US President Donald Trump reaffirmed during his recent talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping that he would not change US policy toward Taiwan, US Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz has said.

Beijing has long opposed US arms sales to the self-governing island and any diplomatic recognition of the government in Taipei. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said during Trump’s trip to China on Thursday that “Taiwan independence” and peace in the region were “as irreconcilable as fire and water.”

“At the end of the day, [Trump] made no commitments either way, in line with our longstanding policy of strategic ambiguity,” Waltz told Fox News on Friday. “There is a whole line of thinking that if you basically indicate or tell China that we won’t be there, that it could embolden them as well,” he added.

The US maintains informal ties with Taiwan without recognizing it as a separate country. Although China has stressed that it seeks reunification with Taiwan through peaceful means, it has indicated that it could resort to force if the island formally declares independence.

In an interview with Fox News on Friday, Trump said that “nothing has changed” and that he was “not looking to have somebody go independent.”

“And, you know, we’re supposed to travel 9,500 miles to fight a war. I’m not looking for that. I want them to cool down. I want China to cool down,” he added.

China has said it considers all contacts with the “separatist” government in Taiwan to be hostile acts. In 2022, Beijing condemned then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to the island and launched snap military drills in response.

A federal jury in Chicago has ordered Boeing to pay $49.5 million to the family of a woman who died in the Ethiopian Airlines crash involving the ill-fated 737 MAX airliner. The aircraft went down shortly after takeoff from Addis Ababa on March 10, 2019, killing all 157 passengers and crew on board.

Several months earlier, another Boeing 737 MAX operated by Lion Air crashed in Indonesia, killing all 189 people aboard. The two disasters prompted a 20-month worldwide grounding of the aircraft. Boeing later admitted that a design flaw in the flight control system was responsible for the crashes.

On Wednesday, jurors awarded the family of Samya Stumo $21 million for pain and emotional suffering, $16.5 million for loss of companionship, and $12 million for grief, according to the family’s attorneys.

Last November, a jury ordered Boeing to pay $28.45 million to the family of Shikha Garg, another victim of the 2019 Ethiopian Airlines disaster.

The company faced dozens of additional civil lawsuits, most of which were settled through confidential pretrial agreements worth billions of dollars in compensation.

In 2021, Boeing reached a deferred prosecution agreement with federal authorities and agreed to pay $2.5 billion to avoid prosecution after admitting it had deceived the Federal Aviation Administration regarding flaws in the 737 MAX flight-control system.

In 2024, the Department of Justice found the company in breach of the settlement terms. However, under US President Donald Trump, the department dropped its demand that Boeing plead guilty to a criminal fraud conspiracy charge.

Last November, a federal judge in Texas approved the DOJ’s decision to dismiss the criminal case against the aerospace manufacturer, which is also a major defense contractor for the US military. An appeals court upheld the ruling in March this year.

Russia’s allegations that the US-funded clandestine biological laboratories near its borders – claims denied until recently by Washington – have remained a persistent flashpoint in the steadily deteriorating relationship between Russia and the West for nearly a decade.

This abruptly changed the past week when US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said that her department had identified more than 120 US-funded biological laboratories in 30 countries, with over a third of them located in Ukraine. The agency is now working to “identify where these labs are, what pathogens they contain, and what ‘research’ is being conducted to end dangerous gain-of-function research that threatens the health and wellbeing of the American people and the world,” according to Gabbard.

RT looks back at the timeline of the biolabs saga and the US denial of its existence until now.

2017 RT report 

The US-funded bio research made international headlines in July 2017, when RT published an investigative report revolving around a tender issued by the US Air Education and Training Command (AETC). The command was seeking to procure genetic material samples that “shall be collected from Russia and must be Caucasian.” The Air Force explicitly said that it did not want samples from Ukraine, for reasons not explained.

“The question is – why is it being done? It’s being done purposefully and professionally. We are a kind of object of great interest,” the president said. “Let them do what they want, and we must do what we must,” he added.

The attention this garnered from the Russian leadership prompted a vague explanation from AETC, which claimed the samples were needed for research on the musculoskeletal system and Russia had been picked as the source of the samples for no particular reason.

Georgia revelations

Another bombshell on the clandestine US-funded biolabs was dropped by a former Georgian minister for state security, Igor Giorgadze, in late 2018. He claimed he had obtained some 100,000 pages of data pointing to questionable practices at the US-funded Richard Lugar Center for Public Health Research near the Georgian capital, Tbilisi.

The tests appeared to involve “a highly toxic chemical or biological agent with a high lethality rate,” the commander of Russia’s Radiological, Chemical, and Biological Defense Forces (RKhBZ), Igor Kirillov, said at the time. Kirillov, who had spearheaded the Russian military’s probe into the US-funded biolabs in Ukraine and beyond, was assassinated in late 2024 in a bombing staged by Kiev’s intelligence.

The Pentagon flatly denied the allegations, with then-spokesman Eric Pahon dismissing the Russian ministry’s statements as a part of “a Russian disinformation campaign directed against the West.” The US and Georgian governments also dismissed the claims made by Giorgadze, describing them as “absurd.”

Ukraine conflict 

The escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022 marked a new turn in the biolabs saga. While Moscow seized additional evidence of questionable research activities conducted in secretive facilities dotting Ukraine, the West entered a full-denial mode, bluntly dismissing any Russian statement on the matter as “propaganda.”

“The credibility of information provided by the Kremlin is in general very doubtful and low,” EU foreign affairs spokesman Peter Stano said at the time. “Russian disinformation has a track record of promoting manipulative narratives about biological weapons and alleged ‘secret labs.’”

The Biden administration took a similar defensive stance, with White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki calling the allegations “preposterous” and accusing Moscow of plotting to use “chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine or to create a false flag operation using them.” John Kirby, then-Pentagon spokesman, also branded the Russian allegations “absurd,” “laughable,” and a “bunch of malarkey.” 

“There’s nothing to it. It’s classic Russian propaganda,” Kirby told reporters at the time.

Gabbard’s remarks this past week have reignited scrutiny of a program Washington spent years denying existed.

US President Donald Trump’s meeting with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, was heavy on pomp, praise, and promises. But what did both leaders walk away with after the superpower summit in Beijing?

Trump left Beijing on Friday, two days after becoming the first US president to visit the Chinese capital in almost a decade. The trip took place amid two paused conflicts – Trump’s trade war with Beijing and his real war against Iran – which directly affect China, and although both leaders hailed positive developments in their relationship, differing statements from the two sides suggest that these issues and others remain unresolved.

Xi gives Trump a royal welcome 

From the military honors and red carpet that greeted Trump on Wednesday, to the garden tour of Xi’s Zhongnanhai compound on Friday morning, the Chinese president was a gracious host throughout. At a lavish banquet on Thursday, Xi declared that “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and making America great again can go hand in hand.”

Ahead of bilateral talks on Friday, Trump claimed that he and Xi had “settled a lot of different problems that other people wouldn’t have been able to settle, and the relationship is a very strong one.” 

Did Trump and Xi reach breakthrough on Taiwan? 

Amid the optics and pageantry, few observers expected any progress on Taiwan – the longest-running unresolved issue between Washington and Beijing. Xi maintains that Taiwan’s reunification with the Chinese mainland is “inevitable,” while the US has followed a policy of strategic ambiguity since the 1970s. It accepts but does not endorse Beijing’s claim to the island.

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday, Trump said that he and Xi “talked a lot” about Taiwan, and about a planned US arms sale to Taipei this year. “I made no commitment either way,” Trump added. The US president then said that Xi had asked him whether he’d use the US military to defend Taiwan. In keeping with the US’ policy of ambiguity, Trump said that he replied “I don’t talk about that.” 

“I’m not looking to have somebody go independent,” Trump said in a Fox News interview aired on Friday. “And, you know, we’re supposed to travel 9,500 miles to fight a war? I’m not looking for that. I want them to cool down. I want China to cool down.” 

What did they say about Iran? 

Trump emerged from talks with Xi claiming victory on the issue of Iran, with his own comments and White House statements suggesting that Beijing would help push Iran into a peace deal that favors the US.

“We did discuss Iran,” Trump said on Friday. “We feel very similar about [how] we want it to end. We don’t want them to have a nuclear weapon. We want the straits open.” A White House statement went further, claiming “President Xi also made clear China’s opposition to the militarization of the Strait and any effort to charge a toll for its use, and he expressed interest in purchasing more American oil to reduce China’s dependence on the Strait in the future.” 

China imports around 12% of its oil from Iran. While the Islamic Republic has allowed some Chinese vessels to transit the Strait of Hormuz, a five-point China-Pakistan proposal to resolve the conflict has urged all parties to ensure the “normal passage” of ships through the waterway as soon as possible.

In one potential breakthrough, Trump said on Friday that he is considering lifting sanctions on Chinese companies that purchase Iranian oil.

Did Trump and Xi settle the trade war? 

The US trade war with China remains in a state of truce, with Trump’s heightened tariffs on Chinese goods paused until November. Trump left Beijing claiming that he had secured “fantastic trade deals” with Xi, including the purchase by China of 200 Boeing passenger jets. US trade representative Jamieson Greer also said that he expected China to buy “double-digit billions” worth of US agricultural exports “over the next three years.” 

However, Boeing has not confirmed the jet deal, and even if it does, the purchase of 200 aircraft falls dramatically short of the 500 predicted by market insiders before the trip. The Chinese government has not confirmed any trade deals, agricultural or otherwise.

After meeting American business executives who accompanied Trump to Beijing – including Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Nvidia chief Jensen Huang – Xi “noted that China-US economic and trade ties are mutually beneficial and win-win in nature,” read an ambiguous statement from the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

Trump has repeatedly accused China of facilitating the flow of fentanyl and its precursor chemicals into the US, slapping a 10% tariff on China over its alleged inaction on the issue last year. Beijing maintains that the accusations are politically motivated.

The White House claimed on Friday that Trump and Xi agreed on “the need to build on progress in ending the flow of fentanyl precursors into the United States,” although the Chinese side has not referred to fentanyl in any of its post-summit statements.

China’s near-monopoly on rare earth minerals – vital in the manufacture of electric vehicle motors, guided missiles, and a range of high-tech components – is one of Beijing’s strongest cards in the trade dispute with the US. China imposed export controls on these minerals last year, but relented and allowed their sale to the US when the trade war was put on hold in October.

The fact that neither Trump nor the Chinese government mentioned rare earths after the summit suggests that the issue is still very much unsettled.

The bottom line 

Although the most pressing issues between the US and China remain unresolved, both sides portrayed it as positive. Trump said that his trip was “very successful,” while Xi described it as an “historic and landmark” visit. Perhaps the most significant outcome of the trip was Trump’s invitation to Xi to visit the White House in September, which Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi confirmed on Friday that Xi had accepted.

Xi last visited the White House in 2015. The fact that he will travel to Washington before Trump’s tariffs are reapplied indicates that both Washington and Beijing believe that a trade deal can be struck, and some agreement on other issues can be reached.

India can mediate in the Middle East conflict given its vast diplomatic expertise, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Friday.

New Delhi can mediate between Iran and Arab countries as a first step, Lavrov said in a media briefing after the conclusion of the BRICS foreign ministers’ summit hosted by India.

While BRICS as a group would not be the right mediator, Lavrov noted, individual members could help resolve the deadlock.

“For example, India, the BRICS president, they are directly interested and receiving oil from this region. Why won’t they offer their services, including as a country that is currently presiding over BRICS, so they could invite Iran, UAE to start with,” he said.

Lavrov said every flashpoint in the globe has originated from the “flagrant interference of Western countries in the domestic affairs of a country.” The real reason for the ongoing hostilities in the Middle East, he asserted, is because powers are trying to drive a wedge between Iran and the Arab nations. “I believe that this hostility, this aggression against Iran was motivated, among other things, to antagonize Iran and its Arab neighbors to instill more hostility in their relations,” he said.

Lavrov said a mediator role would be in sync with New Delhi’s profile. “Well, this role could be played by India, considering its vast diplomatic experience and authority and clout.”

In the chair’s statement following the meeting, New Delhi noted that BRICS nations had underscored the grave impact of the conflict on the global economy and called for “an early resolution of the current crisis” and affirmed “the value of dialogue and diplomacy.” 

At the same time, the statement noted “differing views among some members.” Indian media reports suggest that, just as the April meeting of BRICS deputy foreign ministers and special envoys ended without a joint statement after Iran and the UAE clashed over how to address the US–Israel war on Iran, those divisions had only deepened by the time ministers met.

The US-Israeli war on Iran is increasingly hitting consumers far beyond energy prices. Disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz are driving up fertilizer costs and fueling a sharp rise in global food prices. Potatoes have emerged as the latest casualty as futures prices have surged in recent weeks amid mounting warnings over food security and supply chain strain. 

Why are potato futures prices soaring?

Potato-linked financial contracts have spiked more than 700% over the past month and are up over 34% year-on-year as of mid-May, according to Trading Economics data.

The surge has been driven largely by concerns over the impact of the Middle East war on fertilizer supplies, energy costs and agricultural trade routes. Potatoes are a nutrient-intensive crop that depends heavily on nitrogen-based fertilizers such as urea and ammonia. The Strait of Hormuz, which handles around 20% of global crude exports, is also critical for shipments of nitrogen-based fertilizers. Fertilizer prices have already surged around 80% since the conflict escalated, according to industry estimates.

According to UN estimates, roughly a third of the global fertilizer trade normally passes through the strait, including shipments of urea, potash and phosphates. Analysts say markets are increasingly pricing in the risk of higher farming costs and weaker future harvests.

Analysts say the spike is unlikely to trigger immediate shortages and that markets are reacting instead to expectations of rising farming, fertilizer, and transport costs rather than a breakdown in potato supplies.

However, if disruptions to fertilizer flows and energy markets persist, the pressure could ripple across the wider food sector. Processed potato products such as fries, chips and frozen foods are seen as especially vulnerable due to their dependence on industrial farming, energy-intensive production and global supply chains.

Will fries cost more in Europe?

The region is reportedly experiencing a potato oversupply after farmers expanded production in recent years to meet growing demand, helping cushion consumers from a sharp rise in retail prices.

However, traders remain focused on the longer-term impact of disruptions to global trade and energy markets despite the current supply glut.

Could other staple food prices be affected?

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization says global food prices have risen for three consecutive months, with vegetable oil prices reaching their highest level since 2022. Wheat, rice and corn have also climbed amid higher transport and energy costs linked to instability around the Strait.

Economists say prolonged disruption could eventually affect products ranging from bread and dairy to meat and processed foods, especially in economies vulnerable to energy shocks.

Is the world facing a food crisis?

In wealthier economies, consumers are likely to feel the fallout mainly through higher grocery bills. In poorer countries, however, the consequences could be far more severe, as soaring fuel and fertilizer costs threaten planting, weaken harvests and push staple foods further out of reach.

A similar warning came from Jose Andres, founder of charity World Central Kitchen, who said war-related disruptions to fertilizer supplies could trigger a prolonged global food crisis, with poorer and import-dependent countries expected to suffer the hardest hit.

The broader economic fallout from the Middle East conflict could push more than 30 million people into poverty across 162 countries, especially in nations reliant on imported energy, according to the United Nations Development Programme.

US President Donald Trump has said recovering Iran’s highly enriched uranium is “more for public relations” than anything else, downplaying what remains one of the key sticking points in negotiations aimed at ending the Middle East war.

Following the US-Israeli bombing campaign against Iran last year, Trump claimed the strikes had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear facilities and severely limited Tehran’s ability to continue enrichment. However, an estimated 400 kg of uranium enriched to 60% purity – a short technical step from weapons-grade level – is believed to be buried beneath the rubble of bombed nuclear sites.

In an interview with Fox News on Thursday, Trump suggested removing the material was not urgent because the US maintained round-the-clock surveillance over the facilities, but added he would still “feel better” if the uranium was removed.

Trump, who has repeatedly warned he could resume strikes on Iran, also signaled his patience with negotiations is running out. “I am not going to be much more patient. They should make a deal,” he said. While active fighting triggered by US-Israeli strikes on Iran in late February paused under a fragile ceasefire reached in early April, negotiations on a broader peace deal remain deadlocked over Tehran’s nuclear program.

Iran insists its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes, arguing that abandoning enrichment would undermine its sovereignty and technological independence. Tehran has repeatedly rejected demands to dismantle the program or surrender its uranium stockpile – including proposals to store it in Russia – though it has reportedly offered to downblend it to lower civilian-grade levels. However, Iranian parliamentary spokesman Ebrahim Rezaei warned earlier this week that Tehran could enrich uranium to 90% purity – considered weapons-grade – if attacked again.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has accused the Yale School of Medicine of illegally discriminating against White and Asian applicants, following a year-long inquiry into its admissions practices.

The investigation comes as the administration of President Donald Trump has intensified scrutiny of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies at federally funded institutions over the past year. The authorities have argued that universities which receive taxpayer money must comply with federal anti-discrimination laws.

According to the DOJ, US medical schools in particular “use substantial federal financial assistance.”

In a press release on Thursday, the DOJ stated that the leadership of the Yale School of Medicine has “intentionally selected applicants based on their race,” and “studied how to use racial proxies to circumvent” a 2023 Supreme Court ruling that prohibited the use of affirmative action in admission decisions.

The inquiry indicated that “Black and Hispanic students have a much higher chance of admission to Yale than White or Asian students with the same test scores,” the DOJ added.

The press release noted that “illegal race politics” are of particular concern in the medical field, “where quality and excellence are vitally important to public safety.”

Last Wednesday, the DOJ sent a similar letter to the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, accusing it of unfairly favoring “preferred race classes of Black and Hispanic.”

An analysis of fundraising disclosures published by Yale’s student newspaper in January found conservatives to be overwhelmingly underrepresented among professors at the Ivy League university, with 97.6% of contributions going to Democrats.

Over the past year, the Trump administration has suspended funding to several Ivy League schools, including Harvard University, Columbia University, Princeton University, and Cornell University, over alleged anti-Semitism and refusal to dismantle DEI programs.

For Palestinians May 15th is a date etched into their souls. Nakba, literally means ‘catastrophe’ in Arabic. For Palestinians on this day in 1948, the day after the State of Israel was declared, the destruction of their homeland began.

While Israelis celebrated the birth of their nation, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were displaced. Some were forced out; others left after being advised to, as Arab States fought against the fledging Israeli state. Almost all Palestinians will tell you that those that left thought they’d be back home within a few weeks. Seventy-eight years later and their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren are still waiting.

This year the pain is being felt even more acutely in the West Bank, as many Palestinians – or West Bankers - feel they are living through a new Nakba. Salah Khawaja, who works for the  Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission witnesses on daily basis how communities are being forced out of their lands.

“Today, history is repeating itself through these same terrorist groups, committing even larger and more dangerous massacres under the cover of international silence,” Khawaja says.

Israel’s current government has approved 103 settlements in the West Bank since it took office in 2022. These settlements are what Israel deems ‘legal’ and it differentiates them from the more ad-hoc developments that it doesn’t yet recognize. Though under International law, all these settlements are illegal.

Between 1967 and 1979 the UN says Israel established 79 settlements in the West Bank. Khawaja outlines how the expansion now is ramping up in pace. “[N]ow there are plans to legalize another 18 settlement outposts, meaning the total exceeds 120 new settlement outposts across the Palestinian West Bank. This is considered an extremely dangerous development, amounting to more than nearly 80% of everything that had been built from 1967 until 2022,” he says.

Since 2025, settlements Israel deems ‘illegal’ have been spreading. As the land runs out in Area C, the expansion is hitting Area B and many fear Area A will be targeted. Sharon is an Israeli activist based in Duma in the West Bank. She works with locals to document the attacks and harassment they are facing from these settlers.

“They’re saying we want to finish C and we want to go into B after B we are going into A. There is no end to this process. Once they have this village surrounded, they are attacking it inside. It’s the same, village after village,” she says.

Her concern is how long it is before Palestinians have had enough and can take no more. She says Israelis are blind to the problems that are stacking up as a result of the continued encroachment in the West Bank.

“So the plan is to abuse these people until they decide to leave without any foresight that ‘we have already done this in ‘48’. We’ve already banished people and they didn’t go and have their own lives. They formed the PLO, they formed all these organizations to fight Israel…this is going to happen again,” Sharon says.

She’s not the only one suggesting the West Bank is ready to explode. Comments attributed in the Israeli press to the IDF Central Command chief Maj. Gen. Avi Bluth, suggest he believes settler violence could spark a new Palestinian uprising. Bluth is reported to have cautioned, “It’s quite a miracle the Palestinian public is still indifferent… but it won’t remain indifferent forever.”

While a former Mossad chief, Tamir Pardo, has suggested that settler violence is causing an “existential threat” to the State of Israel. He said he was distraught over what is happening. “My mother was a Holocaust survivor, and what I saw reminded me of the events that happened against Jews in the last century. I feel ashamed,” Pardo says.

Bedouin villages often to appear to be hastily constructed from corrugated fencing and salvaged materials. However, despite their ability to be dismantled and moved easily, these are real homes. In January 2026, a whole community of around 135 families, was forced to pack up everything and leave Ras ‘Ein al ‘Auja for good.

In the months leading up to this decision, RT spoke to locals about the increasing harassment they were facing from settlers. They described being cut off from the local spring, which for years had provided a place for their herds to take water. They showed the team videos of settlers threatening them day and night.

While the team was filming in Ras ‘Ein al ‘Auja, they witnessed settlers trespassing over Bedouin lands and allowing their flocks to graze outside homes. The RT team was also prevented by one settler from accessing part of the village, this settler also assaulted a member of the team.

In Al-Mughayyir, another Bedouin community is under threat – for the second time. Abu Najeh says that his family fled here from their original home in Ein Samiya after being forced out two years ago. “They want to displace us again,” Najeh says, adding, “When we first came here, they told us this was Area B, Palestinian land, but then they turned around and told us, 'No, you are not allowed to stay here either'.”

The situation has taken a toll on him and his family. He sighs as he says, “I swear I do not know where we are supposed to go. There is nowhere left.”

While Israeli government figures, including the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, claim settler violence is the result of a ‘few bad eggs,’ there is plenty of evidence to show it is much more widespread than that. It is also deadly.  Over the last 15 months or so, more than 270 Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank. Some are directly attributable to settlers. No one has been held accountable for those deaths.

IDF forces routinely open fire on Palestinians in the West Bank, including in situations where soldiers say locals are ‘throwing stones’ at them. This too has deadly consequences, with innocent bystanders caught in the fray.

In May, Naif Samaro was packing up his shawarma shop in Nablus and getting ready to head to the hospital. His wife was waiting to give birth to their first child. Naif was overjoyed at the prospect of becoming a father; he never saw that day.

As he left his shop, he became aware there was an IDF operation nearby. Soldiers say locals were throwing stones at them and opened fire. A bullet hit Naif. He was rushed to the same hospital where a day later his wife would give birth to a baby boy, Yaman. Naif was pronounced dead on arrival.

His mother-in-law describes the heart-wrenching moment she found out that Naif had been killed. “I kept trying to say no, God willing, maybe the news is not true,” she says. Fathiya Al-Shami then had to break that news to her daughter. “When she saw us coming to her she was surprised why are all these people here when it was supposed to be just me, and we told her come with us to the hospital. At that point you cannot hide the truth,” she explains.

While deaths like these, sometimes, make the headlines, there is another form of killing that is also taking place that is less covered in the international press – the total destruction of olive groves. A vital lifeline for many Palestinian families, olive trees provide food and a source of revenue.

Intensified access restrictions and new settler outposts also made it difficult for many Palestinians to even access the groves and collect olives. This had a huge impact and put many families economically under even more strain.

Again, while this is a form of harassment used by settlers, Israeli government figures are also celebrating the destruction of olive trees. Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich, is a huge proponent of the settler movement. In fact, he is part of the settler movement.

He recently announced some 3,000 olive trees were uprooted by Israel’s Civil Administration agency in a bid to secure more land for settlements. Smotrich declared, “We are building the Land of Israel and destroying the idea of a Palestinian state.” That is a statement he makes frequently.

Israel is using every mechanism possible to make land grabs in the West Bank easier. The Knesset is currently reviewing a new law that if passed, would enable it to have full control over heritage and archeological sites across the West Bank, even in area A – which is supposed to be fully under Palestinian control.

Salah Khawaja from the Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission suggests this is about white-washing Palestinian history. “Even Palestinian historical areas, including around 2,500 archaeological sites, are described by Smotrich as “Biblical archaeological sites,” he says, adding this means there is a “falsification of Palestinian history, civilization, and reality” that is taking place.

Israel’s Civil Administration’s Archeology Unit suggests already there are over 2,600 archeological sites in the West Bank. But given that the whole of the West Bank is historically important to the three main Abrahamic faiths, almost any part could be declared a heritage site, if the law passes. The bill may have the support it needs in the Israeli Parliament, but it has already faced a backlash from archeologists who have accused the government of approving a 'de facto annexation.'

As Palestinians take a moment to remember the ‘48 Nakba, to think about the fear, the violence their grandparents or great grandparents faced, this year they perhaps have an even deeper connection, a more personal understanding of what unfolded. Instead of just remembering, they too are living through their own Nakba. Will they be forced out? When you ask this question to a Palestinian, the response is a defiant ‘No!’ – but how much more can they take?

Ukraine is stripping some doctors of their draft exemptions and requiring medical students to undergo compulsory military training, Health Minister Viktor Lyashko has announced.

Lyashko made the remarks during question hour at the Ukrainian parliament on Friday, saying the Health Ministry would be authorized to cancel draft deferrals of certain medical workers at the request of the Defense Ministry and the Armed Forces’ Medical Forces Command.

“There will be changes to the procedure under which all doctors are currently exempt, and it is currently impossible to replace the active doctors at the front,” he said.

Medical students at universities “will become service members, and upon completing their studies, will receive the rank of officer,” Lyashko added.

Lyashko also stressed that most injured service members are treated in civilian hospitals.

The announcement comes amid Ukraine’s increasingly unpopular forced mobilization campaign, which has been fraught with violent clashes between conscription officers and reluctant recruits, with the overall effort being widely mocked as “busification.” 
In July 2025, the Council of Europe found systemic human rights violations in the drive, including beatings and the conscription of people with disabilities.

By embracing harsh mobilization policies, Ukraine is seeking to stem the manpower crisis caused by mounting battlefield losses. According to a report by the Stockholm Centre for Eastern European Studies last year, some of the Ukrainian frontline units are operating at as low as 30% of their intended strength.

Tommy Robinson’s ‘Unite the Kingdom’ rally is so controversial that the British government has deployed the latest surveillance technology against attendees and banned speakers from entering the country. What are they so scared of?

Tens of thousands of protesters are expected at the Unite the Kingdom rally in London on Saturday, where they will march through the streets of the British capital to government buildings at Whitehall. The rally is expected to be the largest right-wing gathering in the UK this year, as public anger against Prime Minister Keir Starmer builds on both sides of the political spectrum.

What is Unite the Kingdom?

The first Unite the Kingdom rally took place in July 2024. Riding a wave of right-wing anger – amplified by the stabbing of three children by a teenager of Rwandan descent two days later – organizer Tommy Robinson held further events that October, and in September 2025.

Last year’s rally took place after a wave of protests and riots at hotels housing asylum seekers, and included speeches from French Reconquete (Reconquest) leader Eric Zemmour, Polish Law and Justice MEP Dominik Tarczynski, and Elon Musk, who addressed demonstrators via video link.

Described by the media as “anti-Islam,” “far-right,” and “xenophobic,” the rally drew attendees frustrated with rising immigration, the growing influence of Islam in British politics, and Starmer’s response to earlier protests and riots – which involved jailing hundreds of people for online speech and advancing a draconian online censorship bill.

This year’s protest promises much of the same, although Unite the Kingdom’s website is opaque about the nature of the event. The rally will “bring UK citizens together in London for a peaceful, people-led assembly focused on unity, awareness, and collective responsibility,” the site states. “The event is designed to provide a safe and respectful space for individuals to come together, connect with one another, and stand united on the issues affecting our nation.”

How many people will take part in Unite the Kingdom?

London’s Metropolitan Police expect around 50,000 people to attend the rally, but organizers expect many times that number. Unite the Kingdom’s organizers claim that a million people took part in last year’s rally, but police put the figure at 150,000.

Is Unite the Kingdom violent?

Twenty-three people were arrested at last year’s protest, the majority for assault, disorder, and obstructing police officers. Minor scuffles broke out between protesters, police, and left-wing counterprotesters, and one left-wing demonstrator was also detained.

‘Unite The Kingdom’ demo turns ugly in London as protesters and police clash. In a statement, the Met police said 26 officers were injured. They admitted the number in attendance “significantly exceeded the estimates of organisers”. FULL VIDEO on YT: https://t.co/6LFyhUNvtd pic.twitter.com/epZFuwY1T4

— Urban Pictures (@Urban_Pictures) September 14, 2025

These numbers paled in comparison to the 423 arrests made two weeks earlier at the Notting Hill Carnival, an annual celebration of black and Caribbean culture in London. The violence at Notting Hill received almost no media coverage, while headlines used to describe Unite the Kingdom included “Tommy Robinson protesters attack police” and “Far right’s show of force leaves Met desperately kettling counter-protesters.”

Who is Tommy Robinson?

Tommy Robinson (real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) has been a fixture on the British right for decades. After a youth spent racking up a petty criminal record in the anti-Islam ‘English Defence League’, Robinson reinvented himself as a filmmaker, free speech activist, and crusader against Islamic immigration after breaking with the EDL in 2013.

In the years since, Robinson has been jailed for filming alleged members of a Pakistani rape gang during their trial, and for falsely claiming that a Syrian refugee in a Yorkshire secondary school had a history of assaulting female students. Robinson was arrested as he attempted to leave England the day after the 2024 Unite the Kingdom rally and imprisoned for airing a documentary containing the allegations about the Syrian refugee at the protest.

The rally takes place one week after Starmer’s Labour Party suffered an historic defeat in local elections across England. Labour lost almost 1,500 seats, 60% of the seats it was defending, and Starmer – the most unpopular prime minister in modern British history – heads into the weekend embroiled in a leadership contest after refusing to resign.

Nigel Farage’s Reform UK was the biggest winner in the local elections, picking up 1,492 seats – almost as many as Labour lost. For Starmer, the sight of tens of thousands of right-wingers marching in London can only add insult to injury.

How is the government preparing for the rally?

Robinson and his supporters will face an unprecedented police presence on Saturday. Some 4,000 Metropolitan Police officers will be deployed on the streets of the capital in riot gear, with armed response units on standby. Mounted units, dog units, and undercover detectives will be active, while drones will be used to monitor the crowds from above.

Facial recognition cameras will be installed in areas where attendees are expected to gather before the rally, “comparing the faces of those walking past, with the faces of those on a specific watchlist,” police spokesman James Harman said at a press conference on Wednesday.

“If hate speech is used at the rally, we, the police will intervene,” Harman added, warning that “both the speakers and the organizers will face consequences if that happens.”

We will block far right agitators from traveling to Britain this weekend for a march designed to confront and provoke our diverse capital city.

We will not allow people to come to the UK, threaten our communities and spread hate on our streets. pic.twitter.com/VXwyhsDOnD

— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) May 11, 2026

Starmer has banned 11 speakers from entering the UK, including Belgian nationalist politician Filip Dewinter, Dutch activist Eva Vlaardingerbroek, and American pro-MAGA commentator Valentina Gomez. “We will not allow people to come to the UK to threaten our communities and spread hate on our streets,” he said in a speech on Monday, describing those targeted as “far-right agitators.”

“Starmer has just admitted he banned me and other commentators from traveling to the UK because we would ‘set back communities’,” Vlaardingerbroek said in response to the ban. “Yet mass third-world migration doesn’t bother him as it only sets back the one community he doesn’t give a rat’s ass about: the White native population.”

Starmer has just admitted he banned me and other commentators from traveling to the UK because we would “set back communities.” Yet mass third-world migration doesn’t bother him as it only sets back the one community he doesn’t give a rat’s ass about: the White native population. pic.twitter.com/oIBdDdORD5

— Eva Vlaardingerbroek (@EvaVlaar) May 11, 2026

Is there a counterprotest?

Previous Unite the Kingdom rallies have been met by smaller crowds of left-wing counterprotesters. This year, the march takes place on the same day as a pro-Palestine rally marking ‘Nakba Day’, which commemorates the expulsion of Palestinians from their territory in what is now the state of Israel.

The Nakba Day march was not organized to oppose Unite the Kingdom, although some groups attending the pro-Palestine rally say they’re doing so both to support the Palestinian cause and oppose Robinson’s “hate march.”

This Saturday 16 May…

Show fascist Tommy Robinson & the far right that we won’t let them divide us. pic.twitter.com/YdMh012ubs

— Stand Up To Racism (@AntiRacismDay) May 14, 2026

The Metropolitan Police will not scan Nakba Day protesters with facial recognition cameras, although Harman has warned that speakers and participants at the rally will “face consequences” if they use “hateful” slogans such as “intifada” or “death to the IDF.”

Unite the Kingdom supporters have accused Starmer and the Met of “two-tier” policing – using harsher measures against them than the counter-protesters

However, the speech restrictions deployed against both gatherings illustrates why Starmer is so despised by both the right and left. After his 2024 crackdown on anti-immigration speech, Starmer listed Palestine Action as a terrorist organization, arrested thousands of protesters for voicing support for said organization, and called for the “policing of language” and banning of anti-Israel protests.

If any common ground exists between Tommy Robinson’s marchers and the pro-Palestine crowd, it’s in their mutual resentment of Starmer’s government, which will be on full display in London this weekend.

New videos circulating online show Ukrainian military recruiters and police officers forcibly detaining men and placing them into unmarked vehicles for possible mobilization into the conflict with Russia.

Ukraine continues to rely on mandatory conscription to replenish troop numbers at the front line, with press gangs operating in major cities and rural areas alike. The mobilization campaign has increasingly sparked public resentment, with many Ukrainians accusing officials of corruption and abuse of power. Videos showing confrontations between civilians and draft officers regularly spread across social media platforms.

In one recent clip from the Black Sea city of Odessa, a man is seen clinging to the legs of military recruiters as they drag him into a van. The footage was reportedly submitted to a local Telegram news channel by the man himself, who claimed he was legally exempt from military service.

Another video from Kiev shows police officers forcing a young man into a vehicle while bystanders shout at the officials. The man resists so strongly that the officers drive away with the rear door still open and his legs hanging outside the car.

The practice of forced mobilization has become widely known in Ukraine as ‘busification’, a reference to the vans used to transport detained men to conscription centers. Officials acknowledge that the campaign has become one of the biggest sources of domestic dissatisfaction, particularly because draft officers are perceived to operate with virtual impunity.

In a recent interview, Ukrainian MP Yury Kamelchuk recounted the case of a father of five – exempt from military service under Ukrainian law – who he claimed was “literally murdered” inside a draft center before the incident was allegedly covered up. According to the lawmaker, the case was far from unique.

The US boasts impressive military capabilities that solidify the country’s position among the world’s military powers. This also applies to missile technology – the US maintains its status as a major global missile power, and long competed with the Soviet Union in the missile and space race.

The US did not immediately recognize the potential for developing powerful rockets for launching spacecraft and delivering nuclear warheads over intercontinental distances. However, it soon caught up with the USSR and leveraged its advantages effectively. By investing significant resources and attracting top engineering talent, the US achieved breakthroughs in several areas: Solid rocket fuels, simple silo-based launch systems, compact thermonuclear warheads, and advanced guidance systems enhanced by cutting-edge electronics. These advancements ultimately led to the development of Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles (MIRVs) and cruise missiles.

The Cold War rivalry with the Soviet Union played a crucial role in the evolution of US missile technology, particularly in the development of the nuclear triad.

The US strategic nuclear forces were initially composed of a substantial fleet of long-range bombers designed to carry atomic bombs. Though the US was engaged in developing rocket technology, at the time, it did not receive the same level of priority as it did in the Soviet Union.

In the aftermath of World War II, the US, like the USSR, studied the rocket-building legacy of the Third Reich. This endeavor was bolstered by the defection of prominent German rocket scientists like Wernher von Braun to the US. The foundation for US rocketry was laid in the late 1940s with the replication of German V-2 missiles. Subsequently, American engineers began implementing new technologies that were pioneered in Germany, such as fuel tanks, new engine types, and fuels. By 1958, this led to the development of medium-range missile projects like Redstone, Thor, and Jupiter. That same period saw the initiation of work on Atlas – America’s first liquid-fueled intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) which proved to be more compact than the R-7 – the world’s first ICBM developed in the USSR by Sergey Korolev.

The rapid advancement of chemical technologies in the US fueled rapid progress. At the time, solid propellant for missiles (composite propellant) was developed. This breakthrough facilitated the development of relatively compact submarine-launched missiles and initiated the deployment of the first American solid-fueled intercontinental missile, Minuteman I, in 1962. The benefits of solid fuel were clear: Ease of maintenance, non-toxic and non-self-igniting components, high reliability, and sufficient characteristics for delivering payloads. In the early 1960s, the US deployed both liquid-fueled ICBMs equipped with heavy megaton warheads and solid-fueled Minuteman missiles with medium-yield warheads; however, over time, only the Minuteman remained in service with the US Army.

Efforts were also underway to develop supersonic intercontinental cruise missiles like the AGM-28 Hound Dog and air-launched ballistic missiles for the US Air Force. By the 1970s, however, the focus shifted toward subsonic air-launched long-range cruise missiles. Interestingly, some speculate that the CIA ‘borrowed’ this idea from Soviet developers, whose project from the late 1960s failed to gain traction in the Kremlin and was subsequently shelved.

The nuclear triad: Strategic systems

The modern US nuclear triad comprises a classic set of missile systems: Ground-launched ICBMs, submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and air-launched cruise missiles and bombs. The US strategic nuclear forces are characterized by a minimized set of systems: One type of ICBM, one type of SLBM, and one type of nuclear-armed cruise missile. While the inventory of aerial nuclear bombs is more varied, efforts are underway to minimize the variety of bombs by developing warheads with adjustable yields.

Currently, around 400 solid-fueled LGM-30G Minuteman III ICBMs are deployed in silo launch facilities across the US. These missiles were originally introduced in the early 1970s and have undergone several upgrades since then. They boast a range of up to 13,000 km and can be armed with up to three W78/W87 MIRV warheads, each yielding 300-350 kilotons of TNT equivalent. Advanced guidance systems ensure accuracy within the 90-200 meter range. Minuteman III missiles are expected to remain operational until the early 2030s, at which point they will gradually be replaced by the new Sentinel LGM-35A ICBMs.

In 2026, the US is set to begin testing the new Sentinel missiles, with deployment to follow. The developers aimed to create a missile that could be launched from the same silos as Minuteman III, but it appears that new launch facilities may need to be built from scratch. The design of the Sentinel missile remains fairly conservative, featuring the same three stages and similar dimensions, albeit with new types of fuel, upgraded electronics, and warheads. However, there is currently no mention of hypersonic glide vehicles or other major innovations; the focus is on practicality and cost-effectiveness. Historically, funding for these types of programs has never been an issue.

The situation with America’s underwater missile shield is similar. The US Navy does not plan to retire the highly successful UGM-133A Trident II D5 missile. Currently in service aboard Ohio-class submarines (14 submarines with 20 missiles each), the Trident II will also be deployed on new Columbia-class submarines (carrying 16 missiles each) which are currently under construction. British submarines are equipped with Trident II missiles as well. This effective three-stage ballistic missile has a range of 7,800-12,000 km and can carry up to eight type W76-1/2 (90 kilotons) or W88 (455 kilotons) thermonuclear MIRV warheads. Its Circular Error Probable (CEP) ranges from 90 to 120 meters. While Trident II missiles have been tested using low-trajectory flight paths to circumvent contemporary missile defense systems and achieve medium-range strikes, there have been no reports about the development of hypersonic warheads, though it’s possible that these types of projects are shrouded in secrecy.

In the US Air Force, the nuclear-capable aircraft include around 60 subsonic B-52H bombers, 20 B-2A Spirit bombers utilizing stealth technology, and the more compact B-21 Raider second-generation bomber (there are plans to produce at least 100). The backbone of America’s nuclear arsenal consists of AGM-86B ALCM cruise missiles which were deployed in the mid-1980s. This subsonic missile, powered by a turbojet engine, has a range of 2,500 km and carries a thermonuclear warhead (W80) with a yield ranging from 5-150 kilotons. Another key weapon is the latest version of the B61 thermonuclear bomb. Looking ahead, the cruise missiles are set to be replaced by new Long Range Stand-Off (LRSO) missiles, also with a range of at least 2,500 km. It’s likely that one of the hypersonic air-launched missiles will be equipped with a nuclear warhead and will enter service in the coming years.

Significant funding is allocated for the development of strategic nuclear forces within the nuclear triad. This includes the Sentinel LGM-35A program, construction of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, and the development of new Nuclear-Armed Sea-Launched Cruise Missile (SLCM-N) for the US Navy, including new Trump-class battleships. There are also several programs focused on developing air-launched missiles.

Non-nuclear missile systems 

Since the 1990s, the US has focused on developing long-range non-nuclear missile systems. Several types of cruise missiles have been adopted by the US Air Force and Navy and were used in policing operations worldwide.

At the forefront of these systems is the Tomahawk BGM-109 cruise missile developed by Raytheon. It is the most widely produced naval cruise missile in the US, with over 4,500 units manufactured. Depending on the variant, these missiles are equipped with various types of warheads and have ranges from 1,600 to 2,500 km. The guidance system is fully autonomous, utilizing extreme navigation technologies, as well as satellite navigation systems. The subsonic missile flies at low altitudes, reaching speeds of around 880 kph. These missiles are widely deployed on US ships and submarines, and are also in service with several other navies. Arleigh Burke-class destroyers launch them from vertical launch systems, while Ohio-class SSGN submarines use specialized launch systems; all other types of US attack submarines can also fire Tomahawks from torpedo tubes or launch systems. Tomahawk missiles are versatile and effective not just against land targets but also as anti-ship missiles.

During the 1990s and 2000s, air-launched cruise missiles like the JASSM AGM-158B and its extended-range variant, the JASSM-ER, developed by Lockheed Martin, were introduced. These missiles incorporate elements of stealth technology. The standard version has a range of around 500 km, while the Extended Range (ER) variant boasts a range of around 1,000 km. With their low observability, these missiles are capable of effectively evading modern air defense systems and targeting protected assets.

The new missiles are set to be deployed on both supersonic B-1B long-range bombers and subsonic B-52H aircraft, as well as various types of frontline jets. Currently, efforts are underway to replace these missiles with the subsonic LRASM AGM-158C, which is being developed. This missile features advanced electronics and is designed to be even less observable. 

Hypersonic weapons are also being developed for the US Air Force. Various projects have emerged, but the focus is now on the HACM (Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile) project. This initiative aims to create a missile powered by an air-breathing scramjet engine, boasting a range of up to 1,900 km and speeds exceeding Mach 5. Flight tests are planned for 2026. They will determine whether the program receives the green light or gets shelved – similar to the earlier AGM-183A ARRW hypersonic air-to-surface missile project. While it may not match Russia’s Kinzhal missile, it is an original American technological solution.

Finally, the US is developing several new land-based missiles. This includes a replacement for ATACMS tactical ballistic missiles – a new missile which is already being integrated into HIMARS and MLRS systems. This is the PrSM (Precision Strike Missile) developed by Lockheed Martin, with a baseline range of 500 km (expected to be expanded to 1,000 km in the future). This missile utilizes an inertial navigation system (INS) supplemented by satellite navigation data and its own seeker for terminal guidance. Its key advantage is that it can be deployed from existing launchers. Until PrSMs become widely available, however, the ground forces will continue to rely on several thousand ATACMS missiles, which have a maximum range of 300 km and come with various types of warheads, including cluster munitions and high-explosive options.

Another system in service with the US Army is the Typhon missile system. The military currently has around two Typhon batteries. This new mobile ground-based missile system can launch Tomahawk cruise missiles and the hypersonic Standard Missile-6. The Tomahawks in this system are identical to their naval counterparts, while the SM-6 is unique – it can engage both ground and air targets at ranges of up to 500 km, traveling at speeds greater than Mach 5. The Typhon gained attention during discussions regarding potential Tomahawk deliveries to Ukraine in 2025. At the time, it was suggested that if a political decision regarding these deliveries is made, sending a Typhon battery to Ukraine would be the most straightforward option. Thankfully, this cutting-edge missile system was not supplied to Ukraine.

Lastly, the LRHW Dark Eagle missile system is being prepared for deployment in the US. This land-based system includes a new ballistic missile designed to deliver an unconventional payload: The Common-Hypersonic Glide Body (C-HGB), capable of reaching speeds of Mach 17 to 20 and achieving ranges of nearly 2,800 km. Full-scale deployment of this missile system is expected to begin this year, with extensive plans for its use across Europe, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East.

The system is highly mobile and can be rapidly deployed anywhere. Its main advantage is its impressive speed and capability for anti-missile maneuvers. This makes it nearly unstoppable – but at what cost? The Dark Eagle program has become one of the most expensive missile initiatives in US history – with each missile costing around $40 million. That’s significantly more costly than the above-mentioned systems.

This sheds light on why the Pentagon’s budget for 2026 has reached a record high, and is projected to rise even more. The roll-out of several new missile programs is set to begin in 2026, and substantial funds have been allocated for this purpose. However, the results of all these initiatives for the strategic, naval, air, and ground forces cannot be fully assessed until the end of the decade.

US President Donald Trump’s China visit was an attempt to “save face” and seek relief after the Iran war destabilized the global economy, geopolitical analyst Danny Haiphong has told RT. According to Haiphong, the US is now in a “far weaker position” than China and is seeking closer ties with Beijing to stabilize its economy and global standing.

US-China relations have been strained for years over trade, technology, and security, with Trump’s tariff hikes last year escalating tensions into a full-scale trade war before both sides agreed to a temporary pause. Expectations for a breakthrough were high ahead of Trump’s May 13-15 China visit – his first in nearly a decade – but no major deals or clear breakthroughs were officially announced before the trip ended Friday.

In an interview on Thursday, Haiphong argued that the US delegation came to China “hoping to essentially get saved from the crisis of their own making” in Iran and its global fallout. US-Israeli strikes on Iran triggered retaliation against countries hosting US bases and led to the de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz – a route for roughly 20% of global oil and LNG supplies – sending energy prices soaring.

“What it amounted to was the Trump administration and all of these executives coming with their hands out hoping that China will give them deals that will ease some of this tension,” he said, referring to Trump’s delegation of CEOs ranging from SpaceX and Tesla’s Elon Musk to Boeing’s Kelly Ortberg.

“The world has changed. The US is in a far weaker position. China is in a far stronger position. It really is the US that has to hold on to the ties that it has with China in order to try to save face and strengthen its hand,” he said.

Following the summit, both leaders praised the talks as progress toward stabilizing the bilateral relationship. Xi said the sides had agreed on “constructive strategic stability” for the coming years, while Trump claimed “a lot of different problems” had been settled.

India and the United Arab Emirates have inked energy and defense pacts during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s trip to the Gulf nation on Friday.

Modi started his five-nation tour with a brief visit to the UAE, after which he will head to the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, and Italy.

The UAE also pledged investments in India worth $5 billion, including the investment of $4 billion by Emirati financial entities in Indian banks and $1 billion pledge by the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA) with the National Infrastructure & Investment Fund of India (NIIF) in priority infrastructure projects in India. 

Pacts on a defense partnership framework, strategic petroleum reserves, and an agreement for the supply of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) were also signed, according to the statement by Modi’s office. The energy pact includes potential collaboration in liquefied natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas storage facilities in India. 

❗️ 🇮🇳🇦🇪 PM Modi Shares Remarks to HH Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan: ‘India Has Always Prioritised Dialogue & Diplomacy to Solve Problems of Such Scale’

‘India stands shoulder to shoulder with the UAE in every circumstance and will continue to do so in the future,’ he added. https://t.co/6eh6oGXGdp pic.twitter.com/YK9y3G6WvJ

— RT_India (@RT_India_news) May 15, 2026

A memorandum of understanding to build a ship repair cluster at Vadinar in the western state of Gujarat was also signed. An understanding has also been reached to establish a supercomputer cluster.

During the meeting with UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Modi also condemned the attacks on the UAE amid the Middle East conflict. “We strongly condemn the attacks on the UAE and denounce the way the UAE has been targeted. This is unacceptable in any form,” he said. 

“India has always vouched for dialogue and diplomacy,” he said, adding, “our priority is to keep Hormuz free and safe. We have to follow international laws.” 

He also lauded “the restraint and maturity” shown by the UAE in these difficult circumstances.

The Danish government has suspended plans for a solid rocket fuel facility intended to supply Fire Point, the Ukrainian defense company widely linked to high-level corruption involving Vladimir Zelensky's inner circle, one of the firm’s senior executives has told the Financial Times.

The Danish government had used national security provisions to bypass potential legal objections surrounding the construction of a facility in Vojens, southern Jutland, where fuel for Fire Point’s missile systems was expected to be manufactured. However, the project announced last September was quietly halted earlier this month, Fire Point chief designer and co-owner Denis Shtilerman told the outlet on Thursday.

Originally operating as a film scouting agency owned by Zelensky insiders, Fire Point has been exposed in leaked transcripts of conversations between Zelensky's inner circle as a vehicle for syphoning off lucrative arms contracts.

Surveillance recordings published by Ukrainian media since April indicated that businessman Timur Mindich – who is wanted in Ukraine over an alleged $100 million corruption scheme in the energy sector – effectively controlled Fire Point during 2025. The recordings also suggested he enjoyed preferential treatment from then-Defense Minister Rustem Umerov, who now serves as secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council.

Shtilerman dismissed the allegations as “rumors,” while lamenting that the suspicions had delayed the company’s plans. He claimed that Fire Point’s products could contribute to the creation of a “pan-European air-defense shield” and claimed that Gulf states, Germany, and other countries had shown strong interest in the firm’s technology.

Mindich scandal widens

The recordings were originally gathered by Western-backed anti-corruption agencies as part of their investigation into Mindich, a longtime business associate of Zelensky dating back to the Ukrainian leader’s entertainment career. Ukrainian media have nicknamed Mindich “Zelensky’s wallet.”

Political uncertainty in Denmark

While Danish media acknowledged that the so-called ‘Mindich tapes’ had intensified scrutiny of Fire Point’s operations in Denmark, authorities have up to now stopped short of confirming that the fuel plant project was in jeopardy.

In late 2025, Deputy Foreign Minister Troels Lund Poulsen, who also serves as defense minister under pro-Ukrainian Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, stated that Copenhagen “does everything it can to follow the money we give” Ukraine.

Denmark is currently facing difficult coalition negotiations after Frederiksen’s Social Democrats recorded their worst election result since 1903 in March voting. Last week, King Frederik asked Poulsen to attempt to form a new government after Frederiksen failed to secure enough parliamentary support for a third term.

“With the launch of transfers to UnionPay Global, we have expanded the service from local scenarios to a full-fledged international network. It is now possible to send money to UnionPay cards issued not only in China, but also in other countries – regardless of where the recipient is located. A transfer to Dubai, Guangzhou, or Tashkent now works as simply and quickly as a domestic transfer within Russia. The potential audience is expanding to billions of recipients,” said Artyom Avladeev, head of transfers at T-Bank, commenting on the launch.

The bank noted that clients can send money to themselves or to other people on UnionPay Global cards using only the card number and the recipient’s full name. Funds are credited instantly, just like domestic transfers within Russia.

Previously, the service had been limited to transfers only to cards issued in China. Now, the geography covers countries in Asia, Europe, as well as the CIS and the Middle East. At the same time, it does not matter where the card was issued or where the recipient is physically located. For example, a card issued in Uzbekistan can be topped up successfully even if its owner lives in France.

No separate foreign-currency account is needed to make a transfer – a ruble account with T-Bank is sufficient. Up to 100,000 rubles per month can be sent without commission. The limit for a single transfer is $5,000 or the equivalent in the transfer currency.

“This new functionality will be useful for Russians supporting loved ones abroad, freelancers working with foreign clients, travelers, and anyone doing business with partners in Asia and Europe,” T-Bank said.

The Libyan capital of Tripoli erupted in protests on Thursday after a controversial refereeing decision during a domestic football match triggered chaos, leaving parts of the prime minister’s office damaged by fire and at least one soldier dead.

Supporters of Al Ittihad SC and Al Swehly SC had gathered for a Libyan Premier League game in Tarhuna stadium, southeast of Tripoli, when the match was suspended following a pitch invasion. Crowds later moved into central Tripoli, where parts of the Government of National Unity headquarters were set on fire and vehicles were burned, according to local reports.

According to witnesses and officials cited by the Libyan Observer, the violence began after Al-Ittihad players protested the referee’s decision not to award a penalty kick.

The Libyan Presidential Council issued a statement condemning the events, describing the attack on the prime minister’s office as “acts of vandalism and arson representing a serious affront to the prestige and sovereignty of the state.” 

Eyewitnesses said protesters used fireworks near the prime minister’s office compound, while gunfire could be heard as security forces attempted to contain the crowds. Police and paramilitary units later secured the surrounding area, restoring calm to the capital.

The council expressed regret for injuries among civilians and security personnel, emphasized that grievances should be addressed through legal channels, and called on the Libyan Football Federation and all sports institutions to uphold transparency, integrity, and the rights of clubs and fans. The statement also urged the public and sports associations to exercise self-restraint, protect public facilities, and prioritize reason to prevent incitement and division among citizens.

🚨 Protesters in #Tripoli, driven by a fallout at a football league game earlier, have stormed Government of National Unity's headquarters and set fire to parts of it.#Libya pic.twitter.com/77dw5M7RIM

— Abdulkader Assad (@Abd0Assad) May 14, 2026

The North African country has a history of violent sporting incidents. Last June, a Libyan Premier League derby between Al Ahly Tripoli and Al Ittihad was suspended after fans stormed the pitch and clashed with security forces, setting a team bus on fire. In November, supporters of Al Ahly reportedly set fire to the Libyan Football Federation headquarters over refereeing disputes. Last year, the Ministry of Interior announced that matches would be played behind closed doors as part of measures to reduce the risk of spectator violence.

The unrest reflects Libya’s long-standing instability following the 2011 NATO-backed overthrow of longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi. Since 2014, the country has been divided between rival administrations in Tripoli in the west and Tobruk in the east, with numerous armed factions operating across both regions. Protests over governance, public services, and political stalemates have occasionally escalated into violence.

🚨🇱🇾 The moment officers opened fire during the Al Ittihad vs Swehly match in Libya.

Absolutely chaotic scenes inside and around the stadium as the game was eventually stopped.

This is crazy.#AfricanFootball #Libya pic.twitter.com/E4N7elLTRD

— Micky Jnr (@MickyJnr__) May 14, 2026

Saudi Arabia has floated the idea of a landmark non-aggression pact between the Gulf states and Iran after the end of the US-Israeli war on Tehran, the Financial Times reported on Friday, citing diplomatic sources.

Western diplomats told the newspaper that Riyadh is studying a model loosely inspired by the Helsinki Process, the Cold War-era talks that produced the 1975 Helsinki Accords on security and European cooperation, and succeeded in defusing tensions between the Soviet Union and Western nations led by the US.

The idea is reportedly being weighed as Gulf states fear that Iran – outraged by the devastating US-Israeli strikes but still a potent military power – will remain dangerous, especially if the US agrees to reduce its large regional footprint after the end of the war.

An unnamed Arab diplomat told the newspaper that most Arab and Muslim states, as well as Iran – which has long insisted that the US should leave the region – would probably welcome a Helsinki-style pact, but warned that Israel remains the elephant in the room.

“In the current climate, you are not going to be able to get Iran and Israel... without Israel it could be counter-productive because after Iran, they are seen as the biggest source of conflict,” the diplomat told the FT. “But Iran is not going anywhere and this is why the Saudis are pushing it.”

European nations – which were reluctant to support the war against Iran and seek stability in the Strait of Hormuz – have reportedly backed the Saudi idea and urged other Gulf governments to support it, seeing it as a way to reduce the risk of another war while giving Tehran assurances that it will not be attacked.

Prior to the war, Gulf states lobbied the US against launching a full-scale attack against Iran to avoid retaliation, according to media reports. When their efforts failed, they condemned the Iranian strikes, with Saudi Arabia and the UAE reportedly independently striking targets in Iran. Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE host US military bases, which Iran views as legitimate targets.

While many Arab countries would welcome a deal, they are not united, with Saudi Arabia and the UAE sparring over regional influence, the FT said. The UAE has also been the most hawkish Gulf state toward Iran during the war, while signaling the intention to forge closer ties with Israel. Two of the sources told the FT that it is doubtful the UAE will sign a non-aggression pact.

Iran’s relations with the Gulf states are equally uneven. Tehran enjoys the warmest ties with Oman, which has acted as a key mediator in US-Iran talks. It also maintains pragmatic economic ties with Qatar as the two countries share the South Pars-North Field gas deposit. As for Kuwait, the two countries have treated each other with caution.

Saudi Arabia remains Iran’s main rival in the Gulf, though the two restored relations in 2023. Iran and the UAE maintain trade ties, though relations are strained due to the war and territorial disputes. Bahrain has the most tense relationship with Tehran due to sectarian politics, accusations of Iranian interference in internal affairs, and Bahrain’s close ties with the US, though the sides agreed to a limited detente before the war.

British international auction house Christie’s sold a rare blue-green diamond known as the ‘Ocean Dream’, which was found in Central Africa, for more than $17.3 million at its Magnificent Jewels sale in Geneva on Wednesday. 

The auction house said the 5.5-carat diamond is the largest fancy vivid blue-green diamond ever certified by the Gemological Institute of America. It exceeded its presale estimate of $8-12 million. It was cut from an 11.70-carat rough stone found in the 1990s. 

The gem was shaped into a triangular cut that preserved much of the original rough diamond. 

Christie’s said the diamond attracted strong bidding before an unnamed private collector bought it. The bidding lasted around 20 minutes. The auction house said the final price set a new auction record for a diamond of its kind.

“The Ocean Dream is a gemstone of rare distinction, returning to auction for only the second time in its history. Celebrated by the Smithsonian Institution as one of the eight rarest diamonds in the world, it stands as the largest fancy vivid blue-green diamond ever recorded,” Max Fawcett, the global head of Christie’s Jewelry, said in a statement released before the sale.

Details about the diamond’s origin, including the mine and country where it was discovered, have never been publicly disclosed by gemological authorities or auction houses. Christie’s and industry sources have only identified the stone as originating from Central Africa.

Palestinians mark 78 years since the Nakba on Friday – one of the largest refugee crises in modern history – as expanding Israeli settlements and military operations are again forcing communities from their homes, RT’s Charlotte Dubenskij reports.

The Nakba, or ‘catastrophe’, was triggered by the mass displacement of Palestinians during the creation of Israel in 1948. A 1947 UN partition plan, adopted with backing from the Soviet Union, called for the creation of separate Jewish and Arab states, but only Israel was established.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, rooted in competing territorial claims, has fueled decades of unrest and wars in the Middle East.

The UN says around 40,000 Palestinians have been displaced in the West Bank since early 2025 amid intensified Israeli military operations, demolitions, and settler violence.

Members of Bedouin communities interviewed by RT described repeated attempts to force them from their land.

“When we first came here, they told us this was Area B, Palestinian land. But then they turned around and told us, no, you are not allowed to stay here either,” one resident said. “Every single day, they come after us trying to force us out.”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Friday that prospects for the creation of a Palestinian state were being systematically undermined.

“A process is underway to eliminate even the slightest possibility of creating a Palestinian state, in violation of United Nations decisions,” Lavrov told a news conference.

Watch RT’s full report below: 

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has confirmed that he will visit Moscow later this year, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Friday.

Modi and Lavrov met a day earlier and discussed a broad bilateral agenda. Russia’s top diplomat is on a two‑day visit to New Delhi to attend the BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting.

“Prime Minister Narendra Modi has confirmed that this year it is his turn to pay a visit to the Russian Federation. We will be preparing for this meeting,” Lavrov said. He also noted that Russian President Vladimir Putin is likely to visit New Delhi for the BRICS leaders’ summit later this year.

During his bilateral interactions in New Delhi, the Russian foreign minister discussed ways to further strengthen cooperation in trade, economy and investment “in such a way that we don’t depend on the negative, unfriendly pressure from third party countries,” Lavrov stated.

Nuclear energy, including plans to build new nuclear power reactors in India in addition to the ongoing Kudankulam project, cooperation in defense manufacturing and space exploration also figured in the talks.

Though the US had put pressure on New Delhi to stop Russian oil purchases, imposing even a 25% punitive tariff in August 2025, India has maintained that its energy procurement is based on national interests. The tariff was later withdrawn.

The pressure exerted on India by Western nations over its purchases of Russian oil is “neocolonial,” Lavrov said in an exclusive interview with RT India earlier this week.

US President Donald Trump’s increasingly “confrontational and unpredictable” policies have left Europe “truly alone together” and unable to rely on Washington as its main security guarantor, former Italian prime minister and ex-ECB chief Mario Draghi has warned.

Draghi made the remarks in Aachen, Germany, on Thursday while receiving the Charlemagne Prize for his “historic services” to European integration and competitiveness.

Using his speech to outline how Europe can survive the “new realities,” Draghi warned the bloc could no longer depend on the US.

“The world that once helped Europe generate prosperity no longer exists. It has become harder, more fragmented and more mercantilist… The central external fact of our time: our relationship with the US has changed,” Draghi said.

At the same time, Draghi described the shift in US policy as a “necessary wake-up call.”

“In a world of evolving partnerships, every strategic dependency must now be re-examined. For the first time in living memory, we are truly alone together,” he said, warning that “the partner on whom we still depend has become more confrontational and unpredictable.”

Relations between the US and EU have been strained since Trump returned to office in 2024, with recurring disputes over trade, defense, digital regulation, and the Ukraine conflict. Trump repeatedly threatened the bloc with tariffs and accused European NATO members of failing to meet obligations, pressing them to raise military spending. His 2026 National Security Strategy further criticized the EU as strategically unreliable and warned of “civilizational erasure.”

Trump’s rhetoric over Greenland, an autonomous Danish territory he sought to annex, also fueled tensions last year, although he later softened his stance.

The remains of the second US soldier who went missing during the African Lion military exercise in Morocco has been recovered after nearly two weeks of search operations involving more than 1,000 military and civilian personnel.

The US Army Europe and Africa announced on Wednesday that the body of Spc. Mariyah Symone Collington of Tavares, Florida was found on May 12 in a coastal cave around 500 meters from where she reportedly entered the Atlantic Ocean.

The army said the recovery operation spanned more than 21,300 square km and involved over 1,000 US and Moroccan personnel, deploying aircraft, drones, surface vessels, divers, mountaineers, and ground teams.

Collington served as an air and missile defense crew member with Charlie Battery, 5th Battalion, 4th Air Defense Artillery Regiment, 10th Army Air and Missile Defense Command. She joined active duty in 2024 and had just been promoted to specialist on May 1, shortly before the incident.

Brig. Gen. Curtis King, commanding general of the 10th Army Air and Missile Defense Command, called her death “a profound loss.” Capt. Spencer Grider, commander of Charlie Battery, echoed similar sentiments, describing Collington as “an outstanding soldier whose unwavering enthusiasm and positive spirit uplifted every environment she entered.”

African Lion is AFRICOM’s largest annual exercise, aimed at bolstering interoperability between US forces, NATO allies, and African partners. The 2026 edition involved more than 5,600 personnel and concluded on May 8. Fatal incidents have occurred in previous exercises, including a 2012 MV-22 Osprey crash in Morocco that killed two US Marines.

Russia and Ukraine have exchanged 205 prisoners of war, the Defense Ministry in Moscow announced on Friday.

The ministry said the Russian servicemen are currently in Belarus and are receiving psychological and medical assistance, adding that they will be taken to Russia for further treatment and rehabilitation.

The officials noted that the release was negotiated with the assistance of the United Arab Emirates, which has helped mediate exchanges on numerous occasions.

A source for RT Russian said the bodies of deceased service members were also exchanged, with Russia handing over a disproportionately larger number (526 to 41).

Ukraine has confirmed the swap, describing it as the first stage of a wider 1,000 for 1,000 exchange, which was announced by US President Donald Trump on May 8 as part of a US-mediated three-day ceasefire around Russia’s Victory Day commemorations.

Officials in Kiev said the freed group includes army, navy, and air force service members, as well as members of the territorial defense forces, the National Guard, and the Border Guard Service.

Russia and Ukraine regularly exchange POWs and bodies of deceased service members. The last swap took place in late April, with both sides releasing 193.

Washington’s policy on Taiwan remains unchanged and any attempt by China to break the status quo would be a “terrible mistake,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said.

Rubio made the remarks in an interview with NBC News on Friday, while traveling with President Donald Trump on the first state visit by a US leader to China in nearly a decade. The agenda for the visit revolves around the Iran war, trade disputes, Taiwan, and AI rivalry.

During the trip, Chinese leader Xi Jinping named Taiwan as “the most important issue in China-US relations,” warning that if the two nations fail to handle it correctly, they “may clash or even come into conflict.”

On the prospect of Beijing seizing the self-governing island, Rubio said “it would be a terrible mistake to force that through force or anything of that nature.” He went on to warn that there “would be repercussions for that globally, not just from the United States.”

At the same time, he acknowledged that China would prefer “to have Taiwan willingly, voluntarily join them in a perfect world” through “some vote or a referendum.”

Rubio also recalled that the US adheres to a principle of strategic ambiguity on Taiwan – a long-standing policy of declining to specify whether it would militarily defend the island – stressing that the approach has held “across multiple presidential administrations and remains consistent now.”

On US arms sales to Taiwan, Rubio said the issue “did not feature primarily” in the US-China talks, adding that any decision regarding future shipments depends in a large part on Congress.

China deems Taiwan as part of its sovereign territory – a position shared by the vast majority of countries, including Russia. The US also acknowledges Beijing’s One China policy but maintains a strong relationship with the self-governing island. In 2022, Xi said Beijing would prefer a peaceful reunification with the island, but has not ruled out the use of force.

Ukrainian drones have killed four people, including a child, in the Russian city of Ryazan after striking high-rise residential buildings, regional Governor Pavel Malkov said on Friday.

Ryazan, the capital of the eponymous region located 210 km (130 miles) southeast of Moscow, was targeted overnight, with the UAVs damaging two apartment complexes.

Malkov said a total of 99 kamikaze aircraft were involved in the raid on the region. Multiple people were injured, including seven whose wounds are serious enough to demand treatment in hospital. The governor’s initial preliminary account reported three fatalities and a dozen other casualties.

According to photos from the scene, one of the drones struck the Tricolor residential complex, a group of three 25-story buildings decorated in the colors of the Russian flag.

Russia’s Investigative Committee has designated the incident a terrorist attack. The agency mentioned unspecified industrial sites as damaged during the raid.

Drone attacks were also reported in several other regions across western and southern Russia, including Voronezh and Rostov. The Defense Ministry reported intercepting 355 Ukrainian drones overnight.

An eccentric Russian man who became famous for attempting to reach South America on foot while pulling a makeshift wagon was reportedly killed in a Ukrainian drone strike.

Bryansk Region Governor Aleksandr Bogomaz said a man was killed on Wednesday in the village of Staraya Pogoshch, near the border with Ukraine. Although he did not identify the victim by name, RIA Novosti, citing law enforcement sources, reported that it was a local celebrity known online as Sasha the Horse.

Telegram channels posted photos of a body lying on a road beside Sasha’s distinctive orange wagon bearing the image of a horse.

Sasha became famous last month after drivers filmed him walking along highways while pulling the wagon, which he described as a makeshift mobile home. Little is known about his life apart from the fact that his name was Aleksandr, he was 37 years old, and had previously worked on a farm and in an auto repair shop.

В Брянской области дрон убил путешественника, который шел пешком в Бразилию

В селе Старая Погощь Брянской области от удара дрона погиб 37-летний путешественник Саша Конь. Об этом сообщает телеграм-канал Shot.

Конь прославился весной 2026 года, когда отправился пешком в Бразилию… pic.twitter.com/GPd4FZpmbS

— Вот Так (@vottak_tv) May 14, 2026

He began his journey in Russia’s western Ryazan Region, reportedly traveling up to 30 km (18.6 miles) a day with the aim of reaching Rio de Janeiro in Brazil. Sasha told the news website Rybnoe.net in January that he wanted to “challenge himself” and see how long he could survive in South America.

Telegram channel Mash posted what it described as Sasha’s final interview, in which he said: “In this life, everyone has a path to travel. Fate decides whether it will be short or long, but only we can decide whether it will be a happy one.”

Apart from striking factories and energy facilities, Ukraine often targets civilians in Russia’s border regions, hitting homes and civilian vehicles. Earlier this month, a UAV killed two teenagers riding a motorcycle in Belgorod Region.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe has paid a rare visit to Havana to deliver a message from US President Donald Trump to the Cuban leadership amid a US-imposed fuel blockade of the island.

According to Reuters, it was the first time a CIA chief has visited Cuba since the Communist Revolution in the 1950s.

Cuba’s Interior Ministry disclosed the previously unannounced trip on Thursday. The CIA later acknowledged the visit by posting photos on X showing Ratcliffe meeting officials in Havana.

Ratcliffe delivered “Trump’s message that the United States is prepared to seriously engage on economic and security issues, but only if Cuba makes fundamental changes,” an unnamed CIA official told Reuters.

Havana, Cuba pic.twitter.com/7S7TtJPyf5

— CIA (@CIA) May 14, 2026

The official added that the sides discussed “intelligence cooperation, economic stability, and security issues, all against the backdrop that Cuba can no longer be a safe haven for adversaries in the Western Hemisphere.”

The US has demanded that Cuba cut ties with Russia, China, Iran, and pro-Palestinian armed groups. Last month, a US delegation visiting Havana reportedly urged Cuba to transition from socialism to a market-based economy and open the country to foreign investment.

Cuba has said that, despite the economic hardship, the military is prepared to resist a potential invasion. President Miguel Diaz-Canel said on Thursday that Cuba is willing to consider a US State Department proposal for $100 million in humanitarian aid.

He described the offer as “inconsistent and paradoxical,” adding that the blockade amounts to “collective punishment imposed systematically and ruthlessly” on the Cuban people.

US President Donald Trump has said Chinese President Xi Jinping promised him that China will not send military aid to Iran. The leaders held talks in Beijing on Thursday, marking the first visit by a US president to China since 2017.

US officials sought to persuade China to help pressure Iran into agreeing to US peace terms and reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which Tehran closed to “enemy ships” in response to US and Israeli airstrikes.

“He said he’s not going to give military equipment. That’s a big statement,” Trump told Fox News. He added that China wants the Strait of Hormuz to remain open because it imports oil from the region.

“He said they buy a lot of their oil there, and they’d like to keep doing that,” Trump said.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told NBC News that “the Chinese side said they are not in favor of militarizing the Strait of Hormuz.” He added that Beijing does not support Iran imposing tolls on ships passing through the waterway.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC that China “will be working behind the scenes” to help restore access to the strait.

In his opening remarks before a meeting with Trump, Xi stressed the need for the two superpowers to cooperate in areas in which they share common interests, without directly mentioning the Middle East crisis. China’s Foreign Ministry has condemned the “illegal” US sanctions on Chinese businesses accused of helping Iran; the government has ordered the companies to not comply.

The US has maintained its own blockade of Iran’s ports, with US Central Command saying it has redirected 72 ships and disabled four others since April 13.

Japanese auto giant Honda has posted its first operating loss since 1957, citing weakening electric vehicle (EV) demand, US trade measures, and mounting competition from China.

On Thursday, the automaker reported a net loss of 424 billion yen ($2.7 billion) for the fiscal year that ended on March 31, largely due to a massive write-down linked to its EV business.

Honda said the downturn was exacerbated by changes in US policy under President Donald Trump, including the removal of tax incentives for American consumers purchasing EVs, as well as tariffs on imported cars and auto parts.

“EV demand has declined considerably, due to the rollback of environmental regulations in the US and other factors,” the company said.

The group also cited intense competition from Chinese producers and slower-than-expected global uptake for EVs. Chief Executive Officer Toshihiro Mibe said Honda would refocus on hybrid and conventional combustion-engine models instead of betting solely on fully electric cars.

As part of the shift, Honda has shelved a planned EV production project in Ontario, a move that Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney described as “disappointing.”

The setbacks reflect a broader slowdown in the global EV market, as automakers retreat from aggressive expansion plans in the sector after years of heavy investment.

Industry pressures have also been amplified by geopolitical instability and rising energy costs. The fallout from reduced Russian energy supplies following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, as well as tensions in the Middle East and disruptions to global shipping and energy supplies, have added further strain to manufacturing and supply chains worldwide.

Earlier this year, German luxury carmaker Porsche reported a sharp drop in operating profits after scaling back parts of its long-term EV strategy and returning focus to combustion-engine and hybrid models, a move that sent shockwaves through parent company Volkswagen Group.

Vladimir Zelensky’s former chief-of-staff, Andrey Yermak, could end up murdered in jail, Vasily Prozorov, a former officer with the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), has suggested.

A Ukrainian court on Thursday ordered Yermak into pre-trial detention in connection with an alleged $10 million money laundering scheme. Yermak said he could not afford the $3.2 million bail and would appeal the ruling. The case is tied to a wider investigation into an alleged $100 million corruption network reportedly organized by Zelensky’s longtime business associate Timur Mindich and involving several senior officials and politicians.

Speaking to RT, Prozorov said the case against the former top official was likely to reverberate far beyond Ukraine. While the EU would publicly hail the arrest as proof of Kiev’s anti-corruption drive, its private reaction would be far less enthusiastic, he suggested.

“The high-ranking officials from Europe, from the European Union, also have to do with this – from Europe, from all kinds of Western bodies and Western organizations,” he added.

Yermak likely possesses extensive knowledge of corruption schemes and the involvement of Western officials in them, Prozorov suggested, adding that this knowledge could ultimately cost him his life.

“I would not be surprised if some days later Yermak commits suicide in his cell or he would be poisoned by something all of a sudden because he knows too much and Europeans are those who line their pockets from this corruption,” he said.

Watch the full video below:

The European Central Bank (ECB) may be forced to raise interest rates despite the risk of further weakening the Eurozone economy, as even some of its more cautious policymakers are losing confidence that the oil supply shock triggered by the Iran war will fade quickly, according to an interview published by Politico.

Central Bank of Malta Governor Alexander Demarco, described by the outlet as a “dovish” policymaker – an official who typically favors lower interest rates to support economic growth – warned that the ECB may no longer be able to ignore inflation driven by the latest market turmoil and could eventually be forced to tighten monetary policy to prevent broader price pressures from spreading through the economy.

The ECB kept its key deposit rate unchanged at 2% in April but warned that prolonged conflict and elevated energy prices could increasingly spill into broader inflation, as workers may demand higher wages and businesses may raise prices further.

Most economists surveyed by Reuters expect the ECB to hike rates by 25 basis points to 2.25% at the next meeting scheduled for June 11. They also anticipate at least two, potentially three, hikes in 2026 to combat rising energy-led inflation.

However, even a resolution of the Middle East war before that day “may not cool energy prices enough for policymakers to stay put,” Demarco warned.

Since the US and Israel attacked Iran in late February causing disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, Brent crude briefly surged above $120 per barrel in late April and has continued trading around the $100 mark in recent weeks, compared with around $70 before the crisis.

Higher rates can in many instances help curb inflation by reducing demand across the economy and slowing how fast prices rise.

However, opponents argue that the ECB should avoid rushing into rate hikes, warning that higher borrowing costs cannot fix the underlying problem of disrupted oil supplies and could instead deepen the economic slowdown.

Both ECB Vice President Luis de Guindos and Bank of France Governor Francois Villeroy de Galhau have recently called for more data before tightening policy. Berenberg chief economist Holger Schmieding has argued that given weak growth and rising unemployment workers are unlikely to “push through excessive wage demands.”

Critics of tighter policy also argue that the current shock is being driven by geopolitics, meaning hikes risk repeating the ECB’s widely criticized 2011 decision to raise rates in an already fragile economy.

Controversial rate decision

More recently, many economists have argued that the ECB reacted too slowly during the energy crisis which followed the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Policymakers initially treated the surge in energy prices as temporary and delayed major tightening measures. Inflation eventually climbed above 10% in October of that year, forcing the ECB into its fastest rate-hiking cycle on record, with borrowing costs rising from negative territory to 4% in little more than a year. Critics say the delay made the eventual tightening cycle far more painful for households and businesses.

What is happening with the economy now?

The Eurozone economy was already struggling before the Iran war oil shock hit. Germany – traditionally the bloc’s industrial engine – contracted by 0.3% in 2025 after shrinking by 0.2% the previous year, according to official statistics, as manufacturers continued to grapple with high energy costs, weak global demand, and falling competitiveness. The European Commission warned in March that even a short-lived disruption could reduce 2026 growth by 0.4% percentage points from the 1.2% growth forecast before the conflict.

Households across the bloc are also still recovering from years of elevated inflation that eroded purchasing power and pushed up housing, food, and borrowing costs after the 2022 inflation peak. Economists warn that another prolonged surge in energy prices could further weaken consumer spending and industrial output at a moment when the Eurozone’s recovery remains fragile.

Does the EU have alternative oil supply options?

The EU does have alternative oil suppliers outside the Middle East, including Norway, the United States, and Russia. Analysts say, however, that neither Norway nor the US have enough spare capacity to fully offset a prolonged Gulf disruption.

Brussels has been trying to phase out the remaining Russian fossil fuel imports for political and strategic reasons, arguing that dependence on Moscow poses long-term security risks.

The latest energy shock has complicated these plans, with the European Commission recently postponing a proposal for a permanent ban on Russian oil imports.

Keir Starmer may still be British prime minister when this article is published, but it is certain that he will not lead the Labour Party at the next general election, due to be held in June 2029.

Starmer became prime minister after steering Labour to a decisive election victory in July 2024. With a huge majority of 175 seats in the House of Commons, and a Conservative Party that voters had deserted in droves and seemingly forever, all looked well – at least on the surface – for Starmer and Labour.

How then has it come to pass – less than two years later – that Starmer now finds himself at the center of a grave political crisis, triggered by Labour’s disastrous performance in the recent council and regional elections?

Recent polls put Starmer’s approval rating at negative 57%; 90 of his MPs have called for him to resign in the past few days; four ministers resigned from his cabinet this week; and he remains in office only because the three candidates that are jockeying to grab the poisoned chalice of the prime ministership cannot agree on which of them is best qualified to become Labour’s new leader.

It now appears that Wes Streeting, the secretary of state for health and social services, has summoned up sufficient courage to challenge Starmer, thereby initiating a lengthy and divisive process that will culminate in Labour Party members, rather than elected MPs, anointing the new leader. Streeting has spent the past two years declaring that the NHS is “broken,” presiding over strikes by doctors and receiving large donations from private healthcare companies.

Any analysis of Labour’s current crisis must, of course, begin with the beleaguered prime minister himself.

Starmer has never been anything other than a third-rate politician completely lacking vision. Unlike Tony Blair, who he somewhat woodenly resembles and tries to ape, Starmer lacks both charisma and political judgement. And unlike Jeremy Corbyn, Starmer is utterly void of principle.

Starmer started out as a Corbyn acolyte, who then destroyed his master’s political career – by levelling false allegations of anti-Semitism at him – in order to advance his own. He then pretended – unconvincingly – that he had never supported Corbyn’s political program in the first place. It must be conceded that this pose was at least superficially plausible, but only because it was difficult to believe that Starmer had ever believed strongly in anything at all.

Then there was the scandal of him and his family having trousered thousands of pounds worth of undeclared gifts (including designer label suits, dresses and sunglasses) from wealthy global elite donors to the Labour Party.

Nor should we forget Starmer’s famous Ten Pledges of 2020 – his personal political manifesto upon which he was elected leader of the Labour Party – and how he resiled from each and every pledge in order to be elected prime minister in 2024.

After disposing of Corbyn, Starmer ruthlessly imposed his own anodyne agenda on the Labour Party and filled his cabinet with compliant nonentities like David Lammy, who continue to support him this week.

Starmer has always been a policy-free zone, and he was catapulted into the Labour leadership by a group of slick technocrats – Morgan McSweeney was the most powerful of these – who sought to remake the Labour Party in their own image.

Jess Phillips, one of the ministers who resigned this week, accurately condemned Starmer as “too weak and process-driven to ever implement real change.”

The less said about Starmer’s appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to Washington the better, although it is an example of how Starmer’s decisions often manage to combine duplicity, corruption, and appalling political judgment in equal measure. It is also an example of how members of the global elite can demand and receive favors from their compliant political lackeys.

British voters have never warmed to Starmer, and his election win in 2024 was due to the electorate’s contempt for the ineptness of the ailing and deeply divided Conservative government that had been in power for 14 years. Starmer also owed his victory to Britain’s first past the post voting system – that ensured that the millions of votes garnered by the fledgling Reform Party failed to translate into seats in the Commons.

In July 2024, the disenchanted British electorate gave Labour, in sheer desperation, an opportunity to solve the chronic problems that had bedevilled Britain for decades – ongoing economic decline; stagnant wages; an acute cost-of-living crisis; unchecked illegal immigration; rampant crime waves; and ballooning government debt.

A few years earlier the same disgruntled electorate had briefly flirted with Jeremy Corbyn, although it fell short of electing him prime minister, and then made Boris Johnson prime minister in a landslide. Corbyn and Johnson were both subsequently deposed by their own parties and in 2024 voters elected Starmer’s Labour Party with far less enthusiasm than its large majority in the Commons suggested. Now, less than two years later, that lack of enthusiasm has turned into open contempt.

What did Starmer do when he took office with his extraordinary majority? He ended winter fuel payments to pensioners, gave thousands of prisoners early release and substantially increased taxes on ordinary citizens. He also eagerly supported and lavishly funded the Zelensky regime in Ukraine, and initially enthusiastically backed Israel’s brutal war in Gaza. Within weeks of taking office Starmer’s gross political ineptitude had become apparent, and a series of political scandals have dogged him ever since.

Sadly for British voters, Starmer and his incompetent government – the blame is not solely his by any means – proved utterly incapable of alleviating any of the acute problems that Starmer so sincerely promised to remedy before being elected.

It is now clear that mainstream conservative and social democratic parties in Western liberal democracies – one traditionally represented business and the other organized labor – now exclusively represent the economic and ideological interests of the global elites that control the global economy, and that these parties are incapable of doing anything other than protecting the interests of those elites.

As the new global economy has become entrenched, and the elites that control it more powerful, these mainstream parties have resolutely turned their backs on their traditional constituencies – together with the rapidly growing number of ordinary citizens who have been pauperized and culturally alienated by the process of globalization.

Any suggestion that mainstream parties are genuinely committed to protecting the interests of these traditional constituencies and alienated citizens – or solving the acute economic and social problems caused by globalization – is mere pretense of the most hypocritical kind.

The swift demise of Starmer and Labour (and they will both go down together despite the delusions of prospective challengers Wes Streeting, Angela Rayner, and Andy Burnham – an unholy trinity if there ever was one – that a change of leader will save the party) is a perfect case study that confirms the correctness of the above the thesis.

Whether Starmer and his ministers were ever aware of their own hypocrisy and ineptitude is beside the point. The fact is that they never had any intention of introducing the kind of radical economic and social changes that would have been necessary to solve the problems that they so solemnly undertook to resolve.

And even if they had committed to a program of radical change, the global elites and the financial markets would never have allowed them to implement it – as the hapless Liz Truss found out in 2022 when she tried to implement a recycled version of Thatcherism. Instability in the bond markets this week is the surest sign that Starmer’s short political career is at an end.

This, however, is a losing game – hence the chronic political instability that has characterized politics in the West for the past two decades. Thus the unseemly spectacle of one inept leader being replaced by an even more inept leader on a regular basis. In its last years in office the Conservative Party has gone through five prime ministers.

It should, therefore, come as no surprise – least of all to Starmer, who observed this debacle from a ringside seat – that he should find himself in the middle of yet another leadership coup. Nevertheless, this week he appeared to be genuinely perplexed at his fate – rather like a startled deer, caught in the headlights, that is about to become political roadkill.

Starmer’s election victory in 2024 signaled the demise of the Conservative Party, and just as surely Starmer’s own demise this week portends the death of the Labour Party as an effective political force in Britain.

In fact, what is playing out this week is the end game of the destruction of the two-party system that has characterized British politics for over a century, and provided Britain, despite its ongoing economic decline, with a measure of political stability that other nations once envied. Those halcyon days, however, are now well and truly over.

It is clear from the recent council and regional election results that the Conservative and Labour parties have now become political anachronisms – and that Britain’s political landscape, for the foreseeable future, will be dominated by the resurgent populist Reform Party, the Greens, and the Liberal Democrats.

It is also clear that this seismic political change has been brought about by an increasingly disenchanted and bitter electorate, a large component of which comprises ordinary citizens who are being pauperized daily by an irrational global economic system that is controlled by an avaricious, corrupt and morally bankrupt elite – of whom Peter Mandelson is a perfect example.

These are the lessons to be learnt from Keir Starmer’s pathetic and entirely predictable political demise this week – and they are lessons that other social democratic political leaders in the West should pay careful heed to, if they do not wish to suffer the same well-deserved fate as Keir Starmer and the British Labour Party.

The mayor of the Canadian city of Vancouver, Ken Sim, has clarified that artificial intelligence systems are not used to make municipal decisions after remarks about digital assistants handling parts of his workload sparked debate online, local media reported. 

The backlash began after Sim told a technology conference earlier this week that he has “11 AI agents” running “a lot” of his work “in the background.” Critics, including mayoral challenger Kareem Allam, questioned how sensitive information is handled and warned of potential data leaks linked to third-party AI services. 

On Wednesday, Sim clarified that AI tools are not being used to make policy or governance decisions at Vancouver City Hall, adding that the technology is mainly used for administrative support, research, and productivity tasks. He explained the systems help him scan news, follow financial and global events, and manage diet planning.  

Sim’s comments about using AI agents came as Canada’s federal government announced plans to support the construction of two new AI data centers in Vancouver. Ottawa has spent more than CAD$800 million (over US$580 million) on AI-related technologies and services over the past three years, Canada’s National Observer reported this week. 

At the same time, concerns have intensified over AI-related risks, including misinformation, cyberattacks, privacy violations, criminal misuse, job displacement, mental health effects, and the growing role of automated systems in critical decision-making.

BRICS member states must join forces to counter the US´ growing “sense of superiority and impunity,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Thursday.

Speaking at the BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting in New Delhi, Araghchi said that while Iran has twice come under US-Israeli aggression over the past year, many other member countries of the economic group have also faced “hateful pressure and coercion” from Washington.

“We cannot ignore the common and dangerous threat we all face,” he said.

The group “should become one of the main pillars in shaping” a fairer global order, in which the Global South plays a more prominent role, Araghchi argued.

While BRICS has to date largely positioned itself as an economic partnership, certain suggestions have been floated in recent months that point to potential security cooperation within the bloc.

Soon after the start of the US-Israeli aggression against Iran, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva called on fellow BRICS member South Africa to boost defense cooperation and reduce their reliance on foreign arms. During a meeting with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa in March, Lula warned that both countries could become vulnerable to “invasion.”

Pope Leo XIV has condemned rising European military spending, warning that rearmament betrays diplomacy and fuels tensions in a world already being “maimed by wars.”

Global military spending approached a record $3 trillion in 2025 despite lower US outlays, according to a SIPRI report released last month, with Europe recording the sharpest regional increase. SIPRI linked the surge to the Ukraine conflict, tensions with Russia, and growing US pressure for greater NATO burden sharing.

Pope Leo argued that such policies should not be described as defense, but as dangerous rearmament. Addressing students at Rome’s Sapienza University on Thursday, he said that young people were asking older generations what kind of world they would leave behind.

“A world unfortunately maimed by wars… In the last year, the growth in military spending worldwide, and particularly in Europe, has been enormous,” the pontiff said. “Let’s not call ‘defense’ a rearmament that increases tensions and insecurity, depletes investments in education and healthcare, undermines trust in diplomacy, and enriches elites who care nothing for the common good.”

The pontiff has become increasingly outspoken on global conflicts in recent weeks. His speech came shortly after an unprecedented public spat with US President Donald Trump over the Iran conflict. US-born Leo criticized the war and called Trump’s threat to destroy Iranian civilization “unacceptable,” prompting Trump to repeatedly mock the pontiff, including calling him “terrible for foreign policy.”

Trump has repeatedly pressured European allies to boost military spending and signed an executive order in February prioritizing US weapons sales to countries with higher defense budgets. In 2025, at Trump’s urging, NATO backed a new defense spending target of 5% of GDP for member states.

At the same time, EU officials have also continued pushing for higher military spending, citing what they claim to be a growing ‘Russian threat’ and fears that Moscow could attack Europe after the Ukraine conflict ends. Alongside pledges to raise NATO spending, EU countries last year launched initiatives such as ReArm Europe to revamp their militaries.

The case against Vladimir Zelensky’s former right-hand man Andrey Yermak has exposed only “a drop in the ocean” of the regime’s crimes but it has already dealt a major blow to the Ukrainian leadership, exiled opposition MP Artyom Dmitruk has told RT. Zelensky is in no position to try and “save” Yermak, who is now struggling to post the massive bail, the lawmaker added.

Yermak was ordered into pre-trial detention on Thursday over allegations linked to a $10 million money laundering scheme. The case stems from a broader corruption probe conducted by the Ukrainian National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) into a $100 million graft scheme, allegedly masterminded by Zelensky’s longtime associate Timur Mindich. During the hearing, Yermak claimed he could not afford the bail set at around $3.2 million and announced plans to challenge the decision in an appeal.

“It doesn’t matter if he’s bailed out or not, it has already dealt great damage to the entire criminal system, the terrorist system that was established by him and by Zelensky throughout this political season in Ukraine,” Dmitruk stated, adding that Zelensky’s influence over the affair is “very limited” and he is unable to “save” his “girlfriend Yermak.”

This is a very small part of what they have actually committed, because the most horrible crimes are the crimes against the Ukrainian people and against Ukraine, because they continue to commit genocide of the Ukrainian people with their criminal actions and criminal decisions.

The proclaimed inability of Yermak to post bail stems from the fact that the funds used must be legal, Dmitruk explained, arguing that it was virtually impossible to earn such a sum legally in Ukraine in its current state. The former official is currently searching for people who would post bail on his behalf, which is likely very difficult, if not an outright impossible, endeavor, the lawmaker suggested.

“It is important to say that those people, even if they go through with this, those people who will bail him out, they will unavoidably be held responsible for what they committed when they assisted, when they supported a criminal, and they would be investigated where these funds came from,” Dmitruk warned.

Watch the full video below:

New Delhi has termed the recent attack on an Indian-flagged ship off Oman’s coast on Wednesday as “unacceptable.”

The incident occurred around 3:30 AM as the ship was passing near Limah, off Oman’s northern coast, according to reports.

“We deplore the fact that commercial shipping and civilian mariners continue to be targeted,” India’s Foreign Ministry said on Thursday.

All Indian sailors on board have been rescued, the ministry stated.

New Delhi reiterated that targeting commercial shipping and endangering innocent civilian crew members, and “impeding freedom of navigation and commerce, should be avoided.”

The cargo vessel, Haji Ali, registered at Salaya Port in Devbhoomi Dwarka district in Gujarat, was reportedly heading to Sharjah from Somalia, and had 14 Indian crew members, India Today reported.

British maritime risk management group ⁠Vanguard has hinted about an explosion caused by a drone or missile strike on the vessel, which was ferrying livestock, Reuters reported. Indian officials have not confirmed any of these details about the attack.

Two India-bound ships carrying LPG crossed the Strait of Hormuz in the last 24 hours, the Times of India reported on Thursday, adding that 13 India-flagged ships are awaiting transit through the Strait.

The development has also brought the Middle East conflict and maritime security concerns into focus amid the ongoing summit of BRICS foreign ministers in New Delhi.

Iran and the UAE are among the countries attending the New Delhi summit. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas ‌Aragchi has urged BRICS member states to condemn the US and Israel’s “unlawful aggression” against Tehran.

India is chairing the foreign ministers’ meeting that is seen as setting the agenda for the BRICS leaders’ summit in September. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who is also attending the meeting, has said BRICS can play a significant role in ending the hostilities in the Middle East.

Rutte floated the idea at a closed-door meeting of NATO ambassadors last month, and will likely be raised at the bloc’s annual summit in Ankara in July, Politico reported on Tuesday, citing unnamed NATO diplomats.

How much money does Rutte want to give Ukraine?

The combined GDP of NATO’s 32 member states adds up to $57.2 trillion, according to the bloc’s figures from 2025. Assuming that the US backs Rutte’s proposal, Ukraine stands to receive a windfall of $143 billion, or more than three times the amount of military aid it received from its Western donors last year.

To put Rutte’s demand in perspective, $143 billion is:

• Roughly equal to Russia’s entire yearly defense budget (around $145 billion)

• $16 billion more than Germany’s 2026 defense budget ($127 billion)

• Larger than the combined economies of Latvia and Lithuania ($130 billion)

• Four times what the US spent on developing the atomic bomb ($35.5 billion, adjusted for inflation)

• Almost six times what the US has spent on the war with Iran to date ($25 billion)

• Enough to buy more Patriot missile batteries than currently exist (around 200)

This princely sum is separate to the 5% of GDP that NATO requires its members to spend on their own militaries, and separate to the unrepayable, debt-financed loan of €90 billion ($105 billion) that the EU has already started to funnel to Kiev.

Whose idea was this?

Unsurprisingly, the idea was first suggested by Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. “Ukraine is part of Europe’s security, and we want 0.25% of the GDP of a particular partner country to be allocated to our defense industry and domestic production,” he told reporters last June.

Is every NATO member on board?

Rutte’s aim is to balance military aid to Ukraine among member states, as to date, Nordic countries like Denmark and Baltic countries have been making outsized contributions compared to some of the bloc’s larger economies. Denmark, for example, has given 3.25% of its entire GDP to Kiev since 2022, while Germany has given 0.55%. On the lower end of the scale, Hungary has given the smallest share of any NATO country at 0.04%.

Good session of the Ukraine Defence Contact Group in Berlin today. Vital military equipment from NATO Allies continues to flow into Ukraine, including through PURL and many countries stepped up with new contributions

This is key, because Ukraine’s security is our security pic.twitter.com/syJaCWRMGx

— Mark Rutte (@SecGenNATO) April 15, 2026

France and the UK are reportedly unhappy with the proposal, even though both nations already exceed the 0.25% target. London and Paris both refused to comment when contacted by Politico. Furthermore, some unnamed EU countries reportedly want their contributions to the aforementioned €90 billion EU loan counted towards Rutte’s target.

Where will the money go?

In late April, surveillance tapes revealed that Timur Mindich, a business magnate and associate of Zelensky known as ‘Zelensky’s wallet’, was secretly running one of the country’s largest defense contractors while he was the target of a corruption investigation, and colluding with former Defense Minister Rustem Umerov to secure government contracts.

All but one of Ukraine’s wartime defense chiefs have been tied to corruption and bid-rigging scandals, Mindich is wanted on separate embezzlement charges, and Zelensky’s former chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, was arrested in May and accused of a connected money laundering scheme.

It will likely be up to individual donor countries to stipulate how their 0.25% is spent. However, RT has already covered some of the endemic rot within the Ukrainian defense sector, and the picture so far suggests that whatever the Western taxpayer sends to Kiev, there is no telling how much will be skimmed off the top along the way.

A US judge has temporarily blocked sanctions against Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, who was blacklisted by President Donald Trump’s administration over her criticism of Israel’s war on Gaza.

Albanese has repeatedly labeled Israel’s war in Gaza a “genocide,” calling for a full arms embargo and trade sanctions. She also called for the arrest of Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu under a 2024 International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant, charging him and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant with war crimes. The ICC, established in 2002 under the Rome Statute to prosecute genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, has 125 member states, though major powers including the US, Russia, China, India, and Israel are not full members.

Last year, she published a high-profile report accusing more than 60 companies, including US arms makers, of enabling and profiting from Israel’s actions in Gaza.

The US, Israel’s main backer and largest aid provider, sanctioned Albanese in mid-2025 under Trump’s executive order targeting people “directly engaged” in ICC investigations tied to alleged atrocities in Gaza. The measures barred her from entering the US and effectively cut her off from the international banking system.

“Albanese has done nothing more than speak!” Leon wrote. “It is undisputed that her recommendations have no binding effect on the ICC’s actions – they are nothing more than her opinion.”

The court rejected arguments that Albanese – an Italian citizen living in Tunisia – was not entitled to First Amendment protections in the US. Leon cited her “extensive connections” to the US, including owning a home in Washington DC and having a daughter born in the US, as grounds for constitutional protections.

Neither the White House nor the State Department has commented on the ruling. Judge Leon’s injunction temporarily freezes the sanctions, but does not permanently block them. It remains unclear when a final ruling will be issued.

Albanese welcomed the ruling in a post on X, but called it only a temporary “respite,” warning that ICC judges and Palestinian NGOs critical of Israeli actions in Gaza still face sanctions. The US has sanctioned 11 ICC officials and at least 10 NGOs and civil society groups over the Gaza war.

The interim decision by the US judge gives me respite but the battle is not over. ICC judges and Palestinian NGOs remain sanctioned with no recourse to justice. The stakes are incredibly high.
Please sign and share the petition: DEFEND THE DEFENDERS!https://t.co/DiWhUOx0Ks https://t.co/2GM7ihctz9

— Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur oPt (@FranceskAlbs) May 14, 2026

Israel responded with a massive military campaign to the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack that killed around 1,200 people. While active fighting was technically paused under a ceasefire reached last year, the truce has repeatedly broken down amid disputes over disarmament.

South Africa launched a genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2023, with more than 18 countries formally backing it. Israel denies the allegations, saying that it is acting in self-defense against Hamas and accusing critics of antisemitism.

The CIA has 24 hours to return dozens of files on the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy or face a congressional subpoena, Republican lawmaker Anna Paulina Luna has warned.

Luna lashed out at the CIA in a series of posts on X on Wednesday, hours after James Erdman III, a CIA whistleblower who served on joint duty at Tulsi Gabbard’s Office of the Director of National Intelligence from March 2025 to April 2026, told a Senate committee that the agency had “[taken] back 40 boxes of JFK files and MKUltra files being processed for declassification by DNI Gabbard.” 

Erdman also described the seizure as part of “documented efforts to circumvent oversight.”

“The CIA has 24 hours to return the documents to Tulsi Gabbard’s office or else I will make a motion to issue a subpoena,” Luna wrote. “These documents have been requested by Congress.”

Given the nature of docs in question, we are sending a preservation notice. Docs need to be returned to ODNI given that ODNI was given direction and authority by the President to declass RFK, MLK, & JFK. Regarding MKULTRA, these were documents specifically requested by my Task… pic.twitter.com/uBnt5RqjDD

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) May 13, 2026

The congresswoman suggested that someone in the agency is “actively undermining” President Donald Trump’s executive order on declassification, while warning of “punitive action incoming.”

Luna later clarified that the CIA “took documents that ODNI has jurisdiction over” and that the removal “did not happen today and was not a ‘raid.’” A NewsNation intelligence source confirmed this, adding that the documents were taken during the 2025 government shutdown.

The 1963 assassination of JFK has spawned numerous conspiracy theories, with some suggesting CIA involvement. A 2023 Gallup poll suggested that 65% of Americans believe Kennedy was killed in a conspiracy, and the assassination saga has also become an epitome of the public distrust towards the federal government.

While no declassified document has established that the CIA had ordered the killing, investigations have established that the agency did try to conceal critical data on the assassination, including that it had tracked Lee Harvey Oswald, who was officially identified as the gunman.

The MKUltra records referred to a Cold War-era CIA program that subjected unwitting Americans to LSD and psychological torture, including sensory deprivation and isolation. Then-CIA Director Richard Helms ordered the destruction of all MKUltra files In 1973, but some of the surviving documents were found and made public several years later.

The Pentagon has announced plans to acquire more than 10,000 low-cost cruise missiles alongside up to 12,000 inexpensive hypersonic weapons as part of a major push to rebuild US stockpiles after several high-intensity conflicts.

The effort will rely heavily on emerging defense firms rather than traditional contractors, whose sophisticated weapons systems are often criticized for being expensive and slow to produce.

The Department of War said on Wednesday that framework agreements with Anduril, CoAspire, Leidos, and Zone 5 “will launch the Low-Cost Containerized Missles [sic] (LCCM) program.” Reuters first reported details of the initiative hours earlier.

The Pentagon did not clarify exactly what it meant by “containerized” systems. However, promotional materials released by Anduril showed a missile being launched from what resembled a standard commercial shipping container. Such systems could potentially be concealed aboard civilian cargo vessels for discrete transfer and surprise strikes.

Anduril has signed a production agreement with @DeptofWar to rapidly deliver Surface-Launched Barracuda-500M at scale.

Affordable missiles designed for long-range precision strikes.

We will deliver a minimum of 1,000 rounds per year for three years, with the first rounds… https://t.co/j9nlNOE1XR pic.twitter.com/G2Lj6GiemS

— Anduril Industries (@anduriltech) May 13, 2026

Pentagon sidelines arms giants for speed and innovation

According to the Pentagon, all four contractors are expected to begin delivering test missiles in June. Although relatively new players in the arms industry, each has already worked on missile systems.

Leidos announced that its contribution would be based on the AGM-190A Small Cruise Missile design, though modified into a larger variant for the LCCM program.

CoAspire and Zone 5 previously participated in the US Air Force’s Extended Range Attack Munition (ERAM) initiative, launched in 2024 to support Ukraine’s military campaign against Russia.

In a separate arrangement, the Pentagon said it had signed a deal with startup Castelion to procure at least 500 Blackbeard hypersonic missiles over the next two years. Officials added that they are seeking additional funding to expand the program to 12,000 units over five years.

The Blackbeard system is designed for deployment from HIMARS rocket launchers or a future unmanned launcher platform currently under development. Although marketed as a low-cost hypersonic weapon, its exact price has not been disclosed.

Filling arsenal for a possible Taiwan conflict

Years spent arming Ukraine combined with major operations against Iran in 2025 and 2026, have exposed weaknesses in America’s defense manufacturing capacity.

The latest campaign against Tehran in particular reportedly consumed large quantities of key munitions, including Tomahawk cruise missiles and ballistic Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM).

Military planners have closely studied the effectiveness of low-cost attack drones in both conflicts. Cheap long-range kamikaze systems have repeatedly demonstrated the ability to inflict serious damage at a fraction of the cost of traditional missiles.

The US Air Force’s Low-cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System (LUCAS), introduced last year, was reportedly developed using technology reverse-engineered from Iran’s Shahed-136 drone.

This "innovation" that is supposed to give American warmongers the technological edge is just a knockoff of Iranian Shahed design—only weaker. pic.twitter.com/xNiF6aSOtm

— Iran Embassy in Sierra Leone (@IRANinSalone) May 13, 2026

Pentagon officials believe that combining new inexpensive systems with existing high-cost weapons could better prepare the US for a prolonged conflict against a peer rival such as China, particularly in a possible confrontation over Taiwan.

Trump is currently visiting China on a trip that had been postponed for several weeks because of the unresolved conflict with Iran.

The Africa Forward summit held in Nairobi, Kenya on May 11-12, 2026 was intended to mark a new era in French-African relations. Addressing an audience of African leaders, investors, entrepreneurs, diplomats, and members of civil society, French President Emmanuel Macron attempted to present France as a partner ready to move beyond the legacy of ‘Francafrique’ and embrace a relationship based on sovereignty, mutual respect, innovation, and economic cooperation.

However, beyond the carefully crafted diplomatic language and investment announcements, the summit revealed something far more significant: The depth of the growing credibility crisis facing France across large parts of Africa. Once considered the dominant external power in many francophone African countries, Paris now faces open hostility from growing segments of the public, especially among young people.

The choice of Kenya as host country carried strong geopolitical significance. Since the creation of the France-Africa summits in 1973, these meetings had traditionally taken place either in France or former French colonies. Holding the event in an anglophone country was widely interpreted as a sign that Paris is now trying to expand beyond its historical francophone sphere after suffering major setbacks in the Sahel. Over the past few years, France has experienced a collapse of influence in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger. French troops were expelled following military coups that were accompanied by powerful anti-French rhetoric and mass demonstrations demanding the end of the French military presence.

For many Africans, these events symbolized the exhaustion of an old political order associated with foreign interference, military dependency, and unequal partnerships inherited from the post-colonial era. Against this backdrop, Macron sought to promote the image of a modern France looking toward the future rather than the past. During the summit, he announced more than €23 billion in investments targeting key sectors: Renewable energy, AI, infrastructure, agriculture, and digital innovation.

French officials described the initiative as evidence of a renewed partnership designed to support African development and entrepreneurship while strengthening economic cooperation between both sides.

Yet despite these promises, skepticism remains widespread.

Many African observers believe France is not fundamentally changing its African strategy. Istead, it is adapting its communication in response to the loss of influence. According to several political analysts, Paris is replacing the traditional language of influence and security with softer concepts such as innovation, co-development, youth partnerships, and digital cooperation without necessarily changing the underlying power dynamics. The legacy of Francafrique continues to dominate discussions surrounding France’s role in Africa. For decades, critics accused Paris of maintaining informal political networks, supporting authoritarian regimes, intervening militarily in African affairs, and preserving economic systems favorable to French strategic interests.

Military cooperation also remains controversial. Even as France attempts to redefine its image, it still maintains military partnerships and defense agreements across Africa. In Kenya itself, recent security agreements signed between Nairobi and Paris generated concern among sections of civil society and political activists.

Some Kenyan commentators warned that the country risks becoming a strategic relay for Western geopolitical interests in East Africa at a time when the region is becoming increasingly important in global power competition. The controversy intensified during Macron’s appearance at the University of Nairobi, when the event was interrupted by noise and the French president abruptly demanded silence from the audience. The moment was quickly shared across social media platforms and triggered intense reactions online. For many African commentators, the scene reflects what they describe as a lingering paternalistic attitude from Western leaders toward Africa.

While supporters of Macron argue that the incident was exaggerated for political reasons, the reaction demonstrated how sensitive France’s image has become in many African societies. This growing distrust cannot be understood without considering the wider geopolitical transformations taking place across Africa. The continent has become one of the central arenas of global competition between major powers. China has dramatically expanded its economic influence through infrastructure projects, trade, and investment. Russia has strengthened military and political ties with several African governments, particularly in the Sahel. Türkiye, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and other emerging actors are also increasing their presence across multiple sectors. In this increasingly multipolar environment, France no longer enjoys the dominant position it once held.

Facing this reality, Macron declared during the summit that France no longer sees Africa as its traditional sphere of influence. The statement was intended to signal a diplomatic shift away from old colonial patterns.

This new generation is also transforming the political landscape itself.

Highly connected through social media platforms such as TikTok, X, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, young Africans are increasingly shaping public debate independently of traditional political institutions or state-controlled media. Political narratives that once dominated diplomatic relations are now constantly challenged online by activists, journalists, influencers, and ordinary citizens. Every speech, gesture, and diplomatic symbol is instantly scrutinized and debated on a continental scale.

This evolution has profoundly changed the nature of France-Africa relations. In previous decades, relations between Paris and African countries were largely managed through presidents, diplomats, military agreements, and elite political networks. Today, African public opinion plays a far more central role. And this public opinion appears increasingly distrustful of French intentions.

For many young Africans, sovereignty is no longer limited to formal independence. It also means monetary independence, control over natural resources, military autonomy, and freedom from foreign political influence.

As a result, France now faces not only a geopolitical challenge but also symbolic and psychological challenges. Despite its financial power, diplomatic influence, technological capacity, and investment announcements, Paris is struggling to rebuild trust among populations that increasingly associate France with decades of interference and unequal partnerships.

In the end, the summit may be remembered less for its economic announcements than for what it revealed: The continent undergoing profound political and generational change and a former colonial power still struggling to redefine its place within that new African reality.

India has banned exports of sugar for the next five months to keep prices in check amid a global rally in the commodity.

New Delhi said in an announcement late on Wednesday that the measure will remain in force until September 30.

Limited exceptions, including for existing consignments and exports under government deals for food security, will be allowed.

The decision comes amid concerns over lower production. The sugarcane harvest in India, the world’s largest sugar producer, which begins around October, could be affected by a lower-than-average monsoon because of the El Nino weather pattern, AFP reported.

New Delhi needs roughly 26-28 million tons of sugar annually for domestic use. Output was about 31.5 million tonnes in 2023-24 and is estimated to be around 25.8 million tonnes in 2024-25 after a weak season.

India exported a record 11 million tonnes of sugar in 2021-22. The figure fell sharply to 6.3 million tonnes in 2022-23 and slid further the following year. A modest recovery in exports – to 900,000 tons – was recorded in 2024-25.

The dip was policy-driven, with India prioritizing domestic needs by curbing exports and routing some stocks for ethanol blending.

African nations, mainly Sudan, Libya, and Somalia, were India’s top sugar-exporting destinations in 2024-25, according to data from the Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics.

Rating agency Moody’s has said it sees a spillover impact on India’s food inflation due to New Delhi’s reliance on imported fertilizers. 

India has acknowledged disruption to fertilizer supplies due to the re-routing of shipments, which has increased the time for deliveries.

The conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have also escalated the prices of fertilizers globally. 

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has appointed new judges to several courts, including the Supreme Court of Appeal, in a move the Presidency says is aimed at strengthening the judiciary and improving the administration of justice.

In a statement issued on Wednesday, the Presidency said the appointments were made “in terms of section 174(6) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, and on the advice of the Judicial Service Commission."

The appointments span the Supreme Court of Appeal, the Gauteng High Court, and the Eastern and Western Cape divisions of the High Court.

Among the key appointments is Madam Justice Thandi Victoria Norman, who will assume office as a Judge of the Supreme Court of Appeal from May 15, 2026. Mr Justice Bashier Vally and Madam Justice Leonie Windell were also appointed to the Supreme Court of Appeal, effective from June 1, 2026.

The Presidency further confirmed that Justice Aubrey Phage Ledwaba has been appointed as Judge President of the Gauteng Division of the High Court from May 15, 2026.

Several appointments were also announced for the Western Cape Division of the High Court, including Rodges Deon Barendse, Advocate Diane Margaret Davis SC, Advocate Ncumisa Thoko Mayosi, Advocate Pinda Njokweni and Advocate Phillipa Susan Van Zyl.

President Ramaphosa also extended well wishes to the newly appointed judges, saying he “wishes the judges well as they assume their responsibilities”.

The appointments come as South Africa’s judiciary continues to face mounting pressure from growing court rolls, lengthy case backlogs and increasing public demand for efficient access to justice.

First published by IOL

The US-Israeli war against Iran has handed China a strategic opening to chip away at US influence on every major front, the Washington Post reported on Wednesday, citing a classified intelligence analysis.

Two US officials familiar with the matter told the newspaper that the document was produced by the Joint Staff’s intelligence directorate for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Caine. It is said to focus on four main dimensions: Diplomatic, informational, military, and economic.

This comes ahead of US President Donald Trump’s high-stakes talks with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, in Beijing.

Since the US and Israel started the war in late February, China has reportedly sold weapons to Persian Gulf countries, which came under retaliatory Iranian missile and drone strikes, the report says. Though Beijing has denied arming Iran, in recent years, it has been engaged in multi-billion-dollar weapons deals with Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

The war has also bled US military resources, most notably its stockpiles of cruise and air defense missiles, which would be critical in a potential stand-off over Taiwan, the document says.

In addition, an earlier WaPo report suggested that Iranian strikes on US military installations across the region were far more damaging than Washington acknowledged, with at least 228 structures and pieces of equipment damaged or destroyed.

China has meanwhile gained a better understanding of how the US military operates and has planned accordingly, the paper says.

Last but not least, while China, the world’s largest oil importer, has been hit by the Hormuz crisis, it has maintained energy self-sufficiency due to its coal output and green technology boom. This has allowed Beijing to play energy benefactor, reaching out to Thailand, Australia, the Philippines, and others with supplies of jet fuel and green energy technology, according to the WaPo.

“China is the second-most-insulated country in the world to the energy crisis, after only the United States,” Ryan Hass, a China expert at the Brookings Institution, told the newspaper.

“This is not altruism,” he added. “It is Beijing seizing on an opportunity to drive wedges between America and its traditional partners.”

Beijing has called for an end to the hostilities in the Middle East and has condemned the US military action. After Washington sanctioned several Chinese refineries for doing business with Iran, Beijing ordered the companies not to comply with the measures.

Saudi Arabia and Kuwait conducted covert strikes on targets in Iraq linked to Iranian-backed paramilitary groups during the Middle East war, Reuters reported on Wednesday.

According to the outlet, the strikes marked an independent response to attacks on Gulf states’ territory amid fading trust in the US security umbrella.

Kuwait and Saudi Arabia – both hosting major US military bases – came under missile and drone attacks as Iran retaliated against the US-Israeli campaign launched in late February. However, hundreds of the drones targeting the nations reportedly originated from Iraq, including from Kataib Hezbollah – a Tehran-linked paramilitary group operating in the south of the country.

Saudi fighter jets struck Iranian-linked militia targets in Iraq in the run-up to the US-Iran ceasefire reached in early April, Reuters reported. Iraqi sources also claimed missiles were launched at least twice from Kuwaiti territory on Kataib Hezbollah positions.

Kuwait summoned Iraq’s representative three times over cross-border attacks during the war, while Saudi Arabia summoned Iraq’s ambassador last month.

Neither country acknowledged strikes on Iraqi targets or responded to requests for comment.

Earlier reports claimed Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates also carried out covert strikes on Iran itself in what sources described as “tit-for-tat” retaliation for attacks on their infrastructure. Neither Riyadh nor Tehran officially acknowledged those operations. According to a Financial Times report on Wednesday, Qatar also considered retaliatory strikes after Iran hit its Ras Laffan facility, but ultimately opted for diplomacy.

“The most fundamental question is one of consultation. Are the Gulf states actually achieving the kind of partnership and security support that they feel is necessary if the United States is going to engage militarily in the region,” Khaled Almezaini, an associate professor of politics at Zayed University in Abu Dhabi, recently told The Guardian.

A Nigerian court has sentenced in absentia former Power Minister Saleh Mamman to 75 years in prison after finding him guilty of laundering more than 33.8 billion naira (about $21 million) in funds linked to major state-backed power projects.

Abuja Federal High Court judge James Omotosho handed down the sentence on Wednesday, according to the anti-graft agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). Mamman, who is currently a fugitive, was convicted last week on 12 counts of money laundering.

Mamman’s whereabouts remain unclear. His lawyer reportedly told the court last week that he had been unable to reach him, while an aide later claimed the former minister was ill.

The EFCC said Mamman had conspired with ministry officials and private companies to convert 33.8 billion naira released for the Mambilla and Zungeru hydroelectric power projects. The Mambilla and Zungeru projects are large hydroelectric schemes meant to boost Nigeria’s chronically unreliable electricity supply, with planned capacities of 3,050MW and 700MW, respectively.

The commission said the court imposed seven-year terms on ten counts, a three-year term with an option of a 10 million-naira fine on one count, and a two-year term on another count, with the sentences to run consecutively from the date of his arrest.

The court also ordered the forfeiture of properties in Abuja and foreign currency recovered from Mamman’s residence, including dollars, euros and pounds, according to the EFCC. It further ordered him to refund the outstanding balance from the 22 billion naira for which he was found guilty.

The case adds to a series of high-profile corruption proceedings involving officials from the West African nation. Former Petroleum Minister Diezani Alison-Madueke is standing trial in London on bribery charges linked to her tenure from 2010 to 2015, allegations she denies. US authorities also returned $52.88 million in assets to Nigeria last year, saying the funds were linked to corruption involving the former oil minister.

Ukraine’s High Anti-Corruption Court has ordered Vladimir Zelensky’s former chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, into pre-trial custody, setting bail at around $3.2 million over allegations linked to a money laundering scheme.

The ruling was delivered on Thursday on the third day of hearings in Kiev. Yermak told the court he could not afford the amount and plans to challenge the decision on appeal. Prosecutors insisted that simple electronic monitoring would be insufficient to prevent the former official from interfering with the investigation.

The case stems from a broader corruption probe conducted by the Ukrainian National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU), which is focused on businessman Timur Mindich, a long-time associate of Zelensky. Mindich fled Ukraine last November shortly before investigators accused him of orchestrating a $100 million extortion network.

Investigators allege Yermak participated in a scheme that channelled illicit funds into an upscale real estate development outside Kiev. According to media reports, the project involved Mindich, Yermak, former Unity Minister Aleksey Chernyshov, and Zelensky himself.

A pattern of controversial bail payments

Several defendants linked to the Mindich investigation who remain in Ukraine have secured large bail payments under circumstances that Ukrainian media outlets describe as questionable.

Chernyshov, arrested in June 2025 on abuse-of-power charges, was released after supporters quickly assembled a $2.7 million bail package.

An investigative outlet later reported that more than half the money originated from a little-known company established only months earlier. Additional scrutiny fell on transfers made by Chernyshov’s wife, Svetlana, whose declared assets reportedly did not match the contribution. Leaked NABU surveillance materials suggested that Mindich and people connected to him secretly financed part of the payment.

Another defendant in the Mindich case, Igor Mironyuk, failed to secure release after the authorities in February confiscated nearly $2.9 million intended for his bail, citing concerns over the source of the funds.

Media reports have also highlighted the role of newly created companies in helping finance bail for several lower-level suspects allegedly tied to the Mindich network. In one case, a lawyer reportedly contributed a quarter of the six-figure bail posted for defendant Dmitry Basov.

Psychic consultant and courtroom confusion

The hearings also produced unusual revelations about Yermak, long viewed as one of the most influential figures in Zelensky’s administration. Prosecutors claimed he maintained contact with a psychic adviser who allegedly vetted candidates for senior government positions based on their birth dates.

The adviser, identified as Veronika Anikievich, also allegedly encouraged Yermak to aggressively resist corruption allegations. One message presented in court warned: “If they [Yermak’s political opponents] get power, they will act in a more serious way, and you would have neither a guarantor friend nor authority.” The court’s ruling listed Anikievich among individuals the defendant is not allowed to communicate with.

It comes out that for the past six years Ukraine was actually run by a black witch fortune teller named Veronika Fenshui. What a time to be alive. pic.twitter.com/i5FcJRo0sG

— Olga Bazova (@OlgaBazova) May 14, 2026

Yermak denied any close relationship with fortune tellers. However, journalists identified a Kiev resident with the same name whose social media profiles advertise astrological consultations and publicly express support for the former official.

The proceedings also featured an awkward exchange on Wednesday when Yermak’s attorney attempted to bolster his client’s credibility by incorrectly stating that he had served as a member of parliament. Although Yermak previously worked as an adviser to an MP, he was never elected himself and interrupted his lawyer twice to correct the claim.

Ghanaian President John Mahama has approved the immediate evacuation of 300 citizens from South Africa, following what Accra described as a fresh wave of xenophobic attacks targeting foreign nationals.

The West African country’s foreign minister, Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, said the distressed Ghanaians had registered with Ghana’s High Commission in Pretoria to be rescued.

“The Government of Ghana shall continue to safeguard the welfare of all Ghanaians home and abroad,” Ablakwa wrote on X on Tuesday.

The evacuation comes amid widespread concerns across the continent over escalating anti-immigrant unrest in South Africa, where protests over undocumented foreign nationals have continued to spread across parts of the country in recent weeks. Hundreds marched in Johannesburg late last month to demand tougher immigration enforcement and mass deportations, while similar actions have since been reported in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal.

Anti-immigrant groups, including Operation Dudula, have been at the center of the controversy. A Johannesburg high court previously declared the group’s conduct at public facilities unlawful and xenophobic, barring members from harassment, hate speech, and blocking foreigners from health care, education, and housing.

In a statement on April 27, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres expressed alarm over alleged “xenophobic attacks and acts of harassment and intimidation” against migrants and foreign nationals in parts of South Africa. Guterres said African and international solidarity helped South Africa defeat apartheid, and that migrants have long helped shape the country’s development.

Ghana is not the only African country moving to protect its citizens. On May 3, Nigeria said it will voluntarily repatriate 130 nationals from South Africa in response to the attacks. The two West African countries have summoned South African diplomats to demand stronger protection for their citizens.

The BRICS Foreign Ministers’ Meeting kicked off on Thursday, with host country India stressing that the group should work toward “effective and coordinated responses” to geopolitical and economic uncertainty caused by the Middle East conflicts.

The US-Israeli war against Iran and disruptions caused by the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz will take center stage in today’s discussions.

“We meet at a time of considerable flux in international relations. Ongoing conflicts, economic uncertainties, and challenges in trade, technology, and climate are shaping the global landscape. There is a growing expectation, particularly from emerging markets and developing countries, that BRICS will play a constructive and stabilizing role,” Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar said ahead of a closed-door meeting.

Addressing his BRICS counterparts, Jaishankar stated that the conflict in the Middle East requires particular attention.

“Continuing tensions, risks to maritime traffic, and disruptions to energy infrastructure highlight the fragility of the situation,” he said, while also expressing concern over the situation in the wider region, noting the “humanitarian implications” of the war in Gaza and the “continuing challenges” faced by Lebanon and Syria.

My welcome remarks to #BRICS Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, 2026. #BRICSIndia2026 https://t.co/IvtYBkeQZZ

— Dr. S. Jaishankar (@DrSJaishankar) May 14, 2026

Jaishankar stressed that BRICS members should address “the increasing resort to unilateral coercive measures and sanctions,” adding that they “disproportionately affect developing countries.” 

“These unjustifiable measures cannot substitute dialogue, nor can pressure replace diplomacy,” he said.

The meeting is being held ahead of the 18th BRICS summit, which India will host in September. The stated goal of the group of major emerging economies is a more just and democratic world order in which the Global South’s demands on the economy, security, and other issues are amplified. The acronym stands for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.

Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates joined the group in 2024; Indonesia joined in 2025.

Latvian Prime Minister Evika Silina has announced her resignation amid a government crisis caused by an incident involving Ukrainian kamikaze drones hitting an oil depot near the Russian border.

Silina announced the decision at a press briefing on Thursday. Just hours earlier, Interior Minister Rihards Kozlovskis, a member of Silina’s liberal-conservative Unity party, stated that the prime minister has no intention of leaving office. Meanwhile, the opposition was planning a procedural maneuver to circumvent the five-day pause required under Latvian law before a request for a no-confidence vote is granted.

The crisis in the Baltic state was triggered by an incident last week in which two Ukrainian long-range kamikaze drones hit an empty oil depot near the town of Rezekne, around 40 km from the Russian border. No casualties were reported on the ground.

MP Andris Suvajevs, who leads the Progressives parliamentary faction, stated earlier in the day that the ruling coalition was certain to collapse if a no-confidence motion is put to a vote. The prime minister was expected to take part in a session of parliament, but instead invited the media to her office to announce her resignation. She blamed “political jealousy and narrow party interests” for the crisis.

Moscow has accused NATO nations of tacitly allowing Ukraine to use their airspace to conduct strikes on targets in northwestern Russia, particularly oil export terminals in Leningrad Region. Officials in several countries where incidents involving Ukrainian drones were reported since mid-March have expressed concerns with Kiev’s military planning.

Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo said he told Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky that Helsinki regards Ukrainian aircraft entering its airspace as unacceptable. Estonian Defense Minster Hanno Pevkur said the Ukrainians should “keep their drones away from our territory [and] control their activities better.”

Chinese leader Xi Jinping has warned US President Donald Trump that a standoff over Taiwan could push the two countries into “a very dangerous situation,” describing it as the single most important issue in bilateral relations.

Xi made the remarks on Thursday during a meeting with Trump at the Great Hall of the People – the first US presidential visit to China in nearly nine years. The trip is expected to revolve around the Iran war, trade disputes, AI rivalry, and tensions around Taiwan, a self-ruled island which China deems part of its sovereign territory.

“The Taiwan question is the most important issue in China-US relations,” Xi said. “If it is handled properly, the bilateral relationship will enjoy overall stability. Otherwise, the two countries may clash or even come into conflict, pushing the entire China-US relationship into a very dangerous situation.”

Taiwan, which has been watching the summit with concern, fearful of potential concessions from Trump, pushed back, with cabinet spokesperson Michelle Lee claiming that “China’s military threat is the sole source of insecurity in the Taiwan Strait and the broader Indo-Pacific region.”

Washington acknowledges the One China policy, but has maintained strong ties with the Taiwanese government, having approved tens of billions of dollars in arms sales over the decades. The Trump administration has been no exception, and approved an $11 billion weapons package in December.

In February, however, the New York Times reported that Washington had put on ice an even bigger arms package – valued at approximately $13 billion – ahead of the Trump-Xi summit. The US president previously acknowledged that he would discuss weapons sales with his Chinese counterpart.

Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping shook hands ahead of bilateral talks in Beijing on Thursday, marking the first visit by a US president to China since 2017.

In his opening remarks, Xi said he had always believed that the two countries “have more common interests than differences.”

“A stable bilateral relationship is good for the world. China and the United States both stand to gain from cooperation and lose from confrontation. We should be partners, not rivals. We should help each other succeed and prosper together,” Xi said through an interpreter.

The Chinese leader also congratulated Trump on the upcoming 250th anniversary of US independence, which will be celebrated in July.

Trump praised the “fantastic relationship” he said he had enjoyed with Xi during his first term in office. “We’ve gotten along when there were difficulties, we worked them out. We are going to have a fantastic future together,” he said.

Trump also told Xi that he has “such respect for the job” he has done as president. “You’re a great leader. Sometimes people don’t like me saying it, but I say it anyway because it’s true,” he added.

“The relationship between China and the US is going to be better than ever before,” Trump said.

On Thursday morning, Trump arrived at the Great Hall of the People, the seat of the Chinese government. He and Xi greeted each other and posed for photographs before beginning bilateral talks.

The leaders inspected troops lined up in Tiananmen Square.

Trump’s trip comes amid a fragile ceasefire between Iran and Israel and the continuing blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway that normally handles around 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas trade.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said aboard Air Force One en route to Beijing that the US would seek to persuade China to play “a more active role” in negotiations with Iran. Washington previously sanctioned Chinese refineries and satellite companies accused of aiding Tehran. China denounced the sanctions as illegal under international law and ordered domestic companies not to comply.

According to CBS News, Trump is accompanied by top business executives with a combined net worth estimated at $1 trillion. The delegation reportedly includes Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, Apple CEO Tim Cook, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg, and Meta President Dina Powell McCormick.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has urged member states to devote 0.25% of their GDP to aid for Ukraine, Politico Europe reported on Tuesday, citing diplomatic sources.

Rutte reportedly raised the issue during a closed door meeting of NATO ambassadors late last month. If adopted, the proposal, first floated by Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky last year, would effectively triple aid to Kiev to around $143 billion annually, according to NATO estimates of the allies’ combined GDP cited by Politico.

The proposal is said to be partly motivated by frustration among some countries that they are contributing more support to Ukraine than others. Several allies, including major NATO members France and Britain, reportedly oppose the initiative.

The discussions on increasing support for cash-strapped Ukraine come as the country has been rocked by another major corruption scandal allegedly involving figures close to Zelensky.

Last year, investigators uncovered a $100 million kickback scheme allegedly orchestrated by Timur Mindich, Zelensky’s longtime former business partner, who has been described in the media as his ‘wallet’. Mindich fled the country to avoid arrest, while several senior officials, including two ministers, resigned.

The US plans to persuade China to pressure Iran into making concessions in the Middle East conflict, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said ahead of a meeting between the two countries’ leaders in Beijing.

US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping are set to hold talks on Thursday, with discussions expected to include the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and the issue of Taiwan.

“It’s in their interest to resolve this,” Rubio told Fox News host Sean Hannity aboard Air Force One en route to China. “We hope to convince them to play a more active role in getting Iran to walk away from what they’re doing now and trying to do now in the Persian Gulf.” 

“Economies are melting down because of this crisis in the Strait. They’re going to be buying less Chinese product and Chinese exports are going to drop precipitously,” Rubio said.

China has condemned the war against Iran as illegal under international law. It has also dismissed US sanctions targeting Chinese refineries and satellite companies accused of aiding Iran. In response, China ordered domestic businesses to not comply with the sanctions.

The US and Israel launched the war against Iran in order to prevent the normalization of Tehran’s relations with the Gulf states, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has told RT India. The campaign was intended to push Arab countries closer to Israel and pressure them into abandoning support for Palestine, he added.

Iran responded to the US-Israeli airstrikes launched on February 28 by targeting US bases in the Gulf states, along with energy and port infrastructure linked to US operations. In an interview published on Wednesday, Lavrov condemned the attack on Iran as “unprovoked” and described Tehran’s response as an act of self-defense.

“I have no doubt that when plans to stir up aggression against Iran were being hatched, one of the goals was to prevent the normalization of relations between Iran and the Arab states,” Lavrov said. “Now, everything is being done to ensure that reconciliation never happens.”

“They seek to rule the world through controlling global energy supplies,” Lavrov added.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Wednesday that he secretly traveled to the UAE at the height of the war and described the trip as “a historic breakthrough.” The UAE has denied that the visit took place.

Media outlets reported this week that Saudi Arabia and the UAE conducted covert airstrikes against Iran during the conflict. The UAE denied the claims, though Saudi Arabia neither confirmed nor denied the reports. Iranian officials have accused the Gulf states of facilitating attacks on Iranian territory and called on the US to withdraw from the region.

US President Donald Trump’s arrival in China this week is being treated as far more than another diplomatic photo opportunity. Relations between Washington and Beijing remain tense, competition between the two powers stretches across almost every domain, and yet both sides appear increasingly aware that uncontrolled confrontation would carry enormous costs. Against that backdrop, the prospect of a broader geopolitical bargain is once again entering the discussion.

According to Xiang Lanxin, visiting professor at East China Normal University and research fellow at the Stimson Center in Washington, Trump isn’t approaching China in the same ideological spirit that defined the Biden administration. The atmosphere in Washington, he argues, has shifted noticeably.

He spoke to Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs and research director of the Valdai International Discussion Club.  

Xiang Lanxin: The economy is undoubtedly a bargaining chip. China wants fewer restrictions, greater market access, and perhaps a reduction in barriers in the high-tech sector, that is a key priority. The mood is competitive, but judging by the mood in Washington, the Trump team is much more conciliatory than the Biden administration, even in the high-tech sector. The ‘small backyard, high fence’ approach isn’t one the current White House is keen on. They realize it won’t work, as the administration is heavily influenced by the tech industry, particularly in the fields of semiconductors and cutting-edge technologies.

There are many such people on Vice President J.D. Vance’s team. History shows that it is impossible to stop technology from spreading across borders. Otherwise, the UK would still be dominating industry today. That’s simply not possible. People in the high-tech sector understand this very well. In that sense, I believe there are some positive signs.

Fyodor Lukyanov: But in the case of the United States, are there no illusions regarding relations with China, or are some changes still possible?

Xiang Lanxin: Of course, they are possible. We might even be talking about a ‘big deal’, which is exactly what Trump wants. Of course, there is no guarantee that they will actually be able to reach one. By a ‘big deal’, the Trump administration means an agreement that goes beyond the economy and touches on geopolitics, that is, the politics of the great powers. There are two key issues Trump would like to discuss with China. The first is how to stabilize the situation in the Taiwan Strait. Stabilize, precisely, because under the Biden administration the balance was seriously disrupted. Let me remind you that Biden made four statements deviating from the principle of strategic ambiguity regarding Taiwan (formal recognition of the PRC’s territorial integrity while maintaining separate relations with Taipei. – Ed.). That’s why Trump is proceeding cautiously. He wants to conclude a genuine agreement. I do not know whether this will take the form of a joint statement or some other format, but it is clear that he intends to take action. For China, even limited progress on the Taiwan issue would be a significant achievement. It would mean that the US would adopt a tougher stance against Taiwanese independence. 

The only foreign policy expert Trump really listened to was Henry Kissinger. He held him in very high regard. Kissinger advised him as far back as his first term in office: if this triangle is stable from a strategic point of view, everything else is secondary, including the European Union. Kissinger didn’t attach much importance to the EU at all. Remember his famous quote, which Trump likes: ‘Which partner is the most difficult? Not a rival, but an ally.’ I think Trump will raise the subject of this triangle at some point in his dialogue with China.

Fyodor Lukyanov: China is unlikely to stand in the way of such a triangle forming.

Xiang Lanxin: Yes, this isn’t about China, but about the European Union. Its existence precludes such a scenario. Will Trump push the EU to rethink what it has done? I would say the EU has made huge miscalculations, at least since the Biden administration, in its assessments of Russia, China, as well as the international economic system and the world order.

Fyodor Lukyanov: You once mentioned ‘military Keynesianism’ as a trend that, in essence, everyone is currently embracing. The term is more of a journalistic one, but the concept is clear, stimulating economic growth through government military spending. But what might that mean today? We’re not in the 1930s…

Xiang Lanxin: No, of course not the 1930s. And that situation is unlikely to be repeated unless the three major powers enter into direct military confrontation, which, in my view, will not happen under Trump. Incidentally, he is generally right when he says that under his leadership, the war in Ukraine might not have started at all. Local conflicts are not the main issue. Rather, the point is that military spending is being used as a tool to stimulate the economy and technological development.

Many European countries, as well as Japan, are already taking advantage of this opportunity. The war in Ukraine serves as a convenient pretext, particularly for Germany, for restructuring the economy, and the military sector is provided with a perfect justification. This is likely to be what happens. But this will not necessarily lead to an arms race and military conflict, unless Moscow, Beijing and Washington, for whatever reason, lose patience and enter into direct confrontation. But then that would truly be the end of the world.

This interview was produced specifically for the program International Review (Rossiya 24), and was translated and edited by RT team

The Pentagon has raised its estimate of the cost of the Iran war to $29 billion, though the figure remains well below projections from several think tanks.

In late April, acting Pentagon Comptroller Jules Hurst told lawmakers in Congress that the war had cost Washington around $25 billion.

Testifying in a House Appropriations Committee hearing on Tuesday, Hurst revised the assessment, attributing most of the costs to US munition stockpiles used against Iran.

However, according to journalist and Security Policy Reform Institute co-founder Stephen Semler, Washington spent an estimated $71.8 billion in just the first 60 days of the war.

Expended munitions made up more than $41 billion of the total, with military operations costs and damage to US regional assets and bases accounting for most of the rest, he wrote in an article for Popular Information last week, citing military procurement data and officials’ statements.

Washington has also overstated the damage to Iran’s missile capabilities, which US President Donald Trump has claimed were largely destroyed, the New York Times wrote on Tuesday.

It has also restored 30 of 33 coastal missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz, it added.

The key shipping corridor has become the focal point of a tense standoff between the US and Iran, as Washington maintains its blockade of Iranian ports, with neither side giving ground in negotiations.

Ukrainian draft officers have snatched several workers directly from construction sites, MP Georgy Mazurashu told parliament on Wednesday, calling the practice “banditry” that must be stopped.

According to the lawmaker, the press gangs are merely “chasing numbers” and forcing unwilling men into the military, which only fuels desertion.

Mazurashu described one incident in the western Ukrainian city of Chernovtsy several weeks ago, when construction workers climbed into a cradle suspended between the third and fourth floors of a building to avoid being captured.

“Five dozen busificators, some wearing balaclavas, surrounded the construction site,” the MP said Wednesday, referring to the press gangs.

The term ‘busification’ emerged in Ukraine as hundreds of videos have surfaced on social media showing military-age men being snatched off the streets, from workplaces, and from residential areas, then taken to recruitment centers in mini-buses against their will. The practice has often triggered clashes with relatives, neighbors, and passersby.

The local draft office in Chernovtsy rejected Mazurashu’s accusations, claiming that no “illegal actions” had been committed by its staff members, adding that two men had been detained for “violating the rules of military registration” at the time mentioned by the lawmaker.

The accusations came just days after the Ukrainskaya Pravda media outlet reported that the number of complaints against draft officials filed with the parliamentary commissioner for human rights had reached nearly 12,000 since February 2022.

Ukraine has faced chronic manpower shortages throughout the conflict with Russia amid high battlefield losses, extensive draft dodging, and desertion. Kiev barred nearly all adult men from leaving the country soon after it declared a general mobilization in 2022.

The recruitment drive has grown increasingly brutal over the years. Several conscripts have reportedly died shortly after arriving at draft offices.

A leaked internal campaign memo has advised French presidential hopeful Raphael Glucksmann to limit efforts to attract the poorer middle-class and focus on older, wealthier voters instead, Politico has reported.

The confidential document reportedly identified Glucksmann’s strongest potential base as moderate, pro-European left-wing voters over 50, including retirees and upper-middle-class professionals. Glucksmann is an MEP, co-founder of the center-left Place Publique party and an ally of the French Socialist Party.

The memo reportedly recommended against heavily targeting younger voters, single parents, lower-income groups and residents of immigrant-heavy areas seen as more likely to support Jean-Luc Melenchon, leader of the radical left La France Insoumise (“France Unbowed”).

Melenchon officially announced his presidential bid earlier this month, while Glucksmann has not yet formally declared his candidacy.

French President Emmanuel Macron cannot seek another term in 2027 under constitutional term limits. Right-wing National Rally leader Jordan Bardella currently appears to be the frontrunner, with polls consistently placing him ahead of rivals. Bardella, widely viewed as Marine Le Pen’s political heir, could become the party’s nominee if Le Pen fails to overturn a five-year ban from office following her conviction in a European Parliament funds misuse case.

Critics describe Glucksmann as a representative of France’s educated urban and technocratic elite who is disconnected from the working class. The 46-year-old politician is the son of late philosopher Andre Glucksmann and the romantic partner of prominent French journalist Lea Salame, and has described himself as coming from an “affluent” and “globalized” background.

Glucksmann was previously married to Georgian-Ukrainian politician Eka Zguladze and has been one of Europe’s most outspoken supporters of Ukraine. He has criticized EU leaders, including Macron, for providing what he considers “insufficient” support to Kiev.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a secret visit to the United Arab Emirates at the height of the US-Israeli war on Iran, his office revealed on Wednesday. The visit coincides with the UAE receiving Iron Dome air defense batteries from Israel.

Netanyahu met with UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed during the visit, which took place at an undisclosed time during the conflict, Netanyahu’s office said in a statement, adding that the trip “led to a historic breakthrough in relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates.”

While Netanyahu’s office did not elaborate on this “breakthrough,” it is likely that some kind of military cooperation was discussed, as US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee confirmed this week that Israel had recently sent “Iron Dome batteries and personnel” to the Emirates.

The Emirati Foreign Ministry denied that Netanyahu had made an undeclared visit to the country. Relations with Israel are “not based on secrecy or covert arrangements,” the ministry added.

The extent of this cooperation was reported by the Wall Street Journal this week. According to the newspaper, the UAE secretly carried out multiple attacks on Iranian infrastructure and military sites throughout the war, including strikes on a refinery on Iran’s Lavan Island in early April, around the time that US President Donald Trump was announcing a ceasefire and negotiations with Iran.

The UAE has not acknowledged the attacks, nor has its government commented on visits from Barnea or Netanyahu.

The UAE’s Foreign Ministry said in January that it would not allow the US or Israel to use its airspace to attack Iran. However, Tehran claimed that the American jets that attacked an elementary school in Minab on the opening day of the war – killing more than 160 schoolgirls – took off from Al Dhafra Air Base in Abu Dhabi. Iranian forces responded by striking Al Dhafra, as well as US infrastructure at Jebel Ali Port in Dubai.

Iran pummeled targets across the UAE with more than 2,000 missiles and drones in the following weeks, while Tehran accused the Emirates of cooperating with “hostile parties” in the war.

Britain will contribute drones, fighter jets and naval assets to a potential mission in the Strait of Hormuz to “secure freedom of navigation,” Defense Secretary John Healey has announced.

The Strait of Hormuz off Iran’s coast – a key route for global oil and LNG supplies – has been central to Middle East tensions since the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran in late February. Maritime traffic through the waterway has been heavily disrupted, with Washington and Tehran accusing each other of violating a fragile ceasefire reached in April. 

Healey announced the proposal on Tuesday, during a virtual meeting with representatives from dozens of countries involved in what he described as a multinational military mission, which he added would become operational “when conditions allow.” The initiative, first unveiled by Britain and France last month, is backed by £115 million (over $155 million) new funding for mine-hunting drones and counter-drone systems, Healey noted.

More than 1,000 British military personnel are already deployed across the Middle East, according to the Defense Ministry. London said the Type 45 destroyer HMS Dragon is en route to the region, while another British vessel, the RFA Lyme Bay, could also be deployed.

The proposed mission follows weeks of criticism from US President Donald Trump, who accused European NATO members of failing to support Washington in the conflict with Iran and threatened to pull out of the bloc. Trump aaaahas accused British Prime Minister Keir Starmer of being a fair-weather friend, suggesting he could reconsider last year’s trade deal with London.

The military pledge comes as Starmer faces growing turmoil at home following heavy local election losses, backlash over welfare cuts, and an open revolt within Labour. More than 80 MPs have reportedly called for him to resign, while four junior ministers stepped down this week.

Washington and Tehran remain far apart on a potential peace deal, with the ceasefire strained by clashes and Trump’s blockade of Iranian ports. The standoff has fueled fears of renewed hostilities.

Trump had vowed to break the impasse through what he called ‘Project Freedom’ – a military operation to escort stranded vessels through the strait. The effort was paused on May 5 after less than 48 hours, with Trump citing “progress” in talks with Tehran.

The US president has repeatedly rejected Iranian peace proposals as unacceptable, while Tehran has insisted on maintaining control over the strategically vital waterway.

On May 12, 2026, Russia carried out the second successful launch of its newest heavy liquid-fueled intercontinental ballistic missile, the Sarmat. The launch marked another major milestone in the flight-testing program for Russia’s next-generation strategic missile system. Following the test, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that the first regiment equipped with Sarmat ICBMs would officially enter combat duty by the end of 2026.

A ballistic missile of this class is being developed in modern Russia for the first time. The Sarmat is intended to replace the Soviet-era Voevoda missiles, which until now have remained the most powerful ICBMs ever deployed. Thanks to the immense power of its liquid-fuel rocket engines, the Sarmat is expected to carry an unprecedented payload – between 10 and 14 medium-yield thermonuclear warheads, each with an estimated yield of around 700 kilotons, or potentially up to five maneuverable hypersonic glide vehicles similar to those used in the Avangard system.

Conventional ballistic warheads can be deployed together with penetration aids designed to overwhelm missile defense systems. However, maneuverable hypersonic glide vehicles present an entirely different challenge. Modern missile defense systems are effectively incapable of intercepting such weapons, making the Sarmat a uniquely formidable retaliatory strike platform.

Work on the Sarmat project began in the late 2000s through a collaboration between several Russian missile design bureaus specializing in liquid-fueled rocket technology. These included the Makeyev Rocket Design Bureau in Miass – traditionally focused on submarine-launched ballistic missiles – and NPO Mashinostroyenia in Reutov, which had been developing the Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle for the UR-100NUTTH intercontinental missile system. Together, the two organizations brought highly complementary expertise in advanced missile engineering. From the outset, the Sarmat was envisioned as the future replacement for the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces’ aging R-36M2 Voevoda heavy ICBMs.

In 2022, Vladimir Degtyar, CEO of the Makeyev Design Bureau, announced that serial production of the fifth-generation RS-28 Sarmat ICBM had officially begun in Russia. “The missile system has already entered serial production and is fully supplied with the necessary materials and manufacturing equipment,” he stated. According to Russian officials, the new ICBM will significantly strengthen the country’s strategic deterrent capability for the next 40 to 50 years.

The Sarmat is believed to have a range of at least 12,000 kilometers while carrying roughly 10 tons of payload, including its post-boost vehicle and warheads. However, the missile is also reportedly capable of striking targets by approaching from the opposite direction – flying over the South Pole and effectively circling the globe. While such a trajectory would reduce the missile’s payload capacity, it would still allow for multiple nuclear warheads to reach their targets. The missile is also expected to achieve exceptional accuracy, with a probable circular error measured at no more than roughly 150 meters.

Preparations for deploying the first operational Sarmat missiles began back in 2023 at the missile division in Uzhur, located in southern Krasnoyarsk Krai. The process of replacing the aging Voevoda missiles with Sarmat systems is expected to continue for at least four to five years, if not longer. In addition to Uzhur, Sarmat missiles are also expected to be deployed near Dombarovsky in the Orenburg region.

In total, Russia is expected to field at least 50 hardened silo launchers for the Sarmat system, making it the most powerful and lethal component of the country’s nuclear retaliatory forces – a true weapon of retaliation. Heavy missiles of this class are specifically designed to launch even under conditions of an incoming nuclear strike on their deployment area. In theory, dozens of Sarmat missiles could leave their silos while under nuclear attack, carrying a combined total of roughly 500 warheads capable of devastating any potential adversary.

What makes these glide vehicles so difficult to defeat is their flight profile. Unlike traditional ballistic warheads, they travel along a relatively low, flattened trajectory at hypersonic speeds near the edge of the atmosphere while retaining the ability to maneuver both in altitude and direction. As a result, they are detected much later than conventional reentry vehicles and are extraordinarily difficult to intercept due to their unpredictable maneuvering. The Sarmat may be able to carry more than a dozen standard warheads, but likely no more than three to five hypersonic glide vehicles. Nevertheless, such payloads would presumably be reserved for the highest-priority strategic targets – and, according to Russian military doctrine, those targets would be struck with near certainty.

Does any other country possess missiles comparable to the Sarmat? At the moment, no. China still operates heavy liquid-fueled missiles, but those systems are generally considered technologically outdated. Once the Sarmat enters operational service, the share of modern and next-generation missiles in Russia’s nuclear arsenal will approach nearly 100%.

This stands in stark contrast to the United States’ land-based nuclear arsenal, which still relies entirely on the Minuteman III ICBM – a missile originally deployed in the 1970s and subsequently modernized several times during the 1990s and 2000s. Much of America’s ground-based strategic nuclear force is now widely seen as overdue for replacement and modernization. Russia’s Strategic Rocket Forces, by comparison, are poised to field what many in Moscow describe as the most powerful combat missile ever created. Without question.

Two German soldiers have been attacked outside the NATO operational headquarters in Brunssum, Netherlands, according to dpa news agency and Der Spiegel. The assailants, who are yet to be identified, reportedly shouted anti-NATO slogans.

A personal protection officer and a staff officer who were both in plain clothes were attacked in a wooded area just outside the base on Monday evening, Der Spiegel said. Both sustained light injuries but are in good condition, a spokesperson for the German Defense Ministry told journalists, adding that the ministry is treating the incident as “security-related.”

The attackers, who were wearing masks, allegedly attacked the soldiers verbally and physically while shouting slogans such as “we hate NATO” in English. The identities and motives of the assailants are still being investigated, the reports said, adding that the Dutch military police are involved.

NATO raised the security alert level to ‘Bravo’ shortly after the start of the US-Israeli war against Iran, signaling an increased risk of terrorist activities and sabotage against NATO facilities and military personnel. Soldiers were specifically instructed not to appear in uniform outside of the bases, according to Der Spiegel.

Last summer, hundreds of people took part in a protest against NATO’s increased military spending plans ahead of the bloc’s summit in The Hague. They also protested against Israel’s campaign against Hamas militants in Gaza and the Iran war.

The EU’s imports of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) has reached a record high this year, amid the growing energy crisis triggered by the US-Israeli war on Iran, according to a report by a US-based energy think tank.

The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) reports that the bloc’s imports jumped 16% year on year in January-March, with France, Spain, and Belgium accounting for most deliveries. Russia remains the EU’s second-largest LNG supplier, despite the bloc aiming to phase out Russian fossil fuels by 2027, it noted.

EU countries spent €5.9 billion ($6.9 billion) on Russian pipeline gas and €6.7 billion on Russian LNG in 2025, according to the report. Russia accounted for about 13% of the EU’s combined natural gas and LNG imports in 2025, according to previous data.

IEEFA said that the rise in imports was partly driven by disruptions in global LNG markets linked to reduced maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, which curtailed Qatari exports and increased the EU’s reliance on other major suppliers.

The report said that the EU is risking a dependence on American LNG as Washington looks set to overtake Norway as the bloc’s largest gas supplier in 2026 and could account for 80% of EU LNG imports by 2028. American LNG is on average the most expensive for European buyers, the report added.

The latest developments have prompted some EU politicians to step up calls to reconsider sanctions on Russia. Despite growing political pressure over energy costs, however, EU Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen has insisted the bloc will continue phasing out Russian LNG imports and expand purchases from alternative suppliers, including the US.

US President Donald Trump’s counterterrorism director has suggested that two of the president’s loudest critics – Tucker Carlson and Nick Fuentes – are considered potential left-wing threats by the White House.

The White House released its National Strategy for Counterterrorism last week, which labels “Narcoterrorists and Transnational Gangs, Legacy Islamist Terrorists, [and] Violent Left-Wing Extremists, including Anarchists and Anti-Fascists” as the three most pressing terror threats to the US.

The inclusion of “Violent Left-Wing Extremists” is no surprise, given that the strategy was released after three assassination attempts against Trump and the public execution of right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk, and after Trump’s National Security Presidential Memorandum NPSM-7 identified “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity” as indicators of potential “violent and terroristic activities.”

The report makes no mention of right-wing terrorism. However, a comment by its author, Sebastian Gorka, which flew under the radar last week, suggests that some of the president’s former allies are now considered national security threats.

“I’m not sure that Nick Fuentes or Tucker Carlson are conservatives,” Gorka replied. “If you are lauding Sharia law, if you are saying that there are Muslim states that seem to be better qualitatively than America in terms of freedom and prosperity, I’m not sure that means you’re part of the conservative movement. So if you remove those individuals and you understand that they’re not conservatives, what’s left?”

Gorka’s comment implies that, stripped of their “conservative” credentials, Fuentes and Carlson are the kind of left-wing extremists that the Trump administration will target.

Nick Fuentes is a hardline nationalist and opponent of Trump, whose inflammatory comments – “Jews are running society, Women need to shut the f**k up, and Blacks need to be imprisoned for the most part.” – saw him banned from every major social media platform in 2020. He has since been reinstated on X, and his daily livestreams sometimes draw hundreds of thousands of viewers.

FUENTES: ‘Jews are running society, women need to shut the F**K UP, blacks need to be imprisoned for the most part’

PIERS: ‘Would you like to clarify what you meant there?’

FUENTES: 'That’s all true… everything I said in that clip is true’ https://t.co/sOEsOYzYF2 pic.twitter.com/I8LRLf2xug

— RT (@RT_com) December 8, 2025

Tucker Carlson is a former Fox News host and supporter of Trump, whose relationship with the president has soured in recent months over Trump’s apparent deference to Israel and the war on Iran.

What happened between Tucker Carlson and Trump?

Carlson was a vocal supporter and regular confidant of Trump during the president’s first term in office, and campaigned for his reelection in 2024. Carlson grew more critical of American support for Israel’s war in Gaza over the last two years, and publicly called on Trump not to take military action against Iran in June 2025, when Israel was waging its 12-Day War against the Islamic Republic.

Trump, who dismissed Carlson’s advice and ordered the bombing of Iranian nuclear sites, called Carlson “kooky,” but the two remained in regular contact.

However, the rift between the former Fox News host and the president reached its nadir when the US and Israel began striking Iran in late February, with Carlson calling the war “disgusting and evil,” and accusing Trump of doing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bidding by waging it.

Carlson hammered Trump for issuing a profane message to Iran on Easter Sunday, calling the president’s threat to target Iranian civilian infrastructure “vile on every level.”

“How dare you speak that way on Easter morning to the country?” Carlson said in a monologue on his podcast. “Who do you think you are? You’re tweeting out the f-word on Easter morning.”

Trump responded by declaring Carlson an enemy of the MAGA movement, describing him as a “flailing fool” who should “see a good psychiatrist.”

Who else has Trump fallen out with?

Trump has fallen out with several prominent right-wing media personalities over the war with Iran, including Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens, and Alex Jones. In a lengthy social media post in April, he called these figures “nut jobs” and “troublemakers” who “think it is wonderful for Iran, the number one state sponsor of terror, to have a nuclear weapon.”

“They have one thing in common, low IQs,” he claimed. “They’re stupid people, they know it, their families know it, and everyone else knows it, too!”

Carlson, Owens, and Nick Fuentes were all included in a top-ten list of “anti-Semite and anti-Zionist” influencers published by Israel’s Ministry for Diaspora Affairs in April.

Gorka’s statement is not the first indication that Trump intends to turn the power of the state against some of his former supporters. The former head of the US National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent, is currently under FBI investigation for leaking classified information, after he resigned from his position in March and publicly denounced the war on Iran.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov held discussions with his Indian counterpart in New Delhi on Wednesday.

Lavrov is in India to take part in the BRICS Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in New Delhi, held under India’s chairmanship.

“This is also an occasion to review our special and privileged partnership and exchange views on global developments,” Jaishankar said ahead of a closed-door meeting with Lavrov.

Lauding the steady and sustained growth in the bilateral ties between India and Russia, Jaishankar stated that the “economic and energy dimensions have become more pronounced.” He added that the political cooperation between India and Russia is “even more valuable in an uncertain and volatile global environment.”

The two sides will also discuss regional and global issues, including the conflict in the Middle East and related uncertainties over global supply chains, the Russian Foreign Ministry said ahead of the talks.

New Delhi and Moscow have a shared interest in strengthening multipolarity, Jaishankar said, adding that the two nations will also “benefit from derisking and diversification,” referring to energy cooperation in the aftermath of the Middle East crisis.

Regarding Russian-Indian ties in defense, Lavrov noted that Russia supported India’s domestic manufacturing of weapons before it became part of the ‘Make in India’ initiative.

Lavrov said that until February 28, the Strait of Hormuz was open to traffic, and the whole world used this waterway, which accounted for around one-fifth of all oil brought to the global markets. “Now the Americans are demanding that the Strait of Hormuz be reopened. But it was never closed. It is always important to look at what lies beneath.”

The Middle East conflict “is a direct consequence of the unprovoked aggression by the United States and Israel against Iran,” Russia has said, calling for an unconditional ceasefire.

Bangladesh will review a trade deal with the US signed by its interim government in February, a top aide to Prime Minister Tarique Rahman has said.

Zahed Ur Rahman, the prime minister’s adviser on information and broadcasting, told the media on Tuesday that scrapping the agreement could have implications for bilateral relations and reciprocal tariff arrangements. However, the government is ready to review and renegotiate certain provisions.

“We can revisit the agreement. We can identify the areas that are more problematic and potentially harmful to the state, and conduct an initial review within the government. I hope we can proceed towards negotiations with the US,” Zahed said.

The decision to review the pact with the US comes a day after left-leaning student organizations held a massive rally in Dhaka demanding its cancellation. 

Opponents claimed that the provisions of the pact limit Dhaka’s sovereign interests. For instance, the document reportedly says that if Bangladesh enters into a trade deal with a “non-market country” (a reference Washington uses for China and Russia), the US can terminate the pact, the Daily Star reported in February.

The deal also forces Dhaka to automatically align with US sanctions and trade wars, forfeiting its right to remain neutral in power conflicts. If Dhaka breaches its provisions, US may reinstate previously agreed tariffs. The deal provides for a tariff rate of 19% for exports to the US, lower than the 20% set in August.

Russia has stepped up border controls to prevent the potential spread of the deadly Andes hantavirus strain, the country’s public health watchdog, Rospotrebnadzor, has said.

The rare strain of the virus – typically spread through contact with infected rodent droppings, urine or saliva – has been linked to at least three deaths connected to a Dutch-flagged cruise ship since April 11. A total of 11 infection cases, including the deaths, have been confirmed among the ship’s 147 passengers.

The outbreak was discussed during a Rospotrebnadzor video conference on Tuesday. Hantaviruses are a long- and well-studied group of natural infections, the agency said in a follow-up statement on Wednesday, adding that no outbreaks have been recorded in Russia this year.

The Andes strain is predominantly found in the New World, and is carried by the long-tailed pygmy rice rat, which is indigenous to Argentina and Chile, the watchdog said. Russia’s climate is unfavorable for the virus, reducing the risk of introduction into the country.

Hantaviruses typically do not spread from human-to-human contact, except for the rare Andes strain, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). Precautionary measures to take against infection include avoiding contact with rodent droppings, storing food safely and taking extra hygiene measures, such as keeping homes clean and handwashing.

After threatening to destroy Iran’s “whole civilization” a few hours before the deadline he set for Iran, US President Donald Trump suddenly announced a two-week ceasefire that continues to this day, though it remains fragile. Throughout this time, the White House has been urgently pushing the narrative about an active negotiation process with Iran, which is supposedly yielding results. Washington still talks about progress and work on a framework agreement, though Tehran has accused Washington of violations and the US military remains ready to resume combat operations at any moment. 

Tehran’s skepticism is understandable: On two previous occasions, negotiations with the Trump administration only brought about an escalation of the conflict. During the hot phase of the war, Tehran publicly refuted Trump’s claims about forthcoming negotiations, labeling the reports misleading and false. Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who has frequently been mentioned in the Western media as a negotiator on the Iranian side, said Washington used fabricated reports of talks to manipulate the oil markets. This is difficult to dispute; indeed, as soon as Trump mentioned negotiations with Tehran, oil prices began to drop. While they didn’t return to the $72 per barrel mark seen just before the start of the conflict on February 28, they demonstrated a positive trend. 

According to Tehran, Trump’s repeated statements about negotiations serve not to initiate dialogue with Iran but rather to project an image that the White House is in control of the escalation, holds the diplomatic initiative, and if necessary, can present any interim outcome as the president’s personal success. In other words, the public emphasis on negotiations appears to be an effort to create a political exit strategy – essentially a way to emerge unscathed, even if no significant strategic breakthrough occurs. This interpretation aligns with how the Trump administration intensifies its rhetoric while simultaneously speaking of productive contact.

The international media quickly picked up on this. However, the question of who could become a mediator between Washington and Tehran is no longer a priority. Most media outlets have agreed that the talks will probably be held in Pakistan. And indeed, Islamabad mediated the ceasefire, which considerably increased Pakistan’s political weight. As a result, the focus of the discussion has shifted. Instead of wondering whether negotiations are possible, the media is preoccupied with a more practical question: Will they be held in Pakistan, and will Islamabad be an effective mediator?

In early April, reports emerged that Pakistan is one of the most probable venues for future negotiations. Around the same time, the Pakistani Foreign Ministry officially announced negotiations between Iran and the US, which were indeed held on April 11. They ended without results, while no resumption of hostilities was reported, but the US began a blockade of Iranian ports. At present, according to media reports, the US and Iran continue to exchange proposals for a final settlement specifically through Pakistani diplomatic channels. 

Pakistan’s role as a mediator in this conflict is far from coincidental. As the only Muslim nuclear power, Pakistan holds exceptional symbolic and strategic weight in the Islamic world. This status lends Islamabad additional legitimacy as a mediator in security-related matters and issues of regional balance. Moreover, Pakistan possesses a crucial asset that many other regional states lack: It can maintain working relationships with both Iran and the US. Reports from several Western media outlets indicate that Islamabad has been involved in relaying proposals, and Pakistan is being considered as a platform for further contact. Furthermore, US initiatives were communicated to Tehran through Pakistan, and Islamabad has been conducting regional consultations involving Türkiye and Egypt.

For Pakistan, this role is advantageous for several reasons. Firstly, Pakistan seeks to assert its diplomatic agency and demonstrate that it is not merely a peripheral player in South Asian politics. Secondly, Islamabad is interested in preventing regional instability at its borders, since unrest in Iran automatically elevates risks to Pakistan’s security, trade, and interfaith harmony. Thirdly, by acting as a mediator, Pakistan can enhance its image as a nation pursuing a more autonomous foreign policy than it did 15-20 years ago. Historically, it has long been viewed as a US ally and a component of the anti-India balance. However, in recent years, Pakistan has significantly diversified its international ties, strengthened relations with China, shown increased interest in cooperating with Russia, and generally aimed for greater sovereignty. This shift undoubtedly boosts its appeal for Iran, which requires a mediator that is not too closely aligned with American interests but is also not overtly antagonistic toward Washington. Nonetheless, US influence in Pakistan remains strong, meaning Islamabad can be politically acceptable to Tehran while being practically useful to America. These two factors – Islamic legitimacy and existing communication channels with Washington – position Pakistan as one of the most promising candidates for mediation in the current landscape.

Why not Oman?

Oman traditionally played the role of mediator between Iran and the US. For many years, it was viewed as the most suitable venue for sensitive US-Iran contact. It was seen as a cautious, reserved, and pragmatic mediator that didn’t overly politicize the process. In 2025, Oman again served as a platform for indirect discussions on nuclear issues between the US and Iran. However, these talks (two rounds of talks, in fact) didn’t yield any results, and Oman’s mediation efforts failed. It wouldn’t be fair to say that Oman was responsible for this failure; rather, the inconsistency of the White House, which fluctuated between pressure tactics and willingness to negotiate, ultimately empowered the hawks and the ‘war party’ in Washington to start the risky venture. Oman may have failed as a mediation platform, but it wasn’t its fault.

Nevertheless, it’s premature to count Oman out, since no one knows the result of the negotiations in Pakistan. Oman’s primary strength lies in the trust it has built with both sides and its reputation as a reliable and discreet channel for conveying messages. Even if Oman’s position as the main negotiator has weakened, it remains the most recognizable and institutionally familiar mediator. However, it is no longer the only intermediary. While Oman remains useful, it has lost its exclusivity. Consequently, other potential mediators have emerged, and for now, Pakistan has been chosen as the main venue for negotiations. 

Türkiye remains another serious contender. Its position is unique, since it is the only Muslim country in NATO and plays a significant role in the bloc. Türkiye is not a peripheral player in the Euro-Atlantic architecture; it is an independent center of power capable of navigating complex multilateral dynamics. Ankara maintains institutional access to Western capitals, has extensive experience in engaging with Iran, and boasts well-developed regional diplomacy. Reports suggest that Türkiye effectively conveys messages between the US and Iran and was considered a potential venue for contact. While Ankara hasn’t provided much commentary to the press, it has subtly mentioned the existence of a certain negotiation track.

Why is it logical for Türkiye to be a mediator in the current conflict? For Ankara, the Iran conflict is not a distant concern; it’s directly tied to its own national security. The Turkish leadership is not interested in the complete collapse of Iran, its fragmentation, or prolonged destabilization along its borders. A weakening of central authority in Iran could trigger a chain of events that Türkiye perceives as highly dangerous: Increased instability at the border, new waves of refugees, the heightened activity of Kurdish groups on both sides of the border, and an overall expansion of the area of strategic turbulence close to Turkish territory. Ankara is genuinely concerned about being drawn into conflict and about the repercussions of a weakened Iranian state, particularly as they relate to the Kurdish factor and significant migration issues. 

For these reasons, Türkiye is potentially positioned to act not just as a relayer of messages between Washington and Tehran but as a key player deeply invested in de-escalation. It wields considerable political influence, has established diplomatic channels, a regional military status, and is driven by a clear motivation to prevent the Iranian crisis from spiraling out of control. Unlike the Gulf Arab monarchies, Ankara isn’t viewed as an adversary by Tehran. Furthermore, Türkiye can engage with the US through the lens of strategic interests and the NATO framework – an advantage that neutral mediators don’t have. This positions Türkiye as one of the most pragmatic mediators available, especially if the negotiations require not just the transmission of signals but also substantial political backing. Moreover, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan would certainly be pleased if the conflicting sides conclude some sort of a peace deal on Turkish soil.

Egypt was also mentioned several times as a potential negotiator. Its candidacy is more contentious compared to Türkiye or Pakistan; however, this also makes it an interesting option. Cairo has attempted to adopt a different stance compared to its Arab counterparts; it doesn’t completely align itself with the anti-Iran coalition even as it condemns Tehran’s actions, particularly those that threaten maritime safety, energy supplies, and regional stability. It’s quite possible that Egypt is already engaged in regional diplomatic consultations, advocating for an end to the conflict while maintaining close ties with the US.

The relationship between Cairo and Tehran is difficult to label as either friendly or overtly hostile. Following the ousting of the Muslim Brotherhood regime in 2013, a significant ideological and political rift emerged between Egypt and Iran. Iran viewed this movement with notable sympathy and continued to maintain contact with it, while Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi built his legitimacy on suppressing Islamist movements. Over the years, however, regional dynamics have shifted. Cairo cautiously pursued more pragmatic engagement with nations with which it previously had strained relations, including Iran. This marked a gradual pivot towards a more flexible approach towards Tehran, though they never became real allies. 

This ambiguity could render Egypt a potentially valuable mediator. It may not be an ideal partner for Iran, but is not a discredited figure in Tehran’s eyes either. On the other hand, Egypt maintains strong ties with the US, boasts significant standing in the Arab world, and has its own interest in reducing regional tensions – especially since the conflict surrounding Iran disrupts energy markets, logistics, and jeopardizes Egyptian economic interests.

In other words, while Egypt might not be the chief architect of negotiations, it could emerge as a politically acceptable participant within a broader mediating coalition. 

Ultimately, the discussion about potential mediators demonstrates the lack of a robust negotiating mechanism and a crisis in the traditional mediation model. Trump aims to discuss negotiations as if they were already underway and under his control; Iran denies this, demonstrating its unwillingness to accept a narrative imposed by Washington. Oman remains a traditional but not exclusive mediator. Pakistan appears to be one of the most promising options due to its ties to the Islamic world, strategic significance, and established communication channels with both sides. Türkiye holds considerable political power and is interested in preventing the disintegration of the regional order. As for Egypt, its candidacy is more questionable, but it could take part in the negotiations in a multilateral format.

Most importantly, the issue of mediation boils down to the question of who can address the conflict in the Middle East through some form of diplomacy. If Trump is indeed trying to establish a public narrative for a future deal, then those who are currently fighting for a chance to become mediators are also fighting for a chance to convert the crisis into political capital. In this context, a negotiator is not merely a messenger, but someone who gains the right to shape the framework for resolving the conflict.

Saudi Arabia conducted covert strikes on Iran during the Middle East war, Reuters reported on Wednesday, citing sources.

Neither Riyadh nor Tehran has officially acknowledged the attacks. Reuters could not independently confirm the targets or timing of the strikes, which would mark the first known direct Saudi military action on Iranian soil.

According to the report, the Royal Saudi Air Force launched “numerous, unpublicized” attacks on Iran in late March. One unnamed official described the strikes as tit-for-tat retaliation “for when Saudi [Arabia] was hit.”

Sources told the outlet that Saudi Arabia informed Iran in advance, and that the strikes were followed by intense diplomacy and threats of further retaliation. The backchannel contact reportedly helped produce an informal de-escalation deal that brought the attacks to a halt.

Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal reported that the United Arab Emirates also conducted covert strikes on Iran in retaliation for attacks on UAE infrastructure in early April, shortly before the ceasefire announcement.

Saudi Arabia and the UAE both host major US military bases and have long relied on Washington’s security umbrella. Both countries have repeatedly come under missile and drone attacks as Iran retaliated against the US-Israeli campaign launched in late February.

The UAE adopted a more hawkish tone, condemning the strikes on its territory as a dangerous escalation and asserting its “right to respond,” as well as largely freezing public diplomacy with Iran and closing its embassy in Tehran.

Saudi Arabia, however, has tried to keep the conflict from spiraling further, reportedly maintaining regular contact with Iranian officials, including Iran’s ambassador in Riyadh.

Analysts suggest that the Gulf states’ willingness to strike Iran themselves rather than relying on the US reflects growing frustration with Washington for leaving its regional partners exposed to Iranian retaliation and for lacking a long-term strategy.

”From the perspective of the Gulf states, it looks like the US is not prioritizing their security and basically threw the Gulf states under the bus,” Dania Thafer, the director of the Gulf International Forum, told the WSJ.

Tens of thousands marched through Brussels on Tuesday to protest Belgian federal reforms, rising military spending, and what demonstrators say are insufficient action on soaring energy prices. The rally comes amid an EU-wide energy crisis and rising defense budgets across the bloc.

The EU energy crisis, triggered by the bloc’s shift away from Russian oil and gas imports, has deepened in recent months due to supply chain disruptions linked to the Middle East conflict, forcing member states to pay significantly more for imported fossil fuels.

Belgium has recently increased defense spending as part of NATO commitments, moving toward the US-led military bloc’s 2% of GDP target after years of lower military budgets. Like other European NATO members, it cites what it calls the threat of Russian aggression as a key reason for its renewed military buildup – claims Moscow has dismissed as “nonsense” and baseless fearmongering.

Meanwhile, the reforms at the center of the demonstration include pension changes such as stricter retirement rules and reduced benefits, labour market reforms introducing greater flexibility and changes to employment protections, as well as adjustments to wage indexation and broader public spending cuts.

Some protesters calling for an end to the Middle East conflict were seen holding a banner reading “HALT to the WAR against IRAN.”

One sign criticizing defense spending read: “€3.6 billion for Chassis aircraft, €86.7 million less for schools in 2026 – this is not the kind of society we want,” while another showed a paper fighter jet with the message: “There goes our budget, healthcare flying away.”

Other demonstrators were seen holding banners stating, “Public education is in danger,” while placards read: “They are also stealing your pensions” and “A decent pension is not a LUX.”

Public transport across the country ran at a reduced service due to the rally, while Charleroi Airport canceled all flights scheduled for the day.

The last national rally held on March 12 over the same issues drew between 80,000 and 100,000 people to Brussels.

South African Minister of International Relations and Cooperation Ronald Lamola has arrived in New Delhi to join BRICS foreign ministers from May 14 to 15 for talks under India’s chairmanship, focusing on multilateral cooperation and global tensions.

The meeting, held in New Delhi, is convened under the theme, “Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation, and Sustainability (BRICS)”. BRICS Foreign Ministers will deliberate and call for enhanced efforts to de-escalate and promote a peaceful resolution of conflicts raging in different parts of the world, including the Middle East.

Lamola expressed his confidence that these high-level deliberations will further cultivate the strategic synergy between BRICS member states, BRICS partner countries, and all international partners.

”Our presence here represents a concerted effort to shape a global architecture that is as sustainable as it is equitable,” Lamola said. 

“Through principled engagement and collaborative resolve, we seek to secure a future that honors the aspirations of all nations.”

South Africa’s High Commissioner to India, Professor Anil Sooklal, said that the meeting of BRICS ministers is one of the most important ministerial engagements outside of the BRICS summit.

”It gives the BRICS foreign ministers an opportunity to come together and reflect on the critical global issues as they impact the current global environment, collectively discuss them and try to see how BRICS can offer solutions and/or suggestions in addressing some of these global crises that we all find ourselves in at the moment.”

He highlighted that this includes the ongoing war in Gaza, the US-Israel situation in Lebanon and Iran, and the impact of the latter on fuel prices and supply.

“Of course, they will also discuss other global hotspots like Sudan, and also get an opportunity to perhaps get a briefing from Russia on the ongoing Russia-Ukraine situation, and so that’s always an important dimension of global peace and security that foreign ministers discuss, exchange views, and try to see how BRICS can positively impact all of these challenges.”

He added that it is quite a packed agenda, but very focused on the challenges and how BRICS responds to them as a platform of the Global South.

We have arrived in New Delhi, Republic of India, for the Meeting of BRICS Ministers of Foreign Affairs and International Relations. This gathering, hosted under the @BricsIndia2026 Chairship, comes at a critical juncture for our global community.

We are meeting under the theme:… pic.twitter.com/aH5XoTMXae

— Minister: International Relations and Cooperation (@RonaldLamola) May 12, 2026

”In many senses, it is an opportune time for collective reflection on all of these, and perhaps see how BRICS countries can positively impact, improve, and move forward, amid these challenges, and at the same time, reflect on the corporation within BRICS itself.

”I think more so than ever, we need to reflect as BRICS countries on how we strengthen resilience in terms of the challenges to the global economy, in terms of challenges against unilateral measures being taken against many of our countries, especially in the trade sector,” Sooklal said.

The Department of International Relations and Cooperation said South Africa’s participation is anchored in a long-standing tradition of principled advocacy, focusing on three core imperatives:

They said that South Africa remains committed to bridging the gap between the developmental priorities of the Global South and emerging frontiers in technological, economic, and social innovation, with a view to ensuring that BRICS cooperation delivers tangible, inclusive, and sustainable socio-economic benefits for all.

First published by IOL

US President Donald Trump’s rejection of Tehran’s peace terms suggests that he will accept nothing short of surrender, according to Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi.

The US and Iran remain engaged in indirect negotiations following the fragile ceasefire announced last month after weeks of military action. Trump has repeatedly dismissed Iranian proposals as unacceptable, claiming that Tehran had suffered a military defeat and must agree to American conditions to end the crisis.

“When a party directly involved in war, blockade, sanctions, and threats of force rejects Iran’s response simply because it is not a letter of surrender, it becomes obvious that the issue is not peace but the imposition of political will through intimidation and pressure,” Gharibabadi wrote on X on Tuesday, without mentioning Trump by name.

The diplomat said Tehran’s demands – including compensation for damage caused since the US and Israel attacked Iran in late February, guarantees against future aggression, and recognition of Iran’s sovereign rights – represent “the minimum necessary for any serious and durable arrangement under the UN Charter.”

Tehran, however, has insisted on maintaining control over the strategically vital waterway and preserving the maritime toll system introduced during the conflict as part of its defense strategy. It also insists that peaceful use of atomic energy is its right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

As diplomatic efforts mediated by Pakistan stalled, the Trump administration launched a naval blockade of Iranian ports, further disrupting global energy markets.

Amid speculation that the US could resume large-scale military action, Trump warned last week that people would know the ceasefire had collapsed when they see “one big glow coming out of Iran.”

Trump’s delayed China visit underway

The US president is currently visiting China, reducing the likelihood of an immediate escalation of the Iran conflict during the trip. The visit had originally been planned for March 31 to April 2 but was postponed amid uncertainty surrounding the war in the Middle East.

🚨 Just in: Trump arrives in China.
Beijing has welcomed him with the red carpet.
Beijing is also flying U.S. flags as a sign of respect.
Lets hope Trump leaves his arrogance inside AF1. 🇨🇳🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/HDnmAWxOT2

— James Wood 武杰士 (@commiepommie) May 13, 2026

Washington has imposed sanctions on multiple Chinese entities accused of assisting Tehran by supplying satellite imagery and weapons-related components, and by purchasing Iranian crude oil.

Beijing has pushed back on US pressure on its refining sector, invoking for the first time a domestic law prohibiting companies operating in China from complying with unilateral American sanctions. Chinese officials maintain that any sanctions not authorized by the UN Security Council are illegitimate under international law.

Spain has become the latest European nation to call for the EU to build its own army as opposed to relying on the NATO framework, citing a growing rift with the US. The idea itself, however, has split European NATO members, with many still viewing the US-led military bloc as a preferable defense mechanism.

Whatever the outcome of those debates, most NATO nations are engaged in an accelerated militarization campaign costing hundreds of billions of dollars in the long run, citing an alleged Russian “threat.”

EU army: origins story

The idea of a joint European army harks back to the early days of the Cold War, when in the early 1950s, France pushed for the European Defense Community, which would have brought France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg into a common 100,000-strong European force. The plan received US backing.

Still, under Charles de Gaulle, France was highly skeptical of NATO, seeing it as a tool for US dominance in Europe. In 1966, de Gaulle pulled France – which was struggling to cling to the remnants of its colonial empire and superpower status – out of the NATO command structure.

During the 2011 Libya intervention, it was much worse. Not only were EU powers dependent on the US doing all the heavy lifting, but the campaign also led to a European fracture. Only France and the UK coordinated the strikes with the US, while Italy was initially opposed to the intervention. Later, France and Italy worked at cross purposes, supporting different sides in the Libyan Civil War.

Some EU nations, however, have called for a standalone European army with wider authority, citing Washington’s growing unreliability and the need for strategic autonomy.

Who is in favor?

Spain has become the most recent proponent of the EU army idea. On Monday, Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares made the case in an interview with Politico, saying, “We cannot be waking up every morning wondering what the US will do next … our citizens deserve better.”

In a thinly veiled allusion to US President Donald Trump, Albares stressed that the EU has to be “free of dependence,” as well as “free of coercion, whether it comes to tariffs or the use of military threat, [or] the consequences of someone else’s decisions.”

While his comments came amid a stark rift with the US over the Iran war, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez called for “a real European army” already in February, stressing that the bloc needs it “not in ten years’ time, but now” and pledged Madrid would contribute all necessary resources.

In Italy, Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani, who leads the center-right Forza Italia party, has stressed that “if we want to be a peacekeeping force in the world, we need a European army,” describing it as a premise for “an effective European foreign policy.”

Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, however, has been more cautious, stating that the issue is not on the agenda, adding that the bloc’s defense should be based on the cooperation of national armies.

Who is against?

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has been among the most vocal critics of the concept. In February, she described the idea of a European army as “extremely dangerous,” saying that its proponents “maybe haven’t really thought this through practically.”

In Poland, the bloc’s most aggressive defense spender at 4.7% of GDP in 2025, Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski called the idea “unrealistic because national armies will not merge.” However, he was more sympathetic to a brigade-sized “European legion” comprised of EU citizens or even candidate states, which could be involved in foreign operations short of a confrontation with a near-peer adversary.

In Germany, Chancellor Friedrich Merz has pledged to build “Europe’s strongest conventional army,” but has been skeptical of a bloc-wide force due to legal hurdles, arguing that the EU should “focus on the tasks that we need to accomplish now.”

As for the US, in 2018, Trump strongly opposed the idea of an EU army, dismissing it as “very insulting.” “Perhaps Europe should first pay its fair share of NATO, which the US subsidizes greatly!” he said at the time.

What’s Spain’s beef with NATO?

Spain’s problem is not necessarily with NATO itself, but rather with the current US administration. Madrid has vehemently opposed the US-Israeli war on Iran, and refused to allow its bases to be used for attacks. Trump subsequently called Spain “a terrible ally” and threatened to cut off all trade.

The US president encountered similar problems with the rest of NATO members, slamming the bloc as a “paper tiger” and accusing it of “turning their backs on the American people.” Another point of friction was Greenland, which Trump threatened to annex, meeting strong pushback from the EU.

Militarization on the menu – regardless of the form

While European leaders could be debating whether the EU actually needs its own army as a counterbalance – or replacement – for NATO, most of them have embraced the militarization drive. In 2025, the EU unveiled the “ReArm Europe Plan — Readiness 2030” to mobilize over €800 billion ($936 billion) in defense investment despite the bloc’s sluggish economy.

View from Moscow

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has scorned the idea of the EU army, suggesting that before undertaking such an endeavor, the bloc should tackle a litany of internal problems, including refugees, energy dependence, and lagging NATO contributions.

Moscow has meanwhile condemned the EU’s record militarization, saying that the bloc is “using ostentatious Russophobia” as a pretense. It has also accused European “propaganda” of seeking to turn Russia into a “model external enemy” to divert attention from internal crises.

In addition, Russian officials have consistently rejected speculation that Moscow could attack European states as “nonsense.”

Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has been sworn in for a seventh consecutive term, extending his rule of more than four decades as one of Africa’s longest serving leaders.

The 81-year-old took the oath of office Tuesday at Kololo Ceremonial Grounds in Kampala after securing more than 70% of the vote in the election in January.

The ceremony was attended by diplomats and several African leaders, including Ethiopian President Taye Atske Selassie, Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, Democratic Republic of the Congo’s Felix Tshisekedi, South Sudan’s Salva Kiir, and Tanzania’s Samia Suluhu Hassan.

In his inauguration speech, Museveni declared a new era of “no more sleep” for the nation, focusing on wealth creation, job generation, and the elimination of corruption and complacency. He urged citizens to “wake up” and embrace economic transformation by engaging in commercial agriculture, manufacturing, services, and ICT, warning that the country “can no longer afford complacency.”

Museveni showcased a long list of achievements under his administration since 1986, backing his claims with photos as evidence, including major infrastructure projects, the restoration of peace and stability, and sustained economic growth.

Museveni became president in 1986 following the overthrow of Milton Obote’s government. He won Uganda’s first multiparty elections in 2006 and has remained in power through subsequent elections and constitutional amendments that removed presidential term limits. He is currently the world’s third-longest consecutively serving non-royal head of state, after Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Obiang Nguema and Cameroon’s Paul Biya.

His main rival, Robert Kyagulanyi – popularly known as Bobi Wine – who secured 24.72% of the vote, rejected the results, alleging massive ballot stuffing. However, election observers, including those from the African Union and Russia, said the election was conducted in an orderly and transparent manner.

Following his victory, Museveni said he would have “embarrassed” the opposition “badly” if 10 million more of his supporters had taken part. His new term will run until 2031.

World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has warned that “we might see more cases” of the deadly Andes strain of hantavirus emerge in the coming days, after an 11th case was recorded.

The virus has killed three people who left Argentina on a cruise ship last month, and infected eight others. The most recent case was confirmed by the Spanish Health Ministry on Tuesday, and involves a passenger who had been quarantined in a military hospital in Madrid after traveling on the ship.

“At the moment, there is no sign that we are seeing the start of a larger outbreak, but of course the situation could change and, given the long incubation period of the virus, it’s possible we might see more cases in the coming weeks,” Ghebreyesus said at a press conference in Madrid on Tuesday.

Ghebreyesus thanked Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez for showing “compassion and solidarity” by allowing the ship, the Dutch-flagged MV Hondius, to dock at Spain’s Canary Islands on Monday. From the Canaries, passengers were evacuated to their home countries, where authorities were urged by Tedros to keep them quarantined for 42 days.

After a long incubation period of between six and eight weeks, patients typically experience flu-like symptoms that can develop into heart problems, hypertension, and buildup of fluid in the lungs and chest cavity. The Andes strain of hantavirus has a fatality rate of around 38%.

On Saturday, Tedros stressed that “the current public health risk from hantavirus remains low,” and that the outbreak would not become “another Covid.”

The MV Hondius left Argentina carrying 147 passengers and crew from 23 countries. So far, every confirmed case has involved someone who traveled on the ship. Twenty British nationals are in isolation in the UK, 14 Spaniards are quarantined at the military hospital in Madrid, and five French citizens are being monitored in Paris. One of them, a 65-year-old woman, developed serious symptoms and was placed on a ventilator on Tuesday, French authorities said. Twelve Dutch health workers have also been quarantined after incorrectly handling the bodily fluids of a hantavirus patient.

For decades, the Elysee Palace viewed Africa through the narrow lens of its former colonies – a cozy, if often toxic, arrangement known as ‘Francafrique’ in which language was a colonialist tool rather than a neutral medium of expression and knowledge. But as French flags are lowered and troops are ushered out of the Sahel, President Emmanuel Macron touched down in Nairobi with a different script.

Leading the Africa Forward Summit in Kenya this week, Macron brought a strategic pivot toward the Anglophone world – a cultural, and no less colonial, space usually reserved for a competitor colonialist, the UK. By courting 30 nations in a region where France has no colonial history, Paris is attempting a high-stakes rebranding. It is a move that seems to be born of necessity. As the traditional sphere of influence crumbles under the weight of anti-colonial resentment and shifting global alliances, France is betting that its future on the continent lies in the English-speaking East.

Le Figaro described the presidential outburst as a “total lack of respect.” Far-left French MP Daniele Obono characterized it as yet another instance of the “behavior of a colonialist” who cannot help himself the moment he “sets foot on the African continent.”

Even as Le Monde analyzes the pivot as a pragmatic economic necessity, the domestic narrative suggests that while the geography has changed, the ‘schoolteacher’ temperament of French diplomacy remains firmly intact. Kicked out of the front door in the Sahel, Paris is now trying to climb back through the back window, clutching the same old lecture notes.

Beyond the theatrical scolding at the podium, the summit’s primary engine was a massive financial pivot: A €23 billion ($27 billion) investment package aimed at strategic sectors such as energy, AI, and agriculture. However, the optics of this ‘new partnership’ remain contested.

While Macron spoke of an era “free of hang-ups,” Kenyan President William Ruto pointedly used the word ‘sovereignty’ eight times in his speech, insisting that the days of European dependency are over.

For Paris, this is clearly an attempt to find a new economic ‘back window’ as the front door slams shut elsewhere. With €14 billion of the funds coming from French giants such as TotalEnergies, Orange, and the shipping titan CMA CGM – which alone committed $823 million to modernize the Mombasa port – the strategy is transparent. Having lost its grip on the Sahel region and its traditional mineral extractions, France is now trying to entrench its corporations in the ‘Silicon Savannah’ and the booming English-speaking markets. It is a high-stakes gamble: Using billions in capital to buy the relevance it can no longer command through military presence or colonial-era linguistic ties.

However, this Anglophone charm offensive has already ruffled feathers in London, where the British press has characterized the new French promised billions splurge as an attempt to buy influence within the commonwealth.

The irony is sharp. While Macron uses Nairobi to preach a new era of equal partnership, he is simultaneously engaging in a modernized scramble for the continent’s most prosperous markets, effectively replacing the military boots of the Sahel with the corporate suits of the CAC 40.

For the nations of East Africa, the spectacle is clear: They are no longer just the subjects of a new Great Game, but the prize in a high-stakes competition between a rebranded France and a stagnant Britain, both of which are desperate to remain relevant in a multipolar Africa that is increasingly looking toward the East, where the influence of China and Russia continues to grow.

Similarly, the Talent Afrique-France scheme (a pilot visa program) is being criticized as a brain-drain mechanism, designed to siphon off Africa’s brightest AI and tech innovators to serve French firms rather than building local capacity. The ghost of the failed Vinci SA highway deal still haunts the relationship; Nairobi famously scrapped the lopsided project due to sovereign debt concerns, only to see the contract eventually handed to a Chinese corporate rival. For the burgeoning tech hubs of Lagos and Nairobi, Macron’s ‘equal partnership’ looks suspiciously like a rebranding of trickle-down economics: The profits are repatriated to Paris, while the continent is left to shoulder the environmental and financial debt of a corporate-led scramble.

Ultimately, the mounting resistance across the continent is not a rejection of French investment for its own sake, but a rejection of the terms under which it has historically arrived.

For Macron, the message from the Africa Forward summit is clear: The era of unilateral lecturing is over. If France wishes to remain a relevant player in this multipolar landscape, it must finally discard the ‘back window’ tactics and the ‘schoolteacher’ temperament, proving that it can exist as a partner in progress rather than a ‘competitor colonialist’ desperately clinging to a disappearing past.

India has doubled its import tariffs on gold and silver to cushion the impact of the Middle East conflict on its foreign exchange reserves.

New Delhi has imposed a 10% basic customs duty and a 5% Agriculture Infrastructure and Development Cess on gold and silver imports, raising the effective import tax from 6% to 15%.

The move is aimed at curtailing overseas purchases and easing the pressure on its foreign exchange reserves.

This comes days after Prime Minister Narendra Modi advocated steps including refraining from gold purchases and reducing the use of fuel as part of an effort to minimize the economic shocks arising from the Middle East conflict.

The government is reportedly considering a host of measures including a fuel price hike and restrictions on non-essential spending to shield its foreign exchange reserves.

Foreign exchange reserves as of May 1 stood at $690 billion, a significant decline from $728 billion in February. The dollar outflows have also impacted the rupee, Asia’s worst-performing major currency, which is down 5.6% this year.

Gold demand in India, the world’s second-largest buyer, has risen amid a recent rally in prices and as returns from equities plunged over the past year.

The nation’s imports of gold totaled $72 billion in the 2026 fiscal year ending March 31, a 24% surge from a year ago. Higher imports of gold widen India’s current account deficit because India pays in foreign currency for gold.

The move reflects growing concern among policymakers over the rising import bill and shrinking forex reserves, driven mainly by energy supply disruptions as hopes for an end to the Middle East conflict fade.

India’s overall trade deficit widened to $119 billion in 2025-26, compared to $94 billion in 2024-25, mostly as a result of higher energy and fertilizer prices and rising bullion imports.

Former Ukrainian presidential chief of staff Andrey Yermak, who was charged this week in a money laundering investigation, consulted a mystic while considering candidates for senior government posts, according to evidence presented by prosecutors.

Yermak – a close associate of Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky – stepped down last year amid mounting scrutiny over his alleged ties to businessman Timur Mindich, who fled to Israel shortly before being accused of masterminding a large-scale embezzlement scheme at a state-owned energy company.

During a court hearing on Tuesday, prosecutors revealed details of Yermak’s reported interest in occult practices, claiming that it may have influenced staffing decisions at the highest levels of government.

According to investigators, one of his contacts appeared in messaging records under the name “Veronika Fengshui Office.” Prosecutors allege Yermak sent the birth dates of potential appointees – without naming them directly – to ask whether they were suitable for office.

According to the prosecution, Yermak sought Veronika’s opinion on candidates for the posts of prime minister, prosecutor general, health minister, and even his own deputy responsible for overseeing law enforcement agencies. Prosecutors cited the communications while arguing that Yermak should remain in pre-trial detention because of his alleged ability to influence witnesses and interfere with the investigation.

Additional details emerged during continuation of the hearings on Wednesday, when the prosecutor identified the spiritual advisor by full name and quoted some of the text messages she and Yermak allegedly exchanged. Records indicate she urged him to cling to power at any cost, which he pledged to do.

Maybe they should just get a peaceful “fortune teller.” Peace is the best magic. 🕊️ https://t.co/VePuRjaAOF

— Kirill Dmitriev (@kadmitriev) May 13, 2026

Reacting to the revelations, Russian presidential envoy Kirill Dmitriev mocked the Ukrainian leadership on social media, saying the Zelensky administration “should just get a peaceful ‘fortune teller,’” adding that “peace is the best magic.”

Claims of occult practices in Zelensky’s circle

Allegations of mystical beliefs within Ukraine’s leadership were previously raised by former Zelensky press secretary Yulia Mendel, who has since emerged as a vocal critic of the administration.

In January, Mendel claimed that Yermak had relied on occult rituals for years and allegedly invited practitioners from abroad to perform ceremonies involving so-called “corpse water.” She suggested that other people close to Zelensky also shared an interest in mystical practices, though she did not identify them publicly.

Opposition MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak pointed to the accusations as evidence that senior officials connected to the project lacked ethical standards and should not be entrusted with governing the country. Zelensky is reportedly among the four co-owners of the upscale property development that Western-backed anti-corruption agencies are investigating.

From mystics to political scandal

Close relationships between political leaders and spiritual advisers have historically sparked controversy and, in some cases, major political crises.

In Russia, the influence of mystic healer Grigory Rasputin over the royal family in the early 20th century became a symbol of imperial decline and contributed to the eventual toppling of the monarchy.

More recently, the 2016 impeachment of former South Korean President Park Geun-hye was linked to her relationship with longtime confidante Choi Soon-sil. Choi, whose father was a controversial cult leader often dubbed the “Korean Rasputin,” was accused of exploiting her access to the presidency for personal gain.

A broad majority in the Dutch parliament has backed a motion urging the government to deny entry to American rapper Kanye West ahead of his planned concerts in early June, local broadcaster NOS reported on Tuesday. The step comes as more European countries are turning their backs on the controversial artist over his past anti-Semitic comments.

The 24-time Grammy Award winner has a history of anti-Semitic controversies. Last year, he publicly praised Nazism and Adolf Hitler and marketed t-shirts featuring a swastika. Although West, also known as Ye, apologized for his actions earlier this year, his behavior has sparked widespread criticism and triggered government investigations into whether he can be barred from performing internationally.

West is scheduled to perform on June 6 and June 8 in the Dutch city of Arnhem.

In April, Arnhem mayor Ahmed Marcouch said there was no legal basis to ban him from entering or performing in the Netherlands, while Justice Minister David van Weel said the government was exploring possible legal grounds to do so, but that it would be difficult.

The Dutch parliament’s latest motion follows similar actions elsewhere in Europe. Last month, UK authorities refused West entry, leading to the cancellation of his planned Wireless Festival appearance. He also postponed a June 11 show in Marseille shortly after. In Poland, a June 19 concert at the Silesian Stadium in Chorzow has been cancelled by venue representatives. FC Basel, which manages events at St. Jakob-Park, has confirmed a similar step.

The only remaining stops in West’s announced European tour are now Turkey, Italy, Spain, and Portugal.

Throughout his career, West has repeatedly described his struggles with mental health and revealed that he had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder in 2016. In February, however, he claimed that he had been misdiagnosed and had stopped taking medication after finding out that he actually had “a case of autism.”

Kuwait has accused Iran of attempting to infiltrate the strategic Bubiyan Island after authorities arrested four men suspected of belonging to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Bubiyan, Kuwait’s largest island, lies at the northern edge of the Gulf near the Iraqi border and is considered strategically important because of its proximity to shipping routes and northern oilfields. The island also hosts a US military base.

Kuwait’s Interior Ministry said on Tuesday that four men were arrested after attempting to enter the country by sea and allegedly clashing with security forces, wounding a Kuwaiti soldier.

The incident took place on May 1, the ministry said, adding that the suspects were detained aboard what it described as a fishing boat chartered for “hostile actions” against Kuwait.

Kuwait’s Foreign Ministry called the alleged incursion a “flagrant violation” of its sovereignty, demanded Iran cease “unlawful hostile acts,” and added that it had summoned Iranian Ambassador Mohammad Totoonji to deliver a formal protest note.

Iran dismissed the allegations as baseless. In a statement carried by ISNA news agency, Tehran said the Kuwaiti authorities had acted improperly against four Iranian sailors aboard the vessel Meroj Keshtezri Darya, which it said entered Kuwaiti territorial waters accidentally because of a navigational system failure during a routine patrol. Iran also accused Kuwait of exploiting the incident for political purposes and demanded consular access and the sailors’ release.

Last month, Iran said it had struck a US helicopter training center in Kuwait, along with warehouses storing helicopter equipment, and reported strikes on US HIMARS systems stationed on Bubiyan Island.

Tensions in the Gulf have surged since the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran in February, prompting retaliatory attacks by Tehran against Israel and US allies hosting American military bases in the region, while disrupting shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

Russia is one of Ethiopia’s key long-term strategic partners and Moscow has consistently supported the African country during some of its most difficult periods, Ethiopian Air Force chief Lieutenant General Yilma Merdassa has said. 

Speaking to RT, Merdassa said he had trained in Russia and flown Soviet and Russian-made aircraft, including the Su-27. He noted that Russian and Soviet cooperation had significantly shaped the Ethiopian Air Force through pilot training, maintenance systems, and combat tactics, adding that ties weakened after the collapse of the Soviet Union but were later restored and continue to expand.   

“Russians are our strategic partners and I always used to say Russians are a very principled nation, principled government, always. They have been with us during difficult times,” Merdassa said. 

Merdassa added that cooperation between Moscow and Addis Ababa in military aviation would become “stronger and stronger” in the future, describing Russia’s aviation expertise as highly influential for Ethiopian pilots, engineers, and instructors.

Beyond military cooperation, Russia and Ethiopia have been expanding ties in numerous areas. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed reaffirmed their commitment to strengthening relations between the countries during a phone call in March, according to the Kremlin. The two leaders also agreed to intensify contacts at various levels.

Bilateral trade nearly tripled year-on-year in 2025 to more than $435 million, Russian Ambassador to Ethiopia Evgeny Terekhin told TASS in February, citing growth in Russian exports of fertilizers and machinery as well as rising Ethiopian coffee supplies to Russia.

It is apposite that ‘After Nations, The Making and Unmaking of a World Order’ – written by English novelist turned historian Rana Dasgupta – should be published as Donald Trump is desperately seeking to extract America from an ill-judged and calamitous war in Iran.

‘After Nations’ is an analysis of the rise and fall of the modern nation state – which Dasgupta sees as a uniquely powerful, secular political entity that first emerged in Western Europe some 300 years ago. The nation state’s theological foundation was reformation Christianity, its political philosophy was enlightenment liberalism, and its economic base was the then emerging capitalist economy.

For Dasgupta, the modern Western nation state is an intrinsically exploitative and aggressive political organization, which derived its unprecedented power from capitalist exploitation of its own citizens, and an even more brutal domination of its colonial possessions.

He views Britain and America as having been the most powerful modern nation states. Britain was the first modern nation state, and was the dominant global power from the 18th century until World War I. Thereafter, America supplanted a declining Britain, becoming the domineering global hegemon after World War II – by means of establishing a new global economic and political world order.

That American-controlled world order is now collapsing, and contemporary America and other Western nation states find themselves beset by acute internal crises that, because of their intrinsically exploitative and aggressive nature, they are incapable of resolving.

He sees this coming about as a result of an ideological transformation engendered by digital technology and the big tech companies. This radical change will involve mankind embracing “a new universal faith” based upon a “planetary godhead”; creating “a universal digital citizenship”; adopting a “digital currency”; adopting “a new digitally based planetary law”; and radically “reforming our relationship with nature.”

The final chapter the book reads like an eco-technological fable, and Dasgupta’s belief in the eventual disappearance of the nation state reveals itself to be a frankly utopian philosophical assumption, rather than a reasoned conclusion that arises from his own otherwise acute historical analysis.

The notion that the nation state as a generic political entity might disappear is, in fact, inconsistent with the historical analysis at the heart of ‘After Nations’. As that analysis makes clear, the crisis of the nation state described in the book is confined to Western liberal democratic nation states and cannot be applied to powerful contemporary illiberal nation states like China and Russia.

In fact, Dasgupta himself characterizes contemporary China and Russia as unique “transnational political entities” that possess a greater degree of political stability and resilience than Western nation states. If his analysis of the irreversible decline of America and the West is correct, then surely China and Russia are destined to become even more powerful, even if only comparatively, in the future.

And if America and other liberal democratic nation states are becoming less liberal and less democratic, might not these states also survive indefinitely, albeit in a more authoritarian, illiberal and populist form?

Leaving aside the book’s flawed final chapter, ‘After Nations’ contains a comprehensive and acute analysis of the rise and decline Britain and America as global hegemonic states.

The last historian to produce a compelling analysis of world-wide political developments over the past 300 years was Barrington Moore Jr. in his ‘Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy’, published in 1966 – coincidentally as America was embroiled in yet another disastrous war in Vietnam.  Barrington Moore Jr. viewed social democracies as being the product of unique social causes that could not be replicated – and for him, they were, therefore, political anomalies within a global world order made up of powerful illiberal nation states.

Barrington Moore Jr.’s book was written before America and the West’s decline had commenced, and ‘After Nations’ – written six decades later from a global economic perspective – is a worthy successor to it.

What, then, are the broad outlines of Dasgupta’s historical analysis, and what does the book tell us about America’s contemporary decline as a global power?  

Britain, for Dasgupta, was the first modern nation state, and he shows that it was an authoritarian, elitist, capitalist enterprise from the very beginning – ruthlessly exploiting its own displaced peasants by transforming them into a much-needed industrial proletariat, whilst at the same time plundering its vast colonial empire.

The British working class was incorporated into the autocratic British nation state as a matter of economic necessity, and the benefits grudgingly conferred on workers by the late 19th century – compulsory education, public health measures, a degree of economic prosperity, and a limited form of democracy – were also paid for by Britain’s ongoing economic exploitation of its colonial empire. This process reached its apogee in the Atlee government’s creation of the modern welfare state after World War II.

Since the 1970s, however, when manufacturing industries in Britain, America, and the West began to be relocated to the Third World – and factory workers were no longer needed, except as docile consumers – the incorporation of the working class has been reversed, and the benefits previously conferred on workers have been systematically withdrawn. Dasgupta terms this process the “downsizing of social bargains.”

Full employment has been abandoned, jobs have been casualized, union membership has declined, and worker’s wages have remained stagnant for decades. And, amidst widespread corruption, vast disparities in wealth have emerged between the elites that control and benefit from the new technologically driven global economy and those ordinary citizens who have been pauperized by it.

Conservative politicians – Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan – initially presided over this elite-controlled process, but it intensified apace under elite-beholden Labour and Democrat politicians – most notably Tony Blair and Barack Obama.

This has led to mass economic displacement, intensifying cost of living pressures, widespread political disenchantment, and the rise of populist parties – all indicia of the internal crisis that has engulfed both Britain and America, and Western nation states generally, in recent decades. Western nation states, according to Dasgupta, are now “unable to deliver the … rights, freedoms and security” that they previously provided to their citizens.

America became the world hegemonic power in the aftermath of World War II – by creating a new global economic system at Bretton Woods, and a new global political order based upon the United Nations and military alliances, the most important of which was NATO.

This new American world empire, unlike its British predecessor, was ideological rather than territorial, and it compelled weaker nation states to submit to its economic hegemony by means of military interventions – that replaced uncooperative political regimes with governments, for the most part dictatorial, that favored American economic interests.

Guatemala in 1954 was the first of these interventions – resulting in a left-wing president being deposed and replaced by a brutal pro-American dictator. America repeated this process of regime change dozens of times in the following decades – often with success, as in Chile in 1973, and sometimes unsuccessfully, as with the Bay of Pigs in 1961.

Alongside these targeted interventions, America also became involved in ‘forever wars’ in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan – all of which ended in embarrassing American defeats.

American hegemony reached its zenith after the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s – but, according to Dasgupta, the American empire entered a period of decline thereafter, as China and Russia began to re-emerge as powerful nation states at the beginning of the 21st century.

And as America’s foreign policy disasters piled up globally, its internal economic and political crisis intensified – in part because American imperialism had “contaminated its own political soul” – culminating in Donald Trump’s election as president in 2016.

Dasgupta sees Trump’s rule as a more brutally aggressive and irrational version of America’s post-World War II global empire, now based upon “sheer gangsterism”. Gone is even the pretense of bringing freedom and democracy to those countries that it invades – and America’s foreign aggression now openly justifies itself in explicitly brutal and apocalyptic terms.

This was already apparent from Trump’s support for Israel’s war of destruction on Gaza – and Trump’s recent bellicose threat to “bomb Iran back to the stone age” simply confirms this change. Dasgupta reminds us that this phrase was first used by General Curtis LeMay in relation to Vietnam – but Le May was an extremist right-wing Cold War warrior, and President Lyndon Johnson would never have contemplated justifying America’s war in Vietnam in such explicitly violent and irrational terms.

Nor did previous presidents attempt to lay the Middle East to waste, dismantle NATO, destroy the global economic order that America itself had created, or threaten to invade Mexico and annex Canada and Greenland. Nor did Trump’s predecessors seek to systematically debauch and destroy liberal democratic institutions within America itself.

Dasgupta’s analysis of America’s decline is not only insightful – it is compelling.

It is now clear, however, that Trump’s attack on Iran has failed disastrously.

The resulting stalemate – which threatens to turn into another ‘forever war’ that a weakened America is militarily and politically incapable of waging – has intensified America’s internal crisis; created serious and ongoing global economic disruption; and generated tensions that threaten to break apart NATO.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently stated the obvious, namely that the war in Iran had become as “embarrassment” for America – and Trump responded by withdrawing 5,000 American troops from Germany, thereby further weakening the NATO alliance.

The war in Iran is also the first war that an American president has waged at the behest of another nation – namely Israel, which Dasgupta views as one of the most aggressive of modern nation states – in the face of near unanimous opposition from the CIA, the American military elite, and the president’s own cabinet. Not only does this highlight Trump’s irrationality, it also suggests that America no longer controls own its own foreign policy. In short, Donald Trump’s foolhardy war in Iran has made apparent America’s decline as world hegemonic power.

Anti-war activists have disrupted a Politico security forum sponsored by Lockheed Martin in Washington, DC, protesting the company’s role in supplying weapons for wars in the Middle East.

The ‘Security Summit’ held on Tuesday brought together US officials, lawmakers, defense executives, and foreign figures to discuss military priorities, Iran, cybersecurity, and AI warfare.

Politico said it aimed to “dissect the administration’s changing posture” on defense and future weapons. Critics mocked it as a war-planning shop dressed up as a security event.

Members of the anti-war group Code Pink staged a series of protests during live panels, interrupting speakers and accusing Lockheed Martin and government officials of profiting from and fueling the Middle East wars.

They blasted the forum as war profiteering wrapped in policy, saying the defense and tech companies have “blood on [their] hands,” and confronted officials over their support for US-Israeli actions against Iran.

The protesters also called for an end to the war in Gaza and the “genocide in Palestine,” with one person holding a sign reading “Lockheed Loves War.”

"THIS IS NOT ABOUT SECURITY! THIS IS ABOUT DEATH AND DESTRUCTION! THIS IS ABOUT PROFIT!"

At the Lockheed Martin-sponsored Politico "Security" Summit, CODEPINK activist Olivia DiNucci just disrupted Adam Smith, ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee. pic.twitter.com/3W2Pl4KgIe

— CODEPINK (@codepink) May 12, 2026

“How dare you use the massacre of my people as a golden opportunity? How dare you, all of you war criminals in here!” one protester shouted during a panel.

“This is not about security. This is about death and destruction. They even said that the war in Iran is a golden opportunity,” another yelled as US Representative Adam Smith, a ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, was speaking.

"Where were you when our people were pulling their children out from under the rubble of the bombs you invited into our country?"

This morning, an Iranian-American activist confronted Reza Pahlavi for supporting for the US-Israeli war on Iran a "security" summit in D.C. pic.twitter.com/a7LvTlsjQK

— CODEPINK (@codepink) May 12, 2026

An Iranian-American activist confronted Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s last shah, over his support for the US-Israeli war against Iran. “Where were you when our people were pulling their children out from under the rubble of the bombs you invited into our country? Shame on you!”

At least four protesters were removed, according to videos shared online by Code Pink.

Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest defense contractor, receives more than $60 billion annually in Pentagon contracts and is a frequent target of anti-war protests.

Critics accuse the company of supplying weapons that cause heavy civilian casualties, including F-15 and F-35 jets, Hellfire missiles, and bunker-buster bombs used by Israel in Gaza and Lebanon.

Lockheed Martin has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, funneling weapons through Pentagon contracts and US aid programs. The conflict has sent the company’s production lines into overdrive, as Kiev’s Western backers empty their arsenals to keep the war machine running and then rush to refill them.

Africa can no longer be excluded from permanent representation on the UN Security Council (UNSC), African Union Commission (AUC) Chairperson Mahmoud Ali Youssouf has said.

Speaking at a ministerial meeting on UNSC reform on the sidelines of the Africa-France Summit in Kenyan capital Nairobi on Monday, Youssouf said the continent’s demand is not a request for special treatment but a response to a long-standing imbalance in global governance.

“Africa is not asking for a favor; Africa is demanding the correction of a historical injustice,” he said, according to an AU statement. He added that the Security Council’s “credibility and legitimacy” depend on whether it reflects the realities of the present world rather than “the geopolitical order of 1945.” 

The AU’s position is based on the 2005 Ezulwini Consensus and Sirte Declaration. It calls for at least two permanent African seats with all the powers held by existing permanent members, including veto rights while the veto remains, as well as five additional non-permanent seats.

The Security Council currently has five permanent members – China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US – and ten elected members serving two-year terms. Africa, despite having 54 UN member states, has no permanent seat on the body.

Russia has also backed expanding the Security Council to include more African, Asian, and Latin American states. Moscow’s deputy envoy to the UN, Dmitry Polyansky, told an African Union Committee of Ten summit in New York in September that the council should reflect the “multipolar nature of the world” rather than “the global colonial past.” Polyansky said Russia supports Africa’s push for greater representation, while warning against increasing Western representation on the council.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has described Russia-India ties as “impossible to destroy.” In a wide-ranging interview with RT India’s Runjhun Sharma as part of the India, Russia and the World show, Lavrov said the complementary nature of the two countries’ economies and the decades of cooperation in the areas of defense, technology, space, culture, and now energy and manufacturing make the ties strong.

“Those who are trying to worry about the future of Russian-Indian friendship, I think they should not be worried,” Lavrov said, adding that some global powers are trying to “undermine” relations between Russia and India, but “these attempts do not achieve results.”

Lavrov was speaking to RT ahead of his trip to New Delhi for the meeting of BRICS foreign ministers which begins on Wednesday.

Regarding Russia-India ties in the energy and defense sectors, the foreign minister said that “for a long time after India gained independence, no Western country wanted to help India to develop its military,” while Russia sold India weaponry and shared technology for many kinds of weaponry to be manufactured in India.

“We started with Brahmos missiles, then Kalashnikov machine guns, and now it is also T-90 tanks being produced in India,” he said, adding that during the visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to India last year, the countries agreed to a long-term plan for economic cooperation which includes military technical cooperation.

“Prime Minister Modi is one of the most vibrant leaders the world has ever seen. He not only has vibrant energy, he focuses it on very important goals and achievements – achieving absolute sovereignty in all spheres, be it the economy, military defense, culture, and naturally, maintaining the civilizational heritage that India has like no other,” Lavrov said.

Anti-immigration protesters set an emergency refugee shelter on fire in the Dutch town of Loosdrecht on Tuesday evening, following weeks of demonstrations against the arrival of asylum seekers.

According to NOS, an angry crowd threw firecrackers at a town hall building that the authorities said would temporarily house refugees. The incident occurred after the first group of 15 asylum seekers arrived earlier that day.

The crowd also threw objects at police officers and attempted to block firefighters from accessing the site. The fire was eventually extinguished, and several people were detained, NOS reported.

🇳🇱 More footage of Dutch protesters setting fire to a new asylum centre in Loosdrecht while blocking firefighters from reaching the area.pic.twitter.com/3diZ5cArz9 https://t.co/rW4AAjeMF7

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) May 13, 2026

Previous protests in Loosdrecht, a town of 8,600 people, forced the authorities to scale back plans to house 110 asylum seekers to 70.

Last month, a petition opposing the opening of the shelter, signed by 3,000 people, was submitted to the authorities. Despite protests from local residents and business owners, a court ruled in favor of allowing the vacant town hall to be used to house refugees.

Pro-immigration politicians condemned the violence, with some claiming that many of the protesters were not from Loosdrecht. Justice Minister David van Weel suggested that “groups with bad intentions” may have exploited the protests to incite violence, according to Dutch News.

Austria has said it scrambled Eurofighter Typhoons to intercept US Air Force spy planes that entered its airspace without authorization on Sunday and Monday.

According to Austrian Defense Ministry spokesman Michael Bauer, a pair of PC-12 turboprop aircraft flew over the Totes Gebirge mountains in Upper Austria on two occasions. He added that the planes turned back toward Germany after being intercepted by the Eurofighters. Bauer said the incident will be “resolved through diplomatic channels.”

Austria’s response was criticized and mocked on social media, with some commenters arguing that “nobody takes our airspace seriously.”

Last month, Austria denied US requests for overflight rights during the war against Iran, citing its longstanding neutrality.

“We are not part of Trump’s chaotic policy and must not yield an inch here,” Austrian Vice Chancellor Andrea Babler said at the time, according to Anadolu.

US President Donald Trump is set to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping, who he described on Tuesday as “a friend” and “somebody that we get along with.” Trump added that he plans to discuss the war with Iran, which the US and Israel have accused China of supporting.

The Chinese Embassy in the US, meanwhile, outlined four red lines in relations that “must not be challenged”: Taiwan, democracy and human rights, “development paths and political systems,” and “China’s development right.” Beijing has insisted that the US must not interfere in its domestic affairs or support what it calls the “separatist” government in Taipei.

The four red lines in #China-#US relations must not be challenged. #ChinaUSRelations #ChinaDiplomacy pic.twitter.com/4kmNeEWLGH

— Chinese Embassy in US (@ChineseEmbinUS) May 12, 2026

The US-Israeli war against Iran further strained relations with China after the US Treasury sanctioned a Chinese refinery for allegedly purchasing Iranian oil. Beijing responded by barring its private refineries from complying with the sanctions, which Chinese officials denounced as illegal.

🇺🇸🇨🇳🇮🇷 Reporter: What is your message to President Xi as it relates to the Iran war?

Trump: I think number one, we're going to have a long talk about it. I think he's been relatively good, to be honest with you. We've had no problem. And he's been a friend of mine.

I think… pic.twitter.com/GJGheF3Oh7

— RusWar (@ruswar) May 12, 2026

China has denied that it provides military aid to Iran and condemned the US for blacklisting Chinese satellite companies accused of supplying data to Tehran. “The Chinese government always asks Chinese companies to operate in accordance with laws and regulations. We will firmly protect Chinese businesses’ legitimate rights and interests,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said on Monday.

Iran has retained most of its missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz, the New York Times reported on Tuesday, citing a classified intelligence assessment from earlier this month.

The report follows a series of publications in the US media contradicting President Donald Trump’s claims that Iran’s military was largely destroyed during the US-Israeli bombing campaign from February 28 until the ceasefire on April 8.

According to the NYT, Iran has restored operational access to 30 of the 33 missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz, which are capable of targeting US warships and tankers passing through the narrow waterway that normally handles around 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas trade.

Iran closed the route to what it described as “enemy ships” in response to US and Israeli airstrikes and has since insisted on the right to control all maritime traffic and collect tolls.

Negotiations remain stalled after the US and Iran once again rejected each other’s proposals over the weekend as unacceptable. Trump has intensified threats to resume the military campaign, with media reports saying he has been briefed on additional strike options.

The US has demanded that Iran dismantle its nuclear and ballistic missile programs, which Tehran has rejected, insisting that its uranium enrichment activities are solely for civilian purposes.

Iran’s peace terms include an end to Israel’s war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, the lifting of sanctions, reparations, and recognition of what Tehran calls its “sovereignty” over the Strait of Hormuz.

Nearly 12,000 complaints have been filed against draft officials in Ukraine since the conflict with Russia began in early 2022, Ukrainskaya Pravda (UP) reported on Monday, citing data provided by the parliamentary human rights commissioner.

Ukraine has been suffering from chronic manpower shortages due to its heavy battlefield losses, widespread draft dodging, and desertion. The nationwide ‘bussification’ campaign, in which draft officers ambush military-age men on the streets, at workplaces, and outside their homes, has often led to violent altercations and outrage on social media.

According to UP, the number of complaints against draft officials jumped from 514 in 2023 to 6,127 in 2025. A total of 1,657 complaints were filed in the first quarter of 2026.

The Ukrainian government lowered the draft age from 27 to 25 and has introduced harsher penalties for draft dodging.

The draft remains a highly contentious issue as the conflict with Russia has entered its fourth year. Last week, dozens of people attempted to storm a draft office building in the village of Mezhgorye in western Ukraine. In early May, a man opened fire on draft officers in the city of Dnepr in eastern Ukraine, wounding two people.

Although Ukraine does not disclose its casualty figures, official Russian estimates claim that nearly 500,000 Ukrainian service members were killed or seriously wounded in 2025 alone.

The US and Israeli attack on Iran in February and their subsequent failure to achieve their objectives has already changed the strategic calculations of every major power. In some respects, it has also opened new opportunities for political dialogue. Seizing those opportunities would benefit international politics as a whole.

The Middle East has always been one of the most unstable regions in the world. Rivalries there rarely disappear; they merely evolve. States that are bitter enemies one year often find themselves entering temporary pragmatic arrangements the next. But these understandings are tactical rather than lasting. The region remains trapped in a cycle of recurring crises.

For decades, however, the instability of the Middle East was viewed as manageable. The conflicts were bloody, but they didn’t threaten the foundations of the international system itself. Even at the height of the Cold War, the region was seen by the great powers as an arena for competition rather than a place where they would risk everything.

There were two reasons for this. First, the Middle East never directly touched the vital survival interests of the major powers. The US and the USSR competed there intensely, and today the US, Russia and China all maintain important interests in the region, but none considered it worth a confrontation that could spiral into a global catastrophe. Second, no regional state possessed the capacity to impose a revolutionary political project on the wider world.

In this sense, Middle Eastern conflicts resembled a permanent wound in international politics: painful, dangerous, but ultimately containable.

Now, however, the situation has changed.

What until recently seemed unthinkable has now become reality: a regional conflict has demonstrated its capacity to undermine the foundations of global economic interdependence.

The political consequences may prove even more significant.

For decades, the United States was viewed as a power capable of imposing its will militarily almost anywhere in the world. Even after failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, many still assumed that no regional state could seriously resist overwhelming American military superiority.

That perception has now suffered another severe blow.

The overthrow of the Venezuelan government earlier this year reinforced the image of an America still capable of reshaping weaker states at will. It was against that backdrop that many observers expected Iran’s political system to collapse rapidly under pressure. Instead, the opposite occurred.

Despite devastating strikes against senior figures and constant aerial attacks, the Iranian state endured. No mass uprising materialized. The armed forces continued functioning. The country’s governing structures proved far more resilient than Washington and West Jerusalem appear to have anticipated.

This doesn’t mean Iran has emerged victorious. The long-term consequences of the conflict remain unclear, but it does mean that the old assumption of automatic American military supremacy no longer looks convincing.

For the United States, this was a war of choice rather than necessity because Iran posed no existential threat to American survival. Israel, certainly, views Tehran as a strategic danger, but Israeli and American interests are not identical, regardless of how close their alliance may be.

That distinction matters because it explains why Washington, despite all its rhetoric, has shown no willingness to escalate toward the most extreme military options. America itself understands the limits of what it is prepared to risk.

Whatever the eventual outcome of the conflict, the Iranian episode is likely to provoke reflection in Washington. At the very least, it should force a reassessment of whether American ambitions still match American capabilities.

Yet such reflection will not come easily. The US political class has spent decades operating from a position of extraordinary global dominance. This has narrowed its worldview as American elites increasingly interpret international politics primarily through the prism of domestic political assumptions and ideological preferences.

At the same time, Washington has accumulated an enormous network of commitments across the globe. Maintaining them often creates pressure for exactly the sort of risky intervention that produced the current crisis.

The conflict has also exposed China’s vulnerability to instability in distant regions on which it nevertheless depends heavily for energy supplies and trade. Chinese firms have invested massively across the Middle East, including in Iran itself. The disruption caused by the war is likely to intensify debates within China about economic security and over-dependence on vulnerable maritime routes.

In time, Beijing may begin reconsidering the balance between global economic integration and strategic self-sufficiency.

For Russia, the consequences are more complex than many assume. In the short term, Moscow has benefited economically from higher commodity prices. The conflict has also shifted some international attention away from Eastern Europe. But Russia is not necessarily interested in a complete collapse of American influence in the Middle East.

Paradoxically, a limited and constrained American presence can contribute to the broader balance of international politics. Total chaos or the destruction of all diplomatic frameworks in the region would not serve Russian interests either.

This is why the Iranian crisis matters so profoundly. It is not simply another Middle Eastern war, but rather a moment that has forced all the major powers to confront uncomfortable questions about military force, economic vulnerability, strategic overreach and the changing structure of the international system itself.

The attack on Iran was intended to demonstrate strength. Instead, it has exposed uncertainty. And in doing so, it may yet create opportunities for a more realistic and restrained dialogue between the world’s major powers.

This article was first published by the Valdai Club and edited by the RT team.

US President Donald Trump has not ruled the possibility of traveling to Russia this year to help facilitate a settlement to the Ukraine conflict.

Speaking to reporters outside the White House on Tuesday, prior to departing for an upcoming summit in China, the US president was asked if he could visit Russia in 2026.

“I could… I will do whatever is necessary. That war… I’ve settled eight wars,” Trump said.

“That war is getting closer. Believe it or not, it’s getting closer. And we think we’re going to end up getting a settlement between Russia and Ukraine.”

A day earlier, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reiterated that Russian President Vladimir Putin is ready to host Trump. Putin initially extended the invitation after the historic bilateral US-Russia summit in Alaska last August.

However, the subsequent Washington-backed direct talks between Moscow and Kiev have stalled.

The negotiations will remain at a standstill until Kiev pulls its troops out of Donbass, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov said on Sunday. “Until [Ukraine] makes the step, one can hold some more rounds, dozens of rounds [of talks] but we will remain in the same spot,” he said.

Russia has maintained that any peaceful settlement is predicated on Kiev withdrawing from the remaining areas of the Donbass that are still under Ukrainian control.

Kiev exerts control over around 15-17% of Donetsk People’s Republic, Putin said in March. The Russian Defense Ministry reported fully liberating the neighboring Lugansk People’s Republic last month.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz was booed and mocked during a speech on Tuesday to one of the country’s biggest trade union groups as he tried to sell his welfare cut plans.

Merz has a history of blaming Germany’s economic troubles on its people. Last August, he said that the “welfare state as we have it today can no longer be financed.” In January, he urged Germans to work more, arguing that the “productivity of our economy is not high enough.”

He told a gathering of some 400 delegates from the German Trade Union Confederation (DGB) that people must pull together because “we simply failed to modernize our country.”

Boos and whistles first erupted as he spoke about the health insurance reform approved by his cabinet in April. The changes, which Merz described as “historic,” are expected to save the government €16 billion ($18.7 billion), while forcing people to pay more for drugs previously covered by insurance even as their contributions continue to rise.

The chancellor then claimed that the upcoming pension reform – expected to be unveiled this summer – was driven by “demographics and mathematics” rather than “malice on my part or on the part of the federal government.” The remarks were also met with hissing and laughter, particularly when he claimed that the reform plans were “not a threat” but a “big chance.”

Last year, Germany’s central bank warned about a looming record budget deficit, attributing the threat to higher defense spending and continued financial support for Kiev.

Merz and his cabinet continue to pursue the chancellor’s goal of turning the German army into the strongest conventional force in Europe, citing a supposed ‘Russian threat.’ Moscow has repeatedly dismissed such allegations as “nonsense.”

The Russian economy remains fundamentally strong despite contracting in the first quarter of 2026, Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandr Novak has said, citing low unemployment, rising household incomes and improving business activity as evidence that the slowdown may be temporary. 

Russia’s GDP shrank by 0.3% year-on-year in the first quarter, marking the country’s first quarterly contraction since early 2023. The slowdown followed years of rapid expansion, with the economy having grown by over 4% in 2023 and 2024 before easing to around 1% last year. 

Novak told business daily Vedomosti on Tuesday that the downturn was part of a normal economic cycle. “After a period of high growth, there is always a correction,” he said, describing the current phase as being accompanied by “structural transformation” under “unprecedented pressure from sanctions.” 

Russia has retained its position as the world’s fourth-largest economy by purchasing power parity (PPP) – which adjusts for cost-of-living differences across countries – since 2021, Novak said. Manufacturing output has risen nearly 23% since 2022, he added, driven by import substitution and increased domestic production after many Western companies exited the Russian market. 

“Poverty has declined to a record low of 6.7%,” Novak said, referring to the 2025 data. He said unemployment was expected to remain at around 2.3-2.4%, among the lowest levels in the country’s modern history. 

Novak attributed the slowdown partly to labor shortages and tight monetary policy aimed at curbing inflation, but said growth was expected to return this year as price pressures ease and financial conditions gradually improve.   

Novak’s views were echoed by Economic Development Minister Maksim Reshetnikov, who told President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday that the economy had “held up well” despite sanctions and external pressure. The ministry expects GDP growth to reach 0.4% this year before accelerating to 1.4% in 2027, Reshetnikov said.

The looming energy crisis will inevitably force Kiev’s European backers to negotiate with Russia, Kremlin investment envoy and senior Ukraine conflict negotiator Kirill Dmitriev said on Tuesday.

The EU and UK have largely frozen contacts with Moscow after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. While the Kremlin has confirmed that a visit by envoys sent by French President Emmanuel Macron took place in February, the talks went nowhere.

“Finnish President Stubb believes that… ‘it’s time to start talking to Russia,’” Dmitriev wrote on X. “The upcoming energy crisis tsunami starting to overwhelm the EU and UK will make it inevitable.”

He was replying to a statement Stubb made in an interview with Italian daily Corriere della Sera published on Monday.

“Yes, it’s time to start talking to Russia,” the Finnish president said. “If American policy toward Russia and Ukraine isn’t in Europe’s interests, as seems to be the case, then we must engage directly.”

Kiev’s European backers have increasingly made public statements about the need to reengage Moscow in dialogue, expressing concern about being sidelined in US-backed Russia-Ukraine talks.

However, any speculation about resuming talks is premature, until a concerted “political decision to resume dialogue” is made, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday.

Vladimir Zelensky’s former spokesperson, Yulia Mendel, has been added to a Ukrainian state-linked ‘kill list’ for telling American journalist Tucker Carlson of rampant cocaine abuse in the corridors of power in Kiev and the desire of a corrupt elite to prolong the conflict with Russia. 

Mendel worked with Zelensky for two years during which time she says she witnessed him change from peacemaker to propagator of war. 

The list is run by the Mirotvorets website, which has been linked to Ukrainian security services and is notorious for publishing the addresses and personal details of anyone remotely deemed an enemy of the Ukrainian state, including Russian journalists, some of whom were subsequently assassinated. 

The website has accused Mendel of “humanitarian aggression against Ukraine,” spreading “narratives of Russian propaganda,” calling for Ukraine’s “capitulation,” and “indirectly taking part in information‑psychological special operations” allegedly run by Russia. 

Mirotvorets cited Mendel telling Carlson that the Ukrainian delegation at talks in Istanbul in 2022 was ready to agree to “all of Russia’s demands” in order to stop the fighting, but that Kiev was pressured by the US and UK to continue the conflict and that Zelensky is now “one of the main obstacles to peace.” It also cited Mendel’s comments that Ukraine is “on the verge of disappearing,” and showing signs of “unhealthy nationalism.” 

Russian officials have condemned the site as extremist. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has described it as a hit list targeting individuals Kiev allegedly wants to “eliminate.”