news

破除地方保护，营造良好营商环境。建立长效清理机制，加快清理妨碍统一市场和公平竞争的规定和做法，打破地区间行政壁垒。加强对地方政府行为的监督考核，建立健全问责机制，引导地方树立正确的政绩观。推动区域间市场规则对接，促进区域市场一体化发展。加强区域间合作交流，通过共建产业园区、合作开发项目等方式，实现优势互补、互利共赢。

Translation: Eliminate local protectionism, and promote good business environment: To establish mechanisms for long-term clean-up, as well as to speed up the cleanup of regulations and practices that hinder unified market and fair competition. To eliminate the administrative barriers between regions. To strengthen the supervision and assessment of the local governments’ behavior, to enhance accountability mechanism, and to guide local governments to establish a correct concept of political performance. To promote the integration of inter-regional market rules and the integrated development of regional markets. To strengthen inter-regional cooperation and exchange, and to realize complementary advantages and mutually beneficial “win-win” cooperation through joint construction of industrial parks and cooperative development projects.

提升对内开放水平，推进高水平对外开放。立足畅通国内大循环，加快培育完整内需体系。畅通出口转内销渠道，加大财税、金融等方面支持，推动内外贸一体化发展。建设高标准市场体系，营造市场化、法治化、国际化一流营商环境。稳步扩大制度型开放，加强规则、规制、管理、标准等制度建设。坚持合作共赢，推动共建“一带一路”高质量发展。

Translation: Improve the level of opening up internally and promote a high level of opening up externally: To establish the great internal circulation with minimal hindrance, to accelerate the cultivation of a complete domestic demand institution. To minimize barriers for export-to-domestic sales channel, to expand the support for fiscal, taxation and financial aspects. To promote the integrated development of domestic and foreign trade. To construct a high-standard market institution, to create a market-oriented, rule-based and internationalized first class business environment. To steadily expand the opening up of institutions, strengthen rules, regulations, management, standards and various other institutions. To adhere to win-win cooperation, and promote the high quality development of the Belt and Road Initiative.

The humanitarian mission trying to break the Israeli blockade on Gaza was the victim of new attacks, which they denounce are for psychological warfare and intimidation. The Global Sumud Flotilla, made up of 50 boats carrying humanitarian aid bound for Gaza, denounced on Tuesday that it was the target of nine drone attacks that targeted five ships, while they were sailing in the Mediterranean Sea south of the Greek island of Crete.

Spanish journalist Néstor Prieto, who is aboard the flotilla, reported that they activated a drone protocol, after about twenty of them began to fly over the flotilla.

Prieto reported that initially, the drones carried out surveillance tasks, carrying out sweeps at different heights. However, shortly after the attacks began, with at least nine impacts documented in videos broadcast on social networks.

The journalist noted that the attacks appear to follow a pattern of psychological warfare, with sound bomb detonations in the air and water, designed to frighten and disable boats, rather than to cause lethal damage.

The most recent of the attacks would have caused damage to the masts of one of the ships, although the information is still confusing due to the effects that the flotilla’s telecommunications are suffering, which force them to constantly change radio channels, according to Prieto.

Explosions, unidentified drones and communications jamming. We are witnessing these psychological operations firsthand, right now, but we will not be intimidated. The lengths to which Israel and its allies will go to prolong the horrors of starvation and Genocide in Gaza are…

— Global Sumud Flotilla Commentary (@GlobalSumudF) September 23, 2025

Although the origin of the drones is unknown at the moment, the pattern of attack points to Israel or related groups, according to the journalist’s report. At 2:27 a.m. local Greek time, drones continued to fly over the boats, including the Al Awda ship.

“Our determination is stronger than ever. These tactics will not deter us from our mission to deliver aid to Gaza and break the illegal siege. Any attempt to intimidate us only reinforces our commitment. We will not be silenced. We will continue sailing,” the participants of the flotilla assured on social networks.

The initiative is part of a global effort to challenge the Israeli siege, denouncing the critical humanitarian situation in Gaza and demanding an end to the genocide.

About 3,200 members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) went on strike on Aug. 4, and on Sept. 12 rejected a subsequent contract offer from Boeing. With no date set for Boeing and IAM to come back to the negotiating table, Boeing is interviewing prospective candidates to start taking what were once union jobs, said Dan Gillian, Boeing’s vice president of Air Dominance and senior executive at the St. Louis site. “We’ve had our first hiring event. We’ve received hundreds of qualified applicants. We’re working through that now,” he said in a Tuesday interview at the Air Force Association’s Air, Space and Cyber conference. Gillian declined to provide specifics on how many permanent workers it intends to bring on and what jobs it will try to fill first, but said that “we certainly have some areas where we think we can more rapidly bring people online than in other areas.” “I won’t comment on specific job codes,” he added, “but we do think that based on the protracted nature of the strike, and per our contingency plans, now is the time to be making some of these decisions to begin bringing on additional staff.”

Boeing’s IAM workforce in St. Louis is overwhelmingly focused on its defense business, producing legacy fighters, several aircraft still in their development stages and a portion of its weapons portfolio. Those workers will also build the sixth-generation F-47 fighter, the first of which is currently being manufactured, according to the Air Force’s top general. Any new hires to the company’s defense unit will join the business at a pivotal moment. Boeing’s defense division has started to show signs of recovery from supply chain and technical challenges that’s cost billions in losses across numerous fixed-price aircraft development programs. At the same time, the company is ramping up production of the F-15EX, sunsetting the Super Hornet line, and standing up production of the F-47, with a sixth-generation Navy fighter contract potentially looming. The strike also comes as Boeing’s commercial arm refocuses on production quality following a 2024 incident where a door plug blew off the fuselage of a 737 MAX in mid-flight. The National Transportation Safety Board in its investigation found that “Boeing’s failure to provide adequate training, guidance and oversight” of its factory staff ultimately led to the incident, according to an executive summary of the report published in June. (Boeing responded at the time that it regretted the accident and was focusing on improving its safety culture.)

Gillian said that Boeing’s current offer, which includes a 24 percent general wage increase and 45 percent average wage growth, is a “compelling” deal that “represents a lot of respect” for the workers in St. Louis. However, he added that the company’s previous two-tier wage structure allowed wages to become “out of control relative to the market.” “I think my teammates should be paid at the very top of the scale. They build airplanes and weapon systems and all kinds of complex things that make sense for them to be paid at the very top of the scale,” he said. At the same time, “I have to balance that with the needs that our customers have and the economics of our business, and I think we’ve done that. And I remain open to talking about how to move things around, but the answer cannot be more.” Just an hour after the interview, the union held a press conference to discuss the ongoing strike. Informed of Gillian’s comments, Jody Bennett, IAM’s lead negotiator, didn’t mince words.

“Why don’t you ask Dan if they’ve ever presented a deal to a union that they didn’t say was a very good deal? Obviously, anything the company slides across, they’re going to say it’s a very good deal,” he said. “Our membership doesn’t think it’s a very good deal. Matter of fact, they rejected it. … So please feel free to ask him if he’s ever given a final offer in which he said, ‘Hey, you ought to turn this down because it’s not worth a shit.’” Boeing’s plans to hire permanent workers is damaging its relationship with its workforce, he said, adding that many machinists were considered essential personnel during the COVID pandemic and have years of experience that cannot be replaced by new hires. “What’s going to happen is they continue to push forward with replacement workers, they’re going to put their product at risk, in my estimation. … It’s hard to find people that can do this work, and when you do get people in and you get them trained, you certainly want to retain their expertise, because they’re very high skilled,” Bennett said. “They’re going to damage the reputation, plus they’re already sending a statement out to our folks by even talking about permanent replacement workers, that a lot of these folks are already talking about looking for other jobs elsewhere, because it’s pretty clear to them that Boeing doesn’t care about them.”

critical support to the US capitalist class in their heroic struggle to sabotage military production (by being too greedy to pay their workers, and trying to replace them with scabs who have nowhere near the level of expertise and knowledge of the ins-and-outs of the various planes)

Gillian said that any new employees hired permanently to take over union roles either already have aerospace manufacturing experience or will be trained by Boeing in the skills needed to successfully do the job. “We won’t compromise on that,” he said. “I also appreciate our partnership with the Defense Contract Management Agency, who is helping with their second set of eyes to make sure that we’re doing things the right way, and I am very confident that the product we’re delivering to our customer meets the highest standard that we have.” Although both Gillian and Bennett indicated that they are willing to restart negotiations to work out a contract agreement, the path forward remains unclear. Last week, IAM members ratified their own proposed deal, which was developed without Boeing’s input. According to Bennett, the union proposal differs from Boeing’s offer in three ways. The proposal keeps wage increases the same as Boeing’s offer, but makes some changes to allow for growth at the top of the pay scale. It increases Boeing’s match on St. Louis workers’ retirement accounts to be at the same level as its union employees in the Pacific Northwest, and it bumps the ratification bonus from $4,000 to $10,000. Gillian said that from Boeing’s perspective, the union’s proposal is “way beyond the economics of what we put on the table” and “isn’t real” because it was not a result of collective bargaining between the company and IAM leadership.

Impacts To Aircraft Production

During a July earnings call, Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg downplayed the impacts of a potential strike, saying that one wouldn’t reach the magnitude of last year’s machinist strike in Seattle, which lasted about two months and cost Boeing, its suppliers and its customers about $9.6 billion. “The order of magnitude of this is much, much less than what we saw last fall. That was roughly 30,000 machinists,” he said. “So we’ll manage through this. I wouldn’t worry too much about the implications of the strike.” Steve Parker, the chief executive of Boeing’s defense unit, declined to comment Tuesday when asked whether the strike could lead to additional losses on fixed-price defense contracts in Boeing’s third quarter. Even with the ongoing strike, Boeing has been able to keep deliveries of its Joint Direct Attack Munitions roughly at the same pace they were prior to the strike and has continued to deliver F-15EXs and F/A-18s, with Gillian stating that from the customer’s perspective, those aircraft deliveries are “coming about as expected.”

by "coming about as expected" they apparently mean "coming in with glaring reliability issues" https://hexbear.net/post/6018345/6471687

As part of its contingency plan, Boeing has qualified some of its managers to perform work on the production line and brought on temporary workers “to add capacity,” he said. Nonetheless, the production pace for programs like the F-15EX has slowed. “Definitely not having everybody at work every day has an impact down throughout the production system on something like an F-15, and through our contingency plans, we’re working to mitigate that as much as possible, and we are able to continue delivering airplanes. I’d say we are slowing our rate ramp increase a bit as a result of that.” Boeing planned to increase F-15EX production from one to two aircraft a month by the end of 2026, Flight Global reported earlier this year. Asked whether Boeing would be able to keep to that timeline, Gillian said the company would not be able to forecast the timing for the ramp up until the end of the strike. However, he added that the company has been working to incorporate additional process and engineering improvements during the strike in the hopes of increasing efficiency when workers do return. “I’m optimistic that those improvements will help me meet those rate ramp requirements in front of me,” he said.

Not every rifleman in the U.S. Army rides to battle in beefy Bradley or Stryker armored vehicles—in fact, a growing number of soldiers will soon do so in Chevrolet pickup trucks. So far, the Army is in the process of converting five of these planned Mobile Brigades to fight on foot with the intention of 9–14 units in total. Still, soldiers have to reach the combat zone, so each infantry squad will get an M1301 Infantry Squad Vehicle (ISV) based on Chevy’s Colorado ZR2 Bison. Popular Mechanics anointed the truck the “ultimate mid-sized off-road pickup” in 2018. By foregoing armor; mine protection; weapons; and even a windshield, roof, and doors, the ISV weighs merely 2.5 tons and can seat a nine-man squad (if one of them drives). Soldiers have praised the ISV’s fuel efficiency, air transportability, and ability to negotiate muddy or forested terrain.

However, an Army National Guard officer with over 20 years of experience serving in a unit converting into a Mobile Brigade Combat Team told Popular Mechanics the new Infantry Squad Vehicle’s design is ill-conceived—unable to survive enemy fire, lacking capacity for basic supplies, and pricier than existing, roomier alternatives. But the Pentagon is keen on the new whips. In May, the U.S. Department of Defense canceled most ongoing armored vehicle procurement, including Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV), Humvees, and Stryker troop carriers, claiming enough had been delivered and that ISVs were the future. Infantry Squad Vehicles may indeed assume other roles, too. The Army has tested air defense lasers on ISVs, while Chevrolet is offering flatbed transport models, a weapons-turret variant, a command-and-control kit, and an electric-propulsion model. ... it retains 90 percent civilian parts—theoretically lowering cost. However, while 2025 civilian ZR2s typically cost $49,000–$60,000, M1301 contracts average well over $330,000 to $370,000 per vehicle delivered. By comparison, recent contracts show costs of $225,000 to $275,000 per Humvee, and $330,000–$400,000 per JLTV. Following initial Infantry Squad Vehicle tests in 2020 and 2021, the Pentagon’s Department of Testing and Evaluation (DOT&E) expressed concerns over high breakdown rates, poor long-range radio performance, uncomfortable seating, and lack of cybersecurity, accessible stowage, firepower, and protection. Accordingly, Chevrolet revised the finalized production model’s engineering, ergonomics, and comms. In 2023, evaluators found the breakdown rate reduced to one incident per 15,000 miles. But DOT&E noted improvements to other cited problems weren’t evaluated, particularly “the [lack of] capability to deliver effective fires, provide reliable communication, and force protection.” But the Army didn’t require those qualities.

That’s why Infantry Squad Vehicles are supposedly meant for delivering infantry just outside combat zones without contacting enemy forces. But if ISVs truly are non-combat vehicles, they’re logistically outperformed by cheaper alternatives in service like LMTV trucks or the M1152 expanded capacity Humvee. Though an M1152 (with limited in-built armor) is 40 percent heavier at 3.5 tons, it matches or outperforms ISVs in key ways when forgoing add-on armor. Despite their non-combat role, ISVs are being attached directly to combat squads much like Bradley or JLTVs with combat capability. That means when the squad dismounts, they must either leave a squadmate in the truck or abandon it. “If the drivers are tied to the vehicles, you have just lost 11 percent of your combat power across the formation,” said the officer, who asked to remain anonymous due to fear of retribution. “If not, [i.e. the trucks are abandoned] how do we evacuate casualties or resupply troops on the line?” He argued non-combat trucks should be pooled in separate logistical platoons so infantry units don’t have personnel tied to vehicles they can’t deploy near the combat zone.

Infantry squad vehicles are also often promoted as being so mobile and stealthy that they’ll evade enemy strikes—again, despite being classed as non-combat vehicles. The Army broadly advocated for similar concepts at the turn of the century—until mines and ambushes in Iraq began killing soldiers in armorless trucks. A soldier famously asked then-Defense Secretary Rumsfeld why troops were forced to “dig through landfills for scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to uparmor our vehicles.” The Pentagon scrambled to acquire the most heavily protected trucks possible. But the Pentagon now favors unprotected transports again, saying it doesn’t expect to fight another insurgency, but rather plans for scenarios wherein U.S. troops rush to defend its allies from China or Russia. ISV proponents argue trucks transiting through friendly territory won’t face ambushes and mines, and that that long-distance artillery, kamikaze drones, and missiles can defeat light armor. So they argue it’s better for trucks to trade armor for speed to avoid attacks and outrun enemy detection-targeting-firing cycles, or “kill chains.”

The officer didn’t think this theory was realistic. “The ISV cannot outrun or outmaneuver a threat. Every link in the kill chain moves faster than any vehicle on the battlefield,” he said. “You cannot ‘move stealthily’ in a vehicle. Modern sensors are much more capable than our ability to deceive them.” The 2021 evaluators seemingly concurred, reporting that in exercises ISV-equipped rifle companies “did not successfully avoid enemy detection, ambushes, and engagements during a majority of their missions,” were slowed excessively while transiting off-road, and experienced “numerous casualties.” “ISVs would not survive within the 30+ kilometer range of FPV kamikaze drones,” the officer asserted. “They would shred their tires on the artillery shrapnel littering the road leading to the Forward Line of Own Troops. They would spectacularly demine the fields of whatever country we were operating in one device at a time.” (In Ukraine, rocket artillery and drones have been used to sow minefields on supply roads behind the frontline.) And bivouacking the trucks 30 kilometers back would render them useless to the units they’re tied to, he said.

“If the problem is that vehicles get killed easily by drones, I don’t think the answer is packing nine guys into one and trying your luck. We’ve all seen footage of Russians dying in droves driving around in rail buggies and ATVs. Would we be any different?” He observed the loss of just one Infantry Squad Vehicle would overwhelm the capacity of a standard Battalion Aid Station. “That means triage, strain on casualty/medical evaluation, and inability to properly deal with other casualties. And the ISV cannot carry a stretcher without modification [unlike a Humvee].” He believes vehicles near the frontline still require armor and an active protection system that shoot down incoming missiles and drones. “Armor will protect you from fragmentation,” the officer said. Light armor may not prevent vehicle knockouts, he acknowledged, but it still greatly improves passengers’ survival odds.

Still, the officer said he didn’t oppose motorized light infantry broadly. “[Mobile Brigade Combat Team] has far less of a logistical burden, is a better fit for domestic operations [like disaster response], and doesn’t require enormous amounts of money to move to training areas. That said, its ability to be decisive in a maneuver fight is lacking.” He simply felt integration of Infantry Squad Vehicles didn’t make sense, arguing their selection reflected roots in the Special Operations Command and testing by elite airborne units, with little input from regular motorized and mechanized infantry experienced in large-scale conventional motorized operations using available vehicles. “A vehicle that needs modification to hold a stretcher, or carry the basic load and three days of supply is probably not what you want to be looking at for the future of mobile brigades,” the officer said. “We have many vehicles in the inventory that will already accomplish those tasks.”

critical support to US Special Forces ghouls in their heroic effort to mislead the US military into buying a bunch of bullshit that is completely ill-suited for actual war rather than cruising around murdering civilians