NEWS

Mérida, October 20, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuela held its second National Popular Consultation of the year on Sunday, October 18, as voters chose local projects to receive state funding.

Organized by communes and communal circuits within the Ministry for Communes and supported by the National Electoral Council (CNE), the vote took place at over 11,400 voting centers nationwide.

More than 37,000 proposals, debated and prioritized in local assemblies under the Seven Transformations (7T) framework, were put to a vote in 5,418 communes and communal circuits. Most options focused on infrastructure and basic service repairs, including addressing water supply and electricity issues.

In this event, and for the first time, over 400 condominium boards took part as well. Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez announced the expansion of the electoral exercise to residential instances outside the traditional popular power organizations.

“I want to congratulate all the Venezuelan citizens who have participated in this consultation, because it reflects a genuine belief in a democracy that is growing stronger,” Rodríguez said on state broadcaster VTV on Sunday night. “The funds for these projects are now ready to be allocated for their execution.”

Each winning initiative is slated to receive the equivalent of US $10,000, with local organized communities charged with executing the works and rendering accounts. This was the sixth consultation held since President Nicolás Maduro launched them in 2024.

Two days before the vote, Minister of Communes Ángel Prado, during a meeting with communes in Lara State, explained that the resources would be transferred in stages: an initial disbursement to begin project execution, followed by subsequent disbursements contingent upon the progress of the work. This includes monitoring the projects and ensuring accountability to the communities.

Communities voted on a range of initiatives tailored to local needs. The selected projects included extending the electrical grid, equipping school canteens, expanding irrigation and sewage systems, replacing gas cylinders, maintaining public roads, and developing livestock-related initiatives.

In Cojedes State, the winning project in Los Vencedores Hijos de Chávez Communal Circuit was the extension of the high- and low-voltage electricity network. Meanwhile, in the 5 de Marzo Comandante Eterno Commune in Caracas, the winning project focused on rehabilitating walkways and stairs in a section of the area.

Alongside the popular consultation, activists in Simón Planas, Lara State, also set up a signature drive to oppose mining exploitation in the local Cerro La Vieja. Local organizer José Luis Sifontes told Venezuelanalysis that more than 6,000 people signed the document calling on the government to declare Cerro La Vieja a natural park.

Grassroots resistance has stopped previous efforts to drill for limestone in the area, with communal organizations denouncing that mining will contaminate the soil and water sources.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

The decision has drawn sharp criticism from left-wing politicians and environmentalists.

The United Kingdom’s government has approved a natural gas project off the coast of Scotland, as the Labour government seeks to balance its climate goals with energy security concerns.

Energy Minister Miatta Fahnbulleh said on Wednesday that the Jackdaw gasfield would begin supplying energy to UK homes by the end of the month and would help to boost the country’s energy security.

The government said the North Sea project would increase UK gas production by about 6 percent at its peak.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham said the decision will “protect hundreds of jobs and help keep millions of homes warm”, but stressed it would not hinder the government’s targets on renewable energy.

The government also announced a New Energy Wealth Fund, which will invest in renewable and low-carbon energy projects as part of the green transition.

The fund has been established with an initial 2 billion pounds ($2.7bn), with plans to raise additional funds through tax revenues from North Sea oil and gas.

Higher energy prices amid the Russia-Ukraine war and the United States-Israel war on Iran have weighed on households and businesses, dragging on Britain’s economy.

Fahnbulleh told UK radio station LBC that the development of Jackdaw would not bring down household energy bills.

“I think it’s really important that we’re honest about this,” Fahnbulleh said.

“That was not a consideration in the decision because it won’t mean cheaper bills. This was about energy security.”

The announcement has drawn criticism from left-wing politicians and environmental groups.

Zack Polanski, the leader of the opposition Green Party, described the decision as “climate vandalism”.

“Surreal to hear [the] energy secretary try and say this is a ‘pragmatic decision’,” Polanski wrote in a post on X.

“It will do nothing to lower bills. It will do lots for the profits of the oil and gas companies. And will continue us further down the path of floods and wildfires.”

Environmental group Greenpeace said the decision showed “the toxic grip fossil fuel lobbyists still hold over our energy policy”.

“True pragmatism means severing our reliance on expensive oil and gas that leaves British households broke, supercharges extreme weather, and leaves our energy security at the mercy of petrostates,” said Ami McCarthy, head of politics at Greenpeace UK.

New photos provide an interesting first public look inside the payload bay of Australia’s Ghost Shark extra-large autonomous underwater vehicle (XL-AUV), and a glimpse of the highly modular concept at the heart of the Royal Australian Navy’s emerging undersea warfare capability. Australian authorities had said in the past that they plan to use Ghost Sharks to conduct “persistent intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and strike” missions, but without any real elaboration.

The photographs were taken during a recent visit to the Anduril Australia factory in Sydney, New South Wales, by Pat Conroy, Australia’s Minister for Defense Industry. They emerged as the Australian government announced new details of payload development for Ghost Shark, the Speartooth large uncrewed underwater vehicle (LUUV), and the BlueBottle uncrewed surface vessel (USV), on October 19. While the announcement described the payloads in very broad terms, the photos plus additional details from the Anduril event reveal a more concrete picture of the missions Ghost Shark is being designed to perform.

The three previously undisclosed payload options include deploying up to 12 sea mines in a mission, leaving supply caches on the seabed, and launching Anduril’s ALTIUS aerial drones for reconnaissance or strike missions.

“Ghost Shark now has teeth, and will have the ability to inflict damage on any potential adversary,” Conroy said.

The payload bay image is significant in its own right. Ghost Shark’s modular design is intended to accommodate different mission-specific systems, allowing the Royal Australian Navy to configure the same underlying platform for different operational requirements. Ghost Shark was designed to be extremely modular, flexible, and readily reconfigurable. As part of this, the overall payload portion can be readily configured in different ways using different-sized modular hull sections. Since the nose and the tail are different pieces, with an expandable section in the middle, there is plenty of scope for different payloads as well.

Seeing the internal bay for the first time provides a more tangible look at that approach than earlier photographs of the submarine’s exterior.

Inside the bay of one of the Ghost Sharks on display, there appear to be cylindrical spacers, formed in segments, rather than operational stores. These spacers, and other areas inside the bay, look as if they are fabricated from plywood or similar. Overall, this means it is not entirely clear if they represent the kind of ballast that would be loaded to take the place of actual payloads during trials, or whether they are part of a mockup.

Of the three payload options, the ability to deploy ALTIUS aerial drones is particularly noteworthy. An underwater vehicle capable of releasing aerial systems could extend a naval force’s intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) reach beyond the submarine’s own sensors. Depending on the drone variant and mission configuration, it could also provide a means of delivering effects at a distance without putting personnel directly in harm’s way. Other roles could include stimulating enemy air defense networks, perhaps even responding to pop-up air defence threats as they appear and attacking them. The ability to put miniaturized satcom terminals, as well as AI, on small drones also greatly opens up the possibilities for UUV-launched aerial drones.

Which ALTIUS variants the Ghost Shark will be able to deploy has not been publicly disclosed. The models displayed at the Altus factory are all derivatives of the ALTIUS-600 family. Notable versions include the ALTIUS-600 for ISR, as well as the ALTIUS-600M, which is designed for strike missions. As you can read here, the basic drone has an overall weight of between 20 and 27 pounds, depending on its payload, which typically weighs between three and seven pounds. The ALTIUS-600 has a maximum range of around 275 miles and can remain airborne for at least four hours, according to its developer. Unarmed variants of the ALTIUS-600 are designed to be recoverable and reusable, although it is unclear how practical that would be after launch from a UUV.

ALTIUS-600M Loitering Munition

There is another missing part of the payload puzzle, namely the kinds of capsules that would contain the ALTIUS UAVs for launch from the sub.

The Rheinmetall Asteria 533mm-diameter mine pictured alongside the Ghost Shark is not installed in the vehicle’s payload bay. Its appearance nevertheless provides an intriguing visual counterpart to the newly disclosed mine-delivery capability. According to the manufacturer, the Asteria can be deployed from surface vessels, aircraft, and submarines (normally via torpedo tubes). It can be remotely controlled via an acoustic link and is optimized for the defense of harbors, straits, ports, and other critical areas.

The seabed supply-cache concept points to a different operational role. Ghost Shark could position equipment and supplies underwater for later retrieval, potentially supporting forces operating in areas where conventional resupply is difficult or risky.

The notional supply cache payloads — which are under development by the Defense Science and Technology Group (DSTG) — don’t appear to be on display here. Alex Luck, a naval analyst who closely tracks submarine developments, told TWZ that the cache payloads would likely take the form of capsules, similar in shape to the Asteria mine, but containing whatever supplies need to be moved. It is not immediately clear who would use those caches. One option could be special operations forces, but if the payloads could later rise to the surface, they could be accessed by other forces, too.

It should also be noted that the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps, in particular, are envisioning future fleets of UUVs and USVs that can carry out kinetic attacks and employ electronic warfare and other non-kinetic effects, as well as emplace mines, providing a direct parallel with the planned mission set for Ghost Shark.

Some of the new payload capabilities are due to be featured in Exercise Maritime Big Play Pacific in San Diego, an AUKUS Pillar II activity focused on advanced maritime capabilities and interoperability. The Australian government says the development effort involves the Royal Australian Navy, Defense Science and Technology Group, the Advanced Strategic Capabilities Accelerator and defense industry.

As we have discussed in the past, Maritime Big Play has links to the U.S. military’s Technology Readiness Experimentation (T-REX) effort and NATO’s Robotic Experimentation and Prototyping Augmented by Maritime Unmanned Systems (REPMUS) exercise series, according to the Pentagon. The U.S. Navy has also been conducting a growing number of large-scale uncrewed-focused maritime exercises and demonstration events in recent years.

Under AUKUS Pillar II, Australia is collaborating with the United Kingdom and the United States on Ghost Shark and its associated capabilities. While Pillar I centers on providing Australia with nuclear-powered submarines, Pillar II focuses on the joint development of advanced defence technologies, including artificial intelligence and autonomous systems.

Exactly how the Ghost Shark will be deployed during the Maritime Big Play Pacific exercise is unclear, but, speaking about the concept of operations, Conroy described examples of it being deployed from a shipping container or launched from the back of a small vessel using a crane. In the past, we have also seen the Ghost Shark loaded in a standard shipping container and transported in a Royal Australian Air Force C-17A Globemaster III airlifter.

Overall, U.S. military wargames have highlighted how uncrewed systems could shape a high-end conflict across the Pacific, particularly a fight over Taiwan. One set of Taiwan conflict simulations found that large swarms of relatively low-cost, networked drones could be decisive in helping locate and attack an invading force, while other wargaming by the Center for a New American Security has highlighted the severe challenges of defending the island against a Chinese assault. Maritime drones could also play a major role: the U.S. Navy has explored submarine-launched aerial drones that act as “flying periscopes,” extending sensor coverage and providing targeting data beyond a submarine’s own reach, while uncrewed underwater vehicles could conduct mine-laying and other asymmetric missions around key maritime chokepoints. The rapid growth and technological advances made by the Chinese submarine fleet also underscore the critical importance of anti-submarine capabilities, in which uncrewed systems can play a major role. Together, these developments underscore the potential value of autonomous systems for the Royal Australian Navy as it prepares to operate across the vast distances of the Indo-Pacific.

Australia’s 2026 National Defence Strategy and Integrated Investment Program allocate up to A$5.8 billion (approximately $4.05 billion) over the decade to autonomous and uncrewed undersea warfare capabilities, including A$1.7 billion (approximately $1.19 billion) for a new fleet of Australian-designed and built Ghost Shark vehicles.

The newly released imagery and payload details offer the clearest picture yet of how Australia intends to expand Ghost Shark beyond a conventional underwater surveillance role. The next key milestones should provide more details of how the payloads will be integrated into the vehicle, and how they might be deployed in practice.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Katie Boulter moved into the quarter-finals of the Japan Open after she beat Viktorija Golubic in less than an hour.

The British number two defeated her Swiss opponent 6-2 6-1 in Osaka and will face either Croatia’s Antonia Ruzic or American Kayla Day in the next round.

Boulter saved a break point in the opening game but dominated from 2-2 in the first set, winning nine games in a row before Golubic took the penultimate game of the match.

The 30-year-old lost the British number one spot to Sonny Kartal on Monday, but is set to retake the position following her run this week.

Boulter, who is seeded eighth in the competition, said she was pleased with how she handled “difficult conditions”, with a strong wind affecting play.

“I think one of the biggest things for me is staying patient in the wind,” she said.

“Sometimes I can get a little frustrated, and I’m very pleased that I didn’t allow that to affect me today and I think I ended up playing some really good tennis in the second set. I’m really pleased with the performance.”

This autumn, the Supreme Court will consider a question with potentially far-reaching consequences for civil rights in the United States: Who gets to enforce them? On November 30, the justices will hear a case over whether employees of federally funded universities can sue under Title IX over alleged workplace sex discrimination. The Trump administration has urged the court to rule that they cannot, arguing that Congress never gave university employees a private right to bring such claims.

The dispute is the latest front in a broader legal push to restrict the ability of individuals and advocacy groups to take rights violations to court themselves. In June, the Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to a federal appeals court ruling that barred Arkansas United, an immigrant advocacy organisation, from suing to enforce protections for voters who need assistance at the polls. Across a growing number of cases, Republican-led states and the Trump administration are advancing the same basic principle: Unless Congress has clearly authorised private citizens to sue, enforcement should largely be left to the government.

That may sound like an arcane legal argument, but its implications are anything but. If individuals and civil rights groups cannot go to court when laws protecting them are violated, the power to decide which rights are actually enforced increasingly rests with the very government that may be violating, ignoring or choosing not to enforce them.

A private right of action allows individuals, or groups acting on their behalf, to file lawsuits to enforce rights protected by law. These lawsuits can seek compliance with the law or compensation for past violations. Private rights of action are not automatic under US federal and state law. Congress and state legislatures sometimes explicitly authorise private lawsuits. Where they have not, courts have had to determine whether a law implicitly allows individuals or groups to sue, or whether enforcement rests solely with government authorities.

In practice, private litigation has been an essential part of enforcing rights throughout much of US history. As University of Virginia School of Law Professor George Rutherglen writes in a 2015 law review article (PDF):

“The long history of civil rights, dating back to Reconstruction, makes them quintessentially private rights, whose exercise and enforcement should depend primarily on the initiative of the individuals who bear those rights. Public enforcement no doubt remains necessary, and it has an equally long and distinguished pedigree in civil rights law, but it cannot entirely displace individual control over individual rights.”

Proponents of private rights of action, such as AARP, consider them an effective tool for vulnerable individuals and groups to protect their rights when government agencies are unwilling or unable to act. Critics, such as the US Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform, however, argue that private lawsuits can encourage frivolous litigation.

These critics, often from the political right, have attempted to restrict private litigation through legal arguments against private causes of action. An example is the 2001 Alexander v Sandoval decision, in which a Supreme Court majority led by Justice Antonin Scalia ruled that Title VI did not provide a private right of action to enforce regulations prohibiting policies or practices with a disparate impact on protected groups – discrimination that can occur without clear evidence of intent.

The legal push against private rights of action has intensified in recent years. Republican-led states have increasingly challenged the doctrine of implied private rights of action, arguing that courts should reject private suits to enforce various types of rights. The Trump administration has also adopted this stance. When the court decided a 2021 voting rights case, Justice Neil Gorsuch submitted a one-paragraph concurrence, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, questioning whether “the Voting Rights Act of 1965 furnishes an implied cause of action,” despite that issue not being raised in the case itself.

The conservative push to restrict private rights of action has extended to a variety of areas. In June, the Supreme Court ruled against Falun Gong practitioners who accused Cisco Systems of helping the Chinese government develop surveillance technology used to facilitate their persecution, concluding that they could not pursue those aiding-and-abetting claims under the federal laws they had invoked.

One of the most consequential implications of restricting private rights of action is the threat to voting rights. In the Arkansas United case, the Eighth Circuit ruled that the immigrant advocacy organisation did not have the right to sue on behalf of non-native English speakers over the right to have language assistance in the voting booth. The ruling concerned Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. But it extended a much broader argument already adopted by the Eighth Circuit: that private individuals and advocacy organisations cannot sue to enforce key provisions of the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court’s refusal in June to hear Arkansas United left that ruling in place.

This argument has also been pushed by Republican-led governments in two redistricting and vote-dilution cases: Board of Election Commissioners v NAACP in Mississippi and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v Howe in North Dakota. In May, the Supreme Court vacated judgments in both cases and sent them back for reconsideration in light of its ruling in Louisiana v Callais, without resolving the private-enforcement question. That decision sharply raised the bar for some racial vote-dilution claims, endangering the voting power of Black, Hispanic and Native American communities across the US. At the same time, conservative-controlled governments are attempting to deny members and advocates for these communities the right to even bring some of these cases before the courts, arguing that only the Department of Justice can initiate action over such voting rights violations.

The broader danger is that, as private rights of action are curtailed, enforcement of federal law increasingly depends on decisions made by the executive branch.

The Trump administration is now pursuing a different means of restricting private enforcement. The Clean Air Act explicitly gives private citizens the right to bring certain lawsuits, yet the Justice Department has sought to intervene and dismiss a case brought against xAI over allegations that gas turbines at its power facility in Southaven, Mississippi, are violating federal environmental law and polluting surrounding communities. The facility powers xAI’s Colossus 2 data centre in nearby Memphis. In September, the Justice Department appealed to the Fifth Circuit and sought to halt the case. The department has argued that allowing the suit to proceed would threaten national security and the US pursuit of global leadership in AI. Here, the issue is not whether Congress created a private right to sue – it did – but whether the executive branch can nevertheless step in to stop such a case when it conflicts with its priorities.

Relying solely on the Justice Department to pursue such cases at the federal level is a particularly dubious proposition under the current administration. The department has also been weaponised to target political foes of President Trump. Its Civil Rights Division has been steered away from defending the rights of racial and ethnic minorities and refocused on cases brought by white plaintiffs alleging so-called “reverse discrimination”.

The Justice Department’s current politicisation may be reversed under a future administration. But even then, the erosion of private rights of action would leave the enforcement of civil and political rights increasingly dependent on a federal agency with limited resources and subject to political direction. For example, as Democracy Docket noted in 2024, of the 216 active voting rights and redistricting cases it was tracking at the time, only five were cases brought by the Justice Department. As Professor Rutherglen noted in his article, to rely primarily on government actors to enforce rights “is to transform the nature of those rights: from private to public, from individuals to groups, from legal control by plaintiffs to political control by administrators.”

Private rights of action are now being eroded, case by case. Politicians, civil liberties advocates and organisations must challenge this trend before more avenues for enforcement are closed off. Otherwise, protections won over decades may become increasingly dependent on the willingness of government authorities to uphold them, leaving those whose rights are violated with fewer ways to seek redress.

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

Addressing the issue of US intelligence sharing after Tuesday’s talks, Zelensky said he was “thankful that intelligence works now”.

“Speaking about early warning, which is very important for our people, our children, adults, civilians because we can hear when ballistic[s] is coming – so we are thankful to American side, now it works, it’s great,” the Ukrainian president said.

He said he also hoped for a good result on SpaceX’s Starlink satellite access as well, after Ukraine’s military had reported in recent days speed restrictions on the US platform used by Kyiv to carry out drone strikes against Russia.

Before the Oslo talks, Zelensky said he had had a “constructive discussion” with Rubio about the need for US early warnings, missile interceptors and Starlink.

Last week, a bipartisan group of US senators called for an urgent investigation into speed restrictions to the Starlink network in Ukraine.

And Zelensky also restated that Ukraine was “ready for negotiations” to end the war.

“Of course, we are not losing this war, but we are losing people because Russia attacks,” he said.

The Ukrainian leader added that “strong” security guarantees for Ukraine were also discussed in Oslo, as well as energy ceasefire proposals.

Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, who also took part in the talks, stressed that Europe “needs to be at the table” during any discussions about how to end the Russia-Ukraine war.

Unconfirmed reports earlier on Tuesday said the transfer of more US-made Patriot interceptor missiles – the only effective weapon in shooting down Russian ballistic missiles – had not yet been approved.

Rubio, who is currently on a visit to India, admitted to reporters that it may be true that Patriot interceptors had not yet arrived in Ukraine – but he stressed that nothing had been denied to Kyiv intentionally.

European leaders meanwhile have expressed concern about recent US statements from the US towards Russia.

On Monday, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz spoke of “mixed pictures and messages” on the war, adding that he was trying to convince the American government “in total that this is something we have to resolve jointly”.

“It’s really a big effort for our budgets, it’s really a big thing for the European Union, but we are doing that and we are trying to keep on doing that until this terrible war ends,” the German leader told Bloomberg TV.

Asked during an interview on Monday whether or not he saw Ukraine as a US ally, US Vice-President JD Vance said Kyiv was “certainly a partner in some ways, but we have some divergent interests from time to time, like for example… I think they should stop bombing Russian energy”.

“We don’t have a formal alliance as far as I know with Ukraine. They’re not in Nato, I don’t think they should be in Nato… we’re gonna work together on some things, but also we’re going to be opposite on some things too,” he said.

The Guardian says Andy Burnham will face a “climate revolt” by approving drilling at the Jackdaw gas field., external The paper says that, while it will be a “major boost” for Britain’s oil and gas industry, critics will argue it undermines Labour’s green credentials. According to the Financial Times, ministers are expected to say that the project will help increase energy supplies this winte, externalr. The i Paper reports that it will be able to power around a million UK homes., external

The Times reports that the home secretary is facing pressure from her cabinet colleagues to water down plans, external which would make it harder for foreign workers to claim permanent residence in the UK. But an ally of Shabana Mahmood tells the paper that Burnham is “on her side” and is “holding the line”. “Mahmood’s fight to save her migrant crackdown” is the headline.

The Daily Telegraph says a review of anti-Semitism in schools in England is expected to prompt some to ban teachers from wearing pro-Palestinian badges. , externalAccording to the Guardian, the report by Sir David Bell finds that three in five Jewish students have been affected, external by anti-Semitism.

The decision to deploy RAF jets to defend Saudi Arabia is described by the Times as an “expansion of the UK’s role in the conflict in Yemen”, external. A defence source tells the paper that “if Houthi drones or missiles come over the border” then British jets will “take them out”. The Telegraph’s verdict is: “Better late than never”.

The Daily Mirror leads with the Covid inquiry’s findings that government failures during the pandemic allowed the virus to “spread like wildfire” in care homes., external In its leader column, the paper says care home residents were “shamefully abandoned by those entrusted with protecting them”.

Prince Harry’s call for reconciliation with his father and brother is the focus of the Sun’s front page, external. It says the Duke of Sussex is hoping to “fix his bitter family feud”. But the Daily Mail accuses him of “reopening old wounds” in what it describes as a “new Sussex psychodrama”, external. Its headline reads: “Oh, do put a sock in it, Harry!”.

Faecal bacteria are contaminating water in wells and sinkholes in Mexico’s Yucatan state, which are a vital source of drinking water, according to a report by Greenpeace, a global environmental organisation.

The report, published on Tuesday, said nearby pig farms and municipal wastewater were likely sources of the pollution in the southeastern coastal state.

“A range of chemical and microbiological indicators reveal a complex mosaic of severe, localised organic pollution,” it said.

Greenpeace called for an immediate moratorium on new industrial livestock operations and farm expansions in the peninsular state, which was once home to the ancient Maya civilisation.

With no above-ground rivers, groundwater is the Yucatan’s only freshwater source, and the area’s porous limestone bedrock lets pollutants quickly seep into the aquifer.

Laboratory results

The global environmental watchdog group commissioned an independent laboratory to test water at 17 sites near the state capital, Merida, in August.

The sites included household and farm wells, community water points and cenotes, the natural sinkholes that dot the Yucatan Peninsula, which is one of Mexico’s most popular tourist destinations.

According to the report, every sample showed some degree of contamination likely linked to faecal waste, and several sites appeared heavily polluted. Total coliform bacteria reached the test’s upper limit in 16 of 17 samples, and faecal coliforms did so in 13.

However, the tests cannot show whether the waste came from people or animals, and leaking septic tanks and municipal sewage may also contribute to contamination.

Greenpeace said, however, that separate testing using Pig2Bac, a pig-specific DNA marker method, detected pig faecal matter in samples analysed at laboratories at Johns Hopkins University in the US and Mexico’s National Autonomous University (UNAM).

Greenpeace said the results raise “critical accountability questions” about nearby pig farms.

Maya communities joined Greenpeace in demanding action from environmental authorities over the contamination.

Industrial pig farms

A UN report published in July found that there are more than 500 industrial pig farms across Yucatan state with more than 50,000 animals, many located near the lands and territories of Indigenous Peoples.

Marcos Orellana, a former UN special rapporteur who authored the report, said waste and chemicals from industrial farms “find their way very quickly” into the water communities use for bathing, cooking and drinking. He said most farms lack required permits and that regional government initiatives “remain insufficient”.

“The contamination of the waters that have sustained Mayan culture for millennia is predominantly coming from the industrial operations of the growth of animals,” Orellana said.

But Antonio Zumarraga, vice president of the Yucatan Citizen Scientific Water Observatory, defended the local pork industry, saying the sector has invested in water treatment and supports conservation programmes. He blamed local authorities for their inaction.

“It’s an issue that, as long as it doesn’t carry political weight for the government, they won’t do anything about it,” Zumarraga said.

The Yucatan state government was not available for comment, while Mexico’s national water commission, CONAGUA, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Merida’s Association of Pig Farmers also did not respond to a Reuters request for comment.

UN experts have called on the Indian government to stop the use of “excessive force” in the wake of the crackdown on opposition and student protests in India.

In a statement on Tuesday, the two dozen independent experts pressed for an impartial investigation into Indian authorities’ conduct, saying that demonstrators had sustained injuries and some reported being subjected to ill-treatment.

“Protesters have sustained injuries, with some reporting being subjected to ill-treatment. The experts expressed particular concern about reports of sexual violence and other forms of gender-based abuse in the protests and related detentions,” according to the statement.

UN experts are appointed by the UN Human Rights Council to monitor and document specific human rights crises but are independent of the organisation itself.

India’s Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), along with other opposition parties and student organisations, has led protests this month demanding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation, after 130 million names were removed from voter lists.

The protesting groups said the removal disproportionately affected poor and homeless people as well as ethnic minorities including Muslims, who are unlikely to vote for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The BJP and India’s Election Commission deny the accusations. The Election Commission said it was removing duplicate, deceased, shifted and otherwise ineligible voters and that anyone excluded in error can pursue appeals.

‘Deployed force’

“Despite the non-violent nature of the assemblies, law enforcement agencies have reportedly deployed force against unarmed students including by means of police so-called lathi charges, and have prevented thousands from joining the protests,” the UN experts said.

Lathi charges are coordinated movements by a policing force using sticks to disperse crowds.

“We call on the authorities to immediately cease the use of excessive force, rescind blanket assembly bans, and refrain from the misuse of digital surveillance, including through biometrics, and internet disruptions,” they added.

India has repeatedly dismissed such criticism and cast it as interference in the country’s internal affairs, including when the UN human rights office earlier this month expressed concerns over mass detentions in relation to the latest protests.

The U.S. military has successfully demonstrated a new lower-cost receiver that could form part of a future over-the-horizon (OTH) radar. The testing also raises the question of whether the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) research site in Alaska, which the U.S. Air Force transferred away more than a decade ago, could be repurposed for operational use in this role. A new radar of this kind would help the United States plug critical gaps in surveillance coverage over the ever-more strategic Arctic region. Canada is notably already pursuing a multi-billion-dollar OTH radar project in cooperation with Australia for this exact purpose.

The U.S. military put out a press release yesterday regarding the testing of the newly developed receiver array, which occurred between September 7 and September 11. This was the culmination of a series of “Arctic air domain awareness” experiments conducted cooperatively by U.S. and Canadian authorities over the past three years.

The final round of experimentation last month “examined whether an existing high-frequency transmitter [HAARP], paired with a newly developed, low-cost [16-element high-frequency] receiver array, could detect aircraft beyond the coverage of current long-range radar sites,” according to the release. “The effort focused on improving awareness across a region where vast distances, harsh weather and limited infrastructure present challenges for air surveillance.”

“Researchers used the University of Alaska Fairbanks’ High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program [HAARP] facility and a receiver array in Cold Bay developed by MITRE to collect data on participating aircraft over the Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea,” the release added. “MITRE also supported the effort throughout the three-year experiment series and designed and executed the field experiment in partnership with government, scientific, and operational participants.”

The remote HAARP site was built in the 1990s as part of a joint U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy effort. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was also involved. The central component of the 33-acre facility is an array of 180 crossed-dipole antennas, which can transmit up to 3.6 megawatts of radio frequency energy, according to the Air Force.

The primary purpose of HAARP was to provide U.S. government and independent researchers with a state-of-the-art facility to explore ionospheric phenomena. On the U.S. military side, work was focused on improving long-range surveillance and communications capabilities, including ways to communicate with submerged submarines. Over the years, HAARP has also been the subject of several entirely unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.

In 2014, the U.S. Air Force announced that it would shutter the HAARP site and dismantle it. However, the following year, the decision was instead made to transfer it to the University of Alaska Fairbanks, which has continued to operate it as a civilian research facility.

“During an experimental air domain awareness initiative, HAARP served as a high-power illuminator, transmitting signals toward the ionosphere to support the detection of airborne targets over Alaska’s maritime approaches,” according to the captions of several pictures that accompanied the release yesterday. “The experiment evaluated bistatic over-the-horizon detection methods to explore potential improvements in long-range surveillance and air domain awareness across Alaska’s maritime approaches.”

The most common types of OTH radars are so-called ‘skywave’ or ‘backscatter’ designs. They usually consist of two large and geographically separated arrays of antennas. The ‘illuminator’ array pumps out signals that are bounced off the ionosphere, the ionized layer of Earth’s upper atmosphere, at a specific angle so that they return to the ‘receiver’ array. Objects of interest (in the air and/or on the surface depending on the specific configuration) are detected in the process. As TWZ has previously written:

“Commonly, radars are limited by line of sight due to the curvature of the Earth in relation to the altitude they are operating at. OTHRs overcome this critical limitation, but with some major drawbacks.”

…

“While they offer much lower fidelity than many of their line-of-sight counterparts in most cases, they make up for it in huge range, hundreds of miles to thousands of miles (1,500 miles is common, for instance, for powerful military sky wave/backscatter OTHR systems) and a large coverage area. The sky wave type of OTHRs achieve this by bouncing their radio waves off the ionosphere to a coverage area where they hit targets and return the same way to the receiving station. The angle at which the radio waves hit the ionosphere dictates the range, and that angle is limited to a specific envelope or the waves won’t properly bounce back toward Earth. As such, placing the radar in the right place in relation to the targeted surveillance area or areas, to begin with, is key.”

In the testing last month, Air Force E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) radar planes, HC-130J Combat King II rescue aircraft, and KC-135 aerial refueling tankers “served as cooperative targets, providing known positions against which researchers could compare the experimental data,” according to the official release. “The team successfully completed testing, meeting or exceeding its test execution objectives. Initial results show the system was successfully able to achieve full skywave (beyond line of sight) detections of aircraft and correlation to truth flights. Thorough data analysis is ongoing.”

The release also says that the tests “explored how existing infrastructure and emerging technology could complement current surveillance capabilities.” This raises the possibility that the HAARP site, specifically, might be utilized as part of a new OTH radar. Whether or not this is actually under consideration is still unclear, and TWZ has reached out for more information.

Regardless, OTH radars have been experiencing something of a renaissance in recent years in the United States and elsewhere globally. Separate reports just in the past day or so have highlighted what appears to be significant progress on at least one part of a long-planned OTH radar in Russia’s Kaliningrad enclave.

Outside of Alaska, the U.S. military has been working to establish a Tactical Mobile Over-the-Horizon Radar (TACMOR) site in the South Pacific archipelago nation of Palau. The originally stated goal had been to finish work on this facility in 2026, but the project has faced legal challenges.

As already mentioned, OTH radars have also been part of U.S. plans to improve surveillance coverage in the Arctic. Like the recent testing in Alaska, there has been significant cooperation with Canada in this regard over the years, including through the U.S.-Canadian North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD).

Today, NORAD relies heavily on a network of ground-based radars called the North Warning System (NWS) to provide aerial surveillance coverage in the High North. The radars that make up the NWS are also all pointed northward, and none of them provide the kind of wide-area long-range coverage that an OTH design would offer.

The NWS reflects a long-standing focus on monitoring for aerial threats heading across the North Pole toward North America, especially possible nuclear strikes from Russia (and the Soviet Union before it). However, new avenues for geostrategic competition in the Arctic with Russia, as well as China, over natural resources, from oil and natural gas to fish and other sealife, as well as trade routes have emerged in recent years amid receding ice and other impacts of global climate change. This, in turn, has only prompted growing demand for surveillance coverage.

“We need a layered sensing grid, from [the] seafloor to the space layer. And we have no choice. It has to be layered and deep, a defense in depth, from a sensing point of view,” Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) Maj. Gen. Chris McKenna, head of 1 Canadian Air Division and the Canadian NORAD Region, also said during a panel discussion at the Air & Space Forces Association’s (AFA) annual Warfare Symposium in 2025, at which TWZ was in attendance. “And I will say I suffer from an insufficiency of ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] in the Arctic on a daily basis. And I am fighting for information.”

McKenna was responding at the time to a direct question about gaps in so-called “domain awareness” in and around the Arctic and how to address them.

“I think there’s an importance here of not just air domain, but also space domain, and having a sufficiency of ISR in the Arctic to actually build you the [domain awareness] picture,” he added. “I haven’t really touched on over-the-horizon radar, but I certainly can get into it. I think that’s a really important capability given the austerity of the Arctic and the need for it to cue other things.”

For its part, Canada is now building its own new Arctic Over The Horizon Radar (A-OTHR), at an estimated cost of more than $4 billion. In an announcement last year that caught many off guard, the Canadian government announced that it would be leveraging technology originally developed for Australia’s Jindalee Operational Radar Network (JORN) to support this development. It is also important to note here that relations between Canadian authorities and the Trump administration have been and continue to be heavily strained over a variety of issues, which has prompted broad concerns about future defense and security cooperation.

Back in the United States, OTH radar plans are also now tied in with the broader Golden Dome air and missile defense initiative. Golden Dome is seeking to establish new layers of defense around the U.S. homeland against a wide array of threat types, and puts major emphasis on new space-based sensor and interceptor capabilities. Expanded defensive architectures within the Earth’s atmosphere are also part of this plan.

“Adversaries are developing and building advanced nuclear and conventional delivery capabilities,” U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Joseph Jarrard, Vice Commander of the U.S. element of NORAD and Deputy Commander of U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM), warned at the annual Space & Missile Defense (SMD) Symposium in August. This includes “cruise, hypersonic, and ballistic missiles, as well as fractional orbital bombardment systems, or FOBS, to threaten not only Alaska and Hawaii, but the entire continent of the United States.”

Chinese hypersonic and other developments, in particular, enable new modes of attack that “can approach North America from the south, rather than the traditional northerly vector for which our legacy early warning radars were designed,” Jarrard continued. “The Chinese have also been building a conventionally-armed ICBM [intercontinental ballistic missile] equipped with hypersonic glide vehicles that can range [sic] targets throughout Alaska, providing Chinese leaders strike options against our homeland below the nuclear threshold.”

“Russia’s advanced missiles, like the nuclear-armed Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle, are designed to circumvent the ground-based radars used by NORAD and NORTHCOM to detect and characterize an inbound threat, and challenge the ability to provide threat warning and attack assessment,” he added.

New OTH radars positioned in Alaska and elsewhere in the Pacific will not be able to address all of these threat developments alone. At the same time, the recent testing leveraging the HAARP site is another step toward meeting demands for sorely needed expanded long-range radar coverage in the Arctic.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

One of the KC-10A Extender aerial refueling tankers the U.S. Air Force retired some two years ago has left the boneyard at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona. This aircraft is one of a set of KC-10As sold to private aerial refueling contractor Omega Air. At least one other potential operator, a still mysterious end user somewhere in North Africa, could also be in line to pick up several ex-Air Force Extenders.

Maxim Loshak, who goes by the handle @az_aviator on X and Instagram, caught the KC-10A leaving Davis-Monthan earlier today. The aircraft currently carries U.S. civil registration number N82247, and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) records confirm that Omega Air is the new owner. Online flight tracking data also shows the aircraft subsequently flew to San Antonio International Airport, which is Omega’s main base of operations.

The KC-10A in question previously carried the Air Force registration number 86-0034 and had been in the boneyard since May 12, 2023, per the service’s records. The Air Force acquired a total of 60 Extender tankers between 1979 and 1987, and lost one in an accident in 1987. The very last of the remaining 59 KC-10As was retired in September 2024. The Extender was derived from the three-engine DC-10 airliner and was designed to refuel aircraft using either the boom or the probe-and-drogue method.

As seen in the picture at the top of this story, N82247 notably lacks the KC-10A’s trademark boom under the rear fuselage. This is actually not entirely unexpected. The Air Force had put 10 Extenders up for auction last year in a non-flyable state. Each of the planes was missing a single engine, taken from under one of their wings, for reasons that are still not entirely clear. These particular aircraft were also among the first KC-10As to be retired, and their booms had been stripped to be used as spares for other examples that had remained in service until the type’s final retirement in 2024.

In addition to sourcing the requisite engines, “in order to make them flyable, the winning bidder will need to work with Boeing to obtain a fly-away kit to seal up the area where the boom systems was,” an Air Force spokesperson told us last year while the 10 KC-10As were still up for auction.

Omega Air could fit new booms to this KC-10A, as well as other ex-USAF Extenders it is in the process of acquiring. The company could also leave some of them configured as probe-and-drogue-only tankers. Omega already flies two ex-Dutch KDC-10 tankers, which are broadly similar to the KC-10, as well as another DC-10 converted into a probe-and-drogue-only tanker. The company has several Boeing 707-based tankers, as well.

There is a possibility that some of the KC-10As that Omega is acquiring could be operated in non-tanker roles. Carrying cargo was also a major role for Extender while in Air Force service. Still, this seems unlikely given that aerial refueling is Omega’s primary business. Some of the ex-Air Force Extenders might also be used as sources of spare parts. TWZ has reached out for more information about Omega’s overall plans for its new acquisitions.

Regardless, even in a boomless configuration, ex-USAF KC-10As will be a significant addition to Omega Air’s fleet. Demand for private aerial refueling services, in general, has been ramping up in the United States and elsewhere globally in recent years.

For the U.S. military, private contractors offer a valuable way to reduce demand for and strain on organic tanker fleets to meet non-combat-related aerial refueling needs. This, in turn, helps free up government-owned tankers for combat missions and other higher-priority taskings. Those tankers may also simply not need to fly as much with private companies helping to shift the burden. The ability of the Air Force’s existing tanker fleets, in particular, to meet even peacetime demands has been a growing point of concern for years now. This has been further exacerbated by persistent technical and other issues with replacement KC-46 tankers.

With all this in mind, the Air Force’s decision to retire the KC-10A fleet entirely was and still is controversial. Though the Extenders were certainly aging, they were also highly flexible tankers able to carry greater loads of fuel than the KC-46s that supplanted them.

Omega Air clearly still sees value in the KC-10A. As mentioned, at least one other operator in North Africa is at least interested in potentially acquiring Extenders. Others may yet emerge.

If nothing else, after just over two years, an ex-USAF KC-10A has returned to the skies for a second career in the private sector.

Special thanks again to Maxim Loshak for sharing his picture of N82247 with us.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Elon Musk has said he likes the idea of a merger of Tesla and SpaceX, two of his most notable companies, and it is under active consideration.

“Do I think it would be a good idea? Yes,” Musk said during a call with financial analysts over the quarterly business results of SpaceX on Tuesday.

While Musk noted the certainty of such a merger should not be assumed, and it would need shareholders’ support, he said special committees within both companies have been formed to examine the move.

“The special committees have not reached agreement on terms of any transaction and there’s no guarantee that they will,” Musk added. “But I do think there is a lot of merit to merging and a lot to be gained.”

With Tesla valued roughly $1.5 trillion and SpaceX valued at $2 trillion, a combination of the two companies would mark one of the largest mergers in history.

Shares of SpaceX rose 8% in after hours trading.

The company, which builds space rockets and Starlink internet satellites, is now expanding into offering cloud compute capacity for other tech companies, like Anthropic and Google.

That line of business has become the most profitable part of SpaceX, bringing in $7.5bn according to the latest quarterly results. Starlink also tallied revenue of $5.2bn.

SpaceX as a whole, however, is not profitable and has lost $1.1bn so far this year.

Shares of Tesla, which reports its own quarterly results on Wednesday, rose 2% after being down slightly for weeks.

Over the last year, Musk has taken to bringing more of his various companies under fewer banners. Before it went public earlier this year, SpaceX acquired xAI and X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, both of which Musk owned.

The recent launch of Terafab, a combined effort to manufacture computer chips between Tesla and SpaceX, was another signal that Musk sees his companies as potentially more effective when working together.

Musk said on Tuesday a full merger between the two companies would make sense for the work each is doing around chips, artificial intelligence, software and more.

Ukraine continues to struggle with throttling of the speeds at which weapons using the vital satellite communications services provided by the SpaceX Starlink system can operate, one weapons manufacturer tells us it is rethinking whether to rely on it in the future. As we have previously reported, heavy use of Starlink on both sides of the conflict in Ukraine, including as a means of guiding one-way attackers in the air and at sea, has underscored potential risks of exclusive reliance on Elon Musk’s orbital communications networks in critical tactical tasks.

At issue are complaints by Ukrainian officials that “in various sectors of the front, the equipment ceases to function at speeds of 130–161 kilometers per hour.”

A limit on how fast Starlink terminals on vehicles can travel before the feed is cut off in certain areas impacts a slew of weapons and campaigns, especially strikes on Russian logistics behind enemy lines and in the sea of Asov, as well as the control of defensive interceptor drones critical for taking down Russian long-range one-way attack drones, like the notorious Shahed-136.

The following video shows one such Shahed interception.

The limiting of Starlink/Starshield occurred amid deteriorating relations between the Trump administration and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The latest chill between Washington and Kyiv was sparked by the American leader’s claims that Ukraine’s attacks on Russia’s energy infrastructure have reduced the supply of diesel fuel to the U.S. and other nations more than the conflict in the Middle East. Trump was upset Ukraine kept hitting these targets despite his demanding they stop.

Exacerbating this issue, Trump on Oct. 9 announced via his Truth Social platform that he had made a deal to purchase diesel from Russia, pivoting away from a years-old Western policy that placed massive economic pressure on Moscow.

Who gave the order to limit the speeds at which Ukrainian weapons using the Starlink/Starshield system operate is unclear.

“The order to limit a satellite system used by Ukraine ​for battlefield communications and drone operations came from inside the White House,” Reuters reported last week, citing two U.S. officials and a Western official briefed on the matter. “The officials said ‌leaders at the Defense Department received a message that the SpaceX Starshield service for the Ukrainian military needed to be slowed.”

“No such request was ever made by the president,” a U.S. official told us on Monday.

“There has been no change to Department of War policy regarding intelligence sharing or any capabilities we are enabling Europeans to provide to Ukraine,” a senior Pentagon official responded to our questions about whether the Pentagon imposed the limits and, if so, why.

When we pushed for a more specific response to the Starlink/Starshield concerns, the Pentagon declined comment. However, Tuesday afternoon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the Pentagon did not order any changes and that Ukraine violated Starlink’s terms of services.

We reached out to SpaceX as well, but the company did not immediately respond. Last week, SpaceX’s founder and CEO, Elon Musk, said that “any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately” Trump. Musk had previously refused Ukrainian requests to use Starlink against targets inside Russia.

The prohibition against using Starlink inside Russia has drastically limited Ukraine’s ability to strike dynamic targets like mobile ballistic missile launchers and hunt for drone launch sites. However, Ukraine has not had to rely on Starlink in its campaign against oil infrastructure or other fixed targets deep inside Russia which upset Trump in the first place.

Tuesday morning, Zelensky spoke with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and again brought up Starlink/Starshield in addition to other major concerns.

“…the situation with Starlink/Starshield… needs to be restored,” Zelensky urged.

I spoke with Marco Rubio @SecRubio, and it was a substantive conversation – focused on the issues that matter. I am grateful for his readiness to help and his clear position. First, ballistic missile interceptors, which are needed to protect lives. Second, early warning of…

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) October 20, 2026

Rubio denied that any assistance was being withheld from Ukraine. Noting that Starlink “is a private company,” the secretary told reporters that Trump is “frustrated…because he doesn’t like to be blamed for things that aren’t true, including accusations that somehow he had ordered intelligence sharing to be cut off. And that’s not true; he’s said that repeatedly.”

SECRETARY RUBIO: There’s nothing being deliberately denied to Ukraine. It’s simply a balance between our obligations to other partners, and frankly, our own standards and requirements for our own facilities as well. pic.twitter.com/x9NWbIufBa

— Department of State (@StateDept) October 20, 2026

This most recent flap isn’t the first time SpaceX and Musk have faced particularly significant criticism over limiting some Ukrainian use of the network. Actions SpaceX took earlier this year to block unregistered Starlink terminals also had major consequences for Russian forces, which were sent scrambling to find alternatives to fill the massive resulting communications gap.

Given the tenuous nature of Ukraine’s ability to use Starlink/Starshield, the Wild Hornets company is reevaluating whether to use the SpaceX system in future endeavors even though, so far, it has experienced few problems with it. Wild Hornets is a major Ukrainian combat drone maker. Among other weapons, it makes the Sting interceptors, designed to defend against Russian Shahed kamikaze drones.

The Starlink/Starshield issue isn’t affecting current operations, Wild Hornets spokesman Mike Orliuk told us Tuesday morning. “Our own communications system provides the basic connection to our interceptors,” he said. “Plus, our technology for remote control of the interceptors can use various sources of internet connectivity. True, the military often uses Starlink for this, but in our case, the terminal doesn’t need to be moved at high speeds (it simply provides a connection between the command center and the ground station to which the interceptor is connected—it’s somewhat similar to cell towers).”

Відео 100 збиттів шахедів перехоплювачем #STING #wildhornets #дикішершні #fpv

Concerns about the reduction in speeds at which Starlink terminals can operate has Wild Hornets thinking about ditching a future project, Orliuk told us.

“But we understand that there are other types of interceptors,” added Orliuk. “For example, some drones carry a terminal on board and need to fly at high speed with it. In such cases, Starlink’s limitations make their operation impossible. From this point of view, it also makes us rethink some of the projects we’re currently working on. For example, launching interceptors from aerial platforms.”

“We’re keeping an eye on the situation,” Orliuk continued. “For our current operations (connections with ground stations), we can use any source of stable internet connectivity. Therefore, various solutions are possible in different locations. However, for these needs, everything is operating normally with Starlink at the moment. As for our plans with new projects, we don’t have a clear decision yet, but we will be testing alternatives.”

Orliuk declined to provide further details about what “alternatives” could look like.

There are a number of ways the lack of Starlink for extended-range drone operations could be mitigated to a degree, but the persistent, reliable, high-bandwidth and compact capability SpaceX provides has no direct alternative at this time. The use of drones that work as line-of-sight relays, which can be daisy chained together electronically with other airborne relays, with a connection spanning dozens or even hundreds of miles to a ground entry point is possible. You can read about this concept here. The use of swarms of balloons to create an active network over a battlespace and using starlink on those slower moving platforms to relay line-of-sight connections to multiple drones below is another possibility. You can read more about this concept here. But we must stress again, nothing can fully replace Starlink/Starshield and its seamless beyond line-of-sight communications architecture at this time.

“I believe, in any case, depending on a single solution is very risky,” Orliuk proffered. “Especially if you don’t have full control over it. Especially when it comes to something as critical on the battlefield as communications. That’s exactly why our ecosystem is built around our own communications technology and basically is open to various solutions when it comes to internet connectivity.”

The No. 1 interceptor: STING by Wild Hornets has destroyed over 15,000 Shaheds and Gerberas in one year 🔥

Confirmed data shows that STING has topped the interceptor rankings for 12 consecutive months. In September this year, Ukraine’s Defense Forces downed around 1,600 Shaheds,… pic.twitter.com/4v1aeOxPiy

— Wild Hornets (@wilendhornets) October 13, 2026

As far as military units are concerned, the commander of the Georgian Legion told us that his forces have been affected by issues with Starlink/Starshield even though the main concerns have been about the speeds at which weapons can travel and still have connectivity. The Georgian Legion is fighting in the heavily contested Kramatorsk region of eastern Ukraine.

“We use Starlink a lot because, in this war, reliable communication is essential,” Mamuka Mamulashvili told us. “It helps us stay connected when everything around us is changing. Of course, we’ve learned not to rely on just one system. There are alternatives, like mobile internet, fiber-optic connections, radio and other satellite systems such as OneWeb. But honestly, none of them can fully replace Starlink in Ukraine right now.”

“The problems were not limited to the speed restriction of approximately 160 km/h,” the Georgian Legion commander pointed out. “Starlink connectivity itself was also intermittent, repeatedly switching on and off. This caused communication disruptions across various drone systems, not just those operating at speeds exceeding 160 km/h. As a result, the impact was broader than the restriction on high-speed interceptor drones. Intermittent connectivity created problems for drone control and communications across multiple systems, affecting their reliability and the ability to carry out missions as intended.”

“We had serious communication problems,” Mamulashvili explained. “At one point, our drone operators were struggling to maintain a reliable connection with the drone systems, which disrupted coordination and made it difficult to carry out missions as planned. When you lose the connection between the operator and the drone, you can lose control of the situation in seconds. We managed to adapt, but it definitely affected our work.”

“We have to adapt and find solutions, as we always do,” the commander said. “This war teaches you one thing every day. You can’t depend on a single technology or expect someone else to solve all your problems. You have to be ready for anything and keep moving forward.”

Russian sources, meanwhile, are gloating over the speed limits placed on weapons using Starlink/Starshield, particularly how it is affecting Ukraine’s mid-range drone attacks that have crippled Russian logistics. As we explained in a previous report, Ukrainian units have relied on the SpaceX system to help extend the range of their drones to reach as far as 150 miles into Russian-occupied territory. The SpaceX system is not used to hit targets inside Russia proper.

The following video shows some of these mid-range attacks.

Russian rail logistics are now also the target of Midstrike drones, with lines to Crimea being particularly affected. pic.twitter.com/K1BFd0QVov

— Sergio 🇺🇦 🇪🇺 (@SergioCentaurus) June 5, 2026

“Disabling or slowing down Starlink has significantly reduced the enemy’s ability to launch medium-range drone strikes along the ‘Novorossiya’ highway,” influential Russian milblogger Vladimir Romanov reported. The highway, also known as the R-280, is a key link between cities in occupied southern Ukraine and the occupied Crimean peninsula. The road has been a frequent target of Ukraine’s mid-range strike campaign.

“The success of these strikes depends on the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ access to American satellite communication,” Romanov noted. “For the past six months, the Ukrainian Armed Forces have been attacking civilian transport – trucks, cars, and buses – exclusively through the use of ‘Starshield.’ This means that, for the past six months, American military satellite infrastructure has been used to carry out terrorist acts against Russian civilians, and so on. In other words, the United States is still directly involved in the war with Russia!”

America’s gifts to Russia never end, with Russian military bloggers now confirming that Washington’s operation to cut Ukraine’s Starlink has halted Ukraine’s ability to strike Russian logistics routes in Ukraine.

An operation likely written in the Kremlin, executed by… pic.twitter.com/iXcIAu5Rr3

— SPRAVDI — Stratcom Centre (@StratcomCentre) October 20, 2026

As for how widespread worries among Ukrainian weapons manufacturers are, Orliuk suggested that Wild Hornets is not alone. He said he has spoken with other companies relying much more heavily on Starlink/Starshield who have expressed concerns. He pointed to growing interest in the European Eutelsat satellite constellation as an example of companies seeking options, but noted that “of course, creating something like Starlink won’t be easy.”

We’ve reached out to the Ukrainian Brave1 defense technology incubator and the National Association of Ukrainian Defense Industries (NAUDI) for additional insights into how this issue is affecting Ukraine’s defense manufacturing base.

It will be interesting to see if other Ukrainian weapons companies also consider scrapping plans to rely on Starlink in the future and what architectures will emerge at least as a backstop to it.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

NATO member Finland is preparing to reintroduce anti-personnel landmines into its military arsenal, with a contract for around one million examples due to be signed soon, following the country’s withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention that aims to eliminate these weapons. The move comes as Helsinki looks to strengthen its territorial defenses against a longstanding Russian threat and the prospect of a larger Russian military presence along its eastern border in the years ahead.

Finland’s withdrawal from the treaty, which prohibits the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of anti-personnel mines, took effect on January 10 of this year. Reflecting growing concern among NATO’s eastern-flank members about Russia’s military posture and the lessons of the war in Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia have also moved to leave the convention.

Mines have, for many centuries, been used to complicate an attacker’s movement, slow operations, and force troops to devote time and resources to clearing obstacles. Anti-personnel mines, in particular, have long been employed in defensive campaigns, but they come with significant humanitarian risks. They can kill or maim civilians long after hostilities end, which has seen them fall foul of international humanitarian law in many countries — at least when those nations don’t see a realistic risk of invasion.

It is a measure of how badly the European security environment has deteriorated that anti-personnel mines are back on the agenda.

The Finnish Defense Forces previously said that discussions with the domestic defense industry and preparations to train military personnel would begin early this year. It has now announced that the project seeks two different types of anti-personnel mines, of Finnish manufacture.

The two weapons will comprise a modern tube mine activated by a tripwire trigger, and a pressure-activated step mine. In the future, more technically advanced mines may also be procured, including cluster-type mines of the kind deployed by Russia in Ukraine. In general, anti-personnel mines have been very widely used by both sides in that conflict, with Kyiv notably receiving them as part of U.S. air packages, as you can read about here. Neither the United States nor Russia are signatories of the Ottawa Convention.

“The aim is for production of the new anti-personnel mines to begin in Finland in 2028,” said Col. Riku Mikkonen, inspector of engineers for the Finnish Army Command.

“We have a materials procurement project underway, which is currently in the preparatory and market review phase. At the same time, we are drawing up the technical specifications for the mines,” Mikkonen added. “We will soon move on to the stage where we issue requests for tenders, so that we can eventually proceed to a competitive tendering process and conclude contracts.”

At this point, no contracts have been signed. However, once the procurement effort is underway, the Finnish Defense Forces are set to return their anti-personnel mine stockpile to what it was before acceding to the Ottawa Convention in 2012.

The first new mines and associated training equipment are expected to become available during 2027. Ultimately, all conscripts will be trained to employ anti-personnel mines. The total cost of the project is around $110 million, with the last of the mines scheduled to be delivered in the 2030s.

Helsinki has stressed that it does not intend to lay anti-personnel mines during peacetime. Mikkonen said the weapons would be used only under emergency conditions.

Finland’s decision reflects a national defense philosophy that has long been shaped by direct experience with Soviet aggression. The Soviet Union invaded Finland in 1939, beginning the Winter War, and fought another conflict with the country from 1941 to 1944. Finland lost territory but preserved its independence, subsequently maintaining conscription, a large trained reserve, and a defense strategy built around making any invasion costly.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 reinforced Finnish concerns that major conventional warfare in Europe remained a realistic possibility. Finland joined NATO in April 2023, and the country shares a little over 800 miles of border with Russia.

Finland’s defensive approach traditionally emphasizes rapid mobilization to defend national territory and delay a much larger attacking force until reinforcements can arrive. The role of anti-personnel mines in that scenario is clear, being sown to slow down infantry movements and hamper advances through vulnerable areas. Their disproportionate effect, at least in theory, is especially relevant for a country with a relatively tiny population compared to the length of its border.

At the same time, anti-personnel mines would form only one part of a much broader defensive system incorporating artillery, airstrikes, engineering obstacles, fortifications, and reserve forces. It should be noted that Finland also has a considerable armory of anti-tank and anti-vehicle mines, most of which are of local manufacture.

In general, Moscow has been restructuring its military command arrangements and starting to establish the foundations for a larger conventional presence across northern Europe.

In 2024, Russia reestablished the Leningrad Military District, an apparent response to Finland’s and Sweden’s subsequent entry into NATO.

The Leningrad Military District is responsible for a strategically important region that covers the approaches to St. Petersburg, areas bordering Finland, and territory extending toward the Arctic. Its reestablishment gives Russia a dedicated command structure for managing forces facing NATO across this northern sector.

While significant, the creation of a military district does not necessarily generate additional combat power.

Russia’s war in Ukraine continues to drain resources in terms of personnel, equipment, logistics, and more.

Nevertheless, Moscow’s longer-term plans point toward a substantial expansion of its ground forces and military infrastructure in areas facing Finland and the wider NATO alliance.

A central element of Russia’s reorganization is the formation of the 44th Army Corps in the Republic of Karelia, near Finland’s eastern border. The corps was established in 2024 as part of the wider effort to strengthen Russia’s military presence in the northwest.

Russia’s wider military development also encompasses the Kola Peninsula and approaches to the Arctic, where facilities support the Northern Fleet and its strategic nuclear submarine force.

Satellite imagery last year showed construction at the Lupche-Savino garrison near Kandalaksha, including facilities intended to accommodate an artillery brigade and at least part of an engineering brigade. The location is approximately 70 miles east of Finland’s border.

Earlier this year, a separate report by the Finnish Yle media outlet found that the Russian military was expanding a base in the town of Novaya Vilga to hold as many as 6,000 Russian troops. It is located about 100 miles from the Finnish border.

For Finland, the situation could change dramatically if the war in Ukraine winds down, and the Russian military assembles in greater strength closer to its borders.

Finland’s Military Intelligence Review 2026 assesses that Russia’s military reforms have not yet significantly increased its capabilities in its immediate vicinity. But it still anticipates a substantial increase in Russian military capabilities as circumstances permit and identifies Finland as a major direction for future force development after the war.

A ceasefire or settlement in Ukraine would not automatically enable Russia to launch a major offensive against Finland. A ceasefire could ease the immediate military pressure on Russia while still creating a serious economic and political challenge for the Kremlin. Russia’s wartime spending has sustained defense-sector production and employment, but winding that spending down risks exposing structural weaknesses.

With a ceasefire or settlement, Moscow would still need to rebuild units, replace equipment, replenish personnel, and establish the logistical capacity to sustain large-scale operations. However, there are indications that this is already happening, at least to a degree.

Recent imagery analysis indicates, for example, a significant buildup of newly delivered Russian armor, including new T-90M tanks, at the 22nd Central Tank Reserve Base, located around 450 miles from the Finnish border.

Finland’s planned acquisition of anti-personnel mines fits into a broader effort to prepare for a potential future conflict. Prominent in the minds of Finnish — and other Nordic — defense planners is the fact that Russia is rebuilding the command structures and infrastructure needed to support a larger military presence near NATO’s northern frontier, even as the war in Ukraine limits its immediate ability to do so.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The new strategy shifts the bloc’s focus from long-term climate concerns to urgent security measures.

The European Commission has unveiled a new Arctic strategy for the European Union that lists security and resilience first among four priorities, alongside climate change, economic prosperity and opportunities for Arctic communities.

The strategy calls for a new maritime security hub to help member states and partners share information and monitor maritime activity in the Arctic, the Commission said on Tuesday.

The hub would later expand to track shadow fleet vessels, detect illegal fishing and pollution, and improve search and rescue coordination.

The Commission also said the EU will work to expand European icebreaker capacity. Icebreakers are specialised vessels designed to navigate ice-covered waters by breaking up sea ice and maintaining safe shipping routes.

“The Arctic is one place where the tectonic plates of geopolitics are colliding,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said, adding that sovereignty and territorial integrity can no longer be taken for granted.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said Russia is expanding its military footprint in the high north, citing drone incursions, GPS jamming and cable sabotage, the AFP news agency reported.

Cutting reliance on Washington

Several measures appear aimed at reducing dependence on the United States. The Commission said the EU will back a strategic pan-Arctic fibre-optic telecommunications cable project linking Greenland directly to Europe. It is part of a wider plan that would also connect Canada, Japan and South Korea.

The EU will also provide secure satellite connectivity for government communications through the IRIS² constellation, a constellation AFP said is meant to rival US tech mogul Elon Musk’s Starlink.

The shift follows US President Donald Trump’s repeated demands to take control of Greenland, a Danish autonomous territory. Although his tone has softened this year, with a security deal signed with Greenland and Denmark, many in Europe remain wary, AFP said.

Member states press for action

The strategy follows last month’s meeting of leaders from 12 countries, including Germany, France, Finland and Denmark. Member states urged the EU to take a more strategic and proactive role, according to a joint statement.

Participants identified Russia as the largest threat while noting the ambitions of China and the US.

At the meeting, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said the era of “high north, low attention” was over. Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo called Russia the most significant long-term threat and said the EU must treat the Arctic as a strategic frontier.

The Commission reiterated the EU’s position remains that oil, coal and gas should stay in the ground, including in the Arctic.

To combat increasing climate concerns, the Commission pledged to “strengthen climate research, observation and monitoring to better understand these changes and support effective responses”, while working in tandem with the people who live and work in the Arctic.

Between smiles and a handshake, Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez thanked US President Donald Trump for “supporting the country’s return to multilateral forums,” following a face-to-face meeting on September 22 that she called “historic.”

In her address before the UN General Assembly one day later, Rodríguez reiterated her gratitude to Trump while promising a “democratic transformation” of her country. The acting leader’s trip to New York, a mere nine months after the January 3 US bombings and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores, perfectly encapsulated the Venezuelan government’s international and domestic realignment with US imperialism in general and its MAGA faction in particular.

In her speech, she euphemistically called the January 3 military strikes “the outcome of the exhaustion of domestic politics and heightened confrontation with the US,” basically holding Venezuela partially responsible for the imperialist attack it suffered.

The abandonment of Maduro

Rodríguez’s trip was as symbolic for what was said as for what was left unsaid. The acting leader and her entourage heaped praise on Trump and took turns posing for pictures. Rodríguez also maintained an undignified silence when Trump, addressing the UN, gloated about the January 3 military operation and abduction of Maduro, whom he called an “outlaw dictator,” while shamelessly boasting that “to the victor belong the spoils.”

Maduro and Flores – currently detained in Brooklyn just 10 miles from UN headquarters and facing a show trial on ludicrous “narcoterrorism” charges – were not worth a single mention by Rodríguez. This stance has been backed by pro-government pundits who are increasingly dropping the “acting” label when referring to Rodríguez.

Her government has effectively undermined Maduro and Flores’ sovereign immunity argument to get their charges dismissed. US Justice Department prosecutors told the court that Caracas, via its embassy in the US, had advocated to the State Department for Rodríguez to receive head-of-state immunity in an unrelated civil lawsuit in Florida. But, Venezuelan authorities have declined to do the same vis-à-vis Maduro and Flores in what the US Justice Department called “devastating silence.”

The official indifference is even more remarkable given Flores’ documented health issues, heavily aggravated by the brutal kidnapping, which led defense attorneys to request that she be moved to house arrest during the trial. This silence contrasts with the Maduro government’s loud defense of Alex Saab, which repeatedly brought up his health issues under incarceration during the international campaign for his release.

Saab is another prime example of the Rodríguez administration’s pragmatic rapprochement with Washington. He was irregularly handed over to US agencies in May and recently pleaded guilty in a US federal court in Miami, promising to cooperate against unnamed Venezuelan officials.

An imperial satellite

The Venezuelan leadership’s diplomatic activity in New York more broadly showcased a new foreign policy direction that is now unmistakably marching to Washington’s drum.

Rodríguez held talks with International Monetary Fund and World Bank representatives, deepening reengagement with the Washington-based financial institutions that former President Hugo Chávez denounced as instruments of US imperialism and booted them out of the country. The specter of another IMF loan-and-adjustment package returns as the Rodríguez administration begins negotiations to restructure the country’s enormous and illegitimate debt.

In addition, Rodríguez held sideline meetings with US allies only, such as Netherlands PM Rob Jetten, Trinidad and Tobago PM Kamla Persad-Bissessar and Chilean President José Antonio Kast. Rodríguez also hosted Paraguayan President Santiago Peña in Caracas before flying to the US. 

The right-wing Chilean and Paraguayan administrations had firmly backed US regime change efforts in Venezuela, leading the Maduro government to sever ties. Trinidad and Tobago’s case was even more egregious, with Caracas suspending all cooperation, including in key cross-border natural gas projects, after Port of Spain endorsed Washington’s military buildup and extrajudicial boat bombings on Venezuela’s doorstep in late 2025.

Rodríguez and her team also broke with the Chavista tradition of holding meetings with global majority countries similarly under Washington’s gun, especially allies and strategic partners like Cuba, Iran, China and Russia. A customary event in Harlem, alongside Cuban officials and international solidarity movements, was scrapped as well.

The acting president’s UN address exposed how anti-imperialism and the defense of multipolarity have vanished from the official discourse. Absent was the hitherto denunciation of Washington’s criminal wars across the globe, replaced by a vague expression of solidarity with “peoples who suffer war.” Nor was there any condemnation of US economic sanctions, which remain in place against Venezuela and its former allies.

Rodríguez offered no words of support for Cuba as it faces a US blockade that gets more murderous by the day. There was no mention of Palestine either. Before January 3, Venezuelan representatives had never wasted an opportunity to reiterate support for the Palestinian cause and to expose the international community’s failure to rein in the genocidal, Western-sponsored settler colony.

In contrast, Venezuela joined the US, Israel, Ukraine, Western European countries and Latin American right-wing governments in boycotting the UN’s commemoration of the 25th anniversary of the Durban Declaration. The 2001 World Conference Against Racism marked a milestone in the ongoing struggle to end racism and colonialism, provoking the ire of the US and Israel, which have led boycotts of every one of its commemorations.

Fuel for a sputtering empire

Along with the 180-degree foreign policy shift, the Rodríguez administration has moved to restructure the economy to the benefit of a declining US hegemon reeling from its strategic defeat in the war against Iran.

With US officials’ input and supervision, Venezuelan authorities have overhauled energy and mining laws in the interest of multinational corporations, slashing taxes and royalties as well as ceding operational and commercial control. Corporate executives, often shepherded by Trump aides, have paraded through the presidential palace to sign agreements carving up Venezuela’s immense subsoil resources.

A recent oil deal with the Trump administration, which Rodríguez also hailed as “historic,” will turn over 17 prime oilfields holding more than a fifth of Venezuela’s crude reserves to a private petroleum company, NABEP, controlled by the Pentagon. Furthermore, the US State Department will be able to buy 20 percent of NABEP’s output at cost, while having a right of first refusal for the remaining 80 percent, for which a Venezuelan oil official promised a major “sales discount.” In other words, Venezuela is going to supply energy below market price to the imperial war machine.

Whatever revenue is ultimately left for Caracas is still going to be controlled by the US Treasury Department, under what Venezuelan state oil company (PDVSA) chief defended as a “state-to-state agreement.” A recent Financial Times report revealed that the White House is presently barring Venezuela from paying dividends to Russian and Chinese joint venture partners in a flagrant attempt to drive them out.

Washington’s semi-colonial control extends beyond privileged access to natural resources, including strategic minerals. A looming privatization drive and debt restructuring process are likely to further entrench Venezuelan dependence on Western monopoly capital. At the same time, the US is also looking to turn the South American country into a captive market for its heavily subsidized agricultural output. Venezuela’s imports of staples such as rice and corn have skyrocketed this year, seriously threatening national production, especially small and mid-size campesino farms supplying much of the country’s food.

(Ab)uses of history

The speed and scope of Caracas’ realignment with Washington has made it an uphill battle for those still insisting that the acting Rodríguez government is merely conducting a “tactical retreat” without straying from the Bolivarian Revolution’s strategic horizon.

One early line of argument was to invoke historical examples, such as the Brest-Litovsk treaty, to rationalize difficult concessions at gunpoint. However, the analogy grew ever more dubious with the passing months, as the Bolsheviks never renounced their anti-imperialist internationalism nor the nascent socialist state’s sovereignty over the commanding heights of the economy.

The argument that subordinating the economy to US-led capital was akin to China’s post-1978 opening up belies the reality that Venezuela does not even manage its own export revenues and must have its expenses approved by the US State Department, subject to auditing by CIA-linked firms like Deloitte.

Venezuelan government officials and unofficial spokespeople have also abused examples related to Chávez, namely his call for troops to stand down in the failed 1992 insurrection and the fact that he did not martyr himself in the 2002 coup that briefly overthrew his democratically-elected government. However, in both cases, Chávez never surrendered his core principles concerning independence and sovereignty. In 2002, he allowed himself to be taken prisoner by the putschists to avoid a bloodbath, but he did not resign and would not have sat quietly if Venezuela were turned into a US semi-colony overnight. On multiple occasions, Chávez underscored he was prepared to fight and die on the frontlines should Venezuela face an Iraq-style US invasion.

There are other historical analogies that are, unfortunately, more appropriate. Iraq after the US invasion, like Venezuela, to this day does not control its oil revenues, which are deposited in a New York Federal Reserve account. Iraq was until recently under US military occupation, hosting some two dozen bases – a possibility that Trump has recently left open for Venezuela. In past months, the US has carried out extrajudicial executions on Venezuelan soil and deployed military assets in the wake of July’s double earthquake, including temporarily taking over operations at the Simón Bolívar International Airport and La Guaira port.

Egypt under President Anwar Sadat is likewise a very instructive precedent. Sadat never renounced his predecessor Gamal Abdel Nasser, simply presenting his program as a “correction” of past mistakes. Yet he progressively dismantled the achievements of Nasserism, rolling back land reform and industrialization policies in favor of imperialist capital. Sadat also realigned Egypt from the Soviet Union to the US camp, going on to reestablish ties with Israel and abandon the Palestinian cause.

Vietnam: The forgotten analogy

Lacking justifications for the new alliance with the Trump administration, Venezuelan government officials and influencers have resorted to straw man arguments, claiming that the “international left” wanted the Venezuelan people to immolate themselves by confronting a vastly superior military foe.

The official rhetoric eclipses what was until recently Caracas’ preferred historical analogy: Vietnam. In late 2025, as the US ramped up its military buildup, Venezuelan leaders warned that Trump would face a “second Vietnam” if he dared to attack. There were months of military drills and detailed preparations across the country, consistent with Venezuela’s asymmetric doctrine of “prolonged people’s war”. 

Ultimately it is impossible to know how much resistance Venezuela could have mounted against the US onslaught because the leadership opted not to fight. US air superiority and electronic warfare notwithstanding, Venezuelan defense officials have neglected to explain why only one of Venezuela’s 5,000 Russian-made Igla-S manpads – ideal for taking down low-flying helicopters and combat aircraft – was used. Venezuela’s armed forces offered no organized resistance on that fateful morning, leaving Maduro’s Cuban security detail virtually alone to confront the invader in what reportedly still proved a fiercely heroic firefight that left 32 Cubans dead.

Though Venezuela might have been unable to avoid decapitation of its top leadership – either via capture or assassination – it could have raised the costs for the US empire to a politically unacceptable degree, potentially miring it in the sort of Iraq-style quagmire that the Trump administration most feared. 

Instead, almost overnight, the acting government seamlessly pivoted from vowing to combat imperialism by all means necessary to fawning over Trump and his underlings. Promises that not a “single drop” of Venezuelan oil would be shipped to the US in case of an attack were replaced by risible claims that supplying crude at cost to the Pentagon was Chávez’s plan all along.

Unable to present a convincing case for the domestic and foreign policy U-turns, official and unofficial government spokespeople have also lashed out at criticism from the Latin American left. Most recently, former Colombian President Gustavo Petro slammed the Rodríguez administration for giving away the nation’s oil to Trump. Caracas responded with ad hominem invectives.

At Washington’s behest, Venezuela has also halted all subsidized oil shipments to Cuba, which has added to the island’s gravest energy crisis in its history. Cuba’s Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Fernández de Cossío recently said that Venezuela remained a “friendly” country, but added that “ally is too strong a word.”

The cost of capitulation 

The human toll of resistance, whether in sanctions-besieged Venezuela or on the battlefields of West Asia, is always immense. However, as national liberation movements have long understood, the price of capitulation is inevitably higher, especially in the medium and long term. Chávez and Maduro clearly grasped this reality, rallying the masses to withstand decades of US hybrid warfare and forging close alliances with anti-imperialist states from Cuba to Iran. 

The cost of submission, meanwhile, is being borne by the Venezuelan laboring classes, from small farmers hard hit by US agricultural dumping to the urban semi-proletariat devastated by spiraling inflation resulting from Washington’s pilfering of the nation’s export earnings. 

For its part, Venezuela’s comprador bourgeoisie, in both its traditional and emergent fractions, stands to reap fabulous rewards from the demolition of the legislative pillars of the Bolivarian Revolution – viz., hydrocarbons, mining, housing and real estate, or forthcoming axing of labor and land laws – reasserting itself as a servile intermediary for US imperialism. 

There is no better example than NABEP owner Alejandro Betancourt, an oil mogul who amassed a fortune from often-unfulfilled state contracts dating back to 2009 and was hand-picked by the Trump administration as a middleman in the 25-year agreement backstopped by the Pentagon. The White House went as far as pressuring domestic and foreign courts to drop money laundering accusations against Betancourt.

Rodríguez and her leadership faction likewise benefit from what analyst William Serafino has called the new regime of “co-government” with the Trump White House, tying their fortunes to the latter to outflank rivals and solidify the strategic alliance with local and imperialist capital. 

The current acting president is one of the architects of the post-2018 neoliberal economic package that was the fulcrum of a new governability pact with the local bourgeoisie, freezing wages and social spending in exchange for social “peace”. Indeed, as then vice president, Rodríguez reportedly brought Betancourt back to Venezuela in 2023, shuttering an investigation into his alleged corruption and key role in financing the self-proclaimed Juan Guaidó “interim presidency” during the first Trump administration. The episode is symptomatic of the Venezuelan government’s Faustian gambit to appease business sectors and maintain a modest economic recovery under crushing sanctions, but at the cost of slowly eroding its popular support base.

The Maduro administration’s concessions hollowed out the Bolivarian Revolution’s sovereign edifice but its institutional foundations remained formally intact alongside the internationalist geopolitical scaffolding binding Venezuela to the broader Axis of Resistance. The post-January 3 semi-colonial offensive has set about demolishing this structure of political-military and economic independence. While the destruction can be repaired through sustained bottom-up mobilization advancing a national popular alternative to capitulation, it will likely be the outcome of a medium- and long-term process. Nevertheless, there are growing signs of revolutionary movements and intellectuals organizing to confront the US empire and its local agents and reconquer sovereignty as the cornerstone of any future socialist construction.

What should be clear without a sliver of a doubt is that the “Rodrigato” – and the lumpen bourgeoisie it represents – has opted to pact with the Trump administration. Any revolutionary strategy to resist re-colonization must begin from concrete analysis of concrete conditions. Ignoring the acting Venezuelan leadership’s discourse and policies, pretending that there is a cunning secret plan being devised or trying to frame everything as a masterful 3D chess move, will ultimately hamper the most important task: fighting US imperialism.

Source: Sovereign Media

Two men have been re-arrested after an incident near RAF Fairford last month, counter-terrorism police have said.

A 24-year-old UK national, and a 25-year-old dual UK-Iranian national, are being held on suspicion of assisting a foreign intelligence service under Section 3 of the National Security Act 2023, with police saying the investigation relates to Iran.

Police had been alerted to three suspicious vehicles near the US airbase in Gloucestershire in the early hours of 27 September – a major incident was subsequently declared and dozens of homes evacuated.

Seven men had initially been arrested as part of the counter-terror police investigation and were later released on bail.

Five men were found with petrol in three vans near the airbase – they were initially arrested on suspicion of committing offences under the Explosives Act and then further arrested on suspicion of preparation of a terrorist act.

The re-arrests announced on Tuesday relate to a 24-year-old man who was initially held on the 27 September near the base and a 25-year-old who was arrested on suspicion of preparation of terrorist acts days later on 1 October in Westminster.

The other five men remain on police bail.

The head of National Counter Terrorism Policing, Assistant Commissioner Laurence Taylor said: “This is very much a live investigation, and our evidence gathering continues, but at this time our position remains the same; we consider it highly likely that there is Iranian state involvement.

“Our investigators are continuing to examine what that level of involvement was and the ambition behind it.”

The officer added that national security investigations can take time to progress due to their sensitive nature.

“Our specialist teams have been working tirelessly to interrogate the many lines of enquiry involved in this hugely complex investigation,” he said.

Following the incident, Gloucestershire Police said it had received a call about “three suspicious vehicles” travelling towards RAF Fairford at 00:45 BST.

A bomb disposal team was deployed to the village to examine a number of vehicles, police said at the time.

The revocations targeted visa holders who had allegedly broken the law, or pose threats to national security.

The Trump administration has said it has revoked more than 300,000 visas issued to foreign nationals, claiming it has done so at a faster pace than any previous administration.

A spokesman for the US Department of State said on social media on Tuesday that the revocations targeted foreign nationals in the United States on visas who had broken the law, committed fraud or posed threats to national security.

“We have zero tolerance for foreigners here on visas who break the law, commit fraud, or undermine our national security,” Tommy Pigott, State Department spokesman, said in a post on the social media platform X.

The administration would continue taking action to secure US borders and protect national security, he added.

Al Jazeera has reached out to the State Department for comment.

The number of visa revocations exceeded 175,000 in August.

In January, the department said it had revoked more than 100,000 visas, a record at the time.

The administration has also adopted a stricter policy on granting visas, with tightened social media vetting and expanded screening.

Rights advocates and human rights experts have condemned the Trump administration’s social media screening efforts, which they say threaten free speech and are akin to surveillance and the singling out of immigrants.

Paddy Power-owner Flutter has announced plans to cut up to 1,400 jobs as its boss claimed the company “cannot fully absorb” tax rises imposed on the gambling industry.

Staff based in Leeds and Dublin, as well as workers for its UK and Ireland business at Flutter’s Portugal and Romania sites, will be most affected, but what roles are at risk has not been disclosed.

The government announced taxes rises on online casino and sports betting, with an exemption for horse racing, in the Budget last year.

Flutter boss Kevin Harrington said the tax hikes had “fundamentally changed” the economic model of the UK betting and gaming industry, arguing it had helped “fuel the unlicensed, unregulated market”.

“We continue to expect these tax increases to have a very significant impact on the overall market,” Flutter Entertainment said on Tuesday.

Flutter, which also owns Sky Bet and Betfair, employs 28,500 people across the world, including 9,000 in the UK and Ireland.

As well as its Leeds and Dublin offices, the BBC understands the cuts could also affect staff based in London and Sunderland, as well as Malta and Gibraltar.

Harrington, who is chief executive of the betting giant’s UK and Ireland business, said: “As we warned a year ago, we cannot fully absorb a rise of this magnitude without reducing our fixed cost base and therefore must restructure our business so that we can best position ourselves for the future.”

The BBC has contacted the Treasury for comment.

Flutter delisted from the London Stock Exchange in August in a blow to the UK, with its shares now solely traded in New York.

In its most recent results, the company reported a $299m (£224m) pre-tax loss for the three months to June for its entire business worldwide, compared to a $205m profit in the same period last year. Sales rose 3% to $4.3bn.

However, revenues in the UK and Ireland rose by 4% over the period, due to strong growth in online gambling games.

Some online gambling tax rises announced in last year’s Budget took effect in April. This included remote gaming duty, which is paid on online casino betting, rising from 21% to 40%.

General betting duty, paid on the profits made from various forms of sports betting, was kept at 15% in betting shops, but is set to rise from 15% to 25% online in April next year.

Betting firms had warned that cost increases would lead to job losses and betting shop closures, but MPs dismissed the warnings as “scaremongering”.

During the summer, Ladbrokes owner Entain announced job cuts, with news agency Reuters reporting 500 roles were being removed.

Punters’ winnings from gambling are not taxed in the UK, nor is VAT charged on bets.

Flutter said its restructuring plan would cost between $80m and $90m.

The company has claimed in previous financial results that the impact of UK tax rises would hit its underlying profit by $320m this year and $540m in 2027, before any savings or restructure to mitigate the impact.

London, United Kingdom – There was a moment towards the end of Andy Burnham’s conference speech in Liverpool that, through silence, spoke volumes.

The new prime minister and Labour leader fell quiet.

For 20 seconds he stood, saying nothing. He hadn’t forgotten his words. He was gathering his emotions for a passage of the speech he hadn’t been able to make it through in rehearsals without crying.

Burnham’s father had died just a couple of weeks before, and this was the section where he’d talk about it.

As the audience realised what was coming they stood, applauding, and urging him on with shouts of “Come on, lad!’ and “Come on, Andy!”

Thanking them, he composed himself and continued.

Conference speeches are theatre, and contemporary British political standards require that a leader be relatable. But there’s little doubt that Andy Burnham handled this moment with an emotional register that struck many as genuine.

His predecessor Keir Starmer sometimes came across as wooden, almost robotic and uncomfortable in front of cameras. Burnham, the seventh prime minister in 10 years, is more emotional.

He talks big ideas and grand solutions and relishes the opportunity to communicate.

In the vibes-denominated currency of modern political discourse, this matters.

The polls speak for themselves. Politico’s Poll of Polls had the Labour Party retake top spot shortly after Burnham became PM – a position it has not relinquished since. At the end of September, Ipsos found Andy Burnham to be the only politician with a positive net favourability rating.

YouGov’s polling also judges him the most popular politician in the UK at the moment.

But to keep up, Burnham must deliver tangible change before the next general election. Unless he calls one early, that will be 2029.

According to political analyst Sam Freedman, “So many in Westminster keep coming back to an early election, despite Burnham ruling it out … No one can quite figure out how Burnham keeps the hope vibe going for three more years with relatively little visible progress.”

‘Going back to what Labour was in the 50s’

In the Welsh town of Port Talbot, terraces of workers’ cottages cluster beside the UK’s largest steelworks.

Like much of Wales, Port Talbot did vote Labour for a century – until elections for the Senedd Cymru or Welsh Parliament in May.

Labour was beaten to an unprecedented third place behind Plaid Cymru’s nationalists, and the anti-immigration Reform UK.

But that was before Burnham took over.

Myles Lewis, who organises social walks for the town’s elderly, told Al Jazeera that Labour had not convinced people on immigration, and Starmer’s communication wasn’t good enough.

“[But now], it’s kind of going back to what Labour was in the 50s and 60s, where they actually looked after the working-class people. I do believe Andy Burnham can get there because I think he has the interests of the working-class people.”

In his first weeks in power, Burnham delivered a quick flurry of eye-catching, domestic, cost-of-living-focused policies.

He capped bus fares, cut the value-added tax (VAT) on electricity bills, and cut business rates for pubs.

He said that he would end street homelessness, reindustrialise the country, take services back into public control, and start the biggest build-out of social housing since World War II.

The mayor of Greater Manchester for nine years, Burnham supports the devolution of powers from Westminster to the UK’s nations and regions.

In July, he announced mayors could keep a share of business rates from April 2027 and of income tax from 2028.

And his conference speech in September set out the contours of some big political battles to come, including a national social care service, free at the point of use, paid for by changing the UK pensions’ triple lock from 2030. It would arrive next parliament. Burnham also pitched a national commission on electoral reform, with a manifesto commitment to overhaul the voting system. And he delivered a blunt verdict on Brexit: that it “has done more harm than good”. He wouldn’t rule out an in-out referendum, or a pledge for the UK to rejoin the European Union, in Labour’s next manifesto, he said.

On foreign affairs, there is less blue water between Burnham and his predecessors.

When he travelled to Ukraine in August, the UK’s new prime minister came with a headline-grabbing gift – British know-how to build the long-range SCALP missile. He was the fourth British prime minister to visit Kyiv since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and pledge steadfast support.

On Gaza, he has said the Labour government “didn’t get it right” and should have called for a ceasefire earlier. And in September, the Burnham government announced a sanctions package against illegal West Bank settlements.

But there has been no genocide declaration, and no full arms embargo against Israel. And Burnham hasn’t overturned the Starmer government’s proscription of the Palestine Action protest group as a “terrorist” organisation.

Defence spending is also a looming problem.

The government’s formal defence pledge is 3.5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035, and Burnham has declined to say whether he’d pay for it with tax rises or welfare cuts.

John Healey, who resigned as the UK’s defence secretary in June over underfunding, is now chancellor of the exchequer, and will not commit to the 3-percent-by-2030 target he set himself.

Burnham’s first budget comes at the end of this month. A full spending review follows next year. Much will be clearer after these.

His biggest pledges – reindustrialisation, control of public services, a new social care system – are expensive.

Burnham certainly has the vibes. The public likes them, for now. The budget will show whether he can afford them.