NEWS

For several days, the streets of Tirana have witnessed a wave of antigovernment demonstrations, with demonstrators engaged in fierce clashes with security forces, while police have fired tear gas on thousands of young protesters to prevent them from scaling barricades.

Protests escalated last week after school and university students joined them, citing rising tuition fees and crumbling infrastructure.

What initially began as a targeted environmental protest in May has rapidly escalated into one of the most serious political challenges facing Prime Minister Edi Rama in his more than a decade in power.

Yet, as the unrest reaches a boiling point, a fundamental question remains: Who is behind this movement, and can it force systemic political change?

Contrary to claims by government officials that the unrest is being orchestrated by political opponents or external actors, analysts and journalists on the ground emphasise that the movement is largely decentralised and youth-driven.

Fatos Hakorja, editor-in-chief of TV Klan and Klan News, told Al Jazeera that the demonstrations have evolved organically into a broad coalition of high school students, university students, environmentalists, and aggrieved citizens.

“So far, what can be said with certainty is that the protests have been organised mainly by young people themselves,” Hakorja told Al Jazeera. “What began as the ‘Flamingo Revolution’ gradually developed into a broader student and youth protest… There is no clear evidence that a single consolidated structure stands behind the protests,” he said, referring to the May protest against a luxury resort that threatens the protected coastline.

Hakorja noted that coordination takes place dynamically across digital platforms such as WhatsApp, Telegram, and Snapchat, rather than through formal organisational hierarchies.

Albanian political analyst and publicist Ben Andoni echoed this view, describing the situation not merely as a standard protest, but as “a genuine, horizontal revolt”.

“The protest has turned into a rebellion for the past seven days. It was a protest before, but it has never taken on the character of a movement. If it were so, there would be a leadership group and some short-, medium-, and long-term goals,” Andoni told Al Jazeera.

“It is a horizontal movement, where people are mobilised by TikTok groups and social networks, but not by true cultural and political organisations. That is also a handicap or a source of pressure for Rama’s government, which seeks to negotiate, but finds no single counterpart standing in its way.”

From the ‘Flamingo Revolution’ to broad structural discontent

The roots of the current unrest are multifaceted, blending localised grievances with deep-seated frustration over governance, economic stagnation, and corruption.

The initial spark – dubbed the “Flamingo Revolution” – was ignited by environmental opposition to controversial luxury development projects, notably in the protected area of Zvernec and the planned resort investment on Sazan Island by the firm of Jared Kushner, United States President Donald Trump’s son-in-law.

The flamingo, native to these coastal lagoons, quickly became a symbol of resistance against the perceived commodification of public lands.

However, environmental concerns swiftly converged with student anger over high tuition fees, inadequate dormitory conditions, and low educational competitiveness. Beneath these immediate triggers lies a much deeper structural crisis.

“Problems of corruption, nepotism, and a lack of perspective are the main reasons that drove people to protest,” Andoni explained.

“The protest summarised the entire range of problems that Albania has, and brought them to the doorstep of a government that has crossed lines regarding corruption, inequality, and particularly a lack of empathy for the people.

“Among some protesters, especially on social media, there is also a narrative that Rama is placing the country’s interests at the service of private interests, his personal hold on power, or foreign interests, including Israeli interests. These claims have not been proven, but they seem to have increased the anger of some young people and part of the wider population,” Hakorja added.

Rama has strongly rejected the allegations, calling them conspiracy theories and dismissing them as manipulated disinformation spread through social media by “foreign hands”, aimed at destabilising the government and undermining the country’s public institutions.

Rejection of the entire political class

A defining feature of the uprising is the protesters’ explicit rejection of the ruling Socialist Party (SP) and the traditional opposition, including the Democratic Party (PD) led by Sali Berisha.

While Prime Minister Rama has accused the opposition of taking over the movement, and opposition supporters have joined the crowds on the ground, experts stress that opposition leaders exercise no direct control over the demonstrators. In fact, several opposition MPs who attempted to address the crowds faced open hostility and rejection.

“A large number of these young people seem to feel unrepresented by the whole political class,” Hakorja told Al Jazeera.

“They see the political system as disconnected from their reality and as a system that protects the interests of a minority more than it addresses the problems of the majority of citizens.”

This widespread cynicism has resulted in an uncompromising stance. Demonstrators have demanded the immediate resignation of Prime Minister Rama and the formation of a technical government, refusing official offers of dialogue due to a total breakdown of trust in state institutions.

The deep cynicism towards Albania’s political class stems from a widespread feeling that leaders are entirely indifferent to citizens’ daily struggles. Young people face rampant corruption, high unemployment, and an economy that drives huge brain drain.

This disconnect is further spurred by years of government apathy towards crumbling public education, high tuition fees, and poor dormitory conditions.

Furthermore, controversial state-backed developments – such as the planned luxury resort by Kushner’s firm – serve as prime examples for citizens who believe the political establishment consistently trades national resources and public goods for private and foreign interests.

Heavy-handed security and growing fatigue

Faced with a leaderless movement that refuses to negotiate, the Albanian government has increasingly relied on security forces to maintain control.

Police have been accused of brutality as they have used tear gas, water cannons, and rubber bullets to quell the protesters. At least 167 people have been arrested, including minors.

In a move that highlights the administration’s reliance on law enforcement, Prime Minister Rama announced a 2,500-euro ($2,800) bonus for police officers on the front lines, alongside substantial salary increases set for 2027.

Hakorja pointed out that the government is treating the crisis predominantly as a matter of public order and security.

He also highlighted troubling incidents, such as the appearance of unidentified civilians armed with wooden sticks inside the Socialist Party headquarters. While these individuals remained inside to protect the building as protesters hurled stones and attacked the entrance, their presence – including individuals holding public positions – led to fears of informal, non-state security responses operating alongside or outside official police forces.

What lies ahead?

As both sides brace for further escalation, the immediate outlook remains uncertain. Without clear leadership to negotiate terms, or intervention from international partners such as the European Union and the US, the deadlock threatens to prolong political instability.

According to Andoni, the Rama administration has used force as its main instrument, as it has suffered a severe loss of moral authority and legitimacy.

“Demonstrators remain persistent and aggressive, while Rama plays the card of force through the police,” Andoni told Al Jazeera, adding that “fatigue” is impacting the young protesters.

“It seems that young people may execute a tactical withdrawal first by temporarily stepping back from the streets due to exhaustion, leaving the weight and burden of proof on Mr Rama” – placing the ultimate responsibility on the prime minister to prove that his government has the legitimacy, capability, and sincere intent to carry out deep reforms and resolve a crisis that police force has only further escalated.

Whether this youth-led rebellion marks the beginning of a new political era in Albania or subsides under policing and exhaustion, it has irrevocably exposed the deep rift between Albania’s youth and its governing political establishment.

Ronaldo was 36 when he returned to Manchester United from Juventus in 2021, when Ole Gunnar Solskjaer was manager.

Under Ten Hag, he scored just three goals in 16 outings before his exit during the 2022-23 campaign.

“It’s the wrong idea to put this to me that I expected him to do the pressing, that he’s exhausted,” added Ten Hag. “But he couldn’t. He ran neither in possession nor out of possession. The reason was because he didn’t prepare himself.

“Every top team has to embrace the top player, but the top player has to work for the team.

“He was telling the players, ‘save your legs at the training’. I understand it when you are top fit – you have sessions you can save the legs. But first you have to train yourself to get into the right fitness levels.”

The publication of Ten Hag’s interview comes as Ronaldo has been given a 30-day suspension and fined 255 euros (£215) by the Portuguese Football Federation for leaving his country’s international camp last month.

Ten Hag was sacked by Manchester United in October 2024, having won the Carabao Cup in 2023 and FA Cup in 2024.

On his time at Old Trafford, Ten Hag added he wanted to sign Frenkie de Jong, Harry Kane and Declan Rice, and was against the sale of Scott McTominay to Napoli in August 2024.

“I said for the first season, ‘centre-half, there’s a problem, centre-midfield, there is a problem, and especially I need a strategist, then we need goals’. And that was the biggest issue in all my three years: goals,” said Ten Hag.

Thanks to Google Earth, we can finally put this one to bed. Since the B-21’s unveiling, people have made wild claims about its wingspan, specifically how tiny it is. This was never the case, as we have reported continuously since we first set eyes on it. Many AI-generated and enthusiast-made B-21 fact sheets have gone viral on social media showing wingspans under 130 feet, which only helped propel the nonsense. Now we can definitively say, give or take a few feet, the B-21 spans 152 feet and is 61 feet long. This puts it at about 12% smaller in terms of wingspan than the B-2, and about the same — 12% smaller — when it comes to length.

The image in question, taken of Edwards AFB and dated June 20, 2026, was recently uploaded to Google Earth. While we have seen satellite images of the B-21 going about its business before, this one was published in the public domain and had enough resolution, when paired with Google Earth’s excellent measurement tools, to get conclusive measurements.

Since we first saw the B-21 at Plant 42 in Palmdale, California, during its unveiling, which TWZ attended, we put the top-end size at 155 feet wingspan-wise. That analysis has only narrowed over the years. I have had many emails, social media threads, and other engagements with folks claiming the aircraft was in the sub-130-foot wingspan range. Now we can finally put those battles behind us.

So what does the size tell us? Nothing we don’t already know. The B-21 was always going to be smaller than the B-2. Our analysis from many years ago has stayed the same — the aircraft would be designed with a premium on range and affordability, as well as very low observability, over massive payload. This resulted in the aircraft you see today. It is smaller, but with design priorities that have shifted from its predecessor’s, and 12% smaller in pure dimensions makes total sense considering what Northrop Grumman was trying to achieve. Above all else, it points to the B-21 having an extreme unrefueled range, with improved aerodynamics for high-altitude cruise, more gas for its size, and two efficient engines instead of four.

As for its length, the B-21 is nearly the same length as an F-15 fighter, which sounds bizarre for a large bomber. However, flying wings are visual transformers, looking like compact UFOs side-on and massive head-on or from the planform view.

As far as what else we can discern from the Google Earth image? Not much. We get a bit of a better view of the B-21’s exhaust configuration, but nothing is really revelatory there. The exhausts are deeply buried with large planar exhaust exit ‘ramps’ and have a large chevron trailing edge over the exhaust aperture itself. We have seen some pretty detailed images of this general arrangement from the rear that have been posted on social media. We do see the exhaust pathway as black in color, a feature that was edited out in the official top-down photo of the B-21 seen above, which was released in April, and this is something we mentioned at the time.

In a letter outlining 42 questions, UEFA gives FIFA until November 2 to release documents on Infantino’s aborted plans.

UEFA has given FIFA a deadline of November 2 to release documents relating to its president Gianni Infantino’s aborted attempts at a secretive investment plan for the World Cup and other governance issues.

The latest move in a power struggle between the global and continental governing bodies was revealed on Monday, days after European football’s top officials were disappointed by what they perceived as a lack of clarity from Infantino over the issues at a FIFA Council meeting last week.

Infantino provided no documents about the $4.2bn World Cup sell-off plan he launched and quickly dropped in July amid a fierce backlash led by Europe.

Among the 42 questions to which UEFA is demanding answers are: Infantino’s personal remuneration package, financial payments made to singer Marc Anthony, the handling of USA striker Folarin Balogun’s disciplinary case, business and political relationships involving US President Donald Trump and his family, and the operational independence of FIFA’s judicial, electoral and ethics committees.

UEFA asked US federal courts to authorise subpoenas compelling the production of documents and sworn testimony about the abandoned investment plan called FIFA Forward Enterprise.

FIFA lawyers have claimed UEFA is harassing Infantino.

Al Jazeera reached out to FIFA for a comment but did not receive a response.

Deep dissatisfaction

The formal letter, signed by UEFA general secretary Theodore Theodoridis on behalf of European FIFA Council members, stated Infantino’s apology for his actions and subsequent explanation failed to address their core concerns.

“These explanations have not begun satisfactorily to address a number of fundamental questions raised by Council members. Others remain unanswered, and the information and documentation requested have not been [provided],” the letter said.

“The withdrawal of FFE, the recognition of mistakes, and the announcement of ‘potential governance reforms’ do not answer how the relevant decisions were taken or why the FIFA Council was not involved at the appropriate stage.”

According to media reports, the letter further said: “Any refusal to disclose information or documents should be justified individually, with a clear explanation of the specific grounds relied upon.”

Tight timeline

UEFA submitted 42 detailed questions to FIFA, demanding responses by November 2 — 16 days before the nomination deadline for the presidential election on March 18, 2027.

With the next FIFA Council meeting scheduled for December 16 in Doha, Qatar — after nominations close — UEFA insisted that answers cannot wait.

“These questions require answers now. They cannot be deferred until the next meeting of the FIFA Council — nor can future governance reforms substitute for scrutiny of decisions already taken and accountability for them,” the letter emphasised.

The earlier deadline would give federations time to assess FIFA’s answers — or its failure to answer — while they can still nominate or endorse a challenger.

With more than one million votes counted, about 76 percent supported remaining in Canada.

Alberta residents have voted to remain ⁠part of Canada in the province’s first-ever referendum on separation, in a much-needed win for Prime Minister Mark Carney as he ‌attempts to unify the country amid an ongoing trade war with the United States.

With more than one million votes counted, about 77 percent supported remaining in Canada, compared with 23 percent who backed beginning a process that could lead to separation, early results showed on Tuesday.

The vote was not a direct referendum on independence but would have set oil-rich Alberta on a path towards a future vote on separation from Canada.

Carney welcomed the result and said Albertans had made a “clear choice” in favour of unity.

“They chose unity, to build together, and to take care of each other,” he said in a statement on X.

Jeffrey Rath, a top leader of the secessionist Alberta Prosperity Project, told reporters his push for an independent Alberta will “absolutely” continue, despite the result from Monday’s vote.

“We’ve learned a lot of lessons from this fight,” he said.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, a conservative, said she voted against independence but called the referendum to settle an issue that has divided the province.

She has said a win for the federalists would close the secession question.

Alberta has the world’s fourth-largest proven oil reserves, and much of the secessionist momentum has been driven by anger over oil industry management.

Smith has blamed Carney’s predecessor Justin Trudeau for igniting the secessionist fire, accusing him of trying to crush oil production to advance his pro-climate agenda.

Alberta’s independence push has also drawn sustained interest from the allies of US President Donald Trump, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who called Alberta Washington’s “natural partner”. Elon Musk, the world’s richest person and eminent Trump supporter, also posted on X that Alberta “should separate”.

Carney, who grew up in Alberta, has worked to improve relations between the province and Ottawa since taking office last year. He has partnered with Smith on advancing a new pipeline to export more Alberta bitumen overseas, a project considered a nonstarter during Trudeau’s tenure.

As he prepares for a potential future conflict on the continent, the commanding general of Multi-Domain Command Europe told TWZ that he envisions dispersing hundreds of high-altitude balloons at a time. The balloons, Brig. Gen. Steven Carpenter explained, would be used for a wide range of purposes, from serving as communications platforms to launching weapons. For years now, TWZ has been closely tracking the expanding use of high-altitude balloons and other lighter-than-air systems globally for intelligence gathering, networking, as platforms for launching drones, and in support of other missions.

Basically, in the European scenario, hundreds or possibly thousands of balloons would be sent east. They would provide attritable real-time reconnaissance, strike, and decoy capabilities, while also acting as a force multiplier for other assets by providing a resilient active network over the battlefield — one that could help fill in the gaps if the space-based layer gets degraded.

“We would like to proliferate the stratosphere with high-altitude balloons, but I mean 200, 300 at a time,” Carpenter told us during last week’s Association of the U.S. Army (AUSA) conference in Washington, D.C., which TWZ attended. The Army would utilize high-altitude balloons “not only as decoys, a lot of decoys, but also communications retrans[mission platforms], electronic sensing, as well as electronic attack, and then obviously air-launched effects to be able to drop them down and use kinetic means as well.”

Air-launched effects (ALEs) is a collective term the U.S. military now commonly uses to discuss air-launched drones configured for a wide array of missions. The ALE umbrella encompasses designs that can be used for surveillance and reconnaissance, electronic warfare tasks, or signal relay, and can act as decoys. It also includes loitering munitions often referred to as kamikaze drones, capable of carrying kinetic attacks.

In general, modern high-altitude balloons offer persistent deployment that can last for days, weeks or even months at a time. After navigating to an assigned operating area, some modern balloon systems can hold their position, in spite of prevailing winds, by modulating their altitudes to keep on station.

In addition, high-altitude balloons operate at heights providing excellent fields of view for radars, cameras, and other sensors in all directions and across very broad areas. From a perch of 60,000 feet or more, they also offer a way to peer into certain denied areas while still soaring in international airspace and keeping farther away from potential threats. During a conflict, the balloons could be deployed deep into enemy airspace as they are attritable.

Though some balloon systems can hold their general positions in many circumstances, Carpenter told us that seasonal weather changes will still play a role in deployment.

“The flight paths are different. We study that,” he noted. “We understand during what seasons where the best places are to launch those high-altitude systems, and then again to hold enemy cities and capabilities at risk at any time, so that we can defeat them at the time and place of our choosing.”

We asked Carpenter for more details about how he sees balloons being used by troops in Europe.

“I think everybody knows there’ll be a point where satellite communications are going to be degraded, if not eliminated,” he stated. “One of the things that we’re focusing on is in the stratosphere, so above 60,000 feet up to 80,000 feet, which is next to impossible to target unless you’re using one of your exquisite systems, fifth-gen fighters, SA-21 Bravo [S-400 Triumf surface-to-air missile system], etc. to shoot that stuff down.”

Many of the balloons would be equipped with Link 16, a NATO-standard tactical datalink communication system central to U.S. and allied military operations, the general said. Link 16 allows coalition forces to seamlessly transmit and exchange real-time situational awareness data. You can read more about how Link 16 works, and its increasing dependence of space, in our story here.

As for using balloons as ALE delivery platforms, Carpenter told us there are “different technologies, different altitudes that we’d have to deliver those from” at “different ranges, different levels of yield or lethality. But for us, it’s really just a single arrow in a quiver full of arrows, utilizing space capabilities, cyber capabilities, or surface-to-surface capabilities. In this case, you’re talking just another air-to-surface capability with your air-launched effects off balloons.”

Carpenter said that when it comes to balloon-launched ALEs, he is looking at “everything from shorter range, lower yield, maybe targeting an adversary ballistic missile radar, to longer range, higher yield capabilities that you might use to maybe take out a ballistic missile system.”

In such cases, the balloons would carry drones deep into enemy territory, where they would be launched opportunistically to strike the targets Carpenter suggested. The size of the target, and how well it is protected, would determine what kinds of drones the balloons would launch, as well as their proximity to the target.

Should a fight break out in Europe tonight, Carpenter said he is confident he can rely on the technology.

“Our operating concept is proven,” he stated, noting that “we’ve already tested those capabilities against most modern adversary systems that exist. We’ve already validated our operating concept in terms of getting to mass and scale that we would need in large-scale conflict.”

As we have previously reported, while high-altitude balloons have been used for decades, the modern concept of these systems was recently employed operationally by the U.S. in a combat theater.

The Army had planned to demonstrate the ability of balloons to operate in swarms with a high degree of autonomy in the Pacific region last year before those assets were redirected to the Middle East. When exactly that deployment occurred and how long it lasted are unclear.

“We were asked to pivot and do some experimentation in combination with operations, and we pivoted and supported operations in CENTCOM [U.S. Central Command],” Andrew Evans, Director of Strategy and Transformation with the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Army, or G-2, told Breaking Defense, according to a story the outlet published last week. “They were effective for the mission that they were assigned,” he added. However, Evans was not able to disclose the exact location and operational scenarios in which they were used.

Other countries, including U.S. allies and partners, are increasingly fielding balloon-based and other lighter-than-air systems, too. Ukrainian forces notably have been using balloons to conduct kinetic attacks and launch drones against Russian assets. On the other side of that conflict, the Russians have used balloons as decoys to confuse and misdirect air defenses.

The following video shows Ukrainian forces using balloons to launch kamikaze drones.

To achieve the effects he laid out, Carpenter told us that he will still need to surge capacity to Europe.

“The Army will make decisions on which vendors they’re going to go with,” he pointed out. “But the ability to field that at scale is just simply based on the resources provided. I’m talking about money to go ahead and bring them into theater.”

Pushed to provide details of how quickly he could have the desired number of balloons, Carpenter told us that “if the United States or NATO and its allies were on a wartime footing, it would be extremely rapid, but we would need to get them into theater before crisis turned to conflict. So we’d have to keep a close eye from an IC [intelligence community] perspective on indicators and warnings to make sure we have the right systems on the ground at point of need.”

The Army’s overall vision for balloons is not new; the service has been openly discussing it for at least six years now. However, the use of high-altitude balloons in this context is now being operationalized. Meanwhile, China has very actively shown off its ability to gather intelligence and conduct other missions using balloons and other lighter-than-air craft on a broad operational level across the Pacific. TWZ had been reporting on this reality for years before it was thrust fully into the public consciousness after a Chinese spy balloon passed over parts of the United States and Canada back in 2023.

The concept Carpenter laid out for how balloons will be used in a future European conflict is another example of the renaissance in lighter-than-air military technology and how the Pentagon is increasingly seeking to weaponize it on a grand scale.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

Israelis go to the polls on October 27 to elect the 26th Knesset, in the first general vote since the genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and the wars on Lebanon and Iran.

Benjamin Netanyahu, the longest-serving prime minister in Israel’s history, with 19 years in office, is seeking another term while standing trial on corruption charges. His Likud party and the far-right coalition it leads are locked in a close race with a Jewish-led opposition bloc, with neither side appearing on track to win an outright majority in the 120-seat Knesset, Israel’s parliament.

About 7.3 million people aged 18 and above are eligible to vote, according to Israel’s Central Elections Committee. Most polling stations open from 7am to 10pm, and anyone still queuing when they close is entitled to vote. Election day is a national holiday.

Any party clearing an electoral threshold of 3.25 percent enters parliament, which sits for a four-year term. There are no term limits for a prime minister.

How voting works

Israelis vote for a party, not a candidate.

A majority requires 61 of the 120 seats and no party has ever won that outright. Finishing first does not guarantee power. Parties then have 28 days, with a possible extension of up to 14 days, to assemble a coalition reaching 61. If nobody manages it, the country votes again.

Seats are shared out in proportion to each party’s share of the national vote, so a party winning 30 percent of votes takes roughly 30 percent of seats. The votes for parties failing to secure 3.25 percent are discarded, which explains why small parties routinely merge before every election.

Who can and cannot vote?

About 7.3 million Israeli citizens are eligible to vote in this election, but they are not the only adults living under the government they choose.

Roughly three million adult Palestinians in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem have no vote in the government that controls their borders, movement and legal status.

Jewish Israelis and Palestinian citizens of Israel, who number about 1.2 million, can vote. So can adult settlers among the more than 750,000 Israelis living in the occupied West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem, who help elect the parliament that legislates over the land they live on.

Most Palestinians in occupied East Jerusalem hold Israeli residency, not citizenship. They can vote for Jerusalem’s city council but not for the Knesset.

The result is a sharp anomaly in the occupied West Bank, where a settler votes and a Palestinian family living nearby, under the same military authority, does not.

Most Israeli citizens living abroad also cannot vote, because Israel has no general absentee ballot and requires voters to be physically in the country on election day. Diplomats and state emissaries are the exception, casting their ballots at Israeli missions on October 20.

What are the main issues?

Israelis are dealing with a series of domestic and international issues this election cycle, including:

• October 7 security failures – Three years on, the government is yet to form a state commission of inquiry into the events of October 7, 2023, when a Hamas-headed attack led to the killing of some 1,200 people, with about 250 taken captive. Israel launched the genocidal war against Palestinians in the wake of the attack, killing at least 74,000 people and leaving most of the besieged territory in ruins.
• Ultra-Orthodox draft exemptions – Supporters of the exemptions say they protect full-time Torah study, but critics argue they place an unfair military burden on everyone else.
• Judicial reform – Netanyahu’s push to curb the Supreme Court’s powers, which sparked mass protests before the war on Gaza, remains a deep fault line. Critics see it as a threat to democracy, while supporters argue that the court has overstepped its authority.
• War and security – The public wants stability but remains wary of concessions in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and Lebanon. Netanyahu promised “total victory”, but Hamas and Hezbollah remain operational.
• Cost of living – High prices and modest wages are being further squeezed by soaring defence spending. Since 2023, Israel’s defence budget has doubled, increasing pressure on public finances.

Israel’s outgoing government

Netanyahu’s coalition held 60 of the Knesset’s 120 seats when parliament dissolved in July. It comprised Likud with 32 seats, Shas with 11, Religious Zionism with seven, Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit with six, and New Hope with four. Shas left the government in July 2025 but remained in the coalition and New Hope will merge into Likud for this election.

The opposition held 59 seats: Yesh Atid with 24, Blue and White with eight, United Torah Judaism with seven, Yisrael Beiteinu with six, Hadash-Taal and Raam with five each and Labor with four. Noam’s single seat was unaffiliated.

Who are the main contenders?

Netanyahu is seeking re-election while facing a trial on corruption charges, which he denies.

His far-right coalition is up against a bloc comprising of four major Jewish-led opposition parties, whose leaders have signed a declaration promising not to attack each other ahead of the vote and to join forces in forming a government after the polls.

Former army chief Gadi Eisenkot is viewed as the opposition’s most likely candidate for prime minister, with his new Yashar party evenly matched with Likud in the opinion polls.

The opposition alliance includes the Together list, led by former Prime Ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid; Avigdor Liberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu and Yair Golan’s Democrats.

Other key players include far-right ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, the ultra-Orthodox parties, and the Arab-majority lists Ra’am and the Joint List.

Last month, Israel’s Central Elections Committee voted to bar Ra’am and the Joint List from the election, but the Supreme Court unanimously overturned the bans on October 2, ruling that the evidence did not meet the legal threshold for exclusion.

Sami Abu Shehadeh, a Palestinian citizen of Israel who leads Balad, one of the parties in the Joint List, withdrew from the race after the court signalled that a majority of its judges would uphold his disqualification.

The Arab-led parties could hold the balance of power after the vote, but most leaders of the Jewish-led opposition bloc have ruled out joining forces with them.

Sixth election in seven years

October 27 will be Israel’s sixth national vote since 2019, but the first in 38 years to arrive at the natural end of a full Knesset term.

The instability began in April 2019, when Netanyahu’s Likud party and Benny Gantz’s Blue and White party tied on 35 seats each. A second vote that September produced another deadlock, with Blue and White on 33 and Likud on 32, and neither round yielded a coalition able to reach a majority.

A third election in March 2020 gave Likud 36 seats to Blue and White’s 33, and produced a Netanyahu-Gantz unity government that collapsed within a year. In March 2021, Likud won 30 seats to Yesh Atid’s 17, but an eight-party coalition led by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid that also included Ra’am, an Arab party, ended Netanyahu’s 12-year run. It lasted a year.

Netanyahu returned in November 2022, with Likud on 32 and Yesh Atid on 24, at the head of what has been described as Israel’s most right-wing government. Polls now show neither bloc clearly reaching 61.

Israel’s prime ministers

The state of Israel has had 14 prime ministers since its foundation in 1948. Netanyahu is by far the longest-serving, with 19 years in three separate stints: 1996 to 1999, 2009 to 2021 and from 2022 to now

Only David Ben-Gurion, who led the country from 1948 to 1954 and again from 1955 to 1963, comes close.

Whatever happens on October 27, Netanyahu stays on as caretaker prime minister until a new government is sworn in.

A group of parents claims local admission policy boosts Black and Latino students while constraining Asian applicants.

The United States Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case about the role of race in admissions to selective Maryland middle schools after a group of parents claimed policies discriminated against Asian students in favour of Black and Latino students.

The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to hear the parents’ plea on four academically rigorous “magnet” schools in Montgomery County, a suburb on the outskirts of Washington, DC, in the neighbouring state of Maryland.

The high court said it would weigh whether the parent group has enough evidence of discrimination for the case to move forward.

Lower courts previously dismissed the case because Asian-American students were not underrepresented at the specialised-curriculum schools compared with the pool of students that applied.

If the Supreme Court rules for the parent group, the Association for Education Fairness, it could revive the lawsuit.

The court is expected to hear arguments in the coming months and rule by June.

‘The Pandemic Plan’

The Montgomery County school district’s selection process was introduced in the 2021-2022 school year during the COVID-19 pandemic.

It screens all students for academic potential, and then implements a lottery to randomly assign students from that pool to receive enriched instruction at either a magnet school or a local school.

The suit alleged that the screening process makes it harder for Asian-American students, who the challengers said are clustered in “high-performing, low-poverty elementary schools”, to enter the lottery pool.

Part of the process ranks a student’s performance by comparing the student’s test scores against those of other students whose family incomes are at a similar level.

“Under the applicant pool benchmark, the government can set specific racial targets, hit them, and avoid even an inquiry into discriminatory intent,” so long as it has not explicitly called out race in its process, they wrote in their appeal to the Supreme Court.

Previously thrown out

The case was thrown out in 2022 by US District Judge Paula Xinis. She noted that the percentage of admitted Asian-American students exceeded the percentage of Asian Americans among all applicants to the magnet schools.

Xinis also found no evidence that the lottery policy was implemented with discriminatory intent.

The school system has consistently argued the new admissions policy, called the “Pandemic Plan” due to the timing of its release, is race-neutral.

“The Pandemic Plan is a colorblind lottery,” lawyers wrote in a brief asking the Supreme Court not to take up the case. “Nothing about the Pandemic Plan, its history, or its purpose is offensive to the Constitution.”

Supreme Court justices will now consider whether a group claiming to be targeted by a race-neutral policy must show it was disproportionately harmed to prove intentional discrimination.

Caracas, October 19, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Switzerland’s Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA) has lifted “precautionary asset freezes” against Marleny Contreras, wife of Venezuelan Interior, Justice, and Peace Minister Diosdado Cabello, and United Socialist Party (PSUV) lawmaker Jorge Arreaza.

The country’s authorities stated that their inclusion on a list of sanctioned Venezuelan officials was “a mistake” after determining that neither holds assets in Swiss territory nor faces corruption accusations.

The asset freeze was imposed on January 5, two days after US forces bombed Caracas and kidnapped Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Bern claimed the measure was intended to prevent potentially illicit assets from leaving Switzerland amid eventual legal investigations.

The legal measure remains in force until 2030 and includes a formal commitment to return to the Venezuelan people any resources proven to have been illicitly acquired. Over 40 current and former Venezuelan officials, as well as direct relatives and alleged associates, remain on the list.

Alongside the removal of Contreras and Arreaza, the Swiss government added six individuals to the register. New additions include former Venezuelan government envoy and Industry Minister Álex Saab and his business associate Álvaro Pulido. 

Pulido appeared before a Miami court on October 13 after being handed over by Venezuelan authorities to face money laundering charges. Saab was likewise surrendered to US agencies and pleaded guilty to money laundering accusations, pledging to “cooperate” with other US legal investigations.

Saab and Pulido were joined in the Swiss blacklist by José Vicente Amparan Croquer, a lawyer whom US authorities have accused of laundering money from an alleged US $1.2 billion embezzlement scheme at Venezuelan state oil company Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), and Mario Enrique Bonilla Vallera, a businessman identified as an alleged front man for Nicolás Maduro’s stepsons.

The list also includes the wife and former wife of two former deputy electricity ministers who were already on the blacklisteed: Milagros Coromoto Torres Morán, wife and business partner of Nervis Villalobos, and María Consuelo Pardi Celis, former wife of Javier Alvarado Ochoa.

The Swiss decision came two days after the US Treasury Department removed Jorge Rodríguez, president of Venezuela’s National Assembly, chief negotiator in a US-backed dialogue process with an opposition faction, and brother of Acting President Delcy Rodríguez, from its own sanctions list. Delcy Rodríguez herself was removed from the Treasury’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) list last April.

Jorge Rodríguez was first targeted on September 25, 2018, during Trump’s first term in office. Individual sanctions block any assets the person may have on US soil and bar US individuals and companies from engaging in any transactions. The measures lead to issues of overcompliance.

Spanish daily ABC’s White House correspondent David Alandete argued that the parliamentary leader’s removal from the SDN list was a reward for his “cooperation” in a “new phase of relations between Caracas and the White House.”

The move was announced on the same day that Delcy Rodríguez’s acting government and the opposition delegation led by former lawmaker Dinorah Figuera began a third round of US-endorsed talks in Caracas. The discussions are intended to address the continuation of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) renewal process, as well as political rights and guarantees.

Nevertheless, 254 individuals and entities remain on the US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctions list. The Trump administration also maintains wide-reaching coercive measures against key Venezuelan economic sectors, including oil, mining, and banking.

Since January, Washington has issued sanctions waivers to allow select Western corporations to secure access to Venezuelan oil and mineral resources under favorable conditions. The White House has also greenlit select US companies to export and import products to and from the Caribbean nation. However, revenues from Venezuelan exports are deposited in a US Treasury account, with US officials deciding when and how much to disburse to Caracas.

Last week, the Trump administration issued General License 60A. The license authorizes humanitarian assistance transactions focused on addressing damage caused by Venezuela’s June 24 double earthquake until April 21, 2027.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

Riyadh postpones flagship investment conference until 2027, orders government staff to work from home.

Saudi Arabia’s Future Investment Initiative (FII) conference has been postponed until next year, according to a statement on the official website, as deadly strikes by the Iran-backed Houthis against the kingdom continue.

The annual event was due to start next week on October 26 and run through October 29, with a date next year to be announced “very soon”, the statement released on Tuesday said.

FII Institute chief executive officer Dr Maha Bint Mishari Al Saud said the decision “comes from a deep commitment to our partners, members, speakers and delegates”.

“Because this is our landmark tenth edition, we want to ensure it delivers the full scale, extraordinary quality, and unforgettable impact that our community has come to expect and truly deserves,” she said.

Informally dubbed “Davos in the Desert”, a nod to the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Switzerland, the state-backed conference showcases the kingdom’s ambitious investment plans in a bid to attract billions of dollars needed to fund its economic transformation away from hydrocarbons towards tourism, sport and technology.

Expected speakers included: Alphabet & Google’s president and chief information officer, Ruth Porat; Goldman Sachs Group chairman and CEO David Solomon; and BlackRock chairman and CEO Laurence Fink, according to the FII website.

Fighting between a Saudi-led coalition supporting Yemen’s internationally recognised government and the Iran-aligned Houthis has escalated in recent weeks.

The Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah, have hit military, energy and civilian infrastructure across Saudi Arabia, including Riyadh’s international airport, killing at least 18 people and injuring hundreds more.

Government staff to work from home

Government agencies in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, have told employees to work from home, one worker and two consultants told the AFP news agency, as the city comes under repeated attack from the Houthis.

The Kingdom Centre, a 99‑storey tower in downtown Riyadh that houses the International Monetary Fund’s regional office, also requested workers stay away until further notice.

On Sunday, an employee of a government agency in the capital received a message saying, “It has been decided to implement remote work from Monday to Thursday this week”. The message added: “We ask everyone to continue their activities as normal.”

Companies based in the King Abdullah Financial District, which hosts offices of major United States firms, have also asked employees to work from home, according to other sources.

Germany appears to have dropped plans to directly procure the larger, Block 3 version of Boeing’s MQ-28 Ghost Bat collaborative combat aircraft (CCA), leaving doubts over Berlin’s ambitions to field uncrewed combat aircraft alongside its crewed fighters before the end of the decade.

Boeing confirmed to Breaking Defense that Germany’s Ministry of Defense had informed the company it would not proceed with a direct acquisition of the drone, which had previously been lined up. The decision, first reported by Politico, represents a setback for Boeing’s effort to position the Ghost Bat as a candidate for Berlin’s planned CCA capability, something that had seen it announce a partnership with Rheinmetall, the largest arms manufacturer in Germany, earlier this year.

“With Boeing Defense Australia as a partner, we are laying the groundwork to optimally tailor the MQ-28 to the Bundeswehr’s requirements,” said Armin Papperger, CEO of Rheinmetall AG, in March of this year. “As a system integrator, we ensure that integration, operation, and further development come from a single source while simultaneously strengthening industrial value creation in the form of an industrial hub in Germany and Europe. We see revenue potential for Rheinmetall in the range of three-digit millions of euros.”

The move does not necessarily mean the MQ-28 is out of contention for Germany’s wider program. Instead, Berlin appears set to move toward a different acquisition approach, with competing designs potentially having an opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities before a selection is made.

A Boeing spokesperson told Breaking Defense the company “stands ready to support” its German customer on the next steps, while referring questions about the decision to the German Ministry of Defense.

The ministry declined to discuss the specific procurement with the same outlet, citing regulations governing public contracting and the need for such matters to be addressed by parliament.

“[As a] matter of principle — and regardless of the specific case in question — we cannot provide information regarding potential procurement projects,” a ministry spokesperson told Breaking Defense.

Germany has set an ambitious goal of fielding CCAs by 2029. These uncrewed aircraft are intended to operate alongside crewed fighters such as the Eurofighter, extending their reach, adding sensors and weapons, and giving air forces additional options for conducting high-risk missions.

However, the reported change in Berlin’s acquisition plans raises questions about whether that deadline remains achievable.

According to Politico, Germany is now looking toward the early 2030s for the capability to arrive, with flight testing expected to begin in 2027. That would suggest the original target was based around the introduction of the MQ-28, which has already undergone extensive testing, rather than a newer design. The reshuffle could now give prospective suppliers additional time to demonstrate their designs.

The reported new timeline suggests that Germany’s CCA effort could be entering a more competitive and potentially longer development phase.

There is also a question about the degree of operational capability that will initially be fielded by the given date. Getting a CCA into meaningful frontline service is a very significant task, calling for integration with crewed fighters, communications systems, mission-planning networks, weapons, and sensors. Then there is also testing, certification, training, and the establishment of supporting infrastructure. For Germany in particular, getting a military drone, let alone an armed one, cleared to operate routinely in commercial airspace has long been an issue.

If Germany acquired the Ghost Bat directly, it would have offered a route to a CCA capability without having to begin an entirely new aircraft development effort.

However, the MQ-28 was always one of a larger field of candidate aircraft.

A week ago, Airbus and Kratos Defense & Security Solutions announced the first flight of their U740 Valkyrie uncrewed combat aircraft, a Europeanized version of the XQ-58A Valkyrie. Airbus is simultaneously working on its larger U760 Ravenstorm, intended for service in the early 2030s, and the company has previously pitched a stealthy CCA-like concept known as Wingman.

The ride of the Valkyrie ⚔️
With the successful first flight of the Airbus U740 Valkyrie in Europe, we are one step closer to introducing an operational uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) to the German and other European Armed Forces.
The flight achieved all… pic.twitter.com/S2sFrtdmGA

— Airbus Defence (@AirbusDefence) October 12, 2026

Other entrants include Anduril, General Atomics partnered with Germany’s INTEC, as well as Lockheed Martin. Meanwhile, Helsing and Hensoldt are pursuing the homegrown CA-1 Europa, very much an MQ-28 lookalike.

Germany may not be looking for a single drone to do everything, a point we have discussed in the past:

“One option might be a split high-low approach that could pair more capable, longer-range systems for deep-strike missions with cheaper, attritable collaborative combat aircraft that can fly alongside crewed fighters. At this point, it should also be noted that CCAs could also give older fourth-generation fighters a new lease on life, boosting their lethality and survivability by extending their sensor reach, adding weapons capacity, and allowing uncrewed aircraft to take on more dangerous tasks.”

At the same time, Germany continues to define its requirements for a capability described in media reports as a Jagdbomberdrohne, or fighter-bomber drone. Berlin has yet to publicly clarify its intended concept of CCA operations, including whether the Luftwaffe envisions an uncrewed wingman operating alongside crewed fighters, a platform capable of carrying out long-range strike missions independently, or a system designed to perform both roles.

There are signs that the strike mission is being prioritized, at least initially, with a reduced emphasis on air-to-air missions. This is essentially the reverse of the U.S. Air Force’s CCA effort.

Since Germany is set to receive the F-35 stealth fighter, there is also an argument that Berlin could place more orders for the crewed jet. This could have the dual role of filling the gap left by the collapse of the pan-European Future Combat Air System (FCAS), specifically its sixth-generation crewed fighter, and the delayed introduction of the first operational CCAs. Germany is also looking forward to receiving more Eurofighters.

Germany’s evolving CCA plans form part of a broader effort by Western air forces to develop uncrewed aircraft capable of working alongside advanced fighters. These systems are intended to expand the number of available platforms, distribute sensors and weapons across a larger force, and potentially take on missions that would otherwise expose pilots and expensive crewed aircraft to greater risk.

Boeing’s Ghost Bat could still have an opportunity to compete, depending on the structure of the eventual acquisition process and the requirements Berlin establishes.

However, with testing reportedly planned from 2027 and operational fielding potentially slipping into the early 2030s, the original 2029 ambition for an operational German CCA appears increasingly uncertain.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Tehran summons envoy in tit-for-tat move after Berlin summoned ambassador to Iran.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has summoned Germany’s ambassador after a court in Hamburg found two men guilty of plotting to kill two leaders of Jewish organisations at Tehran’s behest, accusing Berlin of leveling “baseless political allegations”.

The decision to summon envoy Axel Dittmann came after Germany summoned the Iranian ambassador, Majid Nili Ahmadabadi, on Monday over allegations that Tehran was behind the plot to assassinate the two pro-Israel public figures.

“Levelling security-related accusations against Iran has long been a tactic employed by the Zionist regime and certain Western nations,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement broadcast by official news agency IRNA.

“Attempting to provide a judicial face to baseless political claims not only fails to lend any credibility to such allegations but also undermines the standing of the German judiciary itself,” the statement added.

Hamburg conviction

Berlin’s allegations stem from a court case involving two men, a Danish national and an Afghan national, who were convicted in a Hamburg court on Thursday for planning to target the president of Germany’s main group representing the Jewish community and the head of the German-Israeli society.

The German Foreign Ministry said on X that the Iranian ambassador had been summoned, adding Tehran would not be allowed to “threaten our free society”.

“The malicious assassination attempts against Josef Schuster and Volker Beck will have legal consequences,” it added.

“We do not tolerate attacks on Jewish life and on those who defend it anywhere, and certainly not in Germany.”

The Dane, partially identified as Ali Hassan S, was jailed for eight-and-a-half years. The Afghan, who was recruited as his accomplice, was sentenced to four-and-a-half years.

Iran’s intelligence service steered the two men, the court said. The pair were arrested in Denmark last year and extradited.

In sentencing the men, the judge said they were guilty of “terrorist activities orchestrated by Iran”.

At the time they were charged, the Iranian embassy in Berlin released a statement rejecting what it called “unfounded allegations made at the behest of Iran’s enemies”.

A Russian satellite, Kosmos 2612, may have passed within approximately 85 feet (26 meters) of a U.S.-registered satellite belonging to commercial imagery provider ICEYE. This would be an extraordinarily close and potentially dangerous pass-by for two objects in space traveling at thousands of miles per hour. For weeks beforehand, ICEYE-X36, which would be of special interest to Russia, had already found itself in increasingly close orbital alignment with its pursuer. The two satellites now look to be drifting further and further apart, but the episode has been a clear sign of what is to come as the potential for conflict in space only continues to grow.

Publicly available space tracking data from the satellitemap.space and orbitalradar.com websites show that Kosmos 2612 (also written sometimes Cosmos 2612 and abbreviated K2612) and ICEYE X36 had their especially close encounter at approximately 16:07 UTC today. Private space services company LeoLabs also told TWZ today that it could not “confirm or contradict what other data sources have stated publicly,” but that it has “high-confidence that the objects came within approximately [emphasis in the original] 500 meters [1,640 feet] of each other.” Kosmos 2612 had been making progressively closer passes by ICEYE X36 in recent days.

“COSMOS 2612 closed from hundreds of kilometers away to extreme proximity to ICEYE-X36. It then maneuvered around ICEYE-X36,  remained nearby for an extended period, and then began moving away,” LeoLabs also stated in a report assessing the situation, which was updated today and provided to TWZ. “The latest observations show the spacecraft strongly diverging and confirm that the close-proximity activity had ended.” 

LeoLabs’ broader assessment here is supported by data from other publicly available sources, as seen below.

Additional context

None of the distances stated earlier may seem especially close, let alone worrisome, by terrestrial standards. However, this is absolutely abnormal for operations in space that are not being directly coordinated by the parties involved. As a point of reference, in 2020, another Russian satellite, Kosmos 2542, came within 150 to 300 kilometers (93 to 186 miles) of USA 245, a KH-11 spy satellite, and became a major international news story.

“We are aware of the situation and tracking it closely,” a spokesperson for ICEYE’s U.S.-based division told TWZ this morning. “Our constellation architecture is designed for continuity and resilience.”

ICEYE was founded in Finland, but now has offices globally. The company specializes in providing imagery via synthetic aperture radar (SAR) from satellites like ICEYE X36, which was launched in 2024.

SAR has the benefit of being able to capture images day or night, and regardless of bad weather or other obscurants like heavy smoke. There are trade-offs in terms of the kinds of details typically visible via SAR compared to what is seen in visual spectrum imagery. Ukrainian authorities have been utilizing ICEYE imagery for years now, including for targeting purposes, as part of the ongoing conflict with Russia. There have been reports in the past that ICEYE X36 has been operating more directly under the control of the Ukrainian government, but this has not been confirmed.

Kosmos 2612 is one of six satellites (Cosmos 2609 through Cosmos 2614) the Russian military launched via a single Soyuz-2.1b rocket on April 17. The exact purpose and configuration of these satellites are unconfirmed. However, they appear to be so-called inspector types capable of rendezvousing and maneuvering close to other objects in space. We will come back to this later on.

What is clear is that Kosmos 2612 has spent the past three weeks deliberately maneuvering to extremely closely shadow ICEYE X36.

“Over two weeks beginning on September 30, 2026, Cosmos 2612 executed a series of new maneuvers that brought it back into coplanar alignment and placed it at nearly the same altitude as the commercial satellite,” Clayton Swope, Deputy Director of the Aerospace Security Project and Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) think tank in Washington, D.C., along with Research Assistant Chantal Li, wrote in an analysis of the situation just last Thursday.

“According to current orbital elements, the Russian #KOSMOS 2612 satellite is now within 1-2 km [0.6 miles to 1.2 miles] of #ICEYE-X36,” Dr. Marco Langbroek, currently a lecturer on Space Situational Awareness at the Faculty of Aerospace Engineering of Delft Technical University in the Netherlands, wrote in a thread on X on Saturday. “Based on current elements, it might come within meters of the latter within a few hours from now. This is an #RPO [rendezvous and proximity operation] without consent.”

“New TLEs [two-line elements] show that K2612 made a manuever [sic] on Oct 16 and is now stationkeeping within 5 km [3.1 miles] or less of ICEYE X36,” Jonathan McDowell, an astrophysicist and astronomer, who previously worked for the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and has long been tracking objects of interest in orbit, also wrote in a series of posts on X on Saturday. “To my knowledge this is the first LEO [low Earth orbit] rendezvous of two active satellites where the owner of one of the sats did not give approval.”

McDowell later clarified that “close passes” of objects in orbit had certainly occurred previously, “but not I think rendezvous [sic] (matching velocity vector).”

“This is the most advanced and potentially dangerous uncooperative RPO we’ve observed,” Adam Marsh, LeoLabs vice president for technical solutions, separately told Breaking Defense.

Unprecedented orbital maneuvering

As underscored by the previous interaction of Kosmos 2542 and USA 245, close shadowing of satellites in orbit is certainly nothing new. The U.S. government, as well as Russia and others, have been observed engaging in this kind of activity in the past. At the same time, just how close Kosmos 2612 got to ICEYE X36, and how long they spent in close alignment, are, at the very least, highly unusual.

“It’s important to note that ‘red’ on ‘blue’ engagements,  such as this, are relatively uncommon in Low Earth Orbit (LEO),” LeoLabs’ report points out. At the same time, “this was not a routine conjunction or ‘fly by.’ The sequence included a controlled approach, changes in relative position, close-proximity loitering, additional small maneuvers, and a controlled departure. The behavior is consistent with sophisticated rendezvous and proximity operations (RPO).”

On top of this, there are other signs that what just happened between Kosmos 2612 and ICEYE X36 may follow a Russian playbook of sorts that could also be used in a prelude to an on-orbit anti-satellite attack.

Within weeks of their launch in April, Kosmos 2610, 2611, 2612, 2613, and 2614 had all moved orbital planes shared by multiple ICEYE satellites. Three of them subsequently made close passes by ICEYE X36, specifically, but none of them initially kept station with it. ICEYE CEO Rafal Modrzewski did say “the company later moved its ​satellite, prompting further Russian manoeuvres [sic],” according to a story Reuters published last week.

To take a step even further back, before Kosmos 2542 was caught shadowing USA 245 in 2020, there were reports that the U.S. spy satellite had shifted its orbit. This was possibly prompted by the movements of another Russian ‘inspector,’ Kosmos 2543. This does not appear to have ever been confirmed.

While in space, Kosmos 2542 had deployed Kosmos 2543 in November 2019. Then, on July 23, 2020, the U.S. military said that it had detected Kosmos 2543 itself launching a smaller object in what it described as a test of a space-based anti-satellite weapon. In a subsequent interview with Time, then-Chief of Space Operations Gen. John “Jay” Raymond, U.S. Space Force’s top uniformed officer, disclosed that American forces had first observed Russian “nesting doll” satellites – a reference to traditional Russian matryoshka dolls – similarly demonstrating the “characteristics of a weapon system” in 2017.

U.S. officials have been warning for years that Russia’s growing array of inspector-type satellites, ostensibly designed to examine other assets the country has in orbit if they break down or otherwise malfunction, are inherently dual-purpose in nature. Beyond launching projectiles, a host of other modes of attack, kinetic and non-kinetic, are enabled by the underlying ability of a spacecraft to maneuver very close to other objects in orbit and hold that position. This includes the use of grappling arms to cause damage or just tow a satellite out of orbit, spraying aerosols to harm or impair optics and solar panels, and electronic warfare jamming. A satellite could turn out to be the weapon itself, becoming a kinetic interceptor that smashes into its target on command.

One satellite shadowing another closely in orbit allows various kinds of intelligence gathering, as well. Collection of imagery and signal emissions can offer valuable details about a target’s capabilities and vulnerabilities, as s well as how it is being used in a particular context.

“As observed by LeoLabs Global Radar Network and analyzed by our team, COSMOS 2612 demonstrated a sequence of capabilities that could be used to inspect, characterize, shadow, or potentially interfere with another spacecraft,” according to LeoLabs’ report. “These actions require planning, maneuverability, precise navigation, and significant fuel. They may also indicate the use of onboard sensors capable of measuring the relative position of another spacecraft.”

What has just transpired between Kosmos 2612 and ICEYE X36 highlights how just a viable threat of attack can be disruptive in its own right. Simply forcing an imagery-gathering satellite out of position could prevent it from collecting over an intended area, or at least doing so in the most effective manner.

Furthermore, satellites only have a limited amount of fuel with which to maneuver in any way after reaching orbit. Harassment in space that forces them to burn off that finite resource at a higher-than-expected rate could reduce their total operational life expectancy, as well as further limit their effectiveness and make them more vulnerable to attacks or accidents. Debris in space is a steadily growing hazard that satellites increasingly need to dodge.

How Much Junk Is There In Space? | Earth Science

The United States, among others, has been actively pursuing on-orbit refueling capabilities to help address these issues. Last month, American officials also made the bombshell admission that there are unspecified U.S. weapon systems in orbit now, ostensibly for defensive purposes amid growing threats from Russia, as well as China. Both of those countries, among others, have been actively developing and fielding various anti-satellite capabilities inside and out of the Earth’s atmosphere.

“We can only speculate about the operation’s goal, but it could have been anything from simply intimidation to outright destruction or sabotage of a U.S.-registered satellite,” CSIS’ Clayton Swope told TWZ directly today in light of the new developments regarding Kosmos 2612 and ICEYE X36. “Perhaps the operation is on hold. There are, however, several other satellites that shadowed ICEYE X36 back in May that could be brought in[to] action too.”

Attribution and broader ramifications

It is important to point out that space, as a domain, inherently creates complications when it comes to attributing any form of attack, should one occur. Satellites do suffer mishaps, sometimes with catastrophic results, the causes of which are not always clear.

Just in January, a Russian inspector satellite launched in 2014 appeared to break up unexpectedly. Sometime around the end of July, the Chinese reconnaissance satellite Yaogan 50-02, which had only been launched some four months earlier, also broke up in orbit. On Sept. 13, a similar fate befell the U.S. Cold War-era Farrah III spy satellite, also known as USA 32. At the time of writing, no firm evidence has emerged to indicate any of these incidents were the result of hostile action rather than accidents of some kind.

“While the intention behind COSMOS 2612’s behavior remains uncertain, the deliberate nature of the activity, the fuel required to conduct this activity, and the proximity to a Western commercial imaging satellite make the event strategically important,” LeoLab’s report notes. “This event, and the capabilities demonstrated, do not establish hostile intent. It does, however, demonstrate capabilities that could support intelligence collection, on-orbit inspection, coercive signaling, interference, or preparation for future counterspace operations.”

It is very possible, if not highly probable, that Kosmos 2612’s recent activities will be indicative of a trend going forward. Aggressive and potentially dangerous maneuvering by armed forces in close proximity to each other is not uncommon within the atmosphere, especially in the air and at sea. Extending a variation on those tactics into the space domain would make sense, especially given the central role that capabilities in orbit increasingly play in modern military operations globally. Those roles extend to early warning, general intelligence gathering, weapons guidance, near-real-time communications, and beyond.

American officials have already said in the past that American assets in space are routinely the target of “reversible attacks,” meaning ones that do not cause permanent damage. That also speaks to the difficulty of attribution if there is no lasting effect or impact to draw attention to.

The U.S. government’s long-time monopoly on the space domain has also been steadily eroding in recent years, especially in light of China’s massive expansion of its intelligence-gathering and other satellite constellations. The scale and scope of what commercial satellite imagery and other space services providers, like ICEYE, offer today have led to a further democratization of space-based capabilities to countries like Ukraine that do not possess significant, if any, constellations of their own.

All of this, in turn, has increasingly driven the U.S. military, specifically, to plan for more proactive operations and potential direct conflict in orbit to ensure it retains its edge going forward. The aforementioned disclosure of U.S. on-orbit weapons is indicative of those developments and an accompanying shift in U.S. policy to be more open about counter-space capabilities.

More details may yet emerge about Kosmos 2612 and its recent rendezvous in orbit with ICEYE X36, but it already points to how space has become an increasingly likely potential zone for direct conflict going forward.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Ukrainians have died because Kyiv is still not receiving reliable US warnings of incoming Russian attacks, according to a key adviser to President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Serhii “Flash” Beskrestnov told the BBC that lives had been lost because there had not been time to warn citizens about ballistic missile strikes, saying: “It’s dangerous… I think it’s really very bad… People [have] already died.”

The adviser also said restrictions to Ukraine’s use of the Starlink internet network were ongoing.

The White House said there had been no changes to intelligence sharing with Ukraine.

Ukraine first reported an interruption to US intelligence sharing last week, as a row with the Trump administrations over its controversial deal to import Russian oil sent relations to new lows.

Despite the denials from Washington, many in Kyiv suspect the issues are not a coincidence.

On Monday morning, Zelensky wrote on social media: “Overnight two ballistic missile attacks were reported on the capital, one without warning, the second with only minimal time to take shelter.”

Hours earlier, an interview the president did with NBC was published, in which he said intelligence sharing had been restored after a three-day pause.

“We are very thankful for this,” he said. “Only [the] United States has this unique intelligence to tell our side when Russia uses ballistic missiles.”

But Beskrestnov told the BBC that American intelligence continued to be incomplete and inconsistent, and that the US had failed to provide a clear explanation for the issue.

“This looks very strange,” he said. “Sometimes we receive this information before the attack, another time we [do] not.”

He continued: “And for example, last night we received it, but… one minute before the attack.”

However, he said other collaboration with US continues, adding: “Intelligence data keeps flowing, and the issue is solely with the air raid alert component.”

Beskrestnov also said the US had given no clarity about who was responsible for the ongoing restrictions to the Starlink internet network and its military service Starshield, which Kyiv uses to provide connectivity for drones, helicopters and military communications.

Last week, Starshield restricted the speed at which mobile units could move while staying connected to the network to 100mph (160km/h).

This has limited Ukraine’s ability to shoot down incoming drones or to launch mid-range drone attacks into Russian-occupied areas.

Starlink owner Elon Musk said last week that the US government ultimately controls access to Starshield, which was designed for the Pentagon, suggesting it may therefore be behind the restrictions. Trump has denied involvement.

Beskrestnov said he thought both issues occurring at the same time was “probably” a deliberate move to put pressure on Ukraine.

He told BBC News: “It’s probably the United States trying to say [to] us, ‘let’s have the conversation, negotiation with Russia, you should find the compromise’.”

Beskrestnov also said Ukraine had its own radar data to provide some limited warning of incoming attacks, but was urgently looking into using alternative communication systems.

He added: “Now we understand that something begins to happen with Starlink, and we’re not sure what will be the next step.

“We understand that we should be prepared for some problems in future. And now we’re thinking about an alternative for Starlink, not only for air defence, for communication between our forces, between our staff, for civilians also, because we don’t know what we should expect in future regarding Starlink.”

On Monday, when asked about intelligence sharing, Trump said: “We’ve given a lot to Ukraine. They’ve given us nothing.”

Earlier, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had said there had not been a “pause” to intelligence sharing.

“I don’t know where [Zelensky is] getting these things or why he’s saying these things to the press,” he told reporters on Monday.

Rubio said he could not comment on the incident, adding: “I know a few nights ago there was a software problem involving their early warning system.”

The BBC has contacted Starlink for a response.

A White House official said there were no changes to intelligence sharing operations between the US and Ukraine.

The official spoke on background to discuss intelligence matters. Trump is focused on ending the war, the official said, and added that the US has provided more aid to Ukraine than any other country.

Russian attacks continued late on Monday, with Ukrainian officials saying at least six people were killed – including a toddler in her pram and an 11-year-old girl – in a drone strike near a park café in the north-eastern Kharkiv region.

Zelensky described the attack in which another 14 people were injured as “absolute atrocity”.

The extension of the custody of the CJP activists comes amid a crackdown on near daily protests against the government.

An Indian ‌‌court has extended the detention of two leaders of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP).

The extension for Ashutosh Ranka and Saurav Das on Monday comes amid a crackdown on near-daily protests against the government.

The two activists from the youth-led movement were arrested as they demonstrated at a historic protest venue despite a ban. Their jailing provoked a new protest in New Delhi on Friday.

The CJP is a major force behind the protests, which have demanded the resignation of India’s election chief over a controversial revision of voter lists that critics say favours Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya ⁠⁠Janata Party (BJP).

Ranka and Das were ⁠⁠among 14 protesters who climbed over barricades last week to enter the Jantar Mantar observatory, the day after it was removed from a list of approved demonstration sites. A court later sent the activists to prison for five days.

Indian media reported on Monday evening that they had been detained for two more days after police requested extra time to question them. Delhi ‌‌Police did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“This is an absolute mockery of the judicial system,” the CJP’s legal head, Ratna Singh, told reporters outside the court, adding that the party would challenge the order in a higher court.

The CJP, alongside opposition parties and left-wing student organisations, has led near-daily protests this month demanding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation, after 130 million names were removed from voter lists.

The Election Commission has said that the lists included 28 million people who have died, 63 million who have relocated, and 30 million who could not be traced. It denied favouring any party and said ⁠⁠wrongly deleted voters can re-enrol.

The BJP has accused rivals of trying to undermine democracy by wrongly questioning legitimate electoral processes.

CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke, student leaders and several of their supporters were also detained on Friday as ⁠⁠hundreds poured into central Delhi for a protest in support of Das and Ranka.

However, the youth-led movement insists it will not back off. A sit-in by the CJP and its supporters earlier this year forced the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over exam paper leaks.

US federal prosecutors allege the defendant was in frequent contact with unnamed member of royal family.

An ex-OpenAI engineer accused of planting a recording device in an executive conference room at the AI company appears to have received considerable support from the Saudi government, United States prosecutors have said in a court filing.

Federal prosecutors allege that the defendant, Abdulrahman Alfozan, 35, was in frequent communication with an unnamed member of the Saudi royal family and that a Saudi military official paid for a one-way plane ticket for Alfozan’s wife and young son to return to Saudi Arabia after his arrest, according to the court document, made public late on Sunday.

Prosecutors made those allegations as they asked a federal judge to keep Alfozan in US custody to await trial, arguing he is a flight risk. Alfozan, a Saudi national and lawful permanent resident in the US, is scheduled to appear in federal court in San Francisco later on Monday.

The case has highlighted security challenges around sensitive AI research as companies and governments compete fiercely for an edge in the transformational technology.

“The defendant went to significant lengths to create customized, encrypted recording devices to secretly record highly sensitive meetings involving senior OpenAI personnel and executives, high-level business counterparts, and government officials, all while communicating with individuals of significance in Saudi Arabia and pursuing opportunities in — and making plans to travel to — Saudi Arabia,” prosecutors wrote in a detention memo.

The Saudi government media office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A lawyer for Alfozan did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The lawyer, William Pernik, previously asked for Alfozan to be released from custody, subject to conditions including location monitoring and surrendering his passport, and said Alfozan had spent the last 15 years in the US and had applied to become a citizen.

The lawyer said a planned trip by Alfozan to Saudi Arabia this month was booked before he was under investigation and was for “family and immigration reasons”, according to a court filing.

Investigation remains active

US prosecutors charged Alfozan last week with using an electronic device to intercept oral communications. Alfozan plugged a recording device into the back of a television in an executive conference room at one of OpenAI’s San Francisco buildings, according to a criminal complaint.

Meetings involving government officials took place in the conference room around the time the device was installed, according to the prosecutors’ detention memo.

Prosecutors said the investigation remains active and additional charges could be brought against Alfozan.

A member of the Saudi royal family sought to recruit Alfozan for an AI-focused role in Saudi Arabia, writing in one message, “Saudi needs you more then [sic] the US!” Alfozan replied, “100,” according to messages cited by prosecutors.

Before his arrest, Alfozan was scheduled to fly to Riyadh during a planned two-month parental leave. His wife told investigators that she and their son planned to move permanently to Saudi Arabia and that Alfozan eventually intended to join them, according to prosecutors.

In an Arabic-language interview on the Identity Capital podcast last month, Alfozan said that he visits Saudi Arabia three or four times a year, follows developments there and advises or mentors Saudi startups.

He said meeting Prince Mohammed bin Salman, then deputy crown prince, during a 2016 gathering with young Saudi tech workers in Silicon Valley persuaded him to learn at a top tech company before bringing those skills back home.

While Alfozan was working at Facebook, he and other Saudis in Silicon Valley formed a consulting initiative that linked Saudi public- and private-sector organisations with expertise in big data, the internet of things and machine learning.

OpenAI previously said it discovered the device on September 30 and referred the matter to the FBI.

Al Jazeera has reached out to the Saudi embassy for comment.

United States President Donald Trump has announced his official endorsement of Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s election campaign after previously refusing to endorse anyone.

Trump posted on his Truth Social platform on Sunday that Netanyahu had been a “great warrior prime minister and an even greater partner for peace”, adding that Iran had been “systematically destroyed both militarily and financially, and unless they change their ways, rapidly, we will soon finish the job.”

“If Israel has the wrong Leader, which would be anyone other than Bibi, America will have to do this work ourselves, and I am not inclined to do so,” Trump wrote.

“Bibi Netanyahu has been Strong, Brave, and Brilliant in the face of tremendous opposition, including that coming from even Israel, itself. Despite all of that, he has endured and, in fact, he has thrived!”.

The president added that normal men and women would have “wilted” under the pressure that Netanyahu was under, but the Israeli prime minister “got stronger”.

“This is the kind of Partner that the United States of America is demanding of Israel, a Country for which it has done so much. Please let this Letter serve to represent my Complete and Total Endorsement of Bibi Netanyahu in his upcoming Race for Re-Election as Prime Minister of Israel. BIBI NETANYAHU WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!”, he added.

The Israeli election will be on October 27 . According to Israeli news outlet Haaretz’s tracker, as of Sunday, the opposition alliance led by the Yashar party of Gadi Eisenkot is expected to win the most seats, at 52, with Netanyahu’s Likud party-led coalition taking 51 of the 120 seats in the Knesset.

So far, no party is projected to secure an outright majority.

But Trump’s endorsement comes after he had previously shied away from fully backing Netanyahu’s election campaign.

Earlier this month, when asked twice by TIME magazine if Netanyahu should be given another term, Trump pivoted to his own popularity in Israel and Washington’s actions supporting Israel.

When asked on Thursday by the right-wing US news outlet, Newsmax, if he was planning to get involved in the Israeli elections,  Trump said: “They’d like me to be. Yeah, they’d like me to be”.

When asked whether he trusted Netanyahu, Trump replied, “I don’t trust anybody, honestly”.

Still, Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East North Africa programme at the British think tank Chatham House, explained that Trump’s endorsement of Netanyahu was “politically significant” because it comes after months of tension between the two leaders.

“It allows Netanyahu to reinforce his claim that he is indispensable to Israel’s relationship with Washington,” Vakil told Al Jazeera.

“However, its electoral impact should not be overstated. Israeli voters remain divided over Netanyahu’s leadership and the outcome of the Iran war. The endorsement may help consolidate his existing support, but it does not resolve the wider questions surrounding his record,” she added.

Andreas Krieg, senior lecturer at the school of security studies at King’s College London, said that Trump’s endorsement was a “political gift” to Netanyahu, whose electoral campaign is struggling.

But like Vakil, he cautioned against treating Trump’s endorsement as a game-changer.

“Netanyahu’s problems are structural, involving fragmented right-wing parties, disillusioned ultra-Orthodox voters and the legacy of October 7. Trump may mobilise reluctant Likud voters, potentially worth a seat or two in a close contest, but he cannot manufacture the coalition majority Netanyahu currently lacks,” Krieg told Al Jazeera.

What the endorsement means for the Iran war

Much of Trump’s endorsement has been heavily focused on the Iran war, at a time when many analysts suggest the US president might be looking to restart attacks, either before or after the midterm elections in early November.

The conflict, which began in February after the US and Israel launched attacks across Iran, is currently at a standstill.

The Strait of Hormuz, which once transported 20 percent of global crude, was effectively shut by Iran after the war started. A US naval blockade of Iranian vessels followed, as each country struck ships passing through the waterway that they accused of not complying with its orders. Oil traffic last month through the strait picked up to pre-war levels as the US Navy shepherded an increasing number of tankers. But a spate of Iranian attacks on vessels early this month has again hit crude exports through Hormuz.

On Monday morning, Brent crude futures stood at $107.57 a barrel, down slightly after reaching their highest since May 19 on Friday, when they briefly touched $110 a barrel.

Last month, Iran presented a proposal to Washington to reopen the waterway within seven days, but negotiations failed after the US did not address Tehran’s seven conditions, which included the lifting of sanctions and the ending of its naval blockade.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Iranian media outlets on Sunday that the proposal remained on the table and, if Washington accepts Tehran’s conditions, the strait could reopen within six days, with talks resuming the following day.

At the same time, Araghchi, in a post on X on Sunday night, accused Netanyahu of wanting to restart attacks on Iran with the US to “stay out of jail”.

“Last time you wanted to ‘finish the job’, Iran emerged even stronger. Want to try your luck again? Be our guest. But be careful; we have unfinished jobs too,” he wrote.

“Netanyahu is driving America into another war to stay out of jail, whatever the consequences for Israel – let alone POTUS,” he added.

Krieg said Trump was prioritising the use of “coercive leverage” through his endorsement of Netanyahu but not necessarily “war over diplomacy”. 

“The naval blockade is hurting Iran considerably and Washington believes time is working in its favour. Trump’s calculation is that Iran will eventually accept nuclear concessions and reopen Hormuz, without Washington having to offer significant concessions first,” he argued.

“His endorsement reinforces the military threat underpinning that strategy. But it does not mean diplomacy is finished. Trump still wants a deal he can present as a victory. The danger is that Tehran increasingly believes it must escalate to improve its bargaining position.”

What is next?

Vakil explained that, while Trump’s declaration of support for Netanyahu had signalled renewed political alignment with Israel and left the door open for future joint military action, it also makes it “harder for Trump to distance himself from the war or portray the US as having been reluctantly drawn into it”.

“He is explicitly taking ownership of the partnership and its military campaign against Iran. However, the endorsement does not necessarily mean that the two leaders have agreed on another operation, nor does it settle the question of who initially pushed hardest for war,” she said.

Vakil added that for Tehran, the statement will reinforce the belief of Iranian leaders that there is “little meaningful distinction between US and Israeli objectives.”

“At the same time, Trump’s suggestion that he is reluctant to confront Iran without Netanyahu could be interpreted as evidence of the limits of Washington’s appetite for another war.”

Meanwhile, while Trump has said that he would not attack Iran before the November midterms, several US media outlets have reported that the Pentagon has drawn up plans to relaunch attacks before voters head to the polls.

Last week, US news outlet Axios reported, citing both US and Israeli officials, that both Trump and Netanyahu had spoken about launching a major new operation against Iran ahead of the elections in both countries.

For Krieg, the likelihood that the US and Israel launch an attack on Iran remains low, assuming there is no Iranian strike that forces a response.

“The more dangerous window opens after November 3 [US midterms], when those electoral constraints disappear. Both militaries are preparing for that possibility. The greatest immediate risk is an uncontrolled escalation in Hormuz that forces Washington’s hand before either leader is politically ready,” he said.

Earlier this year Albanese himself was evacuated from his official residence over a bomb threat. As of August, about 20 cases in which people were accused of making violent threats against him were winding their way through courts around the country.

In recent years, politicians here have been mailed bullets. Female MPs – and in some cases their children – have been threatened with sexual violence. A Jewish MP’s office has been firebombed, a Sydney mayor’s car has been torched and countless other politicians have had their workplaces vandalised.

Just last week Small Business Minister Anne Aly said she had received a wave of death threats after a politician from the opposition said she should be “shamed and stoned in the square” over a tax policy.

According to government statistics, there were 1,067 reports of “harassing and threatening behaviour” against “high office holders” in the year to June: an increase on last year.

“We tend to bury our head in the sand and say, ‘Not here’, but this has been happening now for well over a decade,” Josh Roose, a Deakin University Professor on violent extremism, tells the BBC.

Socioeconomic strain, growing mental health problems in the community, “grifters” who benefit politically or financially from whipping up further discontent, and a “carcinogenic” online environment are drivers of the trend, he says, which has dramatically escalated since the pandemic.

But the political class must also take responsibility for their role, he adds.

“We’ve seen a willingness to cross previously sacred terrain – you know, not targeting individuals, not targeting their families – but we now see that this is part and parcel of Australian political life.

“This is occurring at both ends of the political spectrum.”

And experts like him warn it is not just politicians who are vulnerable: it is members of the media, academics, court officials and other public figures too.

Student protests in France are into their second month, escalating into demonstrations across Europe.

What began in September in France with pupils protesting against overcrowded classrooms and teacher shortages has grown into wider anger at the cost of living and planned cuts to public services.

Protesters in Albania, Belgium, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain have also taken to the streets over the lack of affordable housing, rising costs and failing public services – with many young people saying they no longer expect to be better off than their parents.

Facing their anger are leaders such as French President Emmanuel Macron, Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Spain’s PM Pedro Sanchez and Portugal’s PM Luis Montenegro. Sanchez belongs to the left, Meloni to the right and Macron and Montenegro are conservative-leaning centrists. But while their politics vary, they all face mounting unrest because of soaring costs of living.

Are they out of touch with the experiences and sentiments of youth in their countries? Al Jazeera visualises how prices, wages, housing and education have changed in France, Italy, Spain and Portugal over the past 26 years, from when Macron, Meloni, Sanchez and Montenegro were in their 20s, much like many of the protesters angry with them.

How much more expensive is it compared to 2000?

The prices paid for everyday items such as food, energy, transport and bills have risen by between 59 and 78 percent since 2000 in France, Italy, Spain and Portugal, according to Eurostat – the European Union’s statistics agency. Its harmonised index of consumer prices (HICP) is the EU’s official measure of how much everyday goods and services cost.

Spain recorded the steepest increase at 78 percent, followed by Portugal at 71 percent, 68 percent in Italy and France at 59 percent.

That means goods and services that cost 100 euros ($112) in 2000 now cost about 178 euros ($200) in Spain, 171 euros ($192) in Portugal, 168 euros ($188) in Italy and 159 euros ($178) in France.

Prices rose by about 2 percent a year on average, but jumped in 2022, when annual inflation hit 8.7 percent in Italy, 8.3 percent in Spain, 8.1 percent in Portugal and 5.9 percent in France, the highest rate in all four countries since at least 2000.

The surge was driven mainly by energy costs, which soared after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. By October that year, eight months into the war, energy prices across the eurozone were almost 42 percent higher than a year earlier, and food prices were also rising sharply, according to Eurostat.

Between 2021 and 2023, prices increased by 12 to 15 per cent in the four countries. Wages failed to keep up, and because prices do not fall back once inflation eases, many households are still feeling the squeeze today.

How have salaries changed?

Once inflation is taken into account, the average full-time wage in Italy fell by almost 5 per cent between 2000 and 2025. Over the same period, real wages rose by 7 per cent in Spain, 11 per cent in France and 20 per cent in Portugal, according to OECD wage data adjusted with Eurostat’s price index.

In Spain most new jobs were in tourism and services, and were often seasonal and poorly paid,  Jaime Velazquez, a journalist in Madrid, told Al Jazeera’s Inside Story.

Julius Fintelmann, cofounder and editor-in-chief of The European Correspondent, said ageing societies were squeezing out opportunities for younger workers, adding that the pay gap between older and younger workers has been widening across high-income economies for decades, so the promise that each generation would be better off than the last no longer holds.

How has the cost of housing changed?

Housing has become harder to afford in all four countries since 2000, according to the OECD’s price-to-income ratio. It provides a broad picture of how house prices have changed relative to incomes over time. When prices rise faster than incomes, the ratio goes up, suggesting homes are becoming less affordable on average.

However, it doesn’t show which households or regions are hit hardest, does not account for mortgage and borrowing costs, and says nothing about the quality of the homes people are paying for.

Spain has seen the biggest change. Its price-to-income ratio is 56 per cent higher than in 2000, even after falling sharply following the 2008 financial crisis.

In France, the ratio is 39 per cent higher than in 2000, though it has eased slightly since peaking in 2022.

Italy is the exception where house prices have broadly kept pace with incomes, leaving the ratio just 5 per cent higher than in 2000.

Portugal has seen the sharpest change in recent years. Its price-to-income ratio fell steadily for 15 years after 2000, meaning homes became more affordable. But since 2015 the ratio has risen by 67 per cent.

The OECD publishes the price-to-income ratio with 2015 as its reference year. To compare it with the wage and price data in this article, which started in 2000, Al Jazeera has reset the figures so that 2000 = 100.

How has state expenditure on education changed?

Education has been at the heart of the unrest in France, where protests began because of overcrowded classrooms and teacher shortages. While in Belgium and Albania, demonstrators have rallied against the rising cost of education and access to universities.

According to the latest data from Eurostat, France’s public spending on education amounts to 5.1 per cent of its gross domestic product (GDP) compared to 5.6 per cent in 2000.

Italy spent 4.4 per cent of its GDP on education compared to 4 per cent in 2024, Spain spent 4.1 per cent in 2000 and the same in 2024. Portugal spent 4.8 per cent in 2000 and 4.3 per cent in 2024.