Today’s generation of weapons — many of which are fractions of the size of the bombs America dropped in 1945 but magnitudes more deadly than conventional ones — poses an unpredictable threat.

It hangs over battlefields in Ukraine as well as places where the next war might occur: the Persian Gulf, the Taiwan Strait, the Korean Peninsula.

This is one story of what’s at stake — if even one small nuclear weapon were used — based on modeling, research and hundreds of hours of interviews with people who have lived through an atomic detonation, dedicated their lives to studying nuclear war or are planning for its aftermath.

Nuclear war is often described as unimaginable. In fact, it’s not imagined enough.

If it seems alarmist to anticipate the horrifying aftermath of a nuclear attack, consider this: The United States and Ukraine governments have been planning for this scenario for at least two years.

In the fall of 2022, a U.S. intelligence assessment put the odds at 50-50 that Russia would launch a nuclear strike to halt Ukrainian forces if they breached its defense of Crimea. Preparing for the worst, American officials rushed supplies to Europe. Ukraine has set up hundreds of radiation detectors around cities and power plants, along with more than 1,000 smaller hand-held monitors sent by the United States.

Nearly 200 hospitals in Ukraine have been identified as go-to facilities in the event of a nuclear attack. Thousands of doctors, nurses and other workers have been trained on how to respond and treat radiation exposure. And millions of potassium iodide tablets, which protect the thyroid from picking up radioactive material linked with cancer, are stockpiled around the country.

But well before that — just four days after Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine, in fact — the Biden administration had directed a small group of experts and strategists, a “Tiger Team,” to devise a new nuclear “playbook” of contingency plans and responses. Pulling in experts from the intelligence, military and policy fields, they pored over years-old emergency preparedness plans, weapon-effects modeling and escalation scenarios, dusting off materials that in the age of counterterrorism and cyberwarfare were long believed to have faded into irrelevance.

The playbook, which was coordinated by the National Security Council, now sits in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, next to the West Wing of the White House. It has a newly updated, detailed menu of diplomatic and military options for President Joe Biden — and any future president — to act upon if a nuclear attack occurs in Ukraine.

At the heart of all of this work is a chilling conclusion: The possibility of a nuclear strike, once inconceivable in modern conflict, is more likely now than at any other time since the Cold War. “We've had 30 pretty successful years keeping the genie in the bottle,” a senior administration official on the Tiger Team said. While both America and Russia have hugely reduced their nuclear arsenals since the height of the Cold War, the official said, “Right now is when nuclear risk is most at the forefront.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin reminded the world of this existential danger last week when he publicly warned of nuclear war if NATO deepened its involvement in Ukraine.

The risk of nuclear escalation in Ukraine, while now low, has been a primary concern for the Biden administration throughout the conflict, details of which are being reported here for the first time. In a series of interviews over the past year, U.S. and Ukrainian officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal planning, diplomacy and ongoing security preparations.

And while it may cause sleepless nights in Washington and Kyiv, most of the world has barely registered the threat. Perhaps it’s because an entire generation came of age in a post-Cold War world, when the possibility of nuclear war was thought to be firmly behind us. It is time to remind ourselves of the consequences in order to avoid them.

Imagine a nuclear weapon is launched

Even after last week’s nuclear threat, few believe that Putin will wake up one day and decide to lob megaton warheads at Washington or European capitals in retaliation for supporting Ukraine. What Western allies see as more likely is that Russia will use a so-called tactical nuclear weapon, which is less destructive and designed to strike targets over short distances to devastate military units on the battlefield.

The strategic thinking behind those weapons is that they are far less damaging than city-destroying hydrogen bombs and therefore more “usable” in warfare. The United States estimates Russia has a stockpile of up to 2,000 tactical nuclear warheads, some small enough they fit in an artillery shell.

But the detonation of any tactical nuclear weapon would be an unprecedented test of the dogma of deterrence, a theory that has underwritten America’s military policy for the past 70 years. The idea stipulates that adversaries are deterred from launching a nuclear attack against the United States — or more than 30 of its treaty-covered allies — because by doing so they risk an overwhelming counterattack.

Possessing nuclear weapons isn’t about winning a nuclear war, the theory goes; it’s about preventing one. It hinges upon a carefully calibrated balance of terror among nuclear states.

If Putin dropped a nuclear weapon on Ukraine — a nonnuclear nation that’s not covered by anyone’s nuclear umbrella — what then? If deterrence fails, how is it possible to reduce the risk of one attack escalating into a global catastrophe?

We might find an answer in the autumn of 2022, when fears of Russia’s nuclear use in Ukraine were most palpable. A lightning Ukrainian military counteroffensive had reclaimed territory from the Russians in the northeastern region of Kharkiv. The Ukrainians were on the cusp of breaching Russian defense lines at Kherson in the south, possibly causing a second Russian retreat that could signal an imminent broader military collapse.

U.S. intelligence estimated that if Ukraine’s fighters managed to break through Russian defenses — and were on the march to the occupied Crimean Peninsula, where the Russian Black Sea Fleet is based — it came down to a coin flip whether or not Russia would launch a tactical nuclear weapon to stop them, senior administration officials said.

Moscow has made implicit and explicit nuclear threats throughout the war to scare off Western intervention. Around this time, however, a series of frightening episodes took place.

On Oct. 23, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu of Russia made a flurry of phone calls to the defense chiefs of four NATO nations, including Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, to say Russia had indications that Ukrainian fighters could detonate a dirty bomb — a conventional explosive wrapped in radioactive material — on their own territory to frame Moscow.

American intelligence also intercepted chatter around then among Russian military leaders about using a tactical nuclear weapon, according to current and former Biden administration officials. General Austin and the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, Gen. Mark Milley, held three phone calls in four days with Russian counterparts during this tense period.

Believing the Russians were building an unfounded pretext for their own nuclear attack, the Biden administration quickly began a multilateral effort with allies, adversaries and nations in between to de-escalate the situation and try to talk Moscow out of it. For nearly a week, Biden aides pulled all-nighters at the White House, coordinating high-level conversations and planning for the worst: the detonation of a small nuclear device in Ukrainian territory that had the power of a few kilotons or less.

Many in the administration believed the Kremlin’s dirty bomb ploy posed the greatest risk of nuclear war since the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. State Department officials traveled to Poland to ensure that medical supplies and radiation equipment were rushed over the border. The Energy Department sent equipment to collect potential debris so that it could be later analyzed by American scientists for weapon design characteristics and the origin of the nuclear material. U.S. Strategic Command, which oversees nuclear operations, directed a team of experts (cheekily named The Writers’ Club, because their findings were written up daily for the Pentagon leadership) to assess the risk and determine which conditions would trigger Russia to go nuclear.

While cautions about the potential withering economic, diplomatic and military consequences were delivered in private to Moscow, administration officials also publicly sounded alarm bells.

The administration’s diplomatic push was coupled with efforts by leaders of several nations, including China, India and Turkey, to explain to Putin’s government the potential costs if he were to go through with a nuclear attack. That November, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, William J. Burns, met with his Russian counterpart in Turkey, where he conveyed a similar warning. On Nov. 16, the Group of 20 released a joint statement:If the Russian leader was indeed inching toward the brink, he stepped back.

What took place to prevent a nuclear attack that fall was a rare moment of consensus on an issue on which world leaders seem to be moving farther apart. Russia is replacing its Soviet-era hardware with new jets, missiles and submarines. And the other eight nations that have nuclear weapons are believed to be enhancing their arsenals in parts of the world that are already on edge.

India, which has continuing tensions over its borders with China and Pakistan, is fielding longer-range weapons.

Pakistan is developing new ballistic missiles and expanding nuclear production facilities.

North Korea, which has an arsenal of several hundred missiles and dozens of nuclear warheads, regularly threatens to attack South Korea, where the U.S. keeps about 28,500 troops.

China, which has publicly expressed its desire to control the U.S.-allied island of Taiwan by force if necessary, is increasing its nuclear arsenal at a “scale and pace unseen since the U.S.-Soviet nuclear arms race that ended in the late 1980s,” the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States concluded in October.

So while Washington has been helping Ukraine prepare for a nuclear attack, Taiwan or South Korea could be next. The National Security Council has already coordinated contingency playbooks for possible conflicts that could turn nuclear in Taiwan, the Korean Peninsula and the Middle East. Iran, which has continued its nuclear program amid Israel’s war on Hamas in Gaza, has amassed enough enriched uranium to build several weapons if and when it chooses.

During this time of widening conflict, the rising nuclear threat is especially destabilizing: A nuclear explosion in Ukraine or Gaza, where tens of thousands of civilians have already been killed or injured, would sizeably escalate either conflict and its humanitarian toll.

The world has been through a version of this moment before. The last nuclear standoff during the Cold War was cooled in part because of numerous nonproliferation efforts and arms control agreements between the United States and the former Soviet Union. The two nations, recognizing the terrifying situation they were in, worked to identify weapons that were mutually menacing and simply agreed to eliminate them. Nuclear warhead numbers plummeted to 12,500 today from roughly 70,400 in 1986.

Now that shared safety net of treaties and agreements is nearly gone. After a decade of diplomatic breakdown and military antagonism, only one major arms treaty between the United States and Russia remains — New START, which Putin suspended Russia’s participation in last year. The treaty is set to expire in February 2026.

That means we are just two years away from a world in which there are no major treaty limits on the number of strategic nuclear weapons the United States and Russia deploy. Already today, because of the New START suspension, the two nations disclose little information about their arsenals to each other and do not engage in talks for further agreements. If nuclear deterrence — however flawed a concept it may be — is to work, transparency about nations’ capabilities is critical. Without better communication, the risk of rapid escalation and miscalculation will grow.

The danger of nuclear use in Ukraine fluctuates. It waned after Ukraine’s drive to recapture territory and sever Russia’s supply lines to Crimea was stopped short. But if the momentum swings back in Ukraine’s favor, or if Putin feels threatened by increased Western intervention, it could rise again. A U.S. intelligence report declassified late last year estimated Russia had lost around 315,000 troops to death or injury in Ukraine since 2022. That’s nearly 90 percent of its prewar force, along with at least 20 warships, thousands of battle tanks and heavy weapons — all major losses that could create more dependency on its tactical nuclear arsenal.

Imagine the ripple effect of one nuclear warhead on the world — on where people live, what they eat, their sense of safety.

Few nations on earth are unaffected. If the strike happens in a country like Ukraine, among the largest grain-exporting nations in the world, the impact spreads quickly. The attack prompts an agricultural embargo to contain potentially contaminated crops, creating a domino effect of food shortages that spread across the Middle East, South Asia, North Africa and West Africa.

Fear is as dangerous as contamination itself: Panic over radiation exposure and its long-term effects drives people from their homes, regardless of whether the threat in their community is real or not. Border crossings are quickly overrun.

Anxieties over a wider nuclear war immediately spike, causing the New York Stock Exchange to plunge. Lockdown orders trigger a rush on groceries, wiping markets’ shelves clean.

No one can say what would happen next. If it was Putin who launched an attack on Ukraine, the U.S. has warned there would be “catastrophic consequences.” But the response might not be nuclear. It could be a devastating aerial bombardment aimed at Russia’s naval fleet, or Washington could decide to target a base in Belarus, where Russia has recently deployed nuclear weapons, avoiding a direct attack on Russian territory.

A tit-for-tat escalation, once touched off, is difficult to stop. If the end result was a thermonuclear exchange between nuclear powers, like the U.S. and Russia, the impact on humanity would be swift and long-lasting.

Even a limited nuclear war could be catastrophic. A 2022 scientific study found that if 100 Hiroshima-size bombs — less than 1 percent of the estimated global nuclear arsenal — were detonated in certain cities, they could generate more than five million tons of airborne soot, darkening the skies, lowering global temperatures and creating the largest worldwide famine in history.

An estimated 27 million people could immediately die, and as many as 255 million people may starve within two years.

This isn’t an easy time for adversaries to be making big leaps of faith, but history shows it’s not impossible to forge deals amid international crises.

The Limited Test Ban Treaty, which prohibits nuclear tests in the atmosphere, in space and underwater, was signed by the United States, Britain and the former Soviet Union in 1963, less than a year after the Cuban missile crisis. Negotiations over the first Strategic Arms Limitation Talks, which froze the number of American and Soviet long-range, nuclear-capable missiles, were concluded less than two months after the United States bombed Haiphong Harbor in Vietnam in 1972, damaging some Soviet ships. Several close calls in Europe during the Cold War contributed to a sweeping collection of agreements between Washington and Moscow that capped the number of each nation’s strategic weapons, opened communication channels and amplified monitoring and verification measures.

China’s aggressive nuclear buildup has complicated the strategic balance of the Cold War, raising questions in the United States about how to handle a three-way competition. In June, Jake Sullivan, President Biden’s national security adviser, publicly offered to hold nuclear arms control negotiations with Russia and China — one-on-one or multilaterally — without preconditions. The proposal has resulted in only preliminary discussions with the Chinese and was met with outright dismissal from the Russians, according to administration officials.

Nuclear arms treaties typically take months or years to negotiate. And while the agreements don’t solve everything, they do allow governments to gain insights and assurances about an adversary’s stockpile that they otherwise wouldn’t have. Left in the dark, governments are forced to plan for the worst, building offensive and defensive capabilities.

The United States is now preparing to build new nuclear warheads for the first time since 1991, part of a decades-long program to overhaul its nuclear forces that’s estimated to cost up to $2 trillion. The outline of that plan was drawn up in 2010 — in a much different security environment than what the country faces today. This administration, or the next one, could make the political case that even more weapons need to be built in response to the expansion and modernization of other nations’ arsenals, particularly Russia’s and China’s.

Behind a nondescript door on the fifth floor of the State Department building in Washington, down the hall from the former offices of the director of the Manhattan Project, a windowless control room provides a direct channel between the world’s two biggest nuclear powers.

The National and Nuclear Risk Reduction Center was established in 1988 as a 24-hour watch station to facilitate the information exchange required by various arms control treaties and security-building agreements, mostly between the United States and Russia.

With a Russian translator always on the floor, the center once buzzed with more than 1,000 messages a year regarding the testing, movement and maintenance of Russia’s weapons, missiles and bombers. Last year, after the abandonment of New START, the center received fewer than a dozen of those messages.

Today, the mechanisms of peace aren't moving as swiftly as the machinery of war.

The National and Nuclear Risk Reduction Center is adding translating services for Persian, Mandarin, Korean and other languages in case more nuclear nations express an interest in sharing information to reduce the risk of an inadvertent conflict.

But for now, those ambitions are unrealized, and the communication lines remain quiet.

New York Times

A medical student once confessed to me that if he’s not on the verge of a breakdown, he feels like he’s not working hard enough. A CEO told me that waiting to pick up her kids from school makes her feel panicky, like she’s wasting valuable time. A software engineer shared that they skip meals sometimes for fear of falling behind.

As an instructor of psychology at Harvard Medical School and a therapist who treats anxiety and depression, I’ve encountered plenty of people who exhibit these and other signs of toxic productivity. 

What is toxic productivity?

Productivity becomes toxic when you feel pressure to be productive at all times and prioritize your perpetual to-do list at the expense of your well-being.

While it isn’t an actual diagnosis, this mindset can take its toll on your physical and mental health, in some cases leading to anxiety, depression, burnout, insomnia, or self-esteem issues.

Here are five signs you’ve fallen into the toxic productivity trap — and what to do about it:

1. You are on the go all the time

People tell me they feel like there’s never enough time and that they’re perpetually rushing to get to the next thing. They can only slow down or relax once everything’s done. 

This false sense of urgency can make you feel anxious, since the part of the brain responsible for detecting threats senses the urgency and misinterprets the signal as “danger,” activating a fight-or-flight response.   

What to do about it: Try a simple pacing technique. Repeat “slow down” to yourself like a mantra for a minute or two. Then, take your time doing any activity and focus on breathing (five seconds in, five seconds out).

Doing this for three to five minutes can help manage anxiety and minimize the perception of urgency.

2. You feel guilty or ashamed about not getting enough done

Toxic productivity has a lot to do with what you feel when you haven’t checked things off, like guilt when you think you should’ve done something you didn’t and shame when you believe whatever you did wasn’t good enough. 

Both can fuel the toxic cycle that drives you to push yourself to exhaustion, only to feel frustrated when you don’t have energy to do more. 

What to do about it: Write your thoughts in a journal and examine them for patterns. 

If you notice “double standard” thinking — when you hold higher expectations for yourself than others — use self-compassion and say: “I’m doing the best I can, just like everyone else.” 

If you notice “perfectionist” or “all-or-none” thinking — the idea that if something isn’t 100% successful, it’s a failure — say: “Partial success still counts and what I’ve done is enough for today.”     

3. Your self-worth is determined by how productive you are

Productivity levels fluctuate every day for reasons out of your control. But I’ve heard people tell themselves, “Today was a garbage day” or “I was completely useless today,” or conversely, “I’ve earned my downtime today.” 

These thoughts might indicate an over-reliance on productivity for your sense of self-worth. 

What to do about it: Monitor your internal dialogue and practice talking to yourself the way you’d talk to a friend or loved one, using your own name. 

For example, I might say, “Natalie, you’re doing great today!” This technique is called “distanced self-talk” and research shows it can help you see yourself more objectively. 

4. You find it difficult to relax or to have downtime

For many of us, productivity comes with praise and reward, which can release “feel-good” brain chemicals (like dopamine). You become “addicted” to the rush of busyness.

Over time, it gets harder to feel good when you aren’t pushing yourself to the extreme. You may feel agitated, irritable, or on edge when facing unscheduled time and pressure to fill it, instead of just enjoying it. 

What to do about it: Try to reframe downtime as an opportunity. 

If you arrive early to an event, for example, try closing your eyes and listening to the sounds around you. You’re still using that time productively, but in a restorative way.

5. You neglect self-care

If self-care seems like a waste of time, you might be experiencing toxic productivity. This includes neglecting exercise, sleep and rest, healthy meals, relationships, or time for play and pleasure. 

It’s not uncommon for someone with this mindset to skip meals or even put off going to the bathroom or getting a glass of water.

What to do about it: Give yourself unconditional permission to relax every single day. 

Many people tell me they crash from exhaustion at night, but still can’t fall asleep or don’t feel rested the next day even when they do. Restorative sleep requires feeling relaxed. 

Create a bedtime routine that includes sleep-inducing activities, like listening to relaxing music, reading a novel, journaling, taking a bath or shower, dimming lights, cooling the air, or drinking herbal tea. 

** Natalie Christine Dattilo is a clinical psychologist and instructor at Harvard Medical School.

CNBC

Blessing Joseph has been weaving bags, sandals and jewellery earning enough money to feed her son and send him to school. But since November, she has fallen on hard times as customers have stopped coming and she and her son routinely go to bed hungry.

She is among millions in Africa's largest economy, grappling with the worst cost of living crisis in decades, that has deepened since President Bola Tinubu assumed office last May.

Last year, Joseph could easily make 30,000 naira ($18.83) a week but now she will be lucky to get 5,000 naira, she said.

"People used to place orders. I'll design for them, sometimes even (for) weddings I'll make souvenirs for them, but now those orders are not coming," said the 29-year-old Abuja resident.

"It has been very, very difficult, especially that I have a son and he needs to go to school, he needs to eat."

Tinubu inherited an economy that was already struggling with record debt, high unemployment, low oil output, subsidies that drained government finances and power shortages that have crimped growth.

Reuters Graphics

Nigeria imports food and fuel and was buffeted by high global prices due to the Russia-Ukraine war, just as it had exited a Covid-19 induced recession in 2020.

Tinubu, who campaigned on a "Renewed Hope" slogan, removed a costly petrol subsidy and foreign currency controls, in an effort to improve government finances, restore credibility with investors and kick-start the economy.

But inflation has soared to its highest in three decades and the naira currency is slumping to record lows, pressured by acute dollar shortages. Prices of food, cooking gas, medicines, fuel, and public transport have shot up, squeezing household budgets.

Reuters Graphics

"With about 8 percent of Nigerians deemed food insecure, addressing rising food insecurity is the immediate policy priority," the International Monetary Fund said on March 4. after a staff visit.

Nigeria's problems have also rippled through company boardrooms.

Foreign companies like Procter & Gamble will stop manufacturing in Nigeria, while drug makers GSK Plc and Bayer AG will contract third parties to distribute their products, in part due to tough operating conditions and the naira slump.

Africa's biggest telecoms operator MTN Group (MTNJ.J) posted a big fall in full-year profit citing naira devaluation, which also prompted soap maker PZ Cussons Plc (PZC.L) to issue a profit warning.

FOOD PRICE SURGE

At Agodo market in Lagos, tomato seller Farouk Dalhatu has just served his first customer in eight hours. The market is unusually quiet for the time of day when there is often a cacophonous din of traders and customers haggling over prices.

A basket of tomatoes now costs 55,000 naira - about double the national minimum wage - up from 12,000 naira in December. That has forced many of Dalhatu's friends to quit the business.

Reuters Graphics

"They are just trying to find what they can eat now and not do the tomatoes business," he said, pointing to several empty stalls.

Escalating food prices are the major driver of inflation.

Widespread insecurity in food growing areas - including abduction for ransom by armed gangs, a long-running Islamist insurgency and farmer-herder clashes - is adding to the woes by keeping many farmers away from their fields.

"We have an emergency on our hands in terms of the social consequences of this reform, in terms of this food insecurity," said Muda Yusuf, CEO at business advocacy firm Promotion of Private Enterprise, referring to the currency and fuel subsidy reforms.

Labour unions led some protests last month and have threatened to shut down the country to demand a tenfold rise in the minimum wage.

In response, the government on Thursday started national consultations on a new monthly minimum wage, which has been pegged at 30,000 naira since 2019.

A presidency spokesman declined to comment, but Tinubu's administration has announced handouts of cash, grains, fertiliser and seed to vulnerable groups.

Unions say this is not enough and that focus should be on "substantive issues" that have been under discussion with the government since June 2023.

"These include critical matters such as wage increases, social welfare programs, infrastructure development, and the revitalisation of key sectors such as education and healthcare," the Nigeria Labour Congress said in a statement.

For Joseph in Abuja, a thriving business and providing for her son is all she wants.

"I am just thinking about what he will eat if he comes back (from school)," she said while shuffling through empty pots.

($1 = 1,593.3400 naira)

Reuters

UK authorities have banned health workers from bringing dependants to the country.

The UK Home Office made this known in a statement released on Monday.

The statement said the new rules to cut net migration and tackle visa abuse “in force as part of the government’s plan to bring down unsustainable levels of legal migration”.

In a tweet, the Home Office wrote, “From today, care workers entering the UK on Health and Care Worker visas can no longer bring dependants. This is part of our plan to deliver the biggest ever cut in migration.”

While laying out implication of the policy in a separate statement, it said last year alone, a total of 120,000 dependants accompanied 100,000 workers to the UK.

“Reforms to restrict care workers from bringing family members are now in force, while care providers are required to register if they are sponsoring migrants. New rules to radically cut net migration and tackle visa abuse are now in force as part of the government’s plan to bring down unsustainable levels of legal migration.”

“Care providers in England acting as sponsors for migrants will also be required to register with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) – the industry regulator for Health and Social Care – in order to crack down on worker exploitation and abuse within the sector.

“It forms part of a wider package of measures, which is being implemented as soon as possible, which means a total of 300,000 people who were eligible to come to the UK last year would now not be able to do so.”

Home Secretary, James Cleverly MP, was quoted to have said: “Care workers make an incredible contribution to our society, taking care of our loved ones in times of need. But we cannot justify inaction in the face of clear abuse, manipulation of our immigration system and unsustainable migration numbers.

“It is neither right nor fair to allow this unacceptable situation to continue. We promised the British people action, and we will not rest until we have delivered on our commitment to bring numbers down substantially.

Our plan is robust but fair – protecting British workers while ensuring the very best international talent can work and study here, to add value to our society and grow the economy.

“There is clear evidence that care workers have been offered visas under false pretences, travelling thousands of miles for jobs that simply don’t exist or to be paid far below the minimum wage required for their work, exploiting them while undercutting British workers.

“These changes come into force as the government is set to lay rules in Parliament later this week (14 March) to prevent the continued undercutting of British workers, which includes raising the salary threshold that a skilled worker must meet in order to get a visa and removing the 20% ‘going-rate’ discount for migrant workers in shortage occupations.”

Minister for Social Care, Helen Whately MP, said: “International care workers make an invaluable contribution caring for our loved ones, but international recruitment and more immigration are not long-term solutions to our social care needs. These rules provide a more ethical and sustainable approach.

“We are boosting our homegrown workforce by reforming social care careers. These include the first ever national career path for care workers and a new care qualification.

“Our reforms will grow the domestic workforce and build on our success over the last year that saw more people working in social care, fewer vacancies and lower staff turnover.”

The Home Secretary also said the commission will review the graduate route for international students to prevent abuse, protect the integrity and quality of UK higher education, and ensure it works in the best interests of the UK.

Daily Trust

RTD Thompson Ltd.,  an Abuja-based construction firm, has taken the  Oyo State Chapter of the Nigerian Bar Association  (NBA) to task over misgivings the body expressed on the durability and quality of work on a ceremonial hall it is building for the state government at the state high court complex in Ibadan, the state capital.

The body of lawyers had expressed doubts about the quality of job done on the structure in a memo to Governor Seyi Makinde complaining about hindrances to appointment of judges to redress the shortfall in the state's judiciary.

In the letter dated January 30, 2024 which has since gone viral, the NBA, under a subtitle: “STATE OF THE BUILDING PROJECTS AT THE HIGH COURT, RING ROAD”,  alleged that the "construction of the ceremonial hall is not up to standard as the building is not well supported by viable pillars.  The pillars upon which the building stands are very tiny, weak and not that strong in our observation."

The association, in the letter signed by its Chairman,  Folashade Aladeniyi and Olakunle Akintola, therefore, implored Governor Makinde to order relevant regulatory authorities to conduct  structural inspection of the building to forestall possible mishap.

But the construction firm, in a rebuttal signed by its lawyer, Seun Oluwagbenga Ajayi, described the body’s remarks as baseless, misleading, reckless, unfair and disparaging to its integrity as a a credible player in the construction industry renowned for its expertise and for keeping to standards and international best practices.

The company said it was shocked by the impression the  NBA letter conveyed, blaming it on ignorance that would have made the reference unnecessary had the association taken step to consult it and find out the facts.

Contrary to the picture created in the complaint, the lawyer to the engineering firm asserted that "the contract for the construction of the Ceremonial Hall under reference was awarded to our client after a thorough and transparent bidding process by the Oyo State Government taking into consideration the huge profile of our client as a major player in the construction industry in Nigeria. Prior to the commencement of the project, the architectural design was undertaken by Messrs Builtform Nig. Ltd., a firm of Architect led by Olubunmi A. Ayeni, while Messrs Daraplus Ltd. led by its Principal Partner, J.O. Banire a COREN Registered Structural Engineer acted as the structural Engineering Consultant in the production of the architectural and structural design.

"Our client on its part deployed some of its best hands led by a COREN Certified Engineer in person of Rufus A. Iyiola, to oversee the construction of the building.

"In carrying out the construction of the building which consists of three floors and contains among others, the main hall, offices, passenger lift, gallery, stair cases, toilets, our client ensured that the foundation (which is the main load bearing structure) comprised of not less than ninety one (91) heavily built columns with reinforced concrete pad ranging from 1300mm x 1300mm to 4200mm x 4200mm.

The pad reinforcement ranges from 16mm to 25mm high tensile bars.

The columns which transmit the load to the foundation level are of various sizes depending on the location within the structure but their sizes ranges from 230mm x 230mm to 500mm x 400mm.  In addition, the concrete being used is8 grade 25 with maximum size of chipping of 20mm while the slab thickness is 175mm with 12mm reinforcement both top and bottom."

He added: "We make bold to state that, apart from the fact that the project is being continually supervised by professionals from the Oyo State Ministry of Works and Transport towards ensuring that the project is carried out according to specification and acceptable standard, relevant regulatory bodies at every stage of the construction exercise have had course to certify same as measuring up to standard."

In view of the  glaring facts, Ajayi said: "one cannot but be taken aback by your association's conclusion which no doubt was reached without consulting our client the handlers of the project or better still, an independent professional in the construction industry.

"It is our position that, your observation no matter how well intended, is nevertheless one without basis and most unfair to our client whose professional integrity has been violently dealt a grievous blow. As a professional body that thrives on the promotion of the rule of law, our client finds it ludicrous that you failed totally to challenge them on your observations before coming up with such a damaging conclusion relating to their expertise."

Ajayi then demanded of the NBA, as a responsible organization a redress of the injury done his client.

He expressed the company's readiness to answer any question and respond credibly to any observation in relation to its handling of the project.

No fewer than seven people were shot dead and many others injured, on Sunday, when gunmen attacked a market in Zurak Campani in Wase Local Government Area of Plateau State.

According to residents, the attack occurred on a market day when residents gathered to buy and sell at the community’s main market.

Abdullahi Hussaini, a youth leader in the area who confirmed the incident, said the gunmen arrived at the market around 2 p.m. and opened fire at people transacting businesses.

“The gunmen arrived at the market in their numbers riding on motorcycles. They started shooting sporadically, killing seven people instantly while many others were injured. The gunmen did not encounter any resistance because people were not expecting any security threat,” Hussaini said.

“The gunmen later fled to the bush but the police have been deployed to the community to restore law and other. We are calling for more security deployment in the area because we don’t know what may happen anytime again,” the youth leader added.

Spokesperson of the police in Plateau State, Alabo Alfred, did not respond to calls made to his phone about the incident.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Plateau witnesses different forms of violence including ethno-religious crises usually fuelled by the competition for land between resident farming communities and herders. Last Christmas day, gunmen attacked many communities in coordinated attacks that left scores of people dead but with none of the perpetrators yet to be apprehended.

PT

Israeli strikes kill at least 67 Palestinians in Gaza as Ramadan begins

With no end to the war in sight, Palestinians in Gaza began fasting Monday for the holy month of Ramadan as hunger worsens across the strip and pressure is raised on Israel over the growing humanitarian crisis.

The United States, Qatar and Egypt had hoped to broker a cease-fire ahead of the normally joyous month of dawn-to-dusk fasting that would include the release of Israeli hostages and Palestinian prisoners, and the entry of much more humanitarian aid. But the cease-fire talks stalled last week.

Gaza’s Health Ministry said the bodies of 67 people killed by Israeli strikes were brought to hospitals over the past 24 hours, bringing the Palestinian death toll to more than 31,112 since the war began. The ministry doesn’t differentiate between civilians and combatants in its count, but says that women and children make up two-thirds of the dead.

The war began when Hamas-led militants stormed into southern Israel on Oct. 7, killing some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and taking around 250 hostage. Hamas is still believed to still be holding around 100 captives and the remains of others.

Five months of war have forced around 80% of Gaza’s 2.3 million people from their homes and pushed hundreds of thousands to the brink of famine.

Currently:

— Ramadan begins in Gaza with hunger worsening and no end to the war in sight

— Muslims welcome Ramadan with a mix of joy and deep concern

— Houthi attack causes a blast near a container ship in the Red Sea

— ‘The Zone of Interest’ director condemns war in Gaza as he accepts Oscar

Here’s the latest:

U.N. ENVOY SAYS ABUSE OF HOSTAGES DOESN’T LEGITIMIZE FURTHER HOSTILITIES

A U.N. envoy warned Israel that her finding of “clear and convincing information” that some hostages taken by Hamas during its Oct. 7 attack were subjected to sexual violence “does not in any way legitimize further hostilities.”

“In fact, it creates a moral imperative for a humanitarian cease-fire to end the unspeakable suffering imposed on Palestinian civilians in Gaza and bring about the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages,” Pramila Patten told the U.N. Security Council on Monday where Israel’s foreign minister sat listening.

“Continuation of hostilities can, in no way, protect them,” she said of the hostages. “It can only expose them to further risk of violence, including sexual violence.”

Patten, the U.N. envoy focusing on sexual violence in conflict, spoke at a council meeting sought by Israel and called by the United States, United Kingdom and France to focus on her recent report.

Israel’s Foreign Minister Israel Katz said he came to the council “to protest as loud as I can against the crimes against humanity” committed by Hamas in order to deter and scare Israeli society.

He strongly criticized the Security Council’s failure in over 40 meetings since Oct. 7 to condemn Hamas’ actions, saying the U.N.’s most powerful body should declare the extremist group a terrorist organization and pressure it to immediately release the hostages.

ISRAEL AIRSTRIKES HIT DEEP INSIDE LEBANON, WOUNDING 6, HEZBOLLAH SAYS

Israeli airstrikes late Monday near Lebanon’s northeastern city of Baalbek wounded at least six people, a Hezbollah official said.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with regulations, said the locations of the airstrikes, the deepest in Lebanon since Feb. 26, have not yet been specified.

In late February, Israeli airstrikes near the historic city of Baalbek killed two Hezbollah members.

State-run National News Agency said one of the strikes hit a building in the village of Ansar just south of Baalbek. It gave no word on casualties.

Hezbollah’s Al-Manar TV reported at least two airstrikes one striking a building on the outskirts of the village of Taraya and another near Baalbek on the outskirts of Ansar.

Israel’s military and Hezbollah fighters have been trading fire since the Israel-Hamas was began on Oct. 7. More than 220 Hezbollah fighters and nearly 40 civilians were killed on the Lebanese side, while in Israel, nine soldiers and 10 civilians were left dead in the attacks.

Tens of thousands of people have been displaced on both sides of the border.

AP

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Russia producing three times more artillery shells than US and Europe for Ukraine

Russia appears on track to produce nearly three times more artillery munitions than the US and Europe, a key advantage ahead of what is expected to be another Russian offensive in Ukraine later this year.

Russia is producing about 250,000 artillery munitions per month, or about 3 million a year, according to NATO intelligence estimates of Russian defense production shared with CNN, as well as sources familiar with Western efforts to arm Ukraine. Collectively, the US and Europe have the capacity to generate only about 1.2 million munitions annually to send to Kyiv, a senior European intelligence official told CNN.

The US military set a goal to produce 100,000 rounds of artillery a month by the end of 2025 — less than half of the Russian monthly output — and even that number is now out of reach with $60 billion in Ukraine funding stalledin Congress, a senior Army official told reporters last week.

“What we are in now is a production war,” a senior NATO official told CNN. “The outcome in Ukraine depends on how each side is equipped to conduct this war.”

Officials say Russia is currently firing around 10,000 shells a day, compared to just 2,000 a day from the Ukrainian side. The ratio is worse in some places along the 600-mile front, according to a European intelligence official.

The shortfall comes at perhaps the most perilous moment for Ukraine’s war effort since Russia first marched on Kyiv in February 2022. US money for arming Ukraine has run out and Republican opposition in Congress has effectively halted giving any more.

Meanwhile, Russia recently took the Ukrainian city of Avdiivka and is widely seen as having the initiative on the battlefield. Ukraine is struggling not just with ammunition but also growing manpower shortages on the front lines.

The US and its allies have given Ukraine a number of highly sophisticated systems, including the M-1 Abrams tank and, soon, F-16 fighter jets. But military analysts say the war will likely be won or lost based on who fires the most artillery shells.

“The number one issue that we’re watching right now is the munitions,” the NATO official said. “It’s those artillery shells, because that’s where Russia really [is] mounting a significant production advantage and mounting a significant advantage on the battlefield.”Russian war machine in ‘full gear’

Russia is running artillery factories “24/7” on rotating 12-hour shifts, the NATO official said. About 3.5 million Russians now work in the defense sector, up from somewhere between 2 and 2.5 million before the war. Russia is also importing ammunition: Iran sent at least 300,000 artillery shells last year — “probably more than that,” the official said — and North Korea provided at least 6,700 containers of ammunition carrying millions of shells.

Russia has “put everything they have in the game,” the intelligence official said. “Their war machine works in full gear.”

A rough equivalent in the US would be if President Joe Biden invoked the Defense Production Act, a US official said, which gives the president power to order companies to produce equipment expeditiously to support the nation’s national defense.

Russia’s ramp-up is still not enough to meet its needs, US and Western officials say, and Western intelligence officials do not expect Russia to make major gains on the battlefield in the short term. There is also a limit to Russian production capacity, officials say: Russian factories will likely hit a peak sometime in the next year.

But it’s still far beyond what the US and Europe are producing for Ukraine — especially without additional US funding. 

Competing with Putin’s managed economy

European nations are trying to make up the shortfall. A German defense company announced last month that it plans to open an ammunition factory in Ukraine that it said will produce hundreds of thousands of 155mm caliber bullets each year. In Germany, the same company broke ground on a new factory expected to eventually produce around 200,000 artillery shells per year.

US and Western officials insist that although Russia has been able to jump-start its factory lines, in part because it has the advantage of being a managed economy under the control of an autocrat, capitalist western nations will eventually catch up and produce better equipment.

“If you can actually control the economy, then you can probably move a little bit faster than other countries out there,” Lt. Gen. Steven Basham, the deputy commander of US European Command, told CNN in an interview last week. But, he said, “the West will have more sustaining power.”

“The West is just starting their ramp-up of building the infrastructure to add in the munitions capability that is needed.”

When the money was still flowing, the US Army expanded production of artillery shells in Pennsylvania, Iowa and Texas.

Intelligence officials believe that neither side is poised to make any large gains imminently, but the overall math favors Moscow in the long run — particularly if additional US aid does not materialize.

“It’s not going well, but it all depends,” said one source familiar with Western intelligence. “If aid restarts and comes quick, all is not lost.”Targeting Ukraine’s weapons production

Russia has also recently targeted Ukraine’s domestic defense production with its long-range weapons.

“If we were talking about this last fall, we would have talked about how they were targeting critical infrastructure,” the NATO official said. “Now what we see is some critical infrastructure targeting, but also a lot of targeting the Ukrainian defense industrial base.”

According to the senior NATO official, Russia is producing between 115 to 130 long-range missiles, and 300 to 350 one-way attack drones based on an Iranian model provided by Tehran, each month. Although before the war, Russia had a stockpile of thousands of long-range missiles in its arsenal, today it is hovering around 700, the official said.

The Russians have lately conserved those weapons to use in large volleys to try to overwhelm Ukrainian missile defenses. And they have compensated by increasing their use of drones, sending out on average four times as many drones per month as they did last winter.

Perhaps Russia’s biggest challenge has been in tank and other armored vehicle production. It is churning out about 125 tanks a month, but the vast majority are older models that have been refurbished. About 86% of the main battle tanks Russia produced in 2023 were refurbished, the NATO official said. And although Russia has about 5,000 tanks in storage, “probably a large percentage of those can’t be refurbished and are only good for cannibalizing parts,” the official said.

Moscow has lost at least 2,700 tanks, more than twice the total number that they deployed initially to Ukraine in February of 2022, when the invasion began.

Russia’s ‘transformed’ economy

Officials are also closely watching Russia’s economy for signs of how the interplay between a super-charged defense sector, Western sanctions, and Putin’s efforts to gird his economy for war impact Russia’s ability to sustain the conflict.

The war has absolutely “transformed” Russia’s economy, the NATO official said, from the post-Soviet period when oil was the leading sector. Now, defense is the largest sector of the Russian economy, and oil is paying for it.

That creates some long-term imbalances that will likely be problematic for Russia, but for now, it’s working, the NATO official and Basham, the US European Command official, both said.

“In the short term — say, the next 18 months or so — it may be unsophisticated, but it’s a durable economy,” the NATO official said.

The Pentagon is weighing whether to tap into the last remaining source of funding it has — but it has previously been reluctant to spend any of that remaining money without assurances it would be reimbursed by Congress, because taking from DoD stockpiles with no plan to replenish that equipment could impact US military readiness, CNN has previously reported.

“If no more US aid coming, do the Ukrainians change how they feel about negotiating?” the source familiar with Western intelligence said.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Ukrainian drone strikes Russian oil facility – governor

At least one Ukrainian drone has crashed into an oil facility in the western Russian city of Oryol, local Governor Andrey Klychkov confirmed early Tuesday morning.

The attack targeted a “fuel and energy complex facility” in the city around 350 kilometers south of Moscow, the official announced in a statement at 3:30am local time. There were no casualties or injuries on the ground, according to Klychkov.

At least one oil tank caught fire as a result of the strike, an emergency services source told RIA. Photos and videos circulating on social media showed fire and smoke rising from the facility, apparently visible from several kilometers away.

Klychkov said that firefighters are working to contain the blaze, adding that the situation is under control and urging residents to remain calm.

This is not the first time an oil facility in Oryol has come under attack. Back in January, a similar drone raid caused a fire and injured three people. Last week, another Ukrainian drone hit an oil depot in the neighboring Kursk Region.

Ukraine routinely launches artillery, missile, and drone strikes at Russian border regions, many of which have targeted residential buildings and civilian infrastructure. One of the deadliest attacks hit Belgorod in late December, killing 25 people and injuring more than 100.

CNN/RT

On 15 October, 1965, as political uncertainty and violence raged in Western Nigeria, Ladoke Akintola, the regional premier, was due to deliver a primetime radio broadcast to his people at 19:00. Some minutes before the appointed hour, an armed, unmasked and bearded young man appeared in the studio and required Akinwande Oshin, head of the newsroom at the Western Nigeria Broadcasting Corporation (WNBC) to substitute the recorded broadcast of the premier with a tape provided by the gunman. At the appointed hour, the entire region – including the premier – listened as the voice from the gunman’s tape exhorted the premier to spare the region further turmoil and go.

His mission accomplished, the gunman promptly vanished into the night, leaving Oshin and his crew in the newsroom with some questions to answer. The incident would later result in criminal proceedings against a suspect, later identified as Wole Soyinka, at the time a lecturer at the University of Ibadan. In his defence, Soyinka set up an alibi, claiming that he was in Enugu in the then Eastern Region of Nigeria at the time of the incident. In his testimony, Soyinka’s Head of Department at the university, one Professor Axworthy, said that they had both attended a departmental meeting in Ibadan less than two hours before the incident but the Wole Soyinka with whom he attended the meeting, according to the professor, was clean shaven.

The mystery of how a clean shaven man could grow a bushy beard in less than two hours was too much for the trial Magistrate, who felt obliged to acquit the suspect. Kayode Eso, the trial Magistrate, who would go on to a storied judicial career within and beyond Nigeria, immortalised this story in his book fittingly titled The Mystery Gunman.

The mystery gunman is a figure of considerable antiquity in the history of crime and impunity in Nigeria and of myths about both. A mere 11-and-a-half years after that incident in Ibadan, soldiers brutally attacked Wole Soyinka’s aunt, Funmilayo Ransome-Kuti, in the Kalakuta Republic base of her famous son and Afrobeat musician, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti. A judicial commission of inquiry established to identify the perpetrators and recommend suitable measures of accountability, concluded that the attack was the handiwork of the “unknown soldier.” With the act attributed to so ghostly a figure, suggestions of accountability became evidently illusory.

In South-East Nigeria, where a metastasis of murderous violence is widely perceived to have held sway for the better part of the last five years, responsibility for this state of affairs is laid at the feet of the Unknown Gunman. Tired of having to repeat the name with the frequency with which murders, abductions, and violence occur in and around the region, many people have taken to abbreviating the nomenclature to “UGM.” With no memory of what transpired before, the UGM is mostly seen as a novelty in the contemporary ecosystem of violence in Nigeria generally and in the South-East, more particularly. In reality, he is neither new nor indeed unknown.

Nearly 10 years ago, when he disappeared on his way to his community in Nanka, Orumba North Local Government Area (LGA) of Anambra State in May 2014, it was reported that former Anambra State Commissioner for Science and Technology, Chike Okoli, had been “abducted by unknown gunmen.” But one month later, the Anambra State directorate of the State Security Service (SSS) arrested a 10-man kidnap-for-ransom gang, whom they alleged was responsible for the kidnap and disappearance of Okoli. It was led by one Kingsley Chukwuemeka Eze, a local politician from Enugu State.

The abduction and disappearance of Igwe Oliver Nnaji, traditional ruler of Ogwu Aniocha in Ogbaru LGA in November 2021, was similarly reported at first as the handiwork of the “UGM.” However, at the beginning of January, 2023, a raid by a Special Forces assault team on the Ochan Forest in the community reportedly led to the killing of ten members of a crime gang led by one Victor Ibenegbu (alias “Network”), who claimed that “his group was behind the serial killings and arsons in the community,” including the abduction of the traditional ruler.

With the police decimated and devoid of confidence, the investigation of the violence does not receive the kind of assets or commitment it deserves. Most victims and witnesses are not unaware of the authors of the violence in their neighbourhoods. But they are equally mostly unwilling to go on record for the fear of suffering reprisals. The use of “unknown gunmen” to describe the perpetrators is a misnomer. In most cases, they are known but the expression, UGM, describes a tyranny of despondency in the face of widely held perceptions of state incapacity or impunity for these atrocities.

Over nearly 20 months of leading the Truth, Justice, and Reconciliation Commission (TJPC) into the violence in the South-East of Nigeria, it has become evident to me that the UGM is one of the narrative myths and constraints in the crisis of violence and insecurity in the region. It is by no means the only one. You also have the reality of a population forced by the violence into a habit of fear of candour on the subject; an absence of a public or bureaucratic infrastructure of both memory and records of victimisation; a narrative space at both national and state levels unwilling to look beyond separatism as the explanation for the violence; and a policy space attuned only to expeditionary and kinetic responses.

These myths have sustained the misbegotten idea of a unified filed theory for the violence in South-East Nigeria. Anyone interested in addressing this situation must be prepared to look beyond the myths. For whoever is prepared to do so, the pursuit could prove both revealing and richly rewarding.

In Anambra State, for instance, the political economy of land is central to understanding the crisis of violence. It is both property and identity and the supply of land in the state is shrinking under the combined assault of fragilities from both nature and of intense land use. Revenues from land are the focus of an intensity of competing interests. In this competition, cults and organised crime gangs are recruited. These cults and gangs bring with them guns, drugs, and even transactional idolatory. Over time, they also develop a seasonal and entrepreneurial orientation to violence, selling it to whoever is interested, from artisanal rustlers of solid minerals or hydro-carbons to private persons using it to settle scores; from community factions disputing over the stool of the Igwe or positions in the Town Union, to politicians seeking offices in the state.

From the political economy of land, other shorter term factors radiate out, including the mismanagement of transhuman pastoralism; (mis-)appropriation of a narrative vacuum created by official government policy concerning memory from Nigeria’s past; intra-state and inter-community boundary crises; transactional idolatory; the franchising of agitation by criminal cults and gangs; as well as the deployment of violence for artisanal extractive and mining activities and for electoral politics.

For both politicians and security agencies, the focus on mobilising kinetic responses preoccupies itself overly with the symptoms at the expense of addressing the real causes. The implicit idea that the country or the region can shoot its way out of the violence and its causes and consequences is in one word, delusional. Tactical options must always be on the table but, for durable solutions, the country and the region must dispense with the myths and govern their way out of the disease. That is the only way to make the symptoms finally disappear.

Chidi Anselm Odinkalu, a lawyer, teaches at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and can be reached through This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

At age 10, Jenny Woo got really good at reading nonverbal social cues.

It was out of necessity: She emigrated from China to Houston, and didn’t speak English. She connected with her peers largely through what she now defines as emotional intelligence, or EQ — watching their body language and listening to the tones of their voices to learn what excited, inspired and angered them.

In the decades that followed, Woo turned her EQ skills into a career at corporations like Deloitte and Cisco, training managers how to better communicate. She spent some time helping run her kids’ Montessori school in Southern California.

While working on her master’s degree at Harvard University in 2018, she spent $1,000 from her savings to launch Mind Brain Emotion, which sells EQ-focused card games on Amazon. Last year, the side hustle brought in $1.71 million on Amazon, according to documents reviewed by CNBC Make It. Woo estimates 40% of that revenue is profit.

DON’T MISS: The ultimate guide to earning passive income online

Between the side hustle and her three other current revenue streams — lecturing at the University of California Irvine, running an online EQ course and freelance business consulting — she works anywhere from three to 30 hours per week, she says. Her workload depends on the season, and her multiple income streams allow her to go completely offline when her three children are home.

“The mission has always been to make knowledge, skills, competence, mindsets and attitudes accessible ... for really everybody to enjoy,” says Woo, 42. “But being able to support my kids ... is also a true metric of success to me.”

Here, Woo discusses how she set up her side hustle, why she chooses to run it alone and her advice for anyone who wants to replicate her path.

CNBC Make It: Many people who run successful side hustles eventually need to hire people as their ventures grow. Why do you largely run Mind Brain Emotion alone?

Woo: It’s a very intentional choice for me to be the [sole] founder. From my experience in the corporate world and at Harvard Innovation Labs, I’ve seen co-founders really go haywire [and ruin friendships]. I really wanted to avoid that.

It also helps with scheduling. I started this as a full-time student and parent. Now, I like being able to travel with my three kids. I can have control without feeling like I’m letting [a partner] down.

As my kids get older, I would eventually like to operationalize and grow the business globally. I am certainly looking to delegate and bring people onto my team, but only if they have the right talents.

Is your side hustle replicable?

Absolutely. It costs $39.99 per month to have a professional Amazon seller account. Anybody can really list their product there, or on platforms like Etsy.

But you have to pay to play, in the sense that you have to be really savvy with advertising campaigns, SEO and staying on top of the new features on each platform. Last time I checked, there are 12 million products under games and toys on Amazon U.S. Being able to surface can be really, really hard.

There are a couple juicy secrets. You can advertise using keywords, and on your competitors’ sites. I do both.

I also sell in other spaces like Walmart, Faire and on my website. They don’t produce as much revenue. Platforms are constantly changing their criteria and bids. You really have to get on top of it.

You have five degrees and a decade of experience working for corporations. What’s your advice for people who don’t have that pedigree, but want to follow in your footsteps?

I think you have to do two things to be successful. The first: Never stop learning. I tell my students I am a lifelong learner first and an entrepreneur second.

You also have to be your own cheerleader. When I was still learning English in middle school and high school, there were so many incidents where I felt so embarrassed, where I felt I wasn’t good enough, where I felt like I didn’t know anything.

[Navigating those] things can give you coping skills and make you more resilient. There will be haters and copycats. You just have to keep going.

CNBC