Fans torched scooters and clashed with police in Paris on Saturday after local football club Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) won the Champions League, defeating Arsenal.

According to AFP, some 20,000 people gathered on the Champs-Elysees to watch a broadcast of the match, which was played in Budapest, Hungary. The crowd erupted in celebration after the French club beat its English rival in a dramatic 4-3 penalty shootout.

Violence soon broke out as some fans set scooters on fire and launched fireworks at police.

Des poubelles et vélos en libre service sont incendiés en marge des célébrations de la seconde victoire du PSG en finale de LDC. Une habitante tente de s’interposer.#PSGARS #TeamPSG pic.twitter.com/3psl3NIzjd

— CLPRESS / Agence de presse (@CLPRESSFR) May 30, 2026

Paris (May 30) — Rioters started fires in the street to celebrate Paris Saint-Germain winning the soccer Champions League. pic.twitter.com/5w5PMqy43f

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) May 30, 2026

A total of 131 people were detained, 45 of whom were taken into custody, police said.

#PSG, der Moslem- und Afrikanerclub aus #Paris hat gespielt. Natürlich erschüttern sofort schwerste Unruhen Paris. Die Nacht wird blutig. #PSGARS #Elfmeterschießen CL Sieger pic.twitter.com/mbf9JI0f9m

— Max van Stetten (@homo_est_liber) May 30, 2026

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

It’s hard to believe one’s eyes while witnessing the latest performance put on by the comedian tyrant of Ukraine.

Within the space of a week or so, the regime of president-for-eternity-no-elections-needed Vladimir Zelensky has repatriated and reburied with pomp and ceremony the remains of Andrey Melnik, a twentieth-century Ukrainian fascist leader and Nazi collaborator, and named a contemporary military elite unit “Heroes of the UPA” (the Ukrainian Insurgent Army of World War Two).

The UPA was, in effect, the military arm of the OUN, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. The OUN had two political wings that mattered, one under Andrey Melnik, the other under Stepan Bandera. They were rivals, but both were fascists.

During the war between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, both OUN wings tried to collaborate with the Nazis. The Nazis, in their arrogance, did not always let them, but the whole OUN was very eager to please. The OUN and the UPA also participated in murderous German violence against Jews, serving as pro-active mass murder auxiliaries. In addition, they conducted a genocidal ethnic cleansing campaign of their own against Poles.

Predictably, the in-your-face obscenity of Kiev’s latest fascism worship has provoked Israel as well as Poland. Polish president Nawrocki would like to deprive Zelensky of the high state honors that Warsaw has foolishly bestowed on him and has threatened to curtail Poland’s support for Kiev’s EU ambitions. In Israel, both its official Holocaust remembrance and exploitation agency Yad Vashem and the foreign ministry have taken exception. That is, of course, ironic, since Israel itself engages obsessively in genocide and ethnic cleansing as well. Maybe, in this case, it takes a genocidal fascist to know one.

Read more

Official Kiev is in the middle of devastating corruption scandals – but to be fair, when is it not? – and shaken by mortifying revelations about Zelensky personally (surprise, surprise: a raging narcissist on coke and not a democrat but a kleptocrat) from a well-informed insider speaking to one of America’s most influential journalists. Yet its ruling clique finds time to really rub it in, again. How much it cannot stop hugging Nazis, dead and alive? Costs in foreign-policy terms? Apparently, no big deal: When the Nazi-loving urge itches really bad, to hell with caution and – very unusually for Kiev – even dissembling.

Some observers speculate that the fascism fetish is being escalated in public again because of the scandals and continually plunging popularity of the regime: Zelensky and the rest of his merry gang of war profiteers and proxy war meatgrinder jockeys, such commentators believe, are merely using the Nazi play “out of a position of weakness,” to distract from the unprecedently fetid swamp into which they have turned Ukraine’s sleazy politics.

This is a mistake. It is time that even the slowest in the West accept a simple truth about Zelensky, one he is not even hiding (like so many others): He genuinely likes fascists. And, with his extremely cynical manipulation techniques, his vicious persecution of political opposition and any dissent, his abuse of the mass media for propaganda, and his deep contempt for democracy, he has much heartfelt affinity with them, to say the least.

Silly – and, actually, racist – pseudo-arguments, advanced by Western proxy war boosters that Zelensky can’t possibly ally with a violent far-right because he is Jewish deserve no serious answer. The current Israeli regime and its policies of war, genocide, supremacy, and ethnic cleansing are fascist. Case closed.

In fact, the Zelensky regime has a longstanding, consistent habit of pandering to, working with, employing at high levels and on a large scale, and honoring the very far right. Some may love to quibble, in bored-academic-style, about pedantically precise terms for fine distinctions in one big pile of rottenness. But, in reality, those labeled Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, fascists, ultra-nationalists and so on form a large whole having much more in common than not.

Read more

Re-labelling has also served to spread big fat lies. In Ukraine, there is a long and foul tradition, reaching back far into the frozen depths of the first Cold War. Mendaciously re-packaging Ukrainian World War II fascists with their own bloody flavor of terror, genocide, and ethnic cleansing. But re-labelling these Ukrainian fascists as ‘integral nationalists’ makes about as much sense as calling Idi Amin Dada – the former ultraviolent dictator of Uganda rumored to have sampled a few of his victims – an ‘integral vegan.’

And so it is in the present, too. Play with words as much as you like, a fact remains a fact, that Zelensky’s Ukraine is state with a big fascism problem. In time, its roots reach back to the period between World Wars I and II, with a massive escalation during the latter. Regionally, it used to be concentrated in western Ukraine and, after the Soviet victory over the Nazis and Axis forces in 1945, among fugitives in the US, Canada, and Europe. There, with their brand of ready-to-kill fascist anti-Communism, they served the West in the first Cold War and systematically subverted Ukrainian communities and any institution they could buy their way into, such as Yale, Harvard, and Columbia Universities.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, this self-declared Ukrainian ‘diaspora’ – ironically, a term popularized out of the same Israel-envy that produced an unseemly urge to politically claim a Holocaust of one’s own in the shape of the Holodomor (preferably with even bigger victim counts) – re-entered independent Ukraine and “repatriated” its ideology. They impaired Ukraine’s culture and politics with, unfortunately, great success.

In that, long-term sense, Zelensky and his regime’s sympathy for the fascist devil is part of a deeper story. Yet Zelensky’s personal contribution is not merely substantial but crucial. First because he has simply gone much farther than any post-independent leader of Ukraine in making fascism part of a deeply sick new normality. And second, because in our world of often imbecilic identity politics, he has, in effect, exploited his Jewishness to promote the normalization of fascism. It is hard to imagine a greater intellectual and moral perversion. But then again, it’s Zelensky.

Around five US servicemen and contractors suffered minor injuries during a recent Iranian ballistic missile strike on a Kuwaiti air base, Bloomberg reports, citing a source. At least one MQ-9 Reaper drone was reportedly destroyed.

The incident apparently occurred during the latest limited exchange between the US and Iran on Thursday. The US military said it destroyed five Iranian kamikaze drones “that posed a clear threat in and near the Strait of Hormuz” and struck a military site near the port city of Bandar Abbas. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it targeted a US airbase in the region in retaliation.

Bloomberg reported on Saturday that an Iranian Fateh-110 missile was intercepted by Kuwaiti air defenses, but falling debris hit Ali Al Salem Air Base.

The fragments slightly injured around five US personnel and inflicted material damage. One MQ-9 Reaper drone stationed at the base was destroyed and at least one other was seriously damaged, an anonymous person with direct knowledge of the attack told the outlet.

Read more

The US-Israeli attack on Iran has taken a heavy toll on America’s MQ-9 Reaper fleet, with around one-fifth of it wiped out.

Earlier this week, Bloomberg reported that the US military has lost up to 30 drones of the type worth nearly $1 billion. The bulk of them are believed to have been destroyed or badly damaged by Iranian fire, with a few lost in accidents and on the ground in long-range strikes on US military installations in the region.

The losses have left a major dent in the US fleet of medium-altitude long-endurance drones used for reconnaissance missions and precision strikes. The number of MQ-9 Reaper drones in the US inventory has fallen well beyond the Air Force’s minimum floor of 189, hovering at around the 135 mark. 

The drones will not be easy to replace, as the MQ-9 Reaper’s manufacturer, General Atomics, halted production of the flagship model last year, and only produces variants reserved for foreign customers.

Bulgaria is facing EU sanctions due to an excessive budget deficit, just months after joining the eurozone, Prime Minister Rumen Radev has said. He claimed that the crisis was caused by the previous pro-EU government, which massaged economic numbers to narrowly pass the threshold to join the eurozone in the first place.

Speaking at a cabinet meeting in Sofia on Friday, Radev, who is widely regarded as an EU skeptic, said that the European Commission would publish its formal report on the country’s fiscal situation on June 3, thus launching the so-called excessive deficit procedure.

Under the procedure, Sofia must bring spending from last year’s 3.5% back below the 3% ceiling by putting a binding cap on the budget deficit. If Bulgaria fails, the EU can freeze funding and go as far as to impose fines of up to 0.05% of GDP every six months on the Balkan country.

Read more

Radev blamed the situation on a “difficult legacy” stemming from “negligence, incompetence, voluntarism, populism, and financial misconduct” by the previous center-right and pro-EU Zhelyazkov government, which collapsed in December 2025 following mass anti-corruption protests.

The prime minister also predicted that “this year, the deficit will be even larger” than 3.5%. The European Commission forecasts that the deficit will hit 4.1% of GDP this year, rising to 4.3% in 2027.
“They [the previous government] lied to push Bulgaria into the euro… The bubble has burst,” he said of the budget deficit.

Read more

Bulgaria joined the eurozone on January 1, 2026, after barely meeting the criteria, especially in terms of inflation, which was the greatest hurdle. Proponents of the push sought to lock Bulgaria on the pro-West and pro-EU path, with practical monetary consequences deemed minimal as the Bulgarian lev had been pegged to the euro for decades.

However, critics have argued that the Zhelyazkov coalition – which supported eurozone membership – projected an unrealistic revenue growth, with potential to balloon the budget deficit.

A Politico report in 2025 also drew attention to a sudden and “mysterious” 82.8% cut in state-set daily hospital fees in April – a move that helped lower Bulgaria’s 12-month average inflation. At the time, an unnamed former local official told the paper that “the only reason Bulgaria has qualified is… due to state-administered prices.” According to Politico, the previous government also cut inflation by slashing rail fares by over 9%.

Radev – who has advocated for more pragmatic ties with Russia and consistently opposed military aid to Ukraine – was not against the eurozone per se, but insisted that such a decision could be made only on a public referendum.

However, the parliament blocked his request, with critics accusing him of trying to sabotage the process. Radev himself said that Bulgarian citizens were being ignored by an elite “marching toward the eurozone” and that “the representatives of the people denied the people their right to choose.”

A senior lawmaker from Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s CDU has proposed requiring Germans to use their homes to pay for elderly care, triggering a political row over social welfare amid the country’s mounting fiscal pressures.

The proposal by Albert Stegemann, deputy chairman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag, would tighten eligibility rules for public assistance with nursing-home costs, potentially requiring homeowners to draw on property wealth before receiving state support.

“Those who own assets must first use their own assets, including their home, before the community pays,” Stegemann told Bild on Thursday.

Germany’s long-term care system works in three stages. Mandatory insurance covers part of nursing-home costs, with patients expected to pay the remainder from their pension, savings or other assets. If those funds are exhausted, state social welfare assistance covers the gap.

Stegemann argues that homeowners should be required to draw on housing wealth before gaining access to that final layer of taxpayer-funded support.

Read more

The proposal comes as Berlin prepares a major overhaul of long-term care financing. Health Minister Nina Warken has warned that Germany’s statutory care insurance system could face deficits of more than €22 billion over the next two years unless reforms are adopted.

The debate is unfolding against the backdrop of mounting strain on Germany’s welfare model. Europe’s largest economy has endured years of stagnation following the energy shock caused by the Ukraine conflict. Although Germany officially emerged from recession in 2025, growth is forecast at just 0.5% in 2026 after a new Middle East-driven energy crisis dealt another blow to its industrial sector.

Nevertheless, Germany is spending heavily on both Ukraine and its own military buildup. It has committed more than €96 billion in military and civilian aid for Kiev since 2022, while announcing a domestic €100 billion rearmament drive.

READ MORE: Fewer Germans buying into warnings of Russian attack – poll

Stegemann’s remarks immediately drew criticism from coalition partners and welfare organizations, who argue the proposal could effectively force elderly people to liquidate family homes before receiving assistance.

SPD health expert Christos Pantazis warned that many families fear “losing their home or their life’s work,” and called the idea “absurd.” Opposition Greens accused the government of pursuing socially irresponsible policies.

The US will no longer “subsidize” the defense of “wealthy” allies, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has said, reviving a long-running dispute between Washington and NATO’s European members over military spending.

The remarks were made at a major security summit in Singapore on Friday.

Hegseth linked the Trump administration’s push for higher allied defense spending to its broader strategy of shifting resources toward the Indo-Pacific and countering what he described as Chinese “hegemony” in the region.

“The era of the United States subsidizing the defense of wealthy nations is over. We need partners, not protectorates. We seek alliances built on shared responsibility, not dependency,” Hegseth told the annual International Institute for Strategic Studies Shangri-La Dialogue, according to an official statement by the Department of War.

Read more

NATO members agreed in 2014 to spend at least 2% of GDP on defense, but many EU countries failed to reach the target for years. Former President Barack Obama said in a 2016 interview that “free riders aggravate me,” calling on members to spend more.

According to NATO’s official figures, all 32 members met the 2% benchmark for the first time in 2025. However, the US still accounted for 60-62% of the bloc’s total military spending last year.

During a question-and-answer session following his address in Singapore, Hegseth described 2% contributions as “freeloading.”

Last year, NATO members agreed to work toward spending 5% of GDP on defense and security by 2035, including a core defense target of 3.5%.

Several governments have questioned the goal. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez called a 5% target “unreasonable” and “counterproductive.” Belgium and Slovakia have also raised concerns over the scale of the increase.

READ MORE: North Atlantic separation: What might follow a NATO divorce

The dispute has expanded beyond military spending as some EU governments have resisted Washington’s requests related to the Iran conflict. Spain has opposed the military action against Iran and refused to allow US forces to use joint bases for offensive operations, while France and Germany have called for diplomacy.

US President Donald Trump later criticized NATO allies over their response, saying it is “pretty shocking” that countries which support America’s objectives “don’t want to help.”

Croatian President Zoran Milanovic broke ranks with other NATO members as he slammed Lithuania’s foreign minister for his “irresponsible” call to attack the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad.

Milanovic’s comments came after Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys called NATO the “strongest organization ever created” last week, arguing for a more assertive posture toward Russia and saying European NATO members must turn “fear of the threat into a sense of empowerment.” 

“We have to show the Russians that we’re capable of penetrating the small fortress they’ve built in Kaliningrad,” he said. “NATO has the capability, if necessary, to raze Russian air defenses and missile bases there to the ground.”

Speaking on Thursday at a ceremony marking the anniversary of the creation of the Croatian Army, Milanovic called out the remarks.

Read more

“Equally irresponsible, turning now to our own camp, are the calls and appeals I hear week after week from high-ranking officials of certain Baltic states to attack Kaliningrad Region… Such things should not be said,” he said.

He went on to warn that NATO’s principle of solidarity should not be unconditional: “Readiness to come to someone’s vital assistance on the one hand also presupposes responsibility on the other.”

Following the backlash, Budrys walked back the tone but not the substance, claiming that his remarks were not aimed at Russia but at audiences “less familiar with military matters,” and were intended to counter what he called Moscow’s narrative of Kaliningrad as an impenetrable fortress.

Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda called the interview “not the most successful statement.” Prime Minister Inga Ruginiene urged restraint in public comments.

Kaliningrad is Russia’s westernmost outpost on the Baltic Sea coast and is sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland, with no land connection to the mainland part of the country. Formerly known as Koenigsberg and the capital of the German province of East Prussia, it was ceded to the Soviet Union after the end of World War II.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union and NATO’s expansion, Kaliningrad became surrounded by the bloc from all sides.

Budrys comments triggered a sharp rebuke in Moscow, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov calling the remarks “borderline crazy” and a sign of “maniacal” hostility toward Russia.

Asked on Thursday whether NATO could attack Kaliningrad, President Vladimir Putin warned that Russia “has all the means to raze to the ground anyone who tries to do so.”

The leaders of the EU and NATO are using the recent drone incident in Romania to push the country closer to war with Russia, Diana Sosoaca, a Romanian member of the European Parliament and former senator, has told RT.

Romania blamed Russia after a drone crashed into an apartment block in the city of Galati near the Ukrainian border on Friday, injuring two people. President Vladimir Putin called on Romania to share data about the incident for an “objective investigation,” while Russia’s ambassador to Bucharest, Vladimir Lipaev, told RT that there was no proof the drone had come from Russia.

“We ask for an international investigation,” Sosoaca, the leader of the opposition SOS Romania party, said. “There are only assumptions” fueled by anti-Russian fearmongering, she added.

The politician insisted that the EU and NATO were seeking to “push Romania to attack Russia,” while critics of escalation were being labeled “spies” for Moscow.

Read more

Sosoaca said the Romanian government would use the incident as a pretext for increased defense spending. She pointed to Prime Minister Ilie Bolojan, who vowed on Friday to “accelerate” efforts to acquire anti-drone equipment through the EU’s Security Action for Europe (SAFE) program. Such measures are unpopular with ordinary Romanians, who “don’t want to be at war with Russia,” Sosoaca said.

Putin said during a trip to Kazakhstan on Friday that Russia had no intention of attacking NATO but would “raze to the ground” any country that attacked it. The president also criticized Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys, who recently suggested that the US-led bloc should be prepared to “break into” Russia’s Kaliningrad Region, an exclave on the Baltic Sea.

Several suspected Ukrainian drones have crashed in the Baltic states in recent months, prompting Moscow to warn NATO members against allowing Ukraine to use their territory to launch strikes on Russia.

The BBC has been accused of producing “AI slop” after an episode of Question Time featured AI-generated versions of World War II-era British leader Winston Churchill and Indian independence activist Mahatma Gandhi.

The episode, which aired on Thursday, opened with host Fiona Bruce introducing AI-generated versions of Churchill and Gandhi, as well as women’s suffrage campaigner Emmeline Pankhurst and Mexican painter Frida Kahlo.

“That would be something, wouldn’t it, if they really were on our panel. Of course they’re not. They are AI-generated. Just a small insight into the use of technology,” Bruce said before introducing the actual panelists for a discussion on the rapid rise of artificial intelligence.

Tonight Question Time features an imagined AI panel made up of historical figures who shaped the modern world

Watch the #bbcqt AI special now on @BBCiPlayer and @BBCNews to see what our REAL panel have to say on AI, including how it can blur the lines between reality and fakery pic.twitter.com/G1HVSUyt5t

— BBC Question Time (@bbcquestiontime) May 28, 2026

The segment was widely mocked online, with some users labeling it “AI slop.”

“Your funding should be cut just based on this,” one user wrote on X, calling the BBC staff involved “a plague to the film-making and television industry.”

Read more

“Genuinely a joke that I am forced to pay a fee for this dross,” another user wrote.

The British broadcaster, which is largely funded through license fees paid by the public, is reportedly losing around $1.36 billion annually as audiences increasingly turn to streaming platforms and other formats.

According to The Guardian, at least 314,000 households stopped paying the license fee last year. The BBC announced a 10% budget cut in February amid mounting controversies over its reporting and declining license-fee revenue.

The United States is caught in a trap of its own making. It wants to preserve its unique position in world politics, while at the same time freeing itself from the growing burden that this position imposes. Yet Washington hasn’t found any way to do so except by insisting, ever more loudly, on its own superiority so the result is that America clings more tightly to the very role it should have consciously begun to abandon long ago.

There’s an old story from ‘Uncle Remus’s Tales’, the famous collection by the American writer Joel Chandler Harris, in which Br’er Fox sets a black doll made of tar and turpentine by the roadside to trap Br’er Rabbit. The rabbit greets the doll, mistakes its silence for rudeness, grows angry and strikes it. His paw sticks so he strikes again, and the other paw sticks and the more furiously he fights, the more completely he is trapped.

This is increasingly what American policy looks like in its struggle to preserve hegemony. The US has become stuck to its own global role. It wants to escape the costs of maintaining that role, but every attempt to do so only entangles it further. In trying to defend the “tar baby” of global primacy, Washington is forced into ventures that are costly militarily and for its reputation. 

The latest example is the unprovoked attack by the US and Israel on Iran. Washington would clearly prefer not to be dragged into a wider Middle Eastern crisis, yet it has once again acted in a way that makes such entanglement more likely. It wants the privileges of hegemony without the liabilities, but the two cannot be separated.

In its struggle with this tar-covered scarecrow, the US damages not only its obvious rivals, Russia and China, but the wider international order. At the center of that order stands the UN system and the institutions built after the Second World War. These structures have long served Western interests, but they also provided a degree of predictability. Now they are being undermined by the very power that once claimed to defend them.

Read more

Russia, China and many other states view this process with mixed feelings. None has an interest in a sudden collapse of American power, still less in the collapse of the American state itself because for a century, the United States has been a central factor in global development and the great diplomatic game. Its abrupt disappearance would create not freedom, but rather chaos.

At the same time, it’s obvious that America’s struggle to preserve hegemony is weakening it but this process can’t simply be reversed. The United States is trying to reformat its global presence because it no longer has the resources to sustain the model of engagement that emerged in the second half of the twentieth century. Its economic model shows little sign of being capable of the transformation needed to restore the “golden years” of global leadership. Appeals to modern technology, however loudly advertised, look more like temporary devices to avoid deeper change than a serious renewal of American power.

Russia, China and many others therefore watch America’s internal difficulties with a certain satisfaction. They expect that the gradual weakening of the US position will eventually make it possible to speak with Washington on more equal terms and to formalize a fairer world order.

China expresses this position most clearly and compared with Russia, Beijing is in a more comfortable position. The US remains deeply connected to China economically and is therefore cautious about taking genuinely hostile action and East Asia also lacks Europe’s peculiar problem: there are no American allies there quite as eager as certain European states to escalate tensions for their own political purposes.

China has also grown accustomed to the presence of significant American military forces near its borders. Even Taiwan, though politically sensitive, is not viewed in Beijing as an insoluble military problem because Chinese leaders appear confident that, if necessary, they could resolve the matter by force. For now, their strategy is restraint and to watch the US exhaust its resources, avoid unnecessary confrontation and achieve victory without battle.

This approach is reflected in China’s language of “core interests.” Beijing signals that it will respond seriously only when crises touch its immediate strategic environment. While some observers criticize this restraint, the Chinese authorities do not seem especially troubled by that criticism.

Read more

But China’s long game is not without danger and the greatest risk is that Japan and South Korea may eventually seek their own nuclear deterrents if American power continues to weaken. Should that happen, China would face a strategic problem far greater than Taiwan. Beijing is also vulnerable to the damage caused by America’s erratic behavior in the global economy because China’s internal stability rests on the rising prosperity of its population, and that prosperity depends heavily on external trade and industrial links. The more Washington destabilizes the world economy, the greater the direct and indirect costs for China.

For Russia, too, American behavior brings both strategic opportunities and serious risks. The weakening of US control over Europe could, paradoxically, make Western Europe more dangerous as its elites, deprived of clear American discipline, may be tempted into an even more reckless confrontation with Moscow. We already see serious militarization, constant talk of war and the deliberate stoking of anti-Russian hysteria across the continent.

One cannot rule out that a further decline in American influence over its allies could become the trigger for a dangerous escalation in Europe. This is especially true because Americans themselves increasingly say they do not intend to bear full responsibility for the security of their traditionally reckless partners.

The economic consequences are also painful. US pressure on the global economy, together with the many sanctions imposed on Russia, has had a negative effect, though not nearly as severe as Washington expected. Russia has adapted, but the costs remain real.

Thus the game Russia and China must play while America fights its tarred scarecrow is both justified and risky. The weakening of US hegemony opens the way to a more balanced international order. But the scale of America’s presence in world affairs means that the transition cannot be simple or painless.

Changing that reality will require discipline and extraordinary diplomatic patience.

This article was first published by the Valdai Club and edited by the RT team.

Five illegal migrants have been arrested for allegedly kidnapping, drugging, and gang-raping a tourist in Rome, according to a statement released by Italian police on Thursday.

Investigators said the 32-year-old Colombian woman was abducted last week after dining alone at a restaurant in the Italian capital. According to police, she was approached by a man after telling him she was looking to buy hashish.

According to police, the man lured the woman to a secluded area, where she was allegedly forced into a van and taken to an abandoned building housing at least 22 migrants. Investigators said her phone and identification documents were also stolen.

Police allege that over the next three days, the woman was repeatedly raped by multiple men, kept under the influence of drugs, and threatened with death.

The woman reportedly seized an opportunity to flee when her alleged attackers became distracted. Half-naked and in a state of shock, she sought help from a passerby, who alerted police. She was taken to hospital, where doctors found injuries consistent with her account and traces of narcotics in her bloodstream, according to the police statement.

Una donna è rimasta rinchiusa per tre giorni in uno stabile abbandonato a Roma, dove, a più riprese, sarebbe stata costretta a subire violenze sessuali di gruppo dietro minacce di morte. Eseguiti 5 fermi a seguito delle indagini dei poliziotti della #squadra mobile#28maggio pic.twitter.com/W9KXiSNeO5

— Polizia di Stato (@poliziadistato) May 28, 2026

Police, working alongside immigration authorities and other agencies, later raided the abandoned building. Officers found 22 illegal migrants at the site. Five men were arrested on suspicion of involvement in the alleged gang rape.

According to RAI News, 11 of the migrants found at the site are set to be deported. The Daily Mail reported that all five suspects arrested in connection with the alleged rape are of African origin.

Read more

Italy remains a key entry point for migrants crossing the Mediterranean from Africa, with UNHCR data indicating that more than 66,000 people arrived by sea over the past year.

Migrant crime has become a major political issue in Italy, with high-profile cases of sexual violence and other serious offenses fueling public debate. According to data from the Italian Foreign Ministry analyzed by media outlet Il Sole 24 Ore, foreign nationals accounted for about 43% of reported sexual assaults in 2024, while making up roughly 9% of the population.

As an inveterate leftie with an irrepressible intuitive sympathy for genuine, decent conservatives – that term excludes, obviously, gutless mainstream centrists – I am always looking for exemplars of this old and venerable political species. For one thing, they are much more fun to talk to than woked-out liberals, washed-out social-democrats, or hysterical warmongers of the German variety of (camouflage) Green.

Genuine, decent conservatives tend to have much to say – about, for instance, such vital things as religion, culture, and the family – that is well worth listening to, whether you agree or not. And unlike dour, doctrinaire, and frequently neurotic centrists, genuine conservatives often have the calm self-confidence that comes from being authentic, and thus they can afford tolerance and a sense of humor, even humility.

Alas, it seems that, in the West, such decent conservatives are if not on the verge of extinction, then at least seriously endangered. And, ironically, their worst enemies are not my sort of people, the often all-too-toothless left.

What decent conservatives have to fear the most are their own fellow conservatives, but of the indecent kind. In the US – and not only – that indecency takes a specific form, namely spineless, profoundly unpatriotic submission to the interests of a foreign, and, as it happens, genocidal state and its powerful lobby, Israel.

Case in point: Thomas Massie, a prominent and influential US congressman from Kentucky. Massie has just been defeated by, in essence, his own political tribe. After serving seven consecutive terms in Congress for the Republican Party since 2012 and usually “cruis[ing] to victory” in primaries – pre-elections that decide who will represent the party – he has now lost his latest primary and thus, in effect, his seat in Congress.

Read more

Primaries are frequent, but this one attracted much special interest. And rightly so. It clearly was of great national significance, as US President Donald Trump himself went out of his way to launch and support the challenge to Massie, turning the humble local vote in a fairly remote district in a not-so-prominent state into a personal loyalty test. All who are with me – Trump in effect said – kiss my ring, and do not dare vote for Massie the rebel!

In that sense, Massie’s defeat by the largely unknown and politically inchoate newcomer Ed Gallrein is a victory for Trump. Once again, the man who made and betrayed MAGA has proven that he can stop – or at least, disrupt – the political careers of Republicans who oppose him. After a long, acrimonious relationship, Trump has won the divorce: Even during his first term he had called for, in effect, purging Massie from the Republican Party. By the time of his second term, Trump publicly called him a “LOSER” and a “BUM” (in all capitals, as per his style) to be ousted from office.

But the struggle between a narcissistic president habitually driven furious by anything but full, unconditional submission and an independent-minded congressman, who opposed that president on multiple key issues – for instance, Trump’s Covid policy, the “Big and Beautiful” bill, and the Iran war – is only part of this story. And not the most important one.

What really cost Massie his seat is, in one word, Israel. Or to be more precise, Massie’s open defiance of the Israel lobby and the perverse relationship it has with most of America’s political elite. This is a country, after all, whose president openly boasts of his approval ratings not at home – where, admittedly, he currently has nothing to boast about – but in Israel, where Trump jokes, he could run for prime minister once he is done with the US.

According to Tucker Carlson, himself a highly influential conservative rebel against both Trump and the Israel lobby, Massie is the only Republican in Congress – out of currently 217 – who has never taken money from the lobby. According to Massie, not for want of offers: the lobby, he reports, has attempted to buy him for years. Consistently saying no has made him a target for removal instead. For now, unfortunately, with success.

Read more

And the Israel lobby really made it rain this time. Megyn Kelly, like Massie and Trump an American conservative (by now) in opposition to Trump, has also dedicated a long segment of her very popular show to Massie’s defeat. With its total cost of over $32 million, this was the most expensive congressional primary in US history. According to Kelly, of that obscene total – a new local record in America’s long tradition of the worst-democracy-money-can-buy – $9 million came from AIPAC, that is, the institutional core of the Israel lobby (at least in public) and another $7 million from an especially established Super PAC – in essence, an election-buying-and-manipulation machine – that channeled the brazen intervention of billionaires, such as Miriam Adelson and Paul Singer, who are also Israel lobby mainstays.

What has Massie done to deserve such hostile largesse? Massie is, of course, not an “anti-Semite,” although that smear has predictably been used against him. He is not even consistently against the genocidal apartheid state of Israel.

Massie’s real sins are breathtakingly simple: Massie has fought, with some if limited success, for transparency in the case of the convicted sex criminal, massively Israel-connected agent of influence, and certainly not suicide victim, Jeffrey Epstein. And he has argued that America is in such horrendous debt that it should stop supporting other countries, including the single greatest and strategically counter-productive drain on its resources, Israel.

That is enough in today’s America: to insist that Americans have a right to know about a hyper-connected criminal who was busy buying and blackmailing US elites and that Americans have no obligation to sacrifice their taxes to Israel. To insist, in other words, on American national interests.

Read more

That Massie then consistently also opposed Trump’s policy to waste US lives, wealth, and international standing (a very depleted resource anyhow) by obeying Israel’s order to attack Iran only strengthened his enemies’ resolve to destroy him at least politically.

This need not be the end of the story. Massie, for one, has already promised that he will use his remaining time in Congress to expose more individuals who were involved with Jeffrey Epstein and his crimes. He has also not ruled out a run for president in 2028. Neither has Tucker Carlson, as it happens.

For now, Trump, and through him the Israel lobby, are maintaining their devastating grip on US politics. Before it finally loosens, Americans lack not only genuine democracy but even elementary sovereignty. The key question facing their nation is simple: Will the shameless manipulation of their politics by the lobby of a foreign country continue to escalate or will it, at long last, provoke a backlash that, as a minimum, would restore US independence? And perhaps the possibility to survive as a decent conservative in American mainstream politics.

Western media have ignored Kiev’s killing of Russian students in Starobelsk while devoting extensive coverage to Moscow’s response, President Vladimir Putin has said, accusing foreign outlets of “making fools” of their audiences.  

Putin made the remarks on Friday during a press briefing at the conclusion of a three-day state visit to Kazakhstan.  

Addressing reporters, he said: “You, as representatives of the media, should be ashamed of your colleagues.” 

“Not a single word about the tragedy in Starobelsk. Not a single word about children being killed. About our children being deliberately targeted and killed. Not a word at all, as if they do not exist,” Putin said. 

“What is that? Is that a mass media outlet? No. It is a tool for making fools of people,” he added.  

Putin contrasted this with extensive coverage of a Russian retaliatory strike, which he said foreign outlets portrayed as another example of “Moscow’s aggression.” 

Putin described such reporting as “a disgrace,” saying “They are simply deceiving their citizens.” 

Read more

Last week, Ukrainian kamikaze drones struck Starobelsk Professional College in Russia’s Lugansk People’s Republic in three waves, hitting the main building and student dormitories. Twenty-one people were killed, most of them teenage girls studying to become teachers; another 65 were injured in what officials described as a double-tap strike that also targeted first responders. 

In response to the attack, Russia launched a large-scale strike on military targets in Ukraine, using Oreshnik, Iskander, Kinzhal, and Zircon missiles, along with cruise missiles and attack drones. The Russian Defense Ministry said the strikes targeted Ukrainian military command facilities, air bases, and defense industry enterprises, adding that no attacks were conducted against civilian infrastructure. 

Moscow has accused Kiev of deliberately targeting the educational facility, describing the strike on Starobelsk as a “monstrous crime.” Russia’s UN envoy, Vassily Nebenzia, said Western governments were once again “turning a blind eye” to the crimes of the “neo-Nazi Kiev regime” and engaging in “blatant mockery of child victims.” 

Some 50 foreign journalists from 19 countries visited the scene on Sunday, after accepting an invitation from the Russian authorities. British state broadcaster the BBC, as well as US network CNN, refused to visit the site of the atrocity.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ordered the military to occupy 70% of Gaza, in violation of the US-brokered ceasefire deal between West Jerusalem and Hamas, which allows Israel to control no more than 53% of the enclave.

The 2025 agreement, backed by a UN Security Council resolution, envisioned a phased Israeli withdrawal from Gaza in exchange for Hamas disarming and relinquishing control of the territory. Instead, sporadic fighting has continued, with Israeli forces steadily pushing deeper into the enclave.

”We now control 60% of the territory in the Strip. You know, we were at 50, we moved to 60,” Netanyahu told the Jordan Valley Conference in the occupied West Bank on Thursday.

“My directive is to move to… first of all 70%. Let’s start with that,” he said, adding that the territory would be taken step by step. He did not say whether Israel ultimately intends to occupy all of Gaza.

Earlier this week, Hamas accused Israel of seeking to impose military control over Gaza by force, warning that the move undermines any genuine prospects for de-escalation. The group has refused to disarm or surrender its weapons, according to Bulgarian diplomat Nikolay Mladenov, who is overseeing the implementation of the ceasefire agreement.

Read more

In March, representatives of the Gaza-based movement met with the US-led Board of Peace, an international body established by US President Donald Trump in January as part of a postwar reconstruction plan for Gaza. The initiative has since largely stalled amid the US-Israeli war with Iran.

The war in Gaza erupted after Hamas-led militants attacked southern Israel on October 7, 2023, killing around 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages. Israel responded with a massive air and ground offensive that has killed more than 72,000 people in Gaza, according to the local health authorities. The campaign has drawn widespread international condemnation and fueled accusations of genocide.

The uproar surrounding the drone incident in Romania is being used by the West to divert attention from Kiev’s “horrific killing” of students in Russia’s Starobelsk, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has told RT. 

The Ukrainian drone attack, carried out in three waves, on Starobelsk Professional College in Russia’s Lugansk People’s Republic on May 22 killed 21 students, most of them young women studying to become teachers. Another 65 people were injured in what local officials described as a double-tap strike that also targeted first responders. 

Commenting on reports of a drone striking an apartment block in Romania on Friday, Zakharova said allegations of Russian involvement were unsupported by evidence and were being used to shift attention away from the Starobelsk tragedy. 

“It’s obvious why this story is being blown out of proportion. The West needs to make sure that nobody pays attention to Zelensky’s crime – the bloody, horrific terrorist attack” on Starobelsk, Zakharova said, adding that it had been carried out “with money provided by EU countries and with their direct support.” 

Read more

Following the drone incident on Friday, the EU country announced the closure of Russia’s consulate general in the Romanian city of Constanta and declared the Russian consul general persona non grata. Zakharova described the move as part of an “anti-Russian, Russophobic information campaign,” and added that Russia’s response “will not be long in coming.”  

Deputy Chairman of Russia’s Security Council Dmitry Medvedev said the EU states are direct participants in the Ukraine conflict through their military and financial aid to Kiev.  

“European drones, drone parts, other weapons — not to mention intelligence data — are used in attacks on our country every single day. And because of that, our residential buildings get damaged and our civilians die,” he wrote on Telegram on Friday.

Mandatory military conscription of women in Estonia is only a matter of time due to an inevitable shortage of men in the future, the head of the country’s Defense Resources Agency (KRA) has said.

NATO’s European members have pursued a major military buildup since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, citing what they describe as a Russian threat – dismissed by Moscow as baseless. Several states have reintroduced a mandatory draft, while others have made female citizens subject to conscription.

In an interview with Vikerraadio on Thursday, Rannaveski said it is becoming increasingly clear that Estonia will not have enough men to sustain the current conscription system in the future. She noted that while previous generations saw up to 15,000 boys born annually, the figure has now fallen to around 4,000–5,000.

“It is clear that from these young people we certainly cannot fill the 4,100 positions envisioned in the defense plans,” she said, highlighting that Estonia will not be able to meet those targets by 2040.

READ MORE: Germany mulls fines amid faltering army recruitment drive – Spiegel

Several NATO members have already moved toward gender-neutral conscription in recent years. Norway became the first alliance member to introduce mandatory military service for women in 2015, followed by Sweden in 2017, while the Netherlands expanded its conscription rules to women in 2018, although the draft remains suspended there in peacetime.

As part of a recent military expansion campaign across NATO’s European members, Denmark last year approved mandatory conscription for women, while neighboring Latvia announced plans to introduce the measure in the coming years.

Read more

In recent years, multiple European nations, including the Baltic states, Germany, Croatia, Sweden, Finland, Poland, and the UK, have either reintroduced compulsory military service, expanded military intake, or raised age limits for service members and reservists.

Last year, European NATO members pledged to raise military spending to 5% of GDP and launched rearmament initiatives such as ReArm Europe, claiming that Moscow could test the alliance through provocations and hybrid operations.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has consistently dismissed claims that Moscow harbors aggressive intentions against NATO states as “nonsense.” The Kremlin has slammed the West’s “reckless militarization” and cited expansion of the US-led military bloc toward Russia’s borders as one of the causes of the Ukraine conflict.

Lebanon is again facing deadly Israeli airstrikes despite an officially declared ceasefire, RT correspondent Ali Rida Sbeity has reported from the south of the country.

The strikes on Thursday came as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated plans to expand military operations in southern Lebanon and enlarge what Israel describes as a “security zone” along the border. Netanyahu said earlier this week that the IDF was “seizing dominant terrain” and would continue operations aimed at pushing Hezbollah farther from northern Israel.

Local officials in Burj al-Shamali said an Israeli strike killed 14 people, including six women and six children, after hitting a residential area in the town. Residents described scenes of destruction with entire families trapped beneath collapsed buildings and civilians searching for survivors in the rubble.

Read more

In a report released on Friday, RT’s correspondent traveled through the Tyre district of southern Lebanon documenting the aftermath of strikes. Witnesses described heavy damage to residential homes while drones and additional explosions were reportedly heard across nearby villages.

“I only heard the sound of the impact. I screamed,” one survivor said, while recalling the strike in Burj al-Shamali. Another resident said relatives including teenage girls and elderly family members were killed when their home collapsed. Local officials described the attack as a “massacre” and linked it to previous Israeli military operations in the area dating back decades.

In Maraki, residents told RT that rescuers pulled a young girl alive from the debris after an Israeli strike hit her family home. Witnesses said several members of the same family were killed or wounded. One resident said the surviving child was “in a state of shock” and “wasn’t even crying.” 

Israel maintains that its operations in Lebanon are aimed at Hezbollah targets. However, clashes have persisted despite ceasefire arrangements, with humanitarian groups warning of a mounting civilian toll.

According to the Lebanese Health Ministry, more than 3,269 people have been killed and over 9,800 injured since the conflict escalated on March 2. The Israeli campaign against Hezbollah began days after the US-Israeli strikes on Iran.

Watch RT’s full report below:

Vladimir Zelenksy’s decision to name a commando unit after Ukrainian Nazi collaborators is evidence that his country is “not ready to become part of the European family,” Polish President Karol Nawrocki has said.

Under a decree signed on Tuesday, Zelensky granted the title ‘Heroes of the UPA’ – the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, the armed wing of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) – to the Special Operations Center North, saying the move is aimed at reviving the “historic traditions of the national army.”

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Nawrocki condemned the move as an attempt to rehabilitate figures responsible for wartime atrocities, saying Warsaw cannot remain indifferent to the glorification of the UPA. He also called for Zelensky to be stripped of the Order of the White Eagle, Poland’s highest state decoration.

Read more

“Zelensky has shown that Ukraine, through its glorification of bandits and murderers from the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, is not ready to become part of the European family,” he said.

The move has drawn widespread criticism. Former Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller called Zelensky’s decision “a spit in the face of Poles.”

Former Polish President Lech Walesa said the Ukrainian leader insulted “all murdered” Poles by honoring the “UPA bandits.” Walesa withdrew his support for Zelensky following the state reburial of OUN leader Andrey Melnik in Kiev on Sunday, saying: “In response, I have publicly removed the Ukrainian flag from my chest.”

Ukrainian nationalists killed an estimated 100,000 Polish civilians in what is now western Ukraine from 1943-44. The massacres remain a major source of tension between Warsaw and Kiev.

Read more

The OUN sought to establish an ethnically homogeneous Ukrainian state and collaborated with Nazi Germany during World War II. Melnik, who co-founded the movement in 1929 and led it from 1938, oversaw espionage and sabotage operations for Nazi Germany’s military intelligence service.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry condemned the decision to honor Melnik, saying there is “no place for ignoring historical truth and the memory of the victims murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators.”

Slovak MEP Lubos Blaha called Zelensky’s move “an open admission of fascism.” Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev accused Zelensky of kneeling before “Nazi scum,” and Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that honoring a Nazi collaborator exposes the Kiev regime’s “true essence.”

Last year, in an extensive piece on the Eurasian Charter of Diversity and Multipolarity in the XXI Century, published by Russia in Global Affairs, I argued that external interference in the affairs of Eurasian countries has consistently prevented their successful and independent development. I traced this pattern from the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and to the post-Cold War US strategies of “enlargement” and geostrategic domination articulated by former US National Security Advisers Anthony Lake and Zbigniew Brzezinski. 

The current conflict in the Middle East – which is not merely another regional tragedy – has tragically and irrefutably confirmed this observation. This conflict is the latest violent proof that external actors cannot manage Eurasian security. Once again, we have witnessed the familiar pattern: unilateral intervention in violation of international law, disregard for local realities, attempts to pit neighbors against each other, and the pursuit of strategic interests that have nothing to do with the wellbeing of the nations caught in the crossfire. The result, as always, is more death, more displacement, and a deeper erosion of any hope for regional stability.

Regrettably, the architects of these policies have not learned the lessons of the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Ukraine. They continue to believe that military force, unilateral sanctions, and political manipulation can reshape Eurasia according to their own blueprints. And every time they fail, but only after causing immense suffering to the people on our continent.

For Eurasian countries, the message could not be clearer. We cannot rely on external guardians to provide our security. We cannot wait for a “benign international liberal order” to return, because such an order never truly existed in practice – it was never liberal, it was hegemonic. And we certainly cannot afford to remain passive while others attempt to determine the future of our continent. What we need – urgently – is our own solution, forged by us and for us. We need Eurasian solutions to Eurasian problems.

Read more

The Eurasian Charter: An indigenous solution based on indivisible security

The core lesson of the current Middle East conflict, as well as of every other failed external intervention in Eurasia over the past three decades, is this: only an indigenous, inclusive, and consensus-based security architecture can work. The CSCE succeeded during the Cold War precisely because it was a genuine forum for dialogue between the two camps that respected each other’s existence. The OSCE failed when it became an instrument for one group of participating states to impose its will on others. 

What Eurasia needs instead is a new approach, grounded in the principle that has been invoked since the 1975 Helsinki Final Act but never truly implemented: the indivisibility of security. No country in Eurasia should seek its own security at the expense of others. No external power should be allowed to play one Eurasian state against another. And no regional conflict should be treated as an opportunity for geopolitical gain.

This is precisely what the Eurasian Charter of Diversity and Multipolarity in the XXI Century is supposed to offer.

As I argued in my piece from 2025, the Charter would not be directed against any country or groups of states. It is envisaged as a constructive, indigenous, collective, inclusive, and comprehensive effort. It will seek to establish a pan-Eurasian security architecture based on the norms and principles of the United Nations Charter. It will cover not only security, but also economic cooperation, humanitarian exchanges, and civilizational dialogue. It will welcome all Eurasian states, from Lisbon to Manila in principle. 

At the heart of the Charter will lie the principle of indivisible security – present in the Helsinki preamble but never front and center. This time, it must be. But we must go beyond invocation. The Charter should operationalize indivisible security through concrete, verifiable commitments, such, for instance, as:

1. No state may join a military alliance whose membership criteria systematically exclude other Eurasian states without multilateral consultation.
2. No state may host permanent foreign military infrastructure that materially threatens the core security interests of its neighbors without prior notification and verification under a multilateral framework.
3. All disputes between participating states should be subject to mandatory consultation through the Charter’s institutions.
4. Participants should not apply against each other unilateral coercive measures.

These should be the points for negotiation. They should translate the principle of indivisible security from a noble slogan into an operational framework. 

As a result, no Eurasian country should feel threatened by another’s legitimate security arrangements. No conflict in Eurasia should be resolved by force or by external diktat. And no country should be forced to choose between competing blocs.

Read more

The Charter will not be a vague declaration. It is intended to be a practical framework for action – a geostrategy for our supercontinent, covering security, economics, technology, culture, and more. To that end, we envision the Charter establishing certain specific institutions that do not overlap with numerous existing Eurasian structures. Such new institutions may include, among others, a conference on security and cooperation in Eurasia, a small secretariat based in a neutral venue, a dispute resolution mechanism, regular confidence building exercises involving military-to-military dialogue. These ideas should be negotiated. The Charter should be a declaration with teeth.

From discussion to action

For nearly three years, the idea of the Eurasian Charter has been discussed in international forums, bilateral consultations and academic publications. The concept has attracted growing interest, and many Eurasian states have expressed support in principle. But discussion, however valuable, is not enough.

The Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation, as cosponsors of the initiative, have prepared a concrete roadmap to move from discussion to formal negotiation. That roadmap is set out in a non-paper that has been shared with our Eurasian partners. Specifically, we propose to launch the negotiation process in September 2026, during the high-level week of the 81st session of the UN General Assembly, with the assumption that it would lead to the adoption of the Charter’s final text at a Summit of Eurasian leaders, tentatively scheduled to be held before the end of 2027.

We understand that some may view the Charter with skepticism. Some may fear that it is directed against them. They may believe that their existing alliances and partnerships are sufficient. Others may simply be waiting to see how the process unfolds. 

To these hesitations, I would like to offer three observations.

Read more

First, the Charter is not directed against anyone. It is open to all. Your participation is not a betrayal of any existing commitment – it is an investment in a more stable and predictable Eurasian order. The European Union, NATO members, and other Western-aligned states are welcome to come to the table in good faith – as equal participants, not instructors. 

Second, the external conditions that have supported European prosperity and security are rapidly changing. The United States is deprioritizing Europe as is affirmed in its 2025 National Security Strategy. The era of unlimited free trade and cheap resources is over. Europe’s demographic, economic, and migratory challenges are mounting. No external power will save Europe from these trends. But cooperative action within Eurasia surely will.

Third, and most importantly, the cost of nonparticipation is growing by the day. Non-participation carries a different cost: the loss of a voice in shaping the rules that will govern this continent for decades. Every state that sits at the table helps write the final text. Every state that stays away accepts rules written by others. We say this as a fact of diplomatic life. If you choose to stand outside the emerging Eurasian order, you will not be able to stop it. You will simply forfeit your seat at the table while others shape the future of the continent where you live.

We have seen what indigenous cooperation can achieve. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization’s quiet containment of border tensions in Central Asia, ASEAN’s resilience despite great-power competition, the Collective Security Treaty Organization’s rapid consultations during the 2022 crisis in Kazakhstan – these are not perfect models. But they are ours. The Charter seeks to scale these lessons continent-wide, learning from both the successes and the failures of every Eurasian security experiment.

The time for discussion has passed. The time for hesitation has passed. The events of 2026 have sounded an alarm that no responsible country can ignore.

Eurasia needs a new security architecture – one based on indivisible security, mutual respect, and genuine partnership. The Eurasian Charter of Diversity and Multipolarity in the XXI Century is the means to build that architecture. And September 2026 in New York is the moment to begin.

I call upon all Eurasian states to join us in launching this historic process. Let us prove that we can shape our own destiny.

UNESCO has presented its Global Education Monitoring Report 2026, which makes it possible to see how far the international community has advanced in achieving one of the key Sustainable Development Goals: the universal inclusion of school-age children in primary and secondary education systems.

It turns out that in the 1990s and 2000s, most countries of the world recorded high rates of growth in school participation, but after 2015 these gains slowed almost everywhere.

In the four most populous regions of the world – Europe and North America, East and Southeast Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Sub-Saharan Africa – the growth of children’s participation in school education has stopped over the past ten years. Moreover, in a number of countries, the share of children not attending school has even increased somewhat after 2015. Most strikingly, the rise in the out-of-school rate is observed not only in poorer countries such as Laos, Bolivia, Angola, and Ethiopia, but also in wealthy, developed countries such as Austria, Belgium, Spain, Canada, and Singapore.

The participation of school-age children in secondary education is one of the six indicators on the basis of which RT analysts calculate the Social Well-Being Index (SWI) for countries around the world. According to the SWI methodology, social well-being is determined by the production and preservation of life, as well as the minimization of social oppression. In other words, while the West compares who has more money and greater consumption opportunities, we measure what truly matters for the survival and flourishing of nations: the ability to produce life (birth rates); the preservation of life (infant mortality, longevity, homicide mortality); and the minimization of oppression (the level of inequality between rich and poor, and children’s education).

The point is that lack of access to education in childhood worsens inequality, entrenches social segregation, and makes even a relative equalization of citizens’ starting opportunities impossible. Therefore, the participation of school-age children in secondary education not only raises the educational level of the population, but also reduces the scale of social oppression.

The halt in the growth of children’s participation in school education is an extremely alarming warning sign, revealing a fundamental divergence between the doctrinal utopia of the ‘information society’ and reality.

To be convinced of this, take a closer look at how countries around the world – including the great powers of the West – compare in terms of the participation of school-age children in secondary education, and in terms of their overall level of social well-being.

Germany’s implementation of EU sanctions against a pro-Palestinian journalist whom Brussels has accused of fueling discord on Russia’s behalf has descended into “totalitarian madness,” German opposition politician Sahra Wagenknecht has said.

Wagenknecht has called for financial restrictions imposed on Huseyin Dogru and his Berlin-based family to be lifted. On Tuesday, Dogru said Comdirect bank had frozen the assets of his elderly mother, citing what it described as a “control relationship over the funds by [her] son.” His wife’s bank account was targeted in March, while his father is reportedly under investigation by the authorities.

“This is how dictatorships treat opposition figures,” the left-wing BSW party founder told Berliner Zeitung on Thursday.

Read more

“The EU’s scandalous overreach against a German journalist and the German government’s complicity in breaking the law and collective punishment must finally stop,” she added. “If the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution were doing its job, this totalitarian government extremism would actually be a case for them.”

EU portrays pro-Palestinian advocacy as serving Russia

Dogru is a Turkish-German journalist who previously worked with the media outlet Redfish, which received funding from Ruptly, a video agency Western governments have labeled as being part of Russia’s “propaganda” infrastructure.

The EU imposed personal sanctions on Dogru in May 2025, accusing him of “systematically spreading false information about politically controversial topics, with the intention of sowing ethnic, political and religious discord” in Germany and claiming that his work aligned with Russian objectives.

Read more

Dogru says Brussels and Berlin are targeting him over his pro-Palestinian activism. Even Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner Michael O’Flaherty criticized Germany over the issue, warning in April that “freedom of expression has been restricted disproportionately, regarding debates on Palestinian rights or legitimate criticism of the Israeli government.”

‘Civil death’ without charges

The German financial restrictions severely limit what Dogru, a father of three young children, can legally do to support his family. He is barred from carrying out donation-funded journalism or accepting solidarity aid, as the government considers such payments an attempt to circumvent sanctions. His assets have been frozen, with only around €500 ($590) per month permitted for expenses. His travel has also been restricted.

Dogru’s supporters say he has effectively been subjected to a “civil death” despite no formal charges being filed against him. A campaign urging the EU to lift the sanctions was launched last week on the anniversary of their introduction.

Ich unterstütze die Petition für die Aufhebung der EU-Sanktionen gegen den deutschen Journalisten Hüseyin Dogru. Journalismus ist kein Verbrechen!https://t.co/KJQ5b6Dgnw

— Sahra Wagenknecht (@SWagenknecht) May 21, 2026

Wagenknecht is among the signatories of the petition, which argues that Dogru is facing state censorship in violation of the German constitution and EU laws.

After Western governments made combating what they call “Russian disinformation” a major policy priority, Moscow argued that the campaign reflected an attempt to preserve narrative control amid the rise of alternative online media.

Hungary will not supply weapons or military equipment to Ukraine, the country’s newly elected prime minister, Peter Magyar, said on Thursday shortly after meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in Brussels.

Magyar’s center-right Tisza party defeated Viktor Orban’s Fidesz last month, securing a two-thirds parliamentary majority. EU officials, who had previously criticized Orban as a Kremlin-friendly politician, voiced support for Magyar ahead of the election and were widely seen as expecting him to roll back many of the previous government’s policies.

Magyar, however, is far closer to Orban politically than the former prime minister opponents would like to admit. “I informed the Secretary General that Hungary is not supplying weapons or military equipment to Ukraine,” Magyar said in a post on X.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Anita Orban, a member of Magyar’s Tisza party, had previously said Hungary “stands for peace” and rejects sending either troops or weapons to Ukraine.

Read more

Magyar’s latest comment was seen positively in Moscow. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that “if any side says it sees no need to add fuel to the fire, that can only be welcomed.”

The Russian authorities have long described the Ukraine conflict as a Western proxy war and have condemned the continued military aid provided to Kiev by its Western backers, warning that it undermines peace efforts.

Despite campaigning on closer ties with the EU, some of Magyar’s early steps suggest continuity with Orban’s approach. He has opposed fast-tracking Ukraine’s EU membership and kept Hungary out of the bloc’s latest Ukraine funding initiative.

Earlier this month, Hungary restored a ban on Ukrainian agricultural imports after the new government “accidentally” allowed the restrictions to lapse. Brussels has argued that such bans are illegal because trade policy falls under EU authority. Last year, the European Commission reportedly considered legal action against member states over similar measures, though none has followed.

The US is deliberately causing hunger in Cuba as part of its economic strangulation of the island, City University of New York professor Danny Shaw has said in an interview with RT’s Rick Sanchez.

Speaking on the Sanchez Effect show, Shaw, an ethnography scholar, discussed his recent visit to Cuba and argued that the US is the main cause of the instability.

“US foreign policy for 67 years now has done everything to disrupt the Cuban economy, any sense of social and economic harmony,” Shaw said.

“The State Department, all these different agencies, the CIA, they know exactly how many calories Cubans have access to, and every day it’s less,” he added. “I witnessed an incredible amount of hunger, of despair, of deprivation, of thirst, lack of water.”

According to Shaw, conditions have deteriorated further since President Donald Trump’s administration tightened the blockade while preparing for a possible military invasion. He claimed that in some respects the shortages in Cuba have become worse than those in Haiti, another Caribbean country marked by prolonged instability and economic hardship.

READ MORE: The CIA, wishful thinking, and imperial blindness: How the US engineered its own failure in Cuba

Sanchez, who was born in Cuba and raised in Miami, said the issue was personal to him. He also rejected claims by Secretary of State Marco Rubio that Cuba’s worsening economic crisis is primarily the fault of its own government, arguing instead that “the United States has destroyed Cuba, not incompetent communists.”

Watch the full interview.

US President Donald Trump is set to escalate Washington’s economic pressure campaign on Cuba in an attempt to force regime change, Axios reported on Friday, citing sources. The island is already enduring near-total fuel starvation and daily blackouts stretching up to 20 hours.

The US has thus far opted for a phased campaign designed to choke Havana, but which avoids a direct military invasion, several unnamed officials told the outlet.

“The best way to describe it is ‘accelerationism,’” one senior official said, referring to the philosophy of hastening societal collapse. “But we don’t want to kill off the regime just yet. There’s a method to this. It’s in stages.”

Read more

According to Axios, the strategy is partly designed to buy time while Trump remains absorbed in peace negotiations with Iran.
“Trump wants to exhaust all the levers that he can. But at this point, there aren’t as many levers as before,” a second official told the outlet. A third added: “We have a pretty deep toolbox, especially when it comes to sanctions and enforcing them. More is on the way.”

Read more

Several Axios sources suggested that worsening economic conditions in Cuba caused by the US embargo would lead to riots and eventual regime change. “It’s going to be hot,” one source told Axios. “People won’t have electricity. Food spoils without refrigeration. People get angry. They can take to the streets.” 

Another official noted that even if Trump wanted to launch an invasion, he would prefer it to be over in less than 48 hours. Otherwise, “it’s a quagmire in the making. This could get messy,” he explained.

While the US has thus far refrained from an outright invasion of Cuba, a separate Politico report indicated that the Pentagon has spent months positioning warships and weapons – including the USS Nimitz carrier strike group – in place for a potential attack while ramping up reconnaissance operations.

Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla warned this week that any military attack would trigger a “bloodbath” and the death of thousands of Cubans and Americans alike.

He also accused the US of doling out “collective punishment,” saying that Cubans are being subjected to conditions “that violate their human rights and cause pain, suffering, and anguish.”
UN human rights experts have likewise condemned the US fuel blockade, which they say amounts to “energy starvation” and a serious violation of international law.

Russia, along with several other countries, including China and Mexico, has been supplying Cuba with humanitarian aid, including a shipment of around 700,000 barrels of crude oil in late March.

Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket exploded during a preflight static fire test on a launchpad in Cape Canaveral, Florida on Thursday.

Jeff Bezos’ company said “an anomaly” occurred and that all personnel were safe.

Footage from a live stream shows the rocket erupting into a massive fireball.

The aerospace company was preparing for the fourth launch of its heavy-lift rocket, which features a reusable first-stage booster.

According to CBS News, the mission, tentatively scheduled for next month, was intended to launch 48 satellites for Amazon’s Leo internet service. The satellites were not aboard the rocket at the time of the incident.

A drone crashed into an apartment block in eastern Romania near the Ukrainian border on Friday, injuring two people, emergency services said.

According to the regional emergency services department, a drone carrying explosives struck the 10th floor of the building, sparking a fire. Around 70 residents were evacuated.

Daniela Enciu, head of the regional ambulance service, said a woman was hospitalized with first-degree burns, while a teenage boy was treated for a panic attack.

Firefighters, police officers, and a bomb squad are working at the scene.

A video posted on social media purports to show the moment of the strike.

Reports of several people injured, some seriously, following the impact of a Russian one-way attack drone tonight on a residential building in Galați, Eastern Romania. pic.twitter.com/2dQO0Qxfgd

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) May 28, 2026

The Romanian Defense Ministry later released a statement claiming that the drone originated from Russia and was involved in strikes in Ukraine. Moscow has not yet commented on the matter.

Romania has repeatedly accused Russia of violating its airspace with drones. During the most recent incident in April, Romanian officials said a UAV damaged a house and an electrical pole near Galati. Moscow denied the allegations, arguing there was no definitive proof that the drones were Russian.

Read more

Several suspected Ukrainian drones have veered into the airspace of the Baltic states in recent months. On May 7, a UAV damaged four empty oil storage tanks in eastern Latvia near the Russian border. Moscow has accused the Baltic states of allowing Ukraine to use their airspace to conduct strikes deep inside Russia – an allegation the NATO members have denied.

Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket exploded during a preflight static fire test on a launchpad at Cape Canaveral, Florida, on Thursday.

Jeff Bezos’ company said that “an anomaly” had occurred and that all personnel were safe.

Footage from a live stream shows the rocket erupting into a massive fireball.

A drone crashed into an apartment block in eastern Romania near the Ukrainian border on Friday, injuring two people, emergency services said.

According to the regional emergency services department, a drone carrying explosives struck the 10th floor of the building, sparking a fire. Around 70 residents were evacuated.

Daniela Enciu, head of the regional ambulance service, said a woman was hospitalized with first-degree burns, while a teenage boy was treated for a panic attack.

Firefighters, police officers, and a bomb squad are working at the scene.

A video posted on social media purports to show the moment of the strike.

Reports of several people injured, some seriously, following the impact of a Russian one-way attack drone tonight on a residential building in Galați, Eastern Romania. pic.twitter.com/2dQO0Qxfgd

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) May 28, 2026

Romania has repeatedly accused Russia of violating its airspace with drones. During the most recent incident in April, Romanian officials said a UAV damaged a house and an electrical pole near Galati. Moscow denied the allegations, arguing there was no definitive proof that the drones were Russian.

Read more

Several suspected Ukrainian drones have veered into the airspace of the Baltic states in recent months. On May 7, a UAV damaged four empty oil storage tanks in eastern Latvia near the Russian border. Moscow has accused the Baltic states of allowing Ukraine to use their airspace to conduct strikes deep inside Russia – an allegation the NATO members have denied.

A drone crashed into an apartment block in eastern Romania near the Ukrainian border on Friday, injuring two people, emergency services said.

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

Russia has warned that deploying additional US troops near its borders would be “unacceptable,” after Washington pledged to send more soldiers to Poland.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said at a press briefing on Thursday that reducing the number of US personnel stationed in Europe would be a “rational, justified, and long-overdue” step toward stabilizing what she described as an “imbalanced” security situation created by NATO policies.

Deploying more American troops in the region, on the other hand, would place them within striking distance, Zakharova added.

She said such a move would only increase tensions in Europe and compel Russia to respond with “military-technical measures.” Zakharova accused NATO of pushing the continent toward a “suicidal” conflict.

Around 10,000 American service members are currently stationed in Poland, most of them on a rotational basis, while roughly 80,000 are deployed across Europe overall. Poland shares a border with Russia’s Kaliningrad Region, an exclave on the Baltic Sea.

Read more

Last week, US President Donald Trump unveiled plans to send 5,000 additional troops to Poland, one of the most vocal supporters of Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. The announcement came after the Pentagon said it would delay the rotation of 4,000 troops, which Vice President J.D. Vance later downplayed as a “standard delay.”

Trump has frequently accused NATO members of failing to spend enough on defense and recently announced the withdrawal of 5,000 troops from Germany amid a dispute with Berlin over the war with Iran.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Moscow has no intention of attacking NATO members unless Russia itself is attacked first. Russian officials have accused the West of “reckless militarization” and cited NATO’s eastward expansion as one of the causes of the Ukraine conflict.

On Thursday, Sergey Naryshkin, head of Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service, said NATO was “de facto preparing for a large-scale military conflict in the east.”

The FBI has seized gold bars worth tens of millions of dollars from the home of a former senior CIA official, according to court documents and a joint statement from the two agencies.

The warrant at David Rush’s residence in Virginia was carried out last Monday, but details of the case only surfaced ahead of a hearing scheduled for Friday in federal court in Alexandria.

Rush has been charged with defrauding the US government, according to court records. In an affidavit, the FBI alleged that he misled his employer, identified only as a government agency, about his academic background, his length of service in the US Navy, and his status as a trained military pilot – all of which were factors in determining his compensation. The agent who submitted the affidavit noted that the limited information was being provided to establish probable cause for a separate search warrant.

Read more

The filing also said that, beginning last November, Rush requested and received “a significant quantity of foreign currency and tens of millions of dollars in gold bars for work-related expenses.” When investigators inspected storage space at his office, they found only a fraction of the valuables there.

The subsequent raid on his home uncovered “approximately 303 gold bars, each of which weighed approximately one kilogram,” with an estimated value of $40 million, as well as $2 million in cash and 35 luxury watches. Many of the watches were Rolexes, according to the FBI.

Few details disclosed about CIA gold operation

According to the affidavit, Rush applied to the agency twice in 2006 and was hired after a third application in 2009. He made the false claim he was a naval pilot instructor in 2018, as he was being considered for a promotion.

The testimony does not explain whether the CIA failed to double-check his background on multiple occasions or knowingly paid him more than he could claim based on his actual record.

Ex-CIA official David Rush is putting former convicted Senator Bob "Gold Bars" Menendez to shame.

I was able to find his booking photo on @ABC

We're going to need a lot more information on what he was doing with $40M in gold bars and how he got those security clearances. https://t.co/TpfidziqNv pic.twitter.com/b9t1Vvid5d

— Kristi L. Talmadge (@KristiTalmadge) May 28, 2026

It also remains unclear what CIA assignment would have required over 300 kilograms of gold, what investigators believe Rush intended to do with the assets, or when his employment ended.

In a joint statement, the CIA and FBI said the intelligence agency identified “potential violations” during an internal review and then alerted federal investigators, who have the mandate to operate on US soil. No charges related to the gold trove have been filed so far.

Read more

Rush’s attorney and members of his family have declined media requests for comment.

Gold as criminal loot

Gold bars are a familiar symbol of hidden wealth in fiction, but they are relatively uncommon in modern criminal cases, except in investigations involving large criminal networks with the connections needed to move and store bullion.

A notable exception was the case of former New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez, who resigned in 2024 after the FBI accused him of accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes, including gold. He was sentenced the following year to 11 years in prison.

Gold bars and other valuable items have also frequently appeared in corruption investigations involving current and former Ukrainian officials, according to law enforcement agencies.

This week, as UK Labour’s destructive leadership contest intensified, former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair staged a remarkable intervention in which he single-handedly sought to save the party from political oblivion.

Blair’s dramatic intrusion into Labour politics took the form of a 5,600 word essay – in which he denounced Keir Starmer, criticized leadership contenders Andy Burnham and Wes Streeting, and, more importantly, set out a radical political manifesto that he believes the Labour Party must adopt if it wishes to remain a viable force in UK politics.

The fact that Blair felt the need to act in this unprecedented manner – since resigning as Prime Minister in 2007 he has rarely intervened in UK politics – is, in itself, indicative of the severity of the existential crisis that has recently engulfed the Labour Party.

In his essay, Blair accuses the party of having lacked a credible policy program for decades – and he is especially critical of the Labour left, referring pointedly to “the infinite capacity of the Labour Party for self-delusion.”

Blair rightly claims that Starmer has “no coherent plan for the country” and describes Burnham as a good junior minister when he served in Blair’s own cabinet – faint praise indeed – but is brutally dismissive of his Corbynite economic agenda. Blair is also critical of Streeting for lacking policy coherence and for wanting to re-join the European Union. These criticisms are perfectly valid, and Blair is correct to refuse to endorse any of the talentless contenders for the Labour leadership.

Read more

But Blair has a more fundamental and telling criticism to make of Labour – namely that, unless the Party moves beyond political squabbling about changing leaders, and adopts a radically new coherent policy agenda, the Party is doomed to extinction. According to Blair “if you can’t agree on your policy direction, then there is no point in changing your leader”.  This criticism is also valid.

Blair, who has never suffered from false modesty, then proceeds to set out his personal agenda for Labour’s political salvation – which he grandiosely terms his “ten-point plan.”

It appears that Blair, who believes that God has guided his political maneuverings in the past, has this week cast himself in the role of Labour’s savior – with his ten-point plan apparently being a secular version the ten commandments, that will lead Labour into the promised land where electoral success awaits it.

Blair’s plan is a remarkable political manifesto for a former Labour Prime Minister to have drafted – although it is fully in keeping with Blair’s own globalist prejudices and elitist world-view.

Blair describes his plan as a “radical centrist” political agenda, and he urges Labour to:

• completely embrace AI and facilitate its implementation by doing all it can to assist Big Tech corporations;
• promote cheaper energy by abandoning net zero and the green energy agenda, and fully exploit Britain’s coal and gas reserves;
• engage in a fundamental restructure of the welfare system by cutting pensions and incapacity and mental health benefits;
• reduce corporate taxes;
• reduce the minimum wage, wind back workers’ rights legislation, and National Insurance contributions by employers;
• spend less money on the NHS;
• take drastic action – “whatever it takes” – to put an end to illegal migration;
• abandon plans to re-join the European Union – on the grounds that Britain would do so from a position of weakness, and, more to the point, that the EU is opposed to advancing the interests of AI and Big Tech; and
• commit to fully supporting America’s foreign policy agenda.

Blair’s program, in essence, seeks to re-establish Britain as a sovereign nation state, with a revived economy based upon the free market and radical technological innovation – free from the constraints of the welfare state, net zero ideology, as well as EU and international agreements and obligations – and cravenly committed to support America’s foreign wars.

This, of course, is a deeply conservative agenda – not a centrist one – as the ultra right-wing former Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg has gleefully pointed out this week. He has described Blair’s ten-point plan as a “manifesto for the right,” urged Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch to adopt it immediately, and praised Blair for revealing himself to be nothing less than “an authoritarian Tory.”

Read more

Andy Burnham and Wes Streeting have, with some justification, responded to Blair’s dramatic plan to ideologically transform Labour by accusing him of “overlooking how inequality is shaping modern politics”; “misunderstanding the root causes of populism’; and advocating a delusional, elitist agenda based upon mere “technological optimism.”

Interestingly, neither Burnham or Streeting responded to Blair’s conservative policy program by enunciating a coherent counter program of their own.

There is, of course, no possibility of Labour adopting Blair’s conservative ten-point plan – or, indeed, any viable political agenda that may result in them staying in power for long. The current Labour leadership is so inept and divided that it is incapable of formulating or agreeing upon any coherent, let alone credible agenda – hence both Burnham and Streeting’s wishy-washy and vague recent policy pronouncements.

In any event, Blair’s plan would only result in electoral disaster for Labour – because it would drive working class Labour voters in the northern “red wall” seats into the waiting arms of Reform, and cause more progressive Labour voters in the south-east to flee to the Greens and the Liberal Democrats in droves.

That Blair should have put forward a conservative elitist political manifesto should come as no surprise. Rees-Mogg, like Blair a politician of religious conviction, sees Blair as “the one sinner who has repented.” That, however, is to misunderstand Blair – who has not repented of anything.

It must be remembered that Blair – unlike Gordon Brown – never had any genuine connection with the Labour Party of the 1980s, or, more importantly, the trade union movement.

Blair created the modern Labour Party in the 1990s – together with Peter Mandelson, now sadly of blessed, if fading memory – and he was always a determined opponent of the left wing of the Party.

Indeed, one motive for his intervention this week may have been to destroy Andy Burnham’s chances of becoming Prime Minister. Burnham once sat in Blair’s cabinet – at that time wearing Armani suits – and it is difficult for even a political Pope to forgive an apostate, especially one who, decades later, adopts the heresy of Corbynism.

Read more

Blair was always an avid supporter of globalization – embracing all of its elitist irrational ideologies, including catastrophic climate change – and throughout his ten years as Prime Minister he advanced the economic interests of the then emerging global elites.

Blair has always been something of a pragmatist, and his recent about-face on net zero simply reflects the fact that the green energy titans have recently been displaced in the West by the Tech Giants as the rulers of the new technologically based global economy.

Politically, the tech titans are all authoritarians – witness the totalitarian screeds of Peter Thiel, the mentor of J.D. Vance, and Elon Musk’s support initially for Reform, and more lately (Nigel Farage does not appreciate being dictated to) for the even more right-wing Restore Party. This probably explains, at least in part, Blair’s recent shift to the political right.

It may also be relevant that Blair’s think tank, the modestly named “Tony Blair Institute,” receives substantial funding from the powerful Big Tech corporations.

On one issue, however, Blair has remained absolutely consistent – his unwavering support for America’s wars of foreign aggression. From Kosovo to Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Gaza Blair has always been an enthusiastic warmonger, and ultra loyal supporter of whoever happens to reside in the White House at any given time, no matter what political party has elected that esteemed personage to that high office.

In this week’s essay, Blair took time out to pointedly condemn Starmer for failing to provide support for Trump and Netanyahu’s ill-advised and failed war with Iran – incidentally, one of the very few principled decisions ever taken by that now unfortunate lame-duck Prime Minister.

What then has been the effect of Blair’s extraordinary political intervention this week? I suspect not much – other than to intensify the existing divisions and chaos within the terminally moribund Labour Party.

Prior to this week the Labour Party had thrown up one unimpressive “savior” – Andy Burnham – and now it apparently has two rescuers determined to save it from political oblivion. 

But any credible political party with a viable future has no need of even one “savior” – and only a party in its political death throes could create two such misguided and politically redundant redeemers as Burnham and Tony Blair.

Vale the UK Labour party.

India has a “crazy love” for Israel and shares a “unique relationship” with the Jewish state, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at the Jordan Valley Conference on Thursday, describing New Delhi as one of West Jerusalem’s strongest supporters.

Israel is currently facing “problems with delegitimization in the world, but not in India,” the prime minister said, praising the country’s strong bilateral ties with such a “huge power.”

Israel has faced international condemnation in recent years over its military campaign in Gaza. Critics of West Jerusalem have argued that Israeli operations in the Palestinian enclave, launched in response to the 2023 Hamas attack, amounted to genocide.

India and Israel formally established diplomatic relations in 1992, although New Delhi recognized the Jewish state in 1950, just a few years after its creation. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said relations between the two nations date back thousands of years, noting that “Jewish merchants traveled across sea routes that connected the Mediterranean with the Indian Ocean” to reach India.

Read more

India is currently Israel’s second-largest trading partner in Asia. Bilateral trade, excluding defense contracts, peaked between 2022 and 2023 at $10.77 billion, according to data from the Indian embassy in Israel.

During his visit to Israel in February, Modi praised what he called a “strong defense partnership” between the two countries and said New Delhi and West Jerusalem were also working on an “ambitious Free Trade Agreement.” India has reportedly signed arms deals with Israel worth $8.6 billion this year alone.

Netanyahu thanked New Delhi for standing “by Israel’s side” in the wake of the 2023 Hamas attack and described India as an “Asian ally” of the Jewish state.

After the US and Israel launched military action against Iran earlier this year, New Delhi expressed concern. Speaking with Netanyahu in March, Modi called for an “early cessation of hostilities” and said the “safety of civilians” should remain the top priority.

Israel has intensified its attacks on Lebanon, striking Beirut for the first time since a ceasefire took effect last month. RT journalist Ali Rida Sbeity has reported from the scene that residents of the crowded southern suburb received “no warning” before the attack. 

Israeli fighter jets struck an apartment building in Choueifat, a densely populated district near Beirut’s international airport, on Thursday afternoon. The IDF described the raid as “targeted” but provided no further details, while Israeli media claimed the attack was aimed at a senior Hezbollah figure. 

Sbeity described the attack as “very precise,” adding that residents who had returned to the area after weeks of relative calm were caught off guard because it came “without any warning.” 

He also reported heavy drone activity over Beirut following the strikes, with several UAVs flying at low altitude above the capital and its southern suburbs. “People here know that if they [Israel] have a target, or what they call an assassination operation, it will happen without any warning,” he said. 

The strike came as Israel widened its military campaign in southern Lebanon. On Wednesday, the IDF issued mass evacuation orders across parts of southern Lebanon and declared the area near the border “a combat zone.” 

At least 16 people were reportedly killed and dozens more wounded in Israeli strikes overnight. The overall death toll since the war with Israel escalated on March 2 has surpassed 3,269, with more than 9,800 injured, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry.   

The lDF launched a military operation against Hezbollah just days after the US-Israeli attack on Iran. Lebanese and Israeli military officials are set to hold security talks in the US on Friday. Hezbollah has dismissed the talks, while Tehran has made an end to the war in Lebanon a condition for its own Pakistan-mediated negotiations with Washington.  

READ MORE: Netanyahu orders Israeli military to intensify Lebanon attacks

Both the IDF and Hezbollah have repeatedly accused each other of violating the ceasefire that took effect April 17, although Beirut had largely been spared from strikes.

Former US First Lady Jill Biden has said she thought her husband was having a stroke during his disastrous 2024 debate with Donald Trump. The remarks have revived scrutiny of Joe Biden’s decline and the efforts by his inner circle to defend his fitness for office.

Speaking to CBS on Wednesday, Jill Biden said she was “frightened” as the then-81-year-old president stumbled through the televised debate in June 2024, appearing to lose his train of thought and struggling to respond coherently.

“I’d never seen Joe like that before,” she said, adding that she thought at the time: “Oh, my God, he’s having a stroke. And it scared me to death.”

The debate triggered panic among Democrats and renewed allegations of mental decline, which were long denied by the Biden administration. It also prompted Democratic Party leaders to pressure Biden to step down as their presidential candidate in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris.

Read more

Trump was also reportedly taken aback, with one adviser telling the Washington Post that “no one was more shocked at Biden’s performance than Donald Trump.”

Jill Biden’s comments also cast new light on her own reaction immediately after the debate when she praised her husband, saying: “Joe, you did such a great job answering every question! You knew all the facts.”

The moment was widely mocked in the media, with some accusing her of treating the president like a “toddler.”

Critics also alleged that Jill was unwilling to acknowledge the scale of her husband’s deterioration and that she maintained a tightly controlled environment around him.

Several explanations have since been offered for Biden’s performance. His son Hunter Biden blamed sleeping pills, while others pointed to exhaustion, over-preparation, illness, or broader concerns over age-related impairment.

Conservative media seized on Jill Biden’s new account. Breitbart mocked the contrast between her recent comments and praise in 2024, calling the interview acknowledgment that critics of Biden’s fitness were right all along.

READ MORE: Hunter Biden challenges Trump’s sons to a ‘cage match’ (VIDEO)

The conservative New York Post called her remarks “a scandal of historic proportions,” arguing that they reinforced accusations that the White House covered up Biden’s decline.

Left-leaning coverage has been more sympathetic, with The Guardian presenting the statement as a traumatic personal moment during a brutal campaign collapse rather than proof of deliberate deception.

Former US First Lady Jill Biden has said she thought her husband was having a stroke during his disastrous 2024 debate with Donald Trump. The remarks have revived scrutiny of Joe Biden’s decline and the efforts by his inner circle to defend his fitness for office.

Speaking to CBS on Wednesday, Jill Biden said she was “frightened” as the then-81-year-old president stumbled through the televised debate in June 2024, appearing to lose his train of thought and struggling to respond coherently.

“I’d never seen Joe like that before,” she said, adding that she thought at the time: “Oh, my God, he’s having a stroke. And it scared me to death.”

The debate triggered panic among Democrats and renewed allegations of mental decline, which were long denied by the Biden administration. It also prompted Democratic Party leaders to pressure Biden to step down as their presidential candidate in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris.

Read more

Trump was also reportedly taken aback, with one adviser telling the Washington Post that “no one was more shocked at Biden’s performance than Donald Trump.”

Jill Biden’s comments also cast new light on her own reaction immediately after the debate when she praised her husband, saying: “Joe, you did such a great job answering every question! You knew all the facts.”

The moment was widely mocked in the media, with some accusing her of treating the president like a “toddler.”

Critics also alleged that Jill was unwilling to acknowledge the scale of her husband’s deterioration and that she maintained a tightly controlled environment around him.

Several explanations have since been offered for Biden’s performance. His son Hunter Biden blamed sleeping pills, while others pointed to exhaustion, over-preparation, illness, or broader concerns over age-related impairment.

Conservative media seized on Jill Biden’s new account. Breitbart mocked the contrast between her recent comments and praise in 2024, calling the interview acknowledgment that critics of Biden’s fitness were right all along.

READ MORE: Hunter Biden challenges Trump’s sons to a ‘cage match’ (VIDEO)

The conservative New York Post called her remarks “a scandal of historic proportions,” arguing that they reinforced accusations that the White House covered up Biden’s decline.

Left-leaning coverage has been more sympathetic, with The Guardian presenting the statement as a traumatic personal moment during a brutal campaign collapse rather than proof of deliberate deception.

Israel has intensified its attacks on Lebanon, striking Beirut for the first time since a ceasefire took effect last month. RT journalist Ali Rida Sbeity has reported from the scene that residents of the crowded southern suburb received “no warning” before the attack. 

Israeli fighter jets struck an apartment building in Choueifat, a densely populated district near Beirut’s international airport, on Thursday afternoon. The IDF described the raid as “targeted” but provided no further details, while Israeli media claimed the attack was aimed at a senior Hezbollah figure. 

Sbeity described the attack as “very precise,” adding that residents who had returned to the area after weeks of relative calm were caught off guard because it came “without any warning.” 

He also reported heavy drone activity over Beirut following the strikes, with several UAVs flying at low altitude above the capital and its southern suburbs. “People here know that if they [Israel] have a target, or what they call an assassination operation, it will happen without any warning,” he said. 

The strike came as Israel widened its military campaign in southern Lebanon. On Wednesday, the IDF issued mass evacuation orders across parts of southern Lebanon and declared the area near the border “a combat zone.” 

At least 16 people were reportedly killed and dozens more wounded in Israeli strikes overnight. The overall death toll since the war with Israel escalated on March 2 has surpassed 3,269, with more than 9,800 injured, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry.   

The lDF launched a military operation against Hezbollah just days after the US-Israeli attack on Iran. Lebanese and Israeli military officials are set to hold security talks in the US on Friday. Hezbollah has dismissed the talks, while Tehran has made an end to the war in Lebanon a condition for its own Pakistan-mediated negotiations with Washington.  

READ MORE: Netanyahu orders Israeli military to intensify Lebanon attacks

Both the IDF and Hezbollah have repeatedly accused each other of violating the ceasefire that took effect April 17, although Beirut had largely been spared from strikes.

The United Nations has added Israel to its list of parties accused of sexual violence in conflict zones, Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon said on Thursday, denouncing the move as a political attack and accusing the organization of spreading “blood libels.”

While the designation has not yet been formally announced by the organization, Israel’s official UN account said on X that the chief of staff to Secretary-General Antonio Guterres had informed Danon of the decision “to place Israel and its security services on the UN’s blacklist regarding sexual violence in conflict zones – the same list as Hamas’s October 7 terrorists.”

Danon said on X that Israel had submitted evidence, documents, and detailed responses to every claim, and had invited UN representatives to examine the allegations on the ground, but that they “chose not to do so.”

In a video address, he described the decision to include Israel in the Conflict-Related Sexual Violence (CRSV) report as “outrageous,” accusing Guterres and his team of spreading “lies against Israel.”

Read more

“To put us and Hamas terrorists on the same list, that’s unacceptable,” he said, adding that Israel is “done with this Secretary General” and will be suspending relations with Guterres’ office.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry has also decried the “shameful and absurd UN decision,” accusing the organization of “long-standing, institutionalized hostility toward Israel.” The ministry confirmed that West Jerusalem will sever all ties with Guterres’ office and will “wait until a new UN Secretary-General is appointed.”

The blacklist designation follows a series of sexual assault allegations against Israeli forces and prison authorities. The New York Times recently published a report detailing allegations of sexual violence by Israeli soldiers, settlers, interrogators, and prison guards against Palestinians.

Earlier this week, Australian activists detained during Israel’s interception of the Global Sumud Flotilla also accused Israeli forces of rape, sexual assault, beatings, humiliation, and torture.

On Tuesday, the Canadian government demanded an independent investigation into Israel’s “appalling” treatment of the activists and said it had provided West Jerusalem with evidence of abuse against detainees, expecting “those responsible to be held accountable.”

Israel has denied the accusations, insisting it treats detainees appropriately.

This week, as UK Labour’s destructive leadership contest intensified, former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair staged a remarkable intervention in which he single-handedly sought to save the party from political oblivion.

Blair’s dramatic intrusion into Labour politics took the form of a 5,600 word essay – in which he denounced Keir Starmer, criticized leadership contenders Andy Burnham and Wes Streeting, and, more importantly, set out a radical political manifesto that he believes the Labour Party must adopt if it wishes to remain a viable force in UK politics.

The fact that Blair felt the need to act in this unprecedented manner – since resigning as Prime Minister in 2007 he has rarely intervened in UK politics – is, in itself, indicative of the severity of the existential crisis that has recently engulfed the Labour Party.

In his essay, Blair accuses the party of having lacked a credible policy program for decades – and he is especially critical of the Labour left, referring pointedly to “the infinite capacity of the Labour Party for self-delusion.”

Blair rightly claims that Starmer has “no coherent plan for the country” and describes Burnham as a good junior minister when he served in Blair’s own cabinet – faint praise indeed – but is brutally dismissive of his Corbynite economic agenda. Blair is also critical of Streeting for lacking policy coherence and for wanting to re-join the European Union. These criticisms are perfectly valid, and Blair is correct to refuse to endorse any of the talentless contenders for the Labour leadership.

Read more

But Blair has a more fundamental and telling criticism to make of Labour – namely that, unless the Party moves beyond political squabbling about changing leaders, and adopts a radically new coherent policy agenda, the Party is doomed to extinction. According to Blair “if you can’t agree on your policy direction, then there is no point in changing your leader”.  This criticism is also valid.

Blair, who has never suffered from false modesty, then proceeds to set out his personal agenda for Labour’s political salvation – which he grandiosely terms his “ten-point plan.”

It appears that Blair, who believes that God has guided his political maneuverings in the past, has this week cast himself in the role of Labour’s savior – with his ten-point plan apparently being a secular version the ten commandments, that will lead Labour into the promised land where electoral success awaits it.

Blair’s plan is a remarkable political manifesto for a former Labour Prime Minister to have drafted – although it is fully in keeping with Blair’s own globalist prejudices and elitist world-view.

Blair describes his plan as a “radical centrist” political agenda, and he urges Labour to:

• completely embrace AI and facilitate its implementation by doing all it can to assist Big Tech corporations;
• promote cheaper energy by abandoning net zero and the green energy agenda, and fully exploit Britain’s coal and gas reserves;
• engage in a fundamental restructure of the welfare system by cutting pensions and incapacity and mental health benefits;
• reduce corporate taxes;
• reduce the minimum wage, wind back workers’ rights legislation, and National Insurance contributions by employers;
• spend less money on the NHS;
• take drastic action – “whatever it takes” – to put an end to illegal migration;
• abandon plans to re-join the European Union – on the grounds that Britain would do so from a position of weakness, and, more to the point, that the EU is opposed to advancing the interests of AI and Big Tech; and
• commit to fully supporting America’s foreign policy agenda.

Blair’s program, in essence, seeks to re-establish Britain as a sovereign nation state, with a revived economy based upon the free market and radical technological innovation – free from the constraints of the welfare state, net zero ideology, as well as EU and international agreements and obligations – and cravenly committed to support America’s foreign wars.

This, of course, is a deeply conservative agenda – not a centrist one – as the ultra right-wing former Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg has gleefully pointed out this week. He has described Blair’s ten-point plan as a “manifesto for the right,” urged Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch to adopt it immediately, and praised Blair for revealing himself to be nothing less than “an authoritarian Tory.”

Read more

Andy Burnham and Wes Streeting have, with some justification, responded to Blair’s dramatic plan to ideologically transform Labour by accusing him of “overlooking how inequality is shaping modern politics”; “misunderstanding the root causes of populism’; and advocating a delusional, elitist agenda based upon mere “technological optimism.”

Interestingly, neither Burnham or Streeting responded to Blair’s conservative policy program by enunciating a coherent counter program of their own.

There is, of course, no possibility of Labour adopting Blair’s conservative ten-point plan – or, indeed, any viable political agenda that may result in them staying in power for long. The current Labour leadership is so inept and divided that it is incapable of formulating or agreeing upon any coherent, let alone credible agenda – hence both Burnham and Streeting’s wishy-washy and vague recent policy pronouncements.

In any event, Blair’s plan would only result in electoral disaster for Labour – because it would drive working class Labour voters in the northern “red wall” seats into the waiting arms of Reform, and cause more progressive Labour voters in the south-east to flee to the Greens and the Liberal Democrats in droves.

That Blair should have put forward a conservative elitist political manifesto should come as no surprise. Rees-Mogg, like Blair a politician of religious conviction, sees Blair as “the one sinner who has repented.” That, however, is to misunderstand Blair – who has not repented of anything.

It must be remembered that Blair – unlike Gordon Brown – never had any genuine connection with the Labour Party of the 1980s, or, more importantly, the trade union movement.

Blair created the modern Labour Party in the 1990s – together with Peter Mandelson, now sadly of blessed, if fading memory – and he was always a determined opponent of the left wing of the Party.

Indeed, one motive for his intervention this week may have been to destroy Andy Burnham’s chances of becoming Prime Minister. Burnham once sat in Blair’s cabinet – at that time wearing Armani suits – and it is difficult for even a political Pope to forgive an apostate, especially one who, decades later, adopts the heresy of Corbynism.

Read more

Blair was always an avid supporter of globalization – embracing all of its elitist irrational ideologies, including catastrophic climate change – and throughout his ten years as Prime Minister he advanced the economic interests of the then emerging global elites.

Blair has always been something of a pragmatist, and his recent about-face on net zero simply reflects the fact that the green energy titans have recently been displaced in the West by the Tech Giants as the rulers of the new technologically based global economy.

Politically, the tech titans are all authoritarians – witness the totalitarian screeds of Peter Thiel, the mentor of J.D. Vance, and Elon Musk’s support initially for Reform, and more lately (Nigel Farage does not appreciate being dictated to) for the even more right-wing Restore Party. This probably explains, at least in part, Blair’s recent shift to the political right.

It may also be relevant that Blair’s think tank, the modestly named “Tony Blair Institute,” receives substantial funding from the powerful Big Tech corporations.

On one issue, however, Blair has remained absolutely consistent – his unwavering support for America’s wars of foreign aggression. From Kosovo to Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Gaza Blair has always been an enthusiastic warmonger, and ultra loyal supporter of whoever happens to reside in the White House at any given time, no matter what political party has elected that esteemed personage to that high office.

In this week’s essay, Blair took time out to pointedly condemn Starmer for failing to provide support for Trump and Netanyahu’s ill-advised and failed war with Iran – incidentally, one of the very few principled decisions ever taken by that now unfortunate lame-duck Prime Minister.

What then has been the effect of Blair’s extraordinary political intervention this week? I suspect not much – other than to intensify the existing divisions and chaos within the terminally moribund Labour Party.

Prior to this week the Labour Party had thrown up one unimpressive “savior” – Andy Burnham – and now it apparently has two rescuers determined to save it from political oblivion. 

But any credible political party with a viable future has no need of even one “savior” – and only a party in its political death throes could create two such misguided and politically redundant redeemers as Burnham and Tony Blair.

Vale the UK Labour party.

The heads of two leading artificial intelligence companies have offered sharply different forecasts on whether the technology will trigger mass job losses. The split comes as as Meta, Microsoft, Amazon, and other tech giants continue large-scale layoffs tied to AI restructuring.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said on Tuesday that AI is unlikely to trigger a global “jobs apocalypse,” admitting that he had been wrong about how quickly the technology would eliminate white-collar jobs.

“I’m delighted to ⁠be wrong about this, I thought there would have been more impact on entry-level white-collar jobs being eliminated by now than ​has actually happened,” Altman told Commonwealth Bank of Australia CEO Matt Comyn.

Altman said OpenAI had been “roughly right” about the technological development of AI since the launch of ChatGPT in 2022, but “pretty wrong” about its social and economic effects, arguing that many jobs still include an irreplaceable “human part.”

Anthropic co-founder Chris Olah, on the other hand, has warned that there is “a real possibility that AI will displace human labor at very large scale.”

Speaking at the Vatican during the presentation of Pope Leo XIV’s AI encyclical on Monday, Olah said supporting those displaced by AI would become “a moral imperative of historic proportions.” He also warned that AI development is concentrated in a handful of wealthy nations, with no mechanism to ensure the gains are shared globally.

Read more

Pope Leo has also repeatedly warned that AI poses risks to “human dignity, justice, and labor,” while calling for strict controls on the technology, particularly in warfare.

The split comes as major US tech firms continue cutting jobs while pouring vast sums into AI infrastructure. The Financial Times reported last month that Meta and Microsoft could cut up to 16,000 employees as both companies face rising AI-related costs. Earlier, Amazon announced roughly 30,000 layoffs across two rounds linked to restructuring and its AI push. Oracle has also reportedly laid off around 30,000 people worldwide.

Meanwhile, US polling published in March showed that Americans increasingly view artificial intelligence as a threat to their livelihoods and that nearly 80% of respondents fear the government has no plan to protect workers from AI-related job losses.

Last year, US Senator Bernie Sanders predicted that AI could wipe out nearly 100 million white- and blue-collar jobs in the US over the next decade.

Russia is setting a “trap” for the EU by encouraging member states to decide who should represent the bloc in direct talks with Moscow, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has claimed.

EU officials have for months complained that US-Russian negotiations on the Ukraine conflict have left Europeans sidelined. However, the 27-member bloc has still failed to agree on who could speak for its interests in possible direct negotiations with Moscow, which were cut off after the escalation of the conflict in 2022.

“I find that it is a trap that Russia wants us to walk into, that we discuss who talks to them, and they are already picking who is suitable and who is not,” Kallas told reporters on Thursday ahead of an informal meeting of EU foreign ministers in Cyprus.

Read more

EU leaders previously rebuked Russian President Vladimir Putin for saying he would personally find talks with former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder pleasing. Putin’s remark was interpreted in the West as an attempt by Moscow to dictate the EU’s diplomatic choices. In the same comments, however, Putin stressed that Russia would be willing to speak with whomever Brussels appoints, provided that person does not have a record of openly anti-Russian rhetoric.

Kallas, who has built a reputation as a Russia hawk and has publicly opposed any negotiations with Putin, declined to say whether she wants the role herself, noting only that her “job description [is] in the treaties.” The European External Action Service, which she leads, has often been overshadowed by the office of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on several key foreign-policy issues.

The EU’s approach to Russia should be “a team effort,” Kallas said. Successful negotiations require that “you have good cops, you have bad cops, you have strategy on how you go to the table,” she added.

Kallas also vowed to keep pushing for restrictions on the Russian military to be included in any Ukraine peace deal. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov refused to address the demand, saying he does not “comment on idiotic statements.”

Read more

European Council President Antonio Costa argued as early as February 2025 that the EU should talk to Russia after US President Donald Trump abandoned the policy of isolating Moscow. The debate over who should serve as the bloc’s single negotiator has remained deadlocked, with media reports naming potential candidates including former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi, and others.

Commenting on Kallas’ remarks, Putin’s foreign policy adviser Yury Ushakov said Moscow could do nothing to help the EU overcome its indecision.

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky is treating the US as a “piggy bank” and is feeding Washington with “propaganda” to get more US-made air defense systems, Republican Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna has said.

On Wednesday, Zelensky received Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal and Democratic Congressman Jim Himes in Kiev, saying that Ukraine is grateful to the US and President Donald Trump for what he called “strong bipartisan support.”

During the talks, Zelensky said Kiev had a “significant need” for air defense missiles, adding that he had sent a letter to the White House and Congress with a wish list. Earlier, Axios reported that Zelensky had asked for an “urgent supply of Patriot interceptors,” with the Ukrainian leader himself saying last month that the missiles are “in such a deficit, it could not be any worse.”

Read more

In response, Luna accused Zelensky of lying. “This is literally propaganda and not even true. There is no broad support for an endless war and we are not your piggy bank,” she wrote on X.

Luna also recalled that Trump has been pushing for a negotiated settlement to the conflict, but Zelensky is “the ONLY person holding out on the deal.” “The war CANNOT continue,” Luna added.

Under the Trump administration, Ukraine has been procuring US-made weapons mainly through the PURL initiative, a NATO-backed mechanism under which Kiev’s backers fund shipments for Ukraine. Zelensky has praised the scheme, but said it does not fully cover shortages.

Read more

Luna has been an outspoken critic of Zelensky, slamming the Ukrainian leader over the crackdown on the Orthodox Church and advocating a halt in US aid to Kiev. She has also criticized Zelensky over his refusal to hold a presidential election. The Ukrainian leader’s term expired in 2024, with Russia declaring him “illegitimate” and suggesting that his dubious status is an obstacle to signing a binding peace deal.

In March, Zelensky claimed that the US was pressing Ukraine to withdraw from Russia’s Donbass as a precondition for any post-conflict American security guarantees. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, however, dismissed the claim as “lies.”

An albino buffalo in Bangladesh nicknamed “Donald Trump” because of its blond tuft and resemblance to the US president has been spared from sacrifice during the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha after a last-minute government intervention.

The nearly 700-kg animal had already been sold for ritual slaughter and was being prepared for the Muslim festival when authorities stepped in after viral videos and selfie-seeking crowds turned it into an unlikely celebrity.

The rescue was reported on Wednesday by multiple outlets. Bangladeshi Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed ordered officials to stop the sacrifice, refund the buyer, and relocate the animal.

The pale-skinned buffalo from Narayanganj near Dhaka became a social media sensation after videos highlighted its cream-colored forelock, which many Bangladeshis said looked like Trump’s trademark hairstyle.

Read more

“My younger brother named the buffalo Donald Trump because the hair on the front of its head resembles Donald Trump,” owner Ziauddin Mridha said. “Despite its striking appearance it is very calm by nature.”

Crowds traveled daily to the farm to pose for photos as clips of the animal spread widely online.

Residents gathered in the Jijira area on Wednesday hoping to catch a glimpse of the buffalo before Eid festivities, only to find authorities had already removed it. Footage published by local media showed the animal being led away with ropes and loaded onto a pickup truck as early visitors looked on. Some reports said the buffalo was taken to the national zoo in Dhaka while others said it might be returned temporarily to the farm where it was raised.

READ MORE: ‘Satanic Temple’ torn down near Moscow (VIDEO)

“We have been told that the price of the buffalo will be paid or an animal of the same value will be given for sacrifice,” said Moniruzzaman, who according to local reports bought the buffalo for the Eid sacrifice. Several disappointed visitors told reporters they had traveled with their children after seeing the buffalo online but arrived too late to see the now-famous animal.

Albino buffaloes are extremely rare in Bangladesh because of a genetic condition that reduces pigmentation leaving them with pale skin and light hair.

Germany is drawing up a law that would force former soldiers to attend regular military exercises, as Berlin pushes ahead with its militarization campaign, Der Spiegel reported on Wednesday. Moscow has denounced the EU’s military buildup as aimed against Russia, and a ploy to distract the public from deepening domestic crises.

According to the draft Reserve Strengthening Act seen by the German outlet, all men and women who have performed less than one year of voluntary military service and are under 45 will be required to take part in military exercises either two weeks a year or every two years.

Those who served for more than a year, or who enlisted as career or temporary soldiers, could be compelled to participate until the age of 65, the paper says.

Read more

The explanatory memorandum to the bill states that mandatory drills are urgently needed to ensure the “reliable availability of reserves” to safeguard national security.

The proposed bill is the latest move in Germany’s sweeping military buildup, with Chancellor Friedrich Merz vowing last year to turn the Bundeswehr into “the strongest conventional army in Europe.” 

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has set a goal of 265,000 active troops and 200,000 reservists by the mid-2030s, while Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said on Friday that the government will spend more than 4% of the country’s GDP on defense this year. Germany’s total military spending in 2026 will stand at around €108 billion ($125 billion), up from €86 billion in 2025.

Germany has justified the costly militarization campaign by citing Russia and claiming that Moscow will remain “the greatest security threat for Europe” for the foreseeable future. Germany and other EU countries have also speculated that Russia could attack NATO in Europe within several years – a claim dismissed by Moscow as “nonsense.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said the EU’s militarization drive will only destabilize the continent, stressing that Moscow views it as “aggressive” posturing. Russia has also accused European governments of using propaganda to turn it into a “model external enemy” to justify the continent’s internal problems.

Germany is concerned about a potential flood of Ukrainian immigrants from Poland after Warsaw sharply reduced social benefits, Bild reported on Wednesday, citing a confidential report by the German security authorities.

Germany and Poland have accepted the largest numbers of Ukrainian refugees in the EU since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, according to Eurostat data.

Germany was hosting around 1.3 million people under temporary protection as of March 2026, accounting for more than 29% of the EU total. The number in Poland was around a million, or more than 22% of all Ukrainians granted protection across the bloc.

“The content of the new regulations [in Poland] is primarily aimed at placing Ukrainian nationals on the same footing as third-country nationals,” the report seen by Bild stated. “In addition to free access to healthcare and social services, the right to free accommodation is also being abolished,” it added.

Earlier this year, Warsaw approved legislation gradually phasing out the Special Act on Assistance to Ukrainian Citizens, introduced in March 2022 as an emergency response to the escalated conflict. The act created a unique legal regime granting Ukrainians rights nearly equal to those of Polish citizens and access to extensive financial and social benefits.

Read more

Other European countries, including the UK, Norway, the Czech Republic, Denmark, and Hungary, have recently taken steps to curb social programs or reduce the number of arrivals. Officials have cited the prolonged conflict and pressures on national budgets and housing markets as a major reason for the move.

Germany has also taken steps to tighten support rules for Ukrainians, including plans to reduce welfare payments for new arrivals.

German officials have increasingly emphasized labor market integration and faster employment for refugees. In November, Chancellor Friedrich Merz warned that the employment rate among Ukrainian refugees living in Germany is unacceptably low.

Russian Parliament Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin said in 2024 that the issue of Ukrainian refugees was becoming an increasing challenge for Europe and could develop into a new migrant crisis.

President Donald Trump has suggested that the US would attack its ally Oman if it attempts to seize control of the Strait of Hormuz, which has effectively been closed since the US and Israel launched attacks against Iran in February.

According to Reuters, Trump made the remarks after Iranian state TV reported that it obtained an unofficial draft agreement that would reopen the vital waterway, with Iran and Oman jointly managing maritime traffic.

“No, the strait is going to be open to everybody,” Trump told journalists during a cabinet meeting on Wednesday. “We’ll watch over it, but nobody’s going to control it. That’s part of the negotiation that we have.”

Read more

“It’s international waters. And Oman will behave just like everybody else, or we’ll have to blow them up. They understand that. They’ll be fine,” Trump said.

Oman, a key US ally, mediated talks on Iran’s nuclear program until they were suspended by the conflict.

Iran and Oman lie on opposite sides of the narrowest part of the Strait of Hormuz, which normally handles around 25% of global seaborne oil trade and 20% of liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments.

Iran closed the route to ships from “hostile nations” following the US-Israeli airstrikes, while the US declared its own blockade of Iranian ports in April. Tehran has since insisted on its “sovereign right” to manage traffic through the strait and collect tolls.

Iran’s peace terms reportedly include demands for reparations, the withdrawal of US troops from the region, and an end to Israel’s wars in Lebanon and Gaza. The US has demanded that Iran completely dismantle its nuclear program, which Tehran insists is entirely peaceful.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said it targeted a US airbase in the region on Thursday in response to new strikes, marking the second armed clash between the rivals this week.

The latest confrontation began with reports of explosions shortly after midnight in Iran’s southern port city of Bandar Abbas, which is home to a naval base.

In a statement to the media, a US official said American forces shot down four Iranian kamikaze drones that “posed a threat around the Strait of Hormuz” and had also struck a ground control station in Bandar Abbas that “was about to launch a fifth drone.”

The official described the actions as “measured, purely defensive, and intended to maintain the ceasefire.”

Read more

Hours later, several missiles and drones were intercepted over Kuwait, the kingdom’s Defense Ministry said. Open-source analysts suggested online that the projectiles may have been heading toward Ali Al Salem Air Base near the Kuwaiti-Iraqi border.

The IRGC later released a statement saying it targeted a US base involved in the earlier strike on a site near Bandar Abbas Airport. “The aggressor bears full responsibility for the consequences,” the statement said.

The hostilities followed US “self-defense” strikes on Iranian naval vessels and sites in the southern Hormozgan province on Monday. Tehran denounced the attacks as a gross violation of the ceasefire reached on April 8.

Although US officials indicated this week that the sides are close to reaching a preliminary peace agreement, there are no signs that either Washington or Tehran is willing to compromise. Both countries have accused each other of setting unacceptable terms.

The US is making unacceptable demands during negotiations with Iran after failing to defeat the country militarily, Ali Bagheri, the deputy secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, has told RT.

Bagheri, who served as foreign minister from 2021 to 2024, spoke to RT in Moscow, where he attended a security conference and met with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Georgy Borisenko.

He argued that the “excessive demands” made by the US demonstrate that officials in Washington are “detached from reality.”

Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz to ships from “hostile countries” in response to US and Israeli airstrikes and has since insisted on its right to regulate traffic and collect tolls. Bagheri said the conflict shows that the status of the strait is vital to Iran’s security.

“Iran, like other independent countries, believes in peace through dialogue and negotiations. The US does not believe in peace through diplomacy. It believes in peace through force, aggression, and barbarism,” he said.

Read more

Bagheri said there is “no problem” in relations between Iran and the Gulf states, blaming the US for regional tensions. He argued that the military presence of the US and Israel is an obstacle to peace in the region.

Iran fired drones and missiles at Gulf states hosting US bases during the conflict, arguing that the strikes were carried out in self-defense.

Although US officials indicated this week that the sides are close to reaching a preliminary agreement, there are no signs that either Washington or Tehran is willing to compromise. Both countries have accused each other of setting unacceptable terms.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said it targeted a US airbase in the region on Thursday in response to new strikes, marking the second armed clash between the rivals this week.

The latest confrontation began with reports of explosions shortly after midnight in Iran’s southern port city of Bandar Abbas, which is home to a naval base. In a statement to the media, a US official said American forces had shot down four Iranian kamikaze drones that “posed a threat around the Strait of Hormuz” and had also struck a ground control station in Bandar Abbas that “was about to launch a fifth drone.”

The official described the actions as “measured, purely defensive, and intended to maintain the ceasefire.”

Read more

Hours later, several missiles and drones were intercepted over Kuwait, the kingdom’s Defense Ministry said. Open-source analysts suggested online that the projectiles may have been heading toward Ali Al Salem Air Base near the Kuwaiti-Iraqi border.

The IRGC later released a statement saying it had “targeted” a US base involved in the earlier strike on a site near Bandar Abbas Airport. “The aggressor bears full responsibility for the consequences,” the statement said.

The hostilities followed US “self-defense” strikes on Iranian naval vessels and sites in the southern Hormozgan province on Monday. Tehran denounced those attacks as a gross violation of the ceasefire reached on April 8.

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

Australia could host American nuclear weapons at some point, Russian Security Council Secretary Sergey Shoigu has warned. Washington is also eyeing Japan and South Korea as deployment options, he told a Russia-ASEAN meeting on Wednesday.

The US military could deploy Typhon missile systems in southwestern Japan for the Valiant Shield and Orient Shield joint exercises as early as next month. The systems are specifically designed to fire nuclear-capable Tomahawk missiles. The Japanese embassy in Moscow has stated that the Typhon system would be “stored” at a US base in Japan after the drills, claiming that this does not amount to “permanent deployment.”

“Japan and the Republic of Korea are preparing to host American nuclear weapons on their territory,” Shoigu told the Russia-ASEAN security meeting. “Such weapons could also end up on the territory of Australia because of its participation in the AUKUS partnership.”

Canberra joined the AUKUS security pact with the US and UK in 2021. Under the deal, the US agreed to provide the Australian Navy with the nuclear technology needed to produce and operate Virginia-class submarines. The Australian Submarine Agency maintains that its acquisition of nuclear-powered undersea vessels does not breach the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Read more

The move could be part of America’s military buildup strategy in the Asia-Pacific, the Russian security council secretary stated. Washington is preparing to employ “tried and true methods for extracting money from its vassals for American adventures” in Asia, Shoigu warned, adding that the US and Japan are already discussing the formation of an Indo-Pacific Treaty Organization mirroring NATO.

A bill was introduced in the US Congress last month that would oblige President Donald Trump to create a task force to explore potential avenues for creating a NATO-like structure in the Asia-Pacific and assess their feasibility. Tokyo called for such a bloc as early as in 2024.

Both Moscow and Beijing have previously expressed concern about potential NATO expansion into Asia. In October, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused NATO of seeking to turn the entire Eurasian continent into a “fiefdom” aimed at “containing China, isolating Russia,” and confronting North Korea.

The US is making unacceptable demands during negotiations with Iran after failing to defeat the country militarily, Ali Bagheri, deputy secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, has told RT.

Bagheri, who served as foreign minister from 2021 to 2024, spoke to RT in Moscow, where he attended a security conference and met with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Georgy Borisenko.

The diplomat argued that the “excessive demands” made by the US demonstrate that officials in Washington are “detached from reality.”

Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz to ships from “hostile countries” in response to US and Israeli airstrikes and has since insisted on its right to regulate traffic and collect tolls. Bagheri said the conflict showed that the status of the strait is vital to Iran’s security.

“Iran, like other independent countries, believes in peace through dialogue and negotiations. The US does not believe in peace through diplomacy. It believes in peace through force, aggression, and barbarism,” he said.

Read more

Bagheri said there was “no problem” in relations between Iran and the Gulf states, blaming the US for regional tensions. He argued that the military presence of the US and Israel was an obstacle to peace in the region.

Iran fired drones and missiles at Gulf states hosting US bases during the conflict, arguing that the strikes were carried out in self-defense.

Although US officials indicated this week that the sides were close to reaching a preliminary agreement, there are no signs that either Washington or Tehran is willing to compromise. Both countries have accused each other of setting unacceptable terms.

Former US President Bill Clinton should not have been impeached for his affair with Monica Lewinsky, but for lying in an earlier sexual harassment case, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has said.

Gingrich led the 1998 impeachment of Clinton, in which ‘Slick Willy’ was charged with – and acquitted of – lying under oath and obstruction of justice. The charges centered on Clinton claiming that he “did not have sexual relations with” White House intern Monica Lewinsky, which he did.

Speaking to New York Post columnist Miranda Devine on Tuesday, Gingrich said he now considers the decision to impeach Clinton over the Lewinsky affair to be “a mistake.”

“I think it was a mistake because the real problem wasn’t Lewinsky,” he said. “The real problem was he had committed perjury in a case involving sexual harassment while he was governor. In fact, he was stripped of his law license in Arkansas after he left the presidency, and for five years couldn’t practice because he clearly committed a felony.”

Read more

In 1999, a federal judge found that Clinton committed perjury in a civil case brought by Paula Jones, an Arkansas government employee who accused Clinton of exposing himself to her while he was governor of the state in 1991. Clinton was not criminally convicted of perjury, but he was held in contempt of court and stripped of his law license.

The focus of the impeachment on Clinton’s sex life, rather than his “felonies… trivialized” the process, Gingrich told Devine.

Ultimately, Clinton saw out the end of his second term, and Gingrich was forced to resign after the Republican Party lost seats in the 1998 midterm elections. Gingrich later admitted that he was having an affair with a Congressional staffer during the impeachment saga.

Earlier this month, the New York Times interviewed dozens of lawmakers and staffers, concluding that sexual harassment “is still rampant among Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill and often goes unaddressed.” Two prominent lawmakers – Representatives Eric Swalwell and Tony Gonzalez – have resigned this year over inappropriate relationships with staffers.

US President Donald Trump has suggested the US would attack its ally Oman if the Gulf monarchy attempted to claim control over the Strait of Hormuz, which has effectively been closed since the US and Israel launched attacks on Iran in early February.

According to Reuters, Trump made the remarks after Iranian state television reported that it had obtained an unofficial draft agreement that would reopen the vital waterway, with Iran and Oman jointly managing maritime traffic.

“No, the strait is going to be open to everybody,” Trump told journalists during a cabinet meeting on Wednesday. “We’ll watch over it, but nobody’s going to control it. That’s part of the negotiation that we have,” he added.

Read more

“It’s international waters. And Oman will behave just like everybody else, or we’ll have to blow them up. They understand that. They’ll be fine,” the president said.

Oman, a key US ally, mediated talks on Iran’s nuclear program until they were suspended by the conflict.

Iran and Oman face each other across the narrowest part of the Strait of Hormuz, which normally handles around 25% of global seaborne oil trade and 20% of liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments. Iran closed the route to ships from “hostile nations” following the US-Israeli airstrikes, while the US declared its own blockade of Iranian ports in April. Tehran has since insisted on its “sovereign right” to manage traffic through the strait and collect tolls.

Iran’s peace terms reportedly include demands for reparations, the withdrawal of US troops from the region, and an end to Israel’s wars in Lebanon and Gaza. The US has demanded that Iran completely dismantle its nuclear program, which Tehran insists is entirely peaceful.

Dan Greaney, the Simpsons writer who foresaw Donald Trump winning the White House decades in advance, has announced his own 2028 bid for presidency.

The Simpsons’ longtime writer and producer wrote the ‘Bart to the Future’ episode, broadcast in March of 2000, in which an adult Lisa Simpson appears as “America’s first straight female president,” who inherits a “budget crunch from President Trump.”

In a video on social media on Tuesday, Greaney, dressed as a prophet in a loose robe and large fake beard, accuses Trump, Vice President J.D. Vance, and “billionaires, careerists and cowards in both parties” of turning their backs on America’s founding principle “that all men are created equal.”

“The government is supposed to work for everyone. Democracy for all, accountability for all, prosperity for all. We must restore this,” he says.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Dan Greaney (@dangreaneyusa)

Read more

“I’d love to help, but I’m not a lawyer, I’m just a self-proclaimed prophet who went to law school, graduated, passed the bar,” Greaney says in the video, and – as if in sudden realization – tears off the robe and beard to reveal a suit underneath.

“Wait, I am a lawyer,” he says, announcing that he would run for president of the United States on the platform “America for All.”

According to his campaign website, the self-styled “progressive Republican” supports fighting influence-buying, improving transparency in US politics, making housing more readily available, and expanding universal health care.

Students are being taught that black people cannot be racist towards white people as part of an educational initiative aimed at, yes, countering racism.

According to teaching materials adopted by a group of Sheffield schools and introduced by Notre Dame High School, teenagers are explicitly taught: “Black people can be racially prejudiced towards a white person which is wrong and totally unacceptable. However, this is not racism. Racism is racial prejudice plus power. In the UK, white people hold the cultural power.”

In a lesson plan on “being anti-racist in our actions” for children aged seven to 11, a portion of the curriculum is devoted to “empathy building” including “privilege”.

It says: “In Britain, white people are likely to be privileged by the colour of their skin. This privilege arises because they are much less likely to be affected by racist behaviour, including bias, discrimination and verbal and physical abuse.

“Privileged people have a responsibility to reduce racism by: being aware of it; improving their own language and behaviour; challenging their friends’ language and behaviour; reporting incidents of racism; providing support to those who have been harmed by discrimination.”

The initiative pushes the idea that all white people enjoy “white privilege,” despite the fact that this is glaringly untrue. There are large segments of the white population that are impoverished and discriminated against on a daily basis. At the same time, many white people are the target of violence largely due to the color of their skin. In short, the term is highly divisive and unjustly generalizes and alienates disadvantaged white communities.

Read more

Another part of the teaching focuses on white-on-black racism. Students are asked: if racism against blacks is overblown, then how can it be explained that black people are 10 times more likely to be pulled over in their car than white people? Or why is it that black people are being flagged as possible shoplifters every time they walk into a store? Why are the majority of people behind bars in many British towns and cities black when black people are in the minority?

In a question-and-answer section that seems to accept that all of this is the consequence of racism, students are asked: “What is happening? Why is this an example of racism? If race isn’t real, how do you explain this? Has the concept of race led some people to believe that some groups of people are different to others?

“Are certain racial groups being treated differently? Are there other possible explanations for this?”

But is this treatment of black people simply the result of racism and skin color? Or is it more due to the realities on the ground which show that, per capita, black people are more prone to commit crimes than white people? Could it be that it is the black crime rate that largely causes racism against black people? This is not to suggest that racism doesn’t exist, or that there are no police officers who unfairly target black citizens, but crime statistics don’t lie.

In order to resolve the problem, society needs to get to the root causes of black crime, which include economic inequality that black people disproportionately suffer from. Until we reach that day, reckless school lessons like the ones being introduced in the UK risk inciting violence against white people, and thankfully there are British politicians who are able to see the inherent dangers of teaching materials like these.

Read more

Shadow Education Secretary Laura Trott has called on the government to intervene and make sure no school uses these materials.

She said: “It is deeply alarming that children as young as seven are being exposed to divisive identity politics in schools under the banner of ‘anti-racism education.’

“These materials teach children that black prejudice against white people cannot be described as racism, present contested concepts like ‘white privilege’ as unquestionable fact and encourage pupils to see themselves primarily through the lens of race.

“It is hugely damaging and exactly the kind of Left-wing ideological nonsense that should be nowhere near our classrooms.

“Labelling children by race and teaching them to focus on what divides them will only foster resentment and deepen division.”

Parents in the United Kingdom are beginning to push back against an educational system that seems more interested in indoctrinating students with critical race theory than providing a solid education. Children should not be spending their childhood thinking about their peers’ skin color or whether racism against white people exits. In reality, when left to their own devices, children do not place any importance on other children’s skin color and play happily together. It is only when meddling ideologues intervene that children begin to believe there is a problem.

Israel carried out heavy strikes across southern Lebanon after declaring the entire area a “combat zone.” RT witnessed the evacuations ahead of the bombardment.

Wednesday’s escalation came after Israel Defense Forces (IDF) issued evacuation orders for several areas ahead of what it described as strikes on Hezbollah targets. Maps published by the IDF earlier in the day marked large sections of the Lebanese Tyre region for evacuation, and military spokesman Avichay Adraee warned that all areas south of the Zahrani River were considered a “combat zone.”

Reporting from Lebanon’s Tyre District, RT journalist Ali Rida Sbeity said residents had begun fleeing the city, noting that many had “stayed throughout the war, even at its peak and after the ceasefire, but now they are taking this road toward Saida and Beirut, seeking safer areas.”

In a statement posted hours later on X, the IDF claimed that it had struck military buildings, command centers, and launch sites allegedly used by Hezbollah in the Bekaa Valley and southern Lebanon. The military claimed that around 550 Hezbollah-linked targets had been hit since the beginning of the week, adding that operations around Tyre were ongoing.

צה"ל תקף מבנים צבאיים, מפקדות ואתרי שיגור בבקעא: מתחילת השבוע הותקפו כ-550 מטרות של ארגון הטרור חיזבאללה בלבנון

לאורך היום, צה"ל תקף בבקעא ובמספר מרחבים בדרום לבנון מבנים צבאיים, מפקדות ואתרי שיגור בשימוש ארגון הטרור חיזבאללה.

תקיפת המפקדות בצור נמשכות גם ברגעים אלו pic.twitter.com/E0qkGQ3Knt

— צבא ההגנה לישראל (@idfonline) May 27, 2026

Lebanese media reported strikes on several southern towns, including Deir Amas, Braiqaa, Srifa, and Toura. The Lebanese army said one of its soldiers had been killed near a military position in the Bekaa region.

Read more

Hezbollah says its fighters are continuing to conduct retaliatory operations against Israeli troops in southern Lebanon. The group has repeatedly said it is acting in response to Israeli violations of the ceasefire agreement.

The intensified bombing comes amid indirect talks between the US and Iran, with Tehran asserting that Israel must bring a halt to its military operations against Hezbollah if the ceasefire with Washington is to be extended. US President Donald Trump has previously said that Israel should only engage in “surgical” military strikes in Lebanon.

According to Lebanon’s Health Ministry, at least 3,213 people have been killed and 9,737 wounded since Israel launched its military operation against Hezbollah following the US-Israeli attack on Iran in late February.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has slammed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the destruction of Gaza, warning that Muslims may soon teach him a “lesson.”

Erdogan made the remarks during Eid al-Adha celebrations in his hometown of Rize, where he called for Muslim unity and putting pressure on Israel.

“What is happening in Palestine, in Gaza, gives us a special stance, a special vigil this Eid. God willing, this tyrant Netanyahu will soon learn the lesson he deserves from the Muslims of the world,” he said, according to Anadolu news agency.

The comments came days after Israel detained hundreds of activists from a Gaza-bound flotilla, which had departed from Türkiye carrying humanitarian aid and pro-Palestinian campaigners seeking to challenge Israel’s blockade of the enclave.

Erdogan branded the interception “piracy and banditry.”

Read more

Ankara has sought to support Palestinians with humanitarian aid, diplomatic lobbying, ceasefire initiatives, and legal efforts related to Gaza.

Erdogan has been among the most vocal critics of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza since it began in 2023, accusing Israel of “genocide” and “state terrorism” against Palestinians, while comparing the Israeli government to Nazis at times.

In July of 2024, ten months into the conflict, Erdogan said Türkiye could act against Israel “just like” it did in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh, which was widely interpreted by Israeli media and officials as a threat of military intervention.

Israeli officials have increasingly portrayed Türkiye as a regional threat. Following Erdogan’s 2024 remarks, Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz compared the Turkish leader to Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, warning him to “remember what happened there and how it ended.”

Earlier this year, former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said Turkey could become Israel’s leading regional adversary, making it the “next Iran.”

READ MORE: The chance of a Türkiye-Israel war has never been more real

Turkish political analyst Kerim Has described the escalating rhetoric between Turkish and Israeli leaders as “a theatrical performance” aimed at distracting domestic audiences from internal problems.

Has also pointed to the economic links between the two countries, noting that Türkiye provides transit for Azerbaijani oil to Israel, which reportedly meets up 60% of the Jewish state’s crude oil needs.

Senior figures within Germany’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) are allegedly discussing the possible ousting of Chancellor Friedrich Merz due to his record-low approval ratings, according to German media reports.

According to Bild, talks about potentially “swapping” Merz for another chancellor are reportedly taking place within the party’s top ranks, including among regional leaders such as Hendrik Wust of North Rhine-Westphalia, Boris Rhein of Hesse, and Michael Kretschmer of Saxony.

Wust, who leads Germany’s most populous state, has also been floated by Bild, Focus, and Die Welt as a potential replacement for Merz. Several outlets have described him as Germany’s third most popular politician and the highest-rated CDU figure, while Merz was recently named the world’s most unpopular political leader in a public opinion survey.

Eckart Lohse, head of the parliamentary editorial office at FAZ, wrote on Wednesday that even CDU members who don’t openly oppose Merz now “consider the chancellor weak” and speak of “a palpable feeling of unease.”

Read more

“Faith in the strength of the federal government and its leader appears to have eroded so much, even within its own ranks, that the dwindling confidence is no longer being concealed,” Lohse wrote.

Other outlets, including Bild and Focus, have described the reported talks about removing the chancellor as “rumors,” stressing that no concrete plans have emerged so far.

Since taking office in May of 2025, Merz has stepped up support for Ukraine and accelerated Germany’s rearmament drive. He has pledged to make the Bundeswehr Europe’s “strongest” conventional army, citing what he describes as a growing Russian threat.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly dismissed claims that Moscow plans to attack NATO countries as “nonsense,” accusing European leaders of using the narrative to distract their citizens from domestic problems.

Merz has also urged Germans to work more, describing the country’s welfare model as outdated and unsustainable. By mid-April, his disapproval rating had climbed to 76%, with just 19% of Germans satisfied with his performance.

“Significant fractions” of Pope Leo XIV’s recent encyclical on the dangers of artificial intelligence were actually written by artificial intelligence, analyst Linch Zhang claims.

In the 42,000-word ‘Magnifica Humanitas’ (Magnificent Humanity), the pontiff warned of the growing, state-like power of Silicon Valley, the immorality of autonomous weapons, and the dangers of allowing AI to “construct a new Tower of Babel” and reduce human beings to “a resource to be used and exploited.”

Despite its appeal for AI to be regulated and “disarmed,” large portions of ‘Magnifica Humanitas’ show some telltale signs of being written by AI, Zhang claimed in a blog post on Tuesday.

Read more

“Phrases and punctuation much more commonly used by AI are much more present in this papal encyclical than past encyclicals,” Zhang wrote, pointing to the document’s use of em-dashes (127 instances, compared to 26 across four encyclicals by Pope Francis) and “tricolons: a series of three parallel words, phrases, or clauses used for rhetorical effect.”

Running the text through AI detector Pangram, Zhang found that some paragraphs were “essentially 0% AI,” but others were between 40% and 100% AI-written. All four of Francis’ encyclicals registered as entirely human-written, as did writings by Popes Benedict XVI and John Paul II. Pangram also flagged the Italian version of the encyclical for AI, suggesting that artificial intelligence was not just used to translate the document.

When Zhang’s experiment was repeated by The Verge, roughly 46% of the encyclical was determined to be written by AI.

The specific LLM (large language model) used to craft the text was likely Anthropic’s Claude, Zhang claimed, citing his own familiarity with Claude and its overuse of certain words such as “genuinely.”

The fact that certain paragraphs appear completely free of AI suggests that “some senior Vatican officials heavily used AI assistance for this encyclical and many (probably including Pope Leo himself) didn’t,” Zhang wrote.

“My tentative hypothesis is that Pope Leo does not approve of the AI usage in encyclicals, and plausibly was not even aware of significant AI usage in his own encyclical,” Zhang concluded.

The Vatican has not commented on Zhang’s claims. Nor has Anthropic, whose co-founder, Christopher Olah, delivered an address alongside the Pope on Monday.

The EU could temporarily deny future member states’ veto rights in order to prevent them from interfering with the bloc’s foreign policy, the Guardian reported on Tuesday, citing EU sources.

The idea is reportedly being discussed as Brussels seeks to bring new members in before the end of the decade, while avoiding the kind of internal roadblocks that the likes of Hungary and Slovakia have put up to impede EU military and financial support for Ukraine.

According to the newspaper, the European Commission is now considering a plan under which new entrants would not automatically receive the power to block foreign policy decisions or other matters requiring unanimity, such as taxation. The measure could apply for several years after accession, four EU sources told the outlet.

The proposal to restrict veto rights was reportedly brought up during treaty negotiations with Montenegro, which has been negotiating accession for 14 years and is hoping to become the EU’s 28th member by 2028. It is currently considered the frontrunner among the bloc’s nine official candidate countries.

If the ban is ultimately included, Montenegro’s treaty could later serve as a template for other candidates, the Guardian claimed, noting that the measure is “legally borderline” and would have to be time-limited to avoid creating second-class EU members.

Read more

The proposal comes as Brussels has repeatedly struggled to push through major foreign policy decisions, such as a gargantuan €90 billion loan for Kiev, due to the bloc’s built-in unanimity rules, as well as pushback from member states opposed to funding Ukraine’s war effort.

A number of EU officials have since called for abandoning the bloc’s unanimity principles, with German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul stressing that an EU with over 33 members could not continue operating under rules designed for a smaller bloc.

Former EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell has similarly argued that unanimity has made the bloc irrelevant in international politics, calling for a smaller core group of members to be established that would make decisions on EU policy.

However, critics of this push have accused Brussels of using the Ukraine conflict and enlargement debate to centralize power at the expense of national sovereignty. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has warned that abolishing veto rights on fundamental EU issues would be “the beginning of the end” for the bloc.

Spanish police have searched the headquarters of the country’s ruling Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) in a graft probe involving alleged influence-peddling and irregular party financing.

According to local media, investigators from the Civil Guard’s elite Central Operative Unit (UCO) entered the party’s Madrid offices on Wednesday to obtain evidence of suspected illegal financing. 

The case is reportedly centered on former PSOE member Leire Diez; several former party officials and businessmen are also said to be under scrutiny. Diez is accused of attempting to influence graft investigations and discredit members of Spain’s anti-corruption police unit, allegations she denies.

PSOE, which is led by Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, said it would cooperate fully with investigators and hand over any requested information but has denied any attempt to conceal evidence.

Sanchez, who is in Rome for talks with Pope Leo XIV, told reporters there had been “a lot of fake news” and insisted the party “will act decisively, as we always have.” He also warned against politicizing judicial investigations and rejected opposition calls for snap elections, saying he could not call a vote for “partisan interests” but only “for the general interest of the citizens.”

Read more

Wednesday’s raid comes amid several ongoing probes involving figures close to Sanchez, including separate inquiries linked to his wife and brother. Earlier this month, the National Court placed former Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero – a longtime Socialist leader and key Sanchez ally – under investigation in a separate case linked to the 2021 state bailout of airline Plus Ultra. Zapatero denies wrongdoing, while Sanchez has publicly backed the former prime minister.

Sanchez, who has led Spain since 2018, has emerged as one of the EU’s most vocal critics of Israel’s war in Gaza and the US-Israeli military escalation with Iran. He has pushed for limits on arms sales to Israel and refused to allow American forces to use Spanish bases for operations linked to strikes on Iran, saying Madrid would not be “complicit” in the conflict – moves that have heightened tensions with Washington and West Jerusalem.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has slammed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the destruction of Gaza, warning that Muslims may soon teach him a “lesson.”

Erdogan made the remarks during Eid al-Adha celebrations in his hometown of Rize, where he called for Muslim unity and putting pressure on Israel.

“What is happening in Palestine, in Gaza, gives us a special stance, a special vigil this Eid. God willing, this tyrant Netanyahu will soon learn the lesson he deserves from the Muslims of the world,” he said, according to Anadolu news agency.

The comments came days after Israel detained hundreds of activists from a Gaza-bound flotilla, which had departed from Türkiye carrying humanitarian aid and pro-Palestinian campaigners seeking to challenge Israel’s blockade of the enclave.

Erdogan branded the interception “piracy and banditry.”

Read more

Ankara has sought to support Palestinians with humanitarian aid, diplomatic lobbying, ceasefire initiatives, and legal efforts related to Gaza.

Erdogan has been among the most vocal critics of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza since it began in 2023, accusing Israel of “genocide” and “state terrorism” against Palestinians, while comparing the Israeli government to Nazis at times.

In July of 2024, ten months into the conflict, Erdogan said Türkiye could act against Israel “just like” it did in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh, which was widely interpreted by Israeli media and officials as a threat of military intervention.

Israeli officials have increasingly portrayed Türkiye as a regional threat. Following Erdogan’s 2024 remarks, Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz compared the Turkish leader to Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, warning him to “remember what happened there and how it ended.”

Earlier this year, former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said Turkey could become Israel’s leading regional adversary, making it the “next Iran.”

READ MORE: The chance of a Türkiye-Israel war has never been more real

Turkish political analyst Kerim Has described the escalating rhetoric between Turkish and Israeli leaders as “a theatrical performance” aimed at distracting domestic audiences from internal problems.

Has also pointed to the economic links between the two countries, noting that Türkiye provides transit for Azerbaijani oil to Israel, which reportedly meets up 60% of the Jewish state’s crude oil needs.

North Korea has tested newly-developed missile launch and tactical cruise missile systems equipped with precision AI guidance, KCNA state news agency reported on Wednesday.

The drills, carried out on Tuesday, assessed the power of a tactical ballistic missile’s specialized warhead and the reliability of an AI-guided 240mm artillery rocket, as well as the accuracy of a new AI-guided tactical cruise missile, the agency said.

The new North Korean cruise missile’s “tactical cruising shell” has a combination of autonomous navigation and TERCOM (terrain contour matching) navigation systems, as well as “an AI terminal guidance function” that could allow Pyongyang to precisely hit targets at a distance of up to 100 km, KCNA said. With systems like these, artificial intelligence steers the munition towards its target in the final stages of flight.

The firing control and automation systems on the three tested launch vehicles have been updated for the “conditions of modern warfare,” North Korean leader Kim Jong-un said at the test, according to KCNA.

The main task of Pyongyang’s armed forces and defense science sector is to defend North Korea’s sovereignty and guarantee its economic and political development “with powerful war deterrence,” he said.

Various countries, including the US and Russia, have been increasingly focused on integrating AI into their military systems.

Read more

US tech firm Shield AI has been shipping “AI pilots for one-way attack drones into Ukraine” for months, while training its autonomous guidance systems, company president Brandon Tseng told US outlet the War Zone last week.

AI is also being integrated into Russia’s administrative and defense sectors, Russian President Vladimir Putin said last month. Putin instructed the government to develop a national plan to deploy its own “fully sovereign” AI solutions in all areas, including security and national defense.

After February 28, 2026, relations between the United Arab Emirates and Iran entered a new phase of escalation, one in which the old formula of cautious pragmatism effectively stopped working.

Formally, Abu Dhabi declared its neutrality in the war which the US and Israel launched against Iran, and emphasized that it was not providing its territory, airspace, or its waters for strikes against Iran. However, the course of the war quickly showed that Tehran no longer believed such statements. The UAE remains a key US partner in the Persian Gulf, a participant in the Abraham Accords with Israel, and an important financial and logistical hub within the Western infrastructure in the region. For that reason, in Iran’s perception, the Emirates increasingly look like a participant in an anti-Iranian coalition.

The central symbol of the dispute remains the issue of Abu Musa, Greater Tunb, and Lesser Tunb, the three islands located near the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz. Iran established control over them in 1971, shortly before the creation of the UAE. The Emirates have since regarded the islands as occupied territory and have demanded that the dispute be resolved through negotiations or international arbitration. For Iran, the matter is closed, since Tehran considers the islands part of its own territory. For the UAE, it is an unhealed wound from the birth of the federation and a constant reminder of its strategic vulnerability before a larger neighbor. Today’s discussions about a possible military scenario around the islands are perceived as a direct return to the most painful issue in Emirati-Iranian relations.

A veneer of neutrality

Before the current war, Abu Dhabi tried to be on good terms with everyone. It needed to preserve trade with Iran, ensure security through the US, develop technological and defense cooperation with Israel, and, in its public rhetoric, avoid direct involvement in the conflict. But after the US and Israel attacked Iran, that balance began to collapse. Media reports appeared about secret contacts between Israeli officials and the UAE leadership at the height of the war. CBS News reported that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had made a secret visit to the UAE and met with the country’s president, Mohammed bin Zayed.

According to the channel, the meeting took place in late March, after the current military escalation had already begun. The Israeli side treated the visit as a fact, while the UAE publicly denied the reports. That discrepancy itself became an important political episode, damaging the image of Emirati neutrality and giving Iran another argument for accusing Abu Dhabi of hidden coordination with West Jerusalem.

Read more

Even more revealing were reports about visits by Mossad chief David Barnea to the UAE. According to The Wall Street Journal, later cited by Israeli and regional media, Barnea visited the Emirates at least twice during the war in order to coordinate action on the Iranian front. The Jerusalem Post wrote that these visits took place during the operation against Iran and also reported a visit by Shin Bet chief David Zini. These reports, like all wartime back-channel diplomacy, require cautious treatment, since they are based on sources and do not reveal the full picture of the talks. Yet their political significance is clear. If, against the backdrop of declared neutrality, not only Israeli politicians but also Israeli intelligence chiefs are traveling to the UAE, then for Iran, this becomes yet another argument that Abu Dhabi is effectively integrated into a system of Israeli-American coordination against Tehran. For the Emirates themselves, such contacts may look like an element of defensive coordination and intelligence-sharing, but in wartime that distinction almost ceases to function. In Iran’s eyes, a visit by the head of Mossad cannot be a neutral episode, especially when it takes place alongside strikes on Iranian territory, deliveries of air-defense systems, and intensified US pressure on the Gulf states.

Israeli military assistance

Axios, citing Israeli and American officials, reported that Israel had sent the UAE an Iron Dome air defense system and military personnel to operate it – later confirmed by US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee. For the UAE, this cooperation can be explained as a defensive necessity, since the country found itself under the threat of missile and drone strikes. For Iran, however, the logic looks different. Tehran perceives this as the integration of the UAE into Israel’s military infrastructure in the Gulf.

Officially, Abu Dhabi can argue that the matter concerns only the protection of civilian infrastructure. But war erases the boundary between defense and participation. Every air-defense system, every group of foreign military specialists, every exchange of intelligence, and every closed meeting with Israeli leaders can be seen as part of a single front. It shows that UAE-Israel ties after the Abraham Accords are no longer limited to diplomacy, trade, and technology. Under wartime conditions, those ties acquire direct military-strategic significance.

American presence

Iranian representatives claimed that the CIA and US military structures were operating from UAE territory or using Emirati infrastructure in operations against Iran. It’s difficult to verify the truth of these statements, but in wartime the statements themselves become part of the conflict. Tehran uses them to justify pressure on the UAE and to portray it as a platform for US and Israeli activity. Abu Dhabi, for its part, has found itself in a difficult position. If it openly acknowledges deep coordination with Washington and West Jerusalem, it becomes a direct target for Iranian retaliation. If it denies everything while remaining part of the US security system and receiving defense assistance from Israel, its neutrality looks increasingly unconvincing.

The financial factor

For decades, Dubai has remained one of the most important external hubs for Iranian business, including trading companies, exchange houses, intermediary structures, and payment channels through which Tehran partially circumvented sanctions. Amid the war, unconfirmed reports appeared that the UAE, either shortly before the current escalation or already during the conflict, had restricted Iranian financial channels, frozen Iran-linked assets, or participated in closed arrangements involving the movement of billions of dollars. The most reliable open-source evidence points to a broader pattern of intensified pressure. The US imposed new sanctions on the Iranian exchange house Amin Exchange and a network of related entities, including companies in the UAE, Turkey, China, and Hong Kong, which Washington said helped Iranian banks conduct transactions in ways that circumvented restrictions.

For Iran, this is yet another front in the war. Even if the UAE explains tighter financial controls as a requirement of the sanctions regime and as a way to protect its own banking system, the political timing turns such steps into part of the pressure on Tehran. In peacetime, Abu Dhabi could play the role of an intermediary between the reality of sanctions and the realities of living next to Iran. In wartime, that gray zone quickly becomes a field of accusations. If the Emirates close financial channels, Iran sees it as participation in economic warfare. If they leave the channels open, the US increases pressure on Abu Dhabi and demands greater discipline in sanctions enforcement.

Read more

Push to action

The situation was further complicated by allegations that US officials were encouraging the Emirates to become more actively involved in the campaign and to consider the possibility of seizing one of the Iranian islands in the Persian Gulf. True or not, the very fact that such reports appeared shows that the island dispute may once again be used not only as a historical Emirati grievance, but also as an instrument in the US and Israeli military strategy against Iran.

This is where the UAE may find itself under pressure from both sides. On the one hand, the US and Israel badly need regional actors to join their campaign against Iran. Without the participation of Gulf states, the war remains an external operation by Washington and West Jerusalem that causes discomfort even among Arab states that fear Iran. If regional actors take part in the pressure on Tehran, however, it creates the appearance of a broader coalition and reduces the political cost for the US and Israel. The UAE specifically has a modern military, ports, intelligence infrastructure, financial leverage, ties with Israel, and its own territorial dispute with Iran, making it especially important for this strategy.

On the other hand, Iran views any deepening of Emirati involvement as grounds for retaliation. Strikes on infrastructure, threats to shipping, accusations that Emirati territory is being used, drone attacks, and pressure through allied networks in the region show that Tehran is prepared to transfer the cost of war onto its neighbors if it considers them part of a hostile framework. The UAE said drones had struck near the Barakah nuclear power plant and pointed to their origin from Iraqi territory, immediately linking the incident to the wider network of pro-Iranian forces in the region. For the Emirates, this is an extremely dangerous situation. Their cities, ports, airports, energy infrastructure, financial system, and reputation as a safe haven all depend on stability. Even limited involvement in the war could strike at the very foundation of the Emirati development model.

A slippery slope

As a result, UAE neutrality is becoming an increasingly unstable construct. Abu Dhabi does not want to enter the war openly, yet it also cannot fully distance itself from the US and Israel, because those ties provide missile defense, military support, and strategic insurance against Iran. This duality makes the UAE from a potential arbiter of the crisis into one of its most vulnerable participants.

The main danger for Abu Dhabi is that it could be dragged into the conflict not by one abrupt decision, but through a series of gradual steps. Financial discipline against Iranian networks, then deeper US-Israeli defense coordination, then visits and closed consultations with Israeli officials, then participation in securing the Strait of Hormuz, then discussion of the disputed islands as a possible lever of pressure against Iran. Each individual step can be presented as defensive, technical, or forced. But taken together, they may lead to a situation in which the UAE is no longer merely near the war, but inside it.

German regulators plan to force social media platforms such as X to boost government-approved “reliable” media outlets in their algorithms, according to leaked documents. The US government has vowed to respond over what it sees as pressure on American tech firms.

In a draft ‘Digital Media State Treaty’ seen by Apollo News, the heads of Germany’s 14 state media regulators have outlined plans to boost the visibility of “public value media” on social media platforms such as X and TikTok.

In order to combat “disinformative, polarizing, or merely attention-grabbing content,” the regulation would force platforms to alter their algorithms to prioritize content from mainstream news sources, such as Germany’s ARD and ZDF broadcasters. Content will be ranked by its “timeliness, relevance to the public’s interest in information, and journalistic context,” and will appear accordingly in users’ feeds, the draft states.

Read more

The concepts of “disinformation” and “public value” will be decided by media regulators appointed by the parliaments of their respective states. As such, the enforcement of the treaty will be inherently politicized.

If adopted, the regulation will likely apply to all major social media platforms. However, Elon Musk’s X has been singled out by Thorsten Schmiege, who chairs the Conference of Directors of the State Media Authorities. Speaking to the Frankfurter Rundschau earlier this month, Schmiege criticized Musk for stripping away much of the X’s speech restrictions when he purchased the platform in 2022.

“Content moderation was very responsible back then,” he said, adding that he aims to make it “economically necessary” for X to reintroduce its prior censorship policies.

X is an American platform, and any algorithmic changes would influence what kind of content Americans are exposed to. “A key force at play here is foreign governments’ desire to control who commands credibility, even on American platforms,” US Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers wrote on X on Wednesday. Asked whether the State Department would push back against the draft treaty, Rogers responded “stay tuned.”

Europe claims that its lawsuit against X over bluechecks is about consumer deception: that if the ☑️ merely means “user paid,” the platform should not suggest some other imprimatur. But a key force at play, here, is foreign governments’ desire to control who commands… https://t.co/d86sGOUV2j

— Under Secretary of State Sarah B. Rogers (@UnderSecPD) May 27, 2026

The EU fined X €120 million ($139 million) in December for violating its Digital Services Act (DSA), a sweeping censorship bill adopted in 2024. Brussels argues that X’s blue checkmark system for paid subscribers constitutes “deceptive” advertising, claiming that accounts with the checkmarks have not been “meaningfully verified.”

Musk and some senior members of President Donald Trump’s administration have accused the EU of unfairly singling out X for punishment over its refusal to censor political speech.

“The European Commission’s $140 million fine isn’t just an attack on X, it’s an attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said at the time. Rubio sanctioned former European Commissioner Thierry Breton and four pro-censorship activists in response.

The newly elected Scottish Parliament has supported a formal request to London for permission to hold a new referendum on independence.

Scottish voters rejected the previous attempt to leave the United Kingdom during a 2014 referendum, which unionist politicians described as a “once in a generation” opportunity.

The latest push has been strengthened by recent elections in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK, boosting regional pro-independence movements and delivering a major setback to the Labour Party.

How strong is Scotland’s push to quit the UK?

The independence movement was only modestly weakened by the result of the 2014 vote and gained renewed energy after Brexit, which most Scottish voters opposed in 2016.

In the parliamentary election held earlier this month, the pro-independence Scottish National Party (SNP) and Scottish Greens won a combined 73 seats in the 129-member chamber, creating the largest-ever bloc at Holyrood in favor of breaking up Britain.

Read more

MSPs voted on Monday to back First Minister John Swinney’s demand that Downing Street “make a Section 30 order under the Scotland Act 1998,” allowing a new independence referendum –  commonly referred to as “indyref2.”

What is a Section 30 order?

Although the Scottish Parliament was granted lawmaking powers in 2016, those powers remain restricted. Section 30 allows the British parliament to temporarily or permanently transfer additional authority to Holyrood, including over constitutional matters.

The mechanism has been used more than a dozen times since the Scottish parliament was established in 1999. In 2015, for instance, it was used to give 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote in local and Scottish elections.

The 2014 independence referendum was authorized in 2012 through the same procedure. The Edinburgh Agreement also allowed younger Scots to take part in that vote.

Will London approve Scotland’s request?

Not if the Labour government’s public statements are any indication.

Read more

Last year, after Swinney declined to explain how he would pursue another independence referendum following the election, Prime Minister Keir Starmer accused him of “insulting the intelligence of the Scottish people” with a ‘secret’ plan.

After this week’s vote, Downing Street urged the Scottish government to focus “on the issues that really matter – economic growth, the cost of living, and public services.” It argued that, unlike before the 2014 referendum, there is currently no public consensus in favor of indyref2.

Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar has accused Swinney of being driven by an “obsession” with independence, while Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay echoed that criticism. Liberal Democrat Alex Cole-Hamilton dismissed the vote as “performative,” and Reform UK’s Malcolm Offord sought to distance his party from the issue, describing the Holyrood debate as “groundhog day.”

Could Starmer be pressured to change course?

Swinney has challenged Westminster to show that “this is a voluntary Union” by allowing Scots to decide once more whether they want to remain in the post-Brexit UK.

READ MORE: Canadian PM warns oil-rich province against Brexit-style split

The Labour Party suffered a damaging defeat in local elections held on the same day that Scottish voters chose their lawmakers. Pro-independence parties also performed strongly in parliamentary elections in Wales this month, leaving Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland all governed by first ministers who support the breakup of the UK.

There has been speculation that Starmer could step down as Labour leader, but his political vulnerability does not necessarily advance Scotland’s independence ambitions, judging by the conduct of previous prime ministers.

Conservative leader Boris Johnson rejected then-Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon’s request for a Section 30 order in 2022, even as his own cabinet was nearing collapse. His predecessor, Theresa May, also refused to authorize indyref2 in 2017.

The International University Sports Federation (FISU) has allowed Russian athletes to compete in its events in all disciplines via a neutral status. In sports where a relevant federation has already lifted restrictions on Russia, they will be able to participate with their national flag and anthem, it added.

Athletes from Russia and Belarus were banned from international competitions, including the Olympics, following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Some curbs were later eased, with several sporting federations allowing certain representatives from the two countries to return as neutral competitors.

Moscow has decried the restrictions as illegal, with Russian President Vladimir Putin insisting that athletes should be granted equal access to competition based solely on merit and stressing that “politics has no place in sport.”

The student sports governing body said in a statement on Tuesday that the “outright exclusion of Russian student athletes on grounds of nationality alone is considered disproportionate and inconsistent with FISU’s educational mission.”

Read more

Russian participants will be making a comeback following a recommendation made by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) earlier this month, the statement read.

“The IOC has not lifted its senior restrictions for Russian athletes, but recommends that youth athletes should not be held accountable for the actions of their governments,” it explained.

In the same statement, FISU announced that Belarusian athletes have been fully reinstated effective immediately after the Olympic officials suggested that all restrictions on the country should be removed.

Russia’s Sports Minister Mikhail Degtyarev said that Moscow welcomes “the gradual softening of conditions for Russian students by FISU.” He also congratulated Belarusian student athletes on their ability to compete under their flag again.

The deputy head of the Russian parliament’s Committee for Sport and Tourism, Dmitry Svischev, told Tass that “FISU has followed the path adequately as the goal of sport is to unite people.” Its decision “sends the right signal” to other international sports organizations, he said.

Only 41 Russian representatives participated using a neutral status in the FISU World University Games in Germany last summer, winning six gold, six silver and four bronze medals.

READ MORE: Russian gymnasts win four medals at Rhythmic Gymnastics World Cup stage

Earlier this month, World Gymnastics joined United World Wrestling and the international federations for judo, taekwondo and aquatic sports in allowing the Russians to compete under their national flag.

The International University Sports Federation (FISU) has allowed Russian athletes to compete in its events in all disciplines via a neutral status. In sports where a relevant federation has already lifted restrictions on Russia, they will be able to participate with their national flag and anthem, it added.

Athletes from Russia and Belarus were banned from international competitions, including the Olympics, following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Some curbs were later eased, with several sporting federations allowing certain representatives from the two countries to return as neutral competitors.

Moscow has decried the restrictions as illegal, with Russian President Vladimir Putin insisting that athletes should be granted equal access to competition based solely on merit and stressing that “politics has no place in sport.”

The student sports governing body said in a statement on Tuesday that the “outright exclusion of Russian student athletes on grounds of nationality alone is considered disproportionate and inconsistent with FISU’s educational mission.”

Read more

Russian participants will be making a comeback following a recommendation made by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) earlier this month, the statement read.

“The IOC has not lifted its senior restrictions for Russian athletes, but recommends that youth athletes should not be held accountable for the actions of their governments,” it explained.

In the same statement, FISU announced that Belarusian athletes have been fully reinstated effective immediately after the Olympic officials suggested that all restrictions on the country should be removed.

Russia’s Sports Minister Mikhail Degtyarev said that Moscow welcomes “the gradual softening of conditions for Russian students by FISU.” He also congratulated Belarusian student athletes on their ability to compete under their flag again.

The deputy head of the Russian parliament’s Committee for Sport and Tourism, Dmitry Svischev, told Tass that “FISU has followed the path adequately as the goal of sport is to unite people.” Its decision “sends the right signal” to other international sports organizations, he said.

Only 41 Russian representatives participated using a neutral status in the FISU World University Games in Germany last summer, winning six gold, six silver and four bronze medals.

READ MORE: Russian gymnasts win four medals at Rhythmic Gymnastics World Cup stage

Earlier this month, World Gymnastics joined United World Wrestling and the international federations for judo, taekwondo and aquatic sports in allowing the Russians to compete under their national flag.

The US has declined to condemn Russia over its warning about upcoming strikes on military-linked sites in Kiev in retaliation for Ukraine’s deadly attack on a school dormitory in Starobelsk.

On Friday, Ukrainian drones struck a college dormitory in Starobelsk, Russia, killing 21 people, mostly young women, and injuring more than 60 others. Moscow has denounced the attack as a war crime and a deliberate “terrorist act.” Kiev has dismissed the accusation as “pure propaganda,” with its Western backers refusing to hold Ukraine accountable despite ample evidence of its involvement.

On Monday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to warn of “systematic and consistent strikes” on Kiev’s military facilities and “decision-making centers” while urging foreign nationals to leave the capital.

Read more

On Tuesday, Andrey Melnik, Ukraine’s envoy to the UN, shared a joint statement – signed by more than 50 nations, including Germany and other EU members, the UK, Canada and Japan — which condemned Moscow over what it described as “escalating attacks” and “threats by Russia to diplomatic institutions.” Moscow has never mentioned any plans to target either embassies or any other civilian installations.

The statement, however, conspicuously did not mention the US.
Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Rubio likewise refrained from leveling any accusations, saying only that Kiev had “been a very dangerous place now for a number of years.” 

Read more

“This is what happens with these wars – they just continue to escalate”, he added. “There’s a big strike coming one way, a bigger strike coming back – and that’s how these things unravel and keep going. It’s why the war needs to come to an end.”

Under the Trump administration, the US has acted as a key intermediary in Russia-Ukraine talks, although the process froze up amid the Iran war. In March, Vladimir Zelensky claimed that Washington was pressing Ukraine to withdraw from the Donbass region as a condition for providing post-conflict security guarantees – something Kiev has categorically been opposed to.

Rubio, however, dismissed the Ukrainian leader’s comments as “a lie,” insisting that the US was not “advocating” for Moscow but rather only relaying its stance.

A Palestinian man has told RT that Israeli forces locked him in a coffin-like box for over two weeks after he refused to become an informant, amid mounting allegations of abuse in Israeli detention facilities.

Iman Nabhan said he was held in “an iron container with a wooden box inside it,” where his hands and feet were tied. He claimed that during his detention, Israeli personnel fed him through a hole and let him out for just one minute whenever he needed to use the toilet.

“It seemed they wanted to make me feel like I was dead so they could get whatever information they wanted,” Nabhan said. “I stayed inside that coffin for 15 days. I felt like I was alive in a dead body.”

The former prisoner said Israeli forces tried to pressure him into collaboration by offering money, foreign travel, and medical treatment opportunities for his mother, all of which he refused.

The testimony comes as Israel faces growing accusations over the treatment of Palestinians and pro-Palestinian activists in its custody. Earlier this week, Australian members of the Gaza-bound Global Sumud Flotilla accused Israeli forces of rape, sexual assault, beatings, humiliation, and torture after they were detained and deported.

Read more

Previously, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir personally posted footage of the detained flotilla activists kneeling with their hands tied after Israel intercepted the aid convoy. In one video, he was seen waving an Israeli flag and taunting the detainees, telling them: “Welcome to Israel, we are the landlords.”

Ben-Gvir, who oversees Israel’s prison system, has repeatedly taken a hard line on Palestinians, championing legislation mandating hanging for those accused of terrorism, and claiming that detainees should receive “the minimum of the minimum” in food.

The Israeli minister has also dismissed Palestinian nationhood outright. In November, he claimed that “there is no such thing as ‘Palestinian people’.”

The recently appointed commander of Hamas’ military wing, Mohammed Odeh, has been killed in an airstrike in Gaza, the Israeli authorities have claimed.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) continue to carry out attacks on specific targets in Gaza despite a US-brokered ceasefire being in place in the Palestinian enclave since October 2025.

The announcement of Odeh’s assassination comes 11 days after the killing of his predecessor, Izz al-Din al-Haddad.

The office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement on Wednesday that Odeh “was responsible for the murder, abduction, and wounding of many Israeli citizens and IDF soldiers.”

According to the statement, the slain Hamas commander was in charge of the armed group’s intelligence staff during its incursion into Israel on October 7, 2023, which resulted in around 1,200 people being killed and 250 others taken hostage. Since then, 85 captives have died, with the rest being returned to Israel.

Read more

The IDF’s military campaign in Gaza, launched in response to the attack by Hamas, has left more than 72,000 people dead and over 172,000 wounded, according to the Palestinian health authorities. Around 900 of those deaths came during the ceasefire.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said on Wednesday that Odeh was “sent to meet his partners in the depths of hell.”

“We pledged to eliminate everyone who led the October 7 massacre... They are all marked for death, everywhere,” Katz wrote on X.

Hamas hasn’t yet confirmed the death of its military chief, but Palestinian media reported that he was killed together with his wife and sons.

Gaza’s civil defense agency said at least seven people were killed in Israeli strikes on Tuesday, including five in a single attack near the Maghazi refugee camp in the central part of the enclave.

READ MORE: Netanyahu orders Israeli military to intensify Lebanon attacks

Israel’s Channel 12 reported last month that, according to an assessment by the IDF, Hamas was able to “significantly” rebuild itself during the ceasefire. According to a document seen by the broadcaster, the group largely regained its military capabilities and recruited more operatives, while also taking charge of the destitution of goods arriving in the enclave.

The recently appointed commander of Hamas’ military wing, Mohammed Odeh, has been killed in an airstrike in Gaza, the Israeli authorities have claimed.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) continue to carry out attacks on specific targets in Gaza despite a US-brokered ceasefire being in place in the Palestinian enclave since October 2025.

The announcement of Odeh’s assassination comes 11 days after the killing of his predecessor, Izz al-Din al-Haddad.

The office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement on Wednesday that Odeh “was responsible for the murder, abduction, and wounding of many Israeli citizens and IDF soldiers.”

According to the statement, the slain Hamas commander was in charge of the armed group’s intelligence staff during its incursion into Israel on October 7, 2023, which resulted in around 1,200 people being killed and 250 others taken hostage. Since then, 85 captives have died, with the rest being returned to Israel.

Read more

The IDF’s military campaign in Gaza, launched in response to the attack by Hamas, has left more than 72,000 people dead and over 172,000 wounded, according to the Palestinian health authorities. Around 900 of those deaths came during the ceasefire.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said on Wednesday that Odeh was “sent to meet his partners in the depths of hell.”

“We pledged to eliminate everyone who led the October 7 massacre... They are all marked for death, everywhere,” Katz wrote on X.

Hamas hasn’t yet confirmed the death of its military chief, but Palestinian media reported that he was killed together with his wife and sons.

Gaza’s civil defense agency said at least seven people were killed in Israeli strikes on Tuesday, including five in a single attack near the Maghazi refugee camp in the central part of the enclave.

READ MORE: Netanyahu orders Israeli military to intensify Lebanon attacks

Israel’s Channel 12 reported last month that, according to an assessment by the IDF, Hamas was able to “significantly” rebuild itself during the ceasefire. According to a document seen by the broadcaster, the group largely regained its military capabilities and recruited more operatives, while also taking charge of the destitution of goods arriving in the enclave.

The US Department of Energy has selected a number of private companies as potential recipients of weapons-grade plutonium, including one where Energy Secretary Chris Wright served on the board before joining the admimistration of President Donald Trump.

The US government holds roughly 50 metric tons of fissile material recovered from dismantled nuclear weapons at highly secure sites. The Trump administration said last year that it intended to expand the Surplus Plutonium Utilization Program by allowing private companies to manufacture energy-dense fuel for advanced small reactors, with 20 tons of plutonium earmarked for transfer.

On Tuesday, the Department of Energy named five firms chosen for “advanced negotiations” under the plan, among them Oklo Inc., a California-based small-reactor developer that Wright helped run before his confirmation as energy secretary in February 2025.

Oklo said it would use US plutonium in partnership with the European company newcleo. CEO Jacob DeWitte said the initiative “creates a pathway to use existing surplus material as bridge fuel for advanced reactors to bring more reactors online sooner.”

The other companies named by the government are Exodys Energy, SHINE Technologies, Standard Nuclear, and Flibe Energy. The Department of Energy said access to plutonium supplies would help private partners attract investment.

Plutonium transfers will make Trump’s ‘rich buddies happy’

The plan to place weapons-grade plutonium – a dangerous material requiring strict handling and security controls – in private hands has drawn opposition from some US lawmakers, who have warned of safety and proliferation risks.

Read more

“Trump wants to take enough plutonium for 2,000 atomic bombs and hand it over to private industry just to make his rich buddies happy,” Senator Edward Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts, said. “He might as well sell nuclear weapons at Costco. If this material shows up in Iran, we know who’s to blame.”

Critics also argue that the program encourages other countries to view plutonium in spent nuclear fuel as a valuable resource rather than hazardous waste, creating incentives to extract and stockpile it.

Since 2025, the US has attacked Iran twice over the claim that Tehran cannot be trusted to run a civilian nuclear industry and not try to weaponize it. The crisis remains unresolved, while the global economic fallout from disrupted maritime traffic in the Persian Gulf continues to mount.

US hooked on foreign nuclear fuel

The peaceful reuse of Cold War-era fissile material was once a central element of US-Russian cooperation. Under the HEU-LEU program, Russian weapons-grade uranium sufficient for around 20,000 warheads was converted into reactor fuel before the agreement expired in 2013.

A similar plutonium arrangement was signed in 2000, but was suspended in 2016 after being roughly 70% completed, as bilateral ties deteriorated following the US-backed armed coup in Ukraine.

In 2024, the US banned imports of Russian low-enriched uranium, presenting the move as part of its sanctions policy and an effort to revive America’s domestic enrichment sector, which had weakened during decades of abundant imported fuel, including under the HEU-LEU program. However, waivers are available until 2028.

In January, the Department of Energy announced plans to invest $2.7 billion over ten years in enrichment services.

Ukrainian draft officers have been caught adding dead people and convicts to the database of those drafted amid manpower shortages in Kiev’s military and growing anger with forced mobilization in the society. The country’s prosecutor general, Ruslan Kravchenko, has said that falsifications have been discovered at enlistment offices in at least two regions.

According to the Russian Defense Ministry, Kiev lost some 500,000 troops in 2025 alone. Ukrainian Defense Minister Mikhail Fedorov previously acknowledged that around 200,000 troops had deserted, while also saying that at least 2 million men had been placed on a wanted list for avoiding mobilization.

Three high-ranking officers at recruitment centers have been detained after engaging in “paper mobilization,” Kravchenko said in a statement on Tuesday.

They entered false information into the official database in order to report the successful implementation of the enlistment plan, he explained.

“To improve statistics, the list of those ‘mobilized’ included deceased and convicted persons, those with deferral... citizens who are already serving or studying at military universities, as well as those who are no longer subject to mobilization due to age,” the statement read.

Read more

In the town of Mukachevo in Transcarpathia Region, the head of the local recruitment center and his deputy used the scheme to fictitiously mobilize 270 people between January and March, Kravchenko said.

A similar episode occurred in the town of Zolochev in Lviv Region last year, with the interim head of the local enlistment office adding six people who were already serving in the military to the database, he added.

According to the prosecutor general, recruitment centers in other parts of the country are currently being checked for similar schemes.

The police said in a separate statement that those detained are suspected of forgery and making unauthorized changes to an official registry.

“As a result of their actions, the high military command could have received inaccurate information on the actual state of manning of military units,” it stressed.

Earlier this month, an officer in charge of recruitment in Zhitomir Region was arrested for demanding a bribe from a local businessman for not mobilizing his employees.

There have also been reports of draft officers getting payments for smuggling military-aged men across the border.

READ MORE: Ukraine to target doctors for mobilization

At the same time, the mobilization drive in Ukraine has become increasingly violent, with hundreds of videos surfacing on social media of men being snatched off the streets by press gangs.

Former US President Joe Biden is suing the US Department of Justice (DOJ) in an effort to block the release of interviews he gave to his ghostwriter, which later became part of a special counsel investigation into the mishandling of classified documents.

According to the Daily Intelligencer, the records include 70 hours of audio recordings and transcripts of conversations between Biden and ghostwriter Mark Zwonitzer, recorded while Zwonitzer was working on Biden’s 2017 memoir.

The recordings were obtained by special counsel Robert Hur, who was appointed to investigate whether Biden had unlawfully retained classified documents at his home after serving as vice president under Barack Obama from 2009 to 2017.

In May, the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act seeking access to the files. Biden’s lawyers argue that releasing them would violate his privacy.

“Every American, including a sitting or former vice president, has a right to privacy in the personal conversations he has within his own home,” the lawsuit said, according to the Washington Post.

Read more

In his final report released in 2024, Hur concluded that Biden had “willfully retained and disclosed” classified materials, including documents related to military policy in Afghanistan, but declined to recommend criminal charges.

Hur wrote that Biden’s memory appeared “significantly limited” during both the 2017 interviews with the ghostwriter and later interviews with the special counsel. He further argued that, if the case went to trial, Biden would likely present himself to a jury as “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

Concerns about Biden’s declining health played a major role in the 2024 presidential campaign. He withdrew from the race following a disastrous televised debate with Donald Trump, who ultimately defeated Biden’s Democratic replacement, former Vice President Kamala Harris.

Elon Musk’s SpaceX pressured the Pentagon into paying higher rates for Starlink satellite connectivity used by US kamikaze drones during the Iran war, Reuters reported on Tuesday.

The dispute reportedly centered on the Low-Cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System (LUCAS), a cheap loitering munition used by the US military. According to Reuters, SpaceX argued that the military had been paying about $5,000 for connection per terminal while effectively using a higher-tier service priced at $25,000 per month.

In March, Musk tweeted that the use of Starlink in weapon systems violated the company’s terms of service, adding that military operators should instead use Starshield, a separate network designed for government use.

It is a violation of commercial Starlink terms of service to use the terminal for weapon systems. This applies to all users and is shut down when discovered.

There is a separate network called Starshield, which is operated by the US government. This is not under SpaceX control.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 2, 2026

In practice, however, the systems remain closely intertwined, with Starshield relying on the broader Starlink network of roughly 10,000 low-Earth-orbit satellites, according to Reuters.

While the Pentagon denied breaching its agreement with SpaceX, Reuters reported that company executives later pressed officials to pay higher rates for the service. The Pentagon ultimately agreed, nearly doubling the original $30,000 price tag for each LUCAS drone.

Read more

A Pentagon official told the outlet that the military is now looking for alternative suppliers. However, no rival can reportedly offer anything close to SpaceX in scale or capabilities. Competitors such as OneWeb and Amazon’s Project Kuiper remain far smaller or are still being rolled out.

SpaceX “certainly has the US government over the barrel,” Clayton Swope, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Reuters.

Some Pentagon officials, including Deputy Defense Secretary Steve Feinberg, have become increasingly uneasy about the leverage SpaceX presently holds over military operations, according to the outlet. Yet the Pentagon is reportedly considering purchasing more than 3,500 additional Starshield subscriptions in a deal that could generate hundreds of millions of dollars annually for SpaceX ahead of its planned IPO next month.

READ MORE: Pentagon strikes deals with top AI companies

The dependence has become especially sensitive amid the soaring cost of the Iran war. Analysts have estimated that the conflict was costing Washington hundreds of millions of dollars per day, with the first six days alone consuming roughly $12.7 billion, pushing the Pentagon towards cheaper, mass-produced weapons developed by newer defense firms.

Calls for separation in Canada’s oil-rich province of Alberta have invited comparisons with Brexit from Prime Minister Mark Carney, who warned against the move and described it as a “dangerous bluff.”

The western province is set to hold a public vote in October on whether to remain part of Canada or move toward a formal referendum on independence. The vote, announced by Alberta Premier Danielle Smith last week, follows a petition drive by the pro-independence group Stay Free Alberta, which submitted more than 300,000 signatures calling for a referendum on separation.

Commenting on the developments, Carney told reporters on Monday that Canada was “absolutely stronger together.” Referring to Smith’s plan, he described the move as a “very dangerous bluff,” drawing parallels with Britain’s 2016 vote to leave the EU.

“I saw first-hand what happened in the United Kingdom when the view was, vote for this, it’ll be soft, and then we’ll negotiate,” said Carney, who served as governor of the Bank of England during the Brexit campaign. “They’re still 10 years later trying to undo what people didn’t think they were voting for but what they ended up having,” he added.

While Smith has said she supports a “united Canada,” she has defended the vote as a way for Albertans to express their views on the province’s future.

Alberta is one of Canada’s most important energy-producing regions and has long been at odds with the federal government over environmental regulations, taxation, and pipeline access. Separatist sentiment has been fueled by claims that Ottawa has held back the province’s resource economy, though polling suggests full independence remains a minority position. 

Read more

Carney has sought to improve relations with Alberta by backing new energy infrastructure projects, including an agreement signed with Smith’s government earlier this month that could pave the way for a new oil pipeline linking the province to Canada’s Pacific coast.

The agreement has drawn criticism from officials in the neighboring province of British Columbia, as well as indigenous groups and environmental activists, who have accused Carney of abandoning his climate commitments.

The Alberta debate also comes as Canada remains locked in a trade dispute with the US following Donald Trump’s return to office in January. Canada has faced sweeping US tariffs on its goods, while Trump has repeatedly referred to the country as “the 51st state.” Carney has previously warned Washington against interfering in Canada’s affairs, including discussions around Alberta’s future.

Iran has accused the US of violating the ceasefire after American fighter jets struck targets in the country’s southern Hormozgan province.

On Monday, US Central Command said American forces had carried out “self-defense strikes” on missile sites and naval vessels attempting to mine the Strait of Hormuz. According to Iranian media, several Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) naval speedboats were targeted, and at least three sailors were killed in what was the largest military clash with the US since the May 7 strikes in southern Iran.

Seyyed Majid Mousavi, commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force, said the attack constituted a breach of the fragile truce reached on April 8.

Read more

“The ceasefire violation during the negotiations was once again committed by the treacherous enemy,” Mousavi wrote on X on Tuesday.

“The IRGC Aerospace Force is ready to deliver a decisive and rapid response and carry out the orders of the respected commander-in-chief,” he added.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry released a statement condemning the “gross violation” of the ceasefire and saying that Iran would hold the US “responsible for all the consequences resulting from these aggressive and unjustified actions.”

The strikes came after US officials hinted that the two sides were close to a breakthrough in negotiations, which had stalled over disagreements regarding Iran’s nuclear program, sanctions, and the future status of the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, returned from talks with Qatari mediators in Doha on Tuesday.

Tehran had earlier said the US must regain the trust of the Iranian people after Washington and Israel launched attacks on Iran on February 28 during Omani-mediated talks.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Tuesday that finalizing an agreement could take “a few more days.” The outcome of the talks, however, remains unclear, as President Donald Trump reiterated on Monday his demand that Iran relinquish its enriched uranium stockpile – a condition Tehran has previously rejected.

Ten of the 19 migrants slated to be placed in foster homes or children’s care in Kent, England, turned out to be adults, The Sun reported on Monday.

Kent is the primary arrival point for migrants crossing the English Channel in small boats. Illegal crossings remain a hot-button issue, fueling anti-immigrant sentiment alongside a string of high-profile criminal cases linked to migrants. Nearly 1,000 undocumented migrants crossed into the UK in small boats over the past five days alone, according to government data.

A group of migrants in Kent County Council care was reassessed last year after staff raised concerns about their age, The Sun reported, citing government data released under freedom of information laws.

“This puts children already in foster or children’s homes in danger,” Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said. “We have seen absurd cases where illegal immigrants, including a Sudanese man with a receding hairline and facial hair, pretended to be children when they were clearly adults.”

The situation will “get worse now Labour’s Borders Act has passed, which no longer allows illegal immigrants to be treated as over-18 if they refuse to take an age-assessment test,” Philp added.

Read more

The Labour Party has lost significant ground to the Euroskeptic and anti-immigration Reform UK party in recent local and parliamentary elections. The government has tried several methods to tackle migration, including a plan championed by the Conservatives to relocate illegal migrants and asylum seekers to Rwanda, which was scrapped after Labour came to power in 2024.

The number of adult migrants posing as children has quadrupled over the past decade, reaching more than 1,000 last year, the Daily Mail reported, citing Home Office data.

READ MORE: Why is Keir Starmer’s government so unpopular?

In 2022, the government pledged to improve methods for assessing the age of asylum seekers, including X-rays, CT scans, and MRI imaging. Last year, the BBC reported that authorities were planning to use AI technology to verify migrants’ ages.

The US has “no responsibility” to intervene in the management of the Strait of Hormuz, located nearly 11,000 km (6,835 miles) from its borders, University of Tehran political communication professor Foad Izadi has told RT.

The strategic waterway has become a major sticking point in US-Iran peace talks, with Washington maintaining a blockade on Iranian ports and Tehran establishing control over naval traffic and charging for passage through the strait.

“The US has no responsibility in this part of the world. The US is a coastal state to the Gulf of Mexico… almost 11,000 kilometers away,” Izadi told RT in an interview on Tuesday, insisting that only Iran has the responsibility to “provide security” in the Strait of Hormuz.

READ MORE: US jets attack Iranian naval vessels

There are no international waters in the key freight corridor, as it is divided between Iranian and Omani territorial waters under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), he said.

Read more

There are legal precedents for nations charging fees from vessels traversing their territorial waters, Izadi said.

“Australia, Canada, Denmark, Turkey, they all collect fees for countries that are members of the UNCLOS… They call it pilotage fees,” he said, adding that some charges are imposed for “environmental reasons.” Countries like Türkiye, which isn’t a signatory to the convention, “just call it passage fee,” he said.

Izadi stressed that there is “no legal prohibition” on Tehran from doing the same.

“Since Iran wants to be friendly, they are going to do what Australia and Canada and Denmark are doing already,” he said.

Watch the full interview below:

Know what I’m getting really sick of as a Canadian? Harmful deferentiality towards the US that persists despite all the “elbows up” rhetoric.

In the latest example, an Air France fight took off from Paris, heading for Detroit. Do you see anything Canadian in that at all? Canada does!

The airline had royally messed up and let a passenger board from the Congo, the current global headquarters of Ebola. American authorities refused to let the plane land in their territory since they had recently banned all passengers from the Congo, specifically due to the viral outbreak. So, Canadian authorities let the plane land in Montreal. Then they let everyone off and put the passenger in question on the next flight back to Paris.

Why couldn’t they have done all that in Detroit? Is a plane considered to be inside a country the moment it decides it has feelings about the flight? No passenger is technically inside any country until they go through customs anyway. Why did they have to dump it all on Canada? I’ll tell you why. Because they had a choice, and Canada is far too nice.

The answer should have just been “no.” Not “no, but let us convene an interagency working group to explore the emotional implications of saying no.” Just “no.” No getting into the intricacies of Ebola infection risk or whose fault it all is, either. Or whether the guy is actually infected or not. Forget dedicating any bandwidth to any of that.

Perhaps Canada figured that it was doing its buddy, France, a favor, saving it from its own vetting screwup. Again, not Canada’s problem. Let them fight it out with the US. Tell France to threaten to just land the plane on Lake Erie and wish them luck.

Read more

It would have actually been the perfect time for Canada to propose, “Hey guys, you know that Gordie Howe International Bridge that Canada paid to build, running from Windsor to Detroit, that Trump insists on blocking? How about we get that sorted out in time to land this plane? Then maybe Canada will be compelled to lift a finger to help out. Otherwise, looks like this is a ‘you’ problem.”

Canada needs to stop doing any and all favors for America that aren’t a net benefit.

It wasn’t that long ago that American authorities told Canada to arrest and hold the daughter of Huawei’s founder, Meng Wanzhou, the CFO of the Chinese company herself at the time, on a US extradition request as she transited through Vancouver airport. Canada complied – and was rewarded with a massive diplomatic headache lasting years, having inserted itself in a tug-of-war between Washington and Beijing. The kind that comes with the satisfaction of having ‘helped’ and the administrative burden of proving that you didn’t cause the problem in the first place. The allegations that made the mess Canada’s problem related to violations of American anti-Iranian sanctions by the Chinese multinational, despite Canada not even having any of its own sanctions against her or Huawei.

Anyone in France knows that Washington routinely uses criminal charges as a weapon of economic warfare to target foreign executives of companies they want to buy or pressure for criminal charges. It’s the blueprint that enabled General Electric to get its hands on the French nuclear know-how of Alstom, for example.

And what thanks did Canada get for any of these accommodations? Tariffs. Insults about being useless – except as a 51st state. And constantly being told by Trump that it’s freeloading if it doesn’t blow its defense budget on-demand in the US.

Read more

Worse, the US has just been outed as meddling directly in Canadian politics. Why else would a Michigan-based electioneering app, 10xVotes, promoted by the US Ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, of the Michigan GOP himself, end up with the data of registered Alberta voters on its hardware? Turns out it was passed the info by a pro-separatist Canadian group that had been working directly with the American app, linked to shady pro-Trump Republican business and political interests and peddled by the likes of Steve Bannon, Alex Jones, and Tucker Carlson – all of whom also happen to be egging on the Canadian separatists that they couldn’t have cared less about until recently, and against all legal and political reality.

And if that hasn’t stunk up the country enough, the US also recently said that it planned to open more federal drug enforcement offices in Canada. “From a DEA perspective, we’re keeping our eye on Canada,” DEA chief Terrance Cole said at a recent US Senate hearing. “We’re going to open two more offices in Canada, proposed for ‘27.” Lemme guess. There’s a huge fentanyl problem in Alberta. Near an oil pipeline. Am I close? Because there sure as heck isn’t one that directly affects the US from Canadian territory. What do you think this is? A flop house?

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has proven that Canadians have passive aggression in abundance. Telling Trump off in various ways that are intellectual enough to not get picked up by the American president’s finely tuned insult-sensitive radar as they sail over his head. Arguably the most obvious example being Carney’s speech in Davos a few months ago, basically saying that the era of US-led hegemony is over and everyone knew that the notion of it being a net benefit to citizens of the countries that kowtowed to it was a lie that leaders have all long known about but insisted on sticking with anyway.

Canada is no longer a footnote in someone else’s policy agenda. It is drafting its own, at long last. What remains unfinished is the transition from having an agenda to behaving like it is allowed to use it without prior permission. The doormat has only really been pulled halfway out. Go ahead and give it a good yank once and for all, guys. It will hurt a lot less than the alternative.

China is restricting overseas travel for leading AI specialists from companies including Alibaba and DeepSeek, as Beijing pushes for greater self-reliance in artificial intelligence, robotics, and semiconductors, Bloomberg has reported.

Citing anonymous sources, the outlet claimed on Tuesday that Chinese authorities have begun requiring advanced AI researchers, executives, startup founders, and engineers to obtain approval before traveling abroad.

The measures – which Beijing has neither confirmed nor denied – reportedly reflect growing concerns over protecting strategically important technologies. According to Bloomberg’s sources, the government now views top AI talent as a national-security asset, placing them under restrictions previously reserved for nuclear scientists and senior executives at state-owned firms.

Last month, Chinese regulators blocked Meta’s planned $2 billion acquisition of Manus, a Chinese AI startup that relocated to Singapore in 2025. Two Manus executives were reportedly barred from leaving China during a probe into the deal, as Beijing simultaneously tightened restrictions on US investment in the country’s tech sector.

Read more

Bloomberg’s sources said that the latest travel restrictions are not connected to the Manus showdown, but are part of a broader policy to stem the flow of critical technology to the West.

For Beijing, placing export controls on talent is a logical next step after slowing the export of other elements in the AI supply chain. In two rounds of restrictions last year, China blocked the export of 14 rare earth minerals critical in the manufacture of high-tech military equipment. It also banned exports of the semiconductors that power AI supercomputers and data centers, as well as the tools used to refine them.

China extracts at least 60% of the world’s rare earth metals and processes around 90%. By restricting their export, Beijing is attempting to even the playing field with the US and its partners, which have sought to exclude China from the supply chain, while gaining valuable leverage against Washington in trade negotiations.

China’s current five-year-plan, which lays out the country’s development objectives through 2030, calls for taking “extraordinary measures” to develop self-sufficiency in semiconductors, AI, and advanced manufacturing.

Iranian Armed Forces operational command Spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaghari has recently announced that Iran intends to charge fees for the use of undersea cables passing through the Strait of Hormuz. While this news didn’t come as a surprise, it certainly heightened tensions surrounding the digital infrastructure of the Persian Gulf.

Since May 18, the Persian Gulf Strait Authority has controlled the situation in the Strait of Hormuz. This new body was established by the Supreme National Security Council of Iran and is responsible for monitoring compliance with the maritime rules set by Tehran. It was created in response to the US-initiated naval blockade that began in April.

The entire Strait of Hormuz, including its underwater infrastructure, is now viewed by Tehran as part of its jurisdiction and an area of its strategic control. 

Even before the current escalation, however, discussions about undersea internet cables in the Strait of Hormuz had surfaced in Iranian media. The topic first emerged in July 2019 during a broadcast on the state-controlled IRIB television and radio network. At that time, an expert claimed that a disruption of cables in the Strait of Hormuz could potentially affect up to 70% of the world’s internet traffic.

While this figure seems exaggerated – since the global web has backup routes and much of the transit between Europe and Asia relies on other pathways like the Red Sea, Egypt, and the Mediterranean – the statement itself is quite significant.

Even if global internet service isn’t paralyzed in the event of major damage to the cables, countries in the Arabian Peninsula would face severe communication disruptions, reduced bandwidth, increased latency, and failures of digital services.

Back in 2019, the Arab nations dismissed these warnings as fanciful Persian tales. But they may have been wrong. 

The expert opinion expressed in 2019 was not an official statement by the Iranian government about an intention to cut the cables. It only pointed to the potential vulnerabilities of the cables in the Strait of Hormuz and the international ramifications in case of a significant regional escalation. Thus, already at that time, Iran viewed the undersea digital infrastructure in the Strait of Hormuz as a potential tool for strategic leverage.

Read more

The question of whether Iran is indeed prepared to cut internet cables in the Strait of Hormuz should be viewed not as an isolated technical issue, but as part of Tehran’s broader strategy to exert pressure around this vital waterway.

For Iran, subsea digital infrastructure now serves as a new lever alongside oil, tanker traffic, ports, and energy logistics. However, there is a fundamental difference between pointing out vulnerabilities and physically destroying the cables.

In 2026, Iran returned to the topic of undersea internet cables, raising the issue to a new level. On April 22, Tasnim news agency, which is linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), published a report mapping the cable and cloud infrastructure of the Persian Gulf. Essentially, this served as a warning that Tehran may view the Gulf states’ digital infrastructure as part of the conflict zone. The report emphasized that the Gulf monarchies rely on maritime internet routes much more heavily than Iran itself does. 

In May 2026, this idea evolved into a more developed political and economic concept. Iranian state media started pushing the narrative that Iran could charge foreign tech companies for utilizing the undersea cables that run through the Strait of Hormuz. This was not merely a question of fees; it also entailed regulatory oversight, requiring operators and major technology firms to adhere to Iranian regulations, as well as efforts to monopolize cable maintenance and repair services. 

From a military perspective, Iran has the capability to threaten cable infrastructure: the Strait of Hormuz is quite shallow, maritime traffic is dense, and the cables are physically vulnerable to damage. Most damage to subsea cables occurs not from sabotage but from anchors, fishing gear, and navigational errors. Thus, there is a real possibility that these cables may become damaged. When it comes to physical interference rather than a precise cyberattack, the vulnerabilities of such infrastructure are evident.  

Economically, Iran can assert its right to charge for the use of subsea cables within its maritime jurisdiction. According to international maritime law, coastal states have the authority to regulate the installation and maintenance of such infrastructure near their shores. This is why Tehran views the cables not just as  part of an international communication network but as an object under its control.

The political ramifications of such actions or the deliberate severing of cables would be substantial for Iran. Such a move would likely be perceived by the US, the Gulf nations, and major tech companies not as a ‘symmetrical response’ but as an attack on critical international infrastructure.

Moreover, executing such an operation discreetly would be exceedingly difficult for Iran, as the area is under constant military surveillance, and any blatant act of sabotage would give Tehran’s adversaries ample reason for a severe retaliatory response. For this reason, attempting to physically cut cables in the Strait of Hormuz would be an extremely risky maneuver for Iran, and would effectively escalate the conflict to a new level.

Read more

Seven primary communication systems run along the seabed of the Strait of Hormuz; however, they branch out into about 17 distinct cable lines. Some serve mainly regional purposes: the FALCON system connects India with Oman, Iran, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and extends to Egypt, while the Ooredoo Gulf Pathway manages a significant portion of digital traffic within the Persian Gulf. Other cable systems are strategically vital, including the SEA-ME-WE 5, linking Southeast Asia with the Middle East and Europe, and TGN-Gulf, connecting Gulf nations’ infrastructure with India and global networks, including the US.

The security of these cables cannot be ensured without military force. The cable infrastructure is extensive, runs along the seabed, and is physically exposed. However, as recent months have shown, neither side is eager to place their military vessels at risk. 

Repairing damaged cables presents its own set of challenges. Restoring a severed cable necessitates the deployment of specialized ships to the area and that their safe operation is ensured. In the context of military tensions, this quickly transforms from an engineering issue into a political and military one.

Without Tehran’s direct or at least tacit consent, repair efforts in the strait may prove impossible. This situation turns the threat of damage to the cables into a tool for leveraging power, since in addition to the disruption of traffic, the repair process may be complicated. 

Damage to undersea cables in the Strait of Hormuz could impact not only internet speed but also the region’s connectivity with major global IT platforms. A significant portion of the digital infrastructure, including cloud services, data centers, corporate platforms, and financial systems, relies on international data transmission routes.

Disruptions in communication with Southern Europe – home to major data centers for AWS, Microsoft, and other cloud service providers – could be particularly sensitive. If data traffic from the Gulf countries needs to be urgently redirected through alternative routes, the process would put additional strain on other parts of the network. Consequently, users might experience delays, reduced speeds, unstable service quality, and interruptions in access to cloud platforms.

Predicting which specific services will suffer the most is nearly impossible in advance. Information about land-based communication lines, backup routes, and actual traffic redistribution schemes is typically not publicly available. Therefore, the repercussions will depend not only on how many cables are affected but also on how swiftly operators can reroute the traffic.

Read more

Generally, one damaged cable doesn’t trigger widespread internet collapse; traffic can be redistributed through backup routes. However, if multiple cables fail simultaneously, it would cause a drop in internet service quality. In the Gulf countries, this could impact banking operations, digital government services, cloud platforms, corporate communications, messaging apps, and logistics systems.

On a global scale, services like Telegram are unlikely to cease functioning entirely. However, in certain Gulf nations, this would cause problems: messages may be delayed, the connection could become unstable, and in the event of serious damage to several cables, access to specific services might be temporarily disrupted. 

It is most likely that instead of actually damaging the cables, Iran will use the threat of such a possibility as a lever of influence. It suffices for Tehran to mention the possibility that these cables could become targets. This already alters market behavior: operators factor in added risks, repair ships proceed more cautiously in the conflict zone, Gulf countries reevaluate backup routes, and investors assess the region’s vulnerabilities not just in terms of oil but also digital infrastructure.

Meanwhile, the consequences of physical damage to the cables would differ based on the region. This wouldn’t cause a global internet blackout; there are alternative routes in place, and transit between Europe and Asia relies on various paths. However, for the Gulf states, the impact would be far more severe, affecting banking operations, cloud services, data centers, logistics, and digital government platforms. The greatest danger lies not in a single incident, but rather in a prolonged disruption and a situation in which repair ships would not be able to operate safely in the conflict zone. 

Undersea cables remain primarily a means of strategic coercion for Iran – a way to demonstrate that responses to blockades or military pressure could extend beyond the oil market to digital infrastructure as well. Physically cutting the cables would be a last resort, possible only done in the event of significant escalation – however, in the logic of its current pressure strategy, it wouldn’t be the most rational move for Iran. 

Nine countries have withdrawn from a Czech initiative aimed at jointly procuring artillery ammunition for Ukraine, according to Czech President Petr Pavel. The scheme has been plagued by underinvestment since its inception.

Some 18 countries, including Canada, Denmark, Germany, and the Netherlands, signed up to partake in the initiative when it was announced by Pavel in 2024. At the time, Western manufacturers were unable to meet Kiev’s appetite for ammunition, producing 1.3 million shells in a year, while Russia was able to make 4.5 million at a quarter of the cost.

“The initiative is still working, but the new difficulty is that only about nine member states are contributing financially,” Pavel told the Financial Times on Tuesday. “This initiative has been delivering up to 50% of all large caliber ammunition to the Ukrainians, so in this sense it cannot be replaced easily by anything else.”

Read more

Although the initiative has managed to source around four million pieces of artillery ammunition for Kiev, it has fallen dramatically short of its targets. As of February, it has raised €1.4 billion ($1.62 billion) to purchase ammo, less than a third of the €5 billion Pavel had hoped to raise, NATO officials told Reuters.

Pavel refused to say which countries had pulled out of the initiative, although an unnamed Western military official told the Financial Times that Germany and some Nordic nations were among those still participating.

Ukraine has faced a shortage of artillery shells since early 2022, with Russian gun crews carrying out as many as five times more fire missions than their Ukrainian counterparts, and Ukraine’s then-Defense Minister Rustem Umerov pleading for supplies to alleviate the “shell hunger” in early 2024. The Czech initiative failed to even the score, and by the end of 2025, Ukrainian forces had replaced artillery with one-way attack drones in most battlefield situations, Russian military sources told RIA Novosti in November.

As the primacy of artillery declined on the battlefield, support for Ukraine declined in Prague. Since his election last year, Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babis has audited the ammo initiative, and cut all use of Czech funds for the program, which he said lacked transparency and funneled billions of dollars to unknown beneficiaries.

While Babis has kept the scheme running with Prague playing the role of non-contributing intermediary, “some countries now feel that it is strange to pay for something that is not even properly supported by the ruling politicians of the lead country,” a Western official told the Financial Times.

US federal agents have used tear gas against protesters outside the immigration detention center in Newark, New Jersey after days of unrest.

The rally was held on Monday in solidarity with detainees reportedly staging a hunger strike at the Delaney Hall facility.

A sweeping immigration enforcement campaign launched by US President Donald Trump shortly after taking office has led to thousands of arrests across the country. Public support for the crackdown has steadily declined, with most Americans saying the tactics used by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) go too far, becoming increasingly violent and, in some cases, deadly.

Videos circulating online show federal agents using pepper-ball projectiles to disperse the crowd. Democratic US Senator Andy Kim can be seen standing between protesters and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents surrounding a detained individual as an armored vehicle is passing by.

@njdotcom

Federal agents fired upon protesters outside Delaney Hall in Newark using what appeared to be pepper balls following days of unrest at the privately run ICE jail. U.S. Sen. Andy Kim can be seen in the video standing between protesters and ICE agents during an arrest. Kim later said he was caught in a cloud of pepper spray in the melee. 🎥 Jelani Gibson

♬ original sound - NJ.com | New Jersey News

Kim later told local media that he was caught in a cloud of pepper spray in the melee. Another video circulating online show mutual aid volunteers pouring water into Kim’s eyes while he holds an ice pack in his hand.

The DHS said in a statement later on Monday that no one was “directly struck by pepper ball projectiles.” The agency noted that “rioters obstructed law enforcement from exiting” the facility and officers “issued multiple lawful verbal commands for rioters to clear the area.”

Посмотреть эту публикацию в Instagram

Публикация от Veronica De La Cruz (@veronicadelacruztv)

According to protesters, inmates at Delaney Hall had organized the hunger strike against inhumane conditions, including poor-quality food and subpar medical care.

US Representative Rob Menendez, New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill, and other Democratic New Jersey officials are demanding that the facility be shut down over the complaints. The officials visited the detention center over the weekend, where eventually members of New Jersey’s congressional delegation were allowed to enter.

The US has told NATO’s European members that it will reduce its military contributions to the bloc as Washington’s military planners set their sights on China, Der Spiegel reported on Tuesday.

Delivered by senior Pentagon adviser Alexander Velez-Green at a confidential NATO meeting in Brussels last week, the message from Washington marks the latest step in US President Donald Trump’s slow disengagement from Europe.

Trump has reportedly drawn up a “naughty and nice” list of NATO members based on their support for his policies, and earlier this month announced that he would withdraw 5,000 US troops from Germany.

Read more

According to Der Spiegel, Velez-Green told NATO members that the US will drastically reduce its commitments to the ‘NATO Force Model’ – the contingent of troops and equipment that the bloc can deploy on short notice.

The US will cut the number of fighter jets available to NATO by a third, and significantly reduce the number of strategic bombers and warships, the newspaper reported. NATO will also receive no American submarines or drones, leaving its European members to provide this hardware themselves, Velez-Green reportedly said.

It is unclear how many – if any – US troops will be pulled from the NATO Force Model.

The announcement reportedly shocked the Europeans at the meeting, who had predicted more minor and gradual cuts. Now, Der Spiegel claimed, the US expects them to have a plan in place to fill the gap before the bloc’s annual summit in Türkiye this July.

Read more

However, the move comes amid a broader scaling back of the US military presence in Europe, where more than 80,000 US troops were stationed in 2025. The US has maintained a permanent presence there since the end of World War II, but Pentagon sources told Der Spiegel that they want to scale this presence back in preparation for a potential conflict with China in the Indo-Pacific region.

At a meeting in Sweden last week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told NATO foreign ministers that “there are going to be eventually less US troops in Europe than there have historically been.

“We have obligations in the Indo-Pacific; we have obligations in the Middle East; we have obligations in the Western Hemisphere,” Rubio told reporters, adding that the US wants to position its forces to fight “a two-front conflict” if necessary.

While Rubio maintained that “these are not political decisions,” Trump has explicitly politicized the deployment of US troops in Europe. After pulling American service members from Germany amid a spat with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, the US president announced that he would send an additional 5,000 troops to Poland, “based on the successful election” of conservative President Karol Nawrocki.

A Georgian court has jailed two Ukrainian nationals for smuggling military-grade explosives into the country.

The men were sentenced to seven and ten years respectively after being convicted by the Tbilisi City Court of illegally acquiring, storing, transporting, and selling hexogen as well as smuggling the explosive material into Georgia.

In September 2025, Georgian security services discovered 2.4 kg of hexogen – known as RDX and described by the authorities as a “high-powered explosive stronger than TNT” – hidden inside a Mercedes-Benz truck with Ukrainian license plates. The vehicle had reportedly entered Georgia through the Sarpi crossing from Türkiye, having traveled via Romania and Bulgaria.

Read more

“The defendants were found guilty of the illegal acquisition, storage, carrying, and sale of explosives, as well as smuggling them across the Georgian customs border,” the court said.

Investigators said the explosives were destined for a residential building in Tbilisi’s Avlabari district. Although the truck driver reportedly claimed the shipment was headed to Russia as part of ‘Operation Spiderweb 2’, Georgia’s security service said the evidence pointed only to the Tbilisi address.

The ruling came as Russian FSB chief Aleksandr Bortnikov accused Ukraine of turning into “Europe’s largest hub of weapons and ammunition trafficking” and being a driver of instability across the post-Soviet Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Speaking on Tuesday at a meeting of CIS security agencies, Bortnikov said the West had transformed Ukraine into a “testing ground” for new weapons and military artificial intelligence systems.

READ MORE: Poland braces for flood of Ukrainian guns – media

“Under the close supervision of the West Ukraine has become a serious factor of instability in the Commonwealth area” Bortnikov stated, adding that Ukrainian crime groups were involved in synthetic drug production. According to Bortnikov, Russian and Belarusian security services blocked an attempt earlier this year to smuggle more than 500 explosive devices into Russia.

The comments echoed earlier statements by Russia’s UN envoy, Vassily Nebenzia, who told the Security Council in April that weapons supplied to Ukraine were ending up in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, and claimed “one in three assault rifles” used by extremist groups came from Ukraine.

The Canadian government has called for an independent investigation into Israel’s “appalling” treatment of activists aboard the Gaza-bound flotilla.

Prime Minister Mark Carney said Monday that “the protection of all civilians and respect for human dignity must be upheld everywhere, at all times,” according to a government readout of his call with Israeli President Isaac Herzog.

Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand said Israel’s denial of consular access to detainees violated the Vienna Convention, an international treaty requiring countries to allow detained foreign nationals to contact their diplomatic officials. Ottawa had provided West Jerusalem with evidence of abuse and expected “those responsible to be held accountable,” she wrote on X on Monday.

The diplomatic clash follows Israel’s interception of the flotilla in international waters on May 18-19 and the detention of hundreds of activists attempting to deliver aid to Gaza. National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir later released footage showing detainees kneeling with their hands restrained behind their backs while he mocked them on camera.

Read more

Activists later alleged beatings, the use of tasers, sexual assault, humiliation, stress positions, and the denial of food, water, and consular access during detention. Israel has denied the allegations.

Canada appears to be the first government to formally call for an independent investigation into the detentions, while multiple countries have condemned the interception of the flotilla and allegations of abuse against activists.

Canada’s response is particularly notable, given its longstanding support for Israel. Ottawa recognized Israel shortly after its creation in 1948, has frequently backed it diplomatically at the UN, and has developed extensive trade, security, and intelligence ties over decades. Former Prime Minister Stephen Harper famously told Israel’s parliament in 2014: “Through fire and water, Canada will stand with you.”

READ MORE: What is the Gaza flotilla ‘monstrously’ abused by Israel?

Israel claims the blockade of Gaza is necessary to prevent weapons from getting into the enclave. It has also denied withholding supplies from Palestinians in Gaza, almost 2 million of whom have been displaced since the outbreak of the conflict between Israel and Hamas in October 2023.

Western spy agencies are intending to use Syrian militants as a proxy force against Iran, Russian Federal Security Service chief Aleksandr Bortnikov has said.

The jihadists, who fought for Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) and other terrorist groups, are being moved from their detention facilities in Syria to special camps in Iraq, Bortnikov said during a meeting of the security chiefs from the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in Russia’s Irkutsk Region on Tuesday.

“The history of Islamic State began with similar Iraqi prison complexes under the protection of Western coalition intelligence agencies,” he stressed.

The CIS was established in 1991, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, to promote economic, political and security cooperation between members. It currently includes nine nations: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Moldova, and Uzbekistan.

The actions of Western spy agencies also pose a danger to the members of the organization as the released militants, “include individuals from CIS countries who fought in the Islamic State and other terrorist groups and later ended up in Syrian prisons,” Bortnikov warned. They can be used not only across the Middle East, but also in their home countries, he added.

Read more

“Undoubtedly, the escalation of the Iranian conflict and the involvement of an increasing number of parties in it is threatening to destabilize the entire Islamic world,” the FSB chief stressed.

Indirect negotiations are currently ongoing between the US and Iran amid a fragile truce, which was established in early April after a month of intense hostilities initiated by the Americans and the Israelis. Meanwhile, Tehran continues to prevent the ships of Washington’s allies from sailing through the Strait of Hormuz, which accounts for some 25% of the global crude oil trade, while the US maintains its own blockade of Iranian ports.

On Monday, Iran’s top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reportedly arrived in Doha for talks with Qatar’s prime minister on a potential peace deal with the US.

However, both sides downplayed hopes of a swift breakthrough, with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio saying that Washington was willing to give diplomacy a chance before deciding whether to deal with Iran in “another way.”

READ MORE: Netanyahu orders Israeli military to intensify Lebanon attacks

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said on Monday that the fact that the sides were able to reach common ground on some issue “does not mean that the signing of an agreement is imminent.”

China has warned against “bloc confrontation” after officials from the Australia-India-Japan-US ‘Quad’ grouping met in New Dehli.

Beijing said on Tuesday that any collaborative effort should contribute to regional ​peace, stability, and prosperity.

“We also ​do not support the formation ​of exclusive cliques or bloc confrontation,” Chinese Foreign Ministry ‌spokesperson ⁠Mao Ning said at a press briefing. “No cooperation should undermine ​mutual trust and cooperation ​among regional countries.”

Beijing’s response came as the foreign ministers from India, Australia, Japan, and the US met in New Delhi.

The meeting, chaired by India’s S. Jaishankar, was attended by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, and Japanese Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi.

Addressing the press alongside FM @SenatorWong of Australia, FM Toshimitsu Motegi of Japan and @SecRubio of USA after Quad Foreign Ministers’ Meeting.

🇮🇳 🇦🇺 🇯🇵 🇺🇸 https://t.co/cL7nb50X2u

— Dr. S. Jaishankar (@DrSJaishankar) May 26, 2026

Jaishankar said the bloc’s focus will be on the Indo-Pacific, “which is the specific remit of the Quad,” Mint reported.

At the meeting, the Quad countries agreed to jointly ​build ⁠a port in the Pacific island nation of Fiji and signed pacts covering critical ⁠minerals ​and energy ​security.

They said the Quad Critical Minerals Initiative was aimed at “collaborating to secure and diversify critical minerals supply chains.”

Read more

“As four leading maritime nations in the Indo-Pacific, we are united in our conviction that peace and stability in the maritime domain underpin the security and prosperity of the region,” the countries said in a statement.

“We strongly oppose any destabilizing or unilateral actions that seek to change the status quo, including by force or coercion, which escalate tensions and undermine regional peace and stability” in the Indo-Pacific, the statement added.

The Quad grouping originated as a Japanese diplomatic initiative nearly 15 years ago but gained prominence with support from former US President Joseph Biden. However, current US President Donald Trump’s tariff wars have injected uncertainty into the group’s direction.

The Quad nations were expected to hold a summit in India last year, but that did not materialize. India was particularly hit hard by Trump’s punitive trade tariffs.

The Quad joint statement did not set a specific date for its next meeting. “We look forward to the next Quad Leaders’ Summit hosted by India later this year and the next Quad Foreign Ministers’ Meeting hosted by Australia in 2026,” it said.

The previous Quad summit was held in the US in September 2024.

CNN and the BBC should have come to the Lugansk People’s Republic (LPR), the site of a deadly Ukrainian drone attack on a college dorm, if they say they distrust Moscow’s narrative, US journalist Rick Sanchez has said.

Kiev struck a teacher training college dormitory in Starobelsk with several waves of UAVs on Friday, killing 21 people – most of them teenage girls – and injuring 65 others.

Sanchez, who used to work for MSNBC, CNN and Fox News and now hosts the Sanchez Effect program on RT, was among some 50 foreign journalists from 19 countries who visited the site of the attack this weekend. CNN and the BBC rejected the offer to send correspondents on a trip to the LPR at the invitation of the Russian authorities.

The US journalist said that he came to Starobelsk and saw for himself that the Ukrainian claims that there were Russian military installations near the affected college and the dorm were false.

“I don’t believe the Russian Foreign Ministry, right? I want to hear it from the people there… And that’s why you come here. The BBC should have come here asking those questions. CNN should have come here asking those questions,” he said.

Read more

According to Sanchez, it was “frustrating” to see the Western media ignoring the attack on the Russian dormitory and only focusing on Moscow’s retaliatory strikes against Ukrainian military targets, which included the deployment of hypersonic intermediate-range Oreshnik missiles.

“How do you legitimately say ‘I am a journalist’ if you don’t cover one story, but you cover another story?” he wondered.

RT senior correspondent Murad Gazdiev, who was among the journalists with whom Sanchez discussed the decision of the BBC and CNN not to visit Starobelsk, insisted that it was a “statement” on the part of the Western outlets.

They basically said: “we aren’t interested. We’re only interested in any potential civilian casualties on the side that we support. The side that we don’t support - screw them,” Gazdiev explained.

Irish journalist Chay Bowes, who hosts the Moscow Mules show on RT, noted that “the same money that funds the BBC, buys the weapons from the US now and hands them to this dictatorship in Kiev.”

READ MORE: Sanchez: ‘Fear and anger’ after deadly Ukrainian strike on college dorm (VIDEO)

Iranian reporter Christopher Helali from DD Geopolitics website agreed, saying that people working for the BBC and CNN “aren’t journalists. They’re stenographers. They’re not free.”

The Czech government has approved tighter rules for Ukrainian migrants, including restrictions on residency rights and welfare benefits, amid concerns over alleged abuse of aid.

The Czech cabinet approved the legislation on Monday at the proposal of Interior Minister Lubomir Metnar, endorsing sweeping changes to seven Ukraine-related laws governing asylum and foreign residency. Officials said the measures were aimed at addressing concerns that Ukrainian refugees enjoyed advantages over local residents.

The Czech Republic, a country of 10 million people hosting around 385,000 Ukrainian migrants, has one of the EU’s highest refugee populations per capita, Metnar said. He added that EU discussions on extending refugee protections beyond 2027 could include limits for military-age men, as Ukraine faces shortages of soldiers.

Read more

Prime Minister Andrej Babis said the government had approved a tougher security-driven crackdown on temporary protection rules for Ukrainian migrants as part of a broader security push, though the bill still requires parliamentary approval.

“We are tightening the conditions for granting temporary protection, as we have in our government’s program statement,” Babis stated.

Under the proposal, Ukrainians receiving humanitarian aid would have to work, run a business, or actively seek employment through the Czech Labor Office. To qualify for payments, they would also need to spend at least 16 days each month in the Czech Republic. Children, students, and pensioners would be exempt.

The government also wants to strip temporary protection from migrants who spend more than 30 days outside the Schengen Area or are expelled over criminal or administrative offenses. The bill would tighten access to special residence permits and overhaul state-funded health insurance rules for Ukrainians under temporary protection.

Read more

The legislation would also force owners of Ukrainian-registered cars to enter their vehicles into the Czech registry and undergo the same technical inspections required for Czech drivers. Czech media say around 28,000 Ukrainian cars are officially registered in the country, though experts estimate the real number could be twice as high.

Governments across Europe are increasingly scaling back support for Ukrainian refugees as pressure grows on welfare systems and public frustration over migration costs rises. More than 4.35 million Ukrainians are registered for temporary protection across the EU, according to Eurostat, while countries including Poland, Germany, and Hungary have already moved to cut benefits.

A team of Thai police officers have gone viral after disguising themselves as a female dance troupe to arrest a suspected drug dealer during a street festival. The operation took place last week in the Tha Luang district in the central Lop Buri Province, where officers dressed in sparkly outfits to get close to their target without raising suspicion.

In a Facebook post, Tha Luang Police identified the suspect as Mekha Fa-wap-wap, who was detained on drug and illegal gambling charges. Police seized 53 methamphetamine pills, more than 200 plastic bags believed to be used for drug distribution, and a mobile phone allegedly linked to an illegal online slot-machine operation.

A photo shared after the arrest showed a team of mostly male officers in glittering dresses posing with the handcuffed suspect, prompting a wave of jokes from readers. “21 Jump Street at play,” one social media user wrote, referring to an American comedy film about undercover cops posing as high school students.

The cross-dressing sting was not the first time Thai police have used theatrical tactics to catch a suspect. In February, Bangkok officers dressed as a red-and-gold lion dance troupe during Lunar New Year festivities to arrest a man accused of stealing Buddhist artifacts.

Read more

The Bangkok team had previously also used other disguises, including construction workers, foliage, and Lycra-clad wrestlers, to approach suspects who might recognize plainclothes officers.

“You cannot hide from the invisible, or from what you cannot see,” Bangkok police captain Lertvarit Lertvorapreecha told The Guardian in February, stating that “The fastest way of arresting someone is to surprise them, when they’re enjoying life, not knowing what’s going on around them.”

While the intricate operations have repeatedly gone viral both in Thailand and abroad, Thai police have stressed the goal of the operations is effective law enforcement rather than making social media content or gaining internet fame.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has told the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to intensify strikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon to deliver what he described as a decisive blow to the armed group.

The escalation could further complicate indirect talks between the US and Iran, as Tehran has stated that the Israeli military must end its operation against Hezbollah in order for a ceasefire with Washington to be extended. US President Donald Trump previously said Israel should only take “surgical” military action in Lebanon.

In a video message on Monday, Netanyahu insisted that Israel is “at war with Hezbollah” and that the country’s authorities “are not taking our foot off the gas.”

“On the contrary, I have instructed them [the IDF] to press the pedal even harder,” he said.

Hezbollah is “attacking us with drones… but what this requires of us now is to intensify the blows, increase the force,” Netanyahu stressed.

Read more

Shortly afterward, the Israeli military announced more strikes against Hezbollah targets in the Beqaa Valley in eastern Lebanon, as well as other parts of the country.

Netanyahu’s order came despite the ongoing ceasefire between the Jewish state and the Lebanese government in Beirut, which was agreed in mid-April after more than a month of fighting and was extended earlier in May.

The truce reduced the intensity of hostilities but did not stop them completely, with Israel continuing its bombardment of Lebanese territory and Hezbollah responding with UAV attacks.

Earlier on Monday, one IDF soldier was killed and another seriously wounded by a drone in southern Lebanon.

The development prompted far-right Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir to state that “it’s time for the prime minister to bang on Trump’s table and inform him that we are returning to war in Lebanon.” Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich insisted that for every drone fired by Hezbollah “ten buildings must fall in Beirut.”

Axios reporter Barak Ravid said on X on Monday that an unnamed US official had indicated that the Trump administration could support intensified Israeli attacks in Lebanon.

“Hezbollah has ignored repeated requests to stop firing… Israel will never be expected to passively absorb attacks on its forces and civilians. This is not the Biden administration,” the official said.

READ MORE: Iranian enriched uranium stockpile to be ‘destroyed’ – Trump

According to the Lebanese Health Ministry, at least 3,185 people have been killed in the country after Israel launched its military operation against Hezbollah in early March, just days after the US-Israeli attack on Iran.

The number of Germans who believe Russia may launch a military attack on their country has fallen sharply since last year, according to a recent poll.

In recent years, senior German officials have repeatedly claimed that Moscow could pose a direct military threat to NATO by the end of the decade.

In an interview with the Süddeutsche Zeitung earlier this month, Germany’s top military officer, General Carsten Breuer, asserted that Russia could be ready for such a confrontation by 2029.

However, only 38% of Germans now consider an attack from Russia to be a plausible threat – down 14 percentage points from September of last year, Bild am Sonntag reported on Saturday, citing an INSA survey.

Half of respondents said they “are no longer afraid of a Russian attack at all,” according to the newspaper.

The poll also found that only 17% of those surveyed believe the German military would be capable of defending the country in the event of an attack, while 43% doubt the US would come to Berlin’s aid in such a scenario.

Read more

Following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Germany launched a major rearmament drive, with defense spending projected to exceed €500 billion ($585 billion) by 2029.

Despite mounting economic challenges and a widening budget deficit, Chancellor Friedrich Merz has pledged to turn the Bundeswehr into the “strongest conventional army in Europe.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly dismissed claims that Moscow plans to attack NATO as “nonsense,” accusing European leaders of using the narrative to distract their citizens from domestic problems.

Commenting on Germany’s military buildup last month, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova warned that the country’s rearmament could trigger a global tragedy comparable to World War II.

Police investigating a gunshot incident in Scottsbluff, Nebraska, discovered that the gunman in question was not, in fact, a man, but a dog that had accidentally pulled the trigger, injuring a passerby, local news has reported.

Officers were called to a store on Saturday and informed that someone had been shot by a shotgun, local news outlet KNOP reported. Upon arrival, they found a pickup truck with one of its doors blown out, suggesting that the weapon had been fired from inside the truck.

They discovered that the owner of the truck had left his dog in the backseat as he went into the store. The dog had moved from one side of the seat to the other, catching its paw on the trigger of a loaded shotgun. The blast ripped through the skin of the vehicle, and one pellet struck a woman sitting at a nearby traffic light with her arm hanging out the window of her vehicle.

The woman was taken to a hospital and treated for non-life-threatening injuries.

Read more

It is unclear whether the dog’s owner has been charged with a crime. However, the Scottsbluff Police Department warned Nebraska residents that it is illegal to travel with a loaded firearm in a vehicle.

Last November, a Pennsylvania man was seriously injured when his dog jumped onto his bed and set off a shotgun that lay loaded on the mattress with its safety off.

Six months earlier, a similar incident took place in Memphis, Tennessee, when a pitbull terrier jumped onto his owner’s bed as he and his girlfriend lay there with a loaded firearm. The dog’s paw got stuck in the weapon’s trigger guard, police said, causing the gun to fire and a bullet to graze the man’s thigh.

In Kansas in 2023, a dog in the back seat of a pickup truck accidentally triggered a loaded rifle and fatally shot a man in the back.

US President Donald Trump has outlined his preferred options for disposing of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile as negotiators meet for high-stakes talks in Qatar.

The US has demanded that Iran completely dismantle its nuclear program, while Tehran insists that uranium enrichment is its sovereign right. Iranian officials have denied seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

“The Enriched Uranium (Nuclear Dust!) will either be immediately turned over to the United States to be brought home and destroyed or, preferably, in conjunction and coordination with the Islamic Republic of Iran, destroyed in place or at another acceptable location, with the Atomic Energy Commission, or its equivalent, witnessing this process and event,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Monday evening.

On Sunday, CBS News, citing a senior US official, reported that Iran had agreed “in principle” to dispose of its enriched uranium. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei, however, said on Monday that the negotiations were focused on ending the armed conflict with the US. “At this stage, we are not discussing nuclear issues,” he said.

Read more

The sides are expected to discuss reopening the Strait of Hormuz and potentially unfreezing Iranian assets. According to media reports, the two sides are close to extending the truce announced on April 8 by another 60 days.

Axios and Al Arabiya reported that the draft agreement to be discussed in Doha includes a commitment to negotiate the fate of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile over a 60-day period.

Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said on Friday that Iran would “not compromise on its rights” as a sovereign nation. Iranian officials said ahead of the talks that the US needed to rebuild trust after launching airstrikes on Iran in late February, shortly after a round of Omani-mediated negotiations.

US fighter jets have struck Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) speedboats as explosions were heard near the port of Bandar Abbas, Iranian media reported.

The reported attack occurred on Monday as US and Iranian negotiators arrived in Qatar in hopes of advancing stalled talks.

According to SNN, the attack on the Iranian vessels took place south of Larak Island, in the narrowest section of the Strait of Hormuz, which remains under a dual US-Iranian blockade. At least three Iranian sailors were killed, SNN said.

Media outlets also reported a series of explosions in Bandar Abbas, home to an Iranian naval base.

Read more

Al Jazeera journalist Ali Hashem cited an Iranian official as saying that the IRGC targeted an unidentified vessel after US jets struck IRGC boats. The source added that gunfire was heard near Bandar Abbas.

The US Central Command (CENTCOM) later said in a statement that US forces had “conducted self-defense strikes in southern Iran today to protect our troops from threats posed by Iranian forces.” The statement added that the targets included missile sites and “Iranian boats attempting to emplace mines.”

Earlier, the US military warned that it would intervene in response to Iranian attacks on ships transiting the strait.

Iran closed the vital shipping lane to vessels from “hostile countries” in response to the US and Israeli airstrikes launched on February 28. Last month, the US announced a blockade of Iranian ports.

The fragile truce reached between the US and Iran on April 8 has largely held, even as President Donald Trump repeatedly threatened to resume the bombing campaign unless Iran agreed to his demands.

Several Democratic candidates vying for seats in the US Congress have accused their Republican rivals of protecting the wealthy and politically connected associates of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, referring to them as the “Epstein class.”

The party has sought to use the controversy as part of a broader push to regain control of Congress from the GOP.

While President Donald Trump has long accused the Democrats of having ties to Epstein, his administration has come under mounting criticism from both Democrats and some Republicans over its handling of the Epstein files. Critics have accused the Department of Justice of concealing key details through heavy redactions in materials released last November and January.

In the race for an Ohio Senate seat, Democrat Sherrod Brown has been airing a TV ad for weeks that accuses his Republican rival, Jon Husted, of receiving more money from Epstein associates than any other members of Congress.

“Husted’s taken over $116,000 from one of Epstein’s closest friends and co-conspirators,” the ad says, referring to billionaire Leslie Wexner, a longtime client of the disgraced financier.

“Last year, he took a maximum donation from him just weeks before voting to block the release of the Epstein files,” the ad alleges.

Read more

In Maine, presumptive Democratic nominee Graham Platner has aired a similar TV ad accusing Republican Senator Susan Collins of selling out voters to “the president and the Epstein class.”

Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff has also repeatedly portrayed the Trump administration as part of a corrupt elite tied to the convicted sex offender.

“This is the Epstein class ruling our country,” Ossoff said at a rally in February.

Speaking to Axios, Republican National Committee spokesperson Kiersten Pels dismissed the Democrats’ criticism as “cynical political theater” from a “party with no message and no credibility.”

The Epstein files have also exposed growing divisions within the GOP. Outgoing Representative Thomas Massie, who joined Democrat Ro Khanna in advancing the Epstein Files Transparency Act, has suggested his push for disclosure put him at odds with Trump.

Last week, Massie lost a Kentucky primary to Trump-backed Republican Ed Gallrein, whose campaign received support from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC), and other special interest groups.

US fighter jets have struck Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) speedboats as explosions were heard near the port of Bandar Abbas, Iranian media reported.

The reported attack occurred on Monday as US and Iranian negotiators arrived in Qatar in hopes of advancing stalled talks.

According to SNN, the attack on the Iranian vessels took place south of Larak Island, in the narrowest section of the Strait of Hormuz, which remains under a dual US-Iranian blockade. At least three Iranian sailors were killed, SNN said.

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

Moscow has demanded the Czech Republic immediately release Metropolitan Bishop Hilarion detained in the country, branding the incident a “fabricated persecution” of the senior Russian Christian Orthodox hierarch.

The bishop was detained by Czech police on Sunday while traveling in a car from his parish church of Saint Peter and Paul in the resort town of Karlovy Vary. According to Hilarion’s press service, the law enforcement did not provide any solid reasoning behind the traffic stop, proceeding to search the car instead. The law enforcement recovered “four small containers with white substance” from the car’s trunk, believed to be illicit drugs.

“I have never had any connection to the illegal drug trade. Since I’m a clergyman, the very suggestion of such a thing is utterly false. I insist on a full, independent, and procedurally impeccable investigation of what happened,” the bishop said in a statement. 

According to the hierarch’s legal team, his car was searched without proper procedure, including witnesses and video recording. The law enforcement officers also allegedly went straight for its trunk and did not search the personal belongings of Hilarion and his driver. 

Read more

The Russian Foreign Ministry has strongly condemned the detaining of the bishop, accusing the Czech authorities of “fabricating” the drug claims and staging a “provocation” against the bishop and the Russian Orthodox Church as a whole. The ministry will lodge a formal protest over the incident and summon the Czech ambassador, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said.

The Russian Orthodox Church has issued a similar statement, suggesting the incident was a part of a broader “intimidation” and “rabid spy mania” campaign against it waged by the Czech authorities. 

Bishop Hilarion has long held senior posts within the church hierarchy, including leading the Hungarian and Budapest Metropolises from June 2022 to late 2024. The hierarch was stripped down from the post amid sexual misconduct and lavish lifestyle allegations circulated by some media outlets at the time. While none of the claims were proven or led to any legal consequences, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church formally reprimanded Hilarion over “the discrepancy between the nature of his relationships with his immediate circle and his way of life with the image of a monk and a clergyman.” 

China has successfully launched the Shenzhou-23 spacecraft, sending three astronauts to its Tiangong space station on a regular crew rotation mission. The crew will relieve their colleagues currently in orbit and continue long duration experiments aboard the country’s permanent outpost. 

RT correspondent Konstantin Rozhkov reported from the Jiuquan launch site in the Gobi Desert, where a Long March-2F rocket carried the spacecraft into orbit. He noted the parallels between China’s crewed program and Russia’s long track record with Soyuz flights, as well as the two countries’ enduring cooperation dating back to the 1990s, which has included training Chinese astronauts.

READ MORE: China launches year-long orbital mission with lunar ambitions (VIDEOS)

He also spoke to Zhou Yaqiang, a senior engineer at the China Manned Space Agency, who said that China wants Tiangong to serve as “a shared home and a common asset for all humanity” and plans to “strengthen cooperation, deepen exchanges, and jointly promote the long term, peaceful and shared development of space activities.”

Watch more in RT’s report.

Every political and social order comes in two flavors: What its small elite and the minority exploiting it to the full want everyone to believe, and the reality that most of its members actually live in. The two never match, but this mismatch need not be a big problem. However, if the difference becomes too great and too obvious for too long, no order can continue unchanged.

None of the above is news. Keen observers have long understood that things get shaky when a majority loses their belief in – or at least passive acceptance of – the prevalent ideology (in the original meaning of the term, namely, as the elite’s imaginative story about reality, keeping the non-elites compliant).

In such a situation, things will change, but it is hard to predict how, exactly. An acute ideology-reality mismatch can lead to rebellion and, if the latter succeeds, revolution. Yet it can also make the elites ramp up their indoctrination or become more punitive, adding more direct compulsion to keep those below in line. There is always also the option of going to war with enemies abroad – real or, much more likely, invented – to distract from disunity at home. Finally, all of the above can happen in a messy sequence, or even at the same time.

Despite differences and tensions, the West does constitute some form of political and social order. In its elites’ ideology, as spread by their compliant mainstream media, it is a fairy-tale realm of political and economic freedom, combining representative democracy with free markets, the rule of law, individualism, and superior “values” to make the best of all possible worlds. In reality, obviously, it’s a dark zone of capitalist oligarchy with increasingly authoritarian tendencies. Not the Hobbits’ cozy Shire; rather Sauron’s domain under construction.

Read more

Markets, for one thing, are not “free,” but routinely and crassly gamed by insiders. Currently for instance, both the beginning of the criminal Israeli-US war against Iran and deliberately timed, repeated rumors about peace have facilitated manipulative trades worth billions of dollars.

The September 11, 2001 attacks can be considered the evil Big Bang of our current iteration of mass manipulation, authoritarian power grabs in the name of “emergency” response, permanent warfare, and lying so intense it is sometimes hard to remember there is a truth. As the rebellious US ex-MAGA conservative Tucker Carlson has just reminded us, 9/11 was also accompanied – and preceded – by trading, for which the description “highly suspicious” is an understatement.

Democratic political representation and freedom of thought and speech are, at best, if not outright deceptions, then myths. That is, a messy hodgepodge of scraps of reality and large doses of invention. The rare scraps of reality are now diminishing ever further.

Concerning freedom, Britain under the widely hated Starmer regime, for instance, is a Zionist police state. It goes further than smearing and suppressing any action on behalf of the victims of Israel’s crimes, including genocide, as ”antisemitism”; it also condemns any statements of public solidarity with the victims. There is no rule of law worthy of the name: perfectly legitimate speech is prohibited as “terrorist,” the police harass political dissidents as well as the courts and their procedures. These themselves are unreliable (ask Julian Assange), and are brazenly bent out of shape to produce unfair trials and punitive sentences.

Regarding representation, take Germany, for instance: It now has a breathtakingly, historically unpopular government that is only even in place because the last election saw widespread and statistically bizarre miscounts which together acted – very un-randomly – to conveniently eliminate a whole new-left party (the BSW), and thus its voters, from parliament.

Read more

The German new right (AfD) and its voters, meanwhile, are openly threatened with unconstitutional punishment if they dare succeed too much: vote too much AfD and your kid’s high school diploma will be treated like dirt. Yes, that crude; that really is the current level of shamelessness among Germany’s self-radicalizing Centrists.

Even the most conformist inhabitants of the West, moreover, cannot close their eyes anymore to the empirical fact that conspiracies are all too real and exert great, heinous influence by vicious means. You cannot have both your masses soundly believing in the myth of fair popular representation and an Epstein scandal; it is proof of the massive over-representation of a very particular set of interests, and even foreign states, through networks of subversion and blackmail. The system may survive at first, but its base will be undermined by mass frustration and cynicism.

Today, the states of the West, in short, has much in common, and most of it is terrible. That is why we are observing one big trend across it now: In the words of the Wall Street Journal – not usually known for subversive dissidence – “Europeans are fed up and taking it out on their leaders.” Polls show massive discontent across NATO-EU Europe. And not only polls but real elections, too: Britain’s Starmer regime has just received a horrific drubbing in local elections that may well mark the impending end of the UK’s dysfunctional and unfair two-party system.

In a study rating the popularity of 24 leaders, the three worst performers were the heads of France, Germany, and the UK: The top tier of the NATO-EU Europe complex is held by its least popular rulers. But that doesn’t mean others are doing much better. The leaders of Italy, the Netherlands and Spain all have disapproval ratings between 55 and 57 percent.

But what would the West be without its “indispensable” leader? Peruse the Financial Times, another mainstream media outlet above any suspicion of rebelliousness, and you’ll find that there is unhappiness across the Atlantic: In the US, more than half of all voters disapprove of President Trump’s policies, too.

Read more

Almost 60 percent are unhappy with Trump’s handling of inflation. Just like his awful predecessor, the senescent Gaza genocide accomplice Joe Biden, Trump is now haunted by a cost-of-living crisis. Like Biden, Trump has only himself to blame: the two key factors driving up consumer prices are his crude tariffs and his predictable fiasco in Iran. Fifty-five percent of voters believe that Trump has hurt the economy; only a fourth think he has helped it.

It is always tempting to focus on each case of malaise individually: here the German mess with its peculiar East-West tension and its comically self-pitying leader Friedrich Merz, for instance; there the French decrepitude with its constitutional design flaws and the raging narcissist Emmanuel Macron at the center; and there again, the British establishment’s traditional vassalage to the US combined with its perverse relationship to Zionism and genocidal Israel. In the case of America, it is, of course, the upcoming midterm elections that attract the most attention.

But what if we adopt a longer view? Where is all of this misery going? Again, more than one outcome is possible. Full disclosure: I find things desperate enough not to mind rebellion and revolution. But it would be foolish not to consider other scenarios, namely those that the Western elites would prefer: Increasing repression is an obvious fact already. Distraction by war abroad as well: those labeling the Israeli-American assault on Iran Operation Epstein (instead of ‘Epic’) Fury have nailed it. Berlin, being Berlin, naturally is gearing up to fight Russia directly (as opposed to “only” indirectly as it is now), and so is, alas, much of the NATO-EU complex. The future is unpredictable. Except for one thing: Change is inevitable. Don’t bank on it being for the better.

The Caribbean is beginning to smell like war. As Washington tightens its sanctions noose around Cuba, deploys additional military assets to the region, and increasingly resorts to the language of ultimatums, media outlets and policy circles have started seriously discussing the possibility of direct US intervention on the island. The trigger has not only been a fresh wave of accusations against Raúl Castro and the highly publicized appearance of the USS Nimitz carrier strike group off Cuba’s coast, but also the broader logic of escalation itself: an energy blockade, rhetoric about a so-called ‘drone threat’, and a growing perception that the Trump administration sees Cuba as the next target of its hard-power foreign policy.

While the US administration officially denies the possibility of a full-scale military operation, the trajectory of the crisis itself makes such a scenario difficult to dismiss. What might America’s steps look like if the confrontation enters a military phase? Would Washington limit itself to a targeted ‘surgical strike’, launch a large-scale air campaign aimed at crippling Cuban infrastructure, or attempt to achieve its objectives through a naval blockade and economic strangulation? Let’s examine the main scenarios for a potential US operation against Cuba, their military rationale, and likely consequences.

Setting the Stage

In 2026, US-Cuba relations have reached their highest level of tension in decades. An executive order signed by the US president on January 29, 2026, titled “Countering Threats Posed by the Government of Cuba,” formally classified Havana’s policies as a threat to US national security. Cuba remains on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, effectively cutting it off from much of the international financial system and severely restricting foreign investment. In this context, virtually any scenario is possible.

From Washington’s perspective, the groundwork for a military solution already exists. According to testimony delivered to Congress in March of 2026 by General Francis Donovan, commander of US Southern Command, combined regional forces continue operations against narco-terrorist networks using naval assets, aerial surveillance, and special operations units. The US naval base at Guantánamo Bay remains a critical platform for force projection in the region. Additional troops and assets could also be deployed from the continental United States. More than ten US warships and at least 10,000 American personnel are currently operating in the Caribbean.

Read more

For its part, Cuba maintains armed forces with roughly 50,000 active personnel under arms at any given time. The country possesses up to 200 tanks, more than 500 artillery systems of various types, a modest navy, an air force, and air defense units. Most importantly, the Cuban leadership continues to rely heavily on the doctrine of “The War of the Entire People” (Guerra de Todo el Pueblo), which envisions total civilian mobilization, integration of the military with the economy and political system, and preparation for a prolonged asymmetric defense campaign.

SCENARIO 1: Limited ‘Surgical’ Operation

The first scenario that comes to mind resembles previous US actions against Venezuela: a limited ‘surgical’ operation aimed at neutralizing key leadership figures, command-and-control centers, and communications infrastructure. Such an operation would likely involve Tomahawk cruise missile strikes launched from US Fourth Fleet warships and submarines, MQ-9 Reaper drone strikes, and special operations raids.

What could the consequences be? The biggest concern would be the possibility of a disproportionate Cuban military response against the Guantánamo Bay base, as well as broad international condemnation of what many would see as a ‘policing operation’. In theory, even a limited strike could spiral into a far larger conflict, forcing Washington to commit additional troops and resources while becoming bogged down in ground combat around Guantánamo and deeper inside Cuban territory.

That risk is real. But there is also the possibility that a targeted operation could achieve its objectives with limited fallout – particularly if US Special Forces enjoy the same degree of operational success that they reportedly had in Venezuela.

Read more

SCENARIO 2: Full-Scale Air Campaign

The second scenario more closely resembles the joint US-Israeli strikes against Iran: a large-scale air operation designed to suppress Cuban air defenses, destroy military infrastructure, and demoralize the country’s armed forces and political leadership.

Such a campaign would likely involve strategic bombers, including the B-1B, B-2, and B-52H armed with JASSM cruise missiles and JDAM precision-guided bombs. Carrier-based aviation would also play a major role, with F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and F-35C fighters operating from aircraft carriers. Electronic warfare and suppression of radar and communications systems would be handled by EA-18G Growler aircraft.

How could Cuba respond? The island’s air defense network is still largely built around aging Soviet-era systems such as the S-75 and S-125, though some degree of modernization has likely taken place. Portable air defense systems would almost certainly be used extensively. The key question would be whether Cuban forces could maintain coordination and real-time target-sharing under sustained electronic and aerial assault. Under those conditions, the odds of successfully defending against a US air campaign would be slim – but not nonexistent.

For Washington, however, this option is likely less attractive. Unlike a quiet covert strike, a large-scale bombing campaign would be impossible to hide and would almost certainly provoke a far more intense global backlash.

Read more

SCENARIO 3: Naval Blockade and Economic Strangulation

The third scenario would unfold over a much longer period of time: a naval blockade combined with economic pressure aimed at forcing political change without direct military intervention.

In practice, elements of this strategy are already visible. One can expect an increase in the interception and detention of vessels attempting to deliver fuel and energy supplies to the island. From the US perspective, this approach is preferable because it does not require a major troop buildup and carries fewer risks of rapid escalation.

The problem is that Cuba has spent decades operating under conditions resembling a de facto blockade. It is far from certain that additional pressure alone would trigger meaningful political change, meaning Washington could fail to achieve its strategic objectives.

Other Possible Scenarios

Other possibilities cannot be ruled out. One example would be a so-called ‘humanitarian intervention’ justified by a severe crisis on the island. If Washington were somehow able to secure a UN mandate to protect civilians, American troops could arrive under the banner of humanitarian assistance.

But much would depend on how the Cuban population reacts. If the public rallies behind the government, a humanitarian mission could quickly evolve into a counterinsurgency campaign against guerrilla forces, triggering a broader escalation.

One of the key variables remains the position of the international community – particularly Russia and China. In theory, aggressive US actions against Cuba could spark a wider wave of anti-American sentiment across Latin America. Moreover, if Washington became trapped in a prolonged military operation on the island, it would almost certainly generate a strong domestic backlash against the Trump administration itself.

With the Iran crisis still unresolved, Trump is unlikely to want another major geopolitical headache right on America’s doorstep. What he needs is a quick, clean, and preferably bloodless solution. That makes either a symbolic diplomatic settlement – or a short, carefully contained military operation – the most likely outcome.

For now, all that remains is to watch the maps – and the clock.

Global peacekeeping operations have declined sharply amid geopolitical divisions and funding pressures, increasing the risk of further conflicts, according to a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

A total of 78,633 international personnel were deployed in peacekeeping operations as of December 2025. This is the lowest figure recorded since at least 2000, down 49% from 2016 levels, SIPRI said on Monday. Deployments also fell by 17% year-on-year, marking the steepest annual decline of the past decade.

“If things continue in this way, we could see a dramatic weakening of multilateral conflict management and the near-complete sidelining of institutions like the United Nations, due to a perfect storm of funding, political and geopolitical factors,” said Jair van der Lijn, director of the SIPRI Peace Operations and Conflict Management Programme. The result is likely to be “more conflicts” with “even graver impacts on civilians,” he warned.

This new SIPRI map shows all currently active multilateral #PeaceOperations plus other conflict-management operations authorized and/or conducted by the @UN and regional organizations.

Explore the map ➡️ https://t.co/AgrgX2sM3a
New data out now ➡️ https://t.co/hdZCpgz0Wj pic.twitter.com/VxqjCPR2ZN

— SIPRI (@SIPRIorg) May 24, 2026

All ten top contributors of military personnel for multilateral peacekeeping operations came from the Global South last year, SIPRI said.

UN-managed missions have been particularly affected by the funding crisis, with several major donors failing to pay their contributions on time or in full, the report said. In July of 2025, UN peacekeeping operations faced a $2 billion shortfall – more than 35% of their total 2024-25 budget – forcing deep personnel cuts.

READ MORE: US throws pennies at massive UN debt

The warning comes as the UN grapples with a broader financial crisis. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has warned that, if member states neglect to pay their mandatory contributions and the UN fails to overhaul its financial rules, the organization is at risk of “imminent financial collapse.” The largest contributor, the US, has sharply reduced funding for several UN programs amidst President Donald Trump’s ‘America First’ policy shift. Trump has repeatedly criticized the body as ineffective.

Personnel deployments to peace operations declined sharply to reach 78 633, just over half the number deployed in 2016 and the smallest number in at least 25 years.

Explore the visualizations ➡️ https://t.co/FBG95irwBn pic.twitter.com/akn9HOdV0B

— SIPRI (@SIPRIorg) May 25, 2026

SIPRI said growing political pressure is also affecting UN operations, noting that Washington has pushed for the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) to be withdrawn despite repeated violations of the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire. 

READ MORE: UN at risk of ‘imminent financial collapse’ – secretary general

Such developments could signal a “progressively smaller role” for the UN in responding to global crises, SIPRI said. “As UN-led conflict management recedes, it is leaving a growing gap that alternative models are unable to fill,” the researchers concluded.

Pope Leo XIV has delivered a stark warning on artificial intelligence, claiming that the technology is aiding the “normalization of war” and transferring powers of life and death to unaccountable “technological actors.”

The American-born pontiff presented his warning on Monday in an encyclical titled ‘Magnifica Humanitas’ (Magnificent Humanity). In the 42,000-word document, Leo highlighted how the “growth of the military-industrial complex has become a defining feature of the current political landscape,” leading to “a troubling revival of war as an instrument of international politics.”

In this environment, “the development and use of AI in warfare must be subject to the most rigorous ethical constraints, to guarantee respect for human dignity and the sanctity of life and to avoid a race to develop such arms,” he continued.

Popes typically use encyclicals to lay out their teachings on the social issues of their times. Pope Leo XIII, who inspired the current pontiff’s name, addressed the industrial revolution and inequality between the ownership and working classes in 1891’s ‘Rerum Novarum’, for example, while Pope Francis tackled climate change in 2015’s ‘Laudato Si’.

NOW - Pope Leo XIV: "Artificial Intelligence needs to be disarmed." pic.twitter.com/kSxjSAWjmU

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) May 25, 2026

Since his election last May, Leo XIV has repeatedly warned of the destructive power of technology, describing AI as a potential threat to “human dignity, justice, and labor” in an address to cardinals last year. His encyclical goes a step further, calling for a global treaty to “disarm” the technology in order to prevent it from “dominating humanity.”

The Pope takes on Silicon Valley

While the Pope did not address Silicon Valley defense contractors such as Palantir and Anduril Industries by name, he did highlight the shift in power from the state to “major economic and technological actors.”

Read more

Palantir has grown particularly powerful in recent years, with its AI-powered data analytics software used by the US military to choose targets in Iran, and by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to plan strikes in Gaza. In Iran, Palantir’s software reportedly selected a girls’ elementary school in Minab as a valid target, based on outdated, human-compiled maps. A missile strike on the school killed more than 160 schoolgirls on the opening day of the war.

The Pope condemned the growing automation of warfare, declaring it “not permissible to entrust lethal or otherwise irreversible decisions to artificial systems.” AI-enabled systems must retain a “chain of responsibility,” he wrote, adding that “those who design, train, authorize and employ technology must be held accountable for their decisions.”

The pontiff’s encyclical stands in stark contrast to a manifesto released last month by Palantir CEO Alex Karp, in which he declared that American technology companies have “an affirmative obligation” to aid the US military, called for the remilitarization of Germany and Japan, and argued that the West should not engage in “theatrical debates about the merits of developing technologies with critical military and national security applications.”

Leo has found some allies within the AI industry, however. Anthropic co-founder Christopher Olah met with the pontiff in the Vatican on Monday, telling an audience of senior church leaders that AI laboratories operate “inside a set of incentives and constraints that can sometimes conflict with doing the right thing,” and that regulating this industry is “a moral imperative of historic proportions.”

Feud with Trump

Olah and Leo have both run afoul of US President Donald Trump in recent months. Trump canceled the Pentagon’s contracts with Anthropic in February, after the company refused to allow its software to be used in mass domestic surveillance or fully autonomous weapons. Two months later, Trump launched a scathing rebuke of Leo, calling the pontiff “weak” over his opposition to the US-Israeli war on Iran.

READ MORE: Trump attacks Pope

Leo has described Trump’s threat to destroy Iran’s civilization as “truly unacceptable,” and chastised Secretary of War Pete Hegseth for urging Americans to pray for victory “in the name of Jesus Christ.” God, the Pope responded, “does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war.”

The Pope has also condemned the ongoing remilitarization of Europe, warning that rearmament “depletes investments in education and healthcare, undermines trust in diplomacy, and enriches elites who care nothing for the common good.”

The European Union’s demands that Serbia adjust its foreign policy to align with Brussels amount to an attempt to govern the country “by email,” Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic has said during his state visit to China.

Vucic, who arrived in Beijing on Sunday, was asked at a press conference about a recent Bloomberg report claiming that Belgrade risked crossing a red line set by the EU by embracing Chinese military technology for its armed forces.

“First they banned me from talking with the Russian Federation,” he replied. “Now they ban me from going to China, too. They might as well pen a wish list detailing who I can and cannot meet.”

Brussels’ approach to Serbia, an EU candidate country, leaves little room for its own government to make decisions, Vucic said.

Read more

EU leaders would apparently prefer that Belgrade obey “any fax or email coming from some center of power,” he added, insisting that Serbia is a sovereign state and will determine its own policies.

The EU has been pressuring Serbia, a historic ally of Russia, to impose sanctions on Moscow and support Kiev if it hopes to join the bloc. The president sarcastically thanked Bloomberg for warning him that further investment in advanced Chinese weapons could further undermine Serbia’s accession prospects.

Vucic also criticized EU members for shifting from advocating free trade a decade ago to promoting protectionist measures aimed at weakening Chinese competition.

Serbia accuses EU of double standards

In a column published by Fox News last week, Vucic said Brussels is using pressure tactics to damage Serbia’s ties with the US.

Read more

“Elites across the Atlantic have spent years vilifying [US President Donald] Trump,” he wrote, while Serbians view him as “a leader who values national sovereignty over faceless bureaucracy, who prioritizes economic reality over ideological fantasy, and who understands that a nation is defined by its culture, faith, traditions, and heritage.”

According to Serbian parliament speaker Ana Brnabic, Belgrade sees the EU’s demands as unfair. Brussels has effectively frozen Serbia’s integration process since 2021, despite its own inspectors repeatedly confirming that the country is ready to move forward, she told Politico last Thursday.

“The whole world came to be very simplistic, black and white,” Brnabic said, arguing that Serbia is being held to a double standard.

“We saw, for example, tear gas and water cannons used against protesters in Albania – but no one said a word. And why is that? In my view because Albania has aligned 100%” with the EU’s foreign policy goals.

No snap election plans

Vucic traveled to China after the latest round of anti-government protests in Belgrade led to sporadic clashes with police on Saturday.

Нобеловци на Славији, деца ваша чедна, невина и наивна, ваша дика и ваш понос

ВЕЧЕРАС ТЕРОРИШУ ПОЛИЦИЈУ И РУШЕ БЕОГРАД!!! pic.twitter.com/MeyyYL1HMc

— Višnja Petrović 🍒 (@gdjica_visnja) May 23, 2026

The demonstration is part of a protest movement that began after the 2024 railway station disaster in Novi Sad, which left 16 people dead. The Serbian government claims the unrest is being incited by Brussels as part of a pressure campaign.

Београд 23. 05. 2026. pic.twitter.com/RhYIVsdhLF

— vlajcco8 (@vlajcco8) May 23, 2026

Vucic has rejected claims that hundreds of thousands of people took part in the protest, citing a law enforcement estimate that put attendance at fewer than 34,000.

Београд - 23. 5. 2026. pic.twitter.com/wk8iiNhswY

— Никола Мићковић (@NikolaMickovic) May 24, 2026

The president also dismissed calls for early resignation, saying he intends to serve until his second term ends next year. Vucic is constitutionally barred from seeking another presidential term, but could potentially run for prime minister in the future.

Beijing has refuted a Financial Times report that Chinese President Xi Jinping attacked Japan’s “remilitarization” during talks with US President Donald Trump earlier this month. 

Xi and Trump met in Beijing on May 13-15 during the first visit by a US president to China in nearly a decade. 

In a Monday article, the FT claimed that Xi “castigated” Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi for her country’s increased military buildup in “an intense diatribe.”

According to the British newspaper, Xi grew visibly animated when discussing Japan, catching US officials off guard because the issue had not surfaced in earlier talks with Chinese counterparts ahead of the summit. The outlet described the exchange as the most intense moment of the two-day talks.

Read more

Trump reportedly defended Tokyo’s military buildup, saying Japan needed stronger defenses in the face of the growing threat from North Korea, the newspaper said. It was unclear whether he also referred to China in that context.

China’s foreign ministry denied the report later on Monday. Chinese spokeswoman Mao Ning said accounts that Xi had criticized Takaichi during the summit “do not accord with the information available to the Chinese side.”

Takaichi held phone talks with Trump right after his trip ended. According to Kyodo, the prime minister later told reporters she had received a detailed account of Trump’s conversation with Xi, but refused to comment further.

Ties between Beijing and Tokyo have deteriorated over Japan’s growing military spending and tensions around Taiwan. China’s foreign ministry said on Friday that Japan’s defense budget jumped 9.7% in 2025, extending a 14-year streak of increases, and accused Japanese conservatives of steering the country toward “neo-militarism.”

Read more

Beijing reacted angrily in November after Takaichi said a Chinese attack on Taiwan could pose an “existential threat” to Japan and justify a military response.

Beijing, which under its One-China policy views Taiwan as part of China, says it seeks peaceful reunification but has warned it could use force if the island formally declares independence.

Last week, Russia reaffirmed its commitment to the One-China principle, recognizing Taiwan as an inalienable part of China, according to a joint Moscow-Beijing statement.

In late December, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also warned Tokyo against pursuing “accelerated militarization,” saying: “Our Japanese neighbors would do well to carefully weigh everything before making any rash decisions.”

Australian activists who were detained by Israel as part of the Global Sumud Flotilla that intended to deliver aid to Gaza have said they were raped and tortured while being held by Israeli security forces.

Israel intercepted some 50 yachts in international waters off Cyprus in mid-May, detaining 430 volunteers from 40 nations, who were attempting to break the naval blockade of the Palestinian enclave. They spent several days in detention before being deported.

The first of the 11 Austrian citizens from the flotilla returned home to Melbourne late on Sunday evening, while others arrived in Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane on Monday.

Documentary filmmaker Juliet Lamont said that she went through “absolute hell” during her four days in Israeli custody.

“I was dragged into a darkened container ship on a prison boat. I was sexually assaulted. I was beaten… I’ve looked into the eyes of the most soulless people in the universe, and nothing came back,” she recalled, as cited by Reuters.

Read more

Australian climate activist Violete CoCo told The Guardian that she was detained at gunpoint, stripped of her clothes, and shoved into a shipping container where she was beaten, kicked, and sexually assaulted. Soldiers also took photos of her naked body, she added.

“We were constantly kept in a state of different styles of torture, we just didn’t know which pain was coming next,” CoCo claimed.

Another volunteer, Sam Woripa Watson, said he was repeatedly kicked and punched by Israeli servicemen, suffering cheek bone and rib fractures as well as other injuries. He also claimed he witnessed fellow activists being tasered, shot with rubber bullets, and having stun grenades thrown at them.

“Overwhelmingly, the worst feeling is to hear that people that you love are being tortured and being raped around you in the same space and you have no power to do anything about it,” Watson said.

The Israeli military denied the accusations, insisting it has a procedure of “respectful and appropriate treatment of flotilla participants” and that it was not aware of any deviations by troops.

READ MORE: Spanish police clash with Gaza flotilla supporters (VIDEO)

Israel claims the blockade of Gaza is necessary to prevent weapons from getting into the enclave. It also denies withholding supplies for Palestinians in Gaza, almost 2 million of whom have been displaced since the outbreak of the conflict between Israel and Hamas in October 2023.

It is therefore no surprise that police unions are urging their colleagues to flee left-wing cities where people from the “migration” milieu have come to power. In the city of Saint-Denis, the head of the municipal police and all his deputies resigned, and more than half of the officers filed requests for transfers to other cities.

France already has the highest crime rate in Europe, while Paris holds the absolute lead in the frequency of robberies. And now that eight Paris suburbs have formally come under the control of migrant communities, the words “Welcome to Saint-Denis” no longer sound very welcoming in French.

During the recent Paris riots marking Paris Saint-Germain’s advance to the final of the UEFA Champions League, the rioters destroyed the ‘Living Together’ exhibition on Place de la Concorde. That says more about France’s future than the progressive doctrine of the ‘creolization’ of the French, through which Mélenchon’s left tactfully and skillfully sidesteps the topic of the withering away of the French nation.

An experiment has been carried out in France. The welfare state, created after the Second World War for the purpose of France’s national revival and still one of the best in the world, has, as a result of the French elite’s adoption and implementation of the globalist project, been turned into the largest incubator of culturally alien diasporas. These diasporas take social benefits for granted, but reject French patriotism as a relic of an incorrect and doomed civilization.

The course and results of this social experiment can be assessed using RT’s global Social Well-Being Index (SWI). While the West is locked in a measuring contest of who has more money and greater opportunities for consumption, we measure what truly matters for the survival and flourishing of nations: the ability to produce life (birth rates); the preservation of life (infant mortality, longevity, homicide mortality); and the minimization of oppression (the level of inequality between rich and poor, and children’s education).

In examining the French case, one must not only analyze the statistics but also anatomize the mainstream discourse. Because Michel Foucault’s thesis on the power of discourse is relevant everywhere, but most of all in France. To see how a France that no longer fights is feeling, look here.

EU leaders are losing their remaining credibility by condemning Russia’s retaliatory strikes against Ukrainian military targets while ignoring Kiev’s deadly drone attack on a college dorm in the Lugansk People’s Republic, former British MP George Galloway has said.

Ukraine struck a teacher training college dormitory in the Russian town of Starobelsk with several waves of UAVs on Friday, killing 21 people – most of them teenage girls – and injuring 60 others.

On Sunday, the Russian Defense Ministry said it had carried out a large-scale retaliatory raid involving hypersonic Oreshnik systems, as well as other missiles and drones, hitting command centers of the Ukrainian ground forces, military intelligence facilities, air bases, and defense industry enterprises. The ministry stressed that the bombardment was a response to terrorist attacks by Kiev and that no civilian facilities had been targeted.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, however, claimed that the Russian strike was a display of “brutality and disregard for both human life and peace negotiations.” 

Read more

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas accused Moscow of “political scare-tactics,” while French President Emmanuel Macron said the deployment of the hypersonic Oreshnik missile “only reinforced” the EU’s determination to continue supporting Kiev. None of the European leaders mentioned the Ukrainian attack on the college dormitory in Lugansk in their statements.

In an interview with RT on Sunday, Galloway described Ukrainian strike as “murder most foul” and “an act of terrorism,” adding that “you would have expected any decent person, any right-thinking person, to condemn it unequivocally.”

The attack by Kiev was “so vast and so vile that any government in the world would have been forced to respond to it in precisely the way that Russia has done,” Galloway stated.

“Well, Macron actually condemned the retaliatory strike without reference to what it was a retaliation for. How’s that for French hypocrisy?” the former British MP, who hosts the ‘Mother of All Talk Shows’ (MOATS) program on YouTube, noted.

Speaking about von der Leyen’s criticism, Galloway recalled that European nations such as Britain, France, and Belgium have themselves suffered terrorist attacks in recent years.

READ MORE: Ukrainian strikes kill six Russian civilians days after college dorm massacre

“Terrorism is something that right-thinking people have to condemn wherever it happens... You can’t condemn terrorists on London Bridge, but not in a dormitory... in Lugansk, pretend it didn’t happen,” he said.

Watch RT’s full interview with George Galloway below.

Britain, France, Spain, Italy and Canada have rejected a proposal for NATO member states to spend 0.25% of their GDP on the provision of military assistance to Ukraine, the Telegraph has reported.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte was hoping that mandatory funding for Kiev would be approved at the bloc’s summit in Ankara, Türkiye on July 7-8, the Telegraph said in an article on Sunday.

A NATO insider told the paper that Britain, France, Spain, Italy and Canada “aren’t very enthusiastic about the idea.”

Out of the 32 member-states, the proposal was only supported by seven nations, all of which already spend 0.25% or more of their GDP on assisting Ukraine, the Telegraph said.

According to data from the Kiel Institute, the Netherlands, Poland and the Nordic and Baltic countries currently spend 0.25% of their GDP or more arming Kiev.

Read more

Last week, Rutte conceded that the plan did not have the unanimous backing within NATO required for it to be accepted. “I don’t think this one will be proposed” in the Turkish capital, he told journalists.

Mandatory funding had been intended to serve as a show of continued commitment to Ukraine by the bloc’s European members after American assistance to the government of Vladimir Zelensky ebbed significantly under US President Donald Trump, it added.

A British foreign office spokesperson told the paper that “the UK continues to engage with NATO allies on all proposals to ensure the alliance can best support Ukraine.”

Moscow has repeatedly decried Western aid to Kiev, saying that it will not prevent it from achieving its goals in the Ukraine conflict and only prolongs the fighting, increasing the risk of a direct clash between Russia and NATO.

READ MORE: Ukrainian drones could trigger NATO-Russia war – Fico

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said last week that NATO has been using Ukraine “with the blatant goal of creating problems for the existence of our country and setting up a springboard for threats to our security right on our borders.” The idea of “decolonizing” Russia has not yet been given up by the bloc, he warned.

Three Chinese astronauts have successfully reached the Tiangong space station, with one of them set to spend more than a year in orbit. This marks another step in Beijing’s preparations for a future lunar landing.

The Shenzhou-23 spacecraft launched aboard a Long March-2F rocket from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center in the Gobi Desert late Sunday.

Less than four hours later, following a rapid rendezvous and docking process, the crew, led by Commander Zhu Yangzhu, successfully reached the Tiangong space station, a name  that translates as “Heavenly Palace.”

China launched three astronauts to the Tiangong space station aboard Shenzhou-23, with one expected to stay for up to a year, marking one of its longest missions https://t.co/s6HLiJW0Dj pic.twitter.com/VBnipDTB8k

— Reuters (@Reuters) May 24, 2026

Former Air Force pilot Zhang Zhiyuan and payload specialist Lai Ka-ying, a former Hong Kong police officer and the first person from the city to travel to space, were welcomed by the outgoing Shenzhou-22 team.

After a 3.5-hour flight, Shenzhou-23 docked with the China Space Station at 18:45UTC https://t.co/7V9RJU8BBm pic.twitter.com/safcfvjErg

— CNSPACE (@CNSpaceflight) May 24, 2026

The astronauts are expected to spend around six months aboard the orbital station, carrying out scientific experiments, maintenance work, and spacewalks. One crew member is set to stay twice as long to complete China’s first year-long mission in orbit.

Shenzhou-21 crew opened the hatch to welcome Shenzhou-23, marking China's 8th "space reunion" and the first time a Hong Kong astronaut joins the Tiangong family. pic.twitter.com/KlVF0tU1Mg

— Shanghai Daily (@shanghaidaily) May 25, 2026

The China Manned Space Engineering Office (CMSEO) said the Tiangong space station plays a key role in Beijing’s plans to place two astronauts on the Moon before 2030.

Read more

The orbital outpost helps provide long-duration spaceflight experience and allows China to test technologies needed for future lunar missions, agency spokesman Zhang Jingbo said. He added that the new Long March-10A rocket and the Mengzhou crew spacecraft will carry out a series of flights to Tiangong over the next two years to verify systems required for crewed Moon landings.

“We carry out the project of crewed lunar exploration under the established plan. We are not competing with other countries in space,” said the agency’s senior engineer Zhou Yaqiang. “When Chinese astronauts land on the Moon in the future, this will be a great feat for all of humanity.”

Read more

Humans have not landed on the Moon since NASA’s Apollo 17 mission in 1972. The US sent a crew on a flyby earlier this year as part of its Artemis program, but Beijing is seeking to challenge Washington’s efforts to become the first to establish a permanent lunar presence.

Moscow and Beijing have expanded cooperation in space in recent years, agreeing to establish a joint data center for lunar and deep-space exploration focused on the Moon and Mars. In 2021, the two countries announced the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) project, with Russia seeking to build a power station on the Moon to provide energy for the base within the next decade.

Three Chinese astronauts have successfully reached the Tiangong space station, with one of them set to spend more than a year in orbit in another step in Beijing’s preparations for a future lunar landing.

The Shenzhou-23 spacecraft launched aboard a Long March-2F rocket from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center in the Gobi Desert late Sunday.

Less than four hours later, following a rapid rendezvous and docking process, the crew, led by Commander Zhu Yangzhu, successfully reached the Tiangong space station, whose name translates as “Heavenly Palace.”

China launched three astronauts to the Tiangong space station aboard Shenzhou-23, with one expected to stay for up to a year, marking one of its longest missions https://t.co/s6HLiJW0Dj pic.twitter.com/VBnipDTB8k

— Reuters (@Reuters) May 24, 2026

Former Air Force pilot Zhang Zhiyuan and payload specialist Lai Ka-ying, a former Hong Kong police officer and the first person from the city to travel to space, were welcomed by the outgoing Shenzhou-22 team.

After a 3.5-hour flight, Shenzhou-23 docked with the China Space Station at 18:45UTC https://t.co/7V9RJU8BBm pic.twitter.com/safcfvjErg

— CNSPACE (@CNSpaceflight) May 24, 2026

The astronauts are expected to spend around six months aboard the orbital station, carrying out scientific experiments, maintenance work, and spacewalks. One crew member is set to stay twice as long to complete China’s first year-long mission in orbit.

Shenzhou-21 crew opened the hatch to welcome Shenzhou-23, marking China's 8th "space reunion" and the first time a Hong Kong astronaut joins the Tiangong family. pic.twitter.com/KlVF0tU1Mg

— Shanghai Daily (@shanghaidaily) May 25, 2026

The China Manned Space Engineering Office (CMSEO) said the Tiangong space station plays a key role in Beijing’s plans to place two astronauts on the Moon before 2030.

Read more

The orbital outpost helps provide long-duration spaceflight experience and allows China to test technologies needed for future lunar missions, agency spokesman Zhang Jingbo said. He added that the new Long March-10A rocket and the Mengzhou crew spacecraft will carry out a series of flights to Tiangong over the next two years to verify systems required for crewed Moon landings.

“We carry out the project of crewed lunar exploration under the established plan. We are not competing with other countries in space,” said the agency’s senior engineer Zhou Yaqiang. “When Chinese astronauts land on the Moon in the future, this will be a great feat for all of humanity.”

Read more

Humans have not landed on the Moon since NASA’s Apollo 17 mission in 1972. The US sent a crew on a flyby earlier this year as part of its Artemis program, but Beijing is seeking to challenge Washington’s efforts to become the first to establish a permanent lunar presence.

Moscow and Beijing have expanded cooperation in space in recent years, agreeing to establish a joint data center for lunar and deep-space exploration focused on the Moon and Mars. In 2021, the two countries announced the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) project, with Russia seeking to build a power station on the Moon to provide energy for the base within the next decade.

Once the darling of the Democratic Party, Tulsi Gabbard had a hard-earned reputation as a no-nonsense proponent of fact-based truth which she assiduously incorporated into her eloquent defense of Constitutional due process and moral integrity when it came to the national security of the United States.

With a resume that boasts years of honorable military service, inclusive of a tour of duty in war-torn Iraq, Gabbard was a staunch advocate of looking out for the welfare of the men and women in the US military – to whom she regularly referred to as her “brothers and sisters in arms”. She, as much as anyone, understood the age-old mantra, “If you lie, they die” when it came to the relationship between intelligence and troops in the field. She held herself to a high standard and applied that same standard to those she worked with. Her appointment as the Director of National Intelligence was seen by many as a bright shining light of hope when it came to injecting fact-based truths into a Trump administration known to be loose with the facts. Her resignation this past week, ostensibly for personal reasons, is a great disappointment to those Americans who were looking to her for clarity and truth in a world that has degenerated into lie-fueled chaos.

Tulsi Gabbard was always somewhat politically inclined. In 2002 she followed in her father’s footsteps, running for and winning a seat in the Hawaii State Legislature, becoming the youngest woman ever to hold a seat there. Gabbard joined the Hawaiian Army National Guard shortly after winning office, and deployed to Iraq shortly thereafter, where she earned the Combat Action Badge in the performance of her duties. Gabbard’s tenure as a state legislature was cut short by her military service (she was not allowed to vote on issues while on active service), but in 2011, following a second tour of duty in the Middle East, Gabbard ran for and won a seat on the Honolulu City Council. Shortly thereafter the Congressional seat for Hawaii’s 2nd Congressional District became vacant, and Gabbard threw her hat in the ring, winning handily. She quickly was seen as a rising star in Democratic national politics and was invited to speak at the 2012 Democratic National Convention.

As a Congressional Representative, Gabbard served on several prominent committees related to national security, including Homeland Security, Armed Services, and Foreign Affairs. Her political profile was rising, and in 2013 she was appointed as the vice chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC). Gabbard resigned from this position in 2016, during a contentious Presidential primary campaign where she accused the DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, of favoring the candidacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton over that of Bernie Sanders. Gabbard went on to endorse Sanders in the primary (he lost). While many viewed her resignation as the political kiss of death, Gabbard’s reputation for integrity and courage was burnished, paving the way for her to enter the 2020 Presidential race.

The 2020 Presidential campaign saw Gabbard’s willingness to challenge the conventional narrative regarding US national security priorities, especially when it came to America’s involvement in the seemingly endless wars in the Middle East, transform her into a target for a mainstream American media which had a record of supporting establishment candidates and promoting establishment narratives. Her visit to Syria in 2017 as a member of Congress became fodder for her political opponents and their mainstream media allies who sought to paint Gabbard – who had served in combat – as being sympathetic to Islamic terrorists and Middle Eastern dictators.

Read more

Gabbard’s pragmatic approach toward US-Russian relations likewise opened her up to being labeled as an agent of Russian disinformation and as someone under the control of Russian President Vladimir Putin (Hillary Clinton led the charge in this regard, infamously calling Gabbard a “Russian asset.”) She was never able to gain traction amongst a Democratic constituency that had long been under the sway of the Democratic Party’s elite, and she ended her Presidential bid in March 2020.

Gabbard became active on social media, starting her own podcast and frequently interacting with popular conservative media personalities such as Tucker Carlson. During this time, her resentment toward the Democratic Party came to a head, and in 2022 she announced she was going independent. As an independent, she began gravitating toward the policies and positions espoused by Donald Trump, between presidencies at the time, coming out in support of several pro-Trump candidates during the 2022 midterm elections. Gabbard’s star was rising among the ranks of pro-Trump Republicans and following a speaking appearance at the 2024 CPAC conference, Gabbard’s name was often mentioned as a possible Vice President selection for Donald Trump, who had thrown his hat into the ring for the 2024 Presidential race.

While Gabbard wasn’t asked to be Trump’s Vice President (that honor went to J.D. Vance), she and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. were brought into the campaign and played a huge role in bringing out a very substantive independent voting constituency for Trump, helping push him comfortably ahead of the Democratic Party nominee, Kamala Harris. In October 2024 Gabbard joined the Republican Party and, following Trump’s victory in November, was nominated by the president-elect for the position of Director of National Intelligence, America’s senior-most intelligence official.

Gabbard’s confirmation process was contentious, as Trump’s many political foes sought to embarrass the President by making political hay out of Gabbard’s past, highlighting her two meetings with Syrian President Bashar Assad in 2017 and her opinions on Russia, where many politicians from both parties accused her of failing to denounce Russia’s military operation against Ukraine, which commenced on  February 24, 2022, as well as her arguments about the root causes of the conflict, which many believed too closely aligned with those of the Russian government. Gabbard was particularly critical of the US support for NATO expansion and Ukraine’s potential membership in NATO and believed that the military operation could have been avoided had the US simply not supported Ukrainian membership in NATO. Gabbard was likewise very critical of the US program to fund biological research at laboratories in Ukraine – a program many, including Russia, believe has a military offensive biological warfare aspect to it. She was labeled by her political rivals and the mainstream US media as a “darling of Russia’s state media,” a “Russia apologist” and “Russian asset.” Gabbard’s supporters countered by emphasizing her long record of honorable military service and underscored the importance of new blood in the mix when it came to the work of the intelligence community, and ultimately Gabbard was confirmed by the US Senate and sworn in as the nation’s eight Director of National Intelligence, or DNI.

Read more

Gabbard was supposed to be the “adult in the room”, so to speak. Traditionally, the DNI serves as a manager, overseeing an empire comprising 18 discreet intelligence agencies. Her office was also responsible for producing the Presidential Daily Briefing, or PDB, a compilation of the most sensitive and relevant intelligence information produced by the intelligence community. Through her involvement in his campaign and transition, Gabbard earned the trust and confidence of President Trump, something that should have served her well when fulfilling her duties as the one who provides informative, factual and pragmatic briefings to the President.

As DNI, Gabbard oversaw unprecedented transparency efforts, paving the way for the release of hundreds of thousands of pages of records tied to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.. Gabbard also led the charge to conduct a sweeping internal review of the intelligence used by Barack Obama when accusing Donald Trump of colluding with the Russian government in the lead up to the 2016 Presidential election. This review resulted in the debunking of every claim of collusion, and uncovered evidence of criminal conspiracy which led Gabbard to refer former president Obama for prosecution.

Just a week before her resignation, Gabbard announced that her office would be investigating more than 120 biological laboratories abroad that were funded by US taxpayer dollars pursuant to President Trump’s executive order on so-called “gain-of-function” research. These investigations would not only target funding related to Chinese laboratories linked to Covid-19, but also the role played by US funding in Ukrainian laboratories believed by Russia to have been involved in offensive biological warfare research.

But Trump was, and is, a President unlike any other, and Gabbard quickly found out that telling the truth didn’t earn one the trust of the President – especially if the truth was inconvenient – but rather generated scorn as the President quickly viewed any dissent on his viewpoints as being little more than the manifestation of treachery and disloyalty. Her views on Iran directly contradicted the case President Trump was making regarding the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program, prompting the President to opine that “She’s wrong” when it came to Iran – something no Director of National Intelligence wants to hear about the work being done by her charges.

Tensions over Iran led to much speculation that the President was seeking to remove Gabbard from her post. As such, the timing of her resignation has been seen by many as suspicious, although there is no doubting the human reality of her husband’s serious medical condition and her desire to care for him. In any event, the US has lost the services of a true patriot whose integrity proved to be both benefit and bane to the Trump administration.

US President Donald Trump has lashed out at critics of a still-unfinished peace deal with Iran, saying negotiations with Tehran are proceeding in an “orderly and constructive manner” but that he has instructed his representatives “not to rush” into an agreement.

Trump insisted that any deal reached by his administration would not resemble the Obama-era 2015 nuclear agreement, which he unilaterally abandoned during his first term and has described as “one of the worst deals ever made.”

“Our deal is the exact opposite, but nobody has seen it, or knows what it is. It isn’t even fully negotiated yet,” he wrote on Truth Social on Sunday. “So don’t listen to the losers, who are critical about something they know nothing about.”

Trump said “time is on our side” and warned that the US blockade would remain “in full force and effect” until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed. “Both sides must take their time and get it right. There can be no mistakes!” he added.

Read more

Axios reported on Sunday that the emerging deal would take the form of a 60-day memorandum of understanding, which could be extended by mutual consent. Under the draft, the Strait of Hormuz would be reopened without tolls, Iran would clear mines it had deployed in the waterway, and the US would lift its blockade on Iranian ports and issue limited sanctions waivers allowing Tehran to sell oil.

The draft also reportedly includes Iranian commitments never to pursue nuclear weapons and to negotiate over suspending uranium enrichment and removing its highly enriched uranium stockpile, though the method remained under negotiation, according to anonymous US officials cited by the New York Times and CBS News. Fox News reported that the deal was “95% there” as of Sunday, but negotiators were still haggling over “language.”

READ MORE: Trump announces ‘finalization’ of Iran deal

Iranian officials have not publicly commented on the reported terms, but previously said the focus of talks remained on ending the war, and that nuclear details were not being discussed at this stage. The Fars news agency has also disputed Trump’s claim that the Strait of Hormuz would simply be “opened,” saying the waterway would remain under Iranian management.

Read more

Iran has repeatedly portrayed control over the Strait of Hormuz as its main strategic leverage and has sought to change the legal regime governing the strait. Mohammad Mokhber, a senior adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, described the waterway as “a capability equivalent to an atomic bomb,” saying Tehran will not “forfeit the gains” made during the war without concessions from Washington.

The proposed MOU also reportedly states that the war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon would end. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly raised concerns about that provision and other parts of the draft during his call with Trump on Saturday.

The European Union’s top brass and the leaders of several member states have issued statements on the latest exchange of strikes between Kiev and Moscow that ignore the recent deadly Ukrainian attack on a college dormitory that preceded Russian retaliatory strikes.

According to the Russian authorities, 21 people, mostly teenage girls, lost their lives and 60 more sustained injuries after three waves of Ukrainian drones targeted the main academic building and dormitory of the Starobelsk Professional College in the Lugansk People’s Republic overnight from Thursday to Friday.

The Russian military responded early on Sunday by conducting a “massive strike” against military targets in Ukraine, including in Kiev, that featured the intermediate-range hypersonic Oreshnik system, Iskander ballistic missiles, Kinzhal and Zircon hypersonic cruise missiles, among other strike capabilities. The Russian Defense Ministry has reported that Ukrainian military command and control facilities, air bases, as well as defense industry enterprises were struck.

Read more

In a post on X on Sunday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen accused Moscow of displaying “brutality and disregard for both human life and peace negotiations.” She went on to claim that the Russian military had targeted Ukrainian civilians – an allegation Moscow has rejected.

The bloc’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, has similarly spoken of a “political scare-tactic” on the part of Russia.

French President Emmanuel Macron, in turn, has vowed to double down on backing the Ukrainian leadership, with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz denouncing “this reckless escalation.” 
However, none of the said EU leaders mentioned the deadly Ukrainian UAV attack on the college dormitory in Starobelsk that served as the cause of Moscow’s retaliation.

Russia’s UN envoy, Vassily Nebenzia, previously accused Western diplomats of “turning a blind eye” to the crimes of the “neo-Nazi Kiev regime.”

Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Sunday that the BBC and CNN rejected Moscow’s invitation to visit the site of the attack, while Tokyo explicitly banned Japanese reporters from making the trip.

The US military on Saturday conducted a drill in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas that rehearsed a potential emergency and evacuation at its embassy.

The exercise, which had been authorized by the Venezuelan authorities, is the first US military drill held in the country after Washington kidnapped President Nicolas Maduro and his wife.

The drill involved two USMC MV-22B Osprey aircraft, which landed near the US Embassy, as well as naval vessels that entered Venezuelan waters in the Caribbean.

The US mission shared footage of the aircraft landing near the compound, stating the drill was a “military response exercise.”

“Ensuring the army’s rapid response capability is a key component of mission readiness, both here in Venezuela and around the world,” the embassy said.

En estos momentos se está llevando a cabo un ejercicio de respuesta militar estadounidense en la Embajada de los Estados Unidos en Caracas. Garantizar la capacidad de respuesta rápida del ejército es un componente clave de la preparación de la misión, tanto aquí en Venezuela como… pic.twitter.com/PpEwghap8r

— Embajada de los EE.UU. en Caracas (@usembassyve) May 23, 2026

Read more

The markings of the aircraft suggested they belonged to Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 263. The unit is deployed aboard the amphibious assault vessel USS Iwo Jima, which is currently operating in the Caribbean. This is the ship to which Maduro and his wife were flown immediately after they were abducted.

The Pentagon’s activities triggered a small protest in the city as a few dozen activists gathered to condemn the exercise as a “humiliation” to the nation. The protesters were seen holding a Venezuelan flag on which the words ‘No to the Yankee drill’ were inscribed.

The kidnapping of Maduro effectively subjugated Venezuela to the US. The country’s interim authorities have actively cooperated with Washington since the raid. Maduro remains incarcerated in the US on multiple charges, including drug trafficking. He has strongly denied all the allegations, describing himself as a “prisoner of war.”

The US military on Saturday conducted a drill in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas that rehearsed a potential emergency and evacuation at its embassy.

The exercise, which had been authorized by the Venezuelan authorities, is the first US military drill held in the country after Washington kidnapped President Nicolas Maduro and his wife.

The drill involved two USMC MV-22B Osprey aircraft, which landed near the US Embassy, as well as naval vessels that entered Venezuelan waters in the Caribbean.

The US mission shared footage of the aircraft landing near the compound, stating the drill was a “military response exercise.”

“Ensuring the army’s rapid response capability is a key component of mission readiness, both here in Venezuela and around the world,” the embassy said.

En estos momentos se está llevando a cabo un ejercicio de respuesta militar estadounidense en la Embajada de los Estados Unidos en Caracas. Garantizar la capacidad de respuesta rápida del ejército es un componente clave de la preparación de la misión, tanto aquí en Venezuela como… pic.twitter.com/PpEwghap8r

— Embajada de los EE.UU. en Caracas (@usembassyve) May 23, 2026

Read more

The markings of the aircraft suggested they belonged to Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 263. The unit is deployed aboard the amphibious assault vessel USS Iwo Jima, which is currently operating in the Caribbean. This is the ship to which Maduro and his wife were flown immediately after they were abducted.

The Pentagon’s activities triggered a small protest in the city as a few dozen activists gathered to condemn the exercise as a “humiliation” to the nation. The protesters were seen holding a Venezuelan flag on which the words ‘No to the Yankee drill’ were inscribed.

The kidnapping of Maduro effectively subjugated Venezuela to the US. The country’s interim authorities have actively cooperated with Washington since the raid. Maduro remains incarcerated in the US on multiple charges, including drug trafficking. He has strongly denied all the allegations, describing himself as a “prisoner of war.”

The US military has lost up to 30 MQ-9 Reaper drones since the start of the conflict with Iran, which accounts for nearly a fifth of Washington’s entire pre-war fleet and is valued at close to $1 billion, Bloomberg has reported. The bulk of them were destroyed or seriously damaged by Iranian fire, according to the outlet.

The MQ-9 Reaper is capable of conducting both reconnaissance and strike missions. A single drone is estimated to cost more than $30 million. General Atomics halted production of the model last year, although variants are still being manufactured for foreign customers.

In an article on Thursday, Bloomberg, citing an anonymous source, reported that “Iran has destroyed more than two dozen MQ-9 Reaper drones operated by US forces since the war began” in late February.

While many of the drones were downed by Iranian air defenses, others were lost on the ground as a result of missile strikes, as well as in accidents, according to Bloomberg.

Read more

The US fleet of Reapers has now fallen to roughly 135 aircraft, considerably below the Air Force’s long-standing minimum floor of 189, according to Lt. Gen. David Tabor, the Pentagon deputy chief of staff for plans and programs.

Earlier this month, the Congressional Research Service – the nonpartisan research arm of the Library of Congress that works with open-source materials – issued a report named ‘U.S. Aircraft Combat Losses in Operation Epic Fury.’ The document, citing an unspecified “news article,” similarly estimates that the US military had lost 24 MQ-9 Reapers, plus one MQ-4C.

The tally features a total of 42 US aircraft, including four F-15E fighter jets, an F-35A fighter jet, an A-10 Thunderbolt II ground-attack aircraft, seven KC-135 Stratotanker refueling planes, as well as a helicopter.

Appearing before the House Appropriations defense subcommittee last Tuesday, Acting Pentagon Comptroller Jules Hurst said that the cost of the military operation against Iran had swollen from the previously projected $25 billion to $29 billion due to “updated repair and replacement of equipment costs,” among other factors.

The US and Iran are poised to sign a deal which will prolong the ceasefire another 60 days, during which the Strait of Hormuz will be reopened and restrictions on oil trade against Tehran lifted, Axios has reported, citing American officials. In the meantime, the sides will try to reach a final deal to end the conflict, it added.

US President Donald Trump claimed on Saturday that the memorandum of understanding (MOU) has been “largely negotiated” and is currently being finalized. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said the same day that the sides were moving closer to a “convergence of views,” but noted that Tehran remains concerned about a possible U-turn by Washington.

A fragile truce between Washington and Tehran was established in early April after a month of intense hostilities initiated by the US and Israel. Since then, Trump has repeatedly threatened Iran with a renewed attack if it refuses to make concessions.

Axios said in an article on Sunday that as part of the MOU, navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, which accounts for some 25% of global crude trade, would be reopened for all vessels without any toll.

Read more

In exchange, Washington would remove its blockade on Iranian ports and allow the unrestricted sale of oil by Tehran, the sources said.

During the two-month ceasefire, which could be extended further by mutual consent, the sides will engage in negotiations on the Iranian nuclear program, they added.

According to the US officials, the proposed MOU also envisages an end to the Israeli military campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon, which West Jerusalem launched shortly after the attack on Iran.

The lifting of other economic sanctions against Tehran and the unfreezing of Iranian funds would only happen as part of a final agreement, they added.

Baghaei said in a TV interview that the current discussions between the US and Iran “focus broadly on ending the war” and stopping what he called “US piracy and maritime banditry.”

The Strait of Hormuz “has nothing to do with America” as it’s up to coastal states – Iran and Oman – to define a mechanism for its use, he insisted.

“At this stage, we are not discussing the details of the nuclear issue,” but it will likely be addressed later during the truce, the spokesman said.

READ MORE: Netanyahu’s ‘hair was on fire’ after Trump call on Iran – Axios

According to Baghaei, the lifting of “illegal and inhumane” sanctions and an unblocking of Iranian funds remains Tehran’s “constant demand” in contacts with intermediaries.

Ukrainian media and Telegram channels have circulated videos showing clusters of bright objects rapidly descending from the sky. They claimed the footage captured the use of Russia’s intermediate-range hypersonic Oreshnik missile against an unspecified target in the town of Belaya Tserkov near Ukraine’s capital, Kiev. Moscow has not officially confirmed the launch of its state-of-the-art system.

The latest footage resembles videos that circulated in January, when Russia used the Oreshnik system in a strike on a Ukrainian aviation plant in Lviv that was repairing and servicing warplanes and producing long-range drones.

Russia used an Oreshnik missile in a strike on the city of Belaya Tserkov, Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yury Ignat said on Sunday, according to local media reports. It was launched from the Kapustin Yar test range in southern Russia, he added.

The reported strike came after Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the Defense Ministry to “submit proposals” for a response to a Ukrainian drone attack on a teacher training college dormitory in the Lugansk People’s Republic, which left 21 people, mostly teenage girls, dead and 42 injured.

The US Embassy in Kiev had earlier warned American citizens of a “potentially significant air attack” that could occur within 24 hours, advising them to be prepared to take shelter immediately in the event of an air alert.

The dormitory, part of Starobelsk college at Lugansk Pedagogical University, was hit by several waves of Ukrainian drones while students were sleeping inside on Friday, in what Moscow called a deliberate “terrorist act.”

Governor Leonid Pasechnik declared May 24 and 25 days of mourning, calling the attack “pure evil” and saying those responsible must face “deserved and inevitable punishment.”

Read more

Ukrainian authorities have also reported dozens of missile and drone impacts in Kiev and elsewhere across Ukraine, but the Russian Defense Ministry has yet to confirm the scale or targets of the reported combined strike.

Russia first publicly confirmed the use of Oreshnik in November 2024, when Putin said the missile had been used in a strike on the Yuzhmash military-industrial facility in Dnepropetrovsk. The system is designed to deliver multiple warheads at hypersonic speed and has been described by Moscow as practically impossible for current air defenses to intercept.

Four people were arrested at Spain’s Bilbao Airport after police clashed with supporters of the Global Sumud Flotilla returning from detention in Israel on Saturday.

The mission was the latest in a series of Gaza-bound maritime initiatives organized by pro-Palestinian aid workers seeking to challenge Israel’s naval blockade of the enclave. It departed from Türkiye earlier this month carrying around 400 activists from about 40 countries before being intercepted by Israeli forces in international waters on May 18. The participants were later deported.

According to local media reports, the incident happened shortly after 2 PM local time on Saturday, as six members of the Basque delegation posed for journalists after arriving at the airport. A confrontation broke out after a supporter tried to approach the activists and was stopped by an officer from the Basque regional police. The altercation quickly escalated into clashes inside the terminal, with footage showing officers charging at activists and supporters with batons.

Read more

Organizers of the Global Sumud Flotilla expressed “deep indignation,” condemning “police brutality” and calling for an independent international investigation into the incident.

“Our companions have been attacked by the police. They were beaten and thrown to the ground. Police officers pinned them down with their knees, including one companion who had a broken shoulder blade,” activist Diana Zomeno told reporters.

“All this was done to people who have spent four days suffering constant torture, assaults, and violence,” she added, referring to the treatment the activists allegedly suffered while in Israeli custody.

The incident sparked political backlash, with Podemos party leader Ione Belarra, leader of Spain’s left-wing Podemos party, has descried the confrontation as “intolerable,” while the leftist political coalition Sumar condemned what it called “police repression” against the activists. Sumar said it was unacceptable that people allegedly “subjected to violence” in Israeli detention were met in the Basque Country with police brutality, identity checks, and arrests.

The Basque Security Department defended the police response, claiming that some people gathered at the airport obstructed the normal flow of passengers and provoked the clash.

Footage of the Russian strike near Ukrainian capital, Kiev, indicates that an Oreshnik missile was likely deployed by Moscow, former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter has said.

On Sunday night, Ukrainian media outlets and Telegram channels claimed that Russia fired its state-of-the-art intermediate-range hypersonic Oreshnik system at an unspecified target in the town of Belaya Tserkov in Kiev Region. They published footage showing clusters of bright objects rapidly descending from the skies. The Defense Ministry in Moscow has not officially confirmed the use of the munition.

The reported strike came after Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the Defense Ministry to “submit proposals” for a response to a Ukrainian drone attack on a teacher training school dormitory in the Lugansk People’s Republic on Friday, which killed 21 people, mostly teenage girls, and left 42 others wounded.

In his interview with RT, Ritter, who is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer, said that “there’s at least one strike in the vicinity of Kiev that has the visual characteristics of an Oreshnik missile.”

Read more

“It’s precisely the same six separate deliveries of six submunitions, 36 in total, mimicking the previous confirmed Oreshnik use” in November 2024 in Dnepropetrovsk and in January 2026 in Lviv, he noted.

Speaking about the possible target of the attack, the former UN inspector stressed that “there’s a reason to believe that the Oreshnik didn’t strike the center of Kiev, but rather hit a town outside of Kiev that has a military airfield that has been of some interest to the Russian forces in the past. Maybe there was something going on there that was worthy of an Oreshnik strike.”

“It’s clear... Russia is taking the promised action in response to the atrocities that happened in Lugansk,” he stressed.

The attack on the school dormitory was “an act of terror,” which crossed the line and again showed “the nefarious character of the Ukrainian government,” Ritter insisted.

READ MORE: Forget nukes. This is Russia’s new deterrence weapon

The possible use of the Oreshnik is also a signal to the West as “an entire system… exists beyond Ukraine’s borders into Europe and perhaps… into the US that facilitates and empowers” Kiev’s drone attacks in Lugansk and elsewhere inside Russia, he added.

A 21-year-old Maryland man with a history of mental health issues and prior encounters with the Secret Service was fatally shot near the White House on Saturday after allegedly opening fire at officers posted at a checkpoint outside the complex.

The incident prompted the North Lawn to be cleared and reporters to be moved into the press briefing room, while the White House and its grounds were placed on lockdown. US President Donald Trump, who was inside the White House at the time, was not affected.

A US Secret Service spokesperson said the male suspect approached a checkpoint at the corner of 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, removed a weapon from his bag, and fired at posted officers.

A suspect was killed after opening fire on a Secret Service checkpoint outside the White House Saturday evening, a Secret Service spokesperson told CBS News in a statement.

President Trump has been briefed on the shooting that occurred outside the White House, a White House… pic.twitter.com/zZ8hFvtF8U

— CBS News (@CBSNews) May 24, 2026

Secret Service agents returned fire, striking the suspect. He was taken to a local hospital in critical condition, where he later died.

I was in the middle of taping on my iPhone for a social video from the White House North Lawn when we heard the shots. It sounded like dozens of gunshots. We were told to sprint to the press briefing room where we are holding now. pic.twitter.com/iqdQwh4soq

— Selina Wang (@selinawangtv) May 23, 2026

A bystander was also critically injured in the incident, though officials said it remained unclear whether the person was struck by the suspect’s initial gunfire or during the subsequent exchange of fire. No Secret Service agents were reported injured.

ABC News correspondent Selina Wang was recording a video on the North Lawn when the shots were heard. “It sounded like dozens of gunshots,” Wang wrote on X. “We were told to sprint to the press briefing room.”

Read more

Officials identified the suspect as 21-year-old Nasire Best of Maryland, according to AP. Authorities said Best had a history of mental health issues and prior encounters with the Secret Service, including an earlier attempt to enter a White House checkpoint that led to a court order requiring him to stay away from the area.

The New York Post, citing law enforcement sources and court records, reported that Best had previously claimed he was “Jesus Christ” during a July 2025 detention for bypassing a restricted White House pedestrian checkpoint.

The lockdown imposed on the White House and its grounds was lifted at approximately 6:45 PM local time.

The incident comes amid heightened security concerns around the White House. Earlier this month, the Secret Service said a man was shot by law enforcement near the Washington Monument after opening fire on officers, briefly prompting heightened security in the area.

A 21-year-old Maryland man with a history of mental health issues and prior encounters with the Secret Service was fatally shot near the White House on Saturday after allegedly opening fire at officers posted at a checkpoint outside the complex.

The incident prompted the North Lawn to be cleared and reporters to be moved into the press briefing room, while the White House and its grounds were placed on lockdown. US President Donald Trump, who was inside the White House at the time, was not affected.

A US Secret Service spokesperson said the male suspect approached a checkpoint at the corner of 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, removed a weapon from his bag, and fired at posted officers.

A suspect was killed after opening fire on a Secret Service checkpoint outside the White House Saturday evening, a Secret Service spokesperson told CBS News in a statement.

President Trump has been briefed on the shooting that occurred outside the White House, a White House… pic.twitter.com/zZ8hFvtF8U

— CBS News (@CBSNews) May 24, 2026

Secret Service agents returned fire, striking the suspect. He was taken to a local hospital in critical condition, where he later died.

I was in the middle of taping on my iPhone for a social video from the White House North Lawn when we heard the shots. It sounded like dozens of gunshots. We were told to sprint to the press briefing room where we are holding now. pic.twitter.com/iqdQwh4soq

— Selina Wang (@selinawangtv) May 23, 2026

A bystander was also critically injured in the incident, though officials said it remained unclear whether the person was struck by the suspect’s initial gunfire or during the subsequent exchange of fire. No Secret Service agents were reported injured.

ABC News correspondent Selina Wang was recording a video on the North Lawn when the shots were heard. “It sounded like dozens of gunshots,” Wang wrote on X. “We were told to sprint to the press briefing room.”

Read more

Officials identified the suspect as 21-year-old Nasire Best of Maryland, according to AP. Authorities said Best had a history of mental health issues and prior encounters with the Secret Service, including an earlier attempt to enter a White House checkpoint that led to a court order requiring him to stay away from the area.

The New York Post, citing law enforcement sources and court records, reported that Best had previously claimed he was “Jesus Christ” during a July 2025 detention for bypassing a restricted White House pedestrian checkpoint.

The lockdown imposed on the White House and its grounds was lifted at approximately 6:45 PM local time.

The incident comes amid heightened security concerns around the White House. Earlier this month, the Secret Service said a man was shot by law enforcement near the Washington Monument after opening fire on officers, briefly prompting heightened security in the area.

US President Donald Trump has said that a peace agreement with Iran has been “largely negotiated” and is now being finalized, signaling a potential breakthrough after nearly three months of war and repeated threats of renewed American strikes.

Trump said he had held what he described as a “very good call” from the Oval Office with leaders and officials from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Pakistan, Türkiye, Egypt, Jordan and Bahrain concerning Iran, and “all things related to a Memorandum of Understanding pertaining to PEACE.”

“An Agreement has been largely negotiated, subject to finalization between the United States of America, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the various other Countries,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

He added that he had separately spoken with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and that the call “likewise, went very well.”

Read more

Trump said the “final aspects and details” of the deal were still being discussed and would be announced shortly. He also claimed that, among other elements of the agreement, the Strait of Hormuz “will be opened.”

Iranian media, however, disputed Trump’s characterization of the Hormuz arrangement. Fars news agency said the waterway would remain “under Iran’s management,” with Tehran retaining control over routes, timing, passage procedures, and permits.

While Iran had reportedly agreed to restore ship traffic to pre-war levels, Fars said this did not mean a return to “free passage,” calling Trump’s statement “incomplete” and “far from reality.”

READ MORE: Iran’s insurance, NATO intervention, and cables under threat: What’s going on in the Strait of Hormuz?

Trump had repeatedly warned in recent days that the US was prepared to resume attacks if Iran failed to accept a deal to end the war, which began in late February with American and Israeli strikes on Iran.

Read more

The two sides have largely refrained from direct exchanges since a fragile ceasefire was established in early April.

The Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints, has been a central issue in the talks. Iran restricted traffic through the waterway during the conflict, while Washington enforced a naval blockade on Iranian ports.

Tehran has previously said the focus of negotiations remained on ending the war, and that “details related to the nuclear issue are not being discussed at this stage.” The Islamic Republic has insisted that any agreement must preserve its sovereign rights and end what it describes as US “piracy” against Iranian ships.

Up to 50,000 residents have been ordered to evacuate parts of Orange County, California, as authorities warned that a damaged chemical tank remains at risk of leaking or exploding.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has declared a state of emergency in Orange County as emergency crews work to contain the crisis at a GKN Aerospace facility in Garden Grove, about 61 kilometers (38 miles) from Los Angeles. The pressurized tank contains between 6,000 and 7,000 gallons (22,700–26,500 liters) of methyl methacrylate (MMA), a highly flammable industrial chemical used in plastic production.

The incident began Thursday when the tank started venting vapors, according to the Orange County Fire Authority. Officials later said there was no active gas leak or plume but warned that the vessel remained unstable and could still fail.

What started out as a chemical leak has now escalated into an emergency officials say could end in a massive explosion.

Fire crews in Orange County, California, spent hours trying to stabilize a 34,000-gallon tank containing volatile chemicals before announcing that the tank… pic.twitter.com/mvEEsXNpQF

— Fox News (@FoxNews) May 23, 2026

Responders initially believed the situation had stabilized after crews cooled the exterior with water, following drone thermometer readings showing the temperature had fallen to 61 degrees Fahrenheit (16 degrees Celsius). It was later discovered that the drones had measured only the outer shell of the container, while manual readings showed internal heat levels were still rising.

BREAKING 🚨🚨🚨#GardenGrove / #California

‼️‼️ NEW SATURDAY MORNING CRITICAL INCIDENT UPDATE: Temperature in the liquid is higher than expected. OCFA has 3 scenarios to fight through to secure this, no end in sight for the immediate future. pic.twitter.com/TE3qETEr5o

— OC Scanner 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 (@OC_Scanner) May 23, 2026

By Saturday, temperatures inside the vessel had climbed to around 90 degrees Fahrenheit (32 degrees Celsius), with emergency personnel saying the heat was increasing by roughly one degree Fahrenheit per hour. Authorities also said damaged or “gummed up” valves were preventing crews from removing the chemical or relieving pressure.

Read more

Emergency teams have tried cooling the vessel and adding a neutralizing agent, while containment barriers have been set up to limit environmental contamination if the tank fails. Orange County Fire Authority Chief Craig Covey described the incident as a “worst-case scenario” and said the threat of a leak or explosion remained possible.

“Letting this thing just fail and blow up is simply unacceptable to us,” Covey said.

Evacuation orders were initially limited to residents living within 3 miles (4.8 kilometers) of the site, but were later expanded to parts of six Orange County cities: Garden Grove, Cypress, Stanton, Anaheim, Buena Park, and Westminster, affecting up to 50,000 people.

The substance can ignite easily and release toxic fumes if the container ruptures or explodes. Exposure to MMA may cause respiratory problems, neurological symptoms, skin and eye irritation, and, in some cases, unconsciousness, according to health officials.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed what he described as a “landmark” lawsuit against Meta, accusing the company of “falsely claiming” that WhatsApp messages are encrypted and inaccessible to third parties, including its own employees.

The messaging app, acquired by Meta in 2014, states on its website that “no one outside of the chat, not even WhatsApp, can read, listen to, or share what a user says.” 

On Thursday, the Texas Attorney General’s office announced that Paxton had initiated legal proceedings against Meta, accusing the company of having “misled consumers regarding the strength and scope of its privacy protections” for WhatsApp.

The lawsuit argues that Meta’s promotional materials claiming that it uses end-to-end encryption “have led millions of users to believe their communications are fully private.” 

The Texas Attorney General’s office, citing media reports and whistleblower accounts, argued that those claims were “blatantly inaccurate” and amounted to a “complete and total misrepresentation of Meta’s privacy policies.” 

Read more

Commenting on the lawsuit, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone has vowed that the company would fight it and insisted that “WhatsApp cannot access people’s encrypted communications and any suggestion to the contrary is false.” 

Pavel Durov, the founder of rival messaging app Telegram, wrote on X that “now we know what WhatsApp’s founder meant when he said he ‘sold his users’ privacy’.” 

In a 2018 interview with Forbes, WhatsApp co-founder Brian Acton admitted: “I sold my users’ privacy to a larger benefit. I made a choice and a compromise,” referring to the sale of the messaging app to what was then known as Facebook for $22 billion four years prior.

Durov previously charged that “you’d have to be braindead to believe WhatsApp is secure in 2026,” claiming that the Telegram team had “found multiple attack vectors” in its encryption.

The entrepreneur’s comments came amid a major class-action lawsuit filed in a US district court by an international group of plaintiffs against Meta Platforms over WhatsApp’s default end-to-end encryption.

The plaintiffs, citing unspecified whistleblowers, alleged that Meta and WhatsApp “store, analyze, and can access virtually all of WhatsApp users’ purportedly ‘private’ communications.” 

Around the same time, Bloomberg reported that the US federal authorities had for some time been investigating similar allegations.

A gunman was fatally shot by Secret Service agents near the White House on Saturday after allegedly opening fire at officers posted at a checkpoint outside the complex, officials said.

The incident prompted the North Lawn to be cleared and reporters to be moved into the press briefing room, while the White House and its grounds were placed on lockdown. President Donald Trump, who was inside the White House at the time, was not affected.

A US Secret Service spokesperson said the male suspect, whose identity has not been released, approached a checkpoint at the corner of 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, removed a weapon from his bag, and fired at posted officers.

A suspect was killed after opening fire on a Secret Service checkpoint outside the White House Saturday evening, a Secret Service spokesperson told CBS News in a statement.

President Trump has been briefed on the shooting that occurred outside the White House, a White House… pic.twitter.com/zZ8hFvtF8U

— CBS News (@CBSNews) May 24, 2026

Secret Service agents returned fire, striking the suspect. He was taken to a local hospital, where he later died.

I was in the middle of taping on my iPhone for a social video from the White House North Lawn when we heard the shots. It sounded like dozens of gunshots. We were told to sprint to the press briefing room where we are holding now. pic.twitter.com/iqdQwh4soq

— Selina Wang (@selinawangtv) May 23, 2026

A bystander was also critically injured in the incident, though officials said it remained unclear whether the person was struck by the suspect’s initial gunfire or during the subsequent exchange of fire. No Secret Service agents were reported injured.

Outside the press briefing doors right now…

USSS officers, gun drawn, told us to run inside

White House now on lockdown pic.twitter.com/CdgKkKoSZu

— Julie Tsirkin (@news_jul) May 23, 2026

ABC News correspondent Selina Wang was recording a video on the North Lawn when the shots were heard. ”It sounded like dozens of gunshots,” Wang wrote on X. “We were told to sprint to the press briefing room.”

Read more

Officials said the suspect had a history of mental health issues. The lockdown imposed on the White House and its grounds was lifted at approximately 6:45pm local time.

The incident comes amid heightened security concerns around the White House. Earlier this month, the Secret Service said a man was shot by law enforcement near the Washington Monument after opening fire on officers, briefly prompting heightened security in the area.

Gunshots were heard near the White House on Saturday evening, prompting Secret Service officers to clear the North Lawn and order reporters into the press briefing room, according to media reports and journalists at the scene.

NBC News correspondent Julie Tsirkin wrote on X that approximately 20 to 30 shots were heard outside the White House, and that Secret Service officers told those gathered on the North Lawn to run inside.

“USSS officers, gun drawn, told us to run inside,” Tsirkin wrote, adding that the White House was “now on lockdown.”

A Secret Service official told CNN that the agency was investigating reports of shots fired at the corner of 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, just outside the White House complex.

I was in the middle of taping on my iPhone for a social video from the White House North Lawn when we heard the shots. It sounded like dozens of gunshots. We were told to sprint to the press briefing room where we are holding now. pic.twitter.com/iqdQwh4soq

— Selina Wang (@selinawangtv) May 23, 2026

ABC News correspondent Selina Wang also wrote on X that she was recording a video on the North Lawn when the shots rang out.

“It sounded like dozens of gunshots,” Wang wrote. “We were told to sprint to the press briefing room where we are holding now.”

Outside the press briefing doors right now…

USSS officers, gun drawn, told us to run inside

White House now on lockdown pic.twitter.com/CdgKkKoSZu

— Julie Tsirkin (@news_jul) May 23, 2026

Details of the incident remain unclear. There was no immediate official confirmation of casualties, arrests, or whether the reported gunfire posed any threat to the White House complex.

The incident comes amid heightened security concerns around the White House. Earlier this month, the Secret Service said a man was shot by law enforcement near the Washington Monument after opening fire on officers, briefly prompting heightened security in the area.

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

Ukrainian media and Telegram channels have circulated videos showing bright objects descending almost vertically, followed by powerful flashes. They claimed the footage captured the use of Russia’s intermediate-range hypersonic Oreshnik system, although Moscow has not officially confirmed the launch.

The latest footage resembles videos that circulated in January, when Russia used the Oreshnik system in a strike on a Ukrainian aviation plant in Lviv that was repairing and servicing warplanes and producing long-range drones.

The reported strike came after Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the Defense Ministry to “submit proposals” for a response to a Ukrainian drone attack on a school dormitory in the Lugansk People’s Republic.

The dormitory, part of the Starobelsk college of Lugansk Pedagogical University, was hit by Ukrainian drones while students were inside. Local authorities said search-and-rescue operations at the site had been completed, with 21 people confirmed killed.

Governor Leonid Pasechnik declared May 24 and 25 days of mourning, calling the attack “pure evil” and saying those responsible must face “deserved and inevitable punishment.”

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

Multiple gunshots were heard near the White House on Saturday evening, according to media reports.

CNN reported that shots were heard in the White House area, while ABC News reporter Selina Wang wrote on X that journalists at the complex were told to run into the press briefing room.

“Many gunshots were heard when we were at the White House. We were told to run into the press briefing room,” Wang wrote.

Details of the incident remain unclear. There was no immediate official confirmation of casualties, arrests, or whether the reported gunfire posed any threat to the White House complex.

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

US President Donald Trump has said that a peace agreement with Iran has been “largely negotiated” and is now being finalized, signaling a potential breakthrough after nearly three months of war and repeated threats of renewed US strikes.

Trump said he had held what he described as a “very good call” from the Oval Office with leaders and officials from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Pakistan, Türkiye, Egypt, Jordan and Bahrain concerning Iran and “all things related to a Memorandum of Understanding pertaining to PEACE.”

“An Agreement has been largely negotiated, subject to finalization between the United States of America, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the various other Countries,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

He added that he had separately spoken with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and that the call “likewise, went very well.”

Read more

Trump said the “final aspects and details” of the deal were still being discussed and would be announced shortly. He also claimed that, among other elements of the agreement, the Strait of Hormuz “will be opened.”

Iranian media, however, disputed Trump’s characterization of the Hormuz arrangement. The semi-official Fars news agency said the waterway would remain “under Iran’s management,” with Tehran retaining control over routes, timing, passage procedures, and permits. While Iran had reportedly agreed to restore ship traffic to pre-war levels, Fars said this did not mean a return to “free passage,” calling Trump’s statement “incomplete” and “far from reality.”

READ MORE: Iran’s insurance, NATO intervention, and cables under threat: What’s going on in the Strait of Hormuz?

Trump had repeatedly warned in recent days that the US was prepared to resume attacks if Iran failed to accept a deal to end the war, which began in late February with US and Israeli strikes on Iran.

Read more

The two sides have largely refrained from direct exchanges since a fragile ceasefire was established in early April.

The Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints, has been a central issue in the talks. Iran restricted traffic through the waterway during the conflict, while Washington enforced a naval blockade on Iranian ports.

Tehran has previously said the focus of negotiations remained on ending the war, and that “details related to the nuclear issue are not being discussed at this stage.” Tehran has insisted that any agreement must preserve its sovereign rights and end what it describes as US “piracy” against Iranian ships.

At least 18 people have been killed and dozens more wounded – most of them students – in a Ukrainian drone raid on a school dormitory in Starobelsk in Russia’s Lugansk People’s Republic on Friday. As of Saturday afternoon, search-and-rescue operations are still underway, with local officials reporting additional Ukrainian drone attacks aimed at derailing the efforts.

President Vladimir Putin called the raid a “terrorist attack by the neo-Nazi regime,” adding that he ordered the military to prepare retaliation.

Following the attack, Russia requested an emergency UN Security Council session.

However, despite ample evidence and videos from the scene, Western countries have cast doubt on Russia’s account, demanding “an independent investigation” and claiming that the tragedy took place on “occupied territory.” Lugansk, along with three other former Ukrainian regions, overwhelmingly voted in favor of joining Russia in 2022 in a referendum that Ukraine and its Western backers have refused to recognize.

Here’s how Russia, the West, and Ukraine sparred at the UN Security Council.

Read more

What did Russia say about the Starobelsk attack?

Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, led the charge at the Security Council, calling the Ukrainian strike an unambiguous war crime. He called the raid “a deliberate strike” conducted “with the aim of incurring the highest possible number of casualties.”

Nebenzia said the “European [countries’] cynicism has gone off the charts,” as none of them bothered to mention the dead students in Starobelsk. The West’s reaction “cannot be even called hypocrisy or double standards” – it is “blatant mockery of child victims,” he said.

Nebenzia added that he feels “somewhat embarrassed and ashamed” over the Western diplomats’ reluctance to acknowledged the facts.

How did the West respond?

The most contemptuous response came from Latvia, which immediately dismissed Russia’s account out of hand. Its envoy called Russia “imperialist” and said independent media and experts are required.

Denmark has accused Russia of failing to provide “unfettered access for credible independent journalists or international humanitarian organizations” to the site – despite Moscow’s invitation to Western journalists to see the site for themselves.

The UK and France also urged an independent investigation.

The US envoy said Washington is “following the reports of those killed and wounded in Lugansk overnight,” adding that “many questions concerning this attack remain outstanding.”

Read more

What did Ukraine say about the Starobelsk attack?

Kiev’s envoy called the session “a shameless attempt by the Russian Federation to turn reality upside down,” dismissing all statements on Starobelsk as an attempt to “manipulate international public opinion” and as “pure propaganda.”

Unlike Kiev’s Western backers, the Ukrainian envoy did not call for an independent investigation, saying the truth cannot be established until the former Ukrainian territory is “liberated.”

Has Russia invited Western journalists?

Yes. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova announced on Saturday that Moscow is extending an official invitation to foreign journalists to visit the site. She later said the BBC declined to send a reporter, while CNN is apparently “on vacation.” She added that Japan barred its journalists from covering the tragedy. According to Zakharova, however, many foreign reporters have signaled that they are willing to go to Starobelsk.

The Bottom line

Compelling evidence has not convinced Western countries – which have spent hundreds of billions of dollars to support Kiev in the conflict with Russia – to hold Ukraine accountable.

Read more

Speaking to RT, Aleksandr Bobrov, an associate professor at MGIMO, Russia’s leading international affairs university, said the West’s response to the Starobelsk tragedy should not be taken “too literally” – describing it as a “theater” in which each diplomat simply delivers their country’s official line.

He argued that Starobelsk is becoming “a very painful subject” for Ukraine and its European backers – one that could eventually become synonymous with “Ukrainian aggression.” As a result, Bobrov said Western diplomats resorted to “absolutely clumsy statements” designed to shift attention away from the attack to unrelated matters.

“I believe that Russian diplomacy will have to convey the voice of truth at every level – not only at the United Nations, but also at the OSCE and other international platforms – so that all those responsible are appropriately punished,” he said.

2025 can be seen as the year in which the united anti-Russian coalition fell apart. In essence, there are now three distinct players acting against Russia (Ukraine, Europe, the US), and each has its own interests. Analyst Sergey Poletaev has prepared a series of articles in which he analyses the position of each player, their goals and interests in the conflict, and suggests how Russia might respond. 

Today we focus on the United States. Read the first part about Ukraine here.

Resignation from the role of leader

Since the Trump team’s rise to power, US politics has undergone a profound, one is even tempted to say historic, shift: The US is moving away from its role as the ‘leader of the free world’ and seeking to focus on its own interests.

While in the first half of 2025, it seemed that this was merely a whim of Trump’s, and that the US could not be diverted from its course of maintaining its hegemony, by the end of the year, it had become clear that the Trump administration was seeking to reset relations with all global players. We will not be discussing today the extent to which Trump has been successful; what matters to us is his motivation.

The reasons for such a radical shift in policy are clear: For decades, both left-liberal (Democratic) and neo-conservative (Republican) administrations refused to acknowledge reality and behaved as if it were still 1991, the world was celebrating the ‘end of history’, and all nations were looking with hope towards the City on the Hill, reverently acknowledging the leadership and authority of the US.

Read more

This policy reached its peak, and inevitable collapse, following the start of Russia’s military operation in 2022. The attempt to isolate Moscow effectively divided the world into two camps: Those which, whether out of conviction or under duress, stood up for the ‘rules-based order’, and those which effectively refused to abide by those rules. The latter turned out to be in the majority, and something had to be done about it.

Trump proposed a solution: America will no longer impose its rules on anyone, nor will it pretend to act on behalf of all humanity (often forgetting about itself). The US has its own interests and sufficient strength to defend them.

Thus, from being a key front in the struggle for world order, support for Ukraine has turned into a millstone around Washington’s neck. They cannot abandon it (too much has been invested, and opposition is too strong even among Trump’s closest allies, let alone the rest of the American establishment), but there is no point in dragging it along any further.

In effect, the US has offloaded the conflict onto Europe and let things take their course. This doesn’t mean that Trump wants Kiev to lose – it’s in his interests to preserve the current regime in Kiev, but he isn’t prepared to go to the mat for Ukraine, nor is he prepared to pour billions and political capital into the bottomless Ukrainian pit as his predecessor did.

The Beijing Triangle

In principle, Trump would prefer to freeze the Ukraine conflict and gain the opportunity to restore some of the relationship with Moscow. Like several of his predecessors, Trump understands that America’s main foreign policy rival is China, not Russia. However, Trump is the first to have attempted to do something about this, to have tried to at least somewhat slow down China’s expansion, which until last year seemed unstoppable.

First and foremost, the US is seeking to restore order in the New World by pushing China out of the region. The most notable step in this regard was the coup in Caracas, orchestrated with the involvement of the Pentagon, and the subsequent restoration of American control over Venezuelan oil exports. This has been a visible success.

Next on the agenda was a ‘remake’ of the Venezuelan scenario in Iran. As in Venezuela, China is the main buyer of Iranian hydrocarbons, and bringing Iranian oil exports under control would deal a second blow to Beijing.

Read more

However, the key link in Trump’s strategy to isolate China is Russia. Trump himself has repeatedly cited Biden’s main foreign policy mistake as having allowed a strategic rapprochement between the two countries. Washington dreams of weakening the Moscow-Beijing axis, and this cannot be achieved without the carrot of restoring economic ties.

Russia also needs to keep China in check. Of course, this doesn’t mean betraying its eastern neighbor (that is not the issue at all), but even a partial restoration of economic ties with America would give Russia greater room for maneuver in its relations with China. From the perspective of classical diplomacy, this is a sound, rational, and well-considered policy.

So far, however, attempts at a Russian-American rapprochement have come to nothing. First and foremost, this is due to the fierce domestic opposition to Trump, so without a formal end to the conflict, his hands are tied. In over a year, practically nothing has been achieved, not even what seemed a done deal last spring, such as the full reopening of the Russian and US embassies.

Nevertheless, the attempts continue. Moscow’s aim with regard to Washington is to sever Russian-American relations from Ukrainian affairs. It seems a plan was devised in Anchorage: If Trump forces Zelensky to abandon Donbass, Putin will in response declare a ceasefire in exchange for the thawing of economic ties with the US. At the same time, no one is removing the fundamental claims against Ukraine, usually referred to as ‘Istanbul plus territories’, from the agenda.

Agreements with Trump don’t imply agreements with Ukraine and the EU, which are absent from the Anchorage equation. Kiev must comply with what Washington dictates, while the Europeans aren’t taking part in the negotiations at all for the time being. The Kremlin harbors no illusions regarding their willingness to negotiate; on the contrary, according to the Kremlin’s plan, it’s Ukraine with the support of European liberal elites that will violate the peace deal between Putin and Trump, and Russia will punish them for it, while simultaneously restoring trade and diplomatic relations with the US and third countries that are currently forced to comply with the sanctions regime by Washington (for example, South Korea).

Read more

Thus, according to Moscow’s plan, the Ukraine conflict is intended to turn into a war between Russia and Europe, rather than between Russia and the West as a whole. This is the meaning and essence of the diplomatic line that Moscow is pursuing with regard to Washington. A line which, it must be admitted, has not yet yielded results.

Nevertheless, Moscow is making preparations for a possible Trump-led truce very seriously, as evidenced by the systematic work to expand the security zone along the old Russian-Ukrainian border: Over the winter, the length of the areas occupied by the Russian Army in Sumy and Kharkov regions has doubled.

***

So, the US is withdrawing from the Ukraine conflict and from European affairs in general, focusing its attention elsewhere. This approach will continue after Trump, although the rhetoric may change: For instance, a successor to the 47th president with more traditional views might speak of the importance of NATO, but is unlikely to once again extend the US security umbrella over Europe at America’s expense. At the same time, even under Trump, a major deal with Russia remains a fantasy for now, despite all the efforts of the Russian side.

It is to be expected that Moscow will continue its current diplomatic dance with Washington, primarily to prevent the Trump administration from being drawn back into Ukrainian affairs, something that Europe and Ukraine are striving for with all their might.

Czech President Petr Pavel has urged NATO to “show its teeth” in response to what he described as Russian “provocations” on the bloc’s eastern flank.

Pavel’s remarks follow a series of Ukrainian drone incursions into NATO airspace in Europe. Since mid-March, long-range UAVs have repeatedly crossed Baltic and Nordic airspace en route to targets in northwestern Russia, particularly oil facilities in Leningrad Region. The incursions prompted fighter jet deployments, and some drones crashed inside NATO states, causing damage.

Moscow has accused European NATO members of quietly allowing Kiev to use their airspace for attacks on Russian territory, but Western officials deny this, instead blaming Russia for the incursions and claiming that Russian electronic warfare systems may have redirected the drones to stray into NATO airspace.

In an interview with The Guardian published Friday, Pavel echoed the accusations, claiming that Russia was intentionally staging “provocations” operating just below the threshold that would trigger NATO’s collective defense clause, Article 5. He also claimed that Russian military officials openly mock the bloc’s indecision during such incidents, and called for “decisive enough, potentially even asymmetric” responses to counter Moscow’s actions.

Read more

“Russia, unfortunately, does not understand nice language. They mostly understand the language of power, ideally accompanied with action,” he claimed. “When I asked them why they do these provocative actions in the air... their answer was ‘because we can’. That’s exactly the kind of behavior we allowed.”

Citing earlier Western allegations of Russian “provocations” in the Black and Baltic Seas – such as fighter jet intercepts and purported airspace violations – Pavel suggested that NATO should consider shooting down “either an unmanned or manned” Russian aircraft if spotted near its borders. Moscow has denied the accusations, insisting its patrols occur in international airspace and are a necessary response to Western reconnaissance flights near Russian borders.

Pavel also proposed “potentially asymmetric” measures against Moscow, including disrupting internet access, targeting satellites, or cutting Russian banks off from the global financial system, measures he said “are not killing people, but are sensitive enough to make Russia understand this is not the way they should go.”

Read more

Pavel’s position echoes that of several other NATO countries. Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said on Thursday that NATO states should actually help Kiev “direct” drone attacks “in the right directions.” Latvian and Estonian officials defended Ukrainian incursions by saying that Kiev “has every right to defend itself.”

Finland, however, rebuked Kiev over the breaches of its airspace, while Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico urged renewed dialogue with Moscow, warning of potential Ukrainian drone provocations involving NATO territory that he said could trigger direct conflict between Russia and the bloc.

Multiple Western officials have claimed that Moscow could test the alliance through provocations and hybrid operations, or eventually attack European states after the Ukraine conflict ends. Citing the purported threat, European NATO members last year pledged to raise military spending to 5% of GDP and launched rearmament initiatives such as ReArm Europe.

Moscow, however, dismissed claims that it poses a threat to Europe as baseless “nonsense” and condemned what it calls reckless EU militarization. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov recently accused European “warmongers” of portraying Russia as a “model external enemy” to distract from domestic problems.

Hungary has restored a ban on Ukrainian food imports after the new government “accidentally” allowed the restrictions to lapse.

The ban, covering around 20 categories of agricultural goods, was introduced in 2023 after former Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government declared an emergency over the economic fallout of the Ukraine conflict.

Budapest argued that cheap Ukrainian imports flooded EU border markets after Brussels lifted tariffs, undercutting Hungarian farmers and destabilizing the agriculture sector.

While transit shipments were allowed, imports for the Hungarian market were restricted, and the ban stayed in place even after the EU replaced its temporary tariff-free regime with a trade pact last year.

Read more

However, shortly after incoming PM Peter Magyar’s Tisza party defeated Orban’s Fidesz in the recent election, the new government ended the state of emergency, automatically causing the trade restrictions tied to it to expire.

Following pressure from the main Hungarian farmers’ association and reports that several grain shipments already crossed the border, Budapest scrambled to restore the restrictions. On Friday, the government issued a decree reinstating the ban, followed by a post on X from Magyar confirming that Hungary “bans the import of agricultural products from Ukraine.”

“The sanctions were canceled due to a legislative error,” a government spokesperson told Euractiv, claiming lawmakers were reviewing nearly 1,000 decrees inherited from the previous government and the import ban was “accidentally not taken into account.” 
Agriculture Minister Szabolcs Bona described the lapse as a “serious legislative trap for Hungarian farmers,” and pledged that the government “will not allow Ukrainian or any other imported product to endanger the livelihood of Hungarian farmers.”

Read more

Poland and Slovakia also maintain restrictions on Ukrainian agricultural imports introduced alongside Hungary, despite opposition from Brussels.

The European Commission has argued that the bans are illegal because trade policy falls under EU authority, and last year reportedly considered legal action against the countries, though none has followed. Karin Karlsbro, the European Parliament’s rapporteur on EU-Ukraine trade, told Euractiv she “deeply regrets” Hungary’s decision to maintain the “illegal import ban.”

Kiev has not yet commented. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly criticized the bans.

While Magyar campaigned on closer ties with the EU, several moves suggest continuity with Orban. Magyar has opposed fast-tracking Ukraine’s EU membership and kept Hungary out of the bloc’s latest Ukraine funding initiative.

READ MORE: Where will Magyar take Hungary?

However, he signaled that the EU’s new Ukraine aid package would not be blocked and softened the government’s tone on social issues by appointing Judit Lannert – which the media has called Hungary’s “first LGBT activist” – as education minister.

Hungary has restored a ban on Ukrainian food imports after the new government “accidentally” allowed the restrictions to lapse.

The ban, covering around 20 categories of agricultural goods, was introduced in 2023 after former Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government declared an emergency over the economic fallout of the Ukraine conflict.

Budapest argued that cheap Ukrainian imports flooded EU border markets after Brussels lifted tariffs, undercutting Hungarian farmers and destabilizing the agriculture sector.

While transit shipments were allowed, imports for the Hungarian market were restricted, and the ban stayed in place even after the EU replaced its temporary tariff-free regime with a trade pact last year.

Read more

However, shortly after incoming PM Peter Magyar’s Tisza party defeated Orban’s Fidesz in the recent election, the new government ended the state of emergency, automatically causing the trade restrictions tied to it to expire.

Following pressure from the main Hungarian farmers’ association and reports that several grain shipments already crossed the border, Budapest scrambled to restore the restrictions. On Friday, the government issued a decree reinstating the ban, followed by a post on X from Magyar confirming that Hungary “bans the import of agricultural products from Ukraine.”

“The sanctions were canceled due to a legislative error,” a government spokesperson told Euractiv, claiming lawmakers were reviewing nearly 1,000 decrees inherited from the previous government and the import ban was “accidentally not taken into account.” 
Agriculture Minister Szabolcs Bona described the lapse as a “serious legislative trap for Hungarian farmers,” and pledged that the government “will not allow Ukrainian or any other imported product to endanger the livelihood of Hungarian farmers.”

Read more

Poland and Slovakia also maintain restrictions on Ukrainian agricultural imports introduced alongside Hungary, despite opposition from Brussels.

The European Commission has argued that the bans are illegal because trade policy falls under EU authority, and last year reportedly considered legal action against the countries, though none has followed. Karin Karlsbro, the European Parliament’s rapporteur on EU-Ukraine trade, told Euractiv she “deeply regrets” Hungary’s decision to maintain the “illegal import ban.”

Kiev has not yet commented. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly criticized the bans.

While Magyar campaigned on closer ties with the EU, several moves suggest continuity with Orban. Magyar has opposed fast-tracking Ukraine’s EU membership and kept Hungary out of the bloc’s latest Ukraine funding initiative.

READ MORE: Where will Magyar take Hungary?

However, he signaled that the EU’s new Ukraine aid package would not be blocked and softened the government’s tone on social issues by appointing Judit Lannert – which the media has called Hungary’s “first LGBT activist” – as education minister.

At least 82 miners have been killed after a gas explosion tore through a coal mine in northern Shanxi Province, China, with rescue efforts still underway, state broadcaster CCTV reported on Saturday.

The blast occurred on Friday evening at the Liushenyu mine operated by Shanxi Tongzhou Group in Qinyuan County. According to Xinhua, 247 workers were on duty underground at the time of the incident. CCTV said nine people are still unaccounted for.

The cause is still unclear, with an investigation ongoing, though an earlier Xinhua report suggested that carbon monoxide levels exceeded limits inside the mine.

Death toll has risen to 82 after a coal mine accident in Qinyuan County, north China's Shanxi Province. pic.twitter.com/o9CM6MewlX

— China Xinhua News (@XHNews) May 23, 2026

Chinese President Xi Jinping issued instructions on Saturday for an “all-out rescue of the missing and treatment of the injured,” while calling for a thorough investigation into the cause. Officials running the coal mine have been detained, according to media reports.

Read more

A video shared by Xinhua shows numerous ambulances and police cars arriving at the scene.

Coal is a key source of energy in China, powering more than half of the nation’s energy consumption, despite efforts in recent years to reduce its use. In 2021, Xi pledged to “strictly limit the increase in coal consumption” until 2025 and start phasing it out as part of the goal of reaching carbon neutrality by 2060.

In June 2025, the share of coal in power generation dropped to a historic low of 51%, with China rapidly expanding the use of wind, solar, and nuclear energy.

SpaceX’s Starship rocket exploded in a fireball after splashing down in the Indian Ocean on Friday, capping what the company described as a successful test flight of its next-generation spacecraft.

The massive rocket lifted off from SpaceX’s Starbase facility in Texas at around 6:30pm ET and flew for roughly 66 minutes before the upper-stage Starship reentered the atmosphere, performed its landing burn, and reached its planned splashdown zone.

Liftoff of Starship! pic.twitter.com/LQLdjK5V6K

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) May 22, 2026

Seconds after touching the water, the vehicle tipped over and burst into flames, footage from SpaceX’s livestream showed.

Splashdown confirmed! Congratulations to the entire SpaceX team on the twelfth flight test of Starship! pic.twitter.com/XXBAtryPpL

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) May 22, 2026

The explosion was not considered a failure, as the spacecraft was not designed to be recovered from the ocean. Many previous Starship test flights have also ended with the vehicle exploding during reentry or landing attempts, but SpaceX treats such incidents as part of its rapid development program.

During the mission, the Starship deployed dummy Starlink satellites about 20 minutes after launch and tested new hardware, including heat-shield changes intended to stress the vehicle during reentry.

Views of Starship in space from a @Starlink satellite pic.twitter.com/5hfw1n8v1o

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) May 22, 2026

At least one of the spacecraft’s six engines reportedly malfunctioned during the flight, but the vehicle still completed its main objectives and reached the splashdown zone.

Read more

The Super Heavy booster separated earlier in the flight and reportedly performed a “hard” splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico after only a handful of engines reignited for a boostback burn.

Starship is central to SpaceX’s long-term plans, including NASA’s Artemis lunar program and Elon Musk’s ambition to build a reusable transport system capable of reaching Mars. The latest test used an upgraded version of Starship, which SpaceX hopes will eventually carry satellites, cargo, and crews to the Moon and Mars.

Read more

The most widespread and threatening illnesses aren’t ebola or the hantavirus, but mental health disorders, according to a new study published in the Lancet medical journal. With more than a billion people affected, should you be worried?

Published on Thursday, the study found that nearly 1.2 billion people worldwide had a mental disorder in 2023, an increase of 95% since 1990. Out of 12 disorders studied, the researchers found the sharpest increases in anxiety disorders and major depressive disorders, which rose by 158% and 131%, respectively. These two conditions are now the world’s most prevalent mental illnesses.

What mental disorders were studied?

The study’s authors recorded the prevalence of the 12 most common mental disorders, which they found were:

• Anxiety disorders

• Major depressive disorder

• Dysthymia (a chronic but mild form of depression)

• Bipolar disorder

• Schizophrenia

• Autism spectrum disorders

• Conduct disorder

• Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

• Anorexia nervosa

• Bulimia nervosa

• Idiopathic developmental intellectual disability (IDID, or intellectual disabilities of unknown cause)

• A residual category of other mental disorders

Who is at risk?

With the exception of ADHD and IDID, which dropped by 1.8% and 16.4%, respectively, all of these disorders have increased in prevalence. The increase was not distributed equally, however. Most of the 12 conditions are more common among women, with depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder, anorexia, and bulimia all more likely to affect females. ADHD, autism, and conduct disorder – which manifests as aggression and disobedience – are all more prevalent in males.

Mental disorders are most common in people aged 15 to 19, the study found, marking the first time that this demographic bears the highest mental health burden.

Research was carried out in 204 countries and territories, and while the study noted increases across the world, Western countries are the most affected. Measuring ‘life years’ of mental illness, the researchers found a mental illness rate of 3,555 per 100,000 in the Netherlands, and 1,302 in Vietnam, for example.

Middle-developed countries as a whole had average mental illness rates of around 1,853 per 100,000, while highly developed countries had rates of around 2,184 per 100,000.

Why are more people mentally ill?

“There are many factors at play here, and it is difficult to tease them all apart,” lead researcher Dr. Damian Santomauro told CNN. However, Santomauro’s colleague, Dr. Robert Trestman, highlighted one key factor: “The stigma of mental illness has been substantially reduced, [and] people are much more comfortable coming forward, as opposed to suffering in silence.”

While Trestman attributes the rise to loosening stigmas, others point to overdiagnosis of mental disorders.

Overdiagnosis

Between 2013 and 2025, the number of mental health cases handled by England’s National Health Service more than doubled, from just under four million in 2013 to nine million in 2025. With autism and ADHD rates driving the increase, Health Secretary Wes Streeting claimed that “there’s an overdiagnosis” of these conditions, and ordered a government review into the matter last December. 

At the time, the BBC asked 750 British doctors whether they agreed with Streeting’s comments. 442 said they did, with only 81 saying that mental health problems were being under-diagnosed.

“As a society we seem to have forgotten that life can be tough – a broken heart or grief is painful and normal, and we have to learn to cope,” one doctor told the BBC.

In a 2022 study, Australian researchers identified “concept creep” as a key driver of overdiagnosis. They argued that by broadening the definition of some disorders, doctors and psychiatrists have pathologized once-normal behaviors: for example, a boy refusing to sit still in school is more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD nowadays than in 1990.

Big pharma profiting

One of the doctors who spoke to the BBC said that they find themselves “regularly reaching for antidepressants, which I know may only help short term and won’t help prevent recurrence.” As of 2022, roughly 14.7% of the population in England has a prescription for antidepressants, and the number of 5-12-year-olds on these drugs has risen by 41% between 2015 and 2021, according to the pharmaceutical journal. Antidepressant use has soared by 147% in the EU between 2000 and 2020, and by 65% in the US during the same time.

All of these numbers translate into massive profits for the pharmaceutical industry. According to Fortune, the global antidepressant market is expected to grow to $18.3 billion in 2027. Big Pharma is working to drive these numbers up through diagnosis, Fortune notes, highlighting how “for-profit organizations and governments are working to create awareness among the general population about various mental conditions,” which “assists market growth potential.”

Beginning in the 1980s, pharmaceutical companies lobbied the American Psychiatric Association to reclassify depression from an episodic phenomenon to a long-term “disorder” requiring medication. Drugmakers then funded studies to prove that their products – in this case SSRI (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor) drugs – worked, and doctors were incentivized to prescribe them.

Modern research has found that many early SSRI trials were rigged by the industry, and multiple companies – including GlaxoSmithKline, Forest Laboratories, and Takeda – have been sued for offering doctors kickbacks in exchange for prescribing more antidepressants. In a 2012 settlement, GlaxoSmithKline paid $3 billion in damages for unlawfully promoting Paxil and Wellbutrin, including by offering meals and hotel stays to doctors who prescribed the two medications.

Read more

With the exception of conduct disorder, every condition mentioned in the Lancet study is treated with prescription drugs, meaning the pharmaceutical industry has a baked-in incentive to promote their diagnosis.

Modernity is bad for our health

While overdiagnosis and the greed of the pharmaceutical industry go a long way toward explaining the rising prevalence of mental illness, some scientists believe that the modern world itself is making us sick. As psychiatrist Dr. Alex Curmi explained in The Guardian last year, humans evolved to live in close-knit bands of hunter-gatherers, performing hands-on work in “communities rich with tradition, ritual and spiritual meaning,” rather than living atomized and sedentary lives in cities, subsisting on chemical-laden food, and bombarded by news cycles of misery and violence.

“Modern populations are increasingly overfed, malnourished, sedentary, sunlight-deficient, sleep-deprived, and socially-isolated,” read a 2012 study titled ‘Depression as a disease of modernity’. The study also noted “A positive correlation between a country’s GDP per capita…and lifetime risk of a mood disorder.”

Read more

The Lancet study found soaring rates of mental illness after the Covid-19 pandemic, a time of lockdowns, isolation, joblessness and stress for hundreds of millions of people worldwide.

Certain elements of modern life have had a clear and well-documented negative effect on our mental health. After more than 143 peer-reviewed studies, there is a growing consensus that social media use is linked with depression, anxiety, and eating disorders like anorexia and bulimia nervosa, particularly among teenagers.

It is now the official opinion of the US Surgeon General that adolescents – the group which saw the largest rise in mental disorders in the Lancet study – who spend more than three hours per day on social media double their risk of developing anxiety and depression. Just under half of US teens feel that social media use has a “mostly negative” impact on their mental health, a Pew Research survey found last year.

Should you worry?

The short answer here is ‘it depends’. While the risk of mental disorders seems to increase along with a country’s GDP, it’s worth bearing in mind that the richest and most developed countries are also the largest markets for the pharmaceutical industry, making it more likely that their citizens will be overdiagnosed and overmedicated. 

More broadly, some solutions are obvious: limiting screen time and social media use, eating well and exercising, building strong relationships, meditation and prayer are all recognized by both science and common sense as conducive to good mental health.

Canada’s oil-rich province of Alberta will hold a public vote in October on whether to remain in the country or take steps toward a binding referendum on independence, Premier Danielle Smith has announced.

The vote is expected to be held on October 19 and will ask Albertans whether they want the province to remain in Canada. Smith stressed that the ballot would not itself be a binding referendum on Alberta’s independence, but would instead gauge whether residents want to pursue one.

The announcement comes after a pro-independence group, Stay Free Alberta, submitted nearly 302,000 signatures in a bid to trigger a citizen-led referendum on leaving Canada. The required threshold was 177,732 signatures, equal to 10% of the votes cast in the previous provincial election.

Canada's oil-rich province of Alberta will proceed with a non-binding referendum in October on whether its residents want to remain part of Canada, Premier Danielle Smith said, a largely symbolic move that could still pose a challenge for PM Mark Carney https://t.co/iRzsCDWy5H pic.twitter.com/NFMe33B8RC

— Reuters (@Reuters) May 22, 2026

Smith has said she personally supports Alberta remaining in Canada, but argues that residents should be able to express their views on the province’s future. The initiative was also challenged in court by First Nations groups arguing that Alberta’s potential secession would violate treaty rights.

Read more

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney responded by saying Alberta is “essential” to Canada and vowed to build a stronger country. Ottawa has sought to address some of Alberta’s long-running grievances, including disputes over energy policy and access to export markets for the province’s oil and gas sector.

Alberta is one of Canada’s most important energy-producing regions and has long been at odds with the federal government over environmental regulations, taxation, and pipeline access. Separatist sentiment has been fueled by claims that Ottawa has held back the province’s resource economy, though polling suggests full independence remains a minority position.

Canada works — and by working together, we’ll make it even better. pic.twitter.com/xHMJX0enBZ

— Mark Carney (@MarkJCarney) May 22, 2026

Even if Albertans vote to pursue independence and hold an official referendum, the province could not unilaterally leave Canada. Under Canada’s constitutional framework, a clear referendum result would require negotiations with the federal government and other provinces, while legal challenges from Indigenous groups could further complicate the process.

US President Donald Trump has abruptly canceled plans to attend his son Donald Trump Jr.’s wedding this weekend, saying he must remain in Washington as his administration reportedly prepares for possible new strikes on Iran.

The Trump administration was preparing for a fresh round of military strikes against Iran, but no final decision had been made, CBS News reported on Friday, citing sources with direct knowledge of the planning.

Axios reported that Trump convened his senior national security team on Friday morning to discuss Iran, including the state of negotiations and possible scenarios if talks collapse. Vice President J.D. Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, and other officials reportedly attended the meeting.

“I feel it is important for me to remain in Washington, D.C., at the White House during this important period of time,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, adding that he wanted to be with his son Don Jr. and his soon-to-be wife, but that unspecified “circumstances pertaining to Government, and my love for the United States of America, do not allow me to do so.”

Read more

Trump had hinted at the reason on Thursday, telling reporters that the wedding was “not good timing” because of “a thing called Iran and other things.”

The White House has changed Trump’s weekend schedule as Washington awaits Tehran’s response to what CBS described as the “final” US proposal to end the nearly three-month war. The offer was reportedly transmitted to Iran on Wednesday with a warning that rejecting it would mean the resumption of strikes.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said before flying to India that the US expected to receive Iran’s response through Pakistan, which has acted as an intermediary. Axios reported that Pakistani Field Marshal Asim Munir traveled to Tehran on Friday, while a Qatari delegation also arrived to support the mediation effort.

Read more

Trump has grown increasingly frustrated with the negotiations in recent days and, according to Axios, has raised the possibility of a final “decisive” major military operation, after which he could declare victory and end the war.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps warned this week that any renewed US or Israeli attacks could widen the conflict beyond the Middle East, promising “crushing blows” in places Washington and West Jerusalem “cannot even imagine.”

Iran’s Foreign Ministry said on Friday that talks were ongoing but that a deal was not close. A source close to Tehran’s negotiating team told Tasnim that the current focus remained on ending the war and that no other issue would be negotiated until that was achieved.

Hundreds of suspected child predators have been apprehended and dozens of minors rescued in a sweeping multi-agency crackdown across Southern California targeting internet-facilitated child exploitation, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) has said.

A total of 341 suspects were arrested and 40 minors rescued during Operation Firewall, which was spearheaded by the Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force and ran from April 19 through May 3 across Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Santa Barbara, and Ventura counties.

According to a Thursday press release by the LAPD, the operation was aimed at “identifying and apprehending predators who use the internet to facilitate the sexual exploitation and abuse of children.”

Read more

The LAPD said investigators conducted “proactive undercover investigations” across multiple social media platforms and executed numerous search and arrest warrants during the sting. Those arrested are suspected of offenses including the production, possession, and distribution of child pornography, “lewd acts with a child,” and human trafficking.

Speaking at a press conference on Thursday, Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hawkman detailed that the operation involved hundreds of officers from 30 different law enforcement agencies.

Orange County Sheriff Don Barnes revealed that the investigators had posed as “teenage girls as young as 13 years old” in chat rooms and online gaming platforms, where suspects “groomed them, and then made arrangements to meet those young girls.”

Read more

First Assistant US Attorney for the Central District of California Bill Essayli said the “cases we’re announcing today are just a small drop in the bucket,” warning that many more offenses remain undetected.

“Every single one of these cases is our worst nightmare,” Essayli said, urging parents and caregivers to keep children off the internet because “nothing good comes from it.”

Eddie Wang, the special agent in charge for Homeland Security Investigations in Los Angeles, similarly spoke of an overwhelming “epidemic” of internet-facilitated child sex abuse in Southern California.

Italians should focus on having more children to replenish the country’s dwindling workforce so as to avoid bringing in more migrants in the future, Italian Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani has suggested.

Over the past decade, Italy has had one of the lowest birthrates in Europe, and its demographic crisis continues to worsen. The country’s fertility rate hit a new record low last year, standing at 1.14, down from 1.18 the previous year, provisional figures from Italy’s national statistics agency ISTAT indicate. For a stable population, the figure should stand at around 2.1 children per woman.

“We have a problem of demographic decline, and we must understand if we want to have more children,” Tajani said on Thursday while speaking at the Festival del Lavoro (Work Festival) in Rome, an annual event that brings together institutions, businesses, and professionals to discuss the labor market.

Read more

“If we do have more children, then we can also say: right, let’s reduce the number of legal migrants coming to work in our businesses. But if not, we won’t have any workers,” the minister stated. “The lower the birth rate, the more we need foreign workers in our country,” he added.

Tajani, however, did not offer any plan to boost fertility in the country. Nor did he say when exactly it would yield any tangible effect should the rapidly aging population somehow heed his call. The minister’s insights have been ridiculed by the opposition to the center-right government. Valeria Valente, a senator with the left-wing Democratic Party (PD), described them as “absurd.”

“These are all issues for which the [Giorgia] Meloni government has done little and has done it wrong because it continues to look at the world from the keyhole of nationalisms, while we should think of Italy in terms of a piece of the United States of Europe,” Valente asserted.

US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has announced her resignation, citing her husband’s recent diagnosis with a rare form of bone cancer. Her resignation came a week after she revealed she was investigating US-funded biolabs in Ukraine. 

“Unfortunately, I must submit my resignation, effective June 30, 2026,” she wrote in a letter to the president that she shared on social media. “My husband, Abraham, has recently been diagnosed with an extremely rare form of bone cancer. At this time, I must step away from public service to be by his side and fully support him through this battle.”

Gabbard will be replaced by her current Deputy DNI, Aaron Lukas, Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform. "Tulsi has done an incredible job, and we will miss her," the president added.

A former Democrat, Gabbard left the party and denounced its leaders as “elitist warmongers” and anti-white racists in 2022. Gabbard endorsed Trump in 2024, claiming that only he could “walk us back from the brink of war.”

According to media reports and Washington rumors, Gabbard was sidelined by Trump and his closest officials – among them Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth – while plans were drawn up to abduct Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January and attack Iran in February.

I am deeply grateful for the trust President Trump placed in me and for the opportunity to lead @ODNIgov for the last year and a half.

Unfortunately, I must submit my resignation, effective June 30, 2026. My husband, Abraham, has recently been diagnosed with an extremely rare… pic.twitter.com/PS0Dxp5zpd

— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) May 22, 2026

Before endorsing Trump, Gabbard was a vocal opponent of war with Iran, and a persistent critic of US military aid to Ukraine. The Russia-Ukraine conflict, she tweeted in 2022, “could have easily been avoided if Biden Admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns.”

Less than two weeks before news of her resignation broke, Gabbard told the New York Post that she was investigating more than 120 US-funded biological laboratories worldwide, more than 40 of them in Ukraine. Gabbard said that her team would determine whether these labs engaged in “dangerous gain-of-function research” – modifying viruses to make them deadlier or more transmissible

The Russian Defense Ministry has warned about the existence of these laboratories since early 2022, publishing documents that revealed the labs were working on “plague, anthrax, tularemia, cholera and other deadly diseases.”

After reviewing thousands of pages of documents seized from labs in Donetsk, Lugansk and Kherson, Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov of the Russian Radiological, Chemical, and Biological Defense Forces concluded in 2023 that “the US, under the guise of ensuring global biosecurity, conducted dual-use research, including the creation of biological weapons components, in close proximity to Russian borders.”

The existence of these laboratories was initially written off as a conspiracy theory by the US government, although then-US Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland told lawmakers that “Ukraine has biological research facilities,” without admitting that they were funded and operated by the US.

Kirillov led Russia’s investigation into the labs until he was assassinated in 2024, allegedly by Ukrainian security services.

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

An incident involving 13 Soviet-designed MiG fighter jets chasing a mysterious star-shaped UFO was among the encounters described in newly declassified top-secret files released after a decades-long legal battle with the US intelligence community.

The Disclosure Foundation, a US nonprofit advocating greater transparency on UFOs, said on Sunday it had secured 334 pages of records from the National Security Agency, the country’s eavesdropping service, after winning a Freedom of Information Act appeal. The heavily redacted files – many marked “TOP SECRET UMBRA,” one of the US intelligence agency’s highest classifications – contain Cold War-era radar reports and intelligence messages on unexplained objects tracked by military systems worldwide.

One of the most dramatic incidents described 13 MiG fighter jets being scrambled after military radar detected a single unidentified object.

The NSA files do not specify where or when the incidents occurred or identify witnesses. However, repeated references to Soviet-made MiG fighter jets suggest some encounters unfolded during the Soviet period, including one report over China and another describing six MiGs “attacking said UFO.”

Other files describe encounters with star-shaped, disc-like, spherical, and cigar-shaped craft. One report detailed an “elongated ball of fire” that split into three glowing objects while moving across the sky.

In one witness account, an object emitted a “white luminous light” with a slightly “bluish” color. The report said it moved rapidly in vertical motions at high altitude and “kept turning around.” Another file described a “spherical or disc-like” UFO that was “brighter than the sun and about half the Moon’s diameter.”

The documents were released after the NSA initially denied access requests, extending a legal battle over UFO-related records dating back to a 1980 Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the agency.

The release follows the Trump administration’s publication of more than 160 UFO-related files earlier this month. The disclosure push came after earlier declassification orders tied to the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King Jr., and amid renewed debate sparked by former President Barack Obama dismissing claims the US was concealing evidence of alien contact.

American imperialism may be absolutely lawless and perfectly immoral but it does have its favorite and predictable routines. One of them is what can be called the Washington Three-Step of ‘blockade, blackmail, invade’.

The Three-Step is by no means foolproof. Witness, for instance, the recent de facto defeat of the US (and its occasional overlord Israel) at the hands of Iran, which even arch neocon warmonger Robert Kagan has as good as admitted in, of all places, The Atlantic. But failure has never deterred America’s best and brightest. Indeed, the combination of slow, sadistic strangulation of whole nations and taking the military baseball bat to them is a virtual fixation, as central to American foreign policy as permanent bad faith.

Don’t believe it? Here’s a preliminary, most likely incomplete list (in alphabetical order) of countries that have two things in common: In the post-World War II period, they have been the victims of both economic warfare – via sanctions, embargoes, and blockades – and direct military attack, including bombing (directly and by proxy), land invasion (also including by proxy), and Venezuela-type terror raids: Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Grenada, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Panama, Syria, and Yugoslavia.

It may be counter-intuitive, but if you are realistic about the nature of the Ukraine War and all the things Kiev would not be able to do on its own (from ‘survive’ to ‘target deep strikes into Russia’), then – as insanely risky as this strategy has been – the US has already applied the scheme to Russia as well. Which goes to show that the Washington Three-Step is simply irresistible to American elites. Even the serious risk of escalating to World War III against Moscow, which has the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet, has deterred them only imperfectly.

Against this backdrop, you really cannot miss the real meaning of Washington’s latest messages regarding Cuba. First, conveniently anonymous ‘intelligence’ sources have told us that Cuba has around 300 drones and plans to use them for attacks on American targets, including the US base (and legal black hole as well as de facto concentration camp) at Guantanamo Bay and even Florida, that is, the American mainland. For good measure, Russia, China, and Iran have also been fingered as accomplices of those dastardly Cubans.

The cut-out for this particularly ridiculous piece of psychological warfare has been Axios, a publication that has recently been at the center of a scandal involving insider trading manipulations around US President Donald Trump and his assault on Iran as well as reporter Barak Ravid and his long background in Israeli intelligence.

Read more

It is obvious: The bizarre piece of ‘news’ asking us to believe that Cuba is about to commit suicide by giving the US a perfect pretext to bomb, invade, and regime-change it by direct, military force is, in reality, not about any Cuban plans to go to war, but Washington’s preparations for an attack.

That does not mean that America will necessarily make good on this threat-by-false-accusation. The Cuban authorities have, of course, denied the American smears. They have also accused Washington of building a “fraudulent case” for a military attack. And they have the facts on their side: The US assaults on Iraq (2003) and now Venezuela and Iran have demonstrated that, with Washington, brazen lies (WMDs, a nuclear weapons program, drug trafficking, a swarm of drones ready to pounce on Key West) may very well be the propaganda barrage preceding a full-scale military assault.

Or perhaps another Venezuela-style operation? The propaganda groundwork for that option has been laid with the second American threat regarding Cuba: With the US Justice Department charging former Cuban President Raul Castro over the downing of two small planes more than a quarter of a century ago, Washington has not only – in the words of the New York Times – added yet another “extraordinary escalation.” The Trump regime has also issued a threat to do to Cuba, in essence, what it did to Venezuela (where, incidentally, scores of Cuban security personnel were massacred), where it kidnapped President Nicolas Maduro.

The Caribbean island is, of course, a long-standing victim – even longer than Iran, which is a high bar – of fierce American economic warfare. Initially it came with extraordinarily crass assassination and proxy invasion attempts, too. But America’s main and most devastating weapon against Cuba has been decades of unrelenting economic warfare, recently escalating into a full-blown siege, depleting the country’s fuel and other reserves and subjecting its population to a brutal attack by deprivation and disruption.

You may disagree with the Cuban foreign minister categorizing this US attack-by-blockade a “genocide.” But it is certainly a great crime: The deliberate creation of a deep humanitarian crisis for purposes of regime change. Indeed, the US leadership has been perfectly explicit about this aim: Even its offer of “assistance” – made by no one other than the head of the CIA – is nothing but blackmail. It’s real, transparent meaning is: We are strangling your people and we will keep doing so, and only if you finally submit to us will we stop.

The reason for so much American cruelty and violence is, actually, not complicated: Since the Cuban Revolution of 1959, the island’s big, overbearing neighbor has never forgiven it for no longer submitting to US control. Forget the silly ideological cant about freedom (which doesn’t exist in the US), democracy (ditto), and human rights (ask ICE). Even the endless, greedy American and Cuban-exile demands for material restitution stemming from long overdue nationalizations after the revolution and the obsessive American animus against socialism (by which Washington means anything to the left of pure Robber Baron/Tech Titan capitalism) are not the key issues.

Read more

Instead, the essence of the Cuban-US stand-off is that Cuba has dared try to be sovereign in the vicinity of the US, where the old Monroe Doctrine and its new Donroe iteration will tolerate only clients and vassals. Any country not subordinating its national interest as well as the will and welfare of its population to America, is written off and then targeted as a ‘failed state’ or even, as Trump has now called Cuba, a “failed nation.”  And we all know what the US feels it has a right to do to these places.

You may feel, by the way, about the current Cuban government – not “regime” – whatever you wish. Under no conceivable circumstances does the US have the right to inflict so much violence and pain on any country that has not attacked it. Debates about the Cuban economic system are also beside the point: We simply cannot know whether it would work or not or sort-of, since the Cuban economy has always been disrupted by massive US interference. And in any case, the existence of economic problems does not justify being invaded and regime-changed. If it did, the US with its exploding debt, manufacturing-base decline, and cost-of-living crisis would be a legitimate target, too.

Cuba may be able to resist this latest American attack or not. Its president, Miguel Diaz-Canel, has warned Washington that an invasion attempt would encounter massive resistance and produce a “blood bath.” Venezuela has fallen to American lawlessness and violence; Iran has not. Cuba’s fate remains open.

The Taiwanese government has said it was unaware of any “adjustments” to US arms sales after a senior US official said they had been put on hold over the attack on Iran and Washington’s effort to replenish domestic stockpiles.

Earlier this month, US President Donald Trump said arms deliveries to Taiwan were “a very good negotiating chip” to deal with China, appearing to contradict Washington’s decades-old policy that legally binds it to provide the island nation with weaponry. At the time, Taiwan tried to downplay Trump’s remarks, with President Lai Ching-te hailing the sales as “the most important deterrent” against a potential conflict in the region. Beijing has long condemned close US military cooperation with the island, regarding it as a violation of the One-China policy and as meddling in its internal affairs.

The “pause” in arms sales was confirmed by US Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao during a Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee hearing on Thursday. Asked about future sales to the island, Cao pointed at the US-Israeli attack on Iran and the need to make sure “we have everything” with the foreign arms sales set to “continue when the administration ⁠deems necessary.”

Read more

“It’s just right now we’re doing a pause in order to make sure we have the munitions we need for Epic Fury – which we have plenty,” he said.

The US-Israeli attack on Iran is believed to have put a heavy strain on Washington’s stockpiles of weapons. Despite repeated assurances by top US officials that the Pentagon still has all the munitions it needs should the conflict reignite, independent assessments suggest Washington has used alarmingly high volumes of expensive sophisticated weapons, including interceptor missiles and high-precision munitions.

The Pentagon has reportedly warned its European allies, including the UK, Poland, Lithuania, and Estonia, to expect long delays in weaponry deliveries. According to a recent report by the Financial Times, the delays will affect munitions for mobile rocket launchers, as well as anti-aircraft systems. At the time, the Pentagon said it has been “carefully evaluating new requests for equipment from partners as well as existing arms transfer cases to ensure alignment with operational needs.”

French authorities are investigating an alleged election meddling plot by an Israeli “information warfare” company targeting candidates critical of the Jewish state. The scheme – involving fake profiles and AI nudes – follows a familiar pattern.

Multiple intelligence agencies in France are investigating the work of BlackCore, an Israeli firm that allegedly carried out an interference campaign against three left-wing mayoral candidates in Marseille, Toulouse, and Roubaix in March, Reuters reported last on May 13.

All three candidates are members of France Unbowed (LFI), the party of left-wing presidential candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon. In Marseille, Sebastien Delogu was accused of rape by a pseudonymous blogger named ‘Sophie’, while bogus Facebook profiles and QR code stickers plastered around the city boosted the story. AI-generated ‘nudes’ of Delogu were also circulated online, along with captions mocking his support for Palestine.

Bot-boosted profiles posted disparaging stories about Francois Piquemal in Toulouse and David Guiraud in Roubaix. One page accused Piquemal of pedophilia, while another site portrayed LFI as the party of “Sharia law” and “a more Muslim France.” Presented as a “voting guide” for Muslims compiled by an Islamist group, the site was aimed at turning non-Muslim voters against the party, Le Monde reported.

An investigation by France’s Liberation newspaper and Israel’s Haaretz revealed on May 18 that BlackCore was behind the influence operation. According to Reuters, French authorities are now trying to establish who hired the company to intervene in the elections.

Doesn’t BlackCore sound familiar?

Read more

Readers of RT’s ‘Wired for War’ series will be familiar with Black Cube, another similarly named Israeli private intelligence operation. Founded by two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) intelligence veterans, Black Cube counts on its International Advisory Board two former Mossad directors, a former Israeli Police commissioner, and the former chief of Israel’s National Security Council.

According to its website, Black Cube specializes in finding “hard evidence otherwise impossible to obtain” in support of “high-profile litigations, arbitrations, and white-collar crime cases.”

Earlier this year, Black Cube interfered in elections in Cyprus and Slovenia, covertly recording associates of both countries’ leaders discussing petty corruption within their parties. Black Cube’s Cypriot operation led to multiple resignations and tarnished President Nikos Christodoulides’ reputation as Cyprus assumed the EU’s rotating presidency in January. Two months later in Slovenia, the company almost succeeded in tipping parliamentary elections against Prime Minister Robert Golob’s ‘Svoboda’ party, which held onto power by a mere 0.67% of the vote.

Black Cube has admitted to working against Christodoulides, and has not denied interfering in Slovenia. The company makes no attempt to hide the fact that its staff are “veterans of Israel’s elite intelligence units,” with its website boasting that these veterans are equipped to “craft unique, complex scenarios to capture evidence.”

Like many private detective firms, Black Cube operates in a quasi-legal gray area, with laws on covert recording varying from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In Slovenia and Cyprus, however, the EU’s GDPR regulations prohibit such recording.

BlackCore’s sinister methods

BlackCore, however, trades in fakery and manipulation. On its website – which was pulled offline after Reuters published its story – the company advertises itself as “an elite influence, cyber, and technology company built for the modern era of information warfare and digital competition.”

“We empower governments and political campaigns with cutting-edge strategies, advanced tools, and robust security to shape narratives, safeguard digital domains, and gain a decisive edge,” the description continues.

BlackCore claims that it has been active for 15 years, has more than 50 clients, and has a “100% success rate,” though how this success is judged is unclear. Unlike Black Cube, BlackCore makes no mention of its connections to Israel.

A trail leading to Tel Aviv

Haaretz’s investigation revealed that there is no legal entity called BlackCore registered in any country in the world, and that BlackCore’s website was registered anonymously last August, calling the company’s supposed 15-year history into question. Haaretz did discover that BlackCore shares its web infrastructure with Galacticos and SNI, two Israeli firms, owned by tech entrepreneur Guy Geyor and lawyer Doron Afik.

Both men denied any knowledge of BlackCore, but further investigation revealed that some of the tools used by BlackCore to generate fake social media accounts were created by Galacticos and hosted on an SNI server in London.

According to Haaretz, Geyor’s and Afik’s companies employ “people with a background in intelligence,” including at least one Galacticos employee who served in Unit 8200 – a clandestine intelligence unit within the IDF.

The investigation also tied BlackCore to Yigal Unna, the former head of Israel’s National Cyber Directorate. Speaking to Liberation, Unna claimed that he was approached by Afik about potentially working for an “OSINT [open-source intelligence] and social network startup focused on protecting commercial brands,” but declined the offer.

Israel’s interests

Read more

Across RT’s coverage of the Israeli spy-tech sector, one common thread has emerged: supposedly private companies working to advance the interests of the Israeli state. Black Cube intervened in Slovenia after Prime Minister Golob recognized the State of Palestine and weighed joining South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). His opponent, Janez Jansa, is a close ally of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and is widely believed to have hired Black Cube.

Additionally, Netanyahu’s government has tied export licenses for Israeli spyware – including NSO Group’s ‘Pegasus’ malware, Cytrox’s ‘Predator’, and a similar program developed by Paragon Solutions – to the end user’s support for Israel.

In France, BlackCore targeted LFI, a party highly critical of Israel. LFI considers Israel’s war in Gaza to be a “genocide,” and party leader Jean-Luc Melenchon has condemned President Emmanuel Macron for slow-walking Paris’ recognition of the Palestinian state, declaring last July that “we want victory over Netanyahu immediately, meaning the end of genocide and the punishment of war criminals and their accomplices.”

Melenchon, who is a contender to reach the second round of next year’s presidential election, has called on Macron to pass tougher legislation against foreign election interference. “We expect the upcoming election to be the scene of attacks of this kind,” his party said in a statement, with Melenchon adding “we need to be protected, and if we are, all the other [parties] will be too.”

Did BlackCore achieve its objectives?

Delogu withdrew from the second round of the Marseille election to avoid splitting the left-wing vote. Guiraud won in Roubaix, but Piquemal – who was arrested alongside Greta Thunberg aboard the Gaza ‘Freedom Flotilla’ last year – narrowly lost the Toulouse mayoral contest in a runoff vote. He has since filed to have the result annulled, and is waiting on a court decision.

These mixed results have come at a heavy price for BlackCore, which is now the subject of a criminal investigation. Speaking in parliament on May 20, French Interior Minister Laurent Nunez confirmed that the government will take “legal action” against the firm.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry denies any knowledge of BlackCore or its work. It remains unclear who hired Black Cube in Cyprus and BlackCore in France.

The UK has had eight Prime Minister’s this century, with most serving after Brexit and for an average of two years. Sir Keir Starmer is deeply unpopular and the public (and some in his party) want him to resign.

This is not the first challenge to Starmer, but Labour’s slump in recent local elections – to English councils, the Scottish Parliament, and Welsh Assembly – is especially bruising.

For the first time ever, Labour lost control of Wales, one of its traditional heartlands. Despite finishing joint second with Reform in Scotland, it was Labour’s worst ever result north of the border. In England, Labour lost almost 1,500 councillors in different parts of the country to parties on the left and right.

Calls for Starmer to resign intensified ahead The King’s Speech to reopen Parliament. A relatively unknown MP, Sarah West, offered to challenge Starmer if nobody else would. She ultimately backed down from her pledge, but around 90 of Labour’s 400 MPs called for Starmer to go or begin a leadership transition. Yet over 100 MPs publicly backed him.

So far, no leadership challenge has materialized, but potential rivals have made their moves. Wes Streeting has resigned as health secretary and, having no support to challenge Starmer himself, is now backing Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Manchester, who is planning to run for Parliament again. One MP voluntarily has given up his seat for Burnham to do so. More quietly, former Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner has also hinted at a challenge, and Labour’s left are urging former party leader Ed Miliband to run.

But why is Starmer surviving and why do Britons feel the urge to keep replacing their leaders? A few factors are important here.

First, there is no obvious alternative to Starmer within the Labour Party. Andy Burnham would lose an election to Parliament. Wes Streeting, on the party’s right, would lose a membership vote. Angela Rayner is not popular with the broader British electorate, and Ed Miliband has already lost an election as leader (with the British press incredibly harsh on him and his family).

Read more

The elections’ stubborn arithmetic is also illustrative. Beyond the headlines, Labour’s health is much better than it seems.

The Green Party, challenging Labour from the left, underperformed in these elections. Much of that had to do with recent antisemitism within the party and its controversial leader, Zack Polanski. Although the separatists won in Scotland and Wales, it was not due to any appetite for independence. The SNP remains deeply unpopular in Scotland (perhaps more so than Labour), but the unionist party votes were very split.

On the right, Reform also underperformed and appear to have peaked. Whilst Reform won the most councillors and came second in Wales, its vote share was down from last year’s elections. Also, increased voter turnout seemed to work against Nigel Farage’s party. Reform only won in places that voted for Brexit and is yet to attract any new voters. In other parts of the country, their vote never reached above 10%.

Translated to a General Election, Reform would fall far short of a majority. Some estimates show that it would need to increase its vote share by 22 points to win any sort of governing majority. For that to happen, either the Conservatives or Labour (or both) would have to see their vote collapse, or voter fragmentation would need to be rife across the board.

Thus far, the Conservative vote has proven remarkably stubborn, as has the Liberal Democrats’. Labour is also clinging onto around 20% of the electorate, depending on the poll. As for the Greens, they did well primarily among students – a small slice of the electorate – and urban-based women.

Read more

On top of that, Farage is not popular with the British electorate. In every single head-to-head poll with Starmer – and all the other party leaders – Farage lost. Britons do not directly elect the Prime Minister, but cast votes for who will be living at 10 Downing Street. So, whilst Reform has led the polls for over a year now, it is losing support and Farage is a turn-off.

That brings us to Britons themselves. Why, indeed, are Britons so impatient with their leadership this century? Their appetite for regicide is greatly misunderstood.

It is worth remembering that a hundred years ago, from 1900-1926, Britain also went through eight Prime Ministers in quick succession (from three different parties). There are some parallels, even though the times were very different. As Winston Churchill famously quipped about the early 20th century, “the market was free, slaves were free, and conscience was free. But hunger, squalor, and the cold were also free, and people wanted something more than liberty.”

In Britain today, people want something more. After the 2008 financial crash, austerity, Brexit, COVID-19, and recent cost of living crisis, the British public is tired and impatient.

But unlike then, there is no new intellectual thinking to tackle today’s economic problems (mostly generated by Brexit). Instead, there are demagogues and populists, shouting their empty promises and muddying the waters.

Starmer might be unpopular, but the sad truth is anyone else would be. Britain is close to going ungovernable because the population are too impatient. They are desperate to see government working in earnest, as Starmer promised it would.

Britain needs to have an honest conversation with itself about where it is going and how it will get there. To unite the kingdom, Britons need something more than the Football World Cup and the Amandaland TV show.

This article was forst published by Russia in Global Affairs.

The Taiwanese government has said it was unaware of any “adjustments” to US arms sales after a senior US official said they had been put on hold over the attack on Iran and Washington’s effort to replenish domestic stockpiles.

Earlier this month, US President Donald Trump said arms deliveries to Taiwan were “a very good negotiating chip” to deal with China, appearing to contradict Washington’s decades-old policy that legally binds it to provide the island nation with weaponry. At the time, Taiwan tried to downplay Trump’s remarks, with President Lai Ching-te hailing the sales as “the most important deterrent” against a potential conflict in the region. Beijing has long condemned close US military cooperation with the island, regarding it as a violation of the One-China policy and as meddling in its internal affairs.

The “pause” in arms sales was confirmed by US Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao during a Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee hearing on Thursday. Asked about future sales to the island, Cao pointed at the US-Israeli attack on Iran and the need to make sure “we have everything” with the foreign arms sales set to “continue when the administration ⁠deems necessary.”

Read more

“It’s just right now we’re doing a pause in order to make sure we have the munitions we need for Epic Fury – which we have plenty,” he said.

The US-Israeli attack on Iran is believed to have put a heavy strain on Washington’s stockpiles of weapons. Despite repeated assurances by top US officials that the Pentagon still has all the munitions it needs should the conflict reignite, independent assessments suggest Washington has used alarmingly high volumes of expensive sophisticated weapons, including interceptor missiles and high-precision munitions.

The Pentagon has reportedly warned its European allies, including the UK, Poland, Lithuania, and Estonia, to expect long delays in weaponry deliveries. According to a recent report by the Financial Times, the delays will affect munitions for mobile rocket launchers, as well as anti-aircraft systems. At the time, the Pentagon said it has been “carefully evaluating new requests for equipment from partners as well as existing arms transfer cases to ensure alignment with operational needs.”

RT has gained rare access to Shajareh Tayyebeh elementary school in the southern Iranian city of Minab, more than 80 days after US and Israeli strikes left the site in ruins and killed more than 170 people, most of them children.

The US has refused to accept responsibility for the strike, with the Pentagon again declining this week to acknowledge involvement despite investigations by multiple media outlets and a reportedly internal military probe concluding the school was likely hit by a US-made missile.

US officials initially offered conflicting explanations, while President Donald Trump at one point suggested the attack had been “done by Iran,” drawing accusations of “endless stalling” over what critics describe as “obvious” American culpability.

RT correspondent Saman Kojouri has visited the ruins of what was once an ordinary school but now lies in rubble, with part of the site turned into a memorial exhibition displaying belongings recovered from the debris. He spoke to families of victims and surviving teachers gathered at the school to demand accountability and ask why children became targets.

Here is the full report.

RT has gained rare access to Shajareh Tayyebeh elementary school in the southern Iranian city of Minab, more than 80 days after US and Israeli strikes left the site in ruins and killed more than 170 people, most of them children.

The US has refused to accept responsibility for the strike, with the Pentagon again declining this week to acknowledge involvement despite investigations by multiple media outlets and a reportedly internal military probe concluding the school was likely hit by a US-made missile.

US officials initially offered conflicting explanations, while President Donald Trump at one point suggested the attack had been “done by Iran,” drawing accusations of “endless stalling” over what critics describe as “obvious” American culpability.

RT correspondent Saman Kojouri has visited the ruins of what was once an ordinary school but now lies in rubble, with part of the site turned into a memorial exhibition displaying belongings recovered from the debris. He spoke to families of victims and surviving teachers gathered at the school to demand accountability and ask why children became targets.

Here is the full report.

The recent summit between Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping sent another wave of panic through Western political and media circles. On both sides of the Atlantic, the growing partnership between Russia and China is habitually described as an authoritarian alliance plotting against the ‘free world’. Headlines drip with warnings about a new anti-Western axis. Think tanks speak in apocalyptic tones. Liberal commentators invoke a new Cold War.

But beneath the hysteria lies a simpler reality: The old world order is losing its grip.

The Russia-China partnership is not a crusade against the West. It is a revolt against unipolarity – against the idea that one civilization, one ideology, and one political model should dominate the entire planet indefinitely. Moscow and Beijing are not trying to destroy the international system. They are building alternatives to an order monopolized for decades by Western liberal power.

This distinction matters enormously. What Putin and Xi are advancing is the idea of a multipolar world: A world where civilizations, nations, and cultures can pursue their own paths without ideological supervision from Washington, Brussels, or transnational liberal institutions. Far from threatening Europe and America, this transformation could ultimately save them from their own political and civilizational exhaustion.

The cracks in the liberal world order

When Russia and China first issued a joint declaration on multipolarity in 1997, few in the West took it seriously. At the time, the Soviet Union was gone, American power appeared unstoppable, and liberal globalization seemed destined to swallow the planet whole. Francis Fukuyama’s ‘end of history’ thesis captured the mood of the age. Borders were supposed to fade. National sovereignty was increasingly portrayed as obsolete. Globalization accelerated while NATO marched steadily eastward.

Yet Russia and China already sensed the weakness hidden beneath the triumphalism. Even at the height of American dominance, both powers understood that a world organized around a single ideological center would eventually generate instability, arrogance, overreach, and backlash. And that is precisely what happened. Endless wars, regime-change interventions, financial crises, deindustrialization, mass migration, censorship, social fragmentation, and cultural nihilism slowly eroded confidence in the liberal model itself.

Nearly 30 years later, Putin and Xi have returned to the same historical idea – only now from a position of far greater strength.

At their latest summit, the two leaders adopted a new joint declaration on the multipolar world order and the reform of global governance – a manifesto on sovereignty, shared security, openness, intercivilizational dialogue, and democratization of international relations. More profoundly, it rejects the belief that liberal modernity represents the only legitimate destiny for mankind.

Read more

This is what truly terrifies liberal elites. The emerging Eurasian vision challenges Western geopolitical dominance as well as the very ideological foundations of the post-Cold War order itself. It insists that humanity is composed of many civilizations, not one universal civilization governed by a single moral and political doctrine.

In many ways, the Putin-Xi vision resembles a genuinely Schmittean Pluriversum: A world of sovereign civilizational states rather than a homogenized global marketplace administered by technocrats, NGOs, and supranational bureaucracies. In this world, nations are not expected to abandon their traditions, religions, or historical identities in the name of abstract universalism. Diversity among civilizations is treated not as a problem to be erased but as a reality to be respected.

Particularly striking was the declaration’s recognition of the constitutive and positive role of religion in civilizational development and renewal. At a time when many Western institutions treat Christianity and religious tradition as embarrassing remnants of the past, Russia and China acknowledged spiritual inheritance and cultural continuity as pillars of social cohesion and meaningful intercivilizational dialogue.

That message will resonate far beyond the two countries. Across Europe and the US, millions increasingly feel alienated by borderless economics, bureaucratic managerialism, cultural deracination, collapsing communities, demographic anxiety, and the aggressive moralism of liberal ideology. They are told that national identity is dangerous, tradition oppressive, religion backward, and sovereignty obsolete. Yet the more the liberal order promises liberation, the more fragmented and rootless Western societies become. Putin and Xi are speaking into that vacuum.

Sanctions, sovereignty, survival

The Ukraine conflict accelerated historical processes already underway. Western governments unleashed unprecedented sanctions against Russia, expecting economic collapse and political destabilization. Instead, Russia adapted. Its economy diversified, redirected eastward, and survived the largest sanctions regime in modern history.

China played a decisive role in that outcome, providing for trade expansion, deeper financial cooperation, increased technology exchanges, and new logistical and commercial corridors. Predictably, Western commentators portrayed this as Beijing enabling ‘Russian aggression’. But China’s calculations are far more strategic.

Chinese leaders understand that sanctions have evolved from exceptional measure into instruments of systemic coercion. Asset seizures, financial exclusion, and economic warfare create precedents that can eventually be used against any state unwilling to submit to Western political demands. And so, Beijing’s support for alternative financial systems doesn’t only help Russia – it is a defense of sovereign autonomy in an increasingly weaponized global economy.

Read more

This explains the growing importance of BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, trade in national currencies, and independent payment infrastructures. These initiatives are designed to create resilience and strategic flexibility. Even the West could benefit from this type of system. A world in which economic interdependence cannot be weaponized so easily may ultimately prove more stable than one governed by coercive monopolies.

Ironically, it’s liberal globalization itself that created this fragmentation. The same elites who once preached open markets and global integration now advocate censorship, sanctions, decoupling, industrial protectionism, and ideological conformity. The supposedly universal liberal order has revealed itself to be highly selective, punitive, and openly political.

Russia and China simply adjusted to reality faster than the West did.

The Eurasian rebalance

The geopolitical importance of Sino-Russian relations cannot be overstated. Together, Russia and China dominate the strategic core of Eurasia – the largest landmass on Earth. Their shared border stretches farther than any other in the world. Both are nuclear powers, permanent members of the UN Security Council, and civilizations with deep historical memory.

Hostility between the two would destabilize the entire continent. Partnership, on the other hand, creates a new Eurasian equilibrium. What many Western analysts still fail to grasp is that this partnership is not historically abnormal. If anything, it corrects decades of imbalance.

After the Cold War, Russia looked overwhelmingly toward Europe and the US. China became economically intertwined with America in what came to be known as ‘Chimerica’. Even today, despite rising tensions, China’s economic relationship with the US remains far larger than its trade with Russia.

The real geopolitical paradox here is that Western elites simultaneously pursued confrontation with both powers while expecting them not to align strategically. By opening a two-front struggle against Russia and China at the same time, the liberal establishment accelerated precisely the Eurasian partnership it feared most.

Europe has suffered the greatest consequences. As European governments severed ties with Moscow, China gained privileged access to Russian energy, raw materials, agricultural exports, and Arctic trade routes. Europe voluntarily surrendered strategic advantages while Beijing stepped into the vacuum. In many respects, Europe is financing its own geopolitical marginalization.

But this process is not irreversible. Future European leaders may eventually realize that permanent confrontation with Russia serves neither Europe’s prosperity nor its security. A stable Eurasian balance built on cooperation rather than ideological crusades would benefit the entire continent.

Read more

Multipolarity is not the West’s enemy

The greatest misunderstanding surrounding multipolarity is the belief that it means the destruction of the West. In reality, it may represent the only path toward Western renewal.

For decades, liberal globalism hollowed out the very foundations of Western civilization. National sovereignty gave way to supranational bureaucracy. Manufacturing disappeared. Borders weakened. Communities fragmented. Endless foreign interventions drained public trust. Cultural atomization replaced social solidarity.

Under liberal universalism, nations themselves were expected to dissolve into a borderless order.

Ordinary Europeans and Americans increasingly reject that vision. They want continuity, identity, security, tradition, and meaningful sovereignty – the same principles Moscow and Beijing now defend openly on the world stage.

This does not mean the West must imitate Russia or China. That kind of uniformity would go against the very idea of multipolarity. Civilizations should be free to develop according to their own histories, traditions, and moral frameworks without external ideological enforcement.

Russia, China, Europe, and even the US are not natural civilizational enemies. In many respects, they share a common adversary: Liberal globalism and the transnational class that weakened sovereignty, eroded traditions, shattered social cohesion, and subordinated nations to abstract universalist dogmas.

The Putin-Xi summit, therefore, symbolized the accelerating transition from a world organized around ideological uniformity to one grounded in civilizational plurality.

Western elites may resist this transformation for years to come. But history rarely reverses course. The unipolar era is ending, and it wasn’t Russia or China that destroyed it. Liberal globalism exhausted itself from within.

A balanced world of sovereign civilizations, distinct cultures, and multiple centers of power does not threaten Europe or America. It may offer the only viable path toward restoring their own civilizational confidence.

Fears of a US military operation against Cuba – or an outright invasion – have escalated after Washington indicted former Cuban leader Raul Castro, as the US continues to choke the island with an economic blockade.

What’s going on around Cuba?

On Wednesday, the Justice Department accused the 94-year-old Castro of ordering the 1996 shootdown of two American planes off Cuba’s coast, which killed four anti-Communist activists.

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants who has never concealed his aspirations for regime change, released a Spanish-language address to the island’s residents, advocating for a “new Cuba.” US President Donald Trump has echoed the sentiment, calling Cuba a “failed nation” and suggesting Washington could “take [it] over.”

Read more

The pressure campaign – which also involved the redeployment of the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier to the Caribbean – has sent ripples across Latin America. Many former colonies are watching the tensions with growing suspicion and alarm, fearing that they could be next in Washington’s crosshairs.

How is Cuba responding?

Cuba has pushed back hard against the US pressure. President Miguel Diaz-Canel condemned the Castro indictment as a political ploy meant to “justify the folly of a military aggression against Cuba,” and accused Washington of manipulating the history of the 1996 shootdown.

Read more

Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez said that the US was concocting a “fraudulent case” to justify military action, adding that Cuba is prepared to defend itself.

Who stands with Cuba and who doesn’t?

Brazil

Brazil has been one of the region’s most active voices in support of Cuba. In March, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva warned that Latin America faces the threat of a return to colonial rule.

“It’s not possible for someone to think that they own other countries. What are they doing with Cuba now? What did they do with Venezuela? Is that democratic?” he said, without directly naming Trump.

Read more

In late April, Brazil was one of the countries that pledged to ramp up humanitarian aid to Cuba while calling for dialogue and stressing that the Cuban people must be free to determine their own future.

However, after meeting Trump in early May, Lula told reporters he believed the US was not planning to invade Cuba, and that Havana wants dialogue with Washington to end the oil embargo, which has led to unprecedented blackouts across the island.

Venezuela

Venezuela, traditionally one of Cuba’s staunchest partners and oil suppliers, responded with caution, mindful that in January Trump ordered an operation to kidnap President Nicolas Maduro. 

Read more

Acting President Delcy Rodriguez has remained conspicuously silent on Cuba, with no signs of Caracas resuming desperately-needed oil shipments.

Still, the ALBA alliance – which groups Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and others – expressed “deep concern and firm rejection” of US threats to use force against Cuba, warning of growing tensions that jeopardize peace and stability across the region.

Mexico

Mexico – another close partner of Cuba – has been forced to walk a tightrope in the face of potential US retaliation. President Claudia Sheinbaum has pledged to continue providing humanitarian aid to Cuba, calling the US sanctions “unfair to the Cuban people” while describing Trump’s blockade “unjust” and insisting that her country had “every right to send fuel, whether for humanitarian or commercial reasons.”

Read more

The rhetoric, however, has not matched the policy, as Mexico has supplied Cuba with oil since January. While Sheinbaum insisted that the decision was a “sovereign” one, it came on the heels of Washington’s threat to slap tariffs on the country.
Despite this, Mexico still joined the chorus calling for Cuban sovereignty to be respected.

Colombia

Colombian President Gustavo Petro clearly denounced the US policy, stressing that “a military aggression against Cuba… is a military aggression against Latin America.”

Former President Ernesto Samper Pizano issued a similar warning, saying that “if the United States gets involved in bullying Cuba, it will be mistreating all of Latin America. It’s time to stop the hegemonic excesses of Trumpism in the world.”

Nicaragua

Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega, himself under US sanctions targeting his sons and senior officials, has delivered some of the sharpest pushbacks. In late April, he labelled Trump “mentally deranged,” accusing Washington of planning to “dismantle” Cuba while recalling Washington’s operation to kidnap Maduro.

“The one in charge in the United States doesn’t care about what international organizations say, or even about US laws, or the role of his country’s Congress and Senate,” he said.

Argentina

Argentinian President Javier Milei – who is arguably Trump’s most ardent backer among Latin American leaders – expressed hope earlier this month that Cuba and Venezuela would soon achieve the “American Dream.”

Read more

“We hope this soon reaches our beloved Cuba and Venezuela, who have suffered so much, and that the model of freedom reaches the last refuge of the continent,” he said.

Milei’s government has embraced a hard line towards Cuba, refusing to appoint an ambassador to Havana, with the president praising the US abduction of Maduro – whom he labeled “a terrorist and a drug-trafficker.”

The bottom line

Latin America’s response to the US crackdown on Cuba has mostly been a message of solidarity though short on practical measures that risk Washington’s wrath, including economic and political sanctions.

Still, some of the region’s leaders have made it abundantly clear: they view US pressure not as an attack on Cuba – but an attack on the whole of Latin America.

Ukrainian drone flyovers over NATO members’ territory could lead to uncontrollable military escalation if Western leaders continue to refuse direct dialogue with Russia, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has warned.

Since mid-March, Ukrainian long-range drones have repeatedly crossed Baltic and Nordic airspace, with several NATO states reporting UAV crashes on their territory. Moscow has accused NATO members of quietly allowing Ukraine to use their airspace to strike Russian targets, particularly energy facilities in Leningrad Region.

The latest major incident occurred in Latvia, where failure to intercept two drones that hit an oil storage facility on May 7 triggered the defense minister’s resignation and led to the collapse of Prime Minister Evika Silina’s government.

Speaking at a press conference on Thursday, Fico suggested that Ukrainian drone operations could trigger a wider conflict, though he stopped short of explicitly accusing Kiev of planning a false-flag attack.

Read more

“I am incredibly afraid of some provocation that may trigger a mechanism that will then be unstoppable,” he said. “If drones start flying over the heads of NATO member states and those drones are mostly Ukrainian, that’s a serious problem.”

Fico warned that even a relatively small incident could escalate rapidly if communication between Russia and Western leaders remains frozen.

“What are we going to do when such a drone somewhere is a provocation and not just coincidence? A target is hit, then someone says NATO member state attacked and now let’s all go fight. That will be a terrible situation,” he said.

The Slovak leader also criticized what he called the “endless hypocrisy” of the West toward diplomatic contacts with Moscow, saying politicians publicly condemn his meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin while privately asking for updates about them.

Read more

“If the leaders were talking to each other as they should, there would be a very minimal possibility that a [drone] provocation could lead to a major conflict. If everyone is quiet and no one wants to talk, even a small provocation can cause a disaster,” he stated.

Fico has long opposed Brussels’ stance toward Moscow, including military aid to Kiev and sanctions on Russia. He was the only EU leader to attend this year’s Victory Day commemorations in Moscow, where he warned against a “new Iron Curtain” and called for renewed dialogue.

Fico’s position on Ukrainian drone flyovers sharply contrasts with that of some NATO partners. Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said on Thursday that NATO countries should actually help Kiev “direct” drone attacks “in the right directions.” Former Latvian Defense Minister Andris Spruds defended the operations, saying Ukraine “has every right to defend itself,” after a similar remark by Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna.

READ MORE: Ukraine preparing strikes on Russia from NATO country – Moscow

Earlier this week, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service accused Latvia of allowing Ukraine to use its territory for drone attacks on Russian soil. Riga denied the claim, though recently removed Riga City Council deputy Aleksey Roslikov told RIA Novosti it was “an absolute fact” Baltic states were quietly permitting such activity and were even trying to “adapt” residents to living under the constant threat of drones so that “a basement will already become the norm for them.”

Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson has said NATO states should help Ukraine “direct” its drone attacks “in the right directions,” blaming a string of Ukrainian UAV incursions into the airspace of the US-led bloc on Moscow.

Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service said this week that Latvia had allowed Ukraine to use its territory for potential drone attacks on Russia, including by hosting Ukrainian drone operators at several military sites. Baltic officials have rejected the allegation, while insisting that Kiev has every right to defend itself but asking it to better control its drones.

Ukraine “must be more precise” with its drones, Polish Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz said on Thursday, echoing similar warnings from Estonia and Finland. Asked about the comment during a joint press briefing with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, the Swedish PM accused Russia of trying to “give the impression that other countries are kind of doing things that are not legitimate.”

🇸🇪⚔️🇷🇺 Swedish Prime Minister Kristersson has openly stated that Sweden should do everything possible to help Ukraine direct its drones to strike Russian territory. pic.twitter.com/gtDTeKR2am

— DD Geopolitics (@DD_Geopolitics) May 21, 2026

“We should really not be open for the Russian narrative on this, but instead, of course, help the Ukrainians as much as we can to direct, to help them direct their attacks in the right directions,” Kristersson said.

Read more

“It’s my firm belief that the Ukrainians… certainly don’t want their drones to end up on friendly territory,” he said, alleging that “sometimes it’s a matter of jamming, sometimes it’s a matter of other disturbances.”

Rutte also sought to place responsibility for the incidents on Moscow while answering a loaded question alleging that Russia had jammed or redirected the UAVs. Ukrainian drones are violating NATO airspace simply “because of the full-scale Russian attack against Ukraine and Ukraine having to defend itself,” he said vaguely.

Since mid-March, Ukrainian long-range drones have repeatedly crossed Baltic and Nordic airspace while en route to targets in northwestern Russia, particularly oil export terminals in Leningrad Region.

Read more

In Estonia, an alleged “stray” Ukrainian drone crashed into a power-plant chimney in late March, while this week a NATO F-16 fighter jet was scrambled to shoot down another UAV. Lithuania has seen incursions by “suspected” Ukrainian drones on at least four occasions, while Finland and Romania have also reported several incidents.

In Latvia, a failure to intercept a pair of drones that hit an oil storage facility on May 7 caused a major political crisis, the defense minister’s resignation, and the eventual collapse of Prime Minister Evika Silina’s government. Another drone alert on Thursday prompted NATO to scramble fighter jets.

READ MORE: NATO country shoots down alleged Ukrainian drone

Moscow has rejected attempts to blame it for Ukrainian drones entering NATO airspace, arguing that the incidents show Kiev is either unable to control its long-range UAV campaign or is being enabled by neighboring NATO states. The SVR warned that NATO membership would not shield countries that help Ukraine launch attacks on Russian territory.

Israel conserved its air defense interceptors during the war on Iran, while the US expended significant portions of its own high-tech stockpiles, the Washington Post reported on Thursday, citing anonymous US officials.

American forces used more than 200 THAAD interceptors, around half of the total US stockpile, and over 100 SM-3 and SM-6 missiles, three officials told the outlet. Israel, by contrast, allegedly used only 100 Arrow interceptors and 90 David’s Sling interceptors, some of them against less advanced missiles fired from Yemen and Lebanon.

“The United States absorbed most of the missile defense mission while Israel conserved its own magazines,” the newspaper quoted Kelly Grieco, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center think tank, as saying. The figures suggest a “lopsided dynamic,” WaPo wrote, although the Pentagon and the Israeli government both defended the balance of resources used.

Read more

The Pentagon has claimed less than $30 billion in direct spending, but skeptics say the cost of replacing spent munitions and lost assets, as well as the long-term impact on the American economy, could exceed $1 trillion.

While Washington’s interceptor stockpiles have dwindled and new production cannot keep pace with demand, Tehran allegedly preserved much of its offensive capability. Iran has retained around 70% of its mobile launchers and missile stockpile, and regained access to 90% of underground military facilities damaged by US-Israeli bombings, according to earlier US media reports.

Read more

Despite President Donald Trump’s repeated threats to resume attacks unless Tehran accepts his peace terms, many observers have suggested that repeated extensions of the fragile April ceasefire show he is seeking an off-ramp from the increasingly costly and unpopular conflict. Israel, meanwhile, is reportedly pushing Washington to finish the job while Tehran is weak.

Tehran has confirmed that it is reviewing Washington’s updated proposals, but President Masoud Pezeshkian warned that “forcing Iran to surrender through coercion is nothing but an illusion.” Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said talks can succeed if the US ends its “piracy” against Iranian ships and agrees to release frozen funds, while Israel must end its war in Lebanon.

US President Donald Trump has announced that Washington will send 5,000 additional troops to Poland, citing his support for the country’s conservative president, Karol Nawrocki.

The move comes after the Pentagon abruptly canceled a planned rotation of 4,000 US troops into Poland last week, triggering confusion among Polish officials. Vice President J.D. Vance later described the pause as a delay rather than a reduction, saying the media had “overreacted.”

“Based on the successful Election of the now President of Poland, Karol Nawrocki, who I was proud to Endorse, and our relationship with him, I am pleased to announce that the United States will be sending an additional 5,000 Troops to Poland,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Thursday.

Read more

Trump’s announcement follows his decision to withdraw 5,000 US troops from Germany amid growing tensions with Berlin over the US-Israeli war against Iran. The president has previously suggested the troops could be moved to Poland, touting his “great relationship” with Nawrocki, who defeated the pro-EU liberal candidate of Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s party last year.

The White House and the Pentagon have yet to clarify whether the “additional troops” Trump promised are the same brigade whose rotation was paused or the force being pulled from Germany.

Trump has repeatedly accused European NATO members of failing to pay enough for their defense, while treating troop deployments as a political reward or punishment. The White House has reportedly drawn up a “naughty and nice” list of NATO members based on their support for Washington’s policies, including the US-Israeli war against Iran.

Read more

Washington currently has around 80,000 troops stationed across Europe, including more than 38,000 in Germany, according to a Council on Foreign Relations analysis. Poland, which hosts about 10,000 US troops, has been one of Washington’s closest military partners in Europe and a “model ally,” according to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.

Reuters reported earlier this week that the Pentagon also plans to “significantly scale down” the pool of US forces and capabilities that NATO’s European members could rely on during a major crisis under the bloc’s NATO Force Model.

Moscow has repeatedly condemned the growing militarization of Europe, arguing that Western governments are using a fabricated Russian threat to justify turning the EU into a military bloc and to distract from domestic problems.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has proposed granting Ukraine a limited “interim” status within the EU as a way to deal with its accession ambitions, according to media reports on Thursday that cited a letter by Merz to bloc leaders. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly demanded full membership by the end of 2027.

Kiev was granted EU candidate status in June 2022, following the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Since then, it has pushed for fast-tracked membership while some bloc leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron and Merz, have described such demands as unrealistic.

According to the German chancellor’s new proposal, Kiev would be allowed to tap into certain EU-funded programs, as well as request aid from EU members under the “mutual assistance clause” in the event of an attack.

Ukrainian representatives would also be allowed to participate in meetings of the European Council, the European Commission, and the European Parliament, but would not receive voting rights, according to the letter, cited by multiple media outlets, including Reuters and Euronews.

Read more

The status, which Merz reportedly described as “associate membership,” would not replace the standard accession process and could be revoked if Ukraine backslides on the reforms demanded by Brussels.

“It is obvious that we will not be able to complete the accession process shortly, given the countless hurdles, as well as the political complexities of ratification processes in various member states,” the chancellor wrote, as cited by Euronews.

Last month, Merz also said Ukraine’s “immediate” accession was “not possible.” Zelensky has repeatedly rejected anything short of full membership. Speaking to journalists at an EU summit in Cyprus in late April, he insisted that Ukraine had already “earned” its place in the bloc and did not need any kind of “symbolic” status.

Moscow has argued that Brussels uses the prospect of EU membership as political leverage rather than a genuine promise. Back in 2023, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called the EU promise as “a carrot [on a stick] put in front of a carriage.”

A Ukrainian naval drone found off a Greek island earlier this month could have sunk a civilian ship and led to mass casualties, Greek Defense Minister Nikos Dendias has said.

The unmanned surface vessel (USV) was reportedly a Ukrainian Magura V3 kamikaze drone, capable of carrying an explosive payload of up to 300kg. Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis and senior government officials were reportedly briefed on the matter last week, according to CNN.

Speaking at a conference on Wednesday, Dendias refused to divulge the details of the investigation, but stressed that the drone could have caused immense damage.

“It was obviously something extremely dangerous… there is not the slightest doubt – I repeat, the slightest doubt – that this is a Ukrainian sea drone,” he said, adding that if a cruise liner crossed paths with the USV, the ship would have been at “the bottom of the sea.”

How many dead would we have mourned? And how permissible is this thing in the Mediterranean?

Dendias stressed that Kiev owes Athens “a very big apology,” as well as “the absolute assurance that something like this will not happen again in the wider region.”

Read more

Ukraine has used such drones for months to attack ships in the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, targeting vessels it sees as linked to Moscow. Russia has condemned the strikes, calling them “terrorism and maritime piracy.”

Ukrainian UAVs targeting Russian infrastructure have also increasingly flown through the territory of other countries, such as the Baltic states and Finland, according to Moscow. Several Ukrainian drones have crashed in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Finland in recent weeks.

Russian Security Council Secretary Sergey Shoigu said in April that should these countries deliberately allow Ukrainian drones to pass through their airspace, they become “open accomplices in aggression against Russia.” In that case, Moscow has the right to self-defense against such an “armed attack,” he warned.

The US has urged the Palestinian envoy to the UN to withdraw his candidacy for a senior General Assembly post and threatened to revoke his delegation’s visas if he refuses, according to media reports citing an internal State Department cable.

The dispute centers on Palestinian efforts to expand their diplomatic standing at the UN, including a push for full membership and a vice-presidential seat in the General Assembly, despite opposition from US and Israel.

The internal cable issued this week reportedly instructed US diplomats at the American embassy in Jerusalem to tell Palestinian UN ambassador Riyad Mansour that his General Assembly bid “fuels tensions,” risks undermining US President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan, and would face consequences if it moved forward.

Mansour had already dropped a bid to become president of the General Assembly earlier this year following US lobbying, according to the reports. The Assembly is due to elect its next president and 16 vice‑presidents on June 2.

US diplomats were also reportedly instructed to remind Palestinian officials that they would make no progress on recovering tax and customs revenues withheld by Israel if they did not “engage in good faith.” Those funds make up much of the Palestinian Authority’s budget and have been largely frozen since the Gaza war began following the Hamas attack on southern Israel in October 2023.

Read more

Israeli forces have since carried out large-scale operations in the enclave, killing tens of thousands of Palestinians and displacing most of the population. Although a ceasefire was reached last year, the IDF has continued to conduct strikes in the territory.

The Palestinian Authority holds non-member observer state status at the UN and has no vote in the 193-member General Assembly. Although the Assembly backed its bid for full membership in 2024, any upgrade still requires Security Council approval, where previous efforts were blocked by US vetoes.

Under a 1947 headquarters agreement, the US is obliged to allow representatives of UN members and observers to travel to New York for official UN business. However, Washington has previously denied visas to some Iranian and Russian officials and to former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, citing national security concerns.

The US has indicted former President Raul Castro to have a pretext to invade Cuba and eventually dominate the entire region, American labor and human rights lawyer Daniel Kovalik has told RT.

The US Justice Department indicted Castro and five officials on Wednesday for conspiracy to kill US nationals in the 1996 downing of two planes with anti-Castro activists that reportedly breached Cuban airspace.

Four people were killed in the incident, which fueled diplomatic tensions between the two nations. Havanna said at the time that the planes were connected with the US Air Force, and were repeatedly warned to divert before they were fired upon.

Speaking to journalists, acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche said he cannot explain why the Justice Department chose to do it “now as opposed to two decades ago or 30 years ago” when the incident happened. The indictment came several months after US President Donald Trump warned that Cuba would be “next” after Venezuela was targeted for regime change.

READ MORE: Former Cuban President Castro indicted in US

“This is all part and parcel of a plan of the US to fully dominate the region,” Kovalik said on Wednesday in an interview with RT, noting that the indictment comes shortly after the US kidnapped President Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela and is threatening to do the same to former President Evo Morales in Bolivia.

Kovalik, who is currently serves as Colombian President Gustavo Petro’s attorney in the US, also noted that the indictment is “a pretext for invading the island at a minimum to kidnap Raul Castro if not to try to overthrow the government.” He stressed that the measure is “part and parcel of a plan of the US to fully dominate the region.”

See the full interview below

Bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) have reached record levels across Europe, with gonorrhoea and syphilis cases surging, particularly among homosexual men, according to new data released Thursday by the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC).

The report for 2024 found that gonorrhoea reached its highest level since EU monitoring began in 2009, with 28 EU and EEA countries reporting 106,331 confirmed cases. Cases among men increased 7.9% in 2024, while infections among women fell 8.6%.

Syphilis infections more than doubled over the same period, reaching 45,577 cases, with rates more than six times higher among men than women. Chlamydia remained the most commonly reported STI, with 213,443 cases.

According to the ECDC, homosexual men accounted for most reported gonorrhoea (62%) and syphilis (69%) cases.

“Sexually transmitted infections have been on the rise for 10 years and reached record high levels in 2024,” said Bruno Ciancio, head of ECDC’s unit for directly transmitted and vaccine-preventable diseases. “Untreated, these infections can cause severe complications, such as chronic pain and infertility and, in the case of syphilis, problems with the heart or nervous system.”

The ECDC linked the increase to failures in prevention and screening and unequal access to testing across Europe, noting that 13 of 29 reporting countries require patients to pay out of pocket for basic STI tests. The report did not specify which countries recorded the sharpest increases.

READ MORE: EU rules on IDs of transgender citizens

The EU has long promoted LGBTQ rights through anti-discrimination laws, recognition of same-sex marriages for residency and free movement, and funding policies tied to protections for sexual minorities and gender identities.

Read more

Several members, however, have resisted Brussels on LGBTQ policies. Bulgaria, Romania, Lithuania, and Slovakia do not recognize same-sex marriage and legally recognize only two genders.

Under Viktor Orban, Hungary adopted a 2021 law restricting the promotion of homosexuality and gender transition to minors, but after his election defeat, incoming Prime Minister Peter Magyar signaled a shift by pitching Judit Lannert – described by media as Hungary’s “first LGBT activist” – as education minister.

Read more

Russia, which has taken steps to promote traditional values, has banned “LGBTQ propaganda” and designated the movement as “extremist.” Russian officials, including Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, have argued that Western-promoted LGBTQ agendas seek to “erode, erase, and subjugate” the values and identities of other countries.

Russia has not banned non-traditional relationships themselves, with President Vladimir Putin repeatedly stating that relationships between adults are a private matter. However, he has stressed that the promotion of such relationships, especially among minors, is prohibited.

The UK Defense Ministry has claimed that two Russian fighter jets “dangerously” intercepted a British spy plane over the Black Sea, and released footage that it said showed the encounter. Moscow has consistently maintained that Russian pilots act in strict accordance with international law.

The video published by the British ministry on social media on Wednesday appears to show two Russian jets flying close to the aircraft. One of the jets appears to maneuver alongside the British plane, while another flies ahead of it before moving away.

The British ministry claimed that a “Russian Su-35 aircraft flew close enough to trigger emergency systems” aboard the reconnaissance plane, while a Su-27 fighter was “flying as close as six meters” from its nose. Defense Secretary John Healey accused the Russian pilots of “dangerous and unacceptable behavior… towards an unarmed aircraft” while admitting that the British plane was able to continue its mission without any issues.

A @RoyalAirForce Rivet Joint aircraft operating in international airspace over the Black Sea was dangerously intercepted by Russian military jets – flying as close as six metres and triggering onboard emergency systems.

Despite these reckless manoeuvres, RAF crew completed their… pic.twitter.com/QyUP7dE4OJ

— Ministry of Defence 🇬🇧 (@DefenceHQ) May 20, 2026

The RAF Rivet Joint aircraft involved in the incident is equipped with advanced electronic surveillance systems. London said that the aircraft had been conducting a “routine flight” over international waters in the Black Sea. The region has seen heightened military activity throughout the Ukraine conflict, including Ukrainian drone and Western-supplied missile strikes targeting Russian infrastructure.

Moscow has not officially commented on the British claims.

READ MORE: NATO spy plane intercepted over Black Sea – MOD

Russian fighter jets have repeatedly fended off RAF spy flights over the Black Sea during the conflict. In July 2024, the Russian military had to scramble jets on two such occasions in just two days.

British spy planes had already ramped up their activity in the Black Sea region before the Ukraine conflict escalated in February 2022. In 2021, they conducted flights in the area just days before a Royal Navy frigate attempted to sail through Russian territorial waters past Crimea in what was later revealed to be a deliberate provocation.

RT has gained rare access to the Strait of Hormuz, where hundreds of vessels are backed up waiting to pass through one of the world’s most critical shipping chokepoints.

The waterway has remained largely shut since the US-Israeli attack on Iran in February and Tehran’s subsequent standoff with Washington.

Earlier this month, Iran announced the creation of the Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), a new body tasked with overseeing transit through the strategic passage, which carries roughly a fifth of the world’s seaborne oil and LNG. Tehran said that vessels seeking passage would need PGSA permits and declared a sweeping zone of control stretching from its coastline toward waters near the UAE.

According to RT correspondent Saman Kojouri, “the scale of the maritime congestion here is immediately visible” with hundreds of vessels in the area, many awaiting permission from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to pass.

Read more

While Iran insists that the Strait of Hormuz remains open to crucial energy shipments, it stresses that vessels need to coordinate their passage with the IRGC, and that “countries considered hostile toward Iran cannot freely operate inside and through the corridor,” Kojouri said.

Tehran has maintained that the measures are in place “to prevent further escalation” and preserve regional stability in the Middle East, he added.

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday threatened to resume strikes on Iran if the Islamic Republic did not give Washington “the right answers” in the peace negotiations.

Watch RT's full report from the Strait of Hormuz below.

The existential crisis that recently engulfed the British Labour Party has intensified over the past week, and it is now clear that the party is facing political extinction.

Two weeks ago, British voters showed their contempt for Labour, after enduring two years of scandal-ridden and ineffective government. The party lost almost 1,600 local council seats; ceded control of the Welsh parliament for the first time ever; and performed very poorly in Scotland.

The Labour Party has responded to this unprecedented electoral drubbing by engaging in an unseemly orgy of political infighting that will continue for months to come.

Within days, some 90 MPs announced that they no longer had faith in Keir Starmer as prime minister – and five cabinet members resigned, including Wes Streeting, the health secretary, who had been maneuvering to depose the unpopular Starmer for some time.

Streeting, however, declined to challenge Starmer for the leadership because he could not muster the support of the necessary 81 MPs to do so.

A week later, Streeting delivered an extraordinary speech in which he announced that he would contest the leadership when Starmer was eventually challenged, described Starmer’s ascension to Labour leadership as “dishonest” and astonishingly urged Britain to re-join the European Union – thereby reviving the divisive Brexit issue that has poisoned British politics for over a decade, and had previously split the Labour Party.

Streeting, by injecting Brexit into the Labour leadership contest, has ensured that it will become much more divisive and bitter that it otherwise would have been. One Labour minister has already condemned Streeting for “re-opening the Brexit wars.”

Other potential challengers – Angela Rayner and Ed Miliband – have also declined to challenge Starmer at this stage, and the unpopular Starmer appears determined to remain prime minister for the present.

This strange political impasse then provoked the ambitious mayor of Manchester, Andy Burnham, to launch a prospective challenge against Starmer. Burnham, however, cannot challenge at present as he is not in parliament – because earlier this year Starmer refused to endorse him as a candidate in a by-election in a safe Labour seat, that was subsequently won by the Greens.

Read more

Then, last week a young MP in the Manchester seat of Makerfield, Josh Symons, resigned from parliament so that Burnham could contest the resulting by-election (due to be held on June 18), win a seat in the Commons, and then challenge Starmer for the prime ministership. After defeating Starmer, Burnham would then have three years to win back those millions of voters that have recently deserted Labour, and lead Labour to victory in the 2029 general election.

This is the Machiavellian plan concocted by the apparatchiks that currently control the Labour Party – and Streeting, Rayner, and Miliband have, for the time being, acquiesced in it, no doubt expecting to be suitably rewarded with cabinet appointments if and when Burnham becomes prime minister.

There are, however, numerous, insuperable difficulties confronting this high-risk strategy.

Burnham is by no means certain to win the by-election that has been gifted him. He is currently a very popular mayor of Manchester, but at the recent council elections Reform won every ward in the Makerfield electorate – and voters may well take a dim view of their local member being edged out so as to allow Burnham to make a bid for the prime ministership.

In 1965, Prime Minister Harold Wilson engineered a similar piece of by-election spivery when Patrick Gordon Walker, who was slated to become foreign secretary, surprisingly lost his seat at the general election that brought Wilson to power a year before. Wilson subsequently arranged by-election in a safe Labour seat – in which voters refused to elect Walker.

Makerfield is a white working-class electorate that voted overwhelmingly in favor of leaving the EU at the Brexit referendum in 2015 and is staunchly anti-immigrant. Josh Symons won the seat at last year’s election with a majority of 5,300 votes over the Reform party candidate.

Reform leader Nigel Farage has promised to “throw the kitchen sink” at Makerfield, and the party will campaign on the key issues of Brexit (thanks to Streeting) and immigration. Burnham – who is previously on record as wanting to reverse Brexit, and has this week been branded “open borders Burnham” by Farage – is vulnerable on both of these issues.

Read more

Nor should it be forgotten that when Burnham was a MP (he was the member for Leigh between 2001 and 2017) he was twice decisively defeated in leadership ballots – once by Ed Miliband and once by Jeremy Corbyn.

Even if Burnham wins in Makerfield he may not win the leadership contest – Streeting and perhaps others will be candidates – that will ultimately be decided by Labour Party members, rather than the elected Labour MPs or the party’s ruling cadre.

More importantly, even if Burnham wins the by-election and becomes prime minister, does anyone believe that voters will not punish Labour for the lengthy, divisive and self-indulgent leadership contest now in train that resulted in him becoming prime minister?

The absurdity inherent in the plan to make Burnham prime minister was highlighted this week when David Lammy, the deputy prime minister, announced that both he and Starmer would campaign for Burnham in Makerfield.

The plan to install Burnham as prime minister also seriously underestimates the rage and contempt that British voters have for politicians in general, and Labour politicians in particular – and voters are more than capable of derailing it.

The unsavory political infighting that Labour has engaged in over the past few weeks, which can only intensify over the next few months, has, in my view, already condemned the party to political oblivion – in much the same way that the tawdry and protracted leadership contest that resulted in Liz Truss becoming prime minister signaled the demise of the Conservatives as a viable mainstream party.

More to the point, does anyone really believe that Labour is capable of formulating and implementing a political program that would carry it to an election win in 2029?

If Streeting’s foolish suggestion that Brexit be reversed – surely a political gift to the Reform Party that not even Farage could have anticipated in his wildest dreams – is indicative of Labour’s new policy direction, then the party is beyond saving.

Read more

Nor do Burnham’s recent policy pronouncements – “I will fight for justice and ordinary people”; “we need to reverse deindustrialization”; and “we need more public ownership” amount to a credible political program that the divided Labour Party can coalesce around, let alone expect to win an election with.

Burnham’s economic views mirror those of Jeremy Corbyn – and Corbyn’s economic agenda was decisively rejected by the electorate at the 2019 general election, won in a landslide by Boris Johnson, and again in 2024 when Starmer won a large majority on an explicitly anti-Corbynite program.

By what miraculous process is Burnham going to persuade the electorate to vote for a big spending economic agenda that it has resolutely rejected at the last two general elections?

And how, one might ask, does Burnham propose to convince the more than 250 MPs who are still committed to Starmer’s cautious technocratic agenda to embrace a program based upon reindustrialization, nationalization, and increased government spending? Even if Burnham were to win Makerfield by a large margin, this would not have given him a mandate to implement a radical political program of this kind.

But Burnham’s difficulties do not end there.

Burnham’s crude working class persona may play well with voters in Greater Manchester – but he does not have the same appeal to the disenchanted British electorate at large, or, indeed, to many displaced workers in the north (Burnham’s own constituency) who have been voting for Reform in ever increasing numbers in recent years.

Burnham may be “the King of the North” but he is an unimpressive political messiah – even though his career may well end in his electoral crucifixion – and Labour’s desperate plan to install him as prime minister is, in my view, a gross political miscalculation based upon wishful thinking.

Read more

The chaos that has engulfed Labour in the past few weeks was by no means inevitable.

Starmer could have resigned with a modicum of dignity, and a new leader could have been appointed without the need for a protracted and divisive election process. The party could have drafted a genuinely reformist political program, implemented it – with its massive majority in the Commons – over the next three years, and had at least some chance of being re-elected in 2029.

The current Labour Party leadership was, however, incapable doing any of these things – in large part because Starmer and those ambitious politicians who are now seeking to depose him are completely lacking in political judgment, and the party itself is utterly bereft of credible ideas and basic political proficiency.

In this regard, Labour has come to resemble the moribund Conservative Party, and, in my view, is doomed to suffer a similar fate.

In a recent interview, political commentator Peter Hitchens described the Conservative and Labour Parties as “corpse parties” – an apt description of the two ailing major mainstream political parties that once dominated British politics.

With the Labour Party’s imminent demise – which will be pathetically played out over the next few months – that era is now coming to a chaotic and ignominious end.

Washington needs to reimpose its presence in Greenland, US special envoy Jeff Landry has said, as the administration of President Donald Trump seeks to expand its military and strategic footprint on the Arctic island.

The Republican governor of Louisiana arrived in Nuuk on Sunday at Trump’s assignment to “find a lot of new friends.” The visit followed months of tensions stirred by Trump’s calls for an American takeover of the autonomous Danish territory and sparked controversy after it emerged that Greenlandic authorities reportedly had not officially invited Landry.

“I think it’s time for the US to put its footprint back on Greenland,” he told AFP on Wednesday during his first visit to Greenland since taking up the post in December 2025, adding that the US is looking at boosting military operations and reviving former bases on the island.

Read more

The US operated 17 military installations across Greenland during the Cold War, but most were later shuttered, leaving Pituffik base in the island’s far north as Washington’s only remaining military outpost.

Recent media reports suggested that Washington is in talks with Denmark and is seeking to open three new bases in southern Greenland.

“I think you’re seeing the president talk about increasing national security operations and repopulating certain bases in Greenland,” Landry told the outlet.

Under a 1951 defense agreement with Denmark, updated in 2004, the US is already permitted to expand troop deployments and military infrastructure on the island, provided Copenhagen and Greenlandic authorities are notified in advance.

Read more

Greenlandic and Danish officials have repeatedly insisted that the island alone will decide its future, rejecting outside pressure over its sovereignty, in a stance that reflects a growing split within NATO as Denmark – a founding member of the bloc – finds itself at odds with Washington.

Landry questioned whether Greenland currently had sovereignty at all when asked by Danish broadcaster DR whether an expanded US presence on the island would respect Greenlandic self-rule, while insisting Washington had always respected sovereignty, “even in places where we have had to go in and liberate.”

At the same time, he dismissed fears of a US takeover, saying Greenlanders “should not be afraid.”

Read more

Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens Frederik Nielsen said after meeting Landry on Monday that the island’s position toward the US “had not moved an inch,” reiterating that Greenland’s “red lines” remained unchanged. He also noted that despite “constructive talks” there was “no sign” Washington had softened its stance.

Declassified US military documents showed Washington viewed Greenland as vital to American security as early as 1946, prompting a $100 million offer to buy the island and even discussions about swapping part of Alaska. Denmark rejected the proposals, and the issue was later shelved after Copenhagen joined NATO and agreed to host US military bases in Greenland.

Trump renewed the push to bring the mineral-rich Arctic territory under greater US control, claiming that the island risks falling into the hands of China or Russia.

Washington needs to reimpose its presence in Greenland, US special envoy Jeff Landry has said, as the administration of President Donald Trump seeks to expand its military and strategic footprint on the Arctic island.

The Republican governor of Louisiana arrived in Nuuk on Sunday at Trump’s assignment to “find a lot of new friends.” The visit followed months of tensions stirred by Trump’s calls for an American takeover of the autonomous Danish territory and sparked controversy after it emerged that Greenlandic authorities reportedly had not officially invited Landry.

“I think it’s time for the US to put its footprint back on Greenland,” he told AFP on Wednesday during his first visit to Greenland since taking up the post in December 2025, adding that the US is looking at boosting military operations and reviving former bases on the island.

Read more

The US operated 17 military installations across Greenland during the Cold War, but most were later shuttered, leaving Pituffik base in the island’s far north as Washington’s only remaining military outpost.

Recent media reports suggested that Washington is in talks with Denmark and is seeking to open three new bases in southern Greenland.

“I think you’re seeing the president talk about increasing national security operations and repopulating certain bases in Greenland,” Landry told the outlet.

Under a 1951 defense agreement with Denmark, updated in 2004, the US is already permitted to expand troop deployments and military infrastructure on the island, provided Copenhagen and Greenlandic authorities are notified in advance.

Read more

Greenlandic and Danish officials have repeatedly insisted that the island alone will decide its future, rejecting outside pressure over its sovereignty, in a stance that reflects a growing split within NATO as Denmark – a founding member of the bloc – finds itself at odds with Washington.

Landry questioned whether Greenland currently had sovereignty at all when asked by Danish broadcaster DR whether an expanded US presence on the island would respect Greenlandic self-rule, while insisting Washington had always respected sovereignty, “even in places where we have had to go in and liberate.”

At the same time, he dismissed fears of a US takeover, saying Greenlanders “should not be afraid.”

Read more

Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens Frederik Nielsen said after meeting Landry on Monday that the island’s position toward the US “had not moved an inch,” reiterating that Greenland’s “red lines” remained unchanged. He also noted that despite “constructive talks” there was “no sign” Washington had softened its stance.

Declassified US military documents showed Washington viewed Greenland as vital to American security as early as 1946, prompting a $100 million offer to buy the island and even discussions about swapping part of Alaska. Denmark rejected the proposals, and the issue was later shelved after Copenhagen joined NATO and agreed to host US military bases in Greenland.

Trump renewed the push to bring the mineral-rich Arctic territory under greater US control, claiming that the island risks falling into the hands of China or Russia.

Europe is facing an “energy crisis tsunami” following a series of political earthquakes, Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev has warned. The forecast comes as energy shocks caused by the US‑Israeli war on Iran continue to destabilize supplies across the region.

Since the beginning of the US‑Israeli military campaign in late February, global crude benchmarks have surged by roughly 50%, forcing retail fuel and wholesale natural gas prices to historic highs. The Middle East conflict has further exacerbated a critical situation in European states, which had already drastically cut Russian energy imports since the 2022 escalation of the Ukraine conflict.

“More to come as the energy crisis tsunami hits the EU/UK imminently,” Dmitriev stated on X, responding to a Swedish journalist who noted that Germany’s right-wing AfD party was nearly as large as the CDU and SPD combined in the latest poll, calling the shift “a political earthquake.”

Traditional mainstream parties across Europe have increasingly lost ground to far-right or center-right coalitions over the past years.

Read more

The Iran-related energy shock has pushed the UK to issue a temporary license for Russian-origin diesel and jet fuel imports to stabilize markets shaken by disruptions to navigation through the Strait of Hormuz. The route handles around 20% of global oil and LNG. The decision, announced on Wednesday, mirrored a similar move by the US earlier this week extending a sanctions waiver for limited Russian seaborne oil purchases.

Several officials across the EU have called for restoring energy ties with Russia to tackle the crisis. However, the European Commission has stated that there will be no return to Russian energy imports and it will continue to pursue a full phase-out of Russian fossil fuels by 2027.

Earlier this year, Dmitriev said that the EU would “inevitably beg” for Russian gas, as energy prices are projected to further increase. He has also stated that the bloc is the last in line among Russian energy consumers as Moscow expands projects with other countries.

The world has entered a holding pattern ahead of what increasingly looks like a second round of confrontation between the United States and Iran. Officially, diplomacy is still alive: public statements continue to reference the possibility of a deal, while intermediaries in Pakistan, Qatar, and Türkiye are attempting to keep both sides engaged in negotiations. But judging by developments over the past several days, it is becoming increasingly clear that this is less about reaching a durable compromise and more about buying time before the next phase of escalation. The talks in Islamabad in April did not stop the conflict – they merely underscored how inevitable it may be. No breakthrough emerged, while disputes over the Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s nuclear conditions remain at the core of the standoff. US President Donald Trump himself recently stated that he had planned to strike Iran on May 19 but backed off at the request of Gulf monarchies.

At first, there were legitimate reasons to believe that Washington – especially under Trump’s current political circumstances – had little interest in prolonging the conflict with Iran. First, fatigue with Middle Eastern wars is growing inside the US, alongside mounting criticism of unconditional support for Israel. Second, a prolonged war with Iran would carry political costs for Trump personally, undermining his image as a leader capable of quickly “ending” conflicts rather than getting dragged deeper into them. Third, policymakers in Washington clearly understand the limits of military force: airstrikes can damage infrastructure, hit military targets, and raise the costs for Tehran, but they cannot instantly dismantle Iran’s political system. The Iranian regime is not something that can simply be “taken down” in a single military campaign; it is deeply embedded within a complex network of institutions, security structures, ideological mechanisms, and regional alliances.

That is why, even after the Islamabad talks, there was still cautious hope for a political settlement. But within roughly a week, it became obvious that neither side was moving toward compromise. Instead, both began locking themselves into increasingly rigid and fundamentally irreconcilable positions. One revealing moment came when Tehran demanded compensation for the damage caused by US strikes and emphasized Iran’s special status regarding the Strait of Hormuz.

Reports indicated that Iran’s counterproposal demanded compensation from the US while stressing Tehran’s sovereign rights over Hormuz – or, more precisely, demanding US recognition of Iranian dominance over the strait, something that would amount to a major geopolitical victory for Tehran. For Washington, such terms are effectively unacceptable, since accepting them would look not like the capitulation Trump appears to expect from Iran, but rather like a strategic retreat by the US in one of the world’s most critical energy corridors.

Read more

This exchange of ultimatums does not look like a diplomatic malfunction or an emotional outburst. It appears far more like a deliberate strategy. When parties genuinely want a deal, they leave room for maneuver, make concessions, and negotiate tradeoffs. But when one side presents demands the other could never realistically accept, the process ceases to be genuine diplomacy. It becomes a way to buy time while preparing for the next strike.

Iran, by all appearances, is using this pause not to prepare a comprehensive peace agreement, but to restore internal coordination, assess the damage inflicted, regroup its forces, and prepare for another round of confrontation. The US, meanwhile, is preserving a diplomatic channel in order to continue issuing ultimatums while simultaneously keeping the military option on the table should negotiations finally collapse.

In this conflict, the Strait of Hormuz has long ceased to be just a narrow shipping lane on the map. For Iran, it is its single most powerful leverage point – the card Tehran continues to play instead of resorting to more direct forms of escalation. Fully shutting down the strait would hit everyone at once: America’s Gulf allies, Israel, and global oil markets alike. For Washington, meanwhile, freedom of navigation through Hormuz is fundamentally about who sets the rules of the game in the Middle East.

That is precisely why the positions of both sides are fundamentally incompatible. The US demanded the full reopening of the strait and the removal of highly enriched uranium from Iran. In practice, these are not negotiating terms – they are surrender terms dressed up in diplomatic language. Accepting them would require Iran to publicly acknowledge defeat while voluntarily giving up its two main tools of leverage. No Iranian leadership could realistically agree to that.

Trump, meanwhile, does not appear to be steering negotiations toward a sustainable compromise. Instead, he seems to be laying the political and diplomatic groundwork for another round of war. Formally, both Trump and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio continue to speak about negotiations and the possibility of a new agreement in the near future. But the substance of Washington’s demands suggests otherwise: the US is not offering Tehran an equal bargain, but rather a framework for capitulation – fully aware that the Iranian leadership would struggle to accept it without serious domestic political fallout. That is the key logic driving the current moment: impossible demands can serve not only as pressure tactics, but also as a way to preemptively shift blame for failed negotiations onto Iran.

Read more

In effect, Washington has outlined an exceptionally rigid framework for any future settlement with Tehran, built around five core demands: Iran must drop its claims for compensation over damage caused by US strikes; transfer 400 kilograms of enriched uranium to the US; reduce its nuclear infrastructure to a single active facility despite currently operating roughly eight or nine sites; accept the unfreezing of no more than 25% of its frozen assets; and expand negotiations to include ending conflicts across all fronts, including Lebanon. These conditions have repeatedly surfaced in reports outlining the US position, while Washington has also publicly signaled that it considers Iran’s proposals insufficient and remains open to resuming military operations.

In reality, the framework proposed by Washington does not envision any meaningful lifting of sanctions pressure on Iran. More importantly, the demand that enriched uranium be handed over to the US would represent not merely a technical restriction on Iran’s nuclear program, but external control over its most critical component. Politically, such a scenario is nearly impossible for Tehran to accept, since it would be perceived domestically as capitulation under pressure and a direct erosion of national sovereignty. That is why the American position looks less like a proposal designed to secure rapid agreement and more like an intentionally hardline negotiating framework – one that would allow Washington to later claim diplomacy had been exhausted once Iran rejected it.

From the outset, it was also clear that Washington had no serious intention of discussing compensation for the damage caused. For the US, acknowledging such responsibility would create an extremely undesirable political and legal precedent, effectively amounting to an admission of responsibility for the military phase of the conflict. Equally revealing is the vague wording surrounding the demand to end conflicts across multiple fronts, including Lebanon: there is no concrete enforcement mechanism, no firm security guarantees, and no clear understanding of who would be responsible for de-escalation or how it would be implemented. According to Reuters, Iran, by contrast, has attempted to link any settlement to a complete cessation of hostilities across all fronts, the withdrawal of US forces from areas near Iran, and compensation for damages.

As a result, Tehran has effectively been told that its own conditions are not considered a legitimate basis for bargaining. In this form, the negotiating process increasingly resembles not an attempt to find common ground, but an effort to impose a settlement model overwhelmingly favorable to Washington. For Iran, such a framework is unacceptable not only in practical terms, but symbolically as well: it would mean restrictions on its nuclear capabilities, the partial continuation of sanctions, and abandonment of compensation claims without receiving comparable concessions in return.

Read more

That is precisely why Trump’s actions can be viewed as preparation for another war. First, the US creates the impression that it offered Iran a “reasonable off-ramp” through diplomacy. Then, after Tehran predictably refuses, Washington can argue that Iran itself sabotaged the diplomatic process. At that point, the White House gains political justification for resuming strikes – not as a first choice, but as a “last resort” following failed negotiations. This strategy allows Trump to project peacemaking rhetoric while simultaneously preserving room for military escalation.

Under this logic, the probability of another round of confrontation remains high. The central question is no longer whether a new phase of strikes is possible, but when it may begin, how large-scale it could become, and what strategy Tehran will choose in response: a limited retaliation, a drawn-out proxy conflict, or an attempt to raise the stakes around the Strait of Hormuz and regional infrastructure. In practice, the current diplomatic process increasingly resembles not a mechanism for preventing war, but diplomatic preparation for its next stage.

The first phase of the conflict resolved none of the core issues. Iran’s political system remained intact; the nuclear question was not settled; the previous security architecture around the Strait of Hormuz was not restored; and no mutually acceptable framework for de-escalation emerged. On the contrary, both sides came out of the first phase believing that concessions would be interpreted as weakness. And in such situations, negotiations rarely become a path to peace – more often, they serve as the diplomatic formalization of a pause between two rounds of conflict.

The main conclusion is that the current moment is not a stable ceasefire, but a strategic pause. Both Iran and the US are already thinking in terms of the next phase of confrontation. Tehran is inflating its demands in order to avoid appearing defeated and to buy time. Washington is signaling openness to negotiations, while remaining unable to accept terms that would undermine its regional position. That is why the growing sense of an approaching second round of war stems not from isolated remarks by Trump or figures within the IRGC, but from the very structure of the conflict itself: neither side is prepared for genuine peace, nor willing to accept defeat – and both are therefore preparing for what comes next.

Paris Mayor Emmanuel Gregoire has launched a special inquiry into the city’s childcare system amid a growing scandal involving allegations of sexual abuse against children as young as three, French media has reported.

He repeatedly apologized and acknowledged a “systemic risk” to children, announcing a €20 million ($23 million) emergency reform plan including staff training, surprise inspections and a ban on adults being left alone with children.

Former Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo tried to keep the complaints out of public view. Gregoire, who was elected in March, has pledged transparency, revealing last month that 78 after-school workers had been suspended in 2026, including 31 over suspected sexual misconduct.

The scandal has shocked France after reports that some victims were aged as young as three. The Telegraph, which interviewed parents of affected children, reported they were allegedly locked in rooms, sexually abused, and threatened with death if they spoke. Parents, activists, and unions say the crisis exposed systemic problems in childcare: chronic understaffing, precarious contracts, and poor vetting. They also accuse City Hall of transferring problematic workers instead of terminating them.

Read more

The move follows revelations about the scale of abuse in Paris schools: earlier this month, Paris prosecutor Laure Beccuau said he had launched investigations into suspected sexual violence at 84 nursery schools, 20 elementary schools, and ten daycare centers.

The announcement came the same day investigators from the Paris Juvenile Protection Brigade carried out a major operation linked to the scandal: 16 people working in after-school programs at a school in the 7th Arrondissement were detained during coordinated raids. Prosecutors said the suspects, aged 18 to 68, include kindergarten assistants, city education supervisors, and activity leaders employed by City Hall to supervise children before and after classes. Allegations range from rape and sexual assault to sexual exhibitionism and violent behavior.

The issue gained national attention in January when France 2’s Cash Investigation aired undercover footage showing verbal abuse and sexual misconduct in a Paris nursery, prompting suspensions of twelve workers.

Read more

According to Le Monde and Le Parisien, Gregoire has ordered the creation of a so-called “information and evaluation mission” (MIE) – a body similar to a parliamentary inquiry commission – which will have six months to conduct the probe on the allegations and report on their findings. The announcement came during a City Council session on Wednesday after opposition parties demanded a formal investigation into failures within the city-run extracurricular care network.

READ MORE: Macron’s wife under fire over ‘stupid b***hes’ insult

France has formally acknowledged a widespread child sexual abuse crisis through multiple state-backed inquiries. CIIVISE, the commission on incest and child sexual violence, estimated in 2024 that 5.4 million adults – about 10% of the population – had suffered sexual abuse as children, with roughly 160,000 minors victimized each year. Another report found around 330,000 children were abused within the French Catholic Church since 1950, involving some 3,000 alleged predator clergy. France also faced criticism for not introducing a fixed age of consent until 2021, when it was set at 15, and 18 for incest.

Paris Mayor Emmanuel Gregoire has launched a special inquiry into the city’s childcare system amid a growing scandal involving allegations of sexual abuse against children as young as three, French media has reported.

The move follows revelations about the scale of abuse in Paris schools: earlier this month, Paris prosecutor Laure Beccuau said he had launched investigations into suspected sexual violence at 84 nursery schools, 20 elementary schools, and ten daycare centers.

According to Le Monde and Le Parisien, Gregoire has ordered the creation of a so-called “information and evaluation mission” (MIE) – a body similar to a parliamentary inquiry commission – which will have six months to conduct the probe on the allegations and report on their findings. The announcement came during a City Council session on Wednesday after opposition parties demanded a formal investigation into failures within the city-run extracurricular care network.

Read more

The announcement came the same day investigators from the Paris Juvenile Protection Brigade carried out a major operation linked to the scandal: 16 people working in after-school programs at a school in the 7th Arrondissement were detained during coordinated raids. Prosecutors said the suspects, aged 18 to 68, include kindergarten assistants, city education supervisors, and activity leaders employed by City Hall to supervise children before and after classes. Allegations range from rape and sexual assault to sexual exhibitionism and violent behavior.

The issue gained national attention in January when France 2’s Cash Investigation aired undercover footage showing verbal abuse and sexual misconduct in a Paris nursery, prompting suspensions of twelve workers.

Read more

The scandal shocked France after reports that some victims were aged as young as three. The Telegraph, which interviewed parents of affected children, reported they were allegedly locked in rooms, sexually abused, and threatened with death if they spoke. Parents, activists, and unions say the crisis exposed systemic problems in childcare: chronic understaffing, precarious contracts, and poor vetting. They also accuse City Hall of transferring problematic workers instead of terminating them.

While former mayor Anne Hidalgo largely kept the complaints out of public view, Gregoire, who was elected in March, pledged transparency, revealing last month that 78 after-school workers had been suspended in 2026, including 31 over suspected sexual misconduct. He repeatedly apologized and acknowledged a “systemic risk” to children, announcing a €20 million ($23 million) emergency reform plan including staff training, surprise inspections and a ban on adults being left alone with children.

READ MORE: Macron’s wife under fire over ‘stupid b***hes’ insult

France has formally acknowledged a widespread child sexual abuse crisis through multiple state-backed inquiries. CIIVISE, the commission on incest and child sexual violence, estimated in 2024 that 5.4 million adults – about 10% of the population – had suffered sexual abuse as children, with roughly 160,000 minors victimized each year. Another report found around 330,000 children were abused within the French Catholic Church since 1950, involving some 3,000 alleged predator clergy. France also faced criticism for not introducing a fixed age of consent until 2021, when it was set at 15, and 18 for incest.

The US intends to build up an icebreaker fleet larger than Russia’s, as the current gap in Moscow’s favor is “ridiculous,” President Donald Trump has said.

Speaking to US Coast Guard graduates in New London, Connecticut, on Wednesday, Trump highlighted an agreement signed with Finland earlier this year to build 11 icebreakers.

“We’re going to learn the craft and we’re going to have so many icebreakers,” Trump said. “You know, Russia has 48 and we have one very old one, that’s ridiculous.”

He claimed the US would eventually operate 55 such ships, overtaking Russia and strengthening the American presence in the Arctic.

The agreement with Finland was finalized in February. Seven of the ordered vessels are expected to be constructed at US shipyards. The deal falls under the trilateral ICE Pact, which also includes Canada and was launched by then-President Joe Biden in July 2024.

Read more

Russia currently operates the world’s most powerful icebreaker fleet, which supports navigation along its northern coastline. It includes more than 40 vessels, among them eight nuclear-powered icebreakers.

The Yakutia, a 160-meter Arktika-class vessel able to break through ice up to three meters thick, was the latest ship to enter service with Rosatomflot, Russia’s state-owned maritime nuclear operator. Three more icebreakers of the same class are being built and are expected to replace older vessels, including the Taymyr and Vaygach, shallow-draft ships constructed for the Soviet Union by Finland.

Russia also operates the Viktor Chernomyrdin, the world’s most powerful diesel-electric icebreaker, with 25 megawatts of propulsion. The US Coast Guard’s gas-turbine Polar Star, currently America’s only operational heavy icebreaker, is admittedly more powerful at 44.7 megawatts. It is also far older, having entered service in the 1970s.

Moscow considers its icebreaker fleet a strategic asset, both for sustaining its Arctic presence and for keeping the Northern Sea Route open for as much of the year as possible. The route offers a shorter shipping link between Asia and Europe than the traditional passage through the Suez Canal. The US-Israeli war with Iran, which disrupted supplies of key goods from the Persian Gulf and raised safety concerns over Red Sea traffic, has renewed interest in the Russian alternative.

The Strait of Hormuz – a critical chokepoint accounting for 20% of seaborne oil trade prior to the US-Israeli war against Iran – remains effectively blocked despite the tentative ceasefire. The traffic has ground to a halt due to the risks posed by mines, recurring attacks, and ship seizures, as well as insurers’ reluctance to step in.

The US maintains its own blockade on Iranian ports, with NATO countries reportedly considering taking on a role in escorting ships in the area.

Despite the severe disruption, media reports suggest a slight uptick in traffic through the strait, with Iran reportedly offering a Bitcoin-based scheme to provide insurance to shipping companies.

Here are the most recent developments in the Strait of Hormuz.

NATO Hormuz intervention?

On Tuesday, Bloomberg reported, citing a senior official, that NATO is mulling the possibility of escorting ships if the strait is not reopened by early July, though the idea does not yet have unanimous backing in the US-led military bloc.

Read more

NATO has been split over the US-Israeli war against Iran – deepening US President Donald Trump’s ire towards the bloc’s European members, who have signaled that they could take part in ensuring maritime security after the sides reach a sustainable peace.

It is unclear how NATO would be able to step in even if a consensus is reached, Bloomberg noted, given that the US has not been able to establish control over the strait.

Read more

Iran develops shipping insurance

On Monday, Fars news agency reported that Iran launched a Bitcoin-based shipping insurance service – ‘Hormuz Safe’. The government says the scheme will provide “fast, verifiable digital insurance” while generating an estimated $10 billion in revenue.

CoinDesk expressed skepticism, citing factors complicating passage, as well as the possibility of US sanctions on companies that accept the offer. According to Iranian media, the insurance would cover detention, inspection, and cargo confiscation, but not damage from weapons.

Read more

The scheme has also been interpreted as another attempt to establish a toll regime in the strait – which the US said it would not accept under any circumstances.

A previous US attempt to guarantee insurance for shipping companies ended in failure. Early in the conflict, Trump announced that he ordered the US Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to provide up to $40 billion in reinsurance for all shipping through the Gulf, with Chubb, AIG, and Berkshire Hathaway named as backers.

Read more

According to the Financial Times, the program did not provide a single dollar of coverage because the precondition of US naval escort was not met.

Has traffic through the Strait of Hormuz increased?

While the current traffic through the chokepoint remains a fraction of that before the war, Lloyds List reported on Monday that at least 54 vessels – including ten Chinese-linked vessels – transited through the strait last week – more than double than a week prior. Before the war, around 3,000 vessels crossed the strait every month, compared to 191 in April.

Read more

The apparent increase came after Iranian media reported that Iran began allowing some Chinese vessels to transit through the Strait of Hormuz after the two countries reached an understanding on Iranian management protocols for the waterway. Tehran also earlier signaled it would allow passage to ships not linked to the US and Israel.

On Wednesday, Bloomberg reported, citing a source familiar with the matter, that India – which imports around 55% of its oil from the Gulf – is preparing to send vessels through the strait to load up energy cargoes. According to the agency, the plans are in the final stage.

Read more

Iranian officials claimed on Wednesday that they coordinated the transit of 26 vessels through the waterway over the past 24 hours.

Is the Strait of Hormuz still dangerous?

Last week’s modest traffic uptick was accompanied by renewed violence. On May 14, a Honduras-flagged ‘floating armory’ named Hui Chuan, which stored weapons and ammunition for security companies and anchored near the port of Fujairah, was seized by unauthorized personnel and towed to Iranian waters.

Around the same time, an Indian-flagged livestock barge, Haj Ali, was struck by a “major explosion” – likely caused by a drone or missile attack – and sank off the coast of Oman, with all crew members rescued.

In total, as of last week, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported 49 incidents in the region, with 27 classified as attacks.

What crucial cables lie in the Strait of Hormuz?

The stand-off in Hormuz could also impact global telecom networks. Iranian military spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaghari warned this month that Tehran “will impose fees on internet cables.” Iranian media also signaled that the measure would include licensing fees and annual “protection payments” from major tech companies including Meta, Amazon, and Microsoft. These companies, however, are obliged to follow US sanctions that prohibit them from engaging in business with Iran.

At least eight major telecom cables lie on the strait’s bed, with many of them spanning thousands kilometers from Europe to China, and are owned by dozens of international companies, according to submarinecablemap.com.

Will the US and Iran be able to reopen the Strait of Hormuz?

The outcome of the crisis ultimately depends on whether the US and Iran are able to bridge their numerous differences, and so far they seem to be as far from a deal as ever.

On Monday, Axios reported, citing sources, that Iran submitted a new peace proposal, but the White House considered it insufficient: “We are really not making a lot of progress… We need some real, sturdy, and granular conversation [regarding the nuclear program]. If that’s not gonna happen, we will have a conversation through bombs, which will be a shame,” an unnamed US official told the outlet.

Read more

The same day, Trump said he was planning a “very major attack” on Iran for Tuesday but canceled it after being approached by several Gulf states which implored him to give diplomacy a chance.

“For Iran, the clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them,” he warned.

Iran – which has denied that it seeks to develop nuclear weapons – has insisted that a peaceful settlement should include the cessation of hostilities against both Iran and Hezbollah, a US military withdrawal from the region, the lifting of all sanctions, and reparation for damages.

The US has demanded that Iran dismantle its nuclear program, surrender its stockpile of enriched uranium, and lift any restrictions on traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

The German Interior Ministry is considering offering Syrian refugees up to €8,000 ($9,300) to return home voluntarily, Focus magazine has reported, citing government sources. The proposal comes as support for the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which has been campaigning heavily on migration concerns, reaches record highs.

Germany was one of the main destinations for Syrians fleeing the civil war during the 2014-2015 migrant crisis, after then-Chancellor Angela Merkel adopted an open-door migration policy.

More than 951,000 Syrians were living in Germany as of August 2025, according to the Interior Ministry’s data. Over 500,000 hold temporary residence permits tied to refugee or subsidiary protection status, while the number voluntarily returning to Syria remains relatively low, Focus reported on Wednesday.

Roman Poseck, interior minister of the central German state of Hesse, argued that even tens of thousands of euros given to each refugee willing to go home would be worth it in the long run since otherwise much more would have to be spent on their accommodation in Germany. Under the current system, voluntary return payments average around €1,000 ($1,163).

Read more

“Support payments in the four-figure range or sometimes even in the lower five-figure range would often still be a gain for the state when measured against the long-term costs of social benefits,” he told Focus.

Berlin is now rejecting 95% of all new asylum applications by Syrians, German media reported last month. Chancellor Friedrich Merz said in March that up to 80% of Syrians living in Germany could return home over the next three years, later attributing the claim to Syrian leader Ahmed al-Sharaa. Sharaa then denied he had made any such statements, calling the figure exaggerated.

Merz, who was recently rated Europe’s most unpopular leader, is facing growing pressure from the right. The AfD emerged as Germany’s most popular party, surpassing the chancellor’s Christian Democratic Union in terms of public support, according to a poll last month. The right-wing party came out on top despite a boycott by all mainstream parties and accusations of “extremism” by its critics.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was furious after a tense call with US President Donald Trump over a new proposal to end the war with Iran, Axios reported on Wednesday, citing three sources familiar with the matter.

One US source briefed on the conversation said Netanyahu’s “hair was on fire” after the call, which took place after Trump delayed a planned “very major attack” on Iran, saying Gulf leaders had asked Washington to give diplomacy more time.

The US president has since said that the US and Iran were “right on the borderline” between a deal and renewed war.

Read more

“Either have a deal or we’re going to do some things that are a little bit nasty,” Trump told reporters on Wednesday, adding that the war could resume “very quickly” unless Washington receives “100% good answers.”

Netanyahu is “highly skeptical” of the negotiations and wants to resume the war in order to further degrade Iran’s military capabilities and weaken the country by destroying critical infrastructure, Axios reported.

Trump, however, claimed that Netanyahu “will do whatever I want him to do” on Iran, while insisting he has a good relationship with the Israeli leader.

Read more

The latest diplomatic push reportedly centers on a “letter of intent” that would be signed by the US and Iran to formally end the war and launch a 30-day negotiation period over Iran’s nuclear program and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran has confirmed that it is reviewing an updated proposal. However, Iran’s Foreign Ministry insisted negotiations were continuing on the basis of the 14-point plan previously dismissed by Washington.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said this week that “dialogue does not mean surrender,” adding that Tehran would not retreat from “the legal rights of the people and the country.” Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said talks could succeed only if the US ends its “piracy” against Iranian ships and agrees to release frozen funds, while Israel must end its war in Lebanon.

Israeli forces intercepted the Global Sumud Flotilla in international waters as it approached Gaza on May 18, preventing the vessels from reaching the enclave and detaining more than 400 activists from around 40 countries.

The mission had set out from Türkiye to challenge Israel’s naval blockade and draw attention to Gaza’s humanitarian crisis. Those detained included citizens of Italy, the UK, Canada, Türkiye, Greece, France, Spain, Germany, the Netherlands, South Korea, Ireland, and New Zealand.

The controversy escalated after Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir released videos showing detained activists zip-tied and kneeling with their foreheads to the ground while he walked among them, mocked them, and described them as supporters of terrorism.

The US has no obligation to give Israel anything and should cut off all aid to the Jewish state, conservative American journalist Tucker Carlson has said. Washington’s association with what he described as Israel’s “many crimes” has damaged America’s global reputation, he argued.

Speaking to Israeli Channel 13 in an interview aired on Tuesday, Carlson said that he was “disgusted by the way that Israel treats Arabs, like animals or subhumans,” and argued that the Jewish state has “lost its morality.”

“I think we should stop all aid to Israel, all special deals for Israel. Tomorrow,” he said. The US also has no obligation “to lend its moral authority” to Israel, he added. Due to the US-Israeli war on Iran, Washington’s relationship with West Jerusalem, while well-intentioned, “is hurting the US very badly,” Carlson said.

Tucker Carlson on Israeli Channel 13:

I don't think the United States owes Israel anything. I don't think the United States should give Israel anything.

I think we should stop all aid to Israel, all special deals for Israel tomorrow. pic.twitter.com/npc1ZGKetY

— Clash Report (@clashreport) May 20, 2026

“We can’t afford it, and our standing in the world has declined, and we’re implicated in some of the many crimes Israel has committed,” he said.

Read more

Carlson added that he blamed President Donald Trump for “folding under pressure from [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu” and pulling the US into a war with Iran “that is bad for the United States.”

Carlson previously described the president’s true religion as “Israelism,” after Trump released a series of controversial religion-themed social media posts and feuded with Pope Leo XIV over the war on Iran.

Despite being a staunch Trump supporter during his re-election campaign, the prominent conservative commentator has increasingly criticized the president on foreign policy. He has joined a growing list of disillusioned MAGA supporters such as ex-congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, commentator Candace Owens, and InfoWars host Alex Jones.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has wrapped up a two-day state visit to Beijing, during which he and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, hailed “unprecedented” bilateral ties, describing the relationship as a stabilizing force amid growing global turbulence.

The two leaders held nearly three hours of talks in the Great Hall of the People on Wednesday, covering the full spectrum of cooperation – from trade and energy to international security.

Both Putin and Xi emphasized that the strategic partnership is not directed against any third country, but remains “self-sufficient” and serves as an example of how states should build ties in the modern world.

READ MORE: Putin-Xi summit delivers 40 deals and sweeping joint declarations: As it happened

Economic ties were a major focus of the talks, with Putin saying bilateral trade exceeded $240 billion last year. He described energy as the “locomotive” of Russia-China cooperation and said that most trade transactions are now conducted in rubles and yuan. The two sides have also reached an understanding on the key parameters of the planned Power of Siberia 2 gas pipeline, according to the Kremlin.

The summit concluded with the signing of more than 40 intergovernmental and corporate agreements covering energy, transport, industrial cooperation, nuclear technology, education, science, artificial intelligence, and media. Moscow and Beijing also announced joint Years of Education for 2026-2027 and agreed to extend their visa-free travel regime until the end of 2027.

Among the key documents adopted were a joint declaration on deepening the comprehensive strategic partnership and a separate statement backing a multipolar world order based on equality, mutual respect, and international law.

Putin and Xi also addressed major international issues, saying that the root causes of the Ukraine conflict should be resolved in line with the UN Charter. They also said the US-Israeli strikes on Iran violate international law and undermine stability in the Middle East.

Moscow and Beijing pledged to oppose hegemony, unilateral pressure, and what they described as the “law of the jungle” in global affairs, arguing that no country or group of countries should dominate international affairs.

Putin confirmed plans to attend the APEC summit in Shenzhen later this year and invited Xi to visit Russia in 2027.

RT captured some of the most memorable moments from the visit, from the ceremonial welcome in Beijing, featuring an honor guard, military orchestra, and children waving Russian and Chinese flags, to Putin’s meeting with Chinese engineer Peng Pai, whom the Russian president first met during his 2000 visit to China, when Peng was a child.

RT’s crew carried out its special coverage of President Putin’s high-profile visit from a fitting setting – Beijing’s Aman Summer Palace. It sits just beyond the East Gate of the Summer Palace, separated from the imperial gardens by a single wall. Originally used to host guests awaiting an audience with Empress Dowager Cixi, the venue still carries the atmosphere of the late Qing era while naturally coexisting with contemporary China.

The indictment of former Cuban President Raul Castro by the US Justice Department marks the latest escalation in Washington’s pressure campaign against Havana. Is President Donald Trump trying to repeat the Maduro playbook?

What was Raul Castro charged with?

Unsealed on Wednesday, the indictment accuses Castro of ordering the shooting down of two American planes off the coast of Cuba in 1996. Castro and five of his officials are charged with conspiracy to kill US nationals, destruction of aircraft, and four counts of murder, one for each of the Cuban-Americans killed in the shootdown.

Castro, who was Cuba’s defense minister at the time of the incident, “participated in a conspiracy that ended with Cuban military aircraft firing missiles at those civilian planes and killing four Americans,” acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche said at a press conference in Miami on Wednesday.

What happened in 1996?

On February 24, 1996, Cuban fighter jets shot down two light aircraft which Havana said were violating its airspace. The planes – two Cessna 337 Skymasters – were operated by ‘Brothers to the Rescue’, a group of anti-communist Cubans and Americans led by CIA operative Jose Basulto. The group’s official purpose was to help dissidents to leave Cuba, and to “support the efforts of the Cuban people to free themselves from dictatorship through the use of active non-violence.”

However, one of the organization’s former pilots, Juan Pablo Roque, defected to Cuba two days before the planes were shot down and claimed that Brothers to the Rescue was involved in smuggling weapons on to the island to be used by anti-government guerillas.

In a statement on Tuesday, Cuba’s embassy in the US claimed that the organization’s aircraft committed “more than 25 serious, deliberate and systematic violations” of Cuban airspace between 1994 and 1996. With the US refusing to heed Havana’s written warnings, Cuba had “no choice but the direct defense of its borders,” the embassy added.

Ever since the incident, Basulto has pressed the US government to file criminal charges against Castro.

Will Castro ever see a US courtroom?

There is no indication that Castro, who is now 96 years old, will ever appear in an American court. Cuba has limited diplomatic relations with the US, let alone an extradition treaty, and the Cuban government is highly unlikely to hand over Castro, a former president and revolutionary hero to the US, where he would face the death penalty if found guilty.

Asked about the likelihood of Castro facing trial in the US, Blanche told reporters that “we expect that he will show up here by his will, or by another way.”

How has Cuba responded?

The indictment “only reveals the arrogance and frustration that the representatives of the empire feel toward the unyielding resolve of the Cuban Revolution,” Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel said in a statement on X. “This is a political maneuver, devoid of any legal foundation, aimed solely at padding the fabricated dossier they use to justify the folly of a military aggression against Cuba.”

.@DiazCanelB

The purported accusation against Army General Raúl Castro Ruz, just announced by the U.S. government, only reveals the arrogance and frustration that the representatives of the empire feel toward the unyielding resolve of the Cuban Revolution and the unity and… https://t.co/jWbV1zDauk

— Cuban Embassy in US (@EmbaCubaUS) May 20, 2026

Is the US planning regime change in Cuba?

Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have made no secret of their desire to overthrow Cuba’s communist government. After indicting and abducting Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January, Trump warned that Cuba was “ready to fall” next. In an interview with NBC News the day after the Maduro operation, Rubio stated “If I lived in Havana and I was in the government, I’d be concerned.”

Read more

The US then imposed an energy blockade on Cuba, while Trump made repeated threats that Cuba would be “next.” In a statement earlier on Wednesday, the US president said that “America will not tolerate a rogue state harboring hostile foreign military, intelligence and terror operations just ninety miles from the American homeland.”

Three days earlier, US spies told Axios that they believe Cuba has acquired more than 300 military drones in preparation for an attack on the US military base at Guantanamo Bay and targets as far afield as Key West in Florida. Havana ridiculed the claims, accusing the US of fabricating a “fraudulent case” for military intervention.

While it is unclear whether Trump intends to order such intervention, the Pentagon announced on Wednesday that the USS Nimitz carrier strike group had entered the Caribbean. With more than 60 combat aircraft on board, the Nimitz is ideally placed to and equipped to launch military strikes, should they be ordered. Asked by reporters whether he planned to follow the indictment with military action, Trump replied “I don’t want to say that.”

“The potential for an invasion is much higher than it was 24 hours ago,” Daniel Shaw, a professor of Latin American Studies at City University of New York, told RT. “They’re searching for some kind of legal and media justification to go in there, to take out some of these top leaders, and hoping then that the Cuban people will come into the streets so they can justify further penetration.”

Doesn’t this sound familiar?

The Trump administration followed a similar pattern before kidnapping Maduro in a special forces raid on his Caracas residence in January. After threatening to depose Maduro “the easy way or the hard way,” Trump blockaded Venezuelan waters, deployed the USS Gerald R. Ford to the region, and unsealed an indictment against the Venezuelan president moments before the raid. 

While the Justice Department had charged Maduro with drug trafficking in 2020, the superseding indictment unsealed on the day of the raid added his wife and son, and ‘Tren de Aragua’ cartel boss Nino Guerrero to the list of those charged.

Read more

The complete standdown by the Venezuelan military during Maduro’s kidnapping has led many to believe that the US colluded with insiders in Caracas to arrange a bloodless raid and smooth transfer of power to Vice President Delcy Rodriguez. Despite a trip by CIA Director John Ratcliffe to Havana last week, in which Ratcliffe reportedly promised “to seriously engage on economic and security issues, but only if Cuba makes fundamental changes,” there is no indication that the Cuban government is willing to hand over Castro.

In a social media post on Monday, Diaz-Canel warned that any military action against his country would result in “a bloodbath with incalculable consequences” for the US.

What does the US want from Cuba?

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. In short, Washington is seeking a complete dismantling of Cuba’s communist system and of its foreign partnerships.

In a Spanish-language video address on Wednesday, Rubio offered Cuba $100 million in aid, and, despite the US blockading the island, blamed Cuba’s government for shortages of electricity, food and fuel. Rubio said that Washington will not allow the Cuban government to distribute the aid, and promised to help Cubans “build a better future,” presumably after the overthrow of the government.

🇺🇸🇨🇺 pic.twitter.com/nwEePVJ1lX

— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) May 20, 2026

Cuba’s embassy in Washington accused Rubio of lying “repeatedly and unscrupulously,” while subjecting the country to “cruel and ruthless aggression” via the ongoing blockade.

Shaw, who just returned from a month in Cuba, told RT that he witnessed “hunger, despair, and malnutrition” on the island as a result of the blockade, which he compared to “the tightening of the colonial noose around the neck of the Cuban people.”

Russia is spearheading an international effort to save 80 descendants of the so-called “cocaine hippos” once owned by Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar, Global Union of Zoological Institutions (GUZI) head Svetlana Akulova has said.

Colombian authorities plan to euthanize the animals, which they see as a growing invasive threat.

Akulova, who is also the director of the Moscow Zoo, described the effort as an “unprecedented international campaign” to save the animals.

Escobar imported four hippos from Africa for his private zoo in the 1980s. After he was killed in 1993, the animals were left behind on his abandoned estate and eventually escaped into the surrounding countryside, where they multiplied unchecked.

The herd has swelled to nearly 200 animals and could explode past 1,000 within a decade, according to local authorities. They say the hippos are tearing up riverbanks, disrupting local ecosystems, and increasingly coming into conflict with nearby communities and fishermen.

Environment Minister Irene Velez has defended the planned cull as necessary to protect Colombia’s ecosystems.

Authorities have long argued that relocating the animals was unfeasible, while animal rights activists have fiercely opposed the euthanasia plan. Senator Andrea Padilla called the move “cruel,” writing on X that “massacres will never be acceptable.”

Read more

GUZI said it had appealed to Colombian authorities to halt the euthanasia plan and instead transfer the animals to zoos and sanctuaries accredited by the association.

India’s Vantara, one of the world’s largest animal rescue and rehabilitation centers, has joined the Russian-led effort and offered to relocate the hippos to a specially designed sanctuary.

”These 80 hippos did not choose where to be born, nor did they create the circumstances they now face,” Anant Ambani, Vantara founder said in a statement. “They are living, sentient beings, and if we have the capacity to save them through a safe and humane solution, we have the responsibility to try,” he added.

GUZI said it was also working on a “fair distribution” of the animals among accredited institutions to tackle genetic problems caused by the herd’s limited gene pool.

The UK government has denied easing sanctions on Russia after coming under fire for issuing a temporary license allowing imports of Russian-origin diesel and jet fuel. London said the move was necessary to stabilize energy markets disrupted by the Middle East conflict.

The license, which takes effect on Wednesday, effectively reverses a pledge by Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government to ban imports of fuel made from Russian crude abroad, leaving a route for sanctioned oil to enter the British market through refiners in countries such as India and Türkiye. Western nations have imposed sanctions and price-cap measures on Russian oil exports since the 2022 escalation of the Ukraine conflict in an effort to reduce Moscow’s revenues.

The decision follows a similar move by the US, which on Monday extended a sanctions waiver allowing limited purchases of Russian seaborne oil to help vulnerable countries cope with supply disruptions after the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz during the US-Israeli war on Iran.

Read more

The license has sparked a wave of criticism from the Conservative Party. Former Conservative cabinet minister David Lidington rushed to brand the government decision to weaken sanctions on Russian oil “an appalling betrayal of Ukraine.” He was echoed by Tory leader Kemi Badenoch who posted on X that “after 18 months of ‘standing up to Putin’, the Labour government quietly eased the restrictions.”

Starmer’s cabinet then rushed to dismiss the accusations, framing them as a misunderstanding stemming from poor communication. “We’ve handled this clumsily,” a Business and Trade Department official, Chris Bryant, told the Commons, apologizing for “giving the wrong impression.”

Read more

The prime minister himself, who is facing a crisis at home and calls to resign, claimed the licenses were “short-term” and insisted that the government was in fact tightening sanctions by simultaneously introducing “a strong new package” of restrictions targeting Russian LNG and refined oil products.

“These are new sanctions being phased in. This is not a question of lifting existing sanctions in any way whatsoever,” he told Parliament. According to the British media, imports of Russian-origin fuels are allowed for an indefinite period.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksander Novak said the moves by Britain and the US showed that the Western sanctions policy was beginning to crack under pressure from the Middle East energy crisis.

“Without Russian oil and oil products, global markets cannot cope today,” Novak told Vesti on Wednesday.

Moscow has repeatedly signaled that it is ready to plug any oil supply gaps triggered by the Middle East conflict. Some Asian countries have already moved to secure Russian crude since Washington first eased the restrictions.

A former AI engineer at Google DeepMind has accused the US tech giant of unfairly dismissing him over protests against the company’s deals with Israel, The Guardian reported on Wednesday. The man described the decision to fire him as discriminatory and filed a claim with a British employment tribunal.

Google’s ties with the Israeli government, including a $1.2 billion AI and cloud computing contract signed jointly with Amazon, have repeatedly sparked employee protests. In 2024 alone, the company fired dozens of dissenting staff members.

According to the engineer, he was called into a meeting with a manager that led to his dismissal after distributing flyers around DeepMind’s London office reading: “Google provides military AI to forces committing genocide” and “Is your paycheck worth this?” He also reportedly sent emails to his colleagues and called on them to unionize.

Read more

The former employee, who is of Palestinian origin, alleged in his lawsuit that Google discriminated against his belief that no one should be complicit in war crimes and claimed he was acting as a whistleblower, according to The Guardian. The US tech giant insisted that the employee’s version of events “does not accurately reflect the facts” and said that he had resigned.

In October, several media outlets reported that the 2021 agreement Google and Amazon signed with Israel barred the companies from restricting West Jerusalem’s access to their services even in cases it violated their terms of use. The deal also reportedly included clauses explicitly preventing the two tech giants from breaking ties with Israel under pressure from employees, shareholders and activists.

Israel’s contracts with US tech companies have come under increased scrutiny amid accusations that its military campaign in Gaza following the 2023 Hamas attack amounts to genocide. In 2024, Gaby Portnoy, head of Israel’s National Cyber Directorate, credited the Google-Amazon Nimbus Project with enabling “phenomenal things” in combat that he said “constitute a significant part of victory.”

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has summoned Israel’s ambassador in Rome after condemning the treatment of pro-Palestinian activists detained during Israel’s interception of a Gaza-bound aid flotilla.

In a sharply worded statement on Wednesday, Meloni described footage showing Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir taunting the detainees as “unacceptable.”

“It is inadmissible that these demonstrators, including many Italian citizens, are subjected to this treatment that violates human dignity,” she wrote.

While Meloni was among Israel’s strongest EU supporters after the October 2023 Hamas attacks, she has become increasingly critical of its actions in Gaza, describing the humanitarian situation as “unacceptable” and warning that Israel has gone beyond “the principle of proportionality.”

The Israeli ambassador will be asked to provide “formal clarifications,” while Rome demands the immediate release of Italian citizens arrested by Israel, according to the statement. Meloni also demanded an apology over the treatment of the demonstrators and “for the total contempt shown toward the explicit requests of the Italian Government.”

The diplomatic row erupted after Israeli forces intercepted a convoy of vessels that departed from Türkiye carrying humanitarian aid for Gaza. Around 430 activists from more than 40 countries were detained, some for days.

Ben-Gvir posted a video on X on Wednesday showing detainees kneeling with their hands bound. In the footage, the far-right minister appears to mock the activists while urging Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to allow them to remain imprisoned “for a long, long time.”

Netanyahu later sought to distance himself from the incident, saying Ben-Gvir’s conduct toward the activists “is not consistent with the values and norms of the State of Israel.” Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said Ben Gvir “caused harm” to Israel with his “disgraceful display.”

Israeli officials defended the interception, describing the flotilla as a “PR stunt at the service of Hamas.”

READ MORE: Israeli MPs cheer death penalty for Palestinians accused of terrorism (VIDEO)

The incident comes amid reports of rising settler violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. Human rights groups have warned of growing lawlessness and impunity, accusing the Israeli authorities of enabling attacks by failing to prosecute perpetrators.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump could meet on the sidelines of the APEC summit in China in November, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov has said, while stressing that no talks are currently planned. 

Putin, who has just concluded his official two-day visit to China, told Chinese President Xi Jinping that he plans to attend the APEC summit in Shenzhen on November 18-19. Trump, who also traveled to China last week, has reportedly signaled that he intends to take part as well. 

“Our president has confirmed that he will come to the APEC summit,” Ushakov told reporters on Wednesday. “I think that, in any case, if both leaders are in China, they will probably cross paths and hold some kind of meeting,” he said. 

The Russian presidential aide added that “so far this has not yet been agreed, but given that such a prospect exists, it is unlikely that anyone would refuse it.”  

A potential meeting in China would follow the August 2025 summit between Putin and Trump in Alaska – the first and only face-to-face meeting between Russian and US leaders since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. The meeting ended without a ceasefire deal but was described by both sides as productive.   

Since returning to the White House, Trump has alternated between criticizing Putin over the lack of progress toward a Ukraine peace deal and praising their personal relationship. The two leaders have held several phone calls focused on the Ukraine conflict and other major international issues, including the US-Israeli war with Iran. 

READ MORE: Trump hints at Russia trip this year (VIDEO)

Trump hinted at a possible trip to Russia this year, telling journalists last week that he would “do whatever is necessary” to help facilitate a settlement to the Ukraine conflict, as Washington-backed direct talks between Moscow and Kiev have stalled. The Kremlin has said Putin is ready to host Trump. 

Russia has maintained that any peaceful settlement is predicated on Kiev withdrawing from the remaining areas of Donbass that are still under its control.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has hosted Russian President Vladimir Putin for a two-day official visit in Beijing.

Putin’s visit comes days after Xi’s summit with US President Donald Trump and coincides with the 25th anniversary of the Russia-China Treaty of Good-Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation, a landmark agreement that laid the foundation for the countries’ strategic partnership.

Putin arrived in Beijing on Tuesday night accompanied by a high-level delegation that includes senior Kremlin officials, ministers, and the heads of major Russian companies and financial institutions, including Kremlin investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev, Central Bank Governor Elvira Nabiullina, and Russian space chief Dmitry Bakanov. 

Wednesday began with one-on-one and expanded-format talks between Putin and Xi. Speaking to reporters, Xi described the discussions as “deep, friendly, and productive,” saying they covered a broad international agenda. Putin called Russia-China ties a “model of interstate relations in the modern world,” arguing the partnership is built on equal rights, mutual support, and “genuine friendliness.”

Read more

Around 40 cooperation documents have been signed as a result of the talks, Putin said at a press conference following the negotiations. These included a major declaration on strategic cooperation and a declaration on the emergence of a multipolar world.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also confirmed Russia would extend its visa-free regime with China, saying the “practice has proved itself positively.” Xi meanwhile noted that despite the “difficult international situation,” bilateral trade had exceeded $200 billion, with turnover between January and April alone rising 20%, which he described as “not an easy feat.”

Follow our live coverage below for continuous updates.

Former Cuban President Raul Castro has been indicted by the US Justice Department, officials told Reuters on Wednesday. The indictment came months after US President Donald Trump warned that Cuba would be “next” after Venezuela was targeted for regime change.

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

Chinese President Xi Jinping has hosted Russian President Vladimir Putin for a two-day official visit in Beijing.

Putin’s visit comes days after Xi’s summit with US President Donald Trump and coincides with the 25th anniversary of the Russia-China Treaty of Good-Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation, a landmark agreement that laid the foundation for the countries’ strategic partnership.

Putin arrived in Beijing on Tuesday night accompanied by a high-level delegation that includes senior Kremlin officials, ministers, and the heads of major Russian companies and financial institutions, including Kremlin investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev, Central Bank Governor Elvira Nabiullina, and Russian space chief Dmitry Bakanov. 

Wednesday began with one-on-one and expanded-format talks between Putin and Xi. Speaking to reporters, Xi described the discussions as “deep, friendly, and productive,” saying they covered a broad international agenda. Putin called Russia-China ties a “model of interstate relations in the modern world,” arguing the partnership is built on equal rights, mutual support, and “genuine friendliness.”

Read more

According to the Kremlin, around 40 agreements are expected to be signed during Putin’s visit. Putin and Xi have already signed a joint statement extending the Russia-China Treaty of Good-Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation, as well as a declaration on building a multipolar world, stating that attempts by “some states” to dominate global affairs, impose their interests, and restrict other countries’ sovereign development have “failed.” 

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also confirmed Russia would extend its visa-free regime with China, saying the “practice has proved itself positively.” Xi meanwhile noted that despite the “difficult international situation,” bilateral trade had exceeded $200 billion, with turnover between January and April alone rising 20%, which he described as “not an easy feat.”

Follow our live coverage below for continuous updates.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has hosted Russian President Vladimir Putin for a two-day official visit in Beijing.

Putin’s visit comes days after Xi’s summit with US President Donald Trump and coincides with the 25th anniversary of the Russia-China Treaty of Good-Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation, a landmark agreement that laid the foundation for the countries’ strategic partnership.

Putin arrived in Beijing on Tuesday night accompanied by a high-level delegation that includes senior Kremlin officials, ministers, and the heads of major Russian companies and financial institutions, including Kremlin investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev, Central Bank Governor Elvira Nabiullina, and Russian space chief Dmitry Bakanov. 

Wednesday began with one-on-one and expanded-format talks between Putin and Xi. Speaking to reporters, Xi described the discussions as “deep, friendly, and productive,” saying they covered a broad international agenda. Putin called Russia-China ties a “model of interstate relations in the modern world,” arguing the partnership is built on equal rights, mutual support, and “genuine friendliness.”

Read more

According to the Kremlin, around 40 agreements are expected to be signed during Putin’s visit. Putin and Xi have already signed a joint statement extending the Russia-China Treaty of Good-Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation, as well as a declaration on building a multipolar world, stating that attempts by “some states” to dominate global affairs, impose their interests, and restrict other countries’ sovereign development have “failed.” 

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also confirmed Russia would extend its visa-free regime with China, saying the “practice has proved itself positively.” Xi meanwhile noted that despite the “difficult international situation,” bilateral trade had exceeded $200 billion, with turnover between January and April alone rising 20%, which he described as “not an easy feat.”

Follow our live coverage below for continuous updates.

In mid-May 2026, the dispute between Greece and Türkiye again moved from diplomacy into the more dangerous world of maps, laws, and military warnings.

Turkish officials confirmed that work is continuing on a new law on maritime jurisdiction areas, while Greek officials immediately treated the initiative as an attempt to give legal form to Ankara’s Blue Homeland doctrine. The message from Athens was that a unilateral Turkish move concerning maritime zones in the Aegean would be rejected as legally meaningless and politically provocative. Türkiye, meanwhile, says it is not attacking anyone but protecting its maritime rights and organizing state policy in the surrounding seas.

The Blue Homeland doctrine, Mavi Vatan in Turkish, is built around a simple but emotionally powerful idea. Türkiye must not think of its sovereignty only through land borders, because the seas around it are also part of its security, economic, and regional future. The Aegean, the Black, and the Eastern Mediterranean seas are filled with trade, naval movement, undersea infrastructure, and geopolitical competition. If Ankara does not defend its interests there, supporters of this doctrine argue, other actors will draw the maps for it.

Talk moves into law

The Blue Homeland concept emerged from Turkish naval and strategic circles, and its intellectual architects are usually identified as retired admiral Cem Gürdeniz and retired rear admiral Cihat Yaycı. Gürdeniz is widely associated with the birth and popularization of the phrase Mavi Vatan in the mid 2000s, while Yaycı helped transform the idea into a more concrete geopolitical and legal doctrine.

Gürdeniz gave the concept its broader strategic language, turning the sea into a central element of Turkish geopolitical imagination. Yaycı, in turn, worked to give this imagination a more technical and cartographic form. He linked maritime zones, continental shelves, island disputes, and the Eastern Mediterranean into a single strategic picture. In a sense, Blue Homeland is a response to a deep Turkish anxiety that the country was being pushed away from the seas that surround it.

This origin also explains why the doctrine cannot be reduced to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s personal foreign policy. Blue Homeland came from a tradition that saw Türkiye’s future as dependent on becoming a serious maritime power, and was later absorbed by politics and became part of a broader national narrative. That is one of the reasons it has survived different tactical phases in Turkish politics. It speaks not only to Islamists, nationalists or naval officers, but to a wider feeling inside Türkiye that the country has been constrained by a regional order designed by others.

Read more

For Greece, however, this doctrine sounds much less defensive. Athens sees Blue Homeland as an attempt to question the legal order of the Aegean, reduce the maritime rights of Greek islands and reopen issues that Greece considers settled by international treaties. The fear is not only that Ankara wants more influence at sea, but that Türkiye is gradually normalizing the idea that some parts of the Aegean are legally unclear and therefore open to pressure.

This is where the controversy over 152 small islands, islets, and reefs becomes so sensitive. In Turkish nationalist and strategic discourse, these formations are often described as territories whose status was not clearly defined by international agreements. Greece rejects this argument and insists that the sovereignty of its islands is not up for discussion.

The memory of the 1996 Imia/Kardak crisis still hangs over both countries. That confrontation began around small uninhabited islets, but it nearly pushed Greece and Türkiye into open conflict. In the Aegean, escalation can begin with a patrol boat, a helicopter, a fishing vessel, a television broadcast or a nationalist post on social media. When geography is tight and political nerves are exposed, escalation can move faster than diplomacy.

The current situation is especially fragile because the dispute is moving from rhetoric into legislation. A speech can be corrected, and a military exercise can end, but a law has a different political weight. If Ankara codifies Blue Homeland, it will not automatically change international law, yet it may change Turkish politics. It would make future compromises harder and allow nationalist forces to accuse any government of giving up rights that had already been written into law.

When no one is looking

The issue’s flashpoint potential is exacerbated by its timing. The Aegean is no longer living inside a stable international environment where major powers can freeze local conflicts and force allies back into predictable channels. The global order is going through a harsh transformation, where the war around Iran has turned the wider Middle East into a zone of constant military and economic nervousness. That conflict and the resulting shipping crisis has shown that maritime space has again become one of the main arteries of war.

This wider crisis changes how Ankara and Athens view the same sea. When the region is calm, Greece and Türkiye can keep their disputes inside the diplomatic space and NATO channels. But when the Strait of Hormuz demonstrates how quickly maritime routes can become battlefields, every coastal state starts thinking in terms of strategic depth. Türkiye looks at this chaos and sees one more argument for Blue Homeland. Greece looks at it and sees all the more reason not to allow grey zones to appear in the Aegean.