Month: February 2026

Feb. 25 (Asia Today) — President Lee Jae-myung on Tuesday defended his directive to review a comprehensive survey and possible sale orders for uncultivated farmland, rejecting criticism that the move amounts to communist-style policy.

Lee said on social media that some critics “misunderstand the constitutional principle of land to the tiller and talk about the Communist Party” in response to his order.

He clarified that the review does not target inherited farmland or land left uncultivated due to age or unavoidable circumstances. Instead, he said it focuses on cases in which individuals submit farming plans for speculative purposes, acquire farmland and then fail to cultivate it themselves.

Under South Korea’s Constitution and the Farmland Act, only those who intend to farm the land directly may acquire farmland. Prospective buyers must submit a farming plan detailing how they will cultivate it. If they fail to do so, authorities may issue a sale order through legal procedures.

Lee emphasized that the “land to the tiller” principle was enshrined in the Constitution under former President Syngman Rhee, who also led postwar land redistribution by acquiring land from non-farming landlords and distributing it to farmers.

“The government’s land reform based on this principle became the foundation of South Korea’s economic development,” Lee said, adding that even critics of Rhee acknowledge his achievements in land reform. “Syngman Rhee was not a communist,” he said.

At a Cabinet meeting Monday, Lee said high farmland prices are making it difficult for people seeking to return to farming or rural life.

“We need to lower the cost of returning to farming, and fundamentally that requires bringing down land prices,” he said, calling for a full-scale investigation and possible sale orders if illegal activity is found.

Lee added that soaring real estate prices are at the root of many social and economic problems in the country.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260225010007408

The TWZ Newsletter

Weekly insights and analysis on the latest developments in military technology, strategy, and foreign policy.

The commander of Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) has said that he would like to field F-15E Strike Eagle and F-15EX Eagle II combat aircraft to help the command meet its commitment to supporting the overall Air Force mission. AFRC commander Lt. Gen. John P. Healy was speaking at the Air & Space Forces Association’s annual Warfare Symposium, where TWZ is in attendance.

Headquartered at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, the AFRC is responsible for three numbered air forces, 34 flying wings, 10 flying groups, a space wing, a cyber wing, and an intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance wing. It also has other subordinate units that help to accomplish its total-force missions.

Healy was addressing how AFRC is grappling with how best to contribute to the Air Force’s 10-year fighter jet plan, which calls for purchasing more F-15EXs, F-35s, and F-47s, as it aims to have nearly 1,400 combat-coded tactical aircraft in service by 2030. The commander noted that the plan is not only “pretty ambitious” but also that, while it has been submitted to Congress, it is still very much a work in progress.

Nevertheless, Healy said that, whatever happens, the Air Force’s future fighter plans will rely heavily on the AFRC. At the same time, this organization is facing upcoming combat aircraft retirements, including the A-10 attack jet, which the Air Force wants to withdraw entirely.

“As the commander of Air Force Reserve Command, I am keenly aware that some of my units are scheduled to divest without any plan of recapitalization,” Healy said. “Some could say I am loud and annoying when it comes to how we can ensure that we can maintain this fighting force,” he added, noting that in certain AFRC units, 100 percent of the airmen are combat veterans, and that he wants to ensure “that talent, that experience, doesn’t walk out the door during a normal, planned divestment.”

Healy is hopeful that the historic practice of aircraft divestment without recapitalization, something he said has existed over the last 14 years, is now on the way out.

“I think we’re finally at a point where we’re putting a stop to that,” Healy said. “We’re looking at maintaining our classic associations where we have them and recapping as the active duty can. For the remaining fighter units that we have that are divesting or scheduled for divestment, our full expectation is that we’re going to recap those with new weapons systems.”

There’s no doubt that many of the AFRC’s planned divestments are badly needed, with upward of 80 percent of the command’s fleet now being considered “legacy.” Healy continued: “You know, it’s code for old. Some of these airplanes need to be divested, but we also need to ensure that we are proportionately, concurrently fielded with new equipment.”

That’s where the F-15E and F-15EX could come into play.

“For every one of these A-10 units that are going away, I’m looking at if there’s a means by which we can get an F-15 unit behind it, whether it’s a Strike Eagle or an EX.”

Meanwhile, Healy said he’s also “pressing hard” to ensure that ARFC units divesting from the F-16 will be backfilled with F-35 stealth jets.

“We’ve got that combat capability,” Healy added. “We’ve got that combat experience. We need to leverage that.”

The AFRC boss also made the financial case for continuing to re-equip his command’s squadrons with new (or, failing that, newer) equipment.

According to the Air Force’s own factsheet, the AFRC provides around 14 percent of the total force within the service, while consuming only around four percent of the total manpower budget.

“My job is to constantly remind the programmers and remind the chief and the secretary of the value proposition, the advantage of the Reserve, because at the end of the day, we’re providing a little bit more money that we can reinvest into other things as well.”

Healy said that, when it comes to operating the F-16, an AFRC squadron does that “$12 million cheaper than the active duty can.”

The savings on F-15 units would be even more compelling, Healy argued, with an AFRC Strike Eagle squadron working out as $28 million cheaper than the active-duty equivalent, or $24 million in the case of the F-15EX.

There remains a question, however, around just how feasible it might be for the ARFC to get the F-15E or F-15EX. For all their undoubted capabilities, these types are both in short supply and high demand.

The Air Force’s planned F-15EX numbers have fluctuated repeatedly over the last few years. Under the Fiscal Year 2026 budget proposal, the Air Force’s program of record is now set to grow from 98 to 129 aircraft, with the addition of at least one more squadron, which will be converting from the A-10.

Originally, the Air Force had a minimum number of 144 F-15EX aircraft to replace the F-15C/D force. Some of the Eagle units have switched to other platforms since then, but units that fly A-10s, F-16s, and even F-15Es could end up getting F-15EX if the service chooses to go such a route. It seems quite possible that further growth of the program could occur, and that would seem to be a prerequisite if the ARFC is to get the Eagle II as well.

When it comes to the F-15E, the Air Force inventory numbers 218 aircraft, of which 119 are powered by the older F100-PW-220 turbofan engines that produce some 23,500 pounds of thrust each. The other 99 have the F100-PW-229s, each of which is rated at 29,000 pounds of thrust.

The Air Force previously aspired to retire the Dash-220-powered jets by the end of Fiscal Year 2028.

The Air Force has argued that it needs to retire its older F-15Es to help free up resources for its future modernization plans, but lawmakers have been concerned about dwindling numbers of available tactical aircraft if this were to happen.

The possibility of transferring F-15Es from active-duty units to Air National Guard (or AFRC) units is something that TWZ has discussed in depth in this previous feature.

As far as the AFRC is concerned, the best chance of getting its hands on F-15Es will almost certainly be provided by the return stateside of the two squadrons of Dash-229-powered Strike Eagles currently at RAF Lakenheath in England. These are due to be replaced by F-35s in the future. For the time being, they are the only permanently forward-deployed F-15Es, which remain the service’s first choice for a wide variety of critical missions around the globe.

Another option, and one we have explored in the past, would be to pass on the Dash-220-powered jets to the AFRC, and it is somewhat surprising the Air Force hasn’t floated this idea before when it has sought to offload the older, less-powerful Strike Eagles.

Asked by TWZ about the likelihood of F-15Es making their way to his command, the AFRC commander responded: “I am optimistic that we’ve at least got people listening to the value that we provide, the combat capability we provide, the experience that we provide. We’ve proven it over and over again. We’re efficient, we’re experienced, we’re 100 percent accessible as a reserve force, and we’re lethal in all these mission sets. I think our message is sounding in a positive way with senior leadership within the Air Force. I’m not going to cash the check yet, but I’m optimistic about our future in terms of recapitalizing some of our units.”

Many of the savings that the AFRC makes are a result of the efficiencies that are baked into its ‘business’ practices. Of the 67,000 airmen that make up the command, 14,000 are full-timers.

“Those full-timers are the ones that keep the lights on day-to-day,” Healy continued. Our business model is such that a typical unit will have 25 percent full-timers, and they run that unit for 28 days of the month. It’s only that one weekend a month that we’re at 100 percent — full strength. So those cost savings, right there, are what allow us to realize benefits. It adds up when we start putting it into big numbers like that.”

Whether examples of the F-15E Strike Eagle or F-15EX Eagle II end up on Air Force Reserve Command ramps remains to be seen, but in Lt. Gen. John P. Healy, that component has a strong advocate for making that happen.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

ALL Saints star Melanie Blatt says taking part in the Strictly Come Dancing Christmas special stripped away her confidence.

The 1990s girl group singer, 50, said she did not feel comfortable in the flowing yellow dress she wore, which she said made her “look like custard”.

Speaking to Good Housekeeping UK she said: “I felt extremely vulnerable.

“It’s taken me 50 years to feel as good as I have ever felt about myself and Strictly stripped it away from me. Nothing dodgy went on — I think they’re on their best behaviour — but I just didn’t feel comfortable in a dress.”

Mum Mel and her professional dance partner Kai Widdrington finished fifth out of six couples after performing an American smooth in the telly extravaganza.

It was won by TV host Scarlett Moffatt and Vito Coppola, who got a perfect 40 score for their cha-cha-cha.

Despite finishing second from bottom, Mel and Kai scored 36 out of 40 and she was hailed “fabulous” by judges Shirley Ballas and Anton Du Beke.

Mel had been tipped to take part in the full series this autumn but her comments suggest there is no way back.

Yet following her Christmas Day dance on the BBC One show, watched by 7.75million at home, Mel told host Tess Daly: “I really enjoyed it.

In a telling remark, she added: “It’s been amazing yet challenging, getting out of my comfort zone, having to wear a dress, having to look like custard . . . all of these things.”

A source insisted that Mel had taken her own dress which was “styled and adjusted” by the Strictly costume team to her specifications.

They added: “Strictly would never make anyone wear something they felt uncomfortable in.”

Mel, who had five No1 singles with All Saints, revealed last year that she was serving burgers at a North London boozer.

She is no longer in the pub but wants to start a new career in the food industry.

Mel, who performed in All Saints with Shaznay Lewis and sisters Nicole and Natalie Appleton said: “The main thing I want from life is peace and happiness.

“My dream is to do a cookery book or have my own cookery programme, something like ‘Cheeses of the World’. I will make it happen.”

• Mel’s full interview can be read now in April’s Good Housekeeping.

Real Madrid’s win against Benfica to reach the Champions League last 16 was a “victory for everyone who stands against racism”, midfielder Aurelien Tchouameni says.

Vinicius Jr alleged he was racially abused by Benfica’s Gianluca Prestianni during the first leg, in which the Real forward scored the game’s only goal.

Prestianni – who has denied racially abusing the Brazilian – was subsequently handed a one-match ban, meaning he missed Wednesday’s return leg.

Support was shown for Vinicius by the home fans as a banner with the words “no to racism” in Spanish was displayed in the stands before kick-off.

Vinicius was again on the scoresheet, netting Real Madrid’s second goal as the Spanish side came from 1-0 down on the night to win 2-1 and book their place in the next round with a 3-1 aggregate victory.

“I think there are more important things than this match, than football,” said Tchouameni, who scored Real’s first-half equaliser.

“Vinicius keeps his confidence and he keeps focused on what he needs to do.

“I think they made the right decision by not letting the boy [Prestianni] play this match.

“Like I said, there are things more important than football and this is a victory for all of us.”

Real Madrid and England defender Trent Alexander-Arnold said Vinicius had been his usual self before the fixture, “very chilled” and “very relaxed”.

“He didn’t need to score to send a message or show his mentality,” said the former Liverpool player.

“He doesn’t need to prove anything to anyone because he’s shown time and time again how good he is.

“He steps up when we need him the most. He knows his quality and what he brings to the team.”

Feb. 25 (UPI) — FBI agents executed search warrants at the home of Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Alberto Carvalho and the district’s headquarters Wednesday, the LAUSD said.

A statement from the district provided no details about the raids. Law enforcement officials also declined to confirm the reason, Politico reported.

“The district is cooperating with the investigation, and we do not have further information at this time,” the statement read.

The FBI and Justice Department confirmed the searches to KTTV-TV in Los Angeles, adding that a third location, a Southwest Ranches residence connected to Carvalho, was also searched. They said they evacuated LAUSD employees from headquarters during the the search there.

The news outlet said its helicopter spotted agents carrying boxes out of Carvalho’s San Pedro home.

Prior to heading up the LAUSD in 2022, Carvalho was superintendent of Miami-Dade County Public Schools for nearly 14 years.

US judge says that rapid deportation of migrants to countries other than their own violates due process.

A United States federal judge has ruled that the administration of President Donald Trump had violated the law through the swift deportation of migrants to countries other than their own, without giving them an opportunity to appeal their removal.

US District Judge Brian Murphy declared the policy invalid on Wednesday, teeing up a possible appeal from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to the Supreme Court.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“It is not fine, nor is it legal,” Murphy wrote in his decision, adding that migrants could not be sent to an “unfamiliar and potentially dangerous country” without any legal recourse.

He added that due process – the right to receive fair legal proceedings – is an essential component of the US Constitution.

“These are our laws, and it is with profound gratitude for the unbelievable luck of being born in the United States of America that this Court affirms these and our nation’s bedrock principle: that no ‘person’ in this country may be ‘deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law’,” Murphy said.

The ruling is the latest legal setback in the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign.

Trump has long pledged to remove immigrants from the country who violate the law or are in the country without legal paperwork. But critics argue that his immigration crackdown has been marked by widespread neglect of due process rights.

They also point out that some of the deportees have been in the country legally, with their cases being processed through legal immigration pathways like asylum.

Murphy said in his ruling that the swift nature of the deportation obscures the details of each case, preventing courts from weighing whether each deportation is legal.

“The simple reality is that nobody knows the merits of any individual class member’s claim because [administration officials] are withholding the predicate fact: the country of removal,” wrote Murphy.

In the decision, Murphy also addressed some of the Trump administration’s arguments in favour of swift deportation.

He highlighted one argument, for instance, where the administration asserted it would be “fine” to deport migrants to third-party countries, so long as the Department of Homeland Security was not aware of anyone waiting to kill them upon arrival.

“It is not fine, nor is it legal,” Murphy responded in his decision.

Murphy has previously ruled against efforts to swiftly deport migrants to countries where they have no ties, and over the past year, he has seen some decisions overturned by the Supreme Court.

Noting that trend, Murphy said Wednesday’s decision would not take effect for 15 days, in order to give the administration the opportunity to appeal.

Last year, for instance, the conservative-majority Supreme Court lifted an injunction Murphy issued in April that sought to protect the due process rights of migrants being deported to third-party countries.

The injunction had come as part of a case where the Trump administration attempted to send eight men to South Sudan, despite concerns about human rights conditions there.

Wednesday’s decision, meanwhile, stemmed from a class-action lawsuit brought by immigrants similarly facing deportation to countries they had no relation to.

A lawyer for the plaintiffs, Trina Realmuto from the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, hailed Murphy’s latest ruling.

“Under the government’s policy, people have been forcibly returned to countries where US immigration judges have found they will be persecuted or tortured,” Realmuto said in a statement.

Realmuto added that the ruling was a “forceful statement” about the policy’s constitutionality.

Paramount Skydance is betting its future on its streaming business, as gains at the media and entertainment company’s Paramount+ platform helped boost earnings for the fiscal fourth quarter of 2025.

On Wednesday, Paramount reported $8.1 billion in revenue for the three-month period that ended Dec. 31, up 2% compared to the previous year’s quarter. That was due to growth in its streaming business, which saw a 10% increase in quarterly revenue to $2.2 billion, as well as gains at Paramount’s filmed entertainment segment, which reported revenue of $1.3 billion,an increase of 16% compared to the previous year.

The company’s TV media business, however, had a tougher quarter.

That segment reported revenue of $4.7 billion, down 5% compared to last year, as traditional broadcast networks continue tolose subscribers. Paramount also cited a 10% decrease in advertising, partially due to a drop in political spending and not having the Big 10 championship as it did in 2024.

Paramount reported an operating loss of $339 million, which included $546 million in restructuring and transaction-related costsattributed to its merger with Skydance last year. Diluted losses per share totaled 52 cents, compared to a loss of 33 cents during the prior year.

Chief Executive David Ellison praised the company’s progress under his tenure, noting that investments in the film studio, original series, UFC and tech upgrades to Paramount+’s streaming platform and advertising would build momentum in the coming years.

“It’s been six months, but we really do feel good about the work the team has done to date,” he said during an earnings call with analysts Wednesday afternoon. “You can expect that to accelerate into the future quickly.”

The company said it expects total revenue of $30 billion for 2026, which would mark a 4% increase compared to 2025. Paramount signaled the primary driver of that growth will be its streaming business, though the company also anticipates a boost from its studio segment.

Company executives declined to answer questions on the call about Paramount’s bid to acquire rival Warner Bros. Discovery.

The only mention of the ongoing fight was in Paramount‘s letter to shareholders, which noted that the company was “confident” in its standalone strategy and growth trajectory, but that adding Warner would be an “accelerant to achieving these goals more quickly” and in a way that would be “economically compelling” for Paramount’s shareholders.

Paramount submitted a higher bid Monday offering $31 a share in cash to Warner Bros. Discovery investors. Previously, the offer was $30 a share.

The company also agreed to pay $7 billion to Warner should the deal fail to clear various regulatory hurdles. That was a $2 billion increase. (The previous commitment was $5 billion.)

Paramount reaffirmed that it would cover the $2.8 billion termination fee that Warner would owe Netflix if Warner abandoned its deal with the streamer.

Paramount also said it would pay a so-called ticking fee sooner. Now, the company said it would pay an additional $0.25 per quarter to shareholders after Sept. 30 until a Paramount-Warner transaction closed. It also agreed to cover Warner’s potential $1.5 billion in financing costs associated with a planned debt exchange offer.

Additionally, Paramountsaid it “agreed to an obligation to contribute additional equity funding to the extent needed to support the solvency certificate required by PSKY’s lending banks.” That provision was offered because Warner board members have expressed concerns that Paramount may not be able to round up sufficient financing to close such a gargantuan deal.

But the company’s earnings — and the declines its facing in its own TV business — raised concerns about the potential Warner acquisition, John Conca, analyst at Third Bridge, wrote in an email.

“It is becoming questionable why leadership is aggressively pursuing [Warner], a deal that would effectively double their exposure to dying linear networks while also creating even more massive integration headaches,” he said.

Former Premier League defender Curtis Davies said the decision was an “absolute disgrace”.

“Kelly goes up for a header, he’s gone for the header cleanly. His feet have to land on the ground somewhere,” he added on BBC Radio 5 Live.

“Unfortunately, he lands on the player. There needs to be a level of understanding – where is he meant to put his feet? I understand Kelly’s frustration.”

Davies’ sentiments were echoed by football journalist Rory Smith, who called the decision “awful” and a “disgrace”.

Meanwhile, former Tottenham midfielder Andy Reid felt football was “moving closer and closer to being a non-contact sport”.

“There needs to be contact in football and sometimes people do get painful ones. It happens. There’s nothing you can do about that. It’s part of the game,” he said.

According to Uefa rules, any player sent off by the referee – whether that is via two yellows or a straight red – is automatically suspended for the next match in European club competition.

However, in light of Juventus’ exit from the Champions League, Kelly’s suspension will carry over to next season.

Former Manchester City defender Nedum Onuoha added: “If I was Kelly I’d be really disappointed, but with how football works, it’s always going to be a red.”

But former Liverpool full-back Stephen Warnock disagreed.

“I don’t agree with it because it is purely accidental. I understand the yellow card, but not the red,” he said.

Manila, Philippines – “Bongbong is our principal worry. He is too carefree and lazy,” then-President of the Philippines Ferdinand Marcos Sr wrote in 1972.

Marcos Sr was referring to his only son and namesake by the child’s moniker, Bongbong.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

He was concerned about what the future would hold for the young Marcos.

“The boy must realise his weakness – the carefree wayward ways that may have been bred in him,” his father further warned in his diary.

Half a century later, his son – Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr – would be sworn in as the 17th president of the Philippines, following a landslide victory in the 2022 polls.

The rise of Marcos Jr to the presidency marked his family’s dramatic rehabilitation after the mass street protests that forced Marcos Sr from power and the family into exile in 1986.

In his inaugural speech, Marcos Jr invoked memories of his late father’s presidency – though he skipped the years of brutal dictatorship and reported plunder of state resources – to project hope for “a better future” for 110 million Filipinos.

“You will get no excuses from me,” Marcos Jr said as he took his oath of office.

“You will not be disappointed.”

But three years into his term in office, Marcos Jr’s popularity has withered.

His political alliance with Vice President Sara Duterte has shattered, and his administration is ensnared in a multibillion-dollar corruption scandal that has plunged the country into a period of uncertainty.

The president who ran on a platform of unity is now struggling to lead a divided nation that is deeply disappointed over his lacklustre performance.

On the 40th anniversary of the People Power Revolution that ousted his father, Marcos Jr seems unable to escape history as some political factions in the opposition are calling for his removal – an ending that befell his father on the fateful date of February 25, 1986.

‘No plan’

Political analyst and economist Andrew Masigan pulls no punches. Masigan said what is happening in the Philippines is a consequence of an electorate choosing the “entitled son of a dictator” over a more competent candidate.

“[Marcos Jr] campaigned under the slogan and promise of unity. Economists and political pundits all assumed that there was a plan behind it. We’ve been waiting, and it has been three years. No such thing exists,” he said.

“His plan was to be president. It was a self-serving plan. It’s a presidency about Bongbong Marcos for Bongbong Marcos,” he added.

“He just wanted the opportunity to whitewash the tainted Marcos name,” he added.

As president, Marcos Jr has “squandered” the demographic advantage of the Philippines, Masigan continued, pointing to the country’s youth, who make up almost half of the population. Given such a youthful and dynamic society, the country’s economy should have been growing 7 to 8 percent annually by now, Masigan said.

Instead, the economy posted a sluggish 4.4 percent growth in 2025, well below the government target of 5.5-6.5 percent, he added.

Susan Kurdli, an assistant professor at De La Salle University in Manila, said the first three years of Marcos Jr’s six-year term were “indeed a period of missed opportunities”.

Kurdli said the “vague direction” the Philippines is heading was only to be expected, “as Marcos Jr never ran on a clear policy ticket”.

“He won the election largely by relying on the tried and tested tactics of tribalism, name recognition and alliance building,” she said.

Foreign investment has also declined by half from $9.42bn in 2024 to $4.7bn in 2025, its sharpest fall in five years, according to the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA).

Unemployment rose at the same time from 3.8 percent in 2024 to 4.2 percent in 2025, PSA data showed. In 2025, only 172,000 jobs were added to the overall labour market, making it the fifth-worst year in job creation in 25 years, according to the think tank IBON Foundation.

A lack of economic opportunity and unemployment are the top risks for the Philippines in the next two years, the World Economic Forum (WEF) 2026 Global Risks Report notes.

If the weak economic figures have left Filipinos disgruntled, allegations of corruption have left them seething with anger.

“The scandal allegations surrounding him and his family have particularly hit a nerve with voters,” Kurdli of De La Salle University told Al Jazeera.

“They have definitely impacted the perceived legitimacy of Marcos Jr as a national leader.”

The latest corruption perceptions index conducted by Transparency International (TI) reflects that assessment.

According to the anticorruption body’s latest report, the Philippines has slipped six notches lower, ranking 120th out of 182 territories covered.

In response to the TI report, presidential spokesperson Claire Castro said Marcos Jr “has not lost interest” in fighting corruption, and is working to strengthen government institutions.

‘Ghost projects’

It was in the middle of last year when allegations first emerged that Marcos Jr had abused his authority by approving three consecutive national budgets riddled with questionable infrastructure projects amounting to billions of dollars.

Among those implicated in the alleged scheme was Ferdinand Martin Romualdez, the once-powerful speaker of the House of Representatives and a first cousin of Marcos Jr, who oversaw the drafting of the national budget.

He was accused by opposition congresspeople of manipulating the budget. An investigation by a Philippine news website also linked him to multimillion-dollar homes in the Philippines and the United States that are allegedly not listed in his government disclosure forms. He has since relinquished his post but has not been called to account despite massive protests and political pressure.

Also accused of cornering millions of dollars in public funds for pet projects were the president’s sister, Senator Maria Imelda Marcos, and his son, Ferdinand Alexander Marcos, a congressman.

Combined, the three Marcos relatives secured government projects worth at least $560m in the last three years, according to public works department data and the National Expenditure Program listed in the budget. They have all denied wrongdoing related to the awarding of the lucrative projects.

Private contractors and government bureaucrats were also linked to the scandal.

Some were reported by the news media to have spent their newfound wealth on Bentley and Rolls-Royce vehicles and gambling sprees. One mid-ranking official, whose monthly salary was the equivalent of $1,250, admitted during a congressional inquiry that he owned a GMC Denali SUV worth $200,000, a Lamborghini Urus worth between $500,000 and $700,000 and a Ferrari estimated at $1m.

Further investigations revealed several nonexistent government infrastructure initiatives, described as “ghost projects”, worth millions of dollars. Marcos Jr himself discovered an abandoned flood control project estimated to be about $1m in Baliwag, a city just north of Metro Manila.

In Quezon City in Metro Manila, the local government reported that 35 flood control projects were missing out of the 331 listed, with a total budget of almost $300m.

According to estimates by the Department of Finance, alleged corruption in flood control projects cost taxpayers approximately $2bn between 2023 and 2025.

The scale of the corruption allegations has reminded some Filipinos of the time when Marcos Sr and his wife, Imelda, ruled the country in what historians have described as a “conjugal dictatorship”.

During their two decades in power, the Marcos couple were accused of emptying the Philippine treasury of up to $10bn.

Masigan, the political analyst and economist, said despite all efforts to distance himself from the ongoing scandal, it is difficult for the current president to do so.

“The three budgets were authored, presided over and approved by the president himself. He signed it,” Masigan said.

“Everything leads to him.”

‘Give Marcos some credit’

Jan Credo, political science professor at Silliman University in Dumaguete City, Philippines, said despite the fierce criticism of the president, Marcos Jr should still get some credit for his role in highlighting the massive corruption scandal during his annual State of the Nation Address last year.

“President Marcos, in fact, started the expose when he chastised members of Congress and told them, ‘Shame on you’, for their involvement in the alleged massive bribery,” Credo told Al Jazeera.

“What this has generated is the consciousness among the public about the issue that led to the crystallisation of the social movement against corruption,” he said.

“If you ask me, Marcos Jr does not have anything to do” with the corruption, Credo said, blaming his close allies instead.

Credo also did not believe that the ongoing scandal would cost Marcos Jr the support of one of the country’s most powerful institutions, the military. Over the last four decades, two Philippine presidents, including Marcos Sr, were forced out of office in popular revolts backed by the military. Two other presidents faced coup attempts.

“Marcos Jr may be in survival mode now. But he is also fortunate to have a military that is highly professionalised and no longer politicised,” Credo said.

“The recent calls by retired military officers to withdraw support from Marcos Jr have not gained traction, because we have learned their lesson,” he explained.

Political analyst Masigan agreed, saying a move by the military was “out of the question”, noting that while there were some whispers for Marcos Jr’s removal, “nothing is being seriously considered”.

“As far as the military is concerned, they are loyal to the constitution; there is no movement to oust the president and have a caretaker government,” he added.

Securing a legacy

With just about two more years left in office, Marcos Jr still wields enough power to change the narrative of his administration, restore the Marcos name and implement policies that help Filipinos, political observers who spoke to Al Jazeera said.

But the president must act fast before the narrowing window of opportunity closes on him, and he becomes a “lame duck” leader, they added.

Major legislation that needs to be addressed includes government transparency, education, energy and investment reforms, as well as an overhaul of the transport and manufacturing industries, said Kurdli of De La Salle University.

But the most urgent policy reform that Marcos Jr has to address is the passage of a law banning political dynasties, which is the main culprit of corruption in the country, Masigan and Credo said.

“If he really wants to have an impact, he must get the antipolitical dynasty law passed,” Masigan said of the president.

In the Philippines, political dynasties have dominated about 80 percent of seats in the Senate and the House, according to a 2025 analysis by the Anti-Dynasty Network.

At the Philippine Senate, for instance, there are four sets of siblings occupying a third of the 24-seat chamber. At least eight other senators have close family members in the House.

President Marcos Jr comes from a dynasty himself. He has one sibling in the Senate, a son and two cousins in the House, and several relatives elected as town and provincial executives.

Vice President Duterte, who is the daughter of former President Rodrigo Duterte, is no different. Her brother, nephew and a cousin are serving in Congress. Another brother serves as the mayor of the Duterte stronghold, Davao City, while a nephew serves as the vice mayor.

While political dynasties are prohibited under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, Congress has failed to pass a supplementary law that spells out what a ban should look like.

For Credo, getting the antipolitical dynasty law passed is “a tall order” for Marcos Jr, given that a vast majority of legislators come from dynasties, guaranteeing fierce resistance.

“But if he can get it done, that would be a major achievement on his part. He will be able to secure his place in the history books,” Credo added.

Masigan said, given the Marcos family history, it is really up to the Filipino citizenry to keep the pressure on and demand real reforms from the government.

“I’ve seen how the Marcoses operate since the 1970s. They are fond of creating a semblance of reforms and giving people hope. But it will never come to fruition,” Masigan said.

“I hope this time it’s different. But I am not holding my breath.”

Monterrey, Mexico – Portraits of the missing cover Guadalajara’s “Roundabout of the Disappeared”, a landmark renamed by families to highlight the state’s disappearance crisis.

On February 22, the streets surrounding the memorial and throughout the city stood empty after the Mexican army killed Ruben Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, the longtime leader of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG).

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

In retaliation, cartel members set fire to buses and taxis, erecting a series of blockades that spread across 20 states.

The widespread unrest demonstrated the CJNG’s capacity for rapid coordination, fuelled by a ‘franchise’ model that allows smaller cells to operate under the cartel’s brand and vast financial network.

While the group’s economic reach extends into Europe and Asia, its power remains rooted in its paramilitary force. This structure relies on extortion, brutal violence and forced disappearances as its main tools to seize territory and control markets.

Oseguera Cervantes, known as “El Mencho”, consolidated one of Mexico’s most powerful criminal organisations in part due to a unique franchise-based structure.

According to the United States Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), the CJNG maintains a presence in every state of Mexico, with varying levels of influence, and operates in more than 40 countries across the Americas, Europe, Asia and Africa, and throughout the US. Its primary activity is the trafficking of cocaine, fentanyl and methamphetamine.

Raul Zepeda Gil, a teaching fellow in War Studies at King’s College London, notes that rather than following a “classic organisational pyramid”, the CJNG avoids a centralised financial network.

“Instead, profits can be distributed across many locations and groups simultaneously,” Zepeda told Al Jazeera.

Besides controlling key areas in western Mexico, the CJNG controls the Pacific Coast region, including the strategic ports of Manzanillo and Lazaro Cardenas, crucial for the import of synthetic precursor chemicals.

“Their most important activity is drug trafficking,” Zepeda said. “Chemical precursors that arrive from China reach Mexican ports and are then sent to the United States already in fentanyl form.”

The organisation also generates revenues through fuel theft, illegal mining, extortion, migrant smuggling and money laundering.

On February 19, the US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned a timeshare fraud network led by the CJNG that targeted elderly Americans.

“Timeshare fraud in Mexico has plagued American victims for decades, costing them hundreds of millions of dollars while enriching criminal organisations such as CJNG,” the Treasury Department stated in a press release.

The CJNG’s extensive reach and rapid growth are made possible by a vast, powerful network that protects drug trafficking operations and ensures impunity, says Carlos Flores, an investigator at the Centre for Research and Higher Education in Social Anthropology (CIESAS). Flores argues that these “hegemonic power networks”, shadow networks of business leaders, politicians, and criminals, have reconfigured state institutions to serve their own interests.

“These same networks, which control and administer state institutions – including security institutions – focus their actions primarily against their competitors, while simultaneously allowing these other networks to consolidate their power,” he added.

The rise of a deadly paramilitary force

Forced disappearances and extortion are crucial for the CJNG’s control of the market, seeding fear that silences communities and facilitates forced recruitment. This ensures a steady supply of disposable labour while following the ‘no body, no crime’ logic that minimises the political and legal costs of their operations.

Homicides and forced disappearances have surged in Jalisco since the group emerged in 2010. The CJNG rose from the remnants of the Milenio Cartel, a subordinate partner of the Sinaloa Cartel based in Oseguera Cervantes’s home state of Michoacan. While across Mexico more than 130,000 people are missing, Jalisco currently ranks at the top with at least 16,000 reported cases, and collectives of families continue to uncover mass graves and what they describe as “extermination sites”.

Raul Servin, a member of the Guerreros Buscadores, a collective representing more than 400 families of the disappeared, told Al Jazeera that their searches frequently reveal human remains in varying states of decay and torture. They have found victims who were shot, hanged or killed with bladed weapons that were left inside the bodies, he said.

“It’s a sadness and helplessness we feel when we see each body these people leave behind,” said Servin, who has been searching for his son since 2018.

Beyond its financial power, the CJNG is notorious for its extensive arsenal of military-grade weaponry, including armed drones, rocket-propelled grenades, and firearms.

On February 22, more than 25 National Guard members were killed in Jalisco. In the past, the organisation has also carried out high-profile attacks against public officials.

Last year in February, US President Donald Trump designated the Jalisco New Generation Cartel as a foreign terrorist organisation. In July, US prosecutors in Virginia unsealed an indictment against Petar Dimitrov Mirchev, a Bulgarian national accused of conspiring with East African associates to equip the CJNG with military-grade weaponry. The indictment states that Mirchev brokered these deals “despite knowing that the CJNG inflicts catastrophic suffering” to protect its prolific drug trafficking operations.

The indictment also revealed that the CJNG was attempting to buy surface-to-air missiles and anti-aircraft systems (ZU-23). Overall, Mirchev allegedly created a list of weaponry worth approximately $58m.

The paramilitary profile has allowed the CJNG to expand rapidly into rival territories and monopolise the market. Flores describes this training, deployment, and weaponry as being similar to an army, making them “practically uncontestable”.

“They operate under a different kind of logic,” Flores said. “They provide a kind of licence to [local] groups that associate with them. They fight their enemies and collaborate on trafficking in exchange for using the Jalisco New Generation Cartel as a label.”

The CJNG adopted a level of brutality similar to Los Zetas, whose founders were elite Mexican special forces soldiers trained by the US and Israel. In its early days, the CJNG was known as the “Matazetas”, or Zetas Killers.

Servin and the Guerreros Buscadores have seen the results of this brutality firsthand. Locating the missing becomes more difficult as concealment tactics evolve, Servin said. Disappearances have become a powerful economic tool to control and exploit territory. Collectives often find bodies buried under layers of dirt and animal carcasses to throw off the scent, or even encased in concrete.

“They make us work harder than necessary. If they took his life, why not leave him where we can find him quickly?”

Zepeda says that the CJNG leveraged military-grade tactics to fill the void left by the government’s crackdown on other cartels carried out between 2008 and 2010. In 2009, the Beltran-Leyva Organisation – which had been at war with the Sinaloa Cartel since their 2008 split – was reeling from a series of high-profile arrests and killings.

The death of Ignacio “Nacho” Coronel, a key finance operator for the Sinaloa Cartel, at the hands of the military in 2010 further cleared the way for new criminal players. Oseguera Cervantes was working under Coronel before breaking away to form what would become the CJNG.

“If we could summarise the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, it’s a reinvention of Los Zetas, which took over all the territory that the other cartels defeated by the Mexican government had occupied,” Zepeda added.

This history serves as a warning of what may follow the death of Oseguera Cervantes. Zepeda pointed out that the drug trade is an incredibly dynamic market where “there will always be a group of people willing to take control”.

Flores warns that “decapitating the leadership” is insufficient if power networks, along with the CJNG’s criminal and operational structures, remain intact.

“Without dismantling the power networks, yesterday’s victory will become the cause of new violence tomorrow,” Flores said. “We’ve seen this approach many times before, and we know what it leads to: It solves neither the transnational drug problem nor creates conditions of greater stability for the Mexican population.”

Neve Campbell helped cement the “Scream” franchise’s legacy in the horror genre, which is why stepping away from the sixth movie was a difficult decision.

But it’s one the actor stands by, she told “CBS Mornings” on Tuesday, adding that she “didn’t think I could live with myself walking on set.”

Campbell, the original “Scream” queen, declined to return for the sixth film following a pay dispute.

“I just didn’t feel right. I just knew that my value to this franchise was bigger than what had been offered,” Campbell told the morning show. “For me, I needed to make that choice.”

However, the actor is now back for “Scream 7” after securing a nearly $7-million deal, according to Variety.

The seventh installment is expected to open to a franchise-high $45 million to $50 million in North America this weekend, according to Variety.

But the film’s journey to the big screen wasn’t easy. Melissa Barrera and Jenna Ortega led the sixth movie in lieu of Campbell, both of whom subsequently left the franchise in 2023. Director Christopher Landon also exited the movie shortly after.

Barrera was fired from the seventh film in late 2023 after sharing on social media pro-Palestinian statements regarding the Israel-Hamas war. Ortega then exited the film, citing her conflicting filming schedule for Netflix’s “Wednesday.”

In “Scream 7,” Sidney Prescott is now a mom living a quiet family life; a “pretty bold choice” for the character, Campbell told “CBS Mornings,” “considering what happens to most of the people she loves, but she’s decided not to let her past dictate the way she’s going to live her life now.”

Campbell’s co-stars from the original film, along with fans of the franchise, were quick to voice their support for the actor’s decision in 2022. Matthew Lillard, who starred opposite Campbell, tweeted that the decision was “straight up sexism.”

“When I spoke out about it, it wasn’t really to sort of rally everybody,” Campbell said. “It was really just my truth at the time and the fact that people sort of got behind me, I got lovely support and that was really nice.”

Capitalizing on a grand stage Tuesday night, President Trump delivered a State of the Union speech laced with political broadsides blaming Democrats for the nation’s problems, including on immigration and the economy, and heaping praise on himself and his administration for ushering in “a turnaround for the ages.”

He did not mention that after a year of his holding the White House and his party controlling both chambers of Congress, many Americans remain displeased and financially frustrated, with increasing numbers blaming Trump, according to polling.

The speech was heavy on partisan attacks, but light on any real acknowledgment of — or proposed path out of — the mounting political tensions that are roiling the nation under his leadership and threatening his party’s chances of retaining power in the upcoming midterms.

“President Trump’s State of the Union address was deeply disconnected from the lived reality of most Americans and profoundly insulting to the immigrant communities who strengthen and sustain this country every day,” Angelica Salas, executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, said in a statement. “While working families struggle with rising costs, threats to civil liberties, and attacks on fundamental rights, the Trump Administration continues to choose distortion over truth and division over unity.”

Time and again, Trump criticized the Democrats in the room — for not taking his bait and applauding as he waxed on about his immigration agenda, for not agreeing with his pronouncements against transgender athletes, for not being sufficiently adulatory toward members of the U.S. men’s hockey team for winning gold at the recent Winter Olympics.

“These people are crazy,” Trump said of Democrats, after they wouldn’t agree with his comments on transgender athletes. “You should be ashamed of yourself,” he said after they wouldn’t clap for his remarks about “illegal aliens.”

The speech went over well with many Republicans.

“Last Night, President Trump gave the BEST and LONGEST State of the Union speech in history because of ALL the many wins he had to tout,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote on X. “In one year, we have REVERSED the damage we inherited from Biden and the Democrats and we are delivering for the American people.”

Democrats watched sedately, or with barely obscured disdain, with brief scoffs and a few vocal rebuttals. But in their remarks afterward, they slammed Trump for ignoring Americans’ mounting displeasure with his agenda.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the speech “Trump’s state of delusion.”

“For nearly two hours, the president inflated his ego, rewrote reality, and offered zero solutions to the problems American families are struggling with every day,” Schumer said.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said the speech was “riddled with dirty rotten lies.”

Many other Democrats also bristled over Trump’s rose-colored depiction of the nation as thriving, the economy as “roaring.”

Trump repeatedly mentioned his campaign to crack down on illegal immigration and his administration’s success in reducing border crossings. But he made no mention of one of the largest scandals of his first year in office — the killings of U.S. citizens Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis — or the cratering public support for his immigration campaign overall.

He mentioned bombing Iran’s nuclear sites last year and said negotiations against future weapons development are ongoing. But he didn’t explain why the Pentagon has led a buildup of U.S. aircraft and warships in the Middle East, or address mounting concerns that he is preparing to take the nation to war.

He spoke of bringing down healthcare costs through several unproven programs, such as his “TrumpRx” prescription platform, but didn’t mention that under his party’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” and its cuts to Obamacare subsidies, millions of Americans are facing increased healthcare costs.

He talked about violent crime declining under his administration, a trend any president would claim as a success. But he skipped over the fact that the declines are a clear continuation of sharp drops under the Biden administration — the same drops he had vociferously denied during his 2024 campaign.

Every president treats the State of the Union as a chance to highlight their wins, less a venue for mulling over controversies or losses. It is a time-honored tradition, but also political theater — a chance for a president to project strength no matter the headwinds they are facing, as Trump did over and over again in his nearly two-hour speech.

But as many Democrats noted, his assessment also conflicted with the sentiments of many Americans, in poll after poll.

“The truth is that the State of our Union does not feel strong for everyone,” said Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) in his Spanish-language rebuttal to the speech. “Not when the costs of rent, food and electricity keep rising. Not when Republicans raise our medical costs to fund tax cuts for billionaires. And definitely not when federal agents — armed and masked — terrorize our communities by targeting people because of the color of their skin or for speaking Spanish — including immigrants with legal status and citizens.”

Minneapolis and other parts of the nation have been beset by poorly trained federal forces waging immigration round-ups that have left communities in fear and American citizens detained and even dead in the streets. Anger over those tactics has dominated the political discussion for months. In his speech, Trump never addressed the Minneapolis campaign head-on.

For months, Trump has also rattled key U.S. allies, including North Atlantic Treaty Organization partners, by repeatedly demanding that the United States be given Greenland, a territory of Denmark. He couched the stunning breach of diplomatic norms as a necessity given sweeping U.S. security concerns in the region. But in his speech, he made no mention of his demands or those concerns.

And while Trump asserted the “state of the union is strong,” he gave little explanation for why he has repeatedly denigrated and targeted the cornerstones of its federal system.

In the last year, Trump has cast himself and the executive office as all powerful; a substantial swath of the federal judiciary as “radical left” lunatics; the nation’s state-controlled voting system as corrupt and unreliable; and many Democrats and other political opponents as illegitimate or even criminal.

He has repeatedly asserted the power to reject decisions and reallocate federal spending by Congress, rewrite by executive fiat the Constitution and core rights within it such as birthright citizenship, and command or coerce states and a vast swath of civil society — including universities and law firms — to align with him politically or face devastating financial losses, including by demanding unprecedented mid-decade redistricting by red states to better his chances of Republican victory in the midterms.

Trump has tried to assert his will on the Federal Reserve, which is designed to independently lead the nation’s economy, and called Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell “incompetent” — which can’t be a good sign for the nation’s economy, no matter how you parse it.

As Trump walked out of the room Tuesday night having addressed few of those unprecedented moves, Republicans showered him with praise — with some telling him he’d just delivered the best State of the Union ever.

Many Democrats, meanwhile, wondered which union the president had been describing.

Since the reintroduction of the last-16 knockout round to Europe’s showpiece competition in 2003-04, there has always been at least one Italian representative.

Not since 1987-88, when Napoli went out in the first round of the European Cup to Real Madrid, has Serie A had no teams in the last 16 of the competition – or first knockout round when it took other formats.

After Inter’s exit on Tuesday, many Italian football experts were labelling it a disaster for the sport in their country.

“It is a piece of history,” said journalist Vincenzo Credendino. “Speaking about Italy and Inter, this is one of the worst pieces.”

Another Italian football journalist, Daniele Verri, said all three sides failing to make the knockouts would have been a “complete debacle, a disaster for our clubs”.

Atalanta’s progress – and the manner in which they battled through – at least provides hope, although it doesn’t get easier for them in the last 16, with either Arsenal or Bayern Munich awaiting.

But against Dortmund, they showed the kind of self-belief that will stand them in good stead against either the Premier League or Bundesliga leaders.

“Now Atalanta are the darlings of Italian football,” former West Brom and Aston Villa defender Curtis Davies said on BBC Radio 5 Live.

European football expert James Horncastle added: “They’re sort of Serie A’s Bodo/Glimt in many respects.

“They were a yo-yo club until about eight years ago and we’ve not only seen them win a European trophy and reach three Coppa Italia finals but really establish themselves in the Champions League.”

Football journalist Nicky Bandini described Atalanta’s comeback win as “significant” for Italian football, adding: “I think there would be more of a feelgood factor that carries over for a team like Atalanta than there would be for Juventus or for Inter because they haven’t been traditionally one of the big teams of Italian football.”

The Cuban flag is raised during a ceremony to reopen the Cuban embassy to the United States in Washington, D.C., on July 20, 2015. Officials at the Embassy said Wednesday that a shootout between Cuban border guards and people aboard a U.S.-registered boat near the Cuban coast left four people dead. File Photo by Kevin Dietsch/UPI | License Photo

Feb. 25 (UPI) — Cuban border guards shot and killed four people on a U.S.-flagged speedboat that approached to about a nautical mile off the island nation’s coast Wednesday, the Cuban Embassy in the United States said.

The Embassy said the speedboat, registered in Florida, opened fire on the Cuban vessel, injuring its commander. The Cuban border guard boat with five service members had approached the speedboat to identify those aboard.

The incident took place near Cayo Falcones in the Villa Clara province.

“As a consequence of the confrontation, as of the time of this report, four aggressors on the foreign vessel were killed and six were injured,” the statement from the Embassy said. “The injured individuals were evacuated and received medical assistance.

“In the face of current challenges, Cuba reaffirms its determination to protect its territorial waters, based on the principle that national defense is a fundamental pillar of the Cuban State in safeguarding its sovereignty and ensuring stability in the region.”

Cuban officials didn’t identify those aboard the Florida-registered speedboat.

The Embassy said authorities were investigating the incident to “fully clarify the events.”

This is a developing story.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi defended Israel’s devastating war on Gaza, saying it stands by the country “with full conviction” – despite accusations of genocide against the Palestinian people.

Modi gave a speech to the Knesset, or parliament, on Wednesday, on the first day of his two-day visit and received a standing ovation as he stressed India’s enduring support for Israel.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

It was the first time an Indian leader addressed the Knesset.

“India stands with Israel firmly, with full conviction, in this moment and beyond,” said Modi, condemning the October 7, 2023, attack by Hamas-led fighters as “barbaric”, adding “no cause can justify the murder of civilians”.

India’s leader was earlier greeted by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Ben Gurion International Airport, where a welcoming ceremony was held.

In his own Knesset speech, Netanyahu thanked India for “standing by” Israel in the wake of October 7, and said the two nations shared “common interests”. He described Modi as “more than a friend, a brother”.

Modi said New Delhi expressed “strong support” for the Gaza peace initiative approved by the UN Security Council in November. It “offers a pathway”, he said, adding India believes “it holds the promise of a just and durable peace for all the people of the region”.

‘Trusted partners’

The Indian leader said the two countries are “trusted partners” and this “contributes to global stability and prosperity”.

He described their relations as “vital” for trade and security, and hailed “synergy” on artificial intelligence, quantum technology, and other topics.

“We are committed to further consolidating this relationship across many sectors,” he added.

Modi’s first trip to Israel was in 2017 after relations between the two countries warmed following his election in 2014. Netanyahu also visited India in 2018.

Haaretz newspaper journalist Gideon Levy told Al Jazeera that Modi’s visit cannot be underestimated.

“India is a highly important country and [Modi] showing himself … in these times when public opinion in India is very critical about Israel is a step that cannot be underestimated,” said Levy.

He pointed to similarities between Netanyahu and Modi, saying both are “nationalist, populist in a way, quite conservative, and hawkish. Both countries carry also some stains, Kashmir, Palestine, the West Bank”.

Israel’s largest arms buyer

In September 2025, India and Israel signed the Bilateral Investment Treaty to expand trade during far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s visit to India.

India is Israel’s largest arms buyer, spending $20.5bn on Israeli weapons between 2020 and 2024. In 2024, trade between the two, largely based on defence and security, stood at $3.9bn.

Modi has received criticism for his support for Israel during its genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, which has killed at least 72,073 people and wounded 171,756. At least 615 of those deaths occurred during the “ceasefire” agreed between Israel and Hamas last October.

Last week, India was one of the more than 100 countries condemning Israel’s recent moves to expand its control of the occupied West Bank and move towards annexation.

Imran Masood, a parliamentarian for India’s Congress party, urged Modi to address Gaza during his visit, saying, “if there is any morality then he should talk about death of children in Gaza”, ANI news agency reported.

“India’s stand is clear … that it supports Palestine,” said Masood.

Marian Alexander Baby, leader of the Communist Party of India, said Modi’s embrace of Israel is “a betrayal of India’s anti-colonial legacy and our long-standing position in support of the right to self determination of the Palestinian people, reaffirmed by UN resolutions that India has co-sponsored and voted for”.

Modi continues his visit to Israel on Thursday.