NEWS

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has deployed a military radar in the Somali region of Puntland as part of a secret deal, amid Abu Dhabi’s ongoing entrenchment of its influence over the region’s security affairs.

According to the London-based news outlet Middle East Eye, sources familiar with the matter told it that the UAE had installed a military radar near Bosaso airport in Somalia’s semi-autonomous Puntland region earlier this year, with one unnamed source saying that the “radar’s purpose is to detect and provide early warning against drone or missile threats, particularly those potentially launched by the Houthis, targeting Bosaso from outside”.

The radar’s presence was reportedly confirmed by satellite imagery from early March, which found that an Israeli-made ELM-2084 3D Active Electronically Scanned Array Multi-Mission Radar had indeed been installed near Bosaso airport.

READ: UAE: The scramble for the Horn of Africa

Not only does the radar have the purpose of defending Puntland and its airport from attacks by Yemen’s Houthi rebels, but air traffic data reportedly indicates it also serves to facilitate the transport of weapons, ammunition, and supplies to Sudan’s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), further fuelling the ongoing civil war in Sudan.

“The UAE installed the radar shortly after the RSF lost control of most of Khartoum in early March”, one source said. Another source was cited as claiming that the radar was deployed at the airport late last year and that Abu Dhabi has used it on a daily basis to supply the RSF, particularly through large cargo planes that frequently carry weapons and ammunition, and which sometimes amount to up to five major shipments at a time.

According to two other Somali sources cited by the report, Puntland’s president Said Abdullahi Deni did not seek approval from Somalia’s federal government nor even the Puntland parliament for the installation of the radar, with one of those sources stressing that it was “a secret deal, and even the highest levels of Puntland’s government, including the cabinet, are unaware of it”.

READ: UAE under scrutiny over alleged arms shipments to Sudan

Former United States Special Counsel Jack Smith has defended his prosecution of President Donald Trump, rejecting Republican claims that the cases were politically motivated.

Testifying before lawmakers at the House Judiciary Committee, Smith said the two federal cases, one over Trump’s handling of classified documents and the other over efforts to overturn the 2020 election, were based on evidence, not politics.

Both cases were dropped after Trump was re-elected in November 2024, in line with longstanding Department of Justice policy barring the investigation or prosecution of a sitting president. Smith resigned shortly before Trump’s inauguration in January 2025.

The hearing marked the first time the US public heard at length from Smith since his resignation. He told the panel that he expected Trump’s Justice Department to try to bring criminal charges against him.

These are the key takeaways:

What specifics do we know about the cases?

Smith, a public corruption prosecutor, was appointed in November 2022 to oversee the investigations into Trump.

These are the two cases he investigated:

Classified documents

Smith investigated Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents after he left office at the end of his first term.

The criminal case included 31 counts under the US Espionage Act for the willful retention of national defence information, each punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Separate charges accused Trump of conspiring to obstruct justice and making false statements to investigators.

Prosecutors alleged that Trump removed highly sensitive documents from the White House when he left office in 2021 and later stored them at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

2020 election results

The second case focused on Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, which he lost to Joe Biden. Prosecutors argued that Trump sought to block the lawful transfer of power after the vote, rather than accept the outcome.

The charges followed a wide-ranging investigation into the events leading up to the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol. Trump was indicted on four counts, including conspiracy to defraud the US and conspiracy against the rights of voters.

Smith did not accuse Trump of directly inciting the Capitol riot. Instead, the case centred on Trump’s actions in the weeks between his election defeat and the violence in Washington, examining efforts to pressure officials, advance false claims of fraud and interfere with the certification of the election results.

What were the main takeaways from Thursday’s testimony?

‘No one should be above the law’

Smith said his investigation into Trump was driven by evidence and the law.

“We followed the facts and we followed the law. Where that led us was to an indictment of an unprecedented criminal scheme to block the peaceful transfer of power,” Smith said.

“Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity. If asked whether to prosecute a former president based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether that president was a Republican or a Democrat,” Smith said in his opening remarks.

“No one should be above the law in this country, and the law required that he be held to account. So that is what I did,” Smith added.

Still, the special counsel said he stopped short of filing a charge of insurrection against Trump. That was pursued in the House impeachment of Trump in the aftermath of January 6, though the president was acquitted of the sole count of incitement of an insurrection by the Senate.

Cassidy Hutchinson

Republicans have long focused on challenging the testimony of former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, which was a key moment in the congressional investigation into the January 6 attack.

Hutchinson told the committee she had been informed that Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of his presidential vehicle as he demanded to go to the US Capitol. Other witnesses later disputed that account.

During the hearing, Republican Representative Jim Jordan, the committee’s chair, pressed Jack Smith on the episode. “Mr Smith, is Cassidy Hutchinson a liar?” Jordan asked.

Smith said Hutchinson’s account was second-hand and that investigators were unable to confirm it. He said the Secret Service agent in the vehicle at the time did not back up the claim.

Jordan pressed whether Smith would have brought Hutchinson forward to testify anyway, and Smith said he had not made “any final determinations”.

Jordan seized on that response, arguing it showed prosecutors were determined to go after Trump.

In fact, Smith said, one of the “central challenges” of the case was to present it in a concise way, “because we did have so many witnesses” – state officials, Trump campaign workers and advisers – to testify.

“Some of the most powerful witnesses were witnesses who, in fact, were fellow Republicans who had voted for Donald Trump, who had campaigned for him and who wanted him to win the election,” Smith added.

‘Threats to democracy’

One Democrat, Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington, asked how he would describe the consequences – for US democracy – of not holding Trump accountable for alleged violations of the law and his oath.

“If we do not hold the most powerful people in our society to the same standards of the rule of law, then it can be catastrophic,” Smith said.

“Because if they don’t have to follow the law, it’s very easy to understand why people would think they don’t have to follow the law as well.”

Smith continued, “If we don’t hold people to account when they commit crimes, that it sends a message that those crimes are OK, that our society accepts that… It can endanger our election process, it can endanger election workers, and ultimately our democracy.”

‘I don’t get it’

Smith sharply criticised Trump’s decision to issue mass pardons for people convicted in connection with the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol.

On his first day back in office, Trump granted clemency to all those charged over the riot, including hundreds who had been accused or convicted of assaulting police officers.

When asked about the move, Smith said: “The people who assaulted police officers and were convicted after trial, in my view and I think in the view of the judges who sentenced them to prison, are dangerous to their communities. As you mentioned, some of these people have already committed crimes against their communities again, and I think all of us – if we are reasonable – know that there is going to be more crimes committed by these people in the future.

“I do not understand why you would mass pardon people who assaulted police officers,” Smith said on Thursday. “I don’t get it. I never will.”

According to reports, at least 140 police officers were injured during the Capitol attack.

Smith defends his work

Republican lawmakers sought to portray Smith as an overly aggressive prosecutor who needed to be restrained by senior Justice Department officials as he pursued cases against Trump before the former president’s potential return to office.

They focused, in particular, on Smith’s decision to obtain phone records for members of Congress, including then–House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, arguing the move amounted to overreach.

In a heated exchange, Republican Representative Brandon Gill of Texas accused Smith of using nondisclosure orders to “hide” subpoenas from both their targets and the public.

Smith rejected those claims, saying the collection of phone records was a routine investigative step aimed at understanding the “scope of the conspiracy” to overturn the 2020 election.

“My office didn’t spy on anyone,” Smith said.

He added that nondisclosure orders were sought because of concerns about witness intimidation, pointing to Trump’s public warnings that he would be “coming after” people who crossed him.

“I had grave concerns about obstruction of justice in this investigation, specifically with regards to Donald Trump,” Smith said.

Smith said prosecutors are not required “to wait until someone gets killed before they move for an order to protect the proceedings”.

Trump responds

Trump appeared to be following Smith’s testimony live, posting on Truth Social as the hearing unfolded and praising Republicans for their attacks on the former special counsel.

“Deranged Jack Smith is being DECIMATED before Congress. It was over when they discussed his past failures and unfair prosecutions,” Trump wrote. “He destroyed many lives under the guise of legitimacy. Jack Smith is a deranged animal, who shouldn’t be allowed to practice Law.”

Trump framed the investigations as a “Democrat SCAM” and said those involved should “pay a big price”.

Trump has deployed similar tactics in the past, using his social media account in September to direct the Justice Department to indict other critics of his actions, including New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey.

As key buildings, including the Parliament, suffer from blackouts, finding light, in the figurative and literal sense, becomes a challenge.

Kyiv, Ukraine – The rattle of multiple petrol generators sounded out across the historic neighbourhood of Podil as people attempted to traverse the icy streets in near darkness.

About half the capital’s homes are without heating or power after large Russian aerial strikes on Ukraine targeted the country’s infrastructure in recent weeks.

Temperatures sit well below freezing.

Yet as an air raid siren blares, young people in Kyiv gathered in a row of cafes and bars. Generators are able to provide heating, light and music.

“It’s really important for the youth to meet up and do stuff together so we don’t break down mentally,” Karina Sema, a 24-year-old journalist, told Al Jazeera.

She pulled out her phone and showed a video filmed the day before. About 100 people can be seen gathering in torchlight around a speaker, singing along to a track called All I Need Is Your Love Tonight.

The latest large-scale attack was on Tuesday night, when Russia fired drones and ballistic missiles across the country, plunging the city, including the Ukrainian Parliament, into darkness just as repair crews had begun to restore parts of the grid after an assault earlier in January.

State of emergency

Repeated attacks have pushed President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to issue a state of emergency in the energy sector. He has accused Russia of deliberately exploiting the bitter cold snap as a weapon of war.

United Nations human rights chief Volker Turk denounced the strikes as a “cruel” and clear violation of international law.

The lack of heating has caused water pipes to burst in some buildings, leading to flooding as the water in them freezes.

Residents of an area on the capital’s left bank, which has been hit by repeated drone strikes and has no electricity supply, told Al Jazeera of a number of creative solutions to the crisis.

One popular method is to heat a brick on a portable petrol-powered stove, which helps warm the apartment and retains heat long after the stove is switched off.

Assiya Melnyk, a single mother in her 30s, showed Al Jazeera around her apartment, which had had no electricity for the whole day.

“My eyesight is going because I squint in the dark for so long,” she said, holding a small torch.

“It is hard to stay warm, we use jumpers and blankets; I just think of my daughter and keeping her well mentally and physically,” she said.

Economic impact

The attacks on infrastructure also hurt business owners who have struggled for almost four years under a wartime economy.

Enes Lutfia, a 24-year-old originally from Turkiye, told Al Jazeera that he is now considering closing his restaurants and bars.

It costs him almost $500 a week to fuel his generator.

“I have no customers”, he said. “Young people hang out together on the street or at home, many adult men are fighting, many women have left the country,” he said with a resigned shrug.

Defending the country’s energy sector is also costing Ukraine.

Zelenskyy said the air defence missiles used after Tuesday’s attack cost about $90 million.

‘You stay with your own mind’

It is not just Kyiv that has been affected. Cities such as Kharkiv in the east and Odesa in the south have also suffered near darkness.

In central Ukraine’s Poltava, Anatoli, a 54-year-old car mechanic, told Al Jazeera he now gets electricity only for a few hours at night. He works in his garage in the early morning hours when the lights are on.

He is considering leaving Ukraine.

“I will leave as soon as they open the borders,” he said.

In a restaurant in the city’s centre, 23-year-old Maxim Senschuk told Al Jazeera that staying at home with no electricity can affect a person’s mental state: “You stay with your own mind”.

He bemoaned a “psychological war on society”, but added, “All my family, friends, we are not scared, it has been four years [of war]. Now we are just bored with this”.

Israeli forces on Tuesday demolished multiple structures inside the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) compound in East Jerusalem, a site Israel seized last year. Bulldozers entered the compound under heavy security and razed large buildings that previously housed dozens of UNRWA staff and were reportedly used to store humanitarian aid for the West Bank and Gaza. UNRWA had vacated the premises in early 2025 after Israel ordered the agency to halt operations and leave all its facilities.

UN response and legal claims:
UNRWA strongly condemned the demolitions, calling them an “unprecedented attack” on a UN agency. The organisation said Israeli forces forced out security guards before carrying out the demolition, arguing the action violated international law and the privileges and immunities afforded to United Nations property. UNRWA maintains that the compound remained UN premises despite Israel’s ban on its operations.

Israel’s justification:
Israel rejects UNRWA’s claims of immunity. The Israeli foreign ministry said the compound did not enjoy special legal protection and that its seizure and demolition were conducted in line with Israeli and international law. Israeli authorities have also cited unpaid municipal property taxes of 11 million shekels, arguing the Jerusalem municipality acted only after issuing repeated warnings and following due process.

Political and security context:
The demolition follows Israel’s October 2024 law banning UNRWA from operating in the country and prohibiting Israeli officials from engaging with the agency. Israel accuses UNRWA of systemic bias and alleges that some of its staff were members of Hamas and participated in the October 7, 2023 attack that killed about 1,200 Israelis. While UNRWA has dismissed or disciplined some staff, it says Israel has not provided evidence for all accusations.

Status of East Jerusalem:
East Jerusalem is considered occupied territory under international law by the United Nations and most countries, while Israel regards all of Jerusalem as its sovereign capital. This legal divergence lies at the heart of the dispute, particularly over whether Israeli authorities have jurisdiction to demolish UN-linked facilities in the area.

Humanitarian implications:
UNRWA operates across Gaza, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the wider Middle East, providing education, healthcare, and social services to millions of Palestinian refugees. Former staff say the demolished buildings were part of the agency’s logistical infrastructure, raising concerns that the action could further disrupt humanitarian operations amid an already severe regional crisis.

Analysis:
The demolition of UNRWA facilities marks a significant escalation in Israel’s confrontation with the UN agency and reflects a broader effort to delegitimise its role in Palestinian affairs. Legally, the move deepens a long-running dispute over the status of UN property in occupied territory and tests the limits of international protections for humanitarian agencies. Politically, it reinforces Israel’s narrative that UNRWA is compromised, while strengthening UN and international criticism that Israel is undermining humanitarian access and international norms. In practical terms, the destruction of aid-related infrastructure risks further weakening relief efforts for Palestinians at a time when humanitarian needs are at historic highs, making the episode as consequential on the ground as it is symbolically charged.

With information from Reuters.

South Africa has launched an inquiry into Iran’s participation in joint naval drills with BRICS nations last week, apparently against the orders of President Cyril Ramaphosa.

BRICS is a group of 10 countries: Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates. The acronym BRICS represents the initial letters of the founding members, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.

The group, formed in 2006, initially focused on trade, but has since expanded its mandate to include security and cultural exchanges.

It concluded a week of joint naval drills in South African waters on January 16. The drills have caused controversy in the country and drawn the ire of the United States.

Although South Africa regularly holds drills with Russia and China, the latest maritime training comes amid heightened tensions between the US and many of the group’s members, particularly Iran, which until last week was grappling with mass protests at home that turned deadly.

Pretoria said the exercise, named Will for Peace 2026, was essential for ensuring maritime safety and international cooperation. The training “brings together navies from BRICS Plus countries for … joint maritime safety operations [and] interoperability drills”, a statement from the South African military noted before the exercises.

However, US President Donald Trump’s administration, which has previously accused BRICS of being “anti-American” and has threatened its members with tariffs, has strongly criticised the naval exercises.

Here’s what we know about the exercises and why they were controversial:

What were the drills for?

South Africa hosted the BRICS naval exercise, which included warships from participating countries, on January 9-16.

China led the training, which took place near the southwestern coastal city of Simon’s Town, which is home to a major South African naval base.

Exercises in rescue and maritime strike operations as well as technical exchanges were planned, according to China’s Ministry of National Defense. All BRICS countries were invited.

Captain Nndwakhulu Thomas Thamaha, South Africa’s joint task force commander, said at the opening ceremony that the operation was not just a military exercise but a statement of intent by BRICS countries to forge closer alliances with each other.

“It is a demonstration of our collective resolve to work together,” Thamaha said. “In an increasingly complex maritime environment, cooperation such as this is not an option. It is essential.”

The purpose, he said, was to “ensure the safety of shipping lanes and maritime economic activities”.

South African Deputy Defence Minister Bantu Holomisa told journalists that the drills had been planned before the current tensions between some BRICS members and the US.

While some BRICS countries may face issues with Washington, Holomisa clarified that they “are not our enemies”.

Who participated and how?

China and Iran deployed destroyer warships to South Africa, while Russia and the United Arab Emirates sent corvettes, traditionally the smallest warships.

South Africa, the host country, dispatched a frigate.

Indonesia, Ethiopia and Brazil joined the exercises as observers.

India, the current chair of the group, chose not to participate and distanced itself from the war games.

“We clarify that the exercise in question was entirely a South African initiative in which some BRICS members took part,” India’s Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement. “It was not a regular or institutionalised BRICS activity, nor did all BRICS members take part in it. India has not participated in previous such activities.”

Why is South Africa facing US backlash over the drills?

The US is angry that South Africa allowed Iran to participate in the drills at a time when Tehran was accused of launching a violent crackdown on antigovernment protests that had spread across the country.

The protests broke out in late December, when shopkeepers in Tehran closed up their businesses and demonstrated against inflation and the falling value of the rial. These protests swelled into a broader challenge to Iran’s rulers, as thousands of people took to the streets nationwide to demonstrate over a few weeks.

Security forces in some areas cracked down on the crowds, resulting in the deaths of “several thousands”, according to a statement on Saturday by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. While activists said thousands of protesters were killed, the Iranian government said this was an exaggeration and claimed police officers and security service members formed a significant chunk of those who were killed.

The Iranian authorities also claimed the US and Israel had armed and funded “terrorists” to inflame the protests. They said agents affiliated with foreign powers, and not state forces, were responsible for the deaths of civilians, including protesters.

The mass uprising is one of the most disruptive the country has witnessed since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Tens of thousands of people are believed to have been arrested.

Before the BRICS drills, the US warned South African President Cyril Ramaphosa that Iran’s participation would reflect badly on his country, according to a report by the Daily Maverick, a South African newspaper.

Ramaphosa subsequently ordered Iran to withdraw from the exercises on January 9, the paper reported.

However, three Iranian vessels that had already been deployed to South Africa continued to participate.

In a statement on January 15, the US embassy in South Africa accused the South African military of defying orders from its own government and said it was “cozying up to Iran”.

“It is particularly unconscionable that South Africa welcomed Iranian security forces as they were shooting, jailing, and torturing Iranian citizens engaging in peaceful political activity South Africans fought so hard to gain for themselves,” the statement read.

“South Africa can’t lecture the world on ‘justice’ while cozying up to Iran.”

South African political analyst Reneva Fourie said Washington was merely fishing for reasons to criticise South Africa for bringing a genocide case against Israel before the International Court of Justice for its war in Gaza.

“The US is looking for an entry point,” she said.

The US “is facing increased infringement on freedom of expression and association, democracy and human rights as well as increased militarisation. The US should focus on its own dire state instead of meddling in the affairs of others.”

Tensions over the military drills are only the latest point of contention between the US and Iran.

During the 12-day war between Iran and Israel in 2025, Washington sided with Israel, and on June 22, the US bombed three nuclear sites in Iran. Initial assessments from US officials noted that all three were severely damaged. Iran retaliated by bombing a military base in Qatar where US troops are positioned, in what was largely seen as a face-saving exercise.

Which other BRICS members have tensions with the US?

Nearly all members of BRICS have problems with the current US government.

Besides the dispute over Iran joining the naval drills, South Africa is also caught up in a battle of narratives with the Trump administration, which alleges, without any evidence, that the country’s minority white population is being subjected to a “genocide“. In 2025, Trump established a refugee programme for white Afrikaners wishing to “flee” to the US.

The US has also condemned South Africa’s decision to take Israel to the International Court of Justice in December 2023.

The US currently levies tariffs on South African exports of up to 40 percent as a result.

China has been locked in a tense trade war with the US for more than a year. After slapping each other with tariffs exceeding 100 percent early last year, these were suspended pending trade talks. But China then restricted exports of its rare earth metals, which are required for technology crucial for defence, and Trump again threatened more tariffs before the two sides reached an agreement in late October, under which China agreed to “pause” restrictions on the export of some metals.

Russia is also on Washington’s radar because of its war in Ukraine.

Just three days before the drills began, the US seized a Venezuela-linked Russian oil tanker in the North Atlantic due to its sanctions on both countries.

On January 3, the US military abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, from the capital, Caracas. Both now face drugs and weapons charges in a New York federal court. In September, the US had begun a campaign of air strikes on Venezuelan boats in the Caribbean, claiming they were trafficking drugs to the US, but providing no evidence.

India has been hit with 50 percent tariffs on its exports to the US, partly as punishment for continuing to buy Russian oil.

This month, the US withdrew from the India-led International Solar Alliance, although this withdrawal was part of a broader move to pull the US out of several international bodies.

Harsh V Pant, a geopolitical analyst at the New Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation think tank, told Al Jazeera that, for India, keeping out of the naval drills was “about balancing ties with the US”.

Pant added that in India’s opinion, “war games” were never part of the BRICS mandate.

While BRICS was founded as an economic bloc, it has widened its mandate to include security.

What has the response been in South Africa?

Ramaphosa’s government has also faced some backlash over the drills at home.

The Democratic Alliance (DA), a former opposition party that is now part of the governing coalition and largely represents the interests of the white minority, blamed Minister of International Relations Ronald Lamola for failing to hold the Department of Defence to account.

Lamola is from the African National Congress (ANC) party, which, until 2024, governed South Africa alone.

“By allowing the Department of Defence to proceed unchecked in these military exercises, Minister Lamola has effectively outsourced South Africa’s foreign policy to the whims of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF), exposing the country to serious diplomatic and economic risk,” the DA said in a statement two days after the exercises started.

“South Africa is now perceived not as a principled non-aligned state, but as a willing host for military cooperation with authoritarian regimes.”

What is the South African government saying now?

South African officials have shifted from initially justifying the drills to distancing themselves from the Iran debacle.

Despite initial statements from officials that the drills would go ahead as planned, Ramaphosa eventually appeared to bow to US pressure and, on January 9, ordered that Iran be excluded, local media reported.

Those instructions do not seem to have been followed by the South African Defence Department or the military, however.

In a statement on January 16, Defence Minister Angie Motshekga’s office said Ramaphosa’s instructions had been “clearly communicated to all parties concerned, agreed upon and adhered to as such”.

The statement went on to say that the minister had established an inquiry board “to look into the circumstances surrounding the allegations and establish whether the instruction of the President may have been misrepresented and/or ignored as issued to all”.

A report on the investigation is expected on Friday.

This is not the first time South Africa has been criticised for its military relations with Iran.

In August, its military chief, General Rudzani Maphwanya, prompted anger from the DA when he embarked on a trip to Tehran and affirmed that South Africa and Iran had “common goals”.

His statement came just weeks after the Iran-Israel war. He was also reportedly critical of Israel while in Tehran.

Some ANC critics called for Maphwanya’s firing, but he has remained in office.

Israel is no longer concealing its intention to forcibly displace Palestinians from their homeland, as it now announces this plan more openly than ever before through official rhetoric at the highest levels, said Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor in a report issued today.

Through actions on the ground and institutional measures designed to reframe the crime as “voluntary migration”, explained Euro-Med Monitor, Israel has attempted to implement its displacement campaign by exploiting the international community’s near-total silence, which has enabled the continuation of the crime and Israeli impunity despite the unprecedented nature of humanity’s first livestreamed genocide.

“Israel is now attempting to carry out the final phase of its crime, and its original goal: the mass expulsion of Palestinians from Palestine, specifically from the Gaza Strip. For a year and a half, Israel has carried out acts of genocide, killing and injuring hundreds of thousands of people, erasing entire cities, dismantling the Strip’s infrastructure, and systematically displacing its population within the enclave. These actions aim to eliminate the Palestinian people as a community and as a collective presence.”

The current plans for forced displacement, said the Geneva-based rights group, are a direct extension of Israel’s long-standing, settler-colonial project, aimed at erasing Palestinian existence and seizing land. What distinguishes this stage, it added, is its unprecedented scale and brutality.

“Israel is targeting over two million people who have endured a full-scale genocide and have been stripped of even the most basic human rights, under coercive, inhumane conditions that make living any sort of a normal life impossible. Israel’s deliberate objective is to pressure Palestinians into leaving by making it their only means of survival.”

Having succeeded in revealing the weak principles of international law, such as protections for civilians based on their perceived racial superiority or lack thereof, Israel is now reshaping the narrative once again.

READ: Gaza reaches WHO’s most critical malnutrition level amid Israeli blockade

“Armed with overwhelming force and emboldened by the international community’s abandonment of legal and moral responsibilities, Israel seeks to portray the mass expulsion of Palestinians as ‘voluntary migration’,” said the group. “This is a blatant attempt to rebrand ethnic cleansing and forced displacement using dishonest language — like ‘humanitarian considerations’ and ‘individual choice’ — and is a direct contradiction of legal facts and the reality on the ground.”

Euro-Med Monitor emphasised that forced displacement is a standalone crime under international law, because it involves the removal of individuals from areas where they legally reside, using force, threats, or other forms of coercion, without valid legal justification.

“Coercion, in the context of Israel’s genocide in the Gaza Strip, goes beyond military force. It includes the creation of unbearable conditions that render remaining in one’s home practically impossible or life-threatening.” A coercive environment includes fear of violence, persecution, arrest, intimidation, starvation or other forms of hardship that strip individuals of free will and force them to flee.

“Israel has already committed the crime of forced displacement against Gaza’s population, having driven them into internal displacement without legal grounds and in conditions that violate international legal exceptions, which only permit evacuation temporarily and under imperative military necessity, while ensuring safe areas with minimum standards of human dignity,” said Lima Bustami, Director of Euro-Med Monitor’s Legal Department.

“None of these standards have been met. In fact, Israel has used this widespread and repeated pattern of displacement as a tool of genocide, aimed at destroying and subjecting the population to deadly living conditions.”

Bustami added that although the legal elements of the crime are already fulfilled, Israel is further escalating it to a more lethal level against the Palestinian people, manifesting its settler-colonial vision of expulsion and replacement. “Now it is attempting to market the second phase of forced displacement — beyond Gaza’s borders — as ‘voluntary migration’: a transparent deception that only a complicit international community — one that chooses silence over accountability — would accept.”

Today, the people of the Gaza Strip endure catastrophic conditions that are unprecedented in recent history, said Euro-Med Monitor. “Israel has obliterated all forms of normal life; there is no electricity or infrastructure, and there are no homes, no essential services, no functioning healthcare or education systems, and no clean water services.”

Indeed, the group’s report notes that around 2.3 million Palestinians are confined to less than 34 per cent of the Strip’s 365 square kilometres. Approximately 66 per cent of the territory has been turned into so-called “buffer zones”, or areas that are completely off-limits to Palestinians and/or that have been forcibly depopulated through Israeli bombings and displacement orders. “Most of the population is now living in tattered tents amid the spread of famine, disease and epidemics and an accumulation of waste, conditions symptomatic of the near-complete collapse of the humanitarian system.”

Moreover, Israel continues to systematically block the entry of food, medicine and fuel; destroy all remaining means of survival; and obstruct any efforts aimed at reconstruction or restoring even the minimum conditions for a healthy life.

“These conditions in place are not the result of a natural disaster,” the Euro-Med report says pointedly. “They have been deliberately engineered by Israel as a coercive tool to pressure the population into leaving the Gaza Strip. The absence of any genuine, voluntary alternative for Palestinians in the enclave renders this situation a textbook case of forcible transfer, as defined under international law and affirmed by relevant jurisprudence.”

READ: Israel advocate says, ‘I’m OK with as many dead kids as it takes’

According to Bustami, “While population transfers may be permitted in certain humanitarian contexts under international law, any such justification collapses if the humanitarian crisis is the direct consequence of unlawful acts committed by the same party enforcing the transfer. It is impermissible to use forced displacement as a response to a disaster one has created, a principle clearly upheld by international tribunals, particularly the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.”

Framing this imposed reality as a “voluntary” migration and an option not only constitutes a gross distortion of truth, said Euro-Med Monitor, but also undermines the legal foundations of the international system, erodes the principle of accountability, and transforms impunity from a failure of justice into a deliberate mechanism for perpetuating grave crimes and entrenching the outcomes of such crimes.

“Repeated public statements from the highest levels of Israel’s political and security leadership have escalated in intensity over the past year and a half, and expose a clear, coordinated intent to displace the population of the Gaza Strip. In a blatant bid to enforce a demographic transformation serving Israel’s colonial-settler agenda, senior Israeli officials — including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir — have publicly called for the expulsion of Palestinians from the Strip and for the settlement of Jewish Israelis in their place.”

Netanyahu expressed full support in February 2025 for US President Donald Trump’s plan to resettle Palestinians outside of the Gaza Strip, describing it as “the only viable solution for enabling a different future” for the region. Likewise, Smotrich announced in March that the Israeli government would back the establishment of a new “migration authority” to coordinate what he termed a “massive logistical operation” to remove Palestinians from the Strip.

Ben-Gvir, meanwhile, has openly advocated for the encouragement of “voluntary migration” coupled with calls to resettle Jewish Israelis in the territory.

The human rights organisation referred to the 23 March decision of the Israeli Security Cabinet to establish a dedicated directorate within the Ministry of Defence, to manage what it calls the “voluntary relocation” of the Gaza Strip’s residents to third countries. “This is evidence that this displacement is not a by-product of destruction or political rhetoric, but an official policy,” it noted. “This policy is being implemented through institutional mechanisms, directed from within Israel’s own security apparatus, with full operational powers, executive structures, and strategic goals.”

READ: Israel bombing kills 4-year-old twin girls as they slept in Gaza

Furthermore, current Defence Minister Israel Katz’s statement on the new directorate confirmed that it would “prepare for and enable safe and controlled passage of Gaza residents for their voluntary departure to third countries, including securing movement, establishing movement routes, checking pedestrians at designated crossings in the Gaza Strip, as well as coordinating the provision of infrastructure that will enable passage by land, sea and air to the destination countries.”

The true danger of establishing such a directorate, said Euro-Med Monitor, lies not only in its institutionalisation of forced transfer, but in the new legal and political reality it seeks to impose. “It rebrands displacement as an ‘optional’ administrative service while stripping civilians of their ability to make free, informed decisions, therefore cloaking a war crime in a veneer of bureaucratic legitimacy.”

Any departure from the Gaza Strip under current circumstances cannot be considered “voluntary”, it added, but rather constitutes, in legal terms, forcible transfer, which is strictly prohibited under international law. “All individuals compelled to leave the Strip retain their inalienable right to return to their land and property immediately and unconditionally. They also have the full right to seek compensation for all damages and losses incurred as a result of Israeli crimes and rights violations, including the destruction of homes and property, physical and psychological harm, the assault on human dignity, and the denial of livelihood and basic rights.”

Under its obligations as an occupying power responsible for the protection of the civilian population, Israel is prohibited from forcibly transferring Palestinians and bears full legal responsibility to ensure their protection from this crime.

The rules of international law, particularly customary international law and the Geneva Conventions, require all states not to recognise any situation arising from the crime of forcible transfer and to treat it as null and void. States are also obligated to withhold all material, political and diplomatic support that would contribute to the entrenchment of such a situation.

“International responsibility goes beyond mere non-recognition,” said the rights group. “It includes a legal duty for states to take urgent effective steps to halt the crime, hold perpetrators accountable, and provide redress to victims. This includes ensuring the safe, voluntary return of all displaced persons from the Gaza Strip, and providing full reparations for the harm and violations they have suffered. Any failure to act in this regard constitutes a direct breach of international law and complicity that could subject states to legal accountability.”

READ: Israeli air strike hits Gaza children’s hospital

Euro-Med Monitor said that the international community must move beyond deafening silence and abandon paltry rhetorical condemnations, which have come to represent the maximum response it dares to make in the face of the livestreamed genocide unfolding before its eyes. “It must act swiftly and effectively to halt Israel’s ongoing project of mass displacement in the Gaza Strip and prevent it from becoming an entrenched reality. This action must be based on international legal norms, a commitment to justice and accountability, and an honest reckoning with the root structural cause of the crimes: Israel’s unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory since 1967.”

Endorsing or remaining silent about Israeli plans to forcibly transfer Palestinians out of the Gaza Strip not only exonerates Israel but rewards it for its illegal conduct by granting it gains secured through mass killing, destruction, blockade, and starvation, said the organisation. “This is not just a series of war crimes or crimes against humanity, it embodies the legal definition of genocide, as established by the 1948 Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.”

All states, individually and collectively, must uphold their legal obligations and take all necessary measures to halt Israel’s genocide in the Gaza Strip.

This includes taking immediate, effective steps to protect Palestinian civilians and to prevent the implementation of the US-Israeli crime of forcible transfer that is openly threatening the Strip’s population.

“The international community must impose economic, diplomatic, and military sanctions on Israel for its systematic and grave violations of international law. This includes halting arms imports and exports; ending all forms of political, financial and military support; freezing the financial assets of officials involved in crimes against Palestinians; imposing travel bans; and suspending trade privileges and bilateral agreements that offer Israel economic advantages that sustain its capacity to commit further crimes.”

The rights group insisted that states must also hold complicit governments accountable — chief among them the United States — for their role in enabling Israeli crimes through various forms of support, including military and intelligence cooperation, financial aid and political or legal backing.

“The ethnic cleansing and genocide taking place right now in the Gaza Strip would not be possible without Israel’s decades-long unlawful colonial presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. This is the root structural cause of the violence, oppression, and destruction in the besieged enclave,” concluded Euro-Med Monitor. “Any meaningful response to the escalating crisis in the Strip must begin with dismantling this colonial reality, recognising the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, and securing their freedom and sovereignty over their national territory.

“As Israel and its allies must be compelled to abide by the law, international intervention is the only path to ending the genocide, halting all forms of individual and collective forcible transfer, dismantling the apartheid regime, and establishing a credible framework for justice, accountability, and the preservation of human dignity.”

OPINION: Palestinian voices are throttled by the promotion of foreign agendas

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

The U.S. is continuing to build up its military presence in the Middle East ahead of a possible attack on Iran. The USS Abraham Lincoln and its Carrier Strike Group (CSG) is now in the Indian Ocean, a U.S. Navy official told The War Zone on Thursday. The CSG was in the South China Sea until U.S. President Donald Trump ordered it moved west. In addition, more cargo jets and aerial refueling tankers have arrived in the region. Trump on Thursday said a large naval presence is heading to the region.

These movements come as Trump has threatened to strike Iran over its brutal treatment of anti-government protesters, which has resulted in thousands of deaths.

“We have a big flotilla going in that direction, and we’ll see what happens,” Trump told reporters Thursday afternoon. “We have a big force going toward Iran. I’d rather not see anything happen, but we’re watching them very closely.”

“We have an armada,” Trump added after claiming he “stopped 837 hangings on Thursday…We have a massive fleet heading in that direction, and maybe we won’t have to use it. We’ll see.”

Aside from threatening to strike Iran, Trump on Jan. 13 also promised those taking to the streets that help was on its way.

However, he relented after being told the killings would stop and reportedly called off a strike against Iran last week. According to some accounts, Trump does not want to become involved in a protracted battle with Iran while still contemplating regime change. There are lingering concerns in Washington and Jerusalem about not having enough assets in the region to defend against an expected Iranian response, which in part led Israel to urge Trump to hold off any attack. This was also our analysis at the time.

Underlying theme: the admin is seriously thinking about regime change in Iran.

Issue they’re running into is how to make it happen without a protracted campaign. https://t.co/oEqVUq0aUd

— Gregory Brew (@gbrew24) January 22, 2026

The influx of additional assets to the region will give Trump a greater range of potential action, and allow for the ability to defend against an Iranian attack, whether in response to U.S. military actions or not.

“If Iranian leadership perceives that regime collapse is imminent, the expectation within this assessment is that Iran would escalate aggressively across multiple vectors,” the Times of Israel recently suggested in an opinion piece. “This would include attacks on American assets throughout the region, coordinated pressure against allies such as Israel, and actions designed to disrupt global energy flows. In particular, the Strait of Hormuz represents one of Iran’s most consequential pressure points. Energy agencies estimate that roughly 20 million barrels per day—about one-fifth of global petroleum liquids consumption—transit the strait.”

All this depends on the state of Iran’s command and control at the time of such an operation, as well as many other factors. While the specter of major retaliations in the Strait of Hormuz have persisted for years, it did not come to fruition during the war with Israel in June. Still, operations that seek regime change could change this calculus.

As for U.S. force posture in the region, there remains a large number of unknowns, including the exact composition of U.S. forces that are already there and what role, if any, will be played by Israel and other U.S. allies if Trump moves forward with an attack. We do know that the U.S. already had a limited number of fighter aircraft at several bases throughout the Middle East, as well as three Arleigh Burke class guided missile destroyers and perhaps a submarine plying its waters, among other capabilities, prior to the protests.

Many additional assets have poured in since then, but it remains unclear at the moment whether the current force can support in terms of a sustained conflict and what will be added in the coming days or even weeks leading up to an operation. At the same time, an operation could begin any time, so the current picture is quite murky. Even a limited decapitation operation aimed at the regime would require a huge number of contingencies.

The Lincoln CSG, which appears to be several days away from arriving in the Arabian Sea, would boost U.S. striking power in the region. Its embarked CVW-9 Carrier Air Wing consists of eight squadrons flying F-35C Lightning II, F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, EA-18G Growlers, E-2D Hawkeyes, CMV-22B Ospreys and MH-60R/S Sea Hawks. Its escorts, Ticonderoga class guided-missile cruiser USS Mobile Bay and the Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyers of Destroyer Squadron (DESRON) 21 bring a large number of missile tubes that could be used to strike Iran. These vessels could also be used in the defense of U.S. targets and those of its allies during a reprisal.

So far, there does not appear to have been a major influx of U.S. airpower. Low-resolution satellite imagery observed by The War Zone shows no large deployments to Diego Garcia, the Indian Ocean island where U.S. bombers have previously been staged amid rising tensions with Iran. However, online flight trackers are reporting that there have been flights of C-17 Globemaster III cargo jets to the region. These would be needed to move materiel and personnel. As we projected, the U.S. is sending additional Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) systems to the Middle East for increased protection from any Iranian attack, The Wall Street Journal reported.

As we previously mentioned, online flight trackers also noted that F-15E Strike Eagles, accompanied by KC-135 Stratotanker aerial refueling jets, headed east from RAF Lakenheath in England to the Middle East earlier this week.

The presence of Strike Eagles in the region, especially those coming from RAF Lakenheath, is in itself not new. These jets have maintained a steady presence at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan for nearly a decade, and their recent arrival in the Middle East was largely expected due to the current instability and saber-rattling. F-15Es played a key role in defending against multiple Iranian drone and cruise missile barrages on Israel and they are now more capable of that mission than ever. Beyond its offensive capabilities, if Iran were to launch a major attack on Israel and/or U.S. assets in the region, preemptive or in retaliation, the F-15Es would play a key part in defending against those attacks.

While these are significant additions to the standing force posture in the region, more fighter aircraft would be expected for a major operation against Iran. We have not seen evidence of those kinds of movements just yet, although some movements are not identified via open sources.

Beyond tactical combat aircraft in the region, the U.S. can fly bombers there from the continental United States, as was the case when B-2 Spirits attacked Iran’s nuclear facilities during Operation Midnight Hammer last June.

The U.K. is also sending tactical combat jets to the region.

“The Royal Air Force’s joint Typhoon squadron with Qatar, 12 Squadron, has deployed to the Gulf for defensive purposes, noting regional tensions as part of the UK-Qatar Defence Assurance Agreement, demonstrating the strong and enduring defence relationship between the U.K. and Qatar,” the U.K. Defense Ministry (MoD) announced on Thursday.

“12 Squadron has regularly deployed to Qatar to conduct joint training and share experiences which enhance national and regional security,” MoD added. “Recently, the RAF deployed on exercises such as EPIC SKIES and SOARING FALCON – further reinforcing the operational capability between our two nations.”

RAF Typhoon jets have deployed to Qatar in a defensive capacity.

The UK and Qatar have been close defence partners for decades. This deployment builds on that relationship, supporting regional stability and keeping us secure at home and strong abroad. pic.twitter.com/83FkaBPJng

— Ministry of Defence 🇬🇧 (@DefenceHQ) January 22, 2026

Israel too remains at a high state of alert for an attack on or from its arch-enemy.

“It is my assessment that a strike will take place,” a high-ranking Israeli Defense Force (IDF) official told The War Zone. “The key variables – timing, method of execution, and the identity of participating forces, whether U.S. assets, the IDF, or additional coalition elements should they be involved, will be subject to strict and aggressive compartmentalization.”

“Likewise, the final decision to proceed with execution rests with a single individual alone,” the official added, referring to Trump.

As the U.S. and allies flow assets into the region and Israel stands at a heightened state of readiness, Iranian officials are ratcheting up their rhetoric.

On Thursday, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander General Mohammad Pakpour warned Israel and the United States “to avoid any miscalculations, by learning from historical experiences and what they learned in the 12-day imposed war, so that they do not face a more painful and regrettable fate.”

“The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and dear Iran have their finger on the trigger, more prepared than ever, ready to carry out the orders and measures of the supreme commander-in-chief — a leader dearer than their own lives,” he added, referring to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The IRGC also released a video showing the location of U.S. bases in the region.

Iranian Revolutionary Guard media released a video warning the United States, showing the locations of U.S. military bases across the Middle East that are within range of Iranian missiles

🇺🇸🇮🇷‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️ pic.twitter.com/t2O2dAPWTO

— WW3 Monitor (@WW3_Monitor) January 22, 2026

Khamenei’s government is also claiming it has suppressed the nationwide unrest that began Dec. 28 over rising prices, devalued currency that saw the rial crater now to basically nothing, a devastating drought, and brutal government crackdowns.

“The sedition is over now,” said Mohammad Movahedi, Iran’s prosecutor general, according to the judiciary’s Mizan News agency. “And we must be grateful, as always, to the people who extinguished this sedition by being in the field in a timely manner.”

However, getting verifiable information out of Iran remains incredibly challenging as the regime has cut off internet and phone service, and it is possible that at least some protests are ongoing.

While there is no indication of any imminent fighting, the regional players are increasingly preparing for conflict. This remains a volatile situation we will continue to monitor it closely.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

All That’s Left of You is a film missing from American screens until now. A moving production directed by Cherien Dabis, with Javier Bardem and Mark Ruffalo as executive producers, leaving the viewers in a state of trance long after the final credit has faded into darkness.

My first introduction to this movie came quietly, through a community post by someone who had watched it at San Diego’s Digital Gym Cinema. The message was simple: bring a box of tissues. Then came a text from a fellow writer in Florida, insistent and unmistakably shaken. “The theater was packed,” she told me. She didn’t say how much she cried, but she added something far more telling: her husband cried too, and he never cries.

“I’ve never seen anything this powerful,” she texted. “You have to write a review.” She even sent me the screening link in San Diego, as if daring me not to.

I hesitated. I have never written a film review before, and I knew watching this story in a theater, in public, would not be easy. I told her that KARAMA, an organization I’m associated with, would be screening the film during the San Diego Arab Film Festival in March. She wouldn’t let it go. “Write a review now,” she insisted. “People need to see this movie.”

There is always a first time, I thought. I relented and agreed to watch the film and write my first movie review. Thankfully, through KARAMA’s screening access, I watched it alone, in the stillness of my home office, where tears were free to drift, unpoliced.

All That’s Left of You is the cinema America has been missing, a film that turns away from spectacle and toward remembrance. The large screen becomes a space for lived experience, where memory lingers, mourns, and refuses to die.

What a movie? But it wasn’t a movie. It was the art of using a large screen to bear witness to a life lived. What made it unbearable, and unforgettable, was how intimately it reached into my own life. I was born and raised in a Palestinian refugee camp. I was no longer watching a film. I was remembering. I saw my mother’s tears. I saw my father’s weathered face, scanning the rain-soaked ground, trying to pitch a tent to shelter his wife, his seven-month-old baby, and his aging parents.

I saw displacement, not as an abstract political word, but as I lived it. My parents ethnically cleansed from home, from country, so someone who was oppressed in Europe could find safety and refuge in their home, claiming that a god had given them a deed of confiscation some 3000 years ago.

It became even more poignant as the saga unfolded scene by scene, my eyes flooded with tears. I had to hit the pause button several times, breathe deeply, and steady myself. The grief on the screen was not distant or symbolic. It was intimate, lived, and overwhelmingly familiar. I was taken back to the camp, to its alleys and schools, from flirting with classmates to resistance and political awareness. The camp was a repository of contradictions: a life of destitution, yet rich in love and community. Each scene felt like a reopening of wounds I had spent a lifetime trying to bury, memories layered with loss, fear, and an unrelenting sense of injustice.

What made it cut even deeper was the realisation that I had written extensively on untold stories of Palestinian displacement. I had co-authored two books with the fellow writer who texted me from Florida, a Jewish American author, where we chronicled a multi-generational family saga from Jafa, uprooted from their orange grove and reduced to existence in a tent. As I watched the film, the lines between fiction, memory, and history collapsed. The faces on the screen merged with the characters we had created, and the families we lived with in the pages of our two novels.

The tears were not only for what was lost, but for what keeps being lost again and again. Palestinians didn’t just mourn the homes, trees, and childhoods erased, but also the quiet human truths that survive despite everything. The ache of parents trying to shield their children from despair, the dignity of people stripped of almost everything except their will. At that moment, the film stopped being something I was watching. It became something I was reliving.

“Your humanity is also resistance.” The line from the movie is more than poetic, but rather a lived truth and a personal indictment. I have spent a lifetime watching how our humanity as Palestinians must first be erased before our suffering can be justified. Demonisation is a prerequisite. Only by denying our humanity can they rationalise starving our children, and when the erasure of a nation can be defended as policy rather than crime.

That line affirms what I have known instinctively and painfully, to remain human, to insist on grief, memory, and dignity, is itself an act of resistance against a system that survives on our dehumanisation. Strip our humanity away, then anything becomes permissible. Recognise it, even for a moment, and the entire moral and legal structure used to justify Israeli inhumanity begins to collapse.

All That’s Left of You is not a movie that comforts. It is a testament to humanity’s stubborn endurance under a malevolent Zionist occupation. It reminds us that what remains of a people is not only found in history books, but in the unspoken bonds between parents and children, in the traditions that outlast catastrophe, and in the Palestinian refusal to forget.

Watching this film will leave you with more questions than answers. What stays with you, however, is not confusion, but a sharpened awareness, an understanding passed into the world beyond the screen. All That’s Left of You is essential cinema, not as escapist entertainment, but as a work of rare scope and moral clarity, one that restores humanity to its rightful place and demands the viewer to carry it forward.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

The French Navy, aided by British intelligence, boarded the Comoros-flagged tanker Grinch today. The vessel had originated its voyage from Russia. The move comes amid a growing U.S. and allied effort to use military force for interdictions of the so-called ‘shadow fleet,’ a network of ships with links to Russia that transport its oil, in breach of sanctions and price caps. In response to that effort, Russia sent a warship to escort one of these vessels, following its warning against boardings.

“We will not tolerate any violation,” French President Emmanuel Macron said on X. “This morning, the French Navy boarded an oil tanker coming from Russia, subject to international sanctions and suspected of flying a false flag. The operation was conducted on the high seas in the Mediterranean, with the support of several of our allies. It was carried out in strict compliance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.”

Macron said the ship has been “diverted” and that a judicial investigation has been opened.

“We are determined to uphold international law and to ensure the effective enforcement of sanctions,” the French leader explained. “The activities of the ‘shadow fleet’ contribute to financing the war of aggression against Ukraine.”

The French military posted additional photos of the operation on X. One shows a helicopter hovering near the Grinch.

The French mission was conducted in conjunction with the U.K, which gathered and shared intelligence that enabled the ship to be intercepted, according to French military officials who spoke to The Associated Press. It was not the first such mission and won’t be the last, a French official told us.

“Last September, French naval forces boarded another oil tanker off the French Atlantic coast that Macron also linked to the shadow fleet,” the Independent noted. “That tanker traveled from the Russian oil terminal in Primorsk near Saint Petersburg. Known as ‘Pushpa‘ or ‘Boracay‘ — its name was changed several times — the ship was sailing under the flag of Benin.”

However, the Grinch boarding came as European nations are vowing to increase efforts to stop shadow fleet vessels, and amid growing tensions with Russia over interdiction efforts. On Monday, the Russian Project 20380 corvette Boikiy entered the English Channel, accompanying an oil tanker on its way back to the Baltic Sea, according to the Times. This military escort was the first “since Britain threatened to seize Moscow’s shadow fleet ships,” the Times added.

Last week, U.K. Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper told Politico that London was willing to consider joint enforcement efforts.

“We stand ready to work with allies on stronger enforcement around the shadow fleet,” she said.

While declining to offer specifics, Cooper did not rule out the prospect of British forces boarding vessels.

“It means looking at whatever is appropriate, depending on the circumstances that we face,” she told the publication.

She also “did not rule out using oil from seized vessels to fund the Ukrainian war effort — but cautioned that the prospect was of a different order to using frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine,” according to Politico. “That idea hit a wall in discussions between EU countries in December.”

Cooper’s statements sparked a warning from Russia that these ships “will be escorted by security ships,” Russian Ambassador to the U.K. Andrey Kelin told the official Russian news outlet Izvestia earlier this week. “Areas closed to navigation may arise and attempts may be made to block critical straits and channels.”

“This is a deliberate escalation of instability, the consequences of which for international law and order and global trade will be extremely serious,” Kelin added. “What politicians in London are talking about is essentially a return to the era of the pirate Edward Teach, known as Blackbeard. What they forget is that Britain has long ceased to be the ‘ruler of the seas,’ and its actions will not go unpunished.”

These are the key developments from day 1,429 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Here is where things stand on Friday, January 23:

Fighting

• Two volunteers delivering bread were killed in a Russian drone attack on their car in the border community of Derhachi in Ukraine’s Kharkiv region, the head of the regional military administration, Vyacheslav Zadorenko, wrote on the Telegram messaging app.
• Russian forces launched a drone attack on a high-rise residential building in Ukraine’s Dnipro, injuring at least seven people, the city’s Mayor Borys Filatov said.
• One person was killed, and four were wounded in Russian glide bomb attacks on Komyshuvakha, in Ukraine’s Zaporizhia region, Governor Ivan Fedorov said.
• A Russian attack on Kryvyi Rih city, in Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk region, injured 12 people, including four children, head of the regional military administration, Oleksandr Hanzha, said.
• Russian forces shot down 31 Ukrainian drones overnight and into the early hours of Thursday, Russia’s Ministry of Defence said, according to a report by Russia’s TASS state news agency.

Sanctions

• The French navy intercepted an oil tanker in the Mediterranean Sea that officials said belongs to Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet”, designed to evade international sanctions.
• French President Emmanuel Macron said the oil tanker was “coming from Russia, subject to international sanctions and suspected of flying a false flag”. He added that the operation was “carried out in strict compliance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea” and together with allies.

Energy crisis

• Ukraine’s energy system on Thursday endured its most difficult day since a widespread blackout hit the network in November 2022, and the situation remains “extremely difficult”, the country’s Energy Minister Denys Shmyhal said.
• Conditions were most difficult in the capital Kyiv and the surrounding region and in the southeastern Dnipropetrovsk region, Shmyhal said, as nighttime temperatures fell to -10 degrees Celsius (14 degrees Fahrenheit).
• Kyiv’s Mayor Vitali Klitschko said 2,600 apartment buildings were still without heat two days after the latest overnight Russian attacks, while 600 buildings have had their heating restored.

Politics and diplomacy

• Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that Ukrainian negotiators are on their way to the United Arab Emirates for talks with Russian and United States negotiating teams.

• “Our team is now heading to the Emirates for meetings with both the American and Russian sides,” Zelenskyy wrote on Telegram after a day of talks at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland. “We are waiting to see how it goes and will decide on the next steps.”

• Russian President Vladimir Putin began a meeting with US envoys Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner and Josh Gruenbaum late on Thursday to discuss a plan to end the war in Ukraine, the Kremlin said.

• US President Donald Trump again said that both Russian President Putin and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy would like to make a deal to end the nearly four-year-old war, after meeting with Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the WEF in Davos.

• British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Thursday he “obviously” had concerns about Putin being on Trump’s proposed “Board of Peace” in an interview with Channel 4 News. “He is waging war on a European country. They’re raining down bombs on Ukraine,” Starmer said.

• The relationship between the US and the European Union has “taken a big blow” in the past week, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said in advance of an emergency meeting of the bloc’s leaders on Thursday.

• “Disagreements that allies have between them, like Europe and America, are just benefitting our adversaries who are looking and enjoying the view,” Kallas told reporters.

• Russian Human Rights Commissioner Tatyana Moskalkova told reporters that two Russian soldiers whose bodies were returned as part of a prisoner exchange deal with Ukraine late last year had been alive, without injuries, at the time of their capture in May 2025. Al Jazeera could not independently verify the report.

Military aid

• Norway’s Defence Minister Tore O Sandvik said that his country has “quickly delivered air defence missiles to Ukraine at a critical stage so that the NASAMS system can continue to protect Ukrainian citizens from deadly air strikes” in “cooperation with the United States and others”.

The United States has issued a warning to Haiti’s Transitional Presidential Council, writing that it would consider action should the temporary governing body compromise the Caribbean nation’s security.

In a sternly worded social media post on Thursday, the US embassy in Haiti maintained that its goal was the “establishment of baseline security and stability”.

“The US would regard any effort to change the composition of the government by the non-elected Transitional Presidential Council at this late stage in its tenure (set to expire on February 7) to be an effort to undermine that objective,” Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau wrote.

He added that the US would respond if such changes to the council were to occur. His statement, however, failed to identify the precise circumstances that prompted the warning.

“The US would consider anyone supporting such a disruptive step favoring the gangs to be acting contrary to the interests of the United States, the region, and the Haitian people and will act accordingly,” Landau said.

Haiti continues to struggle with the ravages of widespread gang violence, instability and corruption in its government.

But the US threat is likely to send shudders throughout the region, particularly in the aftermath of the January 3 attack on Venezuela.

The administration of President Donald Trump has repeatedly advanced the notion that the entire Western Hemisphere falls under its sphere of influence, as part of a policy it dubbed the “Donroe Doctrine”, a riff on the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine.

Trump has referenced that premise to justify the use of US military force to abduct Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, as well as to claim the US needs to control Greenland.

A political crisis

Located some 11,000 kilometres (800 miles) southeast of the US, Haiti has long struggled with instability. It is considered the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, as it continues to suffer from the legacy of foreign intervention, dictatorship and natural disasters.

But in 2021, the country faced a new crisis when President Jovenel Moise was assassinated in his home in the capital, Port-au-Prince.

Federal elections have not been held since, leading to a crisis of confidence in the government. The last federally elected officials saw their terms expire in 2023.

Experts say the lack of leadership has allowed Haiti’s gangs to flourish, and since the Moise assassination, they have taken control of vast stretches of the territory, including up to 90 percent of the capital.

The resulting violence has forced more than 1.4 million Haitians from their homes. Millions more suffer from food insecurity, as thoroughfares are often restricted by gang-led roadblocks.

This week, a United Nations report found that, between January and November of last year, an estimated 8,100 people were killed in the violence. That marks an escalation from 2024, when the yearly total was 5,600.

But efforts have been made to restore the country’s stability. The Transitional Presidential Council was designed as a temporary governing structure to set the framework for new federal elections. Established in 2024, it has nine members who rotate to serve as chair.

Very quickly, however, the council faced criticism for its membership – largely selected from the country’s business and political elite – and allegations of corruption swirled. Infighting has also broken out among the members.

The US too has added to the tensions on the council. In November, it announced visa restrictions against an unnamed government official, later identified in the media as one of the council’s members, economist Fritz Alphonse Jean.

While the council had been slated to hold tiered elections starting last November, it failed to meet that benchmark, and the first vote has been postponed to August.

In the meantime, the council’s mandate is set to dissolve on February 7, and the panel’s future remains unclear.

UN calls for action

In this week’s report on Haiti, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres linked Haiti’s ongoing humanitarian crisis to the vacuum in its government.

“Violence has intensified and expanded geographically, exacerbating food insecurity and instability, as transitional governance arrangements near expiry and overdue elections remain urgent,” Guterres said.

Another UN representative – Carlos Ruiz-Massieu, who leads the UN Integrated Office in Haiti (BINUH) – was also emphatic about the immediate need for transparent democratic processes and unified governance.

“Let us be clear: the country no longer has time to waste on prolonged internal struggles,” he said.

Still, in a speech on Wednesday to the UN Security Council, Ruiz-Massieu added that there have been “encouraging” signs ahead of this year’s scheduled elections. He applauded efforts to increase voter registration, including in Haiti’s diaspora, and encourage political participation among women.

But Ruiz-Massieu underscored that security concerns, including gang violence, could impede the democratic process, and that there was more work to be done before elections could be held.

“Achieving this goal will require sustained coordination among relevant institutions, predictable financing of the electoral process and security conditions that allow all voters and candidates to participate without fear,” he said.

The UN also signalled it would bolster its multinational security support mission in Haiti with more troops later this year.

Rafael Tudares Bracho, who is married to Gonzalez’s daughter, was imprisoned shortly before ex-President Nicolas Maduro’s third inauguration.

The son-in-law of Venezuelan opposition leader and former presidential candidate Edmundo Gonzalez has been released from prison in the South American country.

The release of Rafael Tudares Bracho on Thursday comes as the government of interim President Delcy Rodriguez gradually reduces the number of political prisoners held in Venezuela’s prisons.

The move has been widely seen as a concession to the administration of United States President Donald Trump, which has kept military assets deployed off the country’s coast and threatened Venezuelan officials if they do not comply with US demands.

Rodriguez was sworn into office shortly after Trump authorised the abduction of her predecessor, former President Nicolas Maduro, on January 3. Members of the opposition coalition expressed joy at the news of Tudares Bracho’s release.

“After 380 days of unjust and arbitrary detention — having endured more than a year of the inhumane reality of enforced disappearance — my husband Rafael Tudares Bracho returned home this morning,” Edmundo Gonzalez’s daughter, Mariana Gonzalez, wrote on the social media platform X.

“It has been a stoic and profoundly difficult struggle.”

The elder Gonzalez stood against Maduro in the 2024 presidential election after the opposition’s elected nominee, Maria Corina Machado, was barred from running. Election tallies released by the opposition and verified by independent observers showed Gonzalez winning the race, despite Maduro’s claims of victory.

Tudares Bracho was arrested in January 2025, just days before Maduro’s inauguration for a third term, following what his wife has called a “sham” 12-hour trial on charges of “conspiracy, terrorism and criminal association”.

His release comes as the families of Venezuelan prisoners hold vigils at prisons across the country, demanding the release of their loved ones.

Venezuela’s leading prisoner rights organisation, Foro Penal, has verified the release of 145 people it considers to be political prisoners, though at least 775 more remain in detention.

Edmundo Gonzalez, who has remained in exile since the 2024 election, posted a video on social media hailing his son-in-law’s freedom and calling for the release of other Venezuelans who he said remain unjustly detained.

“It would be a mistake to reduce this event to a personal story,” he said. “There are still men and women who remain deprived of their liberty for political reasons, without guarantees, without due process, and in many cases, without truth.”

The Trump administration has so far avoided backing opposition figures to lead Venezuela after Maduro’s abduction.

The US has instead emphasised working with Rodriguez and other officials from Maduro’s government to ensure stability, while it pursues extraction from Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.

Rodriguez, Maduro’s former vice president, has walked a careful line since her boss’s abduction, initially striking a defiant tone with her domestic audience that has gradually morphed into more conciliatory messaging.

She and Trump held their first call last week, when she also met CIA director John Ratcliff. Shortly after, Rodriguez called for the government to open its state-run oil industry to more foreign development, a key Trump demand.

The world’s rules-based order is ruptured, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has said, in a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland that avoided mentioning United States President Donald Trump.

While Trump hit back at Carney, the Canadian leader’s words have been widely praised and analysed.

So, is he right?

Presenter: Adrian Finighan

Guests:

Lionel Barber – Former editor of The Financial Times

Bessma Momani – Professor of political science at the University of Waterloo

Donnacha O Beachain – Professor of politics at Dublin City University

Traitors, agents of foreign powers, and hitmen with superior electronics and sophisticated weapons interfere with communications, murder dozens of our compatriots, kidnap the elected president, defame him, and prepare for the transition by dividing up the country behind closed doors. The spoils are not bad at all: the largest fossil fuel reserves on the planet, stolen without asking the opinion of their owner, the sovereign [Venezuelan] people.

A human avalanche interrupts the looting and reinstates the legitimate authorities. They brandish their secret weapon before the cameras: a little blue book called the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. We are, of course, talking about April, 2002. That Fundamental Law is still in force. Let us consult it.

The question arises of whether a foreign leader, who does not even speak our language, can dictate policy to Venezuela and its authorities. In this regard, the Constitution states: “Article 1. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is irrevocably free and independent and founds its moral patrimony and values of liberty, equality, justice, and international peace on the doctrine of Simón Bolívar, the Liberator. Independence, liberty, sovereignty, immunity, territorial integrity, and national self-determination are inalienable rights of the Nation. Article 5. Sovereignty resides inalienably in the people, who exercise it directly in the manner provided for in this Constitution and in the law, and indirectly, through suffrage, through the organs that exercise public power. State organs emanate from popular sovereignty and are subject to it.”

The Constitution clarifies who owns the mineral wealth that a certain foreign leader considers we have “stolen” and which he will “take charge of” until he sees fit: “Article 12. Mining and hydrocarbon deposits, whatever their nature, existing in the national territory, under the territorial sea bed, in the exclusive economic zone, and on the continental shelf, belong to the Republic, are public property, and are therefore inalienable and imprescriptible. The sea coasts are public property.”

Let us ask ourselves whether the murder, without prior declaration of war, of nearly a hundred defenseless fishermen and another hundred of our brothers and sisters is sufficient grounds for the people or authorities to collaborate with the invaders in the destruction of the Republic. In this regard, our Constitution states: “Article 25. Any act carried out in the exercise of public power that violates or undermines the rights guaranteed by this Constitution and the law is null and void, and the public officials who order or execute it incur criminal, civil, and administrative liability, as the case may be, without the excuse of receiving orders from superiors.”

The foreign leader who ordered this series of mass murders declares that Venezuelan oil “belongs to him” and that he will “take charge of it,” as if the kidnapping of an official made him the owner of assets that belong only to the Republic, that is, to the Venezuelan people. In this regard, our Constitution states: “Article 156. The National Public Power has jurisdiction over: 16. The regime and administration of mines and hydrocarbons, the regime of uncultivated lands, and the conservation, promotion, and use of the country’s forests, soils, waters, and other natural resources. The National Executive may not grant mining concessions for an indefinite period (…)“. And for further clarification: ”Article 302. The State reserves, through the respective organic law and for reasons of national convenience, oil activity and other industries, exploitations, services, and assets of public interest and strategic nature. (…)”.

If foreign leaders and capitalists plunder such assets for their own personal gain, the social, economic, educational, welfare, and cultural rights of all Venezuelans recognized by the Constitution will be rendered inapplicable due to a lack of resources.

Does the bombing, massacre, and invasion of our territory grant the criminal the authority to impose measures contrary to our laws and the Constitution? In this regard, the Fundamental Law states: “Article 138. Any usurped authority is ineffective and its acts are null and void.”

Should we tolerate such usurpation? Our inviolable Fundamental Law answers us: “Article 130. Venezuelans have the duty to honor and defend their homeland, its symbols, and cultural values, and to safeguard and protect the sovereignty, nationality, territorial integrity, self-determination, and interests of the Nation. (…) Article 333. This Constitution shall not lose its validity if it ceases to be observed by an act of force or because it is repealed by any means other than those provided for therein. In such an event, every citizen, whether vested with authority or not, shall have the duty to assist in restoring its effective validity.”

We have been victims of an aggressive war. Until a peace treaty is signed, no diplomatic relations will be established, nor can any agreements of any kind be made with the aggressor.

[…]

The only legal effect of the reprehensible and repudiated invasion, apart from the destruction of lives and property, is the illegitimate kidnapping of the Head of State, the massacre of more than two hundred compatriots, and the civil and criminal liability resulting from such crimes. Crime does not engender rights, only punishment.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Venezuelanalysis editorial staff.

Translated and slightly abridged by Venezuelanalysis.

Source: Rebelión

Sunday services were halted in the South Kivu province of the Democratic Republic of Congo over extensive looting by fighters from the M23/AFC group. On Jan. 18, violence erupted in the Uvira town, forcing churches to shut down and disrupting the sanity of locals.

The rebels invaded several buildings across various quarters of Uvira, making off with valuables, including household belongings and shop stocks. As the looting unfolded, the rebels and their supporters fired shots into the air, instilling an atmosphere of fear and panic among the residents.

The Catholic churches in the town suspended mass services for the day, while other denominations urged their congregations to stay home for their safety. Administrative buildings also fell victim to the chaos, with office furniture and valuables, including important documents and archives, being looted, according to local sources.

“Right now, it is difficult to know who is in control on the ground in Uvira. Youths claiming to be Wazalendo were seen in some quarters of the town, while other youths identified with M23/AFC rebels were also seen in other quarters of Uvira. While the various armed groups have been spoiling the town, the DR Congo national army, FARDC, is nowhere to be found,” a civil society activist in the area told HumAngle.

These incidents came on the heels of the recent departure of some of the M23/AFC combatants from Uvira, where around 200 heavily armed men wearing military helmets were seen leaving the town on foot, while others were in trucks. The M23 group said those sighted included members of its observation and monitoring unit, stating that this departure signified the final phase of their withdrawal from Uvira. They further declared that they would no longer assume responsibility for the town and its inhabitants’ security.

In response to a request from the United States, the mediators in the conflict, the rebel group, claimed it had decided to withdraw its foot soldiers from Uvira in December 2025 to allow peace to reign. Bertrand Bisimwa, head of the M23’s political wing, said the movement of forces from the town was imminent.

“We call upon the civilian population to remain calm,” he said, adding that the group called on mediators and other partners to ensure the town was “protected from violence, retaliation, and re-militarisation”.

Donald Trump officially launched his “Board of Peace,” offering a vision of Gaza that sees Hamas disarmed and real estate developments based on “free market economy principles.”

Manchester United have said midfielder Casemiro will leave the club when his contract expires at the end of this season.

The 33-year-old joined from Real Madrid for £70m in 2022 and has made 146 appearances.

He scored the opening goal in the 2023 Carabao Cup final win over Newcastle as Manchester United finished third in the Premier League in his first season.

But last year he was mentioned by new co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe who said some players were “not good enough” and “overpaid”.

The Brazil international said: “I will carry Manchester United with me throughout my entire life.

“It is not time to say goodbye; there are many more memories to create during the next four months.

“We still have a lot to fight for together; my complete focus will, as always, remain on giving my everything to help our club to succeed.”

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and South Sudan have completed a major prisoner exchange following a recent diplomatic meeting. The border town of the Aru territory in the DRC serves as a haven for numerous South Sudanese refugees escaping the civil conflict in their homeland.

In August 2025, the French humanitarian organisation Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) reported that over 33,000 South Sudanese refugees had been documented on the Congolese side of the border.

The DRC government said the bilateral meeting was held to reinforce security cooperation and the permanent exchange of intelligence between the two countries. The two delegations agreed to exchange detainees as a strong gesture of peace.

“There have been problems: a South Sudanese soldier entered our country through Aguruba, and finally, he was bogged down in mud and got lost. His colleagues came to search for him, and that is when his colleagues, before returning, took hostage a soldier of the Republican Guard and a policeman. Before that, they had already taken a village chief hostage. Fortunately, the chief of the chiefdom has spoken with the commissioner and the village chief was returned,” Richard Mbambi, the police administrator of the Aru territory, revealed.

 “But the soldiers, on leaving, I think they received orders from their superiors, took an element of the Republican guard and an element of the police, and that is what made us agree with the commissioner that we should meet in order to resolve the problem. We brought the soldier who was held in detention and another South Sudanese who had been arrested. We have just returned them to the commissioner, who has also returned the soldier and policeman who were taken on that day,” he added.

The South Sudanese delegation, led by the commissioner of Morobo district, emphasised that the meeting was significant to strengthening coexistence and peace between the neighbouring countries.

“Today, we have met with your authorities to resolve the situation which is going on between us. We must resolve our differences, we must put in efforts so that we no longer return to situations that have already taken place,” said Charles Dhata, the South Sudanese commissioner.

The security situation at the border between the two countries in the Aru territory remains bleak, as many refugees are fleeing the civil war atrocities in South Sudan. Various sources have reported instances of looting in several local communities within Congolese territory, carried out by rogue elements of the South Sudanese security forces and some individuals disguised as refugees. Discussions during the meeting addressed these concerns.

In December 2025, more than 40,000 South Sudanese refugees were relocated to sites with potable water, schools, and health facilities, with the support of the National Commission for Refugees of the MSF and local authorities.

Police administrator Richard stressed the importance of exchanging intelligence between the two countries. This exchange aims to address differences and enhance security in two regions.

“The recommendations that we have made are notably that we must meet from time to time, at least every quarter, so that there are exchanges between the authorities of the territory,” he said.

President Donald Trump has brought up the possibility of changing the designation of the U.S. Air Force’s F-47 sixth-generation stealth fighter if the program gets to a point where “I don’t like it.” The nomenclature was chosen in part to highlight his personal support for the program, which is currently one of the top acquisition priorities across the entire U.S. military.

Trump highlighted the F-47 as an example of the U.S. military having the “best equipment” in a speech today at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting at Davos in Switzerland. He also remarked on the jet’s designation. The Air Force announced in March 2025 that it had picked Boeing to build the F-47. The service views the jet as critical to providing air superiority for U.S. forces in future conflicts, especially high-end fights, such as a potential one against China in the Pacific. The Air Force has said it plans to buy at least 185 F-47s, with the first examples entering operational service toward the end of the decade.

“They say it’s [the F-47] the most devastating plane, fighter jet ever,” Trump said. “They called it 47. If I don’t like it, I’m going to take the 47 off it.”

“I don’t know why they called it 47. We’ll have to think about that,” he continued. “But if I don’t like it, I’m going to take that 47 off.”

Whether anything in particular spurred Trump’s comments today is unknown. TWZ has reached out to the Air Force and the White House.

The Air Force has previously explained, in detail, how it arrived at the F-47 designation.

Firstly, it is a reference to the World War II-era piston-engine P-47 Thunderbolt fighter. P-47s continued to serve for years afterward in the United States and elsewhere globally, long enough to see their nomenclature change to F-47 with the decision to phase out the “P” for “Pursuit” prefix.

The “47” in F-47 is also a reference to the founding year of the independent U.S. Air Force, 1947. The service was originally a branch of the U.S. Army.

Lastly, the F-47’s designation is a reference to Trump, the 45th and 47th President of the United States. For a time, the future of the program that led to the F-47 was very uncertain, and there was a real possibility it might have been cancelled. The Trump administration ultimately decided to proceed, announcing Boeing as the winner of the competition last March.

“The generals picked a title, and it’s a beautiful number,” Trump had himself said during the televised unveiling of the F-47 at the White House last year.

Trump does have a long history of being outspoken when it comes to the aesthetics of major U.S. military weapon systems, especially warships, as well as more technical aspects of their design. The president has also made pronouncements about ordering substantial changes to high-profile programs in the past that have not come to pass.

Even before being elected president, Trump was well known for being particularly conscious of his personal brand, as well.

With all this in mind, it would make sense that Trump would not want to be so directly associated with the F-47 if the program were to run into serious trouble or become the subject of some other controversy, or even if he just does not personally like the design of the jet. Whether or not any such developments have already occurred, but have not yet been publicly disclosed, is not known.

U.S. military aircraft designations are not set in stone. Sometimes significant changes are made to the nomenclature of designs still in development, as well as those already in service. The decision to change the designation of the Air Force’s newest electronic warfare jets from EC-37B to EA-37B is just one recent example.

To date, the Air Force and Boeing have been upbeat publicly about progress on the F-47. The Air Force confirmed last year that the initial prototype is in the process of being built and that a first flight is targeted for 2028. When asked today for an update on how many F-47s are now in any stage of production, and if there have been any changes to the first flight schedule, Boeing directed TWZ to contact the Air Force.

“I won’t even touch the first flight day the Air Force has put the date out there; I’m just going to stay away from all of that,” Steve Parker, president and CEO of Boeing Defense, Space and Security, had said at a media roundtable last November. “It’s all about execution, and that’s what is getting all of my attention. We’re in a good spot.”

Though much about the F-47 is currently classified, it is known that much groundwork for the program had already been laid before Boeing won the contract last year. This includes the Air Force, in cooperation with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, having test-flown relevant X-plane demonstrators for years beforehand.

The Air Force has acknowledged delays with the separate Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion (NGAP) program, which is developing advanced jet engines that could power the F-47 and other aircraft in the future. What engines are expected to power the F-47 initially is unclear. You can read more about what is otherwise known about the design here.

The Pentagon has also thrown its full weight behind the F-47 program. Last year, U.S. officials announced plans to effectively shelve the U.S. Navy’s F/A-XX sixth-generation fighter program in part to ensure there would be no competition for resources with the F-47.

Congress is now moving to get the F/A-XX effort out of purgatory in a new defense spending bill, but certainly not at the expense of F-47. In addition to nearly $900 million for F/A-XX, the legislation would appropriate an extra $505 million for F-47. That would bring the total budget for the Air Force’s sixth-generation fighter program in the current fiscal year to almost $3.1 billion.

It remains to be seen whether the F-47’s designation ultimately changes as work on the jet continues to move ahead.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The armed wing of Hamas, Al-Qassam Brigades, released a video message on Wednesday afternoon showing an Israeli captive currently held in Gaza, the Palestinian Information Centre has reported. The footage shows Omri Miran lighting a candle on what he described as his “second birthday” in captivity.

“This is my second birthday here. I can’t say I’m celebrating; it’s just another day in captivity,” said Miran. “I made this cake for the occasion, but there is no joy. It’s been a year and a half. I miss my daughters and my wife terribly.”

He addressed the Israeli public directly, including his family and friends. “Conditions here are extremely tough. Thank you to everyone demonstrating to bring us home safely.”

The captive also urged Israelis to stage a mass protest outside Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s residence. “Bring my daughters so I can see them on TV. Do everything you can now to get us home. Netanyahu’s supporters don’t care about us, they’d rather see us dead.”

Screengrab from footage shows Israeli captive Omri Miran

He asked captives released in previous prisoner exchange deals to protest and speak to the media. “Let the people know how bad it is for us. We live in constant fear of bombings. A deal must be reached soon before we return home in coffins.

Miran urged demonstrators to appeal to US President Donald Trump to put pressure on Netanyahu: “Do not believe Netanyahu. Military pressure is only killing us. A deal — only a deal — will bring us home. Turn to Trump. He seems to be the only powerful person in the world who could push Netanyahu to agree to a deal.”

He also mentioned the worsening humanitarian situation: “The captors told me the crossings are closed; no food or supplies are coming in. As a result, we’re receiving even less food than before.”

In conclusion, the captive sent a pointed message to the Israeli leadership: “Netanyahu, Dermer, Smotrich, Ben Gvir — you are the reason for 7 October. Because of you, I am here. Because of you, we’re all here. You’re bringing the state to collapse.”

READ: US synagogues close their doors to Israel MK Ben-Gvir

Bangladesh have reiterated their stance on not travelling to India for the T20 World Cup and will, once again, request the International Cricket Council (ICC) to relocate their games to Sri Lanka despite the global cricket body’s refusal to change the tournament’s schedule.

“We will go back to the ICC with our plan to play in Sri Lanka,” BCB President Aminul Islam said after a meeting between BCB officials, Bangladeshi cricketers and representatives of the government in Dhaka on Thursday.

The announcement came a day after the global cricket body warned the BCB that expulsion from the Men’s T20 World Cup 2026 could take place should it not agree to play its matches in India, with Scotland replacing it in Group C.

The ICC asked the BCB to review its decision with the Bangladeshi government and give a response within a day, following which a final decision would be made.

“They did give us a 24-hour ultimatum, but a global body can’t really do that,” Islam told reporters.

“We want to play the World Cup, but we won’t play in India. We will keep fighting,” he added.

The BCB chief said the ICC would stand to lose if Bangladesh were expelled from the tournament.

“The ICC will miss out on 200 million people watching the World Cup,” he said.

Bangladesh are scheduled to play on the opening day of the tournament, on February 7, when they face the West Indies at Eden Gardens, Kolkata. They are set to play two other group-stage games at the same venue before their final Group C fixture against Nepal at the Wankhede Stadium in Mumbai.

However, the BCB has refused to send its team to India, citing concerns over players’ safety and security.

The move followed the abrupt removal of star fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman from the Indian Premier League (IPL) upon instructions from the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), due to the ongoing political tensions between the two nations.

The ICC said, on Wednesday, that it had shared detailed independent security assessments, comprehensive venue-level security plans and formal assurances from the host authorities with the BCB and that all reports concluded “there is no credible or verifiable threat to the safety or security of the Bangladesh team in India.

“Despite these efforts, the BCB maintained its position, repeatedly linking its participation in the tournament to a single, isolated and unrelated development concerning one of its players’ involvement in a domestic league,” an ICC spokesperson said after the global body’s board met via video conference to discuss the issue.

“This linkage has no bearing on the tournament’s security framework or the conditions governing participation in the ICC Men’s T20 World Cup,” the ICC spokesperson added.

Asif Nazrul, a youth and sports adviser in the interim Bangladeshi government, dismissed the ICC’s claims, saying it had failed to quash Bangladesh’s concerns.

“The ICC has failed to convince us on the security question and has taken no stand on our grievances,” he said.

“Even the Indian government did not communicate with us or try to assuage our fears.

“We are hopeful that ICC will give us the opportunity to play in Sri Lanka. It is our government who has decided not to go to India.”

Before the latest round of talks, Bangladesh captain Litton Das had expressed concerns over the uncertainty surrounding his team’s participation.

“From where I stand, I’m uncertain; everyone is uncertain,” Das told reporters after a domestic cricket match on Tuesday.

Diplomatic relations between the once-close allies have been sharply tested since August last year, when former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled to New Delhi from Dhaka after an uprising against her rule.

Bangladesh blames India for a number of its troubles, including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s support for Hasina when she was in power.

During the World Cup, Bangladesh will hold its first elections since Hasina’s ousting.