ROB WARZYNIAK recalls the emblematic 1906 book, The Jungle, in its analysis of the crisis presently engulfing the US Food and Drug Administration
BEFORE it even began, it was clear that the recent two-day summit in Stansstad, Switzerland, on “peace in Ukraine” would not — and could not — succeed in moving towards a settlement that would end the decade-long conflict, even if that had ever been a serious intention.
Sixty-eight of the countries invited, including China, declined to attend, leaving the US, Britain, the EU, Nato and their allies to dominate proceedings. Russia, one of the two protagonists, was excluded. Of those present, 12 refused to sign the final communique.
Significantly, these included Brazil, the Vatican City, South Africa and a number of developing countries. In the end, none of the Brics countries, neither the original five nor subsequent members, signed the final document.
SOPHIE BOLT argues that spending more on military will harm rather than benefit Britain by diverting vital resources away from essential public services
British military spending is among the highest in the world, diverts scarce resources from far better causes and fuels international conflict. It’s time we made different choices, argues LIZ PAYNE
While 69 per cent of Ukrainians want negotiated peace, Western leaders are cynically prolonging the war for their own strategic and economic goals, to the immense detriment of Ukraine and Europe, write BOB ORAM and MAGGIE SIMPSON



