News Desk

Nov. 28 (UPI) — Andriy Yermak, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky‘s chief of staff, resigned Friday after a raid on his home in a sweeping corruption scandal.

Yermak had led Ukraine‘s negotiating team in peace talks with the President Donald Trump administration. He was the most powerful political figure in Ukraine behind Zelensky.

“This is the perfect storm. There is a lot of uncertainty right now,” a Ukrainian official told Axios.

He was scheduled to travel to Miami on Saturday for talks with Trump’s team, but that meeting has been canceled.

On Friday, Hungarian President Viktor Orban met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow in defiance of the rest of the European Union members. Orban said his visit was an attempt to secure Russian energy supplies for the winter for Hungary, Slovakia and Serbia.

Zelensky announced Yermak’s resignation and said he will appoint a new chief of staff soon.

No charges have been filed as of this writing.

“Russia really wants Ukraine to make mistakes. There will be no mistakes on our side,” Zelensky said in a video on X. “We do not have the right to ease the pressure. We do not have the right to retreat or to quarrel among ourselves. If we lose our unity, we risk losing everything.”

Investigators from Ukraine’s National Anti-corruption Bureau and Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office did the searches Thursday morning targeting Yermak, the Kyiv Post reported.

In a Telegram post, Yermak confirmed the searches.

“Today, NABU and SAPO are indeed conducting procedural actions at my home. There are no obstacles for the investigators,” he said.

Yermak said investigators were given full access to his apartment.

“My lawyers are on site, interacting with law enforcement officers. From my side, I am providing full assistance,” he added.

While officials have not confirmed why the searches were conducted, reporter Christopher Miller of the Financial Times said that his sources confirmed it was part of Operation Midas, an investigation into large-scale bribery in the energy sector in Ukraine.

NABU also confirmed the searches.

“NABU and SAPO are conducting investigative actions (searches) at the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine. The investigative actions are authorized and are being carried out within the framework of the investigation. Details to follow,” the agency said on Telegram.

Justice Minister Herman Halushchenko and Energy Minister Svitlana Hrynchuk resigned Nov. 12 after investigators uncovered that officials at the state nuclear energy company Energoatom had manipulated contracts to generate bribes and laundered about $100 million.

On Nov. 13, Zelensky sanctioned his former business partner Timur Mindich over his role in the scandal.

Naval mutinies have long captured the public imagination, but, for the most part, open rebellions on the high seas are consigned to the Age of Exploration, in centuries past. One notable exception occurred in the Soviet Navy 50 years ago this month and, based on available evidence, almost led to the use of nuclear weapons. The mutiny aboard the frigate Storozhevoy is all the more remarkable for the fact that the Kremlin attempted to cover up its existence, with details only emerging in public a decade after its bloody end.

The story was dramatic enough, and its potential implications were worrisome enough for it to be an inspiration for Tom Clancy’s iconic Cold War novel (which in turn led to the film), The Hunt for Red October. This is the story of the fictional Soviet submarine captain Marko Ramius, who apparently goes rogue while commanding a highly advanced ballistic missile submarine.

In the real-life incident, the protagonist was 36-year-old Valery Mikhailovich Sablin, a political officer onboard the Storozhevoy, a Project 1135 anti-submarine warfare frigate, known to NATO as the Krivak I class, and with a displacement of around 3,000 tons. A representative image of a Krivak I is seen at the top of this story, at anchor.

At the time, this was one of the most advanced surface combatants in Soviet service. It had been commissioned in 1974, and it was assigned to the Baltic Fleet. The primary anti-submarine armament of the Krivak I was the quadruple launcher for URPK-4 Metel’ missiles (known to NATO as SS-N-14 Silex), located on the bow, each of which transported a torpedo payload. This feature led to the NATO mnemonic ‘Hot dog pack, smokestack, guns in back — KRIVAK,’ to aid identification.

Unlike Ramius, Sablin was seeking not to defect, but to urge a rethinking of the communist revolution, since he was convinced the Soviet regime had strayed dangerously far from the Marxist principles that he believed in.

Sablin’s plan was to take advantage of the excitement surrounding the anniversary of the 1917 revolution, celebrated every November 7. At the time, the Storozhevoy was moored in Riga, in the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic. Most reports agree that, apart from its primary anti-submarine missiles, the frigate was fully armed, including with surface-to-air missiles for point defense, anti-submarine torpedoes, and 76mm guns.

Sablin wanted to take control of the Storozhevoy and sail east, to Leningrad, where he would arrive alongside the museum ship Aurora (the cruiser that was and remains a potent symbol of the 1917 revolution), and incite something like an uprising against the current regime, under Premier Leonid Brezhnev.

The mutiny began on November 8, 1975, by which time Sablin had already convinced a 20-year-old naval rating, Aleksandr Nikolayevich Shein, and other sympathetic crewmen to assist him.

With a third of the 194-man crew on shore leave, Sablin and Shein surprised and locked up the ship’s commanding officer. The remaining officers were summoned to a meeting, where Sablin explained the situation. Shein stood outside the door armed with a pistol. Those officers who refused to join the mutiny were also locked up.

In the meantime, two crew members had managed to escape the frigate, climbing onto a mooring buoy, then attracting attention. However, their story was not initially taken seriously.

When Sablin became aware that his plan had likely been revealed, he gave up on the idea of reaching Leningrad and instead decided to sail out into international waters, from where he could transmit the speech he had prepared and, he hoped, trigger a new revolution.

Traveling radio silent, with no radar turned on, the Storozhevoy could not move as quickly as usual, since navigation was degraded. Nevertheless, at around 2:50 a.m., the frigate moved out into the Gulf of Riga.

Once it was noticed that the frigate had set sail, a response was launched but seems to have been somewhat slowed down as a result of the effects of copious alcohol consumed in the course of the weekend’s revolutionary celebrations.

Still, 45 minutes after the Storozhevoy sailed, other ships began their pursuit.

Unfortunately for Sablin, the Soviet authorities were now convinced that he must be poised to defect to the West.

Early on the morning of November 9, a large flotilla was ordered to find the Storozhevoy, including warships sailing from Liepaja, also in the Latvian SSR. Among them were small missile corvettes, faster than the Krivak I.

It seems the first vessels to sight the Storozhevoy were torpedo-armed patrol boats from the Soviet Border Troops, who ordered the frigate to stop, but their signals were ignored. They were then ordered to fire upon the rogue warship, but this order was rescinded before they could open fire.

The reason for the change of plan was that the incident had now been passed higher up through the chain of command, and news of it had reached Moscow.

In the meantime, Sablin had sent an encrypted telegram to the commander-in-chief of the Soviet Navy, laying out his demands. These included declaring the shop a free territory, permission to make a radio and TV broadcast, safe anchorage in Soviet waters, and more. The navy rejected the demands and instead called for Sablin to return the Storozhevoy to port.

A furious Sablin then tried to broadcast a message, outlining the reasons for the mutiny, on an open channel. Unbeknownst to Sablin, the radio operator tasked with the job again used the encrypted channel.

At around 6:00 a.m., the Soviet premier was woken and informed of the situation. Terrified by the prospect of the modern Krivak I class falling into an adversary’s hands, Brezhnev now called for the destruction of the Storozhevoy at all costs. This fear seems to have entirely overridden any concern to hear out the demands of the mutineers, if they were even taken seriously.

Several efforts were made to attack the frigate.

First, it had to be located.

On the morning of the 9th, two Il-38 May maritime patrol aircraft, flying out of Riga, began to look for it. One of them found it at around 8:05 a.m. in the Irben Sound, the main exit out of the Gulf of Riga and into the Baltic Sea.

Ultimately, the commander of Naval Aviation of the Baltic Fleet called for Tu-16K-10-26 Badger-C bombers to strike the Storozhevoy with K-10S (AS-2 Kipper) anti-ship cruise missiles, including authorizing the use of nuclear-armed weapons. Nine of these bombers were launched from Bykhov Air Base in the Belarusian SSR at 8:30 a.m. At least one of the aircraft appears to have been carrying a nuclear-tipped version of the K-10S missile. As well as a single K-10S, the Tu-16K-10-26 sub-variant of the Badger was able to carry two KSR-2 (AS-5 Kelt) or the more modern, supersonic KSR-5 (AS-6 Kingfish) anti-ship cruise missiles, but available accounts don’t mention that the aircraft were loaded with these.

The bombers were in the vicinity of the Storozhevoy shortly after 09:00 a.m. For around an hour, the Tu-16s repeatedly dropped below the cloud base and made passes of the frigate, with the aim of forcing Sablin to surrender. Warning shots were fired using the bombers’ 23mm defensive cannons. The Badger-C had a fairly heavy cannon armament, with two 23mm AM-23 cannons each in remotely operated dorsal and ventral turrets and a crewed tail turret, but they were not designed for engaging surface targets.

When the cannons didn’t have the desired effect, the Badger crews instead took to flying very low over the warship, selecting full power on their twin turbojets, and successfully forcing the ship to deviate from its course.

By 10:05 a.m., the Storozhevoy was headed west, toward the Swedish island of Gotland, though Sablin always insisted his original plan was not to enter Swedish waters.

Such evasive action only increased the concerns of the Soviet authorities, who now called into action the Yak-28 Brewer tactical bombers based at Tukums, in the Latvian SSR. Armed with free-fall bombs, these were a more flexible option than the Tu-16s. The Yak-28 unit was informed that they were to attack a foreign warship that had penetrated the Gulf of Riga. However, the unit was also unfamiliar with attacking naval targets and initially failed to locate the Storozhevoy. There was also no coordination between the (Air Force) Yak-28 unit and the (Navy) Il-38 and Tu-16 units.

By 10:00 a.m., there were around 20 Yak-28s in the air and, by 10:20 a.m., these had begun to attack, from a height of around 1,500 feet. Unfortunately for the Air Force, it was the wrong target: The Brewer crews had misidentified a Soviet cargo ship, onto which fragmentation bombs now rained. The ship’s crew radioed for help, and the attack was called off, with no injuries.

At 10:28 a.m., the Yak-28s located the rogue warship and were ordered to hit it, with no warning shots this time. Again, however, bombs were dropped on the wrong target, namely the Komsomolets Litvy, a Project 50 or Riga class frigate, and the lead ship in the flotilla that was chasing the Storozhevoy. The ship launched signal rockets, which were misidentified as anti-aircraft fire, before the pilots realized they had again hit the wrong ship.

The Soviet commanders then called upon the Tu-16 units once more. The pursuit flotilla was ordered to move, and the bombers tasked with holding station behind the Storozhevoy, from where K-10S missiles would be launched.

The order then came at 10:16 a.m. to launch a missile, including the protocol for the use of nuclear weapons. The Tu-16 flown by the commander of the unit, Colonel Arkhip Savinkov, took position.

By this stage, other members of the frigate’s crew understood that their time was nearly up. A group of them freed the captain and other detained officers, who then armed themselves and stormed the bridge. In the confrontation that followed, Sablin was shot in the leg and was then locked up. The freed captain then sent a message that the mutiny was over.

With the Tu-16 preparing to launch, the headquarters of the Baltic Fleet received an urgent message that the Storozhevoy had surrendered. Orders went out to stop the attack, but Savinkov, the Tu-16 unit’s commander, either didn’t receive them or ignored them, perhaps determining that they were meant for the Yak-28 unit.

For another two tense minutes, after the crew had messaged their surrender, the Tu-16 unit was still hunting the Storozhevoy with the intention to destroy it. Savinkov then reported a radar malfunction. Whether this was true, or a result of him not wishing to unclear a nuclear strike (especially against his countrymen), or that he was now too close to the target to launch a missile, he called off his attack. Puzzlingly, another two Tu-16s from the same unit briefly continued their attack plan. It’s unclear if these Badgers carried Kipper anti-ship missiles armed with conventional warheads, if there was some kind of breakdown in communication between the formation, or if all the bombers involved actually had no real desire to attack the warship.

Regardless, at 11:00 a.m., the fire-damaged Komsomolets Litvy reached the Storozhevoy. With an Il-38 and more Tu-16s patrolling overhead, and several other patrol boats in the vicinity, the boarding party of 15 men took over the vessel. The frigate changed course and was then anchored off the island of Saaremaa. The crew was then returned by boat to Riga. Here they were interviewed, with the 12 sailors identified as mutineers — among them, Sablin and Shein — were arrested and taken to Moscow.

The incident had highlighted the poor combat readiness and inefficient chain of command within the Baltic Fleet, and efforts were immediately made to cover it up, including the destruction of documents.

Nevertheless, details leaked out, and some presumed details of the mutiny began to be published in the Western media. A key source of information was Swedish military intelligence, which had monitored the events via signals intelligence (SIGINT). Early Western reports included erroneous accounts that as many as 15 sailors had been killed aboard the Storozhevoy and that 35 more were killed on the ship that was accidentally attacked — the Komsomolets Litvy.

As for the two ringleaders, Shein was imprisoned, while Sablin was sentenced to death for treason and executed in August 1976.

In retrospect, the idealistic Sablin’s plan was likely always doomed to failure. It remains fortunate, however, that his was the only life lost in an incident that could have had much more serious repercussions. Indeed, the available evidence that has emerged since the mutiny suggests that, back in November 1975, only a few minutes stood between the Soviet Navy launching a nuclear strike against one of its own vessels.

Ultimately, perhaps, Colonel Arkhip Savinkov, as commander of what appears to have been a nuclear-armed Tu-16, might have been the one responsible for preventing what could have been a catastrophe. Ironically, the fact that he didn’t launch his missile, for whatever reason, meant that he would be viewed with suspicion by the Soviet military leadership for the rest of his career.

The author is indebted to the work of Michael Friedholm von Essen, whose authoritative account of the mutiny aboard the Storozhevoy is published by Helion & Company.

Contact the author: [email protected]

VICTORIA Bechkam has shared an emotional photo and message for son Brooklyn as the festive season begins.

The mum posted a heartbreaking sign she wants son Brooklyn home for Christmas amid their ongoing family feud.

The family have been at odds for months but Victoria has sent an olive branch, proving she’s still thinking of her eldest son.

The singer and fashion mogul took to her Instagram Stories to share a video from her mother Jackie’s home, where all the grandchildren’s Christmas stockings are up. 

Notably tied to the fireplace was Brooklyn’s embroidered name into his very own stocking. 

Speaking to the camera as she panned over the decorations, she said: “So I’m here at my mom and dad’s house and look how cute. 

READ MORE ON THE BECKHAM’S

WORK IT OUT

Cruz Beckham posts cryptic swipe amid family feud with Brooklyn

say it again

David Beckham recreates viral ‘be honest’ clip after Victoria surprises him

“They’ve got all of the grandchildren’s stockings up ready for Christmas.”

Victoria’s message shows that Brooklyn is still welcome at the Beckham household for Christmas and that he’s in the family’s thoughts.

She also shared a clip of some vintage stockings from her and her younger siblings Louise and Christian’s childhood.

The family have always been close at Christmas often sharing a barrage of sweet pics together over the previous years.

Victoria’s subtle attempt to bridge the family feud comes after her youngest son Cruz made a more blatant plea to his estranged brother Brooklyn.

This week Cruz took to his social media posting a cryptic message hinting that the family rift is getting the better of him. 

Alongside a close-up photo of his face he wrote: “Life is too short to be silence, at least talk it out,” with a crying face emoji.

It seemed to be a subtle plea for his older brother to reach out to him in a bid to hash things out once and for all.

The pair are still not following each other on social media, suggesting they’re still in the midst of a feud.

The once tight knit Beckham clan was pulled apart earlier this year when Brooklyn and wife Nicola Peltz failed to attend his dad’s 50th birthday party.

Hot sauce entrepreneur Brooklyn was also absent from dad David’s knighthood celebrations earlier this month.

Golden Balls marked the honour, given to him by King Charles inside Windsor Castle, with a Michelin star meal at pal Gordon Ramsay‘s Chelsea restaurant.

Prior to that, Brooklyn failed to congratulate his dad on achieving the lifelong dream when the honours list was announced.

One of which, David’s fishing trip to Scotland with sons Cruz and Romeo, saw the dad-of-four write on Instagram afterwards: “You were missed Brooklyn Beckham.”

An insider has now said that while a public apology won’t thaw the ice overnight, it would go a long way to healing the feud which is said to be fuelled by ‘anti-Nicola’ stories briefed to the media.

It was previously claimed that a close aide of Victoria and David was responsible for circulating negative stories about Nicola and her family to manipulate a media narrative.

A source told the Mail: “There is an obvious first step which would be a public acknowledgement [by David and Victoria] of what they did, and an apology.

“It cannot be a performative thing. There is no realistic chance of a reconciliation without that happening first.”

The insider added: “It is hard to understand the intensity and the escalation. It seems that they thought they could heap abuse on Nicola without any consequence. They did not let up.

“It matters what was written. It seemed as if things were being said without any regard being paid to the impact on Brooklyn. He is loyal to his wife.”

CME blamed the outage, which halted trading for more than 11 hours, on a cooling failure at a data centre in Chicago.

Global futures markets were thrown into chaos for several hours after CME Group, the world’s largest exchange operator, suffered one of its longest outages in years, halting trading across stocks, bonds, commodities and currencies.

By 13:35 GMT on Friday, trading in foreign exchange, stock and bond futures as well as other products had resumed, after having been knocked out for more than 11 hours because of an outage at an important data centre, according to LSEG data.

CME blamed the outage on a cooling failure at data centres run by CyrusOne, which said its Chicago-area facility had affected services for customers, including CME.

The disruption stopped trading in major currency pairs on CME’s EBS platform, as well as benchmark futures for West Texas Intermediate crude, Nasdaq 100, Nikkei, palm oil and gold, according to LSEG data.

‘A black eye’

Trading volumes have been thinned out this week by the United States Thanksgiving holiday, and with dealers looking to close positions for the end of the month, there was a risk of volatility picking up sharply later on, market participants said.

“It’s a black eye to the CME and probably an overdue reminder of the importance of market structure and how interconnected all these are,” Ben Laidler, head of equity strategy at Bradesco BBI, said.

“We complacently take for granted that much of the timing is frankly not great. It’s month-end, a lot of things get rebalanced.”

“Having said that, it could have been a lot worse; it’ll be a very low-volume day. If you’re going to have it, there would have been worse days to have a breakdown like this,” he said.

Futures are a mainstay of financial markets and are used by dealers, speculators and businesses wishing to hedge or hold positions in a wide range of underlying assets. Without these and other instruments, brokers were left flying blind, and many were reluctant to trade contracts with no live prices for hours on end.

“Beyond the immediate risk of traders being unable to close positions – and the potential costs that follow – the incident raises broader concerns about reliability,” said Axel Rudolph, senior technical analyst at trading platform IG.

A few European brokerages said earlier in the day they had been unable to offer trading in some products on certain futures contracts.

Biggest exchange operator

CME is the biggest exchange operator by market value and says it offers the widest range of benchmark products, spanning rates, equities, metals, energy, cryptocurrencies and agriculture.

Average daily derivatives volume was 26.3 million contracts in October, CME said earlier this month.

The CME outage on Friday comes more than a decade after the operator had to shut electronic trading for some agricultural contracts in April 2014 due to technical problems, which at the time sent traders back onto the floor.

More recently, in 2024, outages at LSEG and Switzerland’s exchange operator briefly interrupted markets.

CME’s own shares were up 0.4 percent in premarket trading.

Scotland-based rocket company Skyrora has secured a major boost in its latest funding round, thanks to a strategic investment from Ukrainian entrepreneur Max Polyakov. The new capital strengthens Skyrora’s central position in the UK’s plans to establish its own space launch capability.

Closing the UK Launch Gap

Skyrora’s Growing Launch Capabilities

Historic Launch Licence

Sovereign Launch for the UK

Polyakov’s Global Vision

Max Polyakov’s involvement brings not only funding but also a shared vision. He has long championed the idea that space technologies must address global challenges such as climate change and resource management. According to Polyakov, “There is a misconception that by investing in the space sector, we are ignoring significant issues on Earth. But we are no longer going to space just for the achievement: we are going there to seek climate solutions, and we must proactively minimise our impact.” His philosophy perfectly aligns with Skyrora’s mission to make space activity a driver of sustainability on Earth.

Max Polyakov, a Ukrainian-born entrepreneur and economist, is the founder of Noosphere Ventures, a US-based investment fund focused on space and advanced technologies. Through Noosphere, he has built a vertically integrated ecosystem that includes companies like EOS Data Analytics, Dragonfly Aerospace, and SETS.

Building a Global Space Network

Acclaimed architect Robert A.M. Stern, a prominent figure in American architecture who designed notable museums, libraries and residences, died Thursday, according to a statement from the firm he founded. He was 86.

The statement did not specify a cause of death, but said Stern “died comfortably at his home.”

“At RAMSA, we grieve the loss of our founder, mentor, and friend, and remain committed to carrying forth his ideals,” the statement from the firm’s partners said.

Born in Brooklyn, N.Y., in 1939, Stern founded the Robert A. M. Stern Architects firm, now known as RAMSA, in 1969. He gained acclaim for his decades of work and style, which blended postmodernism with contextual design, drawing inspiration from historic and traditional styles.

He was widely known for 15 Central Park West, a luxury condominium featuring a recognizable limestone exterior in Manhattan bordering Central Park. The building opened in 2008 and has attracted prominent, wealthy and famous tenants.

Stern’s works also include the George W. Bush Presidential Center in Dallas, the Museum of the American Revolution in Philadelphia, the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan and Disney’s Yacht and Beach Club Resorts in Florida. Stern also designed Cal State Northridge’s Manzanita Hall in 2003.

He served as dean of the Yale School of Architecture from 1998 to 2016. He was previously the director of Columbia University’s Temple Hoyne Buell Center for the Study of American Architecture.

United States President Donald Trump has sharply escalated his crackdown on immigration with an announcement of a “permanent pause” on migration from “all Third World Countries” late on Thursday.

The president’s remarks came a day after two National Guard members were shot – one of whom has since died from her injuries – in Washington, DC, on Wednesday. An Afghan national has been named as the primary suspect.

“I will permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries to allow the US system to fully recover, terminate all of the millions of Biden illegal admissions,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform.

He did not specify what “third world” means and did not name any countries. But the phrase “third world” generally refers to Global South countries that are economically still developing or economically disadvantaged.

He also said “anyone who is not a net asset to the United States, or is incapable of loving our Country”, will be removed from the US.

Trump added that all federal benefits and subsidies to “noncitizens” will end, and he will “denaturalise migrants who undermine domestic tranquillity, and deport any foreign national who is a public charge, security risk, or non-compatible with Western civilisation”.

Earlier this year, Trump announced a ban on visas for citizens of 12 countries and restrictions for citizens of seven more. He has also introduced other restrictions on travel to the US throughout the year.

Here’s what we know.

What has the Trump administration said?

After Rahmanaullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national, was arrested and named as the suspect in the shooting of the National Guard members on Wednesday, Trump called the shooting “an act of terror”.

In an address to the media on Wednesday night, he said: “We must now re-examine every single alien who has entered our country from Afghanistan under Biden.”

Early on Thursday, US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced an indefinite immediate suspension “of all immigration requests relating to Afghan nationals”.

Effective immediately, processing of all immigration requests relating to Afghan nationals is stopped indefinitely pending further review of security and vetting protocols.

The protection and safety of our homeland and of the American people remains our singular focus and…

— USCIS (@USCIS) November 27, 2025

USCIS Director Joseph Edlow then added on X that, “at the direction” of the president, he had ordered “a full-scale, rigorous re-examination of every green card for every alien from every country of concern”.

“The protection of this country and of the American people remains paramount, and the American people will not bear the cost of the prior administration’s reckless resettlement policies,” Edlow said.

Edlow’s office told US media that the countries for which citizens with green cards will be reviewed would be those on the Trump administration’s June travel ban list.

In June, to “protect the United States from foreign terrorists and other National security and public safety threats”, the Trump administration announced that foreign nationals from 19 countries would face a full travel ban or partial restrictions.

Countries with a full ban in place are Afghanistan, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Those with a partial ban in place – some temporary visas are still allowed – are Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela.

At the direction of @POTUS, I have directed a full scale, rigorous reexamination of every Green Card for every alien from every country of concern.

— USCIS Director Joseph B. Edlow (@USCISJoe) November 27, 2025

On Thursday night, Trump said on Truth Social he would introduce a “permanent pause” on immigration from all “Third World Countries”.

What does a ‘permanent pause’ in immigration mean?

It is unclear.

“In ordinary English, ‘permanent pause’ sounds final, but under immigration law, the term has no defined meaning,” Abhishek Saxena, a New Delhi-based advocate practising in the Supreme Court of India who also handles international immigration consultations, told Al Jazeera.

“Practically, ‘permanent pause’ typically means an open-ended restriction with no stated end date, but not a legally irreversible condition,” he added.

According to the US Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), the president may suspend the entry of immigrants for a fixed period, indefinitely or until the president modifies or lifts the proclamation. This can, however, be challenged. “If any indefinite pause is violating laws passed by US Congress, then such ban or pause can be challenged in a court,” said Saxena.

Roberto Forin, acting director of the Geneva-based Mixed Migration Centre (MMC), said the Trump administration’s vagueness over who these policies apply to and what he means by “permanently pause” or “Third World” is intentional.

“Keeping it undefined allows the administration to indiscriminately intimidate migrant communities in the US and around the world, while giving itself the prerogative to use this ban as another tool in its transactional approach to foreign policy,” Forin told Al Jazeera.

“I would expect the ban to disproportionately affect poorer countries, while sparing those that can offer something in exchange, such as natural resources or other strategic benefits,” he said.

“The objective of such announcements is to signal toughness, shift the narrative, instil fear and dehumanise migrants – regardless of the practical implementation and eventual legal outcomes,” he added.

How will people from such countries who are already living in the US be affected?

It is unclear how people from those countries will be affected until the names of the countries are listed and the immigration measure is implemented.

However, an August report by the Washington, DC-based American Immigration Council concluded that people from the 12 countries on Trump’s June 2025 full travel ban list will “not be able to see family members living abroad”.

“Under the June order, existing visas cannot be revoked, but those who need to leave the United States and renew their visas after they expire could be subjected to the ban instead of being allowed to return,” the report said.

Saxena said a restrictive immigration policy can indirectly affect people in the US in several other ways as well.

“Firstly, it will lead to increased scrutiny of pending applications. USCIS may subject applications from nationals of the affected countries to added background checks, longer security screening, or temporary holds,” he said.

“Secondly, history shows that when a country is placed under heightened security review, [visa] processing times frequently increase,” he noted.

“Lastly, although the government cannot revoke existing residency statuses arbitrarily, it may audit past immigration filings for fraud, misrepresentation, security concerns, or ineligibility under existing statutes,” he added.

Saxena said Trump’s announcement that he will pause immigration from “Third World Countries” would also likely prevent spouses, children, and parents who are abroad from entering the US until the proclamation is lifted.

“This creates long-distance separations, delays in family-based immigration petitions and interruption of family reunification programmes,” he said.

“However, people already inside the US cannot be separated from their families merely because a country is listed in a proclamation. Family-unity principles under the Constitution and the INA apply once a person is inside US territory,” he added.

What if you have a green card?

On Thursday, the Trump administration told journalists that it intends to re-examine all green cards held by people from the countries on the June 2025 travel ban list. However, it is not clear how the process will work or whether green cards could be revoked or even cancelled.

A green card is a US immigration document which allows an immigrant to permanently reside and work in the country.

US immigration judges have the power to revoke green cards and to deport people from the country if there are serious grounds, such as being found guilty of grievous crimes like murder or rape.

The government can also deport an immigrant on these grounds, including if they consider the person “a threat to public safety or if the person violates their visa”.

However, according to Saxena, the government “has no legal authority to revoke green cards without following due process. Any revocation must follow strict statutory procedures and satisfy due-process requirements.”

Last year, the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency detained pro-Palestine activist Mahmoud Khalil on the “basis of his speech” while he was protesting against Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza at Columbia University. Khalil was a permanent US resident at the time, but ICE accused him of omitting information on his green card application.

In September, a US immigration judge ordered that Khalil should be deported to Algeria or Syria, but this has not yet happened.

What other steps has Trump taken this year to restrict immigration?

Besides green card re-examinations and announcing travel bans on citizens of some specific countries, Trump also froze refugee admissions shortly after he resumed office in January.

“The United States lacks the ability to absorb large numbers of migrants, and in particular, refugees, into its communities in a manner that does not compromise the availability of resources for Americans, that protects their safety and security, and that ensures the appropriate assimilation of refugees,” the White House said in a statement in January.

Then, at the end of October, the Trump administration announced the lowest refugee admission cap in the country’s history, limiting entry to just 7,500 people for the fiscal year 2026.

On November 25, according to a memo seen by the Reuters news agency, the Trump administration ordered a review of all refugees allowed into the country under the previous Joe Biden administration, and recommended that their permanent residency applications be paused.

According to the memo, which was reportedly signed by USCIS chief Eldow, the status and applications of about 233,000 refugees who entered the US between January 20, 2021 and February 20, 2025, would be reviewed. The memo cited Trump’s January order on freezing refugee admissions due to national security as a reason.

The US has also cut foreign aid for refugees in host countries.

The Trump administration has also targeted skilled migrant workers in an effort to protect US citizens’ jobs. In September, it increased the application fee for H-1B visas to $100,000 per application. The visa is used by companies in the US hiring overseas workers.

In October, the US Chamber of Commerce filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration for the visa application fee rise, claiming it could harm businesses. The case is pending in the Washington, DC district court.

What does this mean for refugees generally?

“Taken together, these measures, especially if they trigger a ‘race to the bottom’ among governments, could have devastating consequences globally, including in countries already ravaged by conflict and violence,” Forin said.

“We see this happening in Europe as well, from the system the UK has tried to establish to outsource asylum procedures to Rwanda, to the centres Italy tried to set up in Albania, and none of these have worked, because they were blocked by courts at every step.”

“Unfortunately, they have all contributed to the dehumanisation of refugees and migrants, depicting them simply as a threat or a burden, rather than as human beings in need of protection or deserving of a chance at a better future,” Forin added.

Ever since Donald Trump declared that he could end the war in Ukraine “within 24 hours”, much of the world has been waiting to see whether he could force Moscow and Kyiv into a settlement. Millions of views and scrolls, miles of news feeds and mountains of forecasts have been burned on that question.

Trump fed this expectation by insisting that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was running out of options and would eventually have to accept his deal. In reality, the opposite is true. It is Trump who has no leverage. He can threaten Nicolas Maduro with potential military action in or around Venezuela, but he has no influence over Vladimir Putin. Any sanctions harsh enough to damage Russia would also hit the wider Western economy, and there is not a single leader in the West willing to saw off the branch they are sitting on.

Armed intervention is even more implausible. From the first days of the full-scale invasion, NATO decided to support Ukraine with weapons and training while avoiding steps that could trigger a direct NATO–Russia war. That position has not changed.

As a result, Ukraine has been left in a position where, with or without sufficient support from its allies, it is in effect fighting Russia alone. All talk of peace or a ceasefire has proved to be a bluff, a way for Vladimir Putin to buy time and regroup. Putin’s strategy relies on outlasting not only Ukraine’s army but also the patience and political unity of its allies. The United States has now circulated a revised version of its peace framework, softening some of the most contentious points after consultations with Kyiv and several European governments. Yet the Kremlin continues to demand major territorial concessions and the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces. Without this, Russia says it will not halt its advance. Ukraine, for its part, maintains that it will not surrender territory.

Once it became clear that the diplomatic track offered no breakthrough, the United States all but halted arms deliveries to Ukraine. Officials blamed the federal government shutdown, although the real cause was unlikely to be a shortage of movers at the Pentagon. Either way, American military assistance has dwindled to a trickle, consisting mostly of supplies approved under the Biden administration. At his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary-designate Austin Dahmer said: “I’m not aware of any pause in [US military] aid to Ukraine.” It sounded less like a serious assessment and more like an admission of ignorance. Every Ukrainian soldier can feel the consequences of the sharp reduction in American weapons. Every resident of Kyiv and other cities can feel the shortage of air defence systems.

Europe has not filled the gap. The European Union’s defence industry and joint-procurement schemes have produced many promises but little real money. A few billion euros have been formally committed and far less has been delivered. Member states prefer to rearm themselves first and Ukraine second, although their own programmes are moving slowly. The EU remains divided between governments willing to take greater risks to support Kyiv and others that fear provoking Russia or weakening their own budgets. Brussels is now pushing a plan to use frozen Russian assets to back a loan of up to 140 billion euros ($162bn) for Ukraine, which could support Kyiv’s budget and defence spending over the next two years. Several key member states that host most of those reserves remain cautious, and without unanimity, the plan may stall.

This leaves Ukraine expanding its own production and fighting with whatever arrives and whatever is not siphoned off by corrupt figures such as Tymur Mindich, who is under investigation in a major procurement case. For now, Ukraine can slow the enemy at enormous cost, but this is nowhere near enough to win.

The army is under-supplied. The government has failed to sustain motivation or mobilise the country; in fact, it has achieved the opposite. Men are fighting their fourth year of war, while women cannot wait indefinitely. Divorces are rising, exhaustion is deepening, and morale is collapsing. Prosecutors have opened more than 255,000 cases for unauthorised absence and more than 56,000 for desertion since 2022. In the first 10 months of 2025 alone, they registered around 162,500 AWOL cases and 21,600 desertion cases. Other reports suggest that more than 21,000 troops left the army in October, which is the highest monthly figure so far. Social injustice is widening.

Demographically, the picture is equally bleak. Ukraine’s population has fallen from more than 50 million at independence to about 31 million in territory controlled by Kyiv as of early 2025. Births remain below deaths and fertility rates have dropped to about one child per woman.

Against this backdrop, Ukraine is left with three strategic options.

The first option is to accept Putin’s terms. This would mean capitulating, losing political face and giving up territory, but it would preserve a Ukrainian state. It would also lock the country into long-term vulnerability.

The second option is a radical overhaul of Ukraine’s political and military leadership. This would involve rebuilding mobilisation, restructuring the command system and re-engineering the war effort from the ground up. Ukraine cannot fight a long war with institutions that were designed for peacetime politics and rotational deployments.

The third option is to change nothing and maintain the status quo. Ukraine would continue launching precision strikes on Russian oil infrastructure in the hope of grinding down the Kremlin’s economy and waiting for Putin to die. This is an illusion. If such strikes could not break a smaller Ukraine, they will not break a country many times larger in economic, territorial and demographic terms. Damage will be inflicted, but nowhere near enough to force Russia to stop.

Judging by recent statements from Zelenskyy and several of his European partners, Ukraine has effectively committed itself to the third option. The question is how long this approach can be sustained. Even setting aside morale and exhaustion after four years of war, the financial outlook is bleak. Ukraine faces a vast budget deficit and public debt that is likely to exceed 100 percent of gross domestic product. Europe has failed to assemble the necessary funds, Belgium has not released frozen Russian assets and economic growth across much of the continent remains weak. Any significant increase in support would require political courage at a time when voters remain sensitive to the recent inflation surge. The EU is also unable to tie the United States to long-term commitments in the current political climate in Washington.

All this leads to an unavoidable conclusion. If Ukraine intends to survive as a state, it will eventually have to take the second path and undertake a radical restructuring of its political and military leadership. Once that moment arrives, Moscow’s terms will be harsher than they are now. The Russian ultimatum is likely to expand from claims on four regions to demands for eight, along with strict control mechanisms, demilitarisation and further concessions.

Radical change is needed immediately, before Ukraine’s strategic options narrow further and before its ability to resist collapses with them.

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

Stranger Things season five part one has just landed on Netflix and fans are already begging for more.

Stranger Things is “not over”, with multiple spin-offs in the works as the unforgettable sci-fi drama begins its final chapter.

Stranger Things has been a global phenomenon since it originally debuted in 2016 and now, nine years later, its story is finally getting wrapped up as the gang do everything they can to destroy Vecna for good.

While it will be a devastating loss for Netflix fans, this won’t be the end as it’s already been confirmed that the franchise is going to be expanding with new spin-offs.

Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos confirmed the good news at the Stranger Things season five London premiere, sharing: “The world of Hawkins, Indiana and the Upside Down, it’s not over.”

Stranger Things spin-offs

Stranger Things: Tales from ’85

The first show to be announced was an animated series entitled Stranger Things: Tales from ‘85, which is set to be released next year.

Its official synopsis reads: “Set in Hawkins, Indiana in the winter of 1985, where Eleven and her friends unravel a paranormal mystery terrorizing their town.”

Unfortunately, the original cast is not listed as voiceover artists for the animated series with newcomers taking on their iconic characters.

Stranger Things: One Way or Another

Stranger Things will also be taking on a new format with a novel, which has been labelled as “A Nancy Wheeler Mystery”, on the way.

Written by Caitlyn Schneiderhan, Stranger Things: One Way or Another takes place between the events of seasons four and five and follows Nancy and Roby Buckley as they investigate a fellow Hawkins student.

The description teases: “When fellow classmate Joey Taft starts acting shifty at graduation, Nancy is convinced Vecna’s found his newest victim.

“Joined by fellow amateur sleuth Robin Buckley, Nancy doesn’t waste any time questioning Joey.

“What the girls discover leads them down the path of a bigger story than The Hawkins Post could ever have assigned Nancy.”

Fans won’t have to wait very long either for the book to be out as it’s set to be published next week, Tuesday, December 2.

Rumoured live-action spin-off

What’s possibly even more exciting though is there is another rumoured spin-off currently in development.

According to The Duffer Brothers’ IMDb pages, a series labelled “Untitled Stranger Things spin-off series” is currently in pre-production.

It has been reported that this could be another live-action series but for now, there has been no official confirmation on if this is really going ahead or what form it will take.

Either way though, with talk of these spin-offs as well as the ongoing success of the live stage show Stranger Things: The First Shadow, it doesn’t look like it will be the end just yet.

Stranger Things season five, part two, premieres on Christmas Day, Thursday, December 25, in the US, and Boxing Day, Friday, December 26, on Netflix.

Video shows funeral processions in Syria’s Beit Jinn, after Israeli raids and missile strikes killed at least 13 people. Violent clashes erupted after Israel claimed it entered the village to arrest members of the Jama’a Islamiya militant group.

Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF) are pushing hard to take Kordofan. In the sights of the paramilitary force – accused of committing grave human rights abuses during Sudan’s war – are the cities and towns of the vast central region, such as Babnusa and el-Obeid.

The momentum is currently with the RSF, which defeated their Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) opponents in el-Fasher, in the western region of Darfur, last month, unleashing a tidal wave of violence where they killed at least 1,500 people and forced thousands more to flee.

SAF soldiers are still able to repel RSF fighters in West Kordofan’s Babnusa, a major transport junction connecting several parts of the country. But continuing to hold the city will be difficult for the SAF, and if it does fall, then the RSF will likely press forward towards North Kordofan’s el-Obeid, and a vital gateway towards the capital Khartoum.

The RSF were forced out of Khartoum in March, a time when the SAF seemed to be on the ascendancy in the more-than-two-year war.

But now the tables have turned, and having lost Darfur completely with the fall of el-Fasher, the SAF now risks losing Kordofan, too.

“The RSF has momentum, which they will carry on through with,” said Dallia Abdelmoniem, a Sudanese political analyst, who pointed out that an RSF ally, the SPLM-N, already controls the Nuba Mountains region of South Kordofan.

“Hemedti was never going to be satisfied with just controlling the Darfur region – he wants the whole country,” she said, using a nickname for Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, the head of the RSF.

With the SAF overstretched and cut off from reliable arms procurement, Abdelmoniem believes that the balance of power is shifting. “The SAF is weakened unless they miraculously get their hands on weaponry equal, if not better, to what the RSF has.”

Ceasefire talks

It is notable that the RSF advances have taken place despite ongoing mediation efforts from the so-called “Quad” – Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States – aimed at reaching an end to the fighting.

The head of the SAF, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, last Sunday rejected a ceasefire agreement proposed by the Quad, saying that the deal benefitted the RSF. He also criticised the UAE’s involvement in the Quad, accusing it of supporting the RSF, a claim Abu Dhabi has long denied.

For its part, the RSF announced on Monday an apparently unilateral three-month ceasefire. However, since the announcement, the RSF has continued to attack Babnusa.

The Quad mediation efforts, which have included a push from US President Donald Trump, may perplexingly be the reason for the recent escalation in fighting.

“The pressure for a ceasefire coming from the Quad, including Egypt and Saudi Arabia, is pushing the SAF and the RSF to gain a territorial advantage as quickly as possible in case something shifts during the mediation,” said Kholood Khair, the founding director of Confluence Advisory. “Each side will always try to maximise its position before the talks.”

Khair points out that both sides had been amassing weapons over the summer rainy season, when conditions were more difficult for fighting. Now that conditions are dry, the weapons are being “put to use”, particularly as the RSF is emboldened following its victory in el-Fasher.

The strategic importance of Kordofan makes it an important prize, particularly if any ceasefire deal freezes the areas under the control of each side.

“[Kordofan’s] location makes it important to control due to its agricultural, livestock, and petroleum resources,” said Retired Lieutenant Colonel Omar Arbab. “The battle for Kordofan is not merely territorial – it is about controlling Sudan’s economic backbone.”

Arbab added that there is a military logic to the RSF’s push towards Babnusa, as it is the gateway linking their forces in Darfur to el-Obeid. “If the RSF controls it, they could pose a threat to el-Obeid – and certainly will attempt to besiege it.”

“They’ve been shelling it consistently for weeks. If they take it, then they will redeploy some of those troops toward el-Obeid,” said Khair. Should the city fall, she warned, the political shockwave will be enormous. “It’s a huge mercantile centre, a regional capital, and a major economic win. It also brings the RSF several steps closer to Khartoum.”

Potential partition

Beyond the battlefield, analysts warn that Kordofan’s escalation is intensifying the fault lines fragmenting Sudan’s political and ethnic map.

Khair pointed out that the fall of el-Fasher had cemented the territorial fragmentation of western Sudan, but added that there were also “dozens of armed groups”, either aligned to the SAF, the RSF, or independent, that each controlled their own fiefdoms.

For Khair, the real driver of Sudan’s disintegration is not territory but identity. “This war has become extremely ethnicised, by both the SAF and the RSF, so they can mobilise troops. Because of that, you now have a split of communities who believe their ethnic interests are served by the SAF, by the RSF, or by other groups.”

This ethnic competition, she said, is now steering the trajectory of the war more than military strategy. “There’s no singular Sudanese project right now – not intellectually, militarily, politically, or economically – and that is catalysing fragmentation.”

Abdelmoniem, however, warns that some within the SAF may be willing to accept fragmentation. “Undoubtedly, there are elements within the SAF who would be more than happy for further fragmentation of the country so they can continue to rule over the Arab Sudanese side,” she said. “Losing Darfur is not an issue, and they’re willing to forgo the alliance with the joint forces over it,” she added, referring to former rebel groups largely based in Darfur and allied to the SAF.

Many Sudanese in Darfur are non-Arab, and have been targeted in particular by RSF attacks.

But any approach that abandons Darfur, Abdelmoniem believes, is unsustainable. “Without the joint forces and other groups under their political-military umbrella, they cannot win. And how do you contend with public opinion when the Sudanese people will view the SAF as the entity that lost or broke up the country?”

Arbab takes a more cautious view. While he acknowledges the reality of de facto breakage, he believes formal partition is unlikely. “Division is not currently on the table,” Arbab said, “because the structure of alliances on both sides requires a political project encompassing all of Sudan. Social complexities and the diversity of actors make such an option extremely difficult.”

Humanitarian fallout

As the front lines expand, Korodofan now faces the prospect of a humanitarian disaster on the scale seen in Darfur. Abdelmoniem drew a direct parallel to the warnings issued before the fall of el-Fasher. “The atrocities committed will be on a different scale,” she cautioned. “We might not get the video uploads like before, but the crimes will be committed.”

Abdemoniem said international inaction has emboldened all armed actors. “That sense of impunity prevails and will only increase the longer the international community is content with releasing statements and not doing much else.”

Arbab echoed that concern. Global attention, he said, was focused on el-Fasher because the violence there contained “elements of ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity”. But Kordofan’s dynamics differ. In Babnusa, SAF and RSF forces come from the same overlapping tribal and ethnic communities, making the violence distinct from Darfur’s ethnic massacres. Yet the risks remain profound: reprisal killings, sieges, and mass displacement.

Khair warned that humanitarian access to Kordofan is already near impossible. “I don’t see SAF granting access, and I don’t see the RSF granting access into areas they control,” she said. Unlike Darfur, Kordofan lacks open borders where aid could be routed. “Access issues become even more heightened when you’re away from an international border.”

ROBBIE WILLIAMS is set to make a return to touring the UK next year as he will perform ‘Life Thru A Lens’ and ‘BRITPOP’ in full.

The former ‘Take That’ star announced on October 10 that he would be touring the UK to celebrate the release of his future album ‘BRITPOP’.

On the tour, he will be performing his first solo debut Number One album ‘Life Thru A Lens’, which contains songs like ‘Angels’ and ‘Let Me Entertain You’.

Along with his old album, Robbie will also be performing his next project ‘BRITPOP’ in full. 

That album was scheduled to be released on October 10, the same day he announced the tour, but was delayed due to supposed scheduling issues.

However during his gig at the Camden’s Dingwalls last month, Robbie said: “We’re all pretending it’s not about Taylor Swift, but it f***ing is.”

Read More on Robbie Williams

STARTING OUT

Robbie Williams’ rarely-seen daughter, 13, makes acting debut in A-list movie

CLASS ACT

Robbie Williams plans huge career change as he compares himself to comedians

The humorous statement was said to the crowd in reference to the release of her album, ‘The Life Of A Showgirl’ that dropped on the same day Robbie’s was supposed to. 

The 51-year-old pop icon holds several records for live performances, including the Guinness World Record for his 2006 world tour- where he sold more than 1.6 million tickets in a single day.

But the question is, how do you find tickets for his next UK tour?

When are the Robbie Williams’ 2026 tour dates?

Robbie Williams has four dates set for his UK tour.

The venues are spread across Glasgow, Liverpool, London and Wolverhampton and are scheduled for early February next year.

Here is the full schedule for his UK tour:

• 4th February 2026, Barrowlands Ballroom, Glasgow
• 6th February 2026, Liverpool Olympia, Liverpool
• 8th February 2026, O2 Academy Brixton, London
• 9th February 2026, Civic Hall, Wolverhampton

How to buy tickets for Robbie Williams 2026 shows?

Tickets for Robbie Williams’ ‘Long 90s’ tour went on sale on Friday, November 28.

You can find tickets on:

Ukrainian president’s chief of staff Andriy Yermak confirms search, saying he has offered ‘full cooperation’.

Anticorruption authorities in Ukraine have searched the home of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s chief of staff, as a major corruption investigation continues to roil the country and cause consternation among allies.

Andriy Yermak, who leads Kyiv’s negotiating team concurrently trying to hash out the terms of a United States-proposed plan to end the four-year war with Russia, confirmed his apartment was being searched on Friday and said he was fully cooperating.

“There are no obstacles for the investigators. They have been given full access to the apartment, and my lawyers are present on-site, cooperating with the law enforcement officers. From my side, there is full cooperation,” he said on social media.

In a joint statement, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office said the searches were “authorised” and linked to an unspecified investigation.

Earlier this month, the two anticorruption agencies unveiled a sweeping investigation into an alleged $100m kickback scheme at the state atomic energy company that ensnared former senior officials and an ex-business partner of Zelenskyy.

Friday’s searches come as the Ukrainian president faces growing pressure from the administration of United States President Donald Trump to agree to Washington’s proposal to end the Russia-Ukraine war.

Ukraine and its European allies had raised concerns that the Trump-backed plan comprised some elements that Russia has been actively pushing for, including that Ukraine cede additional territory and curtail the size of its military.

But a revised proposal has been put forward, and Kyiv has said it is open to negotiations.

The searches are also likely to worsen tensions between Zelenskyy and his political opponents amid the peace negotiations.

In a statement on Thursday, the European Solidarity opposition party criticised Yermak’s role as a negotiator and called on Zelenskyy for “an honest dialogue” with other parties.

‘Black Friday’

Viktor Shlinchak, a political analyst at the Kyiv-based Institute for World Politics, described the searches as a “Black Friday” for Yermak and suggested Zelenskyy may be forced to dismiss him.

“It looks like we may soon have a different head of the negotiating team,” he wrote on Facebook.

Yermak, 54, is Zelenskyy’s most important ally, but a divisive figure in Kyiv, where his opponents say he has accumulated power, gatekeeps access to the president and ruthlessly sidelines critical voices.

A former film producer and copyright lawyer, Yermak came into politics with Zelenskyy in 2019, previously working with him during the now-president’s time as a popular comedian.

He is widely considered the second-most influential man in the country and even sometimes nicknamed “vice president”.

The corruption investigation revolves around an alleged scheme involving Energoatom, the state-run nuclear power company that supplies more than half of the country’s electricity.

“That [case] has been swirling around Ukraine for several weeks now, rocking the government,” Al Jazeera’s Rory Challands reported from Kyiv on Friday. “The allegation is that some $100m … has gone through a kind of laundromat,” he explained.

Anticorruption investigators have said they suspect that Tymur Mindich, a one-time business partner of Zelenskyy, was the plot’s mastermind.

Mindich has fled the country, with any criminal proceedings against him likely to be carried out in absentia. Two top ministers have also resigned over the scandal.

Challands also noted that the inquiry comes after Zelenskyy’s government had tried in July to take away the Ukrainian anticorruption agencies’ independence and place them under the control of his prosecutor-general.

But the Ukrainian leader backtracked after mass public protests.