stock market shares would suffer a severe blow. And this point is not only important for companies. The magnificent seven They represent a third of the entire S&P 500the index in which the pension plans of millions of Americans are invested. If these big tech companies lose Europe, North American seniors earn less when they retire and that can be dramatic on a social and political level. Europe controls nuclear fuel. On Donald Trump’s roadmap Nuclear power plants are being built everywhere, but the United States does not have enough enriched uranium to supply itself in the short or medium term. Europe, through companies such as Urenco and Orano, is the main supplier of enriched uranium to the US, according to data from the Energy Information Agency. If the EU turns off the tap by prioritizing its own supply, the United States would have a problem meeting its nuclear needs, a key element for powering AI data centers. Because in the artificial intelligence race, The US desperately needs energy. Europe manufactures the turbines. To achieve enough electricity to meet the demand of data centers for AI, a specific type of gas turbines (40 – 60 MW) is also needed and here a European company is the queen: Siemens Energy. Siemens Energy’s SGT-800 has delivery times of one to three years, in a market where general deadlines have skyrocketed to seven years due to the demand for data centers, according to Utility Dive. Europe does not even need to turn its back on the United States, prioritizing its own orders would be enough for US artificial intelligence projects to suffer a few valuable years of delay. And time is money: the cost for large US technology operators could exceed 50 billion euros, according to Dezernat Zukunft estimates. American debt is fragile. The US dollar accounts for 58% of world reserves, but its weight as a reserve currency has been declining for two decades. USA accumulate a deficit of 1.8 trillion dollars annually that is financed by issuing debt and needs buyers. The problem is that central banks have stopped buying that debt: now it is speculative investment funds based in London that support the market. For the German institute, Europe has regulatory tools to discourage the purchase of American debt and favor European debt. If American bond rates rise, mortgages, credit and public spending in the US become more expensive. And we have seen it recently: when 30-year bonds exceeded 5%, Trump backed down in their tariffs. Europe is the best customer for gas. USA is the main supplier of LNG to the EU. However, if war conflicts allow it, starting in 2027 The International Energy Agency plans a gas surplus that will change the balance: sellers will need buyers and not the other way around. Dezernat Zukunft explains that due to geographical proximity, Europe is the best customer for the US, so if the United States tried to use gas as a weapon, it would be making a fatal mistake: it would sink the profits of its gas industry and Europe could buy gas from other countries. In fact, the EU is already working on it. Who needs who more. Although from an objective and abstract point of view parameters such as the largest army or the most powerful economy make Europe look weaker compared to the United States, Dezernat Zukunft highlights one power: that of necessity. And on some issues, the US needs Europe as much or more than Europe needs the US. It is not that Europe does not have cards to play, it is that it is difficult for it to agree to play them. In Xataka | Europe has realized that it cannot … Read more

In the Iraq War, Spain was left “alone” supporting the United States. 23 years later, she has been left alone refusing to help him

by

If a Spaniard from March 2003 could take a look at the press today (03/04/2026) it is most likely that he would not understand anything. And not because of the lack of context, references or the (logical) change of political leaders. Probably what would catch your attention is the 180º turn in the geopolitical chessboard that concerns the US and Europe. Let’s remember. In 2003 José María Aznar he posed smiling together with George W. Bush and Tony Blair to confirm itself as one of the great supporters of the US in the Iraq war. Today the opposite happens. Spain has become almost the loose European verse for his rejection of Trump’s offensive in Iran. It seems like a simple historical curiosity, but it says a lot about how Europe, the US and their relationship have changed over the last two decades. Trump’s anger. This is not the first time that Donald Trump publicly displayed his lack of harmony with Moncloa. In October, in full tug-of-war over the percentage of GDP that should be allocated to defense, the Republican came to suggest that Spain should be “expelled” from NATO. Rarely, however, has the US leader spoken out with the emphatic (and angry) expression he used yesterday when talking about the negative of Pedro Sánchez’s Government to have the US army use the Morón and Rota bases to attack Iran. “Spain has been terrible”. In the threatening tone that has become the hallmark of his second term, Trump made it clear that he does not take no for an answer. “Spain has been terrible,” started . “In fact I have told Scott (Bressent, Treasury Secretary) to cut all relations with her. Spain said we cannot use their bases. We could if we wanted to. Nobody is going to tell us no. But we don’t have to. They have been unfriendly.” In case there were any doubts, the Republican threatened with cutting “everything that has to do with Spain” and pronounced the cursed word: “Embargo.” He didn’t go much further, but neither that nor the fact that other previous announcements have fallen on deaf ears has prevented his words from causing an earthquake. Especially among the sectors that would have it worst if Washington decided to move forward and “cut off trade” with Spain, an otherwise complex scenario since trade policy does not depend on Madrid, but on the European Union. “No to war”. The problem is not only that Spain has refused to allow the US to use the bases in Rota and Morón to bomb Iran. Probably what has raised the most blisters in Washington is that Sánchez has clearly positioned himself against the actions of the US and Israel in the Middle East. did it yesterday and he has done it again this morning with a deliberately emphatic message: “Spain’s position is the same as in Ukraine or Gaza. No to war.” During his speech, Sánchez even recalled the Iraq war, which left (he denounced) “a more insecure world.” His position also has an internal reading: the ‘no to war’ of 2003 was a shock for the PSOE. One club, three positions. Sánchez’s position is not only important for what he says, but also for where and especially when he says it. His speech clashes with that of other European leaders who have been much more understanding of the US and Israeli attacks on Iran. In fact, just a few days ago their counterparts from France, the United Kingdom and Germany they have closed ranks with Trump. On Sunday the three powers (E3) released a statement in which they demanded that Tehran stop its “attacks” and they advanced their willingness to coordinate with the United States. “We will take measures to defend our interests and those of our allies in the region, potentially with necessary and proportionate defensive actions to destroy Iran’s ability to fire missiles and drones,” states the joint writing by Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer and Friedrich Merz. It should be remembered that on Sunday a French naval base in Abu Dhabi suffered an attack with drones and on Monday another drone impact against the British RAF facilities in Cyprus. Tehran has also hit bases with German troops. Madrid’s position thus clearly differs from that of Paris, London and Berlin. Also from that of the community club, which has opted for a more ambiguous position. Although the European Commission has not been slow to guarantee its “full” solidarity with its members in a veiled support for Spain in the face of Trump’s threats, the truth is that Brussels maintains a very different tone from that of Sánchez. On Monday Von der Leyen claimed that “diplomacy” is “the only solution” to the open crisis in Iran and, although he condemned Tehran’s attacks on Middle Eastern neighbors, he did not mention the bombings launched by the US and Israel. Just 23 years later… This morning Sánchez not only insisted on his “no to war.” He also wanted draw a parallel with what happened in 2003 when the Government of Spain, then headed by Aznar, decided to clearly support the US deployment in Iraq, distancing of its European partners. “The world has been here before. 23 years ago another US administration led us to an unjust war. The Iraq war generated a drastic increase in terrorism, a serious immigration and economic crisis. That was the gift of the Azores trio, a more insecure world and a worse life,” Sánchez claimed. Ironies of history, the socialist refers to the famous photo taken just 23 years ago, in March 2003, in the Azores and in which Bush, Blair and Aznar pose smiling. Have things changed that much? The truth is that yes. And not only because where Bush, Blair and Aznar sat 23 years ago, today Trump, Starmer and Sánchez sit (respectively). The most relevant change affects the roles and dealings with Washington. In 2003, the invasion of Iraq caused a fracture of Europe into two blocks well differentiated. One, against … Read more

The United States has found how to protect its most vulnerable ships on the high seas: with escort drones

by

The planet’s oceans and seas are anything but a pond of oil, and not precisely because of the climate: the Black Sea with the war between Russia and Ukrainethe Baltic Sea with hybrid warfare and ghost fleets, Strait of Hormuz tensions through which 20% of the world’s oil passes or the Red Sea crisiswith Houthi drones and missiles. And those are just some of the hot spots that cause logistics and merchant vessels to face serious problems in carrying out their functions. The possibility of sending the navy as a companion for those routes where the atmosphere is heated is obviously not an option. So the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has contracted to a company to solve it with an autonomous escort system with drones. Context. If the Strait of Hormuz is a strategic point for international trade, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait is not far behind: 12% of world maritime trade passes through it, according to the Middle East Research Center. But since 2023, passing through there is a minefield, which has led to thousands of boats (according to Wikipedia citing Pentagon sources) follow an alternative route that involves going around all of Africa passing through the Cape of Good Hope. That’s 20,000 extra kilometers, ten more days of travel and the consequent expense in fuel. This specific case is not a mere example: it is what has led DARPA to make the decision to count on Raytheon to unclog this bottleneck as soon as possible, as explains the company’s president of Advanced Technology, Colin Whelan. Why is it important. Because 80% of world trade circulates by sea and there are a series of straits that are critical and that, in the event of conflict, act as bottlenecks due to their vulnerability. And the effects are immediate in the form of delays in supplies and prices. The protection of merchant ships to date required a naval escort in a slow, expensive operation and for which there are not enough troops to allocate them to that mission. What Pulling Guard proposes is autonomous protection without requiring extra crew or structural modifications. What is Raytheon? That company is not any: Raytheon is the arms division of the RTX group, the largest aerospace and defense company in the world, with 180,000 workers and $88 billion in turnover in 2025. With more than a century behind it and headquartered in Virginia, it has missiles such as the Patriot or the Tomahawk on its resume. It is one of the Pentagon’s Big Five contractors and is a regular in DARPA contracting. What is Pulling Guard. Pulling Guard is the system developed by Raytheon, a semi-autonomous platform towed by the ship it protects. From this, a drone operates with electro-optical and infrared sensors to detect potential threats and transmit information in real time to remote operators on the ground or on board. The latter are in charge of making decisions without the crew exposing themselves. It has two phases: in the first it is an advanced surveillance system and in the second it integrates weapons. Pulling Guard is neither a passive shield nor a preventive warning system: it is, in short, a light autonomous combat unit attached to a civilian ship. What we still don’t know. Beyond technical unknowns such as the budget, the phase schedule or the type of integrated weapons, this proposal raises two tricky questions: international law and gray areas. Without going any further, from issues such as what rules of engagement apply to the remote operator from the ground authorizing fire, who is legally responsible for the attack or what happens if the system acts in the waters of a third state. Not to mention something more mundane like flag registrations or insurance companies. Or something even more basic: does the ship lose its civilian status by carrying this system? In Xataka | The US Navy already knows how to fool enemy radars: drones that create ghost fleets In Xataka | The US is preparing a new radar for Greenland with one objective: to monitor every movement of Russia and China in the Arctic Cover | Raytheo

The United Kingdom has found lithium under its feet, but extracting it is going to be a billion-dollar logistical nightmare

by

For vacationers visiting cornwallin the south-west of the United Kingdom, the landscape is a haven of peace dotted with historical remains. It is the land of the old tin and copper mines that inspired series like Poldarka region with more than 4,000 years of mining history. However, beneath this postcard scenario lies the most coveted resource of the 21st century. The then Prime Minister Boris Johnson baptized it in 2021 as the “Lithium Klondike”, in reference to the historic gold rush. Today, As detailed in an extensive report by Guardianthat “white gold” is the great hope for the British energy transition. The race for the first drop of lithium. The sector has recently reached milestones that seemed impossible a decade ago. On the one hand, as reported Financial TimesCornish Lithium company has just commissioned its first commercial demonstration plant in the region. This facility is designed to extract lithium from hard rock in former clay (kaolin) mines, a crucial step that demonstrates that large-scale domestic mining is technically feasible. Crushing stone is not the only way. In parallel, a fascinating technology has emerged that unites mining and renewable energy. It turns out that, several kilometers deep, the superheated water flowing through the fractures of the granite of cornwall It is loaded with dissolved lithium. As explained by BBCTaking advantage of this has enabled a historic milestone: the United Downs power plant, operated by Geothermal Engineering Ltd (GEL), has become the first in the country to generate electricity from the Earth’s heat, while producing the first domestic supply of lithium extracted from these underground fluids. The mechanics, as detailed Guardianis ingenious: the boiling brine is pumped (at about 200 °C), its heat is used to drive turbines that generate electricity, the lithium is chemically extracted and the cold water is returned to the subsoil. The initial figures for this project are modest—just 100 tons of lithium per year, enough for 1,400 electric cars—but the goal is to scale up to 18,000 tons per year. What does it really mean to unearth this treasure?? As emphasized Financial Timesthe primary motivation is geostrategic: the West desperately needs to reduce its dependence on China in the critical metals supply chain. Additionally, unlike wind or solar energy, geothermal brine provides renewable electricity “24 hours a day, 7 days a week”, shielding the network against the vagaries of gas. An abyss riddled with obstacles. But from the laboratory to the commercial mine there is a stretch full of barriers. First, drilling wells kilometers deep or building processing plants requires massive injections of capital. The GEL project has already cost 50 million pounds, inform BBC. Furthermore, the market is ruthless: recently, the Imerys British Lithium (IBL) side project, which promised to create the largest lithium hub in the country, has had to be halted due to “funding constraints and difficult market conditions.” The second major obstacle is the emotional shock with the population. A report from a few months ago in The Conversation perfectly illustrates this drama in the village of St Dennis. For Cornish Lithium to expand its open-pit mine at the former Trelavour quarry, it needs to demolish huge conical mountains of clay waste. The problem is that the locals have affectionately named them Flatty and Pointy. What for the mining company is debris that blocks lithium, for the people it is their heritage, their visual identity since the 19th century. It is the bitter dilemma of the green transition: sacrificing the local landscape to save the global climate. The Spanish mirror. This tension between national urgency and local rejection resonates strongly in Spain. As we have explained in Xatakathe European Union has launched a lifeline of 22,000 million euros to support 47 strategic mining projects and stop the bleeding of foreign dependence. Seven of them are on Spanish soil, with three standing out in Extremadura: the Aguablanca mine (the only nickel deposit in Europe, which reopens after a decade) and the tungsten mines of Las Navas and La Parrilla. However, the syndrome NIMBY (“Not In My Back Yard”) hits just as it does on British soil. The same publication recalls that the emblematic and controversial Cáceres lithium mine has been left out of European aid due to the fierce opposition of neighborhood and environmental platforms, a social pressure that has already managed to knock down similar projects in Ávila. The shadow of the dragon: the clock is ticking. While Europe deals with waste dumps and bureaucracy, China competes in another league. Fatih Birol, director of the International Energy Agency (IEA), warned to launch An operational mine takes an average of 17 years. The West is running against the clock, and Beijing is two decades ahead of us. And the data is suffocating. China processes 80% of the world’s lithium and 95% of graphite. For years, they sold batteries below production cost, taking losses to exterminate Western competition and establish silent dependence. Far from relaxing, the Asian giant keep devouring the subsoil: it has recently tripled its lithium reserves (going from 6% to 16.5% worldwide) thanks to new discoveries in its salt lakes. And the problem is not just “white gold.” The IEA alert that by 2035 there will be a 30% supply deficit in copper. Without copper for the cables, having batteries will be useless. The true cost of the transition. The UK’s mining awakening is the perfect microcosm of the challenge facing the West. We have discovered that we have the treasure under our feet, but geology is only the starting line. “White gold” requires colossal sacrifices. It requires risking billions in unstable markets, altering places that communities love and facing a very slow bureaucracy in the face of an implacable Asian rival. The batteries that will power the 21st century are not only going to cost us money; They will require profound social wear and tear. Lithium promises us the future, but unearthing it is going to be a real nightmare. Image | Cornish Lithium Xataka | China sold cheap batteries … Read more

China is building submarines faster than anyone else. And that’s a problem for the United States.

by

In a tense geopolitical moment on a global scale with several open fronts such as Greenland, whose melting ice is allowing us to see nuclear submarinesChina just achieved a historic milestone: it is manufacturing nuclear submarines faster than any other country in the world, according to a report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies. This is a complete surprise to the United States, the power that until now held this title, and threatens the advantage that Washington has maintained for decades. Brief notes on nuclear submarines. Without wanting to delve into their characteristics, it is worth distinguishing what types there are: He SSBN is a nuclear-powered submarine designed to launch ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads (some with intercontinental range). They are strategic second response platforms, practically undetectable and guarantee that if someone attacks first, they will receive a response. The SSN/SSGN are nuclear attack submarines (the second, guided missiles), true maritime control weapons: they can attack land or sea targets, block routes and operate for months without resupply. Context. American hegemony underwater lasts for decades, but Beijing has on its roadmap modernize its military capabilities by 2035: it already has the largest surface fleet in the world in the words of the Pentagon and now he has turned on the turbo to reach the last bastion of the United States: the depths. The data. China has surpassed the United States in the pace of launching nuclear-powered submarines (SSN/SSBN). Thus, between 2021 and 2025, the Asian giant launched 10 units compared to Washington’s seven, according to has discovered the IISS through satellite analysis of the Bohai shipyard in Huludao (northern China), as the epicenter of the industrial leap. In a decade, China has gone from being far behind to leading the race: Why is it important. This shift in underwater hegemony has three implications, one of which points directly to the US: Nuclear deterrence. The new submarines Type 094 and future Type 096 They expand China’s nuclear response capacity in the face of possible nuclear attacks. A preemptive attack is strategically unfeasible. Maritime control of commercial routes. SSGNs with high-speed missile systems add a layer of threat to foreign combat groups in the Indo-Pacific, complicating access for the US and its allies to potentially conflictive areas, such as the South China Sea or Taiwan. At a time when The United States is betting on boarding As a sign of maritime control, China has in this fleet a safeguard for its commercial routes. The United States cannot cope with that pace. John Phelan, US Secretary of the Navy, recognized in Congress that “All of our programs are a disaster, honestly. Our best-performing program is six months behind schedule and 57% over budget.” Phelan mentions the erosion of this industry, which according to the Government Accountability Office Today it faces problems such as aging infrastructure and a shortage of qualified labor. The surprise figures. The IISS Military Balance 2025 leaves other interesting figures to better diagnose the reality of both powers in nuclear submarines: Launch rate from 2021 to 2025: seven from the US to 10 from China. The difference in tonnage is notable: while those from China weigh 79,000 tons, those from the US are 55,500. Active nuclear fleet: The United States wins by a landslide, with 65 units compared to China’s 12 units (plus another 46 conventional ones). Quantity vs quality. We have already seen in the previous point that the United States continues to gain in numbers (still) and it is not the only reason for optimism for the country led by Trump. CNN echoes the IISS report where he explains that “Chinese designs are almost certainly behind American and European submarines in terms of quality.” Among other qualities, in noise: Chinese submarines are noisier, which makes them more vulnerable, they explain. But as a captain warns Retired US Navy Half USNI Officer, Biggest Fleets Win. In Xataka | In the midst of rearmament, Spain has just surprised Europe: 5,000 million for 34 warships and four submarines In Xataka | The new fear of Western fleets is not nuclear. They are conventional submarines armed with surprise and a flag: China Cover | CSR Report RL33153 China Naval Modernization: Implications for US Navy Capabilities—Background and Issues for Congress by Ronald O’Rourke dated February 28, 2014 – United States Naval Institute News Blog, Public Domain

There is a paradise island that you only enter armed. And the United Kingdom wants to “liberate” it from the United States

by

Prima facie, chagos It’s just a handful of perfect islands lost in the middle of the Indian Ocean, too small and remote to matter to anyone. But precisely that distance, that silence and that almost total absence of glances, have turned the archipelago into one of the most uncomfortable places of the map, one where paradise and power have been coexisting for decades without giving explanations. A paradise taken by force. part of history we tell it a few months ago. In the middle of the Indian Ocean, the Chagos Archipelago was for centuries a forgotten place, inhabited by a community that developed your own culture far from the great powers, until in the middle of the Cold War the United Kingdom decided to turn it into a global strategic piece. To make this possible, London separated the islands of Mauritius and, in agreement with the United Statessystematically expelled the entire local population between the late 1960s and early 1970s, emptying Diego Garcia to build a joint military base that has since operated outside of public scrutiny. We are talking about a territory where civil life disappeared completely. No one enters here without a weapon. For more than half a century, Diego Garcia is a geopolitical anomaly: a tropical island with perfect beaches and intact reefs that cannot be accessed without military authorization and where the armed presence it’s the norm. Officially administered by the United Kingdom and rented to the United States, the base has been key in operations in the Middle East and Central Asiaand has been surrounded by persistent accusations about secret flights, clandestine detentions and activities that have never been fully clarified. What happens inside remains, to a large extent, a state secret shared. Diego Garcia Island Invisible expelled. As the base grew, the Chagossians were trapped in exile, many of them scattered between Mauritius and Seychellesdeprived of their land, of adequate compensation and for decades even of the right to return. Their towns were swallowed up by the jungle, abandoned churches and cemeteries, and their history was minimized by official documents that described them as temporary workers, not as a community with deep roots. To this day, many continue to die without having seen the place where they were born, while decisions about their future are made. systematically without them. The transfer in small print. Thus, after years of international pressure and a strong opinion of the International Court of Justice, a few days ago London announced its intention to return sovereignty from Chagos to Mauritius, a gesture presented as the closing of a colonial wound with an important “but” in the background. It happens that the agreement includes a key condition: the Diego García base would remain operational for decades (99 years), thus shielding Anglo-American military interests. For many Chagossians, devolution without the island of Diego García is not a real liberation, but a repetition of the same pattern under another name. The clash between allies. The latest twist has come when the United States stopped the processwary of any change that could affect one of its most sensitive military installations, and provoking open tensions with the United Kingdom while returning the negotiations to the starting box in the already closed offices. Thus, Chagos it is again the scene of a dispute where the discourse of international law and decolonization collides with the logic of global security, confirming the central idea that has run through its entire history: on this paradisiacal island, neither the landscape nor its former inhabitants rule, but rather an armed silence of which, still todayyou can’t really know what the hell is going on inside. Image | Anne Sheppard, POT In Xataka | A Finnish couple found an uninhabited island on Google Maps. Today they rent it for 2,400 euros per night In Xataka | One of the most remote islands was taken 60 years ago by the United Kingdom and the United States. Since then, what happens there has been a secret.

The US has had a grain for “Iran”. The United Kingdom does not allow its bombers to enter a secret island that is key to the attack

by

Since the Cold War, many of the great powers have understood that modern wars do not begin when the first plane takes off, but when secures access to the bases from which it will take off. Sometimes the deciding factor is not so much firepower, but the key that opens or closes a key clue at the exact location on the map. That is happening right now on a lost atoll. A problem with name and surname. The United States has had a major problem for “the Iran thing” and it is not in Tehran, but in the Indian Ocean. United Kingdom refuses to authorize the use of Diego García Island and the RAF Fairford base for a possible air campaign against the Islamic Republic, alleging that it could violate international law if it is a preventive attack. Without that permission, Washington loses two key platforms to project its long-range air power, just when the president has given an ultimatum to Iran and has hinted that in a matter of days he could decide between an agreement or a military operation. The secret island that sustains long wars. It we count some time ago. Located halfway between the east coast of Africa and the west coast of Indonesia, The island was part of the Chagos Archipelago. During the 18th century, it was colonized by the French as an agricultural settlement. So they took the Chagossians, descendants of slaves from Africa and India, to the islands to work on growing coconut trees for the production of copra (dried coconut meat). Over time, the locals developed their own culture and dialect, known as Chagossian Creole. By 1814, after Napoleon’s defeat, The island came under British control as part of the Treaty of Parisintegrating into the colony of Mauritius. Throughout the 19th century, life on the island continued with a small population dedicated to agriculture and fishing, but things were about to change with the beginning of the new century. The agreement. During the Cold War, The United States and the United Kingdom sealed an agreement. Both nations saw the island as a strategic location for a secret military base in the Indian Ocean. In 1965, the British separated the Chagos Islands from Mauritius, thus forming the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), which also includes the other 57 islands of the Chagos Archipelago. By 1966, he signed a secret agreement with the United States, allowing the construction of the “secret” military base. Key node. Since then, Diego García is anything but any base, because he is one of the more strategic enclaves of the Pentagon in the Indian Ocean. Its central runway, its port capable of hosting nuclear submarines and its logistics infrastructure allow strategic bombers to be deployed, maintained and rearmed in sustained cycles. Without going too far, last year it already served as a pressure platform when several B-2s arrived in a clear message to Iran, and precisely that type of deployment is what is now conspicuous by its absence. That there are no visible bomber movements towards the island reinforces the idea that the british veto is conditioning military planning. Without bases there are no prolonged campaigns. The geographical difference is abysmal and explains the tension. From Diego García to Iran there are around 2,300 kilometers, from the United States more than 6,000. That distance sets the pace of departuresthe wear and tear of the crews and the intensity of the offensive. For a one-night operation you can fly round trip from Missouri, as was the case in previous attacks, but for a campaign a week or more against nuclear installations, military commands and missile launchers, advanced bases are needed that allow constant sorties to be generated. In other words, without access to the island and Fairford, the role of the B-2, B-1 or B-52 is greatly reduced and the plan loses volume. A clash between allies. The disagreement is not only technical, it is deeply political. London maintains that supporting an attack could implicate it legally if it knows the circumstances of an action considered unlawful, and the prime minister has marked distances with the White House. Washington, for its part, has responded hardening the tone and linking the refusal to the dispute over the future of Diego García within the Chagos Archipelago, whose status and possible transfer to Mauritius have opened a diplomatic rift. Thus, what began as a legal debate has led to a strategic struggle between historical allies. The war that is amplified without the key piece. Meanwhile, the United States continues to accumulate fighters, electronic warfare aircraft and resuppliers in the region, preparing the board as if the military option was still alive and imminent. It turns out that the heart of a prolonged air campaign is not the F-22s in transit, but those strategic bombers operating from a secure and nearby base. Yes UK maintains the vetoWashington will have more distant and less efficient alternatives, which would force the scope and intensity of the blow to be redesigned. In short, in full escalation with Iranthe piece that could do it all more simple For Washington it is precisely the one that blocks the movement today. Image | Department of DefenseRoyal Air Force, US Air Force In Xataka | One of the most remote islands was taken 60 years ago by the United Kingdom and the United States. Since then, what happens there has been a secret. In Xataka | If the most advanced US nuclear aircraft carrier maintains its speed, it will reach its destination on Sunday. Not good news for a nation

Spain has been dealing with the weather in the United Kingdom for a month and a half. And that forces us to rethink how we build our roads

by

Roads closed, prohibited overtaking and new speed restrictions, landslides that are swept away by a moving car or potholes that become sinkholes with the continued passage of vehicles. The roads in Spain have suffered greatly with a month and a half in which a succession of storms has barely given any respite. But is the fault of the investments or is it that we are not prepared for this climate? Potholes, sinkholes and closed roads. We have experienced a beginning of 2026 where news of intense snowfalls and continued rains have accumulated. And that has had an impact on the way we move. In some cases, airports have been forced to stop their activitythe trains have stopped due to the wind and, on the road, we have had all kinds of problems. Videos have become popular on social networks where a string of cars suffers the consequences of a sinkhole. Or the statements of those who affirm that in the same service area they have had to rescue a good handful of cars due to blowouts as a result of the poor condition of the roads. There is information that points to all types of roads: those managed by the Statethose that are from autonomous ownership and those that are from municipal ownership. We have had complaints for everyone. An unexpected event. Beyond the money dedicated to our roads, what seems clear is that a perfect storm has occurred: roads that should be better maintained and a succession of storms for which our roads are not prepared. If we look back, in the first 40 days of the year it rained in Spain triple the average recorded between 1991 and 2020. The recorded figure not only confirms that the swamps have filledalso calls into question to what extent Spain is becoming in a rainy country. And, above all, how we can prepare for climate change with more extreme weather events, repeated more frequently and further away from the typical climate of our country. Are we prepared? The truth is that our roads are prepared for something else. In Spain, roads are based on the PG3 regulations that draws on the European guidelines. Most of them respond to the premises aimed at building roads in hot climates. In fact, the next category is for a “medium” thermal zone and the next is considered “temperate.” This is important because as I said Francisco José Lucas Ochoatechnical and business development director at Repsol in his Twitter account, some time ago, on these roads A bitumen is used that is harder and withstands high temperatures better.. In the wetter climates A softer bitumen is used, as in the United Kingdom, but this can soften and melt if it is very hot. Our disadvantage? Asphalt resists high temperatures better but is more fragile and breaks more easily. This structure on our road leaves us, in most of the country (because high mountain roads are slightly different), roads that are less permeable to the passage of water. And the main objective has never been to resist humidity, it has been to resist extreme heat and fatigue due to the passage of numerous vehicles, since Spain is the second country in Europe with the highest heavy vehicle traffic. What consequences does it have? Asphalts designed for dry climates that have to suffer constant punishment from rain and humidity are more likely to accumulate water and encourage aquaplaning. But when the absorption of water is continuousthe problems are bigger. If the soil receives a constant amount of water, there comes a point where the layers beneath the asphalt remain constantly moist. This alters its ability to distribute loads, which is essential when you have a more rigid or less elastic asphalt like ours. This limited distribution of loads favors the fracture of the upper layer, generating potholes that end up becoming sinkholes both due to the action of the vehicles themselves and the punishment inflicted by the constant fall of water, further delving into the depth of the hole that is exposed. In addition, the useful life of asphalt is limited. Where it doesn’t rain and where it does rain. The added problem is that this train of storms has left a lot of rain where the roads are directly designed to withstand intense vehicle traffic circulating in a dry and hot climate. Andalusia and Extremadura have faced rains typical of Cantabria but, curiously, in Cantabria it has barely rained. In United Kingdomwhere the problem of water on the road is a constant, the construction of roads plays with the porosity of the asphalt, with the aim of making the soil capable of absorbing as much water as possible. A technique that is applied to the surface itself but in which the ditches are also taken into account so that the accumulated water does not infiltrate and, as we said, change the ideal load distribution. This type of asphalt is limited in Spain to very specific areaswith limited traffic and low risk of snow and smelt. In cold and humid climatesFor example, they have to deal with asphalt that is also more rigid but without losing sight of the accumulation of water. There the problem is not so much the latter as it is the formation of ice and the passage of vehicles equipped with studded tires on depending on which roads. If the road were as porous as in the United Kingdom, water would accumulate in the small gaps in the road surface and freeze, turning the road into a skating rink. Is there a solution? Yes and it seems to be underway. From 2021the Center for Studies and Experimentation of Public Works (CEDEX) coordinates the Transversal Working Group on Climate Change and Resilience in Roads. This group is analyzing the current situation of Spanish roads and infrastructure such as bridges, tunnels or aqueducts and what investments must be made to adapt them to the new meteorological reality of our country. Furthermore, in collaboration with CEDEX … Read more

The United Kingdom has always been a country of pets, but fear has triggered a dangerous demand: dogs ready to attack

by

The proverb says that the dog is man’s best friend. In United Kingdom more and more people He believes he can be something more: his best protector. At least that is the feeling conveyed by dog ​​training companies, which have found a curious increase in demand thanks to the visibility that networks and networks are giving them. celebrities. They are not cheap, they carry many more responsibilities than a ‘conventional’ pet and they operate within a complex legal framework, but that does not prevent the fact that on the other side of the English Channel it is increasingly easier to come across dogs ready to jump at the command of their owners. There are those who prediction even that personal defense dogs are a billion-dollar market that is rapidly expanding in the United Kingdom. What has happened? That the training of defense dogs is becoming an increasingly profitable business in the United Kingdom. We know it thanks to Guardianwhich a few days ago published an extensive report in which he explains that this type of pets, ready to obey the orders of their owners and defend them with hooves and teeth (in the most literal sense of the expression) if necessary, is experiencing considerable growth. There are not many statistics or official data that corroborate the trend (Guardian does not provide them at least), but of course the message from the sector is clear. “Demand has increased, without a doubt,” confirms Alaster Bly, founder of K9 Guarda company specializing in “highly trained security guard dogs.” There are even trainers who offer special courses to train pets that people already have in their homes. Has demand increased that much? A quick search Google shows a good number of British companies and blogs dedicated to the same thing: selling or informing about defense dogs. And that’s not the only clue. There are even market reports that assure that it is a business in full expansion. A recent study published by AdAstra Solution estimated the size of the British protection dog market at 1.2 billion dollars in 2024. Its forecast is that in just a decade it will rise to 2.5 billion, with a growth rate CAGR of 9.2%. The key is not only that these pets arouse more interest, but that they are expanding their demand base. What does that mean? That dogs trained to serve as bodyguards seem to be ‘becoming popular’ in the United Kingdom. They are far from being a mass phenomenon, but something has changed: they are no longer a ‘whim’ of the wealthiest families or professionals in the security field. According to confirm Guardian After interviewing professionals in the sector, the panorama is changing little by little, as demand increases. Bly acknowledges that the majority of his clients are still wealthy people, but he has also seen growing interest from families who are not wealthy and simply want to “invest in security.” The reasons for this change? There are two that seem key. The first is concern about crime. Although official statistics can be contradictoryStatista tables reflect that the number of violent crimes against people recorded by the police in England and Wales have increased in recent decades. And clearly. In fact, although they have decreased in recent years, they continue to remain well above the snow levels of the beginning of the 21st century. Are there more reasons? Yes. The networks. British reporter Elle Hunt remember that the increase in demand has gone hand in hand with greater media exposure of this type of dogs through various means. One is celebrities. In recent years, personalities such as Rochelle and Marvin Humes, Molly-Mae Hague, Katie Price, J.Terry…actors, singers, footballers and television personalities with well-identifiable faces in the United Kingdom. In the sector, there are those who remember that the increase in demand coincides with greater visibility through Instagram or TikTok of defense dog exhibitions and competitions. Schuzthunda canine agility sport. And how much do they cost? Much more than a ‘conventional’ dog. A trained dog requires considerable work that, sometimes, begins even before the dog is born. Bly works, for example, with hybrids of German and Belgian shepherds, a “very specific genetic mix” that allows it to adapt to its function. Hence they are not cheap. They cost (at least) £32,000. However, price is only one of the factors that the owner must take into account. ¿Is there anything else? Yes. Another factor, even more important, is the care and responsibility that comes with having a dog specially trained for defense. Guardian remember that these personal protection dogs have a complex legal framework, since they are not under the Guard Dogs Law, which does regulate animals in charge of protecting premises or professionals. “They receive the same treatment as any other dog,” explains a criminal lawyer. The problem is that standard home insurance policies can leave them out of your coverage. An important factor in a country that has seen how in recent years attacks increased of dogs recorded by the police. Images | Bignsmall Paws317 (Unsplash) and Wikipedia Via | Guardian In Xataka | Asturias has been fighting for years to have a decent train connection. And now he is also fighting to include his dogs

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.