TODAY

US President Donald Trump is promoting his nation’s economic record, insisting prices are falling and investment is surging – but the data, and rising cost-of-living pressures, tell a different story. Jillian Wolf checks the facts.

Subscribe to our channel: http://bit.ly/AJSubscribe
Follow us on X : https://twitter.com/AJEnglish
Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera
Check our website: http://www.aljazeera.com/
Check out our Instagram page: https://www.instagram.com/aljazeeraenglish/
Download AJE Mobile App: https://aje.io/AJEMobile

#aljazeera
#aljazeeraenglish
#aljazeeranewslive

The U.S. Navy has recovered an MH-60R Seahawk helicopter and an F/A-18F Super Hornet from the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz that crashed within half an hour of each other in the South China Sea on Oct. 26. They were located and retrieved at a depth of about 400 feet on Dec. 5. You can read about the effort to find the jet and helicopter in our initial story here.

“Both aircraft were recovered intact,” a Navy official told TWZ on Tuesday morning.

“All recovered aircraft components are being transported to a designated U.S. military installation in the Indo-Pacific region for detailed analysis,” the Navy’s 7th Fleet also said in a press release. Officials have not released details about exactly where in the South China Sea the aircraft went down and were subsequently retrieved.

The retrieval effort was conducted by Commander, Task Force 73 (CTF 73); Task Force 75; the Naval Sea Systems Command’s Supervisor of Salvage and Diving (SUPSALV); and CTG 73.6’s Mobile Diving and Salvage Unit, according to the Navy’s release. Task Force 73 is responsible for logistics activities within the 7th Fleet’s area of responsibility, while Task Force 75 oversees diving and salvage units and other expeditionary capabilities.

In addition, the Navy says it employed a “contracted Vessel of Opportunity, equipped with a government-owned, contractor-operated unmanned system, to lift and recover the aircraft.” The 7th Fleet release did not name that ship, and we have reached out for additional details. Contracted vessels have assisted in the recovery of U.S. military aircraft in the past, including in the South China Sea.

On Nov. 20, the Navy had told TWZ that the USNS Salvor (T-ARS 52), a Safeguard class salvage ship operated by Military Sealift Command, was “on-scene conducting operations in support of the recovery efforts.” It is unclear at the moment what role that ship might ultimately have played in retrieving the lost aircraft. It was seen docked in Singapore on Dec. 7, according to the MarineTraffic ship tracking website.

“This recovery was a true Navy team effort across CTF 73, SUPSALV, Task Force 75, HSM 73 [Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 73], VFA 22 [Strike Fighter Squadron 22], and our Mobile Diving and Salvage Unit,” Navy Lt. Cmdr. Christopher Andersen, the CTF 73 officer who led the salvage mission, said in a statement. “Everyone involved brought critical expertise ensuring we could safely and successfully bring these aircraft back under U.S. custody. This operation highlights the importance of naval integration, readiness, and the unmatched capability of our salvage and diving teams.”

As we have previously noted, the tense and contested nature of the South China Sea and its proximity to China would have put additional emphasis on ensuring the aircraft, or components from them, were not recovered by the Chinese. Like the United States, China has foreign materiel exploitation, or FME, programs aimed at recovering weaponry for intelligence analysis and developmental purposes. Both crashed Navy aircraft have a number of sensitive components that would be of particular interest to a major global competitor like China. You can read more about that here.

The aircraft from Nimitz that went down in the South China Sea were recovered a day after the Navy released results of investigations into the separate losses of three F/A-18s from the aircraft carrier USS Truman. Those incidents included one in which a Super Hornet was shot down by the Ticonderoga class guided missile cruiser USS Gettysburg. Unlike the case of the Nimitz aircraft, those jets were never recovered, a Navy official previously confirmed to us.

The cause of the crashes of the Nimitz aircraft in October remains unknown. President Donald Trump previously suggested that the mishaps could have been caused by “bad fuel,” and you can read more about potential fuel issues in our initial coverage here. Navy officials have also previously confirmed to us that they believe there are no “nefarious” circumstances behind the crashes.

With the F/A-18F and MH-60R now recovered, the investigations into their crashes are continuing, the Navy said on Tuesday.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

The seventh Moscow Interior and Design Week has emerged as a major draw for entrepreneurs from the Middle East, underscoring shifting international interest in Russia’s design and creative industries.

Organizers and exhibitors said that while previous editions of the event were dominated by visitors from China and European countries, this year saw a notable increase in business delegations from the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. Attendees from the region praised the exhibition’s organization and the creative approach to showcasing design concepts.

“We had long heard that Moscow is becoming a global center for interior design, but the fact that this event is now in its seventh year convinced us to come as part of a large business mission,” said Mona Negm, chief executive officer of Masahat Interior & Architectural Design. Demand from clients for distinctive, one-of-a-kind interiors is growing, she said, adding that Moscow-based manufacturers demonstrated an ability to compete with leading international studios. Negm described the exhibition as “the most beautiful in the world.”

In addition to business visitors, the event also attracted a growing number of tourists from the Middle East, according to participants. Visitors frequently noted the distinctive aesthetic approach of Moscow designers, particularly in decorative elements.

Exhibitors said guests from the UAE showed strong interest in living room furniture, ceramics and floor lamps—items they view as versatile for both residential and office interiors. As a result, unique design pieces are finding buyers not only among professional procurement specialists but also individual tourists.

“In previous years, foreign visitors to our stand were mostly tourists from China and Western Europe,” said Semen Ivanov, founder of Burg&Glass. “This time, we were surprised by the strong interest from visitors from the Middle East. Many said they came to see Moscow ahead of the New Year holidays and decided to visit the city’s main furniture and décor exhibition as a priority.” Several visitors, he added, described the event as the most beautiful design week they had attended.

The seventh Moscow Interior and Design Week is being held from Dec. 11 to Dec. 14 in the Russian capital. Alongside the main exhibition, the event features an extensive business program with expert-led sessions. Speakers include Reem Bin Karam, chief executive officer of the UAE’s Irthi Contemporary Crafts Council, who is scheduled to speak on Dec. 13 about how professional designers combine styles, forms, textures and patterns to create cohesive interiors.

Winter came to Gaza last month with a violent storm. I woke up at night to a disaster. Our tent was flooded with water which had transformed our “floor” into a shallow pool. The mattresses and pillows were completely soaked, cooking pots were submerged, the clothes were drenched, and even our bags— which function as our “closets”—were filled with water. Nothing inside remained dry.

As I tried to understand what was happening, I suddenly heard children crying at the entrance of our tent. I opened it quickly and found three children from the neighbouring tents, their lips blue from the cold, with their mother trembling behind them saying, “We are completely soaked… the rain leaked inside and the water reached everywhere.”

The same tragic scene was repeated all around us: women, children, and elderly people sitting in the street under the rain, their bedding drenched and their belongings scattered, while confusion and cries filled the air.

All 1.4 million displaced Palestinians who lack proper shelter suffered that day—people with no protection against the weather or its sudden storms.

For us, it took two full days for our belongings to dry because the sun barely appeared; everything stayed cold and damp. We didn’t move to another place—we stayed where we were, trying to salvage whatever we could, because there was simply nowhere else to go.

Only a week later, an even stronger winter storm arrived with severe rainfall. Tents were flooded again; little children froze in the rain again.

This week, when Storm Byron hit, we were flooded once again. Despite all our efforts to reinforce the tents, secure them tightly, and bring in stronger tarps, nothing worked. The winds were fiercer, the rain heavier, and the water pushed its way inside from every direction. The ground no longer absorbed anything. The water began rising rapidly beneath our feet, turning the entire area into a swamp.

According to the authorities, the strong winds destroyed at least 27,000 tents. These are 27,000 families who already struggled and now have nothing, no shelter, nowhere to hide from the rain and cold.

The rain also brought down damaged homes where people had been sheltering. Every time there is a storm or strong wind, we hear the sound of falling debris and concrete pillars from badly damaged buildings near us. This time, the situation was so bad that 11 people were killed by collapsed buildings.

It is clear that after everything we have endured, we – like other displaced Palestinians – cannot survive a third winter in these harsh conditions. We survived two winters in displacement, living in tents that protected neither from cold nor rain, waiting with exhausted patience for a ceasefire that would end our suffering. The ceasefire finally came, but relief did not. We remain in the same place, with bodies drained by malnutrition and illness, under tents worn out by the sun and wind.

We are a family of seven living in a tent that is four by four metres (13 feet by 13 feet). Among us are two children aged five and 10 and our grandmother, aged 80. We, the adults, can push through the cold and hardship. But how can the elderly and children bear what we live every day?

We sleep on mattresses pressed directly against the ground, with cold seeping in from below and above, with only two blankets that can’t shield us from the freezing nights. Everyone in the tent has two blankets each, barely enough to offer temporary warmth. There is no source of heating—no electricity, no heater—just tired bodies trying to share whatever warmth remains.

My grandmother cannot tolerate the cold at all. I watch her shiver through the night, her hand on her chest as if trying to hold herself together. All we can do is pile every blanket we have on top of her and watch anxiously until she is able to fall asleep.

Many people in Gaza live in conditions far worse than ours.

Most families who just want a modest tent over their heads cannot afford one. The price of tents can go as high as $1,000; the rent one has to pay to pitch a tent on a piece of land can be as much as $500. Those who cannot pay live in the street in makeshift shelters.

Salah al-Din Street, for example, is crowded with them. Most are simply blankets hung and wrapped around small spaces for minimal privacy, offering no protection from rain or cold. With any strong gust of wind, they burst open.

There are also children living directly in the streets, sleeping on the cold ground. Many have lost their mothers or fathers during the war. When you pass by, you see them—sometimes silent, sometimes crying, sometimes searching for something to eat.

Despite repeated promises of aid and reconstruction, the trickle of supplies that entered Gaza has made almost no difference on the ground. Earlier this month, the United Nations announced it had managed to distribute only 300 tents during November; 230,000 families received a single food parcel each.

We did not receive any food parcel—there are simply too many people in need, and the quantities are far too small for everyone to access. Even if we had received one, its contents wouldn’t have lasted us longer than a week or two.

Food prices continue to be high. Nutritious items like meat and eggs are either unavailable or cost too much. Most families have not eaten a proper protein meal in months.

There is no mass campaign to remove rubble or level the ground so people can pitch their tents due to an equipment shortage. No steps have been taken to provide permanent housing for families.

All of this means we now face a terrifying possibility: that life in a tent—one that can be flooded or ripped apart by the wind at any moment—may become our long-term reality. This is an unbearable thought.

During the bombardment, we lived with the constant fear of death, and perhaps the intensity of the war overshadowed everything else—the cold, the rain, the tents shaking above our heads. But now, after the mass bombing has stopped, we are facing the full ugliness of Gaza’s “new normal”.

I fear this winter will be much worse for Gaza. With no heating, no real shelter, and the weather getting worse each day, we are likely to see many deaths among the children, the elderly and the chronically ill. Already, the first deaths from hypothermia were reported – babies Rahaf Abu Jazar  and Taim al-Khawaja and nine-year-old Hadeel al-Masri. If the world is really committed to ending the genocide in Gaza, it needs to take real, urgent action and ensure that we have at least the basic conditions for survival: food, housing and medical care.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

US President Donald Trump has vowed retaliation against ISIL after an ambush near Palmyra in central Syria killed three US citizens. Trump blamed ISIL for the attack, though investigators are assessing the possibility it may have been an insider attack by a member of an allied force.

At least 11 people have been killed and more than two dozen wounded in a mass shooting at Sydney’s Bondi Beach, Australian officials said, adding that one of the suspected attackers was killed while another one was in critical condition.

New South Wales Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon said on Sunday, 29 people were injured, including two police officers, in what he declared a “terrorist incident”.

The shooting occurred at about 6:47pm (07:47 GMT) near the Bondi Pavilion during a Hanukkah celebration attended by more than 1,000 people, Lanyon said.

“I’ve also authorised special powers under Section 5 and Section 6 to ensure that if there is a third offender – and we are currently investigating that at the moment – we will make sure that we prevent any further activity. Section 6 allows us to investigate today’s incident,” he said.

In a televised news conference, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called the deadly shooting a “targeted attack on Jewish Australians on the first day of Hanukkah”.

Albanese said the “evil” that was unleashed at Bondi Beach is “beyond comprehension”.

“An attack on Jewish Australians is an attack on every Australian, and every Australian tonight will be – like me – devastated by this attack on our way of life.”

One of the world’s most famous beaches, Bondi is typically crowded with locals and tourists, especially on warm weekend evenings.

Twelve people have been killed and at least 11 others, including two police officers, injured in a shooting at Bondi Beach on Sunday.

Footage captured by an eyewitness shows a man grappling with an alleged gunman, before wrestling the weapon off him.

In a press conference, the New South Wales Police Premier Chris Minns said that one of the gunmen had been killed and another was in custody.

Follow live here.

Morning light glints off the water as children in crisp uniforms, polished sandals, and neatly packed schoolbags paddle across the same waters where fights once broke out among young boys. They are heading to Part of Solution Nursery and Primary School, Makoko, in South West Nigeria, a free, floating school that is turning the tide against crime and violence in one of Lagos’s most marginalised communities.

For five years, Segun Opeyemi made this journey every morning.

But before school days and uniforms, mornings like this did not exist for him. Segun spent his days roaming the streets of Makoko, and he slept wherever night met him—beneath market stalls, beside rickety shacks, or along the water’s edge. Hunger dictated his choices, and survival came at a cost.

“When I was on the street, I indulged in all kinds of bad activities just to put food on my table and survive,” he recalled. 

By 2018, when Taiwo Shemede, the school’s headteacher, first met him, Segun was about ten years old and already hardened by life on the streets. Taiwo took him and enrolled him at the school. “Thank God for education,” Segun said.

‘Part of the Solution’

The story of the school that changed Segun’s life began eight years earlier.

In 2010, members of the Yacht Club of Nigeria, who often visited Makoko, asked the community’s chief, Emmanuel Shemede, what the area needed most. He told them it was “a school building”. The club raised funds and built Whanyinna Nursery and Primary School, the community’s first floating school, which was handed over to the community and run by the Shemede family. 

Soon, Whanyinna became overcrowded. The school’s success drew hundreds of children, and before long, there was no space to accommodate them. Determined not to turn any child away, Sunday Shemede, son of the community chief, and his siblings, including Taiwo, decided to act.

In 2015, they started another school.

“My brothers and I began with just 50 children in our father’s house,” Sunday recalled. “We went to 50 parents and asked each to give us one child we would teach for free.”

That humble beginning marked the birth of Part of Solution Nursery and Primary School, the second free school on the Makoko waterfront, according to Sunday.

As more parents saw how their children were learning to read and write, enrolment grew beyond 400 within months, outgrowing the small family space once again.

A few years later, the Shemedes met Cameron Mofid, an American tourist, who, moved by the lack of uniforms he saw during his visit, started a GoFundMe campaign through his non-profit, Humanity Effect, to raise $5000 for the school. Within a week, over 200 people had donated, contributing more than $100,000.

The funds built an additional wooden school on stilts and provided uniforms, school boats, and other essentials. Another soon followed. Today, the Shemede family runs three free schools across Makoko’s waterside — Whanyinna, Part of Solution 1, and Part of Solution 2 — the only completely free schools in the entire community. Together, they educate more than 750 pupils and operate an orphanage that shelters 31 children, all registered with the Lagos State Ministry of Education.

Segun has lived at the orphanage since he enrolled in the school.

“It was free education with the provision of books and uniforms,” he added. He graduated from the school in 2022 and is now enrolled at nearby Ade Comprehensive Government Junior Secondary School. “The homeless 10-year-old boy of yesterday is now in JSS2 with a dream to become a lawyer,” he told HumAngle.

Welcome to Makoko

Makoko sits on the Lagos Lagoon, just beside the Third Mainland Bridge. The fishing settlement was founded more than a century ago by migrants from the Egun ethnic group of neighbouring West African countries, including the Benin Republic and Togo. It is home to an estimated 100,000 to 200,000 people, though exact figures remain uncertain because the community is considered informal and largely absent from government records. 

For generations, life revolved around the waters, with men casting nets, women smoking fish, and children learning the trade as soon as they could paddle a canoe. 

Before the rise of community schools, Makoko’s youth often grew up without structure, falling into cycles of crime, violence, and hopelessness. But the efforts of the Shemede family and other humanitarian organisations are changing that through community schools where children can learn, dream, and stay safe. 

Building peace through education

Each morning, they paddle to class in small canoes, keeping their books dry in their bags. The atmosphere at the school is lively and disciplined. Pupils recite the alphabet in unison, clap to the rhythm, and eagerly raise their hands to answer questions.

For the founders, literacy was only part of the goal. Education, they believed, was a tool that could prevent the community’s younger generation from drifting into violence.

Before the schools were built, many children like Segun wandered the narrow alleys in canoes or idled at the waterfront. Petty thefts, street quarrels, and fights were part of daily life. Parents expected their children to fish or trade, but without guidance, many drifted into mischief. Teachers say this pattern is shifting.

“For me, keeping them in school keeps them off the streets and away from trouble,” said Juliet Okundere, who has taught at the school for four years. “When we started, most pupils couldn’t read, speak, or write English. Gradually, they began to read and write. That gives them confidence and purpose.”

Twelve-year-old Abutu Lazarus said the school has helped him dream bigger. “Now I can read and write well,” he said with a smile. “I want to be a pilot.”

Across Makoko, others are noticing it too.

“Until recently, young boys fought over little things, and it created bitterness,” recalled Segun Adekunle, a 50-year-old youth leader. “But the coming of education has reduced all that. Even the old ones now go to evening school. So, there’s no time to fight like before. At my age, I am learning how to read, and it gives me joy.”

Jacob Ikeki, an older resident who never had the chance to attend school, has witnessed a transformation in his own family. “When children are not going to school, they just play around and cause trouble,” he said, recalling how he once joined street fights as a child after long fishing trips. “I’m proud to see my son reading and writing perfectly. I know he will not repeat my mistakes.”

Another parent, Mary Rofik, whose son attends the school, said education has brought discipline to her home. “Since he started schooling, he has communicated well in English. When I call him, he responds with ‘Ma’ and calls his father ‘Sir.’ Before, you would see children as young as two or three stealing from their mothers’ pots and talking back to elders. Now, my son has respect, and I know education is shaping him.”

Teachers say fewer children skip class for mischief, traders no longer have to chase them from stalls, and elders notice that quarrels have given way to learning. 

Inside the classrooms

On low benches, children lean over their books as volunteer teachers guide them through lessons in English, maths, and basic science. The space hums with energy — the scrape of chalk, the shuffle of feet, the soft rise and fall of young voices eager to learn.

Among the teachers is Samuel Shemede, who grew up fishing but decided to go to school after seeing how education transformed his siblings. He has completed his secondary school education and is now a teacher at the Part of Solution School. 

Samuel teaches a kindergarten class. “I make learning fun,” Samuel said. “We sing, we play, and through that, they learn. Class time is not just lessons; it is a moment of joy. I want them to love school as much as I’ve learned to love it.”

Keeping the vision afloat 

Part of Solution School and its sister schools remain free, ensuring even the poorest families can send their children. Sunday says this has been key to maintaining high attendance and low street crime in the area.

Still, the school is not without challenges. Classrooms are overcrowded, stipends for the ten volunteer teachers, including Juliet and Samuel, are inconsistent, and learning materials are limited. There are only a few canoes to transport pupils, leaving some to paddle long distances themselves. 

Yet the resilience of the community keeps the project afloat. “What we need the most is increased support for our teachers, technological equipment and facilities, and enough canoes for the children,” said Sunday, who still fishes part-time to sustain the project.

But beyond these daily struggles lies a deeper worry — what happens after?

After primary school, many pupils face another barrier: there are no secondary schools within Makoko. Graduates must cross to Lagos Mainland to continue their studies, where most schools charge at least ₦42,000 per term, far beyond what many families can afford.

To prevent them from dropping out, the Shemede family has created a follow-up system.

“We register our graduating pupils at schools in Sabo, on the Mainland, and pay for their textbooks and supplies,” Sunday explained. “We also check on them every three weeks and stay in touch with their teachers.”

So far, more than 200 pupils have graduated from Part of Solution School.  

Still, he fears that without broader government support, their efforts may not be enough. “If our children can’t continue beyond primary school, we risk returning to the days of idleness and violence. Everything we’ve built could be undone,” he said. 

Despite being Nigeria’s economic hub, Lagos State has a rising number of out-of-school children. While the government has invested in the establishment of schools and the enrolment of students, gaps remain, especially in underserved communities like Makoko.

Grassroots efforts like Part of Solution School have shown how education can calm unrest and open new paths for children. But to secure that progress, they need systemic support — better funding, accessible secondary schools, and consistent policy attention.

Until then, the sight of children paddling to class each morning will remain both a symbol of Makoko’s hope and a reminder of how fragile that hope still is.

This story was produced under the HumAngle Foundation’s Advancing Peace and Security through Journalism project, supported by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Boeing has made good on its promise of completing a first live-fire weapons shot from its MQ-28A Ghost Bat drone, with an AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) launched over the sprawling Woomera Range Complex (WRC) in southern Australia. The milestone event comes as the Australian government commits further to the Ghost Bat program, with an investment of around $930 million in collaborative air capabilities.

The AIM-120 shot, part of the ongoing Trial Kareela 25-4, took place on December 8, and the engagement saw the MQ-28 teamed as a loyal wingman with a Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) E-7A Wedgetail airborne early warning and control (AEW&C), with “support” provided by an F/A-18F Super Hornet. A live AMRAAM was used to “successfully engage and destroy” an Australian-made Phoenix jet-powered target drone.

The MQ-28 was fitted with a single AMRAAM carried on a prominent external pylon mounted on the left-hand underside of the drone, directly below the engine air intake. In its current configuration, Ghost Bat lacks an internal weapons bay, something that may well be addressed in the future.

According to a media release from the Australian Defense Force, “This landmark demonstration proves that the MQ-28A is a world-leading Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) capability and underlines the MQ-28A’s growing potential to deliver an operational capability for the Royal Australian Air Force.”

Few other details of the engagement have so far been made available, but Boeing had previously said it would reflect “a tactically relevant scenario.”

At this stage, we don’t know how the drone found and tracked the target, i.e., whether it did this using its own sensors, or via datalink from another platform.

As we observed before, one option would have been to use the infrared search and track (IRST) sensor seen fitted in the nose of at least two MQ-28s. However, photos from Trial Kareela 25-4 don’t show the IRST — which is understood to be a Selex system — fitted. The MQ-28 is a highly modular design, meaning various munitions, sensors, and other payloads can be integrated; the entire nose can be swapped out to accommodate different payloads.

It is also worth noting that the MQ-28 used in the live-fire trial has a prominent radome with a serrated edge, something that we have seen on at least one of the drones in the past. The Ghost Bat is designed to be capable of housing an onboard radar, at least in future variations.

Using the MQ-28 as a loyal wingman to an E-7 in Trial Kareela 25-4 suggests that target telemetry may have been provided by the radar plane.

Boeing and the RAAF have already conducted some important collaborative work using these two platforms.

“We’ve been sort of testing out some of these capability demonstrations,” Parker said last month. “[The] Wedgetail has already controlled two live MQ-28s with a digital, virtual MQ-28 in the pattern, as well, [and] with a target. We’ve already been doing this. So, we’ve already been doing a bunch of multi-ship activities.”

MQ-28A Ghost Bat Milestone

Potentially, the target may have been handed over to the MQ-28 by the F/A-18F, with the drone very much seen as an adjunct to crewed fighters. In a statement after the live-fire test, Australian Minister for Defense Industry Pat Conroy said: “The Ghost Bat transforms a single fighter jet into a formidable team — capable not only of surveillance but also of engaging adversaries. This delivers a vital layer of protection for our aviators, who remain our most valuable asset.”

The plan to conduct the AMRAAM shot sometime in December was announced by Steve Parker, president and CEO of Boeing Defense, Space, and Security, at a media roundtable ahead of the 2025 Dubai Airshow last month, at which TWZ was in attendance. Boeing officials had said on various occasions earlier this year that the live-fire test could come in late 2025 or early 2026.

We had anticipated that the AMRAAM shot would be not only a first for the MQ-28, but also the first for any CCA-type drone, at least that we know about.

In any event, the Turkish Kizilelma uncrewed combat air vehicle (UCAV) reached this milestone first, using a Turkish-made radar-guided Gökdoğan air-to-air missile to destroy a target drone, as you can read about here.

The Australian government today also announced its latest tranche of funding for collaborative air capabilities, the centerpiece of which involves “transitioning the MQ-28A Ghost Bat into a fully operational war-fighting asset for the Australian Defense Force.”

The latest investment includes new contracts with Boeing Defense Australia (BDA) for six operational Block 2 MQ-28A aircraft and the development of an enhanced Block 3 prototype. In the past, there have been hints that the Block 3 version might include internal weapons carriage, which would ensure the drone retains its low-observable characteristics.

Australia has already acquired eight MQ-28s, all pre-production prototypes, also referred to as Block 1 aircraft. The service previously awarded Boeing a contract to deliver at least three more examples in the improved Block 2 configuration.

While the Block 2 drones are seen as a pathway to an operational capability, when that might actually materialize remains unclear.

Nevertheless, in its announcement today, the Australian government said that the new orders, once fulfilled, “will lay the foundation for an operational Air Combat Platform capability within the Royal Australian Air Force.”

The latest funds, roughly $930 million, constitute just a part of the Australian government’s investment in various different drones over the next decade, under the 2024 National Defense Strategy. This should amount to more than $6.6 billion in all, which will include at least $2.8 billion for uncrewed aerial systems.

Meanwhile, outside of the Australian Defense Force plans, Boeing has recently talked up the possibility of new customers for Ghost Bat, including the U.S. Navy and Poland. Overall, the MQ-28 would appear uniquely well placed for potential export, since it is not only the most mature (known) CCA of Western design, but it is also relatively independent of U.S. export restrictions.

In terms of U.S. Air Force involvement, Boeing was cut from its Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) drone program last year in a down-select. The company did take part in the initial stages of the first phase of that program, or Increment 1, and the Air Force has utilized at least one Ghost Bat in the past to support test work related to the CCA program. Since this is structured around multiple iterative development cycles, Boeing could return to compete in the next cycle, or Increment 2, perhaps with a version of the MQ-28 design.

For the time being, the MQ-28 is very much flying the flag for Australia, with that country now being one of the global leaders when it comes to the development of collaborative combat aircraft.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The global green transition has long been seen as a critical path to addressing climate change and reshaping economies. Yet, since 2020, this vision has faced a growing backlash. Rising energy prices, inflation, and the mounting financial strain on the middle class have made green policies increasingly unpopular in many developed nations. In the U.S., for instance, under the Trump administration, the green transition has been delayed under the pretext of inflation and job security. In Europe, despite some countries’ continued commitment to green initiatives, conservative political forces have begun to push back, casting doubt on the future of the green agenda. Even frameworks like Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) policies, once seen as a driving force for the green transition, are now under attack for “greenwashing”, further undermining their credibility.

What was once an ambitious, unified global vision for a greener future is now splintering into a series of competing political agendas. Against this backdrop of uncertainty, China’s green transition has shown a distinctive sense of continuity.

Unlike many Western nations, China’s green transition is not just about international agreements or ideological alignment. It is driven by deep, internal imperatives to address chronic pollution, improve public health, and upgrade its industrial base. The need for cleaner air and a more sustainable economy is not just a policy choice for China but an urgent requirement for the country’s reality.

This internal drive gives China a unique position to lead the charge in creating a “non-politicized global green coalition”, focused not on ideological divides, but on pragmatic, shared solutions.

With the U.S. scaling back its green subsidies and Europe facing political fragmentation, a leadership vacuum is emerging in global climate governance. In countries like France, Italy, and the Netherlands, right-wing forces are calling for delays to energy taxes and carbon-reduction targets, seeing the green agenda as an economic burden. Meanwhile, in the Nordic countries, while policies remain green, their influence is limited by their small size and capacity to drive global change.

This creates an opportunity for China to step in.

If China can embrace a pragmatic and non-politicized approach, it can work to rebuild cross-regional cooperation on green policies and lay the foundation for a new global green alliance. Such a coalition, focusing on technology, green finance, and shared standards, could bring together countries from East Asia, the Middle East, and emerging economies in Africa and Southeast Asia.

China’s green transition is driven by urgent domestic needs. In 2024, official statistics indicate that the proportion of days with good air quality in China reached 87.2 percent last year, up 1.7 percentage points from the previous year, though pollution remains a problem to be tackled. As China strives to reduce healthcare burdens and improve the quality of life for its citizens, its green transition becomes a necessity, not just a global strategy.

Unlike countries that frame their green policies in ideological terms, China’s approach is rooted in a concrete need for environmental and public health improvement. This focus on sustainabilitypositions China as a potential leader in advocating for non-ideological global cooperation on climate issues.

Indeed, China has already made significant strides in “green diplomacy”. Its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has increasingly focused on green development, with projects in clean energy, sustainable transportation, and ecological conservation now spread across over 100 countries. China’s leadership in renewable energy production, from photovoltaic modules to electric vehicles, gives it a competitive advantage in driving the green agenda forward. China is already the world’s largest producer of clean energy technology, with production capacities for solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries outpacing any other country.

But China’s green transition is not just about technology. The country is also emerging as a leader in green finance. China accounts for 60% of Asia’s green finance, which is roughly $200 billion. Its ability to offer affordable, high-quality green technologies to developing nations, combined with its leadership in green finance, makes it well-positioned to spearhead a new global green coalition.

While China has significant advantages, there are still challenges ahead. Some countries may perceive China-led green initiatives as another form of geopolitical influence. Western nations still control many critical certification systems and intellectual property related to green technologies, which could limit its ability to fully shape the global green agenda. Additionally, the long investment cycles and uncertain returns of green projects could stretch China’s financial resources.

To mitigate these risks, China could focus on building trust through joint projects with other nations and involving Western capital as investors or observers. Focusing on less politically sensitive areas, such as energy storage, carbon trading, and climate education, would also help to avoid ideological conflicts and build a more inclusive global green network.

The global green transition is not just an economic challenge. It is an opportunity to redefine international governance based on shared survival pressures. If China can lead the way with a focus on non-ideological cooperation and pragmatic action, it can help the world move beyond the current political fragmentation and build a greener, more sustainable future for all.

Dublin, Ireland – When I was accepted to Trinity College Dublin, I imagined a fresh start, new lectures, late-night study sessions and a campus alive with possibility.

The plan was clear: begin my studies in September 2024 and finally step into the future I had worked so hard for.

But when September came, the borders of Gaza were shut tight, my neighbourhood was being bombed almost every day, and the dream of university collapsed with the buildings around me. Trinity sent me a deferral letter, and I remember holding it in my hands and feeling torn in two.

I didn’t know whether to feel relieved or heartbroken. That letter became a strange symbol of hope, a reminder that maybe, someday, my life could continue. But everything else was falling apart so quickly that it was hard to believe in anything.

My family and I were displaced five times as the war intensified. Each time, we left something behind: books, clothes, memories, safety.

After the first temporary truce, we went home for a short time. But it no longer felt like the place we had built our lives. The walls were cracked, windows shattered, and floors coated in dust and debris.

It felt haunted by what had happened.

I knew I had to go

I’m the middle child among three siblings. My older sister, Razan, is 25, and my younger brother, Fadel, is 23.

You might think being a middle child spares you, but during the war, I felt responsible for them. On nights when bombings shook the building and fear crept into every corner, I tried to be the steady one. I tried to comfort them as I trembled inside.

Then, in April 2025, my name appeared on a small, restricted list of people allowed to leave Gaza. About 130 people could cross at that time, dual-nationality holders, family reunification cases and a handful of others. My name on that list felt unreal.

The morning I approached the crossing, I remember the long, tense line of people waiting, gripping documents, holding bags, clutching their children’s hands. No one talked.

When two IDF officers questioned me, I answered as steadily as I could, afraid that something, anything, might go wrong and they’d send me back.

When they finally waved me through, I felt relief and guilt at the same time.

I didn’t call home until I got to Jordan. When my mother heard my voice, she cried. I did, too. I told her I was safe, but it felt like I had left a part of my heart behind with them.

My family is now in Khan Younis, still living through the chaos.

I arrived in Amman on April 18, my heart heavy with the weight of what I had escaped. The next morning, I boarded a flight to Istanbul, with nothing around me feeling real.

The sounds of normalcy, laughter, announcements, and the rustle of bags were jarring after the constant bombardment. I had been living in a world where every sound could signal danger, where the air was thick with fear and uncertainty.

I felt like a ghost, wandering through a world that no longer belonged to me.

Finally, after hours of flying, waiting, being screened and watching departure boards, I landed in Dublin. The Irish air felt clean, the sky impossibly open. I should’ve been happy, but I was engulfed by crushing guilt, the joy overshadowed by the pain of separation.

I wasn’t completely alone. A Palestinian colleague from Gaza had arrived in April 2024, and two friends were also in Ireland. There was an unspoken understanding between us.

“You recognise the trauma in each other without saying a word,” I often tell people now. “It’s in the way we listen, the way we sit, the way we carry ourselves.”

Back in Gaza, my daily life had shrunk to pure survival: running, hiding, rationing water, checking who was alive. Bombings hit every day, and nighttime was the worst. Darkness makes every sound feel closer, sharper.

You don’t sleep during war. You wait.

Those nights, the silence was deafening, punctuated by the distant echoes of explosions. I would lie awake, straining to hear danger.

The darkness wrapped me like a suffocating blanket, amplifying every creak of the building, every whisper of the wind.

During the day, people on the street moved quickly, eyes darting, alert.

Water was a precious commodity; we would line up for hours at distribution points, often only to receive a fraction of what we needed. It was never enough.

No human should live like that

Five times, we fled in search of safety, packed in minutes, hearts racing with fear.

In one building where dozens of displaced families stayed, people slept on thin mattresses, shoulder to shoulder. Children cried quietly, adults whispered, trying to comfort one another, but every explosion outside sent ripples of panic through the rooms.

No human being should have to live like that, but millions of us did.

As I sit in Dublin, I carry the weight of my family’s struggles with me, a constant reminder of the life I left behind.

The guilt of survival is a heavy burden, but I hold onto hope that one day, I can return and help rebuild what has been lost.

Even now, far from Gaza, I feel it. You don’t leave war behind; you carry it with you like a second heartbeat.

Watching a world I’m not part of yet

I often stop in the campus courtyards. Not just because they’re beautiful, though they are, but because I need those moments to remind myself that I survived.

The laughter of children here feels foreign, a reminder of joy that has been stolen from so many.

Walking through Trinity College today feels surreal. Students laugh over coffee, rush to lectures and complain about assignments. Life moves so seamlessly here.

I message my family every day. Some days, they reply quickly. Other days, hours pass with no response. Those silent days feel like torture.

But I’m determined. Being here is about rebuilding a life, about honouring the people I left behind.

Survival comes with weight.

I carry the dreams of those who couldn’t leave. That responsibility shapes the way I move through the world; quieter, more grateful, more aware.

I hope someday I can bring my family to safety. I hope to finish my studies, rebuild my life and use my voice for people still trapped in war.

I want people to know what it takes to stand in that line at the border, to leave everything behind, to walk into a future alone.

Renewed border clashes between Cambodia and Thailand entered a second week after Bangkok denied US President Donald Trump’s claim that a truce had been agreed to halt the deadly fighting.

A Royal Thai Navy spokesman says its military launched an operation to reclaim border ‘territories’ in Trat province.

Thailand’s military has launched a new offensive against Cambodia to “reclaim sovereign territory”, spurning mediation efforts including that of United States President Donald Trump.

Violence between the two Southeast Asian nations continued on Sunday, a day after Phnom Penh announced that it was shutting all of its crossings with Thailand, its northern neighbour.

The conflict stems from a long-running dispute over the colonial-era demarcation of their 800km (500-mile) shared border. Fighting has left at least 25 soldiers and civilians dead, and displaced over half a million people on both sides.

The newspaper Matichon Online quoted a Royal Thai Navy spokesman, Rear Admiral Parach Rattanachaiyapan, as saying that its forces “launched a military operation to reclaim Thai sovereign territory” in an area of the coastal province of Trat.

“The operation began in the early morning hours with heavy clashes, conducted under the principles of self-defence according to international law and the preservation of national sovereignty,” Rattanachaiyapan told the Thai newspaper.

The Thai military said it has “successfully controlled and reclaimed the area, expelling all opposing forces”.

The public television channel Thai PBS also reported that the country’s military “planted the Thai national flag” after “driving out all opposing forces” in the area.

Thailand’s TV 3 Morning News quoted the military as saying that, as of early Sunday, the country’s “army, Navy and Air Force are continuing with [their] operations” along the border.

It also reported “sporadic clashes” in several other areas, including in Surin’s Ta Khwai area where “direct fire and indirect” and drone attacks took place.

There were no immediate reports on casualties from the latest incidents. The Cambodian military has yet to issue a statement regarding the latest fighting on Sunday.

But the Cambodian news website Cambodianess reported attacks in at least seven areas including in Pursat province, where the Thai military reportedly used F-16 fighter jet to drop bombs in the Thma Da commune.

Thai military also allegedly fired artillery shells southward into Boeung Trakoun village in the Banteay Meanchey province.

Al Jazeera could not independently confirmed the reports as of publication time.

Border shutdown

Late on Saturday, Cambodia announced that it was shutting all border crossings with Thailand due to the fighting.

“The Royal Government of Cambodia has decided to fully suspend all entry and exit movements at all Cambodia-Thailand border crossings, effective immediately and until further notice,” Cambodia’s Ministry of Interior said in a statement late on Saturday.

The border shutdown was yet another symptom of the frayed relations between the neighbouring countries, despite international pressure to secure peace.

Earlier on Saturday, Trump had declared that he had won agreement from both countries for a new ceasefire.

But Thai officials said they had not agreed to pause the conflict. Rather, Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul pledged that his country’s military would continue fighting on the disputed border.

Thai Minister of Foreign Affairs Sihasak Phuangketkeow also said on Saturday that some of Trump’s remarks did not “reflect an accurate understanding of the situation” on the ground.

Cambodia has not commented directly on Trump’s claim of a new ceasefire, but its Ministry of National Defence said earlier that Thai jets carried out air strikes on Saturday morning.

The latest large-scale fighting was set off by a skirmish on December 7, which wounded two Thai soldiers, derailing a ceasefire promoted by Trump that ended five days of combat in July.

The July ceasefire was brokered by Malaysia and pushed through by pressure from Trump, who threatened to withhold trade privileges unless Thailand and Cambodia agreed. It was formalised in more detail in October at a regional meeting in Malaysia that Trump attended.

Trump has cited his work on the Southeast Asian conflict as he lobbies for a Nobel Peace Prize.

Late on Saturday, a spokesman for Trump said in a statement: “The President expects all parties to fully honor the commitments they have made in signing these agreements, and he will hold anyone accountable as necessary to stop the killing and ensure durable peace.”

Hulu/Disney+

‘It’s not the way they live their life’

Disney/Natalie Cass

Becy/Bell Art Photography

‘Soft-swinging’ and race issues in the show

Additional much-needed MiG-29 Fulcrum fighters are likely headed to Ukraine, with Poland in talks to provide the country with its last remaining examples. Poland already donated 14 of its MiG-29s to Ukraine, after becoming the first country to commit to supplying combat jets to Kyiv. The new package should also involve the transfer of drone and missile technology from Ukraine to Poland.

In a statement on X, the General Staff of the Polish Armed Forces confirmed that talks regarding the exchange of MiG-29s are underway.

“The transfer of these aircraft is related to the fact that they have reached their target service life and there are no prospects for their further modernization in the Polish Armed Forces,” the statement says.

The General Staff states that no final decision has been made, but notes that the donation of the fighters is in line with NATO policy of supporting Ukraine and maintaining security on NATO’s eastern flank.

The statement adds that tasks of the MiG-29 aircraft being withdrawn from service will be carried out by Polish Air Force F-16 fighters and FA-50 light combat aircraft.

Interestingly, the talks also involve the transfer of “selected drone and missile technologies” to Poland.

“The aim is not only to compensate for the equipment, but above all to acquire and jointly develop new defense and industrial capabilities,” the General Staff emphasizes.

Discussions around the possible transfer of Poland’s last MiG-29 jets to Ukraine began back in July 2024.

As of now, the Polish Air Force has 14 Fulcrums, comprising 11 single-seat MiG-29 fighters and three two-seat MiG-29UB combat trainers.

Polish Fulcrums came from a variety of sources, as you can read about here. As well as original deliveries from the Soviet Union, Poland acquired former Czechoslovakian MiG-29s inherited by the Czech Republic, as well as upgraded examples that had previously been flown by the German Luftwaffe (and, before that, by East Germany).

The remaining Polish aircraft are very much still active on the front line and in support of NATO.

On two occasions in late October of this year, for example, Polish MiG-29s intercepted a Russian Il-20 Coot intelligence-gathering aircraft over the Baltic Sea.

In March 2023, Warsaw announced it would transfer the first batch of 14 MiG-29s to Ukraine. The first four of these MiG-29s are reported to have arrived in Ukraine the following month.

They were preceded by MiG-29s provided by Slovakia, which confirmed its donation soon after Poland. The Slovakian government approved the transfer of 13 MiG-29s to Ukraine, and the first arrived there in March 2023 — the first tactical jets to be officially supplied to Kyiv since Russia launched its full-scale invasion. Ukraine has apparently also received MiG-29 spare parts from other sources, too, with speculation that former Moldovan Fulcrums acquired by the United States might have been involved.

As far as Ukraine is concerned, additional fighters are in great demand, with steady attrition since the conflict began.

Ukraine started the war with around 50 MiG-29s in operational service, assigned to two regiments. According to the Oryx open-source tracking group, since the start of the current conflict, 33 Ukrainian MiG-29s have been confirmed destroyed, and more damaged. The actual figure is almost certainly higher, as Oryx only tallies losses that are confirmed with visual evidence.

The situation as regards the Su-27 Flanker is even more serious, with the Ukrainian Air Force having begun the war with around 32 operational examples, at least 19 of which have been confirmed as destroyed — the most recent one earlier this week. Unlike the MiG-29, there is no potential source to help replace Flanker losses.

It’s worth noting that additional examples of both these types have also been brought back to airworthiness after local overhauls. At least some of these were returned to action after long periods standing dormant or in storage.

Meanwhile, Ukraine has introduced more modern and capable F-16s and Mirage 2000s, but it’s significant that the MiG-29, in particular, remains a highly prized asset. This is a fact reflected in its continued adaptation to carry new weaponry, both Western-supplied and locally developed. With significant stocks of spares, weapons, and well-trained maintenance crews, the MiG-29 is regarded as easy to maintain and adapt. It is also well-suited to more austere operations, with the Ukrainian Air Force regularly moving the jets around between different operating locations, making it harder for the Russians to target them.

Kyiv’s need for more MiG-29s, from whatever source, was underscored by the appearance of at least one former Azerbaijani example earlier this year. As you can read about here, this was likely one of three Azerbaijani MiG-29s that were undergoing repair in Ukraine and were left stranded there after the full-scale invasion began.

Should the final 14 Polish MiG-29s be supplied to Ukraine, which would appear to be a formality, the last source of NATO-owned Fulcrums is Bulgaria, which operates around a dozen examples.

In the past, the Bulgarian Ministry of Defense ruled out a transfer of the jets to Ukraine, stating that such a move “would lead to a deficit of capabilities.”

Now that the Bulgarian Air Force has started to receive the 16 F-16C/D Block 70 fighters that it has ordered, that situation could change.

Returning to the Polish Air Force, once the last MiG-29s have gone, it will be left with a combat fleet spearheaded by 47 F-16C/D Block 52+ fighters, which will be upgraded to the F-16V configuration, as you can read about here.

These are bolstered by 12 South Korean-made FA-50GFs that were delivered to Poland between July and December 2023. Another 36 of the more advanced FA-50PL aircraft are also on order.

Starting next year, the first operational Polish fifth-generation fighter squadron is due to be established, with 32 F-35As on order and training already underway in the United States.

There is also the possibility that Poland might further increase its fighter inventory, adding another new type in the shape of the F-15EX, the latest version of the Eagle.

Boeing made an announcement about its pitch to sell an unspecified number of F-15EXs to Poland in 2023, as we wrote about at the time.

Exactly what kinds of drone and missile technologies might find their way from Ukraine to Poland is unclear.

However, the Polish Air Force is currently on something of a drone push, introducing the Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 uncrewed aerial system, as also used by Ukraine, and these will ultimately be joined by three MQ-9B SkyGuardian drones, providing much expanded capabilities.

As well as a wide variety of homegrown drones of different sizes and capabilities, including suicide drones and loitering munitions, Ukraine’s counter-drone expertise could be of particular interest to Poland, which has faced multiple Russian drone incursions.

The first National Security Strategy of the United States of America was released in 1950 under President Truman. It set firm strategic goals based on the containment doctrine to limit the influence of communist ideology in the global order. This first national security strategy marked the beginning of limited global policing in US geopolitics, but it was less pragmatic and more principled realism.  American interests became specific to liberal internationalism and focused only on areas facing the spread of the communist threat.

The Core Security Thinking of the US

The core security thinking of Americans was to preserve their sphere of influence from any adversarial influence or intervention, echoing the Monroe Doctrine. The initial period had this core, and the first national security strategy laid the groundwork for this security thinking. In 1988, the scope of core security thinking expanded, and elements of realism advanced further, with the US beginning to engage in deterrence calculations and global outreach to build collective military alliances against the Soviets. Most importantly, the strategy also focused on strengthening the economy. The core security thinking in the US’s national security strategy by the late 1980s began to realize that, while the Monroe Doctrine is important, US strategic interests must also require adopting flexibility in its confrontational approach, guided by liberal internationalism and the containment of communism.

Pragmatism and Realism

After the Soviet disintegration, US National Security Strategy focused on navigating a multipolar world by reinforcing the idea of collective security under the H.W. Bush Administration. The 1991 and 1993 US National Security strategies expanded on the concepts that started to emerge in the late 1980s—deterrence and engagement. In the 1990s, this strategy was continued through Powell’s four pillars: strong defense, forward presence, alliances, and coalition-building. The national security strategy designs suggest that elements of pragmatism and distinctions of pure realism gradually began to take center stage in the US national security approach.

Strategy in Crises

The National Security Strategy changed after 9/11, possibly in response to shifted security priorities. The previous approach of principled realism, which involved pragmatic and defensive tactics, now showed a slight shift, with the US’s national security strategy emphasizing more openly offensive realism and dogmatism. By the mid-2000s, the US had reactionary national security strategies, moving away from the approach that began to develop in the late 1980s. Key shifts in security strategies after 2001 included the doctrine of preemption and unilateral actions, but another significant change was a major shift in the collective engagement perspective, differing from earlier ideas of shared strategic responsibilities among allies.

After 9/11, the US called on allies, particularly in NATO, to bear a greater share of the burden for collective defense efforts, shifting away from reliance solely on the US. The core security thinking, rooted in peace through engagement, shifted during the 1990s toward peace through strength. Another aspect, after the Monroe Doctrine, peace through strength, gained a label of permanence in the US National Security Strategy, though its effectiveness and emphasis varied over time.

Trump’s National Security Strategy: Rebooting and Readjustments

Trump’s 2025 national security strategy resembles his 2017 National Security Strategy. The nationalist ideals of America First and the focus on economic engagement—which is the main security approach this time—are a mix of realizations and reactions. The first reaction to the current global situation is reasserting the Monroe Doctrine, dubbed “Trump Corollary,” and the second is showing the will for peace through strength by deterrence. Even if conflicts occur, the strategy emphasizes engaging in conflict with strategic skill to quickly win wars with little to no casualties. The realization part of the strategy is the US increasing its understanding of collective efforts and economic strength. The strategy highlights stronger partnerships with countries like India for the Indo-Pacific.

Reaction and Challenge

The realistic approach in this strategy is flexible realism, aiming not at domination but at maintaining a balance of power, while not fully adopting defensive realism. The United States has embraced both offensive and defensive realism. Over the past ten years, the US National Security Strategy under Obama, Trump 1.0, and Biden has incorporated elements of defensive realism along with principled realism, with the US gradually increasing its efforts to balance power through the promotion of liberal and pro-democratic values—examples include its Middle East policy and the revival of QUAD in 2017. However, a notable development in the 2025 strategy is the US’s willingness to undertake offensive actions to maximize security, such as Operation Midnight Hammer against Iran and expanding operations in Latin America against Venezuela. Another prominent aspect of this strategy is the US’s focus on Europe’s burden-sharing, attempting to lighten its responsibilities and emphasizing that Europe should stand on its own, while the US remains a facilitator in Europe’s development. However, it is no longer willing to assume a broader role—similar to sentiments after 9/11. This strategy likely reflects the challenges posed by a rising China, Russia’s multipolar approach, and increasing strategic competition in multilateral arenas. The Trump approach—as mentioned in the strategy—is not just a reboot of the US National Security strategy after the 2000s but with some realizations.

Realization

There is a growing realization, as highlighted earlier, that the US can no longer sustain a confrontational approach and aggressive, offensive realism. The Trump strategy for 2025 recognizes the need to incorporate elements from both the late Cold War and post-Cold War periods. The latter was characterized by defensive realism and principal realism features—approaches that the US emphasized during the Clinton years, when embracing multilateralism, economic diplomacy, and regional collective engagements became central to US national security strategy, paving the way for more pragmatic interventions. A similar recognition of Clinton’s policy of enlargement through engagement is reflected in Trump 2.0 National Security Strategy—Shifting from Aid to Trade with Africa, which exemplifies this focus on promoting economic diplomacy and broadening engagement.

The US National Security Strategy 2025 reflects the nation’s understanding of how to adapt its engagement with the global order while maintaining realism. This time, US security thinking appears to find a balance between engagement and deterrence, which in previous years often seemed to conflict.

Here is where things stand on Sunday, December 14:

Fighting

• Two people were killed in a Ukrainian drone strike on the Russian city of Saratov, regional Governor Roman Busargin said in a statement on Telegram. An unspecified number of people were also injured in the attack.
• Russia’s Ministry of Defence said it hit Ukrainian industrial and energy facilities with hypersonic Kinzhal missiles, in what it called a retaliatory attack for Ukrainian strikes on “civilian targets” in Russia.
• Ukraine’s southern port city of Odesa and the surrounding region have suffered major blackouts after a large overnight Russian attack on the power grid left more than a million households without power.
• Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Russia’s overnight attack on Ukraine included more than 450 drones and 30 missiles.
• Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko described the attack as one of the war’s largest assaults on Odesa, where supplies of electricity and water had been knocked out. She said supplies of non-drinking water were being brought to areas of the city.
• Ukraine’s power grid operator said a “significant number” of households were without power in the southern regions of Odesa and Mykolaiv, and that the Ukrainian-controlled part of the front-line Kherson region was totally without power.
• Ukraine’s navy has accused Russia of using a drone to deliberately attack the civilian Turkish vessel Viva, which was carrying sunflower oil to Egypt, a day after Moscow hit two Ukrainian ports. None of the 11 Turkish nationals onboard the ship was hurt, and the vessel continued its journey to Egypt.
• Earlier, it was also reported that three Turkish vessels were damaged in a separate attack.
• Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant temporarily lost all offsite power overnight for the 12th time during the conflict, due to military activity affecting the electrical grid, according to Rafael Mariano Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Both power lines are now reconnected, the IAEA said.

US-led negotiations

• Zelenskyy said he would meet US and European representatives in Berlin to discuss the “fundamentals of peace”. He added that Ukraine needed a “dignified” peace and a guarantee that Russia, which launched a full-scale invasion of his country in 2022, would not attack again.
• US envoy Steve Witkoff and President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner will meet Zelenskyy and European leaders in Berlin on Sunday and Monday, a US official briefed on the matter said.
• French President Emmanuel Macron, UK Prime Minister Starmer and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz were also expected to attend the Berlin meeting, The Wall Street Journal reported.
• Europeans and Ukrainians are asking the US to provide them with “security guarantees” before any territorial negotiations in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine, the French presidency said.
• British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have discussed work on US-led peace proposals for Ukraine and efforts to use frozen Russian sovereign assets to provide funds for Kyiv, a Downing Street spokesperson said in a statement.
• Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, fresh from a meeting with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Turkmenistan, said he hopes to discuss a Ukraine-Russia peace plan with Trump, adding that “peace is not far away”.

Politics and diplomacy

• Ukraine received 114 prisoners released by Belarus, including citizens accused of working for Ukrainian intelligence and Belarusian political prisoners, according to Kyiv’s POW coordination centre. The centre posted photos appearing to show the released captives boarding a bus, with some of them smiling and embracing.
• Zelenskyy spoke to Belarusian prisoner Maria Kalesnikava after her release, presidential aide Dmytro Lytvyn told reporters. Lytvyn told reporters that military intelligence chief Kyrylo Budanov was present when the prisoners released by Belarus were received.
• North Korean leader Kim Jong Un attended a welcoming ceremony for an army engineering unit that returned home after carrying out duties in Russia, North Korea’s KCNA news agency reported. At the event, Kim praised officers and soldiers for their “heroic” conduct during their 120-day overseas deployment.
• Russia has sentenced top International Criminal Court (ICC) judges and its chief prosecutor Karim Khan to jail, in retaliation for the court’s 2023 decision to issue an arrest warrant for Putin over alleged war crimes during the Ukraine war.

Cross-border fighting between Thailand and Cambodia has shown no signs of easing, after US President Donald Trump announced the two sides would halt attacks. The violence has killed dozens and forced mass displacement.

BREAKINGBREAKING,

Multiple people have been reported injured in a shooting near the Ivy League campus in Providence, Rhode Island.

The mayor of Providence, Rhode Island, has confirmed that two people have been killed and eight more are critically injured after an active shooter was reported on the campus of Brown University.

Around 4:22pm local time (21:22 GMT) on Saturday, the Ivy League university issued an emergency update that there was a gunman near the Barus and Holley engineering lab.

“Lock doors, silence phones and stay stay hidden until further notice,” the university said in its update.

“Remember: RUN, if you are in the affected location, evacuate safely if you can; HIDE, if evacuation is not possible, take cover; FIGHT, as a last resort, take action to protect yourself.”

Later, at 5:27pm local time (22:27 GMT), the school reported that shots had been fired near Governor Street, approximately two blocks away.

The Providence Police Department announced a few minutes later, “Multiple shot in the area of Brown University.”

Earlier in the day, the university withdrew an announcement that indicated a suspect had been taken into custody. It clarified, “Police do not have a suspect in custody and continue to search for suspect(s).”

US President Donald Trump published a similar retraction on his online platform Truth Social, after erroneously posting around 5:44pm (22:44 GMT) that the suspect was in custody.

“I have been briefed on the shooting that took place at Brown University in Rhode Island,” Trump also wrote. “The FBI is on the scene.”

Law enforcement remains on site at the university. The incident is currently under investigation.

Saturday’s shooting is the second major incident of gun violence on a university campus this week.

Just four days ago, on December 9, Kentucky State University in the southern city of Frankfort also experienced gunfire on its campus, killing one student and leaving a second critically injured. The suspect in that case was identified as a Jacob Lee Bard, the parent of a student at the school.

The risk of gun violence has transformed the academic experience in the US, with many schools holding preparedness drills for active shooter situations.

The shooting comes as the academic semester winds down at Brown University. The last day of classes for the fall semester was on Thursday, and the school is in its final examination period until December 20.

The seventh oldest university in the US, Brown is considered part of the prestigious Ivy League, a cluster of private research colleagues in the Northeast. Its student body numbers at 11,005, according to its website.

This is a breaking news story. More details to come.