Source: YouTube

Summary

Inflation continues as Iran war passes 6 months and tariffs lift consumer prices

Why It Matters

This video provides visual context for the story and helps readers quickly understand the key development from the original source.

Watch Original Video

Source: YouTube

Summary

Six months into the US-Israel war with Iran, can anyone win? | BBC News

Why It Matters

This video provides visual context for the story and helps readers quickly understand the key development from the original source.

Watch Original Video

The latest guidance was announced in recent Navy and Marine Corps administrative messages. The Air Force also recently updated its policy on how long service members can have medical waivers for facial hair before facing administrative separation.

Last year, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directed military commanders to begin separating troops who still require a medical waiver for shaving after one year of treatment. Hegseth also mandated that the Defense Department would only issue temporary waivers for medical conditions such as pseudofolliculitis barbae or PFB, which is a painful skin condition common among Black men that is made worse by shaving.

The Navy’s updated policy includes a new requirement for commanders to conduct an initial counseling of sailors with medical waivers for shaving after they’ve undergone six continuous months of treatment that requires “a modification to grooming or uniform standards,” a service official said.

“The purpose of the counseling is to ensure the sailor understands the status of the medical accommodation process, the expectations associated with continued accommodation, and any potential impacts if the medical condition persists,” the Navy official told Task & Purpose. “The counseling itself is not punitive and is intended to document the discussion and ensure the sailor is informed as the accommodation progresses through the milestones established in the policy.”

The Marine Corps is also requiring commanders to formally counsel Marines with medical waivers after six continuous months of treatment, said Yvonne Carlock, a spokeswoman for U.S. Marine Corps Manpower and Reserve Affairs.

Afterward, the counseled Marine will receive a Page 11 entry in their service record book and an acknowledgement that the counseling occurred, Carlock told Task & Purpose. A Page 11 entry is reserved for administrative remarks.

The Navy and Marine Corps also require commanders to track service members with medical waivers for shaving.

Under the Navy’s updated policy, commanders must also submit monthly reports on sailors receiving treatment as part of an approved medical waiver. Stars and Stripes first reported on the move.

The Marine Corps also requires commanding officers to track and report all approved and pending medical waivers for shaving, according to the recent Marine Administrative Message, or MARADMIN.

The reporting process does not affect whether Marines can be approved for a medical waiver for shaving, Carlock, the Marine Corps spokeswoman, said.

The reports allow commanders and the Marine Corps’ headquarters to “actively monitor medical grooming compliance, track treatment timelines, and report data to higher authority,” Carlock said.

Marines and sailors who cannot be clean-shaven after one year of medical treatment face being separated.

Also recently, a July 28 Department of the Air Force memo that was shared on social media laid out when airmen and Space Force guardians with medical waivers for shaving will be considered for separation. A Department of the Air Force official confirmed the memo is authentic.

“Commanders will initiate discharge processing or a retention package for members who accumulate more than 12 months of medical shaving profiles with a 24-month period beginning 1 February 2026,” according to the memo, which was signed by Richard Anderson, assistant Air Force secretary for manpower and reserve affairs.

The memo implements guidance issued in December by the Air Force’s surgeon general.

If you are a currently serving member of the military who has been impacted by these policies, we’d like to hear from you. Please fill out the form below and tell us a bit about what your experience has been like, how these new policies are playing out for you and your peers or subordinates in practice, and anything else you think we need to know.

The post Sailors and Marines to be counseled after 6 months of medical shaving waivers appeared first on Task & Purpose.

Although its mandate expires at the end of the year, the future of the security arrangements in southern Lebanon remains highly uncertain, with multiple options still under consideration.

Part of UNIFIL’s international civilian staff was evacuated during the escalation of the conflict that reignited on March 2, while military personnel remained on the ground and continued operations.

“UNIFIL has a mandate until Dec. 31, 2026, and our mission will continue until then,” UNIFIL spokesperson Kandice Ardiel said.

While rumors, public statements and various proposals have emerged about next steps, no clear plan has taken shape.

On June 2, UN Secretary-General António Guterres submitted three options to the UN Security Council, all of which would significantly reduce the number of peacekeepers deployed in southern Lebanon.

Guterres outlined scenarios that would see a light, medium or more substantial presence, with troop numbers ranging from 900 to 1,500 or 3,000, alongside varying numbers of military observers and reserve forces.

However, the UN Security Council has yet to reach a decision and could ultimately opt for a course of action different from the three proposed alternatives.

“The Security Council is currently examining the options. We will wait and see what decision it makes,” Ardiel said. “For us, the priority remains continuing to implement our mandate, and creating the conditions for a smooth handover to whatever comes next.”

There is no timeline yet, but as the end date nears, the risk is that southern Lebanon will be left with a security vacuum.

The three options, meanwhile, are not the only proposals on the table. Over the past few months, several countries have expressed interest in maintaining an international presence in southern Lebanon.

Following a proposal by Italy and France to form a post-UNIFIL multinational coalition — put forward during the bilateral summit held in Antibes in late June — Germany was the last EU country to join the call for an EU force to replace UN peacekeepers in the border area.

The European External Action Service also proposed a three-year civilian and military mission, not as a replacement for UNIFIL but to strengthen the Lebanese authorities and the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) in enhancing territorial control and border security.

However, any scenario is further complicated by Israel’s continued presence in Lebanese territory and its ongoing military operations in border villages, despite the ceasefire currently in place.

UNIFIL and Resolution 1701, which brought an end to the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war, have been largely absent from both the initial and now-defunct U.S.-Iran agreement, which included a ceasefire in Lebanon, and the security arrangements outlined in the framework agreement signed between Lebanon and Israel in Washington.

The framework agreement foresees the implementation of “pilot zones” in southern Lebanon that would be placed under LAF control and cleared of Hezbollah presence and weapons before the Israeli withdrawal, which would take place upon verification.

How such verification should be carried out remains unclear, while UNIFIL has not been brought into the discussion. So far, Israel has withdrawn from only one of the two agreed pilot zones. Israeli and Lebanese representatives are set to meet again in Rome on Aug. 4.

Regardless of outcomes, UNIFIL will cease operations on Dec. 31. As the mission’s mandate expires, the tasks outlined under Resolution 1701, including monitoring the cessation of hostilities and supporting the deployment of the Lebanese army south of the Litani River, will come to an end, even though the UN Security Council resolutions would technically remain in place.

On a practical level, this means UNIFIL will no longer be on the ground to monitor, report and coordinate daily between the parties, but will instead dismantle its bases and withdraw after nearly five decades of operations.

The Lebanese government has made no secret of its preference for maintaining an international presence along the border.

Officer-in-charge of the United Nations Special Coordinator to Lebanon (UNSCOL) Jean Arnault recently received a delegation representing 86 members of the Lebanese Parliament who signed a petition addressed to the UN secretary-general for the renewal of UNIFIL’s mandate, expressing their concerns about the consequences of the withdrawal.

According to Paul Salem, a non-resident senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and former president and CEO of the Middle East Institute, the Lebanese state and the LAF should be able to assume full responsibility instead of relying on an additional international force.

“The time to rely on others is over,” he said. “The LAF should be supported in gradually assuming full responsibility for security, not by bringing in another international force. They are certainly not ready yet, but that should be the end goal, rather than perpetuating the current model.”

According to Salem, from a realpolitik perspective, UNIFIL has not been particularly effective. At least half of the mission’s positions are currently located in areas occupied by Israel, affecting peacekeepers on the ground and delaying or blocking freedom of movement.

“Other countries should step in to support Lebanese authorities, not only the United States, but also the Gulf states, Turkey and Europe,” he concluded. “Everyone should help the LAF through training, resources, equipment and recruitment, rather than by maintaining a presence on the ground.”