NEWS

‘King [Messi] abdicates, but the prince [Lamine Yamal] takes the throne!’
Spain fans filled the streets of New York with chants and songs ahead of the World Cup final against defending champions Argentina. Spain’s supporters are confident a new generation can bring the trophy home.

The Pentagon has reached new framework agreements with three defense contractors as part of a strategy to acquire thousands of lower-cost air-launched cruise missiles in the coming years. The deals are directly in support of the U.S. Air Force’s Family of Affordable Mass Missiles (FAMM) program. The Air Force has already said that it is aiming to buy nearly 28,000 FAMM munitions in the next five years.

Under FAMM, the Air Force plans to acquire multiple types of lower-cost cruise missiles in different configurations. This will include ‘lugged’ types (FAMM-L) designed to be launched directly from hardpoints on aircraft, as well as ones intended to be employed from cargo planes via palletized munitions systems (FAMM-P). The service is also pursuing extended-range FAMM-BAR designs, with BAR here standing for “Beyond Adversary’s Reach.”

“Through [FAMM] agreements with Anduril, CoAspire, and Zone 5, the DoW will accelerate rapid validation of a new family of low-cost, air-launched cruise missiles – capabilities that will strengthen the Arsenal of Freedom,” according to a press release from the Pentagon today. “The agreements are a direct outcome of several Acquisition Transformation Strategy initiatives, including stabilizing demand signals, procuring industry-driven solutions, and maximizing flexible contracting.”

Anduril, CoAspire, and Zone 5 were also among the companies to receive framework deals from the Pentagon in May as part of plans to buy 10,000 lower-cost ground-launched cruise missiles through 2029. This is under a separate program called Low-Cost Containerized Missiles (LCCM). Leidos is part of the LCCM effort, as well. At that time, the Pentagon announced an additional agreement with Castelion regarding the production of 12,000 Blackbeard lower-cost hypersonic missiles. It’s also worth noting here that, since then, Norwegian defense contractor Kongsberg has aquired Zone 5.

“A key feature of these [FAMM] deals is the establishment of seven-year, multi-year agreements which, subject to congressional appropriations and enactment of all necessary authorizations, will be awarded upon the successful validation and competitive selection of the munitions,” today’s release adds. “The Department was granted 5-year authorization for FAMM in the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and is actively seeking congressional approval in the FY27 NDAA and Appropriations Bill for a 7-year multi-year procurement program to provide stability to new entrants.”

The Pentagon’s press release does not name any specific munitions.

Anduril has confirmed that its contribution will be versions of its Barracuda-500 design, and that it is aiming to start making deliveries under FAMM next year. The company will also be delivering a surface-launched version of the Barracuda-500 for the LCCM effort. Anduril first unveiled the full Barracuda family, which includes several tiers of what it calls “expendable autonomous air vehicles,” back in 2024, as you can read more about here. There are reports that at least one version of the Barracuda-500 has received an official U.S. military designation, AGM-189A.

Introducing: Barracuda-M Family of Cruise Missiles

“We joined the FAMM-L program in February 2026 and will execute the first ground and flight tests for Lug-Launched Barracuda-500M in the next several months,” Anduril noted in its release. “We completed the first successful flight test of Pallet-Launched Barracuda-500M in September 2024 and have since conducted dozens of successful flight tests that have further validated the maturity, performance, and modularity of the Barracuda-500 system, including Networked Collaborative Autonomy flights, terminal engagements, and payload performance validation testing.”

Zone 5 has also confirmed that it will be supplying its AGM-188A Rusty Dagger missile.

“By leveraging modern manufacturing and commercial technology, we are breaking the traditional cost curve, enabling the Department of War to field scalable, affordable capacity. The AGM-188 Rusty Dagger will deliver thousands of weapons per year for fighter and cargo aircraft employment but importantly without sacrificing exquisite performance,” Zone 5’s CEO Thomas Akers said in a statement. “Modern conflict has made one thing clear – the ability to rapidly scale production without sacrificing capability is critically important for air superiority. Rusty Dagger is built to deliver affordable, adaptable, highly survivable, incredibly lethal and rapidly deployable weapons that give the U.S. and our allies the ability to outpace and overwhelm evolving threats without being constrained by cost or production limitations.”

The deal with CoAspire is for that company’s Rapidly Adaptable Affordable Cruise Missile.

“The inclusion of CoAspire in this groundbreaking FAMM program multi-year agreement underscores CoAspire’s ability to revolutionize our country’s strike capabilities, offering a long-range solution that can be deployed across multiple platforms,” Doug Denneny, CoAspire’s CEO, Owner, and Founder, said in his own statement. “We, and our 56 first-tier suppliers across almost every state are excited to support the Air Force’s need to affordably procure thousands of FAMM cruise missiles over seven years. We applaud the Department’s inclusion of CoAspire as the only small business in this historic production opportunity. This is a true commitment to expand the defense industrial base while growing jobs across the US and bringing affordable cruise missile capabilities to the Air Force.”

RAACM Rapidly Adaptable Affordable Cruise Missile

Rusty Dagger and RAACM were both developed initially under the Air Force’s Extended Range Attack Munition (ERAM) program. ERAM’s main initial focus has been on delivering lower-cost air-launched strike capabilities to Ukraine. Zone 5 has previously confirmed that AGM-188A deliveries to Ukraine have begun, but it is unclear whether they are now being employed operationally. ERAM is known to be feeding into the FAMM effort, as well.

Overall, “offering both lugged and palletized variants, the FAMM provides the Air Force with flexible logistics, handling, and deployment options,” the Pentagon’s press release today notes.

“The multi-year approach utilizes firm-fixed-price contracting with a minimum quantity floor. Shares are split among all qualified vendors to ensure multiple production lines are positioned to surge,” the release further explains. “Contractors that meet or exceed production schedules will be eligible for additional procurement quantities – pending congressional appropriations – fostering a competitive environment that rewards efficiency and speed.”

These latter points highlight the fact that the FAMM program, as well as the LCCM effort, has a larger goal of addressing the critical need for strike munitions that can be produced at scale and in a cost-effective manner. TWZ has been calling attention to this broader reality for years, which has only been underscored by the latest conflict with Iran and a succession of other global crises. As we previously wrote after the announcement of the LCCM framework deals:

“Expenditures of critical air-to-surface and surface-to-surface munitions, as well as anti-air interceptors, by the U.S. military, as well as its allies and partners, in conflicts in recent years have only underscored the vital need to bolster these inventories. Demand for stand-off munitions, in particular, would be far greater in any future high-end fight against a near-peer adversary like China. That is a scenario where American forces could easily find themselves tasked to prosecute tens of thousands of targets, just in the opening phase.”

“Furthermore, existing munitions are often exquisite in design, and take months, or more often years, of lead time to produce. The Pentagon’s focus on “disruptive new entrants and commercial innovators,” rather than any of America’s long-established prime defense contractors, with its newly announced framework deals, is extremely significant in its own right. This is the latest example of a major shift away from awarding high-profile contracts to large legacy providers, helping to diversify the industrial base and promote competition. This also means moving away from companies accustomed to very long lead procurement and production arrangements.”

The Pentagon has also made clear that the FAMM framework agreements with Anduril, CoAspire, and Zone 5 do not preclude other companies from being brought into the program in the future. “The Department will also preserve competition opportunities for new vendors to be onboarded for additional quantities and new capabilities in the future as technology continues to advance,” per today’s release.

The market space for lower-cost cruise missiles has exploded in recent years in the United States and elsewhere globally. Relevant designs also occupy a space where the defining lines between these weapons and long-range kamikaze drones, as well as decoys, are increasingly blurry. Overlap between the FAMM and LCCM programs also highlights how many of these weapons are being adapted for launch from air, land, and maritime domains, which can help streamline production and supply chains, as well as offer operational benefits.

Taking deliberate steps to leave the door open to future competition reflects a larger push to avoid so-called ‘vendor lock’ in the U.S. defense contracting space. This has also been punctuated by moves to ensure greater government control of intellectual property rights and a focus on modular, open-architecture systems across major U.S. military acquisition efforts.

With the FAMM framework deals announced today, on top of the LCCM agreements back in May, the Pentagon is continuing to lay a vital foundation for the procurement of thousands of lower-cost strike munitions for years to come.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently launched a public attack on the International Criminal Court (ICC), vowing to “dismantle the ICC—brick by brick.” Washington’s position is that the ICC has no authority to try officials from non-member states—such as the US itself—or their allies, and that it will not accept any international court exercising jurisdiction over American citizens without US consent. Washington therefore intends to use diplomatic pressure and sanctions to counter the Court.

If one still believes in the international community’s definition of war crimes, this looks like a political move to absolve the United States and Israel of war crimes committed in the Middle East. To that end, Washington is pressuring allies — including states that are parties to the Rome Statute — to withdraw from the ICC.

“Trump said in January, ‘I don’t need international law’ to highlight his ‘America First’ policy. He is now keeping that promise, and the ICC is just one example.”

The day before Rubio announced his intent to dismantle the ICC, fourteen countries, including the United States, publicly reaffirmed their support for the ten-year-old ruling in the South China Sea Arbitration—a decision handed down by another international arbitration body: an ad hoc Arbitral Tribunal constituted under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

Ironically, of the fourteen countries, only the Philippines—the actual party to the case—has a direct stake in South China Sea rights. The other five countries with genuine interests in the South China Sea did not join this “cheerleading squad”: Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore, and Indonesia. Of these, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Brunei are, like the Philippines, “principal claimant states.”

Aside from the US and the Philippines, every other country among the fourteen marking the tenth anniversary of the ruling is an ICC member state: Australia, Canada, Estonia, Germany, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, New Zealand, Romania, Slovenia, and the United Kingdom.

These 12 ICC member states have no stake whatsoever in South China Sea affairs, yet they support an international arbitration body — and are now being pressured by the United States to boycott another international arbitration body they themselves belong to. Fourteen countries are happy to use international law to pressure China, but when international law becomes inconvenient for the US and Israel, is that suddenly a different matter?

The Philippines finds itself in the most awkward position of all. Manila withdrew from the ICC in 2019, yet after Ferdinand Marcos Jr. took office as president, it allowed Interpol and Philippine airport authorities to arrest former president Rodrigo Duterte in 2025 and hand him directly over to the ICC for trial.

The real story behind this episode is domestic political rivalry within the Philippines, combined with Washington’s long-standing displeasure with Duterte. International institutions have played the role of “witch-hunt enforcer,” helping the US and Manila nail a political opponent to the cross.

In the past, the international community could invoke Rome Statute standards to brand Duterte’s “war on drugs” a crime against humanity. But what now?

The ICC cannot prosecute non-member states, but it can prosecute individuals—such as Benjamin Netanyahu. Moreover, under the Rome Statute’s territoriality principle, the Court has jurisdiction if the alleged crime occurred on the territory of a member state. In the Middle East case, Palestine is a state party. In the Philippine case, although Manila withdrew from the ICC in 2019, crimes committed before that withdrawal remain within the Court’s reach.

The reason the US can attack the ICC so freely is that other international arbitration bodies do not follow this same “detour through territoriality” to claim jurisdiction over non-member states, nor do they try individuals—they adjudicate sovereign states (or transnational corporate entities). As such, they strictly adhere to the most fundamental principle of international law: the principle of state consent.

Interestingly, the tribunal that presided over the South China Sea arbitration itself violated the principle of state consent by ruling on a case brought against China, which refused to participate. This is precisely why China has never recognized the ruling as having any legal basis. Yet the fourteen countries that support the ruling seem untroubled by this violation of a core principle of international law.

In other words, both the ICC and the ad hoc tribunal behind the South China Sea arbitration suffer from the same flaw: overreach. The ICC has been accused of an “idealism” that oversteps state sovereignty, while the South China Sea tribunal has been criticized for “procedural overreach”—under UNCLOS, an ad hoc tribunal has no authority whatsoever over land territorial sovereignty, yet the tribunal accepted the Philippines’ framing that “downgraded” what were really sovereignty and maritime-delimitation questions into a simple matter of “the legal status of islands and reefs” and used that framing to assert jurisdiction for itself.

Taiwan was an innocent bystander caught in the crossfire of the South China Sea arbitration. Itu Aba (Taiping Island), which is under the actual control of the Republic of China (Taiwan) and has both fresh water and the capacity to sustain human habitation, was nonetheless ruled to be a mere “”rock”—stripping it of any 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone.

Given that both international arbitration bodies suffer from the same problem of overreach, if one follows the US in opposing the ICC, shouldn’t one logically also oppose the South China Sea ruling? This month, the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs launched an “urgent assessment” to awkwardly grapple with exactly this dilemma, since Manila has skin in both games—the Duterte case and the South China Sea ruling.

If Manila agrees to help dismantle the ICC, what happens to Duterte, still awaiting trial in The Hague? And if China then uses that same logic to reject the South China Sea ruling, what then? The other twelve member states that joined this “witch hunt” find themselves in an equally awkward spot.

Second only to the Philippines in embarrassment is Japan. Tokyo is the ICC’s largest financial backer; the Court’s current president, Tomoko Akane, is Japanese; and Japan has long been one of the ICC’s staunchest supporters. Is Tokyo now expected to help the US dismantle the ICC or to withdraw from it altogether?

Japan also finds itself in a glaring contradiction over the South China Sea ruling. If Taiwan-controlled Taiping Island—with an area of 510,000 square meters (roughly the size of 71 standard football pitches), fresh water, and the capacity to sustain habitation)—was ruled a mere “rock,” then how can Okinotorishima, an outcrop Japan claims sovereignty over that covers just 9.44 square meters (about the size of a double bed), possibly qualify as an “island”?

By that logic, Tokyo’s support for the South China Sea ruling effectively concedes that Okinotorishima has no exclusive economic zone at all — a self-inflicted contradiction that China has been quick to mock.

One could, therefore, say all fourteen countries backing the South China Sea ruling are applying a double standard, and that thirteen of them have no connection to the South China Sea whatsoever. Aside from the Philippines, the only country with any real claim to South China Sea interests is the United States — and the US holds international law in contempt, going so far as to vow to destroy an international arbitration institution outright.

This episode symbolizes the unraveling of the international order—a world reverting to the law of the jungle. The United States is dismantling the very international order it built, and the ones hurt most are precisely its own allies.

The Philippines and Japan have been given the responsibility of encircling China on the front line by the United States, but the footholds of the two countries are also being dismantled by the United States. In front of them, there is only the risk of opposing China and the weakening guarantee.

Above all, the United States has proven, by its own actions, that the so-called international order was never fair and never operated on a fixed standard — it was merely a temporary tool for an empire to rule the world. And when the tool stops being useful, it gets discarded, leaving its followers staring, embarrassed, at the tool still in their hands.

The US has launched a new wave of strikes on Iran after two American soldiers were killed by Iranian strikes in Jordan. President Donald Trump called it ‘swift punishment’, as Al Jazeera’s Heidi Zhou-Castro reports.

San Juan arrives at the Cruz de Mayo Wake

For this second installment of our work on Venezuela’s life cycle festivities (click here for part I), we present an in-depth conversation with the renowned Venezuelan musician, cultural practitioner, and percussionist Rolando Canónico. Together, we reflect on the immense responsibility of preserving Venezuelan traditions, specifically during festivals such as Cruz de Mayo and San Juan. From his dual role as a professional musician and cultural worker, Canónico addresses the tension between the commodification of music or competitive virtuosity and absolute respect for ancestral rhythmic and melodic patterns, defending the playing of the drum as an act of genuine devotion rather than a spectacle. He further delves into the powerful spiritual and syncretic connection he experiences when “dialoguing” with the instrument, underscoring his firm commitment to protecting and passing on this invaluable family and cultural heritage to new generations in Caracas.

A percussionist, drummer, and cultural creator, Canónico has participated in Fundación Bigott and renowned musical groups such as Caracas Sincrónica and Francisco Pacheco y su Pueblo. His trajectory is intertwined with a more discrete, yet vital, task: safeguarding Venezuelan musical memory. What began as a conversation between friends turned into a deep discussion about ethics, spirituality, and the responsibility of honoring the legacy of our ancestors in the twenty-first century.

Family and heritage: the weaving of a music lineage

To understand Rolando Canónico, one must look back at his ancestry. “My paternal grandparents passed away many years ago: Luisa Amelia Aponte de Canónico and Benito Canónico,” he recounts. Benito Canónico was the author of “El Totumo de Guarenas,” an important folk music composition. A musical heritage that flows through Rolando’s veins. However, as we delve into his role as a “host” of these festivities, Rolando turned his gaze toward his maternal lineage –to the women who, through the energy of daily life, kept the flame of devotion alive.

His story takes us to the Afinque Marín in the densely populated Afro-Venezuelan community of San Agustín, Caracas, where his maternal great-grandmother became a cultural bridge. “When that wave of people from Barlovento arrived –that migration boom from Barlovento to Caracas –she had the opportunity to be there when all these cultural expressions arrived,” he explained. It was there that, without any artistic pretensions, driven solely by faith, his great-grandmother began to adorn the Cruz de Mayo.

This responsibility passed to his grandmother, Rosa Emilia Pérez Sanz. “She embraced it as such,” Rolando told us, describing a pedagogical-community learning process where knowledge wasn’t taught in classrooms, but rather through observation and habits shared with neighbors. Music, for its part, was naturally incorporated through his mother, the founder of local band Los Tucusitos, blending Christmas carols with the fervor of the Cruz de Mayo vigil. For Rolando, that early exposure to music, combined with the discipline of his musical training, allowed him to turn a family passion into a profession.

A double celebration: a rite of transition and coming together

The celebration that Rolando Canónico holds at his home in La Pastora is not a one-off event, but rather part of a 43-year tradition that has been formally recognized by the Culture Ministry’s Institute of Cultural Heritage for the past 15 years. Every last Saturday in May, the house becomes the setting for a symbolic transition: the farewell to May, dedicated to Cruz de Mayo (May Cross), and welcoming June, the month of San Juan.

The logistical effort is monumental. “It’s not just a matter of sitting there, shouting some stuff, and that’s it,” Rolando emphasized. The process begins days in advance, with the presentation of newborn children and spiritual cleansings. Rather than merely attending as spectators, the community becomes an active participant: “People already know when it is; they don’t even ask anymore –they just show up with a small bouquet of flowers, a candle, fruit, or even a kilo of vegetables for the soup.”

The masterfully designed altar serves both festivities. “We make one, but it also serves as decoration for both,” explained Rolando, describing a symbolic overlap where the Cross is moved aside to make way for San Juan. This is the moment when devotion becomes tangible.

One of the most tense and beautiful moments of the night is the ritual procession. When San Juan arrives, the Cross, guarded by its devotees, seems to resist the change. “That encounter there, that clash, there comes a moment when San Juan announces that he’s going to come out, and the Cross doesn’t want him to,” Rolando tells us with the intensity of someone who has deeply witnessed that “struggle.”

To manage this tension, Rolando delegates to a decimista [poet], who acts as a mediator. He not only sings but also has the authority to say “He said it right!” at the precise moment when the euphoria outside the house reaches its climax. It’s a necessary exercise in control: “I have to do it this way because otherwise the whole thing turns into a conflict.” As the sirens* and golpes de tambor** intertwine, the cross at the altar gives way to the triumphal entry of San Juan, closing one portal to open another.

Rolando Canónico narrates the intensity of this coming together:

That encounter there, that clash, there comes a moment when San Juan announces that he’s coming out, and the Cross doesn’t want him to. So the devotees of the Cross hold their ground. It’s something beautiful, truly beautiful. Right there in that moment, with San Juan already coming down the stairs and the fulía [traditional rhythm] playing at the altar, the devotees form a circle so the fulía doesn’t stop. In the end it’s not a struggle but a meeting. The meeting where San Juan rises as he descends the stairs, already looking toward the Cross, and he’s trying to leave the house to welcome those who are coming. It’s as if he’s saying, “I’m letting you know that I’m on my way here.”

Regarding the energy that is unleashed when the festival reaches its peak with the arrival of the San Juan statues, Canónico adds: “That’s the moment when the altar of the Cross begins to be dismantled, when all the crosses are removed to make way for San Juan.” “That clash there between the Cross and San Juan gives you a powerful feeling,” he continued. “And when the three San Juan statues meet in front of the house, I can’t even describe it…”

Responsibility toward our ancestors and their legacy

If there is something Rolando Canónico is known for, it is his intransigence toward shoddy work. In a world where the commodification of traditional music threatens to sever it from its roots, he stands as a bulwark.

“In my house, I don’t accept things done poorly.” For him, the drum is not an instrument for competition or for displaying empty virtuosity. “I’m not putting on a show. I’m fulfilling a family promise,” he emphatically clarifies. His authority within the festival doesn’t stem from arrogance, but from a deep understanding of and respect for the musical codes, styles, discipline, and rigor that his teachers instilled in him.

This rigor extends to his training of new generations. Rolando is fully aware of his role as a guide and seeks to prepare his nephew and other young people so that the tradition is not diluted by stage “improvisations.” It is a pedagogy by example: he inaugurates each drum, ensuring that the rhythmic foundation is consistent with what has been passed down for centuries.

Finally, the conversation heads into more intimate territory: the relationship between the musician-artist and the divine. When asked if he experiences an altered state of consciousness while playing, Rolando responds with overwhelming sincerity. “I am a devotee of San Juan the Baptist; I am a santero… my spirituality is deeply connected to the drum.”

For Canónico, there is no separation between the musician who reads the score and the practitioner who offers his prayer through the drum’s vibrations. “That’s the best spiritual cleansing there can be here –playing the drum the right way,” he affirms. “I say ‘the right way’ because with the drum, you have to communicate with it.”

This dialogue, this meeting between the sacred and the profane, is what makes the festival in La Pastora, in Rolando’s own words, a “formidable experience.” By the end of our interview, it’s clear that his work is not merely a tribute to the past, but a strategy for cultural re-existence. As our interviewee aptly summarized at the end of our meeting, the true responsibility of a cultural artist is to ensure that, when San Juan arrives at his doorstep, the drum sounds exactly as it should: with the truth of the ancestors and the strength of a future that, thanks to people like him, is guaranteed a place in Venezuela’s collective memory.

Notes

*Sirenas are a cappella songs with an octosyllabic quatrain meter used to express devotion to both the Cross and San Juan.

**Golpes de tambor refers to multiple rhythms where drums, usually in sets of three, are the main protagonists. From a melody standpoint, singers take turns between solos and choruses.

See below for more details on the festivities and the surrounding music.

Fabiola José is a Venezuelan singer. She has performed in countries across South America, Africa, Europe, and Asia. Her singles and albums are available on all digital platforms. She hosted and produced “Cantante y Sonante” for Radio Nacional de Venezuela. In 2018–2019, she created a series of videos for social media, published on her YouTube channel #HechoEnCasa. She holds a bachelor’s degree in Music from IUDEM, Caracas (2005); specialized under Maestro Tom Krause in Spain (2007); and an M.A. in Arts and Cultures of the South from UNEARTE, Venezuela (2020).

Fidel Barbarito is a Venezuelan musician and researcher, with a bachelor’s and master’s degrees in music and history, respectively. He teaches in the undergraduate and graduate programs at the National Experimental University of the Arts (UNEARTE). Together with Fabiola José, he promotes several musical projects aimed at disseminating traditional folk repertoires, integrating them with contemporary compositions inspired by these sounds. Joropo llanero. Parranda de reexistencia is one of his published essays.

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

The Sounds of Celebration

To gain a deeper understanding of the rich soundscape that defines the festivities at the Canónico family home, we break down how the musical universe of these celebrations is organized. It is not merely a decorative sideshow, but rather the ritual language through which faith is expressed.

The music in the Cruz de Mayo wake: a devotional geography (drop-downs with more info)

The Cruz de Mayo ceremony, which precedes the arrival of San Juan, features a structure that honors various regions of Venezuela. Canónico explains that this part of the festival requires specific discipline and respect for the different genres according to their geographic origin.

The order of the genres

Devotional music follows a set pattern that begins with the “Salve Llanera.” Afterward, songs representative of various regions are performed: Lara, Oriente, Falcón, and finally Zulia.

The poet and the sirenas

The mediator plays a crucial role. He recites poetry (“décimas”) and also has the authority to sing sirenas. This person is responsible for maintaining the choir and the performance during the most intense moment, when the altar of the Cruz is being prepared for the transition.

Interpretive rigor

There is a strict hierarchy. Although the community is invited to participate, the singers are committed to specific roles. For example, those responsible for the salve must perform it with the rigor that tradition demands, avoiding any “improvisation” or inappropriate mixing with other genres.

Music for San Juan Bautista: the strength of the drum (drop-downs with more info)

Once the ritual procession takes place and San Juan enters the house, the soundscape changes radically. Canónico explains that, unlike the Cruz, San Juan marks the beginning of a sequence in which the drum takes center stage.

Performance spaces

There is a geographical distinction within the house. The genres permitted to be performed inside the home, directly in front of the altar, are limited and sacred: sirenas, culo e’ puya, quitiplás, and San Juan de Guatire. All other musical performances take place outside the house.

The main reference

Rolando Canónico, as the host and a cultural leader, inaugurates each drum. He performs the Afro-Venezuelan section—specifically the Miranda fulía—alongside his nephew and his godson, ensuring that the rhythmic pattern remains true to tradition and does not veer toward competitive or show-oriented styles.

Ethical guidelines

At the Canónico household, a clear policy has been upheld: to play not for the sake of competition or virtuosity, but out of devotion, tradition, and beauty.

Talking to the instruments

For Canónico, playing the drum is not a technical performance, but a dialogue. He asserts that, in this context, the saint dwells within the drum and that playing it is a form of spiritual cleansing. When the instruments sound, the performer seeks to “detach” himself from rigid patterns in order to let a powerful energy flow, especially when several San Juan statues gather in front of the house.

This musical framework is, in Canónico’s words, a “system” in which every drumbeat and every décima has a specific place and time to ensure that the legacy of the ancestors remains alive without being corrupted by trends or commodification.

Rolando Canónico is a prominent Venezuelan percussionist, educator, and cultural practitioner, recognized as a key figure in the preservation of traditional community music and Afro-Venezuelan percussion. Initially trained at the Bigott Foundation’s Popular Culture Workshops, he has built a prolific musical career by joining iconic groups such as Francisco Pacheco y su Pueblo, Pomarrosa, and Caracas Sincrónica, as well as accompanying important Venezuelan artists, including Cecilia Todd, Cheo Hurtado, Betsayda Machado, Fabiola José, and Luisana Pérez, on recordings and on stage.

Beyond his virtuosity as a session musician, Canónico stands as an active guardian of Venezuela’s musical tradition, demonstrating a deep ethical and spiritual commitment to organizing community festivals, ensuring that historical accuracy and the identity of the ancestors remain alive for future generations.

Tuchel can continue to rely on captain Kane – for now.

The Bayern Munich striker will be 36 when the next World Cup rolls around, but seems in no mood to hand up his England boots.

Kane – who scored six goals at this World Cup, but was an unused substitute against France – told the BBC: “One of the best England groups that I have ever been a part of.

“When you see the boys around the hotel, when you see us training on the pitch, when you see us in the changing room, it is a unique group. We had that bond and had so much belief in each other.”

On Tuchel, Kane added: “It is his first major tournament. I think he has learned a lot of the squad, the campaign, the travel and the games and what it takes – the pressure.”

One of England’s wounds that was deepened by the win over France was Tuchel’s decision not to send on Bukayo Saka against Argentina.

The Arsenal winger, an unused substitute in the semi-final, scored a hat-trick on Saturday against Les Bleus – then afterwards said he is fully fit, having endured some injury worries earlier in the North American campaign.

“Of course, I would love to have played more but it’s too late to talk about that,” Saka told BBC One. “I try to do my talking on the pitch and it’s done now, move on. I’m fit.”

On noise around the manager, he said: “I think that’s just part of the game… it’s how you react to it, how you use it as fuel and today we finished strong and that’s all we could really do and we did that.”

England’s twisting World Cup 2026 story has a bittersweet ending – with a thrilling victory in the game no-one wants to be a part of.

But how this campaign will ultimately be remembered might not be truly determined until after this team have produced their sequels.

Two U.S. troops were killed in action and one remains missing in Jordan on Friday while defending against Iranian ballistic missile and drone attacks, U.S. Central Command announced on X. Another “four American service members were medically evacuated to Jordanian hospitals. They have since been discharged. Other personnel who were evaluated for minor injuries have returned to duty.”

“Out of respect for the families, CENTCOM is withholding additional information, including the identities of the fallen warriors, until 24 hours after the next of kin have been notified,” the command added.

CENTCOM did not say where in Jordan, however, yesterday, CBS News reported that “Iran attacked at least two Jordanian bases this week, resulting in several American service members being injured in the attack after their facility was struck.”

We noted yesterday that data from NASA’s Fire Information for Resource Management System (FIRMS) at 10:59 PM EDT indicated a fire adjacent to the runway near an area where aircraft are parked at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan. However, TWZ cannot independently verify what happened at the base and if any equipment was destroyed or damaged and how personnel there were affected. We’ve reached out to CENTCOM for answers.

We reached out to CENTCOM for confirmation.

Video emerged on social media purporting to show attacks on the base.

Muwaffaq Salti, as we have frequently reported, has come under attack numerous times. In March, CNN obtained imagery from Planet Labs showing an AN/TPY-2 radar damaged, or even possibly destroyed, following an Iranian attack there.

The air base has long been a major regional hub for U.S. operations, and is being very actively utilized in the current conflict. It hosts the greatest concentration of U.S. tactical aircraft in the region, and thus is an extremely important target, where, as we pointed out last night, even one ballistic missile landing on an apron could destroy multiple prized aircraft and take the lives of U.S. service members or cause injuries.

Iran also hit Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia yesterday, Axios reporter Barak Ravid stated on X.

In addition, officials in Kuwait yesterday said one of the country’s power and water desalination plants “was attacked as a result of the Iranian aggression…leading to a fire and damage to the plant’s facilities and several electricity generating units.”

“The fire is now under control and repairs are ongoing,” the Kuwait government added.

The two deaths and the injuries came as the conflict between the U.S. and Iran is escalating rapidly, with each side now attacking critical infrastructure and Iran intensifying strikes on U.S. bases across the region.

Amid the fighting, “Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs Kazem Qaribabadi stated that Tehran has suspended its commitments under the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed with Washington as United States attacks continue,” the official Fars News Agency reported.

US president says death of soldiers in Jordan a ‘sad thing’ as US forces attack Iran for the eighth consecutive night.

Kylian Mbappe scores twice for France to hit World Cup record but England win 6-4 in third-place playoff final.

England beat France 6-4 in a chaotic World Cup third-place playoff as Kylian Mbappe became the all-time leading scorer in World Cup history.

Both teams had higher aspirations at the 2026 tournament but suffered painful semifinal exits – France were outplayed by Spain while England suffered a late collapse against Argentina.

Both coaches made multiple changes for Saturday’s match in the oppressive heat of Miami, with a host of stars on the bench at the start.

England boss Thomas Tuchel left out Harry Kane and Jude Bellingham from his starting lineup while Deschamps, stepping down after 14 years at the helm, omitted Bradley Barcola and Ousmane Dembele.

Arsenal midfielder Declan Rice put England ahead with a goal from distance in the third minute and Ezri Konsa headed home to make it 2-0.

Kylian Mbappe and Michael Olise were a threat as France searched for a way back into the game, but they found England’s second-choice goalkeeper Dean Henderson in top form.

The game threatened to become embarrassing for France when Bukayo Saka made it 3-0 after a swift break.

And it was 4-0 in first-half stoppage time when Saka scored his second goal of the game, celebrated with a fist pump by Tuchel.

France coach Didier Deschamps told French TV channel M6 that the first-half display had been “catastrophic”, urging his men to show pride.

He made four changes, bringing on Dembele, Dayot Upamecano, Lucas Digne and Barcola and was rewarded almost instantly when Mbappe scored his ninth goal of the tournament to move clear of Lionel Messi at the top of the Golden Boot standings.

The game had now totally changed complexion, and Barcola pulled another goal back, with Deschamps clenching his fist on the bench.

Mbappe then netted his second of the game to become the all-time leading World Cup goalscorer with 22 goals – slotting home from Olise’s pass.

That put him two ahead of Messi in the race to finish as top scorer at the 2026 tournament.

France squandered a number of chances to equalise, and England were handed a chance to extend their lead when Malo Gusto brought down Djed Spence in the penalty area.

Saka stepped up to the spot and converted to complete his hat-trick.

There was still time for Dembele to grab a fourth for France, but Bellingham then strode forward to score the 10th goal of the match with an individual effort.

In doing so, Bellingham became the first England player to score seven goals at a World Cup.

By finishing third, England secured their best result at a World Cup since winning the tournament in 1966, though they will carry bitter memories of their defeat by defending champions Argentina.

Deschamps led France to World Cup glory in 2018 and finished as runners-up four years ago.

Les Bleus were favourites to win the 2026 tournament after a sensational start but were well beaten 2-0 by Spain in the semifinals.

Three-time champions Argentina face European champions Spain in the final in East Rutherford, New Jersey, on Sunday.

Nations Championship – round three

Argentina (3) 24

Tries: Carreras, penalty try, Piccardo Cons: Albornoz 2 Pen: Albornoz

England (19) 31

Tries: Freeman, Earl 2, M Smith, Feyi-Waboso Cons: F Smith 3

England held on to beat Argentina in a chaotic match in the Nations Championship after the hosts had a last-gasp try controversially ruled out in Santiago del Estero.

With 13-man England leading 31-24, Argentina wing Bautista Delguy scored in the corner with the final play – leaving a difficult conversion to secure a draw.

Referee Angus Gardner had awarded the try on field, but television match official Brett Cronan insisted Delguy was in touch.

While Gardner repeatedly suggested there was no clear evidence to overturn his original on-field call, the try was eventually chalked off.

Henry Slade’s covering tackle on Delguy proved to be the decisive moment, with Gardner surrounded by frustrated Argentina players at full-time.

A combined seven yellow cards were shown in what was a thrilling and action-packed game.

Steve Borthwick’s side looked set for back-to-back Nations Championship wins after Tommy Freeman’s try and two scores from Ben Earl gave them a 16-point half-time lead.

The Pumas, who wore replicas of the football team’s 1986 World Cup kit for the match, scored next before taking advantage of two England yellow cards, but their own ill-discipline prevented them punishing the visitors further.

Marcus Smith’s try in the corner came with number eight Joaquin Oviedo in the sin-bin, before Santiago Carreras joined his team-mate on the sidelines for 10 minutes.

An individual try from Immanuel Feyi-Waboso then silenced the passionate home crowd.

However, England replacements Henry Pollock and Emmanuel Iyogun were next to be sent to the sin-bin, making for a nervy finish.

Justo Piccardo’s late try and Argentina’s subsequent break had 13-man England scrambling, only for a combination of Noah Caluori and Slade to do just enough to force the full-time whistle.

Having gained the backing of the Rugby Football Union after just one win in this year’s Six Nations – England’s worst performance since the tournament’s expansion from the Five Nations in 2000 – this summer’s fixtures were pivotal for Borthwick’s future.

A tough defeat at Ellis Park against world champion South Africa was expected, but wins over Fiji and Argentina have set England up well for November’s Nations Championship games.

A protest by India’s youth-led Cockroach Janta Party has intensified after activist Sonam Wangchuk was forcibly moved to a hospital on the 21st day of his hunger strike. Party founder Abhijeet Dipke was splashed with ink after beginning a fast in solidarity.

What was the last time you had trouble finding a specific picture you took three years ago? It usually takes around twenty minutes to find it on your phone, laptop, and external drive. And sometimes you cannot find something even in Dropbox, while you actually saved it there.

It is normal that nowadays people create hundreds of files every week and do not have a system to organize them. Vacation photos are on your phone, tax documents are on your computer, and important contracts are somewhere else. This costs you time and energy.

The good news is that you can change that. All you need is an adequate storage system that allows you to keep all your files in one place and access them from any of your devices.

This guide will help you implement it. Let’s get started!

Why Do You Need A Unified Storage System?

If you do not have a proper system for organizing your files, you waste time trying to find them. You may also lose important memories or documents. What if your phone suddenly crashes and you do not have any backups? What if you accidentally delete an important receipt? These situations can create unnecessary stress.

However, a unified storage system solves these problems because everything is stored, backed up, and easy to find. There is also the peace of mind that comes with knowing your important files are safe.

Choose A Storage Platform That Works For You

There are several major cloud storage platforms available today, and each works differently.

• Google Drive is still popular among Android phone users and people with Gmail accounts. It offers 15GB of free storage and integrates well with Google Docs, Sheets, and Photos.
• Microsoft OneDrive is a good choice for people who mainly use Windows products. It also integrates well with Microsoft Office.
• Apple iCloud is designed for iPhone and Mac users and includes automatic photo backups.
• Proton Drive is a good choice for people who value privacy when storing personal files. It offers end-to-end encrypted cloud storage, automatic photo backups, file syncing, and secure sharing across devices.

Your choice of cloud storage depends on three things:

• The devices you already use.
• The amount of storage space you actually need.
• How comfortable you are with the interface.

The price is not the most important factor. What matters most is choosing a service that works smoothly with your existing devices.

Create A Proper Folder Structure

Use A Consistent Filename Convention

Organize Your Files By Type

Set Up Automatic Syncing And Backups

Consider Device Accessibility

Maintain Your Storage System

Do Not Forget About Privacy And Security

Make sure you understand your storage provider’s privacy policy. Enable two-factor authentication and use a strong password. These simple steps help protect your files from unauthorized access.

If you store sensitive documents such as tax returns or bank statements, remember that no online storage solution is completely risk-free. Keeping an additional backup on an external drive at home is still a good idea.

Start Now

Mojtaba Khamenei says Trump’s signature is ‘worthless’ and that ‘bullying’ is a core element of US foreign policy.

Iran’s supreme leader has warned that the United States will suffer “unforgettable lessons” at the hands of Tehran and its regional allies, accusing the US of repeatedly violating the memorandum of understanding (MoU) between the two countries.

A written statement attributed to Mojtaba Khamenei was read out on state television on Saturday, in which the supreme leader said Washington’s breaches of last month’s MoU showed that President Donald Trump’s signature was “utterly worthless and invalid”.

“The repeated breach of agreements by the Great Satan vis-a-vis the accord has once again proven to all that the signature of the President of America is now utterly worthless and invalid, and that bullying, hegemonism and savagery are inseparable components of the American creed and doctrine,” the statement read.

“Now that the American enemy is seeking to foment war and suffer heavier costs and further humiliation, it should know that the dear nation of Iran and the Resistance Front hold unforgettable lessons for it,” it added.

The US dramatically escalated its attacks on Iran this week by targeting civilian infrastructure, including bridges, railway lines and water desalination plants.

Tehran has responded by successfully striking civilian infrastructure in Kuwait, with authorities there urging everyone to ration electricity.

The US-Israeli war on Iran, which began in February, is seen as existential by the country’s senior leadership.

Tehran has shown no sign of caving to the increasing demands from the Trump administration, as regional countries continue to push for an end to the conflict behind the scenes.

Khamenei said the US has “revealed its true face,” exposing its “deceitfulness, irrationality, unreliability and wickedness”.

He called on Iranians to trust the leadership to protect the country, urging people to remain “vigilant” and “active” as the fighting grinds on.

Reports have surfaced in recent days that the Houthis in Yemen could close the Bab al-Mandeb gateway to the Red Sea in support of their crucial ally Iran. That would further destabilise global energy markets, increase inflation and apply additional pressure on Trump to halt attacks.

The war is deeply unpopular in the US and has inflicted economic harm on Americans.

The MoU mediated by Qatar and Pakistan and signed last month aimed to create the conditions to bring the war to a permanent end.

However, Tehran and Washington have since declared the accord “over” after accusing each other of violating it.

China’s mysterious next-generation combat aircraft have dominated headlines since a pair of sixth-generation designs broke cover in late 2024. But while those aircraft understandably command attention, the single most important fighter in the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) is arguably the Chengdu J-20 Mighty Dragon. Not only does the J-20 offer a level of capability previously missing from the PLAAF, but it is being introduced in remarkably large numbers. This underscores China’s ability to mass produce even the most advanced weapons in its arsenal. The quantities of J-20s that are now rolling off the production line also highlight the pace of the PLAAF’s transformation and raise the question of exactly how many Mighty Dragons have already been fielded.

The appearance of new Chinese combat aircraft designs, including the J-35 medium-weight stealth fighter in both naval and land-based versions, means that the J-20 is no longer under such a high level of public scrutiny. This contrasts with the situation back in 2021, when TWZ provided a review of the program on what was then the 10th anniversary of its first flight.

At that time, we stated that the J-20 was, “without doubt, the main focus of global attention when it comes to China’s military aircraft developments. Within the People’s Republic of China, too, the jet known as the Mighty Dragon has become a totem for the country’s fast-emerging high-technology defense sector and its associated aviation industries.”

It is worth recalling that when the J-20 first appeared on the runway at Chengdu’s sprawling manufacturing plant in late 2010, the black-painted aircraft was deemed by some Western observers to be a technology demonstrator at best, not something that would end up being the country’s first stealth fighter built at scale. It is one thing to fly an impressive, hand-built experimental aircraft. It’s very much another to produce an advanced fighter reliably in large quantities, especially one that incorporates stealth technologies that are notoriously challenging to manufacture. However, after some design tweaks, the J-20’s service entry followed in late 2016, and the jet became only the third true stealthy fighter to become operational anywhere in the world.

Since then, the J-20 has continued to be improved, and new variants have emerged. Perhaps the most significant development concerning the jet has been the introduction of a domestically produced powerplant to the series-built aircraft, superseding the use of previous Russian-supplied engines. A two-seat version of the aircraft has also appeared, representing a notable novelty for a fifth-generation fighter. More advanced weapons — and more of them — and enhanced avionics have also been steadily introduced.

Most important, however, has been the increased production rate of the Chengdu jet, leading to its proliferation across the units of the PLAAF.

At the end of 2019, nearly a decade after the J-20 first appeared, Western sources estimated the number of J-20s built to be around 50, a figure that likely also included pre-production machines. At the same time, unconfirmed Chinese reports suggested a production capacity of 48 aircraft annually, but there was no publicly available evidence that that figure had been attained.

By late 2022, Western defense outlets were reporting that the PLAAF had received at least 200 J-20s, a figure based primarily on a study of construction numbers seen on the jets and equating to four production batches. At the same time, more than 240 examples of the J-16 multirole fighter aircraft, a Chinese development of the two-seat Flanker family, were said to be in service, equivalent to 11 batches. Also in production, the number of J-10Cs in service was somewhat lower, but the fleet was also bolstered by older J-10A/B versions.

In its assessment of the PLAAF modernization drive, in early 2023, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), a British think tank, was somewhat more circumspect, counting a frontline fleet of at least 150 J-20s. However, the IISS noted, the fleet was projected to outnumber the U.S. Air Force’s F-22 Raptors by the end of the same year, aided by an annual production rate that “had likely doubled” within the previous three years.

As for the F-22, the U.S. Air Force currently has 185, but only 143 of the jets are combat-coded, with the rest being assigned to training and test and evaluation activities. Meanwhile, a significant portion of the overall fleet is typically down for maintenance at any given time.

A detailed analysis of the operationalized nature of the J-20 program was provided by Janes in mid-2024. This concluded that, in a period of over 11 months from July 2023, the PLAAF had inducted more than 70 J-20s, for a total of approximately 195 of the aircraft. Using satellite imagery, it was determined that, as of May 2024, the PLAAF operated 12 air brigades with J-20s, of which three brigades were fully equipped with the type. Significantly, it also confirmed that all five of the Theater Commands — joint military commands organized on a geographical basis — had inducted the J-20.

Moving forward to 2025, it appeared that the J-20 production total had rapidly reached the 300 mark.

In the fall of that year, Andreas Rupprecht, a longtime Chinese military observer and contributor to this website, identified a J-20 with a serial number that indicated it was the 300th airframe, from the 10th production batch.

Meanwhile, the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), a U.K.-based think tank, assessed that, by late 2025, production rates for the J-20 had likely reached around 120 aircraft per year, and that around 300 of the aircraft were in service across at least 13 PLAAF regiments. “The total produced is likely to be higher,” RUSI explained in a report on the subject, “since a significant number of newly produced fighters will still be awaiting delivery to units.”

Based on the trend, RUSI suggested in its report earlier this year that, by 2030, around 1,000 J-20s of all versions (plus around 900 J-16s) will be in service with the PLAAF. “There is also a noticeable trend towards heavy fighters in general, with J-16s and J-20s being used to re-equip units that previously were operating not only J-11 and Su-27/30 Flanker heavy fighters, but also some J-7 light and J-8 medium fighters,” the report added.

Rupprecht told TWZ that he is confident that, as of mid-2026, around 500 J-20s had likely been delivered. This theory is reinforced by the presence of the jets with 14 frontline PLAAF units, and with another three Flight Test and Training Bases (FTTB), which operate mixed fleets. Of the 14 frontline units, four appear to have introduced the enhanced J-20A version, replacing the initial-production J-20s.

Interestingly, among American officials, there has been some downplaying of the J-20’s capabilities vis-à-vis the U.S. military.

“It’s not anything to lose a lot of sleep over,” Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) head Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach said in 2022. “Certainly, we’re watching them closely and seeing how they field and how they operate them.” Wilsbach qualified his comments by saying that the U.S. Air Force has “had a limited opportunity to assess it [the J-20], but it seems okay.”

On the other hand, other U.S. Air Force leaders have highlighted concern over the rapidly growing PLAAF, an expansion in which the J-20 is playing a major role.

“We are the smallest and oldest that we have ever been,” Air Force Brig. Gen. Doug Wickert, head of the 412th Test Wing at Edwards Air Force Base in California, said of his service during a briefing early last year. “The PLA is the largest and most modern that it has even [sic; ever] been. That is risk. That is uncertainty.”

Wickert added that he predicted that, by 2027, China would have numerical superiority of approximately 12 to one in modern fighter aircraft (including five to three in fifth-generation aircraft) in relation to U.S. assets stationed west of the international dateline.

At the same time, we don’t know how many J-20s Beijing intends to buy. As well as its continued development, much will depend on plans for the land-based J-35, which could potentially offer a cheaper alternative for some mission sets. Beyond that, there are at least two sixth-generation crewed combat aircraft designs and various collaborative combat aircraft (CCAs) and uncrewed combat air vehicles (UCAVs) that will need to be factored into the future force structure.

Undoubtedly, the J-20 has faced challenges, too, but it has matured from a prototype that some were quick to dismiss into the backbone of China’s premier air arm. Its continued evolution in terms of engines, avionics, weapons, and variants is important, but the most important development may simply be the rate at which China is able to build it.

In the same way that technologies and tactics developed alongside the J-20 will find their way into China’s next generation of combat aircraft, these will also be able to leverage the advances in production output. China has proven to be remarkably capable of punching out large numbers of advanced fighters, so these new aircraft could hit flightlines in greater quantities faster than some may expect, once they are developmentally mature enough to enter production. Moreover, Chengdu’s serial-manufacturing abilities underscore the wider degree to which China can churn out its most advanced weapons, of all kinds, which is historically a hugely challenging endeavor.

In military terms, quantity has a quality all on its own, and if current production estimates are even broadly accurate, the J-20 program has entered a phase where manufacturing capacity is just as strategically significant as the fighter’s stealth and performance.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Tehran, Iran – The United States has reinforced its naval blockade on Iran’s southern ports, amid the escalating military confrontation between them.

The US blockade on Iran was first imposed in mid-April and remained for over nine weeks. It was only lifted after the two sides signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in June to end four months of fighting and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran immediately began exporting tens of millions of barrels of crude oil, much of it stored on supertankers anchored close to its oil terminals. However, after the recent resurgence in military strikes over control of the Strait of Hormuz, Washington rescinded oil and banking waivers issued as part of the MoU and prevented vessels linked to Iran from returning to port to load more Iranian oil.

Since the MoU effectively fell apart due to recent strikes, US Central Command (CENTCOM) has redirected several ships operating in the Strait of Hormuz. It also launched a strike to disable the Curacao-flagged supertanker Belma, which had allegedly been transporting Iranian crude during the war.

Iran has also been accused of striking ships in the waterway, leading to the US bombing Iranian coastal areas.

Iranian authorities have acknowledged the previous blockade drastically reduced Iranian crude exports. Iran’s parliament speaker and chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said in a TV interview at the end of June that “we did not export even one barrel” during the blockade.

Energy analyst Hamidreza Shokouhi told Al Jazeera that the new US siege means that at least 1.5 million barrels per day of Iranian oil exports will be taken off the market. That has contributed to pushing oil prices up to around $90 per barrel and sustained conflict could cause further increases.

“That means more pressure on global strategic reserves, which have already been tapped during the war and are facing unprecedented pressure,” he said.

Washington’s insistence on vessels using the southern route of the Strait of Hormuz close to the coast of Oman for the duration of the MoU has contributed to the current military escalation, the analyst said.

Shokouhi noted that Iran responded to the siege by trying to ensure that no other regional country could export their oil via the strait, piling pressure on the US and its allies.

“When the US acts this way, Iran also moves in the direction of not prioritising the economy and using the leverage at its disposal,” Shokouhi said.

A broadening conflict

Seven nights of tit-for-tat strikes between the US and Iran have quickly escalated and intensified as the week progressed.

The attacks left a trail of destruction in both Iran and countries across the region, with Kuwait and Bahrain heavily targeted by Iranian missiles and drones in recent days.

The US military has also heavily targeted provinces across Iran, particularly areas in the south closer to the strait.

Civilian infrastructure – including bridges and tunnels, ports and dock facilities, power stations and water plants – have been systematically hit, along with military sites. Some have speculated that could be in preparation for a ground invasion of Iranian coastal regions.

The Aq Tekeh railway bridge in the northern Iranian province of Golestan was among the first targets to be struck by US forces last week after the fighting re-erupted.

Iranian authorities said damage to the bridge was quickly repaired, but the strike signalled US willingness to attack potential import-export routes to exacerbate the impact of the naval blockade.

Aq Tekeh is on the Gorgan-Incheh Borun line, which connects Iran to the east, including Turkmenistan, Russia and China. It is where food and other essentials are imported from Central Asia and Iranian goods are exported, such as iron ore and polyethylene.

Rising inflation

The previous US naval blockade had also significantly impacted goods and markets in Iran, making everyday life for over 90 million people more difficult.

Although there were no widespread shortages of staples, Iran’s inflation rate – already one of the world’s highest – surged. The price of some basic foodstuffs, such as eggs, chicken and cooking oil, has more than tripled compared to a year ago.

Price increases have also damaged other sectors of the Iranian economy and industries.

“Our sales are very inconsistent. The market is struggling to find prices, there’s too much instability and uncertainty about the future,” said Borzou, a merchant dealing in industrial motors and equipment at Tehran’s Grand Bazaar.

“It looks like most distributors here are still tapping into imported inventories from before, we don’t know what to expect in a few months since many of these goods came through China and the UAE and not all can be imported through inland routes,” he told Al Jazeera.

Rial hits all-time low

There has also been intense pressure on the Iranian rial from the renewed military escalation and reimposition of the naval blockade.

The rial changed hands for over 1.93 million against the US dollar in Tehran’s open market on Saturday, the first day of the Iranian week, registering a new all-time low.

The Tehran Stock Exchange continued its downward trend over the past week, with its main index losing another 120,000 points or 2.4 percent on Saturday to stand at 4.77 million.

Iran’s armed forces have warned they will retaliate against any US strikes on Iran’s civilian infrastructure by attacking similar targets in regional countries hosting US military bases.

“Let’s not forget that the US and Israel started attacks against infrastructure, when they hit South Pars gas fields, Tehran’s oil depots and the petrochemicals in Mahshahr,” said energy analyst Shokouhi.

Utilising help from the Houthi group in Yemen, Tehran could also cause significant disruptions to shipping in the strategically important Bab al-Mandab strait off Yemen’s coast – if US President Donald Trump realises his threat to hit more civilian infrastructure in Iran such as power plants and bridges.

“Trump’s actions over recent months, and particularly over recent days, have only made the situation more intractable and the outlook more uncertain. The current situation cannot continue for much longer, but it is broadening the scope of the conflict and that is concerning,” Shokouhi said.

The move lands as EU foreign ministers remain deadlocked over a bloc-wide ban on illegal settlement trade

Belgium’s federal government has approved a ban on importing goods produced in Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.

It is the latest among a small but fast-growing group of European countries acting alone on a question still unresolved at EU level.

The decision came at the government’s final cabinet meeting before the summer break, the Belgian News Agency (Belga) reported on Saturday.

The move fulfils a commitment made last year over the scale of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza and its death toll.

Earlier this week, Belgian foreign minister Maxime Prevot pressed EU counterparts at a closed-doors meeting in Brussels for a bloc-wide ban, accusing the European Commission of offering ministers “a bone to chew on” rather than a genuine plan to act.

Belgium’s ban arrives as both a domestic pledge fulfilled and a signal to the EU leadership.

The case for tighter controls was strengthened this year by a Global Echo Litigation Center investigation, which examined more than 30,000 export documents covering thousands of Israeli agricultural shipments to Europe.

Roughly one in six contained goods grown in settlements in the occupied West Bank or Golan Heights, rising to nearly one in five among shipments bound for EU countries.

Investigators found exporters routinely obscured the true origin of the produce, labelling it Israeli, blending it with genuine Israeli stock, or shipping it under addresses unconnected to where it was grown.

Similar moves by others in Europe

The EU is Israel’s largest trading partner, buying close to 30 percent of its exports and accounting for nearly a third of its total trade in goods, worth 43 billion euros ($49bn) last year.

Belgium joins a list of states no longer waiting for EU-wide action.

Spain enshrined a ban in law last September, the Netherlands agreed to one in May and Slovenia adopted a similar measure earlier this year, though it has dramatically shifted its approach to Israel following the election of a more pro-Israel government.

Differences between the EU’s 27 member states have made it difficult for the bloc to act decisively on the issue.

Ireland’s parliament passed its own prohibition on July 15 , days before Belgium’s move.

The wave of national bans follows efforts earlier this month by the EU to coordinate action among its member states.

The European Commission reportedly circulated a paper to EU capitals setting out three options: an import ban, a licensing scheme, or high tariffs on settlement goods. However no decision was reached.

Five former European officials, including ex-Italian prime minister Enrico Letta and former German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel, published a joint call for the EU to adopt a bloc-wide ban.

They argued that national bans like Belgium’s carry limited weight alone, since goods cleared through customs in one member state can move freely across the rest of the bloc.

A ban, they wrote, would not amount to a sanction against Israel but would simply bring EU trade policy into line with restrictions it has applied before, including on conflict minerals and goods made with forced labour.

Several EU countries, including Spain, Italy and Germany, have also acted to restrict arms exports to Israel over the war in Gaza.

Artificial intelligence is steadily changing how the world responds to crises.

Governments use it to analyse satellite imagery after natural disasters, humanitarian agencies are testing AI to anticipate displacement before it overwhelms fragile communities, and researchers are applying machine learning to uncover patterns buried inside millions of records that no human could process alone.

These advances, while useful, expose a problem worthy of scrutiny.

Most AI systems are built on data that tells only part of the world’s story. Since they are trained largely on information from North America, Europe, and parts of Asia, they know relatively little about the realities of conflict in parts of Nigeria like Borno, Zamfara, Katsina, Diffa or the wider Lake Chad Basin. They struggle with Hausa, Kanuri, Fulfulde, Igbo and hundreds of other African languages. In addition, they often miss the informal power structures, survival economies, historical grievances, and social relationships that determine whether a community remains stable or slips into violence.

For example, despite advancements in AI content flagging on social media platforms, HumAngle’s reporting and research have consistently found that moderation systems that perform effectively in English often fail to detect incitement expressed in Hausa, Kanuri, Igbo, and other Nigerian languages. Language models frequently miss local expressions, figurative speech and cultural nuances, allowing harmful content to evade automated moderation. That is not simply a technical limitation. It is a human security challenge.

Africa has long faced a deficit in research, reporting, documentation, and structured knowledge about local realities. That gap is becoming one of the continent’s biggest constraints in the AI era. Large language models (LLMs) can only learn from information that exists. If communities, conflicts, languages, histories or ecosystems remain poorly documented, those blind spots are carried directly into the systems built on them. Building culturally informed and representative AI therefore begins long before model development. It begins with producing more reliable knowledge.

Kunle Adebajo, editor of Code for Africa’s African Academy for Open Source Investigations (AAOSI), has this to say: “Artificial intelligence companies have successfully scraped most of what exists on the Internet to train their models. But a vast amount of data lives outside of the shores of the Internet, especially in Africa. AI systems, for example, will struggle with geolocation because many parts of Nigeria are still not properly mapped. They will struggle with translating languages spoken by minority ethnic groups. Even languages spoken by tens of millions of people, like Amharic, are considered low-resource by AI companies and therefore aren’t prioritised, let alone those spoken by only a few million. There’s, of course, also the lived experiences of conflict victims, which aren’t reported online and which you can only understand through fresh field interviews. Even when all this information is integrated into the AI systems, we still have the risk of hallucinations. In matters of security, we cannot take any of these shortcomings and risks lightly, because lives are at stake. Security actors who are incorporating AI tools into their operations must do their due diligence and maintain strong human oversight over the processes.” 

The decline in funding for research and investigative reporting therefore comes at a critical moment. Every research project left unfunded, every environmental change left undocumented, and every local story that never enters the public record represents knowledge that remains unavailable not only to policymakers and researchers today but also to the AI systems increasingly shaping future analysis. The quality of future AI will depend, in part, on the quality and diversity of the knowledge produced today.

If the data is incomplete, the analysis will be incomplete. If the context is missing, the conclusions may be wrong. In fragile environments, inaccurate conclusions can delay humanitarian assistance, distort policy responses and, in the worst cases, cost lives.

Communities see the signals first

Conflict rarely arrives without warning, and the warning signs are rarely dramatic. They are usually ordinary changes that occur over time, not all at once. A weekly market suddenly stops operating, or fishermen abandon parts of Lake Chad. Parents stop sending children to school weeks before an attack while farmlands expand into traditional grazing routes, or herders begin avoiding ancestral migration paths that have remained open for generations. HumAngle’s reporting has repeatedly documented these patterns.

Months before major offensives around the Lake Chad Basin, local communities described unusual restrictions on fishing, increased taxation by armed groups after governments introduced ransom-payment restrictions, shifting movement routes, and growing pressure on traders. These were not isolated observations. They formed part of a broader pattern.

In northwestern Nigeria, our reporting has shown how armed groups shifted from pickup vans to motorcycles when security operations disrupted their mobility. We documented how kidnapping networks increasingly demanded ransom in CFA francs after Nigeria’s cashless policy disrupted access to large amounts of naira. We traced the emergence of new ungoverned forest frontiers, the expansion of illegal mining sites and the growing links between critical minerals, transnational migration and armed violence. These adaptations rarely appear in conventional datasets, yet they are recognised by communities living with insecurity every day.

Researchers increasingly argue that AI systems become more reliable when such verified local observations are analysed alongside conventional datasets, helping analysts identify patterns that would otherwise remain fragmented. 

Joshua Olufemi, Founder of Dataphyte, a data and research analytics company, believes that agenda-setting is critical to this. Speaking to HumAngle about some practical pathways, he mentioned “Multistakeholder agenda setting and strategic partnerships on critical infrastructure and local data modelling and innovation. ⁠Newsroom Viability and business case initiatives to build and sustain the ecosystem.”

Building AI that understands fragile societies

The proposed HumAngle AI and Human Security Lab is designed to explore how verified field reporting, historical conflict data, humanitarian information, environmental indicators, satellite imagery, where appropriate, and open-source intelligence can be organised to identify areas where risk is changing.

The objective is not to predict the exact time or location of an attack. Conflict is too complex for deterministic prediction, and responsible AI requires transparency about uncertainty. Instead, the approach focuses on identifying shifts in risk while ensuring that assessments remain explainable, transparent, and subject to human review.

For humanitarian organisations, even a few days of additional warning can allow food supplies to be prepositioned before roads become inaccessible, schools to strengthen protection measures before attacks occur, vulnerable communities to relocate before violence escalates or emergency resources to reach areas before displacement intensifies.

Journalism is structured evidence

Journalism is often viewed as a record of past events. Increasingly, it also provides structured evidence that can help explain how crises evolve over time.

For more than six years, HumAngle has reported on insurgency, communal violence, kidnapping, humanitarian crises and governance failures across Nigeria and the Lake Chad region.

Its investigations have exposed mass arbitrary detentions, documented attacks on schools, mapped displacement, tracked ransom economies and examined the evolution of Boko Haram, ISWAP and other armed groups.

Reporting on school attacks has gone beyond casualty figures to examine how fear empties classrooms, deepens inequality and reshapes communities. Investigations into kidnapping networks have documented how criminal economies evolve, how ransom systems adapt and how insecurity expands into areas once considered relatively stable. Each story contains verified interviews, timelines, locations, local terminology and community knowledge. They represent one of Africa’s richest public interest records documenting how insecurity has evolved across the Lake Chad Basin and the wider Sahel.

Adebajo argues that this type of journalism becomes even more valuable when its evidence is intentionally structured for computational analysis.

“Credible investigative journalism products and community knowledge can be used to train AI models that provide intelligence for crisis signalling and data-driven predictive research. But it has to be structured. The good thing is that AI tools can help with that structuring, so it doesn’t consume as much time. However, collecting information for AI training and collecting information for Investigative reporting are not the same thing.”

According to the investigative journalist and AI researcher at Code for Africa, “if you set your mind on achieving both objectives, it’ll also inform the kind of data you collect and how you standardise the process and schema across different scenarios. When you have such a big dataset from years of journalism, you can combine it with other security, satellite, and reporting datasets to draw out patterns and outliers. You can determine which areas are more susceptible to attacks and multiple displacements, which seasons, what time of day, etc.”

Beyond the statistics of political violence, you can also draw out patterns in the nature of the attacks and the experiences of victims. All these can help with better allocation of scarce resources in tackling the problem of insecurity, Adebajo argued.

Kofoworola Odozi, a media analyst and AI hobbyist, agrees. She believes deliberate archiving is central to this work. “Newsrooms and CSOs have to build a digital library that has local information and that they completely own and control. What this would do for us is that instead of relying on data that big tech companies gather, we collect more materials like notes from townhalls, local newspapers, budget hearing notes–things like that that you would not typically find in the data that big tech companies have. CSOs and newsrooms can gather that and use open source to document them.”

The media analyst also believes that media and CSOs have to move to a unified digital infrastructure. “Media and CSOs are very individualistic in the ways we work, even though we are all working towards the same thing. We should work towards an industry-wide consortium.”

Adebajo says there are some strategies working at Code for Africa.

“One thing we’re doing at Code for Africa in our fight against information disorder is to go beyond fact-checking to train people who edit Wikipedia articles and train AI models, so that we can put the fact-checks into a pipeline that feeds into quality AI data, because we understand that more and more people are getting their information directly from these models,” he said. “That’s another thing to consider when reporting on conflict, especially in the fight against misinformation and conspiracy theories. How do we get these dozens and hundreds of reports to be assimilated reliably into AI systems, which are not only disseminating information directly to people but are also feeding indirectly into other knowledge production mechanisms?”

Context matters more than computing power

Much of the AI conversation focuses on larger models, faster processors, and bigger datasets. Yet model performance ultimately depends on the quality and relevance of the information used to train it.

A global AI system may recognise the word “flood.” It may identify references to drought, migration or armed conflict. Yet it may completely miss why a cash policy disrupted kidnapping networks, why changes in seasonal border patrols altered irregular migration routes or why the discovery of lithium, gold, and other strategic minerals reshaped local security dynamics.

It may recognise extremist vocabulary without understanding how concepts such as hijrah, bay’ah or takfir carry different meanings depending on who is using them, where they are used, and the historical context in which they are invoked.

It may classify a dispute as ethnic when local communities understand it primarily as competition over grazing routes, irrigation access, taxation or political representation.

Without local knowledge, AI systems risk misunderstanding complex societies despite increasing computational power.

The next battlefield is information

Conflict no longer unfolds only on the ground. It also unfolds across phones, messaging platforms, and social media.

False rumours spread within minutes as old videos are recycled as evidence of new attacks. AI-generated images and synthetic audio are becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish from authentic documentation, and armed groups continue adapting their propaganda while misinformation and disinformation deepen mistrust between communities and weaken confidence in legitimate institutions.

HumAngle has documented how Boko Haram and ISWAP compete not only through violence but also through narratives that seek legitimacy, exploit grievances and shape public perceptions of governance, justice and religion.

Understanding these information ecosystems is becoming increasingly important for humanitarian response and conflict analysis.

The proposed HumAngle AI and Human Security Lab also explores how publicly available information can be analysed to better understand AI-enabled misinformation, extremist narratives, and digital conflict across African contexts, while respecting privacy, freedom of expression, and the principles of independent journalism.

Human judgement must remain at the centre

The growing use of AI in humanitarian and security settings has been accompanied by claims that algorithms will predict wars or replace analysts. Current evidence suggests a more limited role.

AI can support human decision-making by organising large volumes of information, identifying patterns and highlighting anomalies. Human judgement remains essential for interpreting those findings, questioning assumptions, and understanding context. Transparency about uncertainty, limitations, and data quality remains fundamental in fragile environments where analytical errors can carry significant consequences.

Africa and the future of humanitarian AI

The debate over AI in Africa has increasingly shifted from digital access to questions of data, governance, and representation.

Africa possesses extensive community knowledge, linguistic diversity, and historical experience that remain underrepresented in many AI systems. As governments, humanitarian organisations and researchers expand the use of AI in crisis response, these forms of knowledge are becoming increasingly important sources of evidence.

The proposed HumAngle AI and Human Security Lab’s focus is not AI for its own sake. It is the development of analytical tools that help humanitarian organisations act earlier, journalists identify emerging patterns, researchers organise complex evidence and policymakers make better-informed decisions.

If these approaches prove effective, AI may contribute to more timely humanitarian action, stronger evidence-based policymaking and improved protection for vulnerable communities.

Saronic, the company that makes the first sea drones ever to be used as kinetic weapons by American forces, announced it will build a big new shipyard in Brownsville, Texas where they plan to construct an array of crewed and uncrewed ships as big as 850 feet. It is a big step for a company whose largest vessel is a 180-foot drone boat called Marauder.

The move comes as the U.S. is struggling to come anywhere near keeping pace with China in the number of ships it can build and amid delays and cost overruns of projects underway. Boosting America’s capacity to turn out new ships and keep existing ones sailing has been a focus of the Trump administration.

The Austin, Texas-headquartered Saronic said it plans to invest more than $3 billion of its own money to build the facility, which it is calling Port Alpha. The location was chosen after a year-long search.

“Brownsville was selected after a rigorous review of workforce availability, infrastructure readiness, land scale, logistics, and expansion potential,” the company said in a release. “Initially situated on 835 acres at the Port of Brownsville, with the opportunity to expand to nearly 4,400 acres, Port Alpha will encompass a shipyard and manufacturing facility capable of producing vessels up to 850 feet. Future site expansion could support the production of vessels over 1,200 ft. The site provides hundreds of acres of waterfront access, deepwater channel connectivity, multimodal logistics infrastructure, and room for long-term expansion—everything required to anchor a next-generation shipbuilding hub.”

In an interview with TWZ earlier this month, company co-founder and CCO Rob Lehman laid out his vision for the new facility.

“Port Alpha is planned to be the largest shipyard in the Western Hemisphere,” Lehman told us. “We are seeing the need for more shipbuilding capacity, and we are answering the call with a greenfield new yard that will provide the Navy, Coast Guard — all of our sea services — the capacity that they’ve been asking for, and they desperately need.”

“We are here to help address the gaps that we are facing and do it at a speed and scale that hasn’t been seen before,” he added.

Asked about what kinds of ships the yard will build, Lehman said Port Alpha “will be capable of producing everything up to Panamax-sized cargo containers, roll on/roll offs, we are open to a variety of different ship classes, both commercial and military.”

Panamax ships — so named because they are the biggest vessels that can fit through the Panama Canal — have a maximum length of 294 meters and a maximum width of 32 meters, according to SeaRates.com. 

Panamax vs Capesize Ships: What’s the Real Difference? #panamax #capsize #ruzave

Lehman said Saronic is focusing on “how do we create a shipyard of the future that is able to support multiple types of vessels and move at a pace and a level of agility that aligns with how technology is advancing. So commercial ships, military ships, modules, everything under the sun.”

“We are keenly focused and ruthlessly focused, frankly, on what does the customer set need, what are they unable to acquire or sustain within the timelines that they require, and how can we address that? So, as long as we know what’s needed, we can put our private capital to work and not force the government to pay never-ending research and development costs.”

At the time of the interview, Lehman declined to provide any further details about the plans or the exact location. However, he did compare it to an existing shipyard the company purchased last year.

“When we acquired the former Gulf Craft yard last April, [compared] to what it looks like now, we’re investing $300 million into that yard already to expand capacity,” he noted. “We’re bringing hundreds and thousands of jobs to the Gulf Coast, and we look to take that same model and just on steroids at Port Alpha. So, unlike Gulf Craft, it’ll be a greenfield yard, so we have all of the flexibility to design the shipyard of the future without the constraints of an existing physical plant.”

In the media release issued today, Saronic claimed that “the project is expected to generate more than $160 billion in regional economic impact for Cameron County and $264.5 billion for the State of Texas, while creating up to 10,000 direct jobs. This makes Port Alpha one of the largest economic development projects in modern Texas history.”

Construction is anticipated to begin in 2026, with Port Alpha expected to open for operations in 2028, the release continued. Company officials did not specify exactly what ships will be built at Port Alpha. Currently, Saronic makes three uncrewed surface vessels (USV).

Corsair, the aforementioned USV used as a kamikaze weapon, is a 24-foot vessel capable of carrying up to 1,000 lbs over 1,000 NM.

Mirage is a 52-foot USV with a range of 2,500 NM of range and 3,500 lbs of payload capacity.

Marauder is a 180-foot USV with a range of 5,200 NM and is capable of carrying up to 150 metric tons in four 40-foot containers, eight 20-foot containers, or other modular payload configurations.

The Navy is set to evaluate Marauder, as well as designs from six other companies, as part of the first round of prototyping under its latest Medium Unmanned Surface Vessel (MUSV) effort. This is part of a larger strategy the service rolled out in March to try to field more USVs and do so faster, as you can read more about here 

Saronic is on a roll of late. As we noted earlier in this story, three of its Corsair sea drones were used earlier this week to attack “a submarine and ship maintenance facility in Iran,” U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) announced. It marked the first time that the U.S. used sea drones as kamikaze attack weapons.

Last month, a Saronic Corsair USV rescued the crew of a U.S. Army AH-64 Apache that crashed in the Gulf of Oman after it was downed by Iran. That was the first known instance of a drone boat being used to recover personnel as part of a search and rescue mission, and has major implications for these operations going forward.

In December 2025, the company was awarded a $392 million contract from the Navy. The production contract was for the construction of USVs like the Corsair. 

If Port Alpha lives up to the hype, it would be a boon to the Navy and an American shipbuilding industry that struggles to get new vessels out on time and on budget, while supporting those that are already in the water. 

As we noted in previous coverage of U.S. shipbuilding woes, keeping existing vessels afloat “has been a massive challenge as the Navy’s fleet ages while demands for more hulls increase. Crumbling shipyards around the U.S.and a limited number of them that can support mainline military vessels is a huge problem that has led to major delays in maintenance, greatly harming available end strength. It is also of major concern if ships were to get damaged in battle during a conflict and need to be regenerated quickly. While some improvements and investments have been made in upgrading shipyards, it is still a glaring and highly concerning issue.”

GAO: Poor Conditions at Navy Shipyards

The situation is so dire that “the U.S. Navy has officially issued two Requests for Information (RFIs) to major South Korean shipbuilders to assess their capacity to build American destroyers and fleet tankers,” according to Naval News. Such a move “could end an 80-year ban on foreign warship construction,” the outlet added.

Given the state of U.S. shipbuilding, a lot is riding on Port Alpha and the future of this plan is definitely worth keeping an eye on.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The U.S. Navy expects the stealthy destroyer USS Zumwalt, with its new launchers for Intermediate-Range Conventional Prompt Strike (IRCPS) hypersonic missiles, to be formally returned to service by September. Upgrade work on the ship, which started back in 2023, is some 10 months behind schedule. One contributing factor in the delay was the first full shutdown of the notoriously complex Integrated Power System (IPS) since the ship was delivered to the Navy six years ago. IPS is a power plant that provides massive amounts of electricity to propel the ship and run its advanced systems.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO), a congressional watchdog, provided new details on the hypersonic missile upgrades for USS Zumwalt, also known by its hull number DDG-1000, in a report released today. The four new launch tubes, each of which will be able to hold three IRCPS missiles, notably take the place of the destroyer’s original pair of 155mm Advanced Gun Systems (AGS).

Zumwalt has also been receiving other improvements, including expanded fuel capacity allowing for increased range and endurance, as well as undergoing routine maintenance, in parallel to the IRCPS integration. The Navy refers to all of this work, collectively, as the Build Yard Modernization Period (BYMP).

The Navy’s other two Zumwalt class destroyers – the USS Michael Monsoor (DDG-1001) and the future USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG-1002) – are set to receive the same complete slate of modifications. Work on the Lyndon B. Johnson is already underway as part of the larger process of delivering that ship, which is now scheduled for April 2027. The service also eventually plans to integrate IRCPS onto Block V Virginia class submarines.

The Navy’s IRCPS program is also being run in close cooperation with the U.S. Army. The missile at the core of IRCPS is the same one the Army is working to field in ground-based configuration, which it calls Dark Eagle.

The weapon itself consists of a multi-stage ballistic missile-like rocket booster with an unpowered hypersonic boost-glide vehicle on top. The booster gets the vehicle to an optimal speed and altitude, after which it is released. After separating from the booster, the vehicle glides along a relatively shallow flight path within the Earth’s atmosphere to its target, maneuvering along the way, sometimes erratically. In general, hypersonic boost-glide vehicles offer a combination of speed, flight trajectory, and maneuverability that creates distinct challenges for enemy forces. The vehicles are difficult to spot and track, let alone intercept. Their speed limits the time an opponent has to react in other ways. The ability to pierce enemy air defenses and rapidly strike very high-value targets, even ones that may be fleeting, is what makes hypersonic weapons of this type attractive.

“Over the past year, the cost and schedule performance on the first ship to undergo this [IRCPS and other upgrade] work, the DDG 1000, has degraded,” according to GAO’s report. “Program officials reported that the primary cause of recent delays is unplanned work.”

As already noted, one “source of unplanned work and delays per program officials is that this is the first time that the Navy has shut down and restarted key DDG 1000 class ship systems,” per GAO. “For example, equipment failures in the ship’s complex electrical system, which is akin to a small power plant, contributed to delays.”

Zumwalt‘s IPS is a hybrid-electric system that combines gas turbines and electric generators. Hybrid propulsion is not unique, broadly speaking, to this class of ships, but the DDG-1000 design takes it to a completely different level. IPS can generate up to “approximately 78 megawatts of power, nearly what a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier generates,” according to the Navy. It is also said to be able to pump out 58 megawatts of reserve power even while cruising at 20 knots. This level of power generation is essential to support the ship’s array of advanced capabilities, but it also comes with complexities that have proven troublesome over the years.

Integrated Power System (IPS)

In addition, “the unplanned work addresses the need for more cabling than was anticipated in the initial project design, as the contractor cut and removed more cabling than planned from the forward part of the ship for CPS missile launch tube installation,” the report adds. “The additional cabling was needed to match changes to the ship configuration since new construction cables were installed as part of the BYMP.”

Overall, “program officials noted that the Navy modified the BYMP contract with Huntington Ingalls in August 2025 to add 230,000 hours – at a cost of $20 million – for unplanned work,” according to GAO. “The program reported increasing its estimate to upgrade all three ships from $1.8 billion to at least $2 billion.”

GAO says the Navy also stressed that this is the first time it has ever integrated a hypersonic weapon onto one of its warships, and that it has been a learning experience. The service says it is working to ensure that useful lessons are being woven into ongoing work on Lyndon B. Johnson, as well as USS Michael Monsoor‘s future BYMP availability, which is slated to begin before the end of the year.

The timeline for delivery of the Lyndon B. Johnson and the upgrade schedule for Michael Monsoor are already delayed, as can be seen in the GAO graphic below. Delays have also pushed back the target date for a first live-fire at-sea IRCPS launch, a milestone now set to come next year.

The Navy and the Army have conducted several land-based launches as part of a test plan that has suffered its own setbacks in the past.

The Zumwalt class, as a whole, has suffered various trials and tribulations over the years due to a variety of factors. This includes persistent technical difficulties with various systems, especially the main AN/SPY-3 radar. There have been signs for years now that the Navy could replace the AN/SPY-3 with a version of the newer AN/SPY-6. A growing number of other Navy ships are already sailing with or are set to receive AN/SPY-6 variants. The ships have also seen other cutting-edge capabilities watered down.

Challenges facing the Zumwalt class destroyers have been compounded by the prior decision to slash planned orders for these ships from 32 to just three. This has also made the ships extremely expensive to acquire, operate, and sustain. In a separate annual assessment of major U.S. military programs released earlier this month, GAO reported that the unit cost of each of the destroyers had risen to just over $10.6 billion (inclusive of research and development costs). The total acquisition cost of the DDG-1000 program is now nearly $32 billion. For comparison, the price tag on a new Flight III Arleigh Burke class destroyer is around $2.5 billion, according to data released last year by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Broader questions have been raised about the roles and missions that the trio of Zumwalt class ships can be reasonably expected to perform. IRCPS will give the members of the Zumwalt class a new, very-long-range, high-value strategic strike role. The Navy sees this as a key capability for future high-end fights, such as one against China in the Pacific.

At the same time, GAO’s report today also highlights the small number of missiles the Navy and the Army are in the process of acquiring now for IRCPS and Dark Eagle. Prime contractor Lockheed Martin still has limited capacity to produce them, too.

“Navy data indicate that the contractor facility operations are not currently able to meet demand, making it difficult for Lockheed Martin to keep production commitments,” according to GAO. “Specifically, the facility is currently capable of producing a maximum of six to seven rounds a year out of the 12 rounds per year necessary to stabilize production.”

“Over the past 5 years, CPS costs estimates have fluctuated, driven by factors such as the Navy’s removal or addition of host platforms, revisions to total quantities, planned periodic capability insertions, and production time frames to date, among others,” per GAO’s report. “In fiscal year 2020, early in the MTA [middle tier acquisition] rapid prototyping phase, the Navy estimated it would cost about $31 billion in total lifecycle costs for a program that would deliver 262 missiles. In 2024, the Navy increased its estimate of the total cost to acquire CPS by about 30 percent while reducing the number of missiles to be procured – now $41 billion in total lifecycle costs for 224 missiles.”

“These missile quantities do not reflect a specific program requirement, according to CPS program officials, but rather modeling based on various inputs, including budget documents, analyses of industrial base capacity, and direct, ongoing collaboration with the U.S. Strategic Command and the requirements sponsor – OPNAV N97 [the Undersea Warfare Division within the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations],” the report also notes. “Additionally, the Army is planning to spend more than $10 billion to procure 48 missiles and associated ground support equipment.”

As of April 2026, the average estimated unit cost for each missile was pegged at approximately $67 million. GAO points out that “the exact unit cost will depend on the contractor’s efficiency in production, which is, in part, dependent on stable annual procurement funding for the missile.”

USS Zumwalt‘s formal return to the fleet as the Navy’s first vessel equipped to fire hypersonic missiles will be an important milestone. However, signs still very much point to IRCPS being a relatively limited and costly capability, likely to be held in reserve for very high-priority targets, at least in the near term.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

When Washington celebrates the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, the celebrations will arrive bruised. There will be the customary funding disputes, a federal commission fighting against a more partisan task force from the White House, and a public worn by years of political turmoil, all of which will turn what could have been an occasion of civic healing into another USA ‘celebration’ in the world. None of this has gone unnoticed in Beijing, given that this ‘celebration’ is being interpreted more as a diagnosis than a birthday. What is being asked throughout the commentaries from Qiushi (求是), on CCTV, in Tsinghua and Peking University, is simply put, what kind of America is turning 250?

Within the last five years, the interpretation given from both the official channels and the more informal academic channels in Beijing has varied considerably. Most importantly, these streams have been diverging for some time and therefore offer significant insight into how Beijing has been interpreting the country it has been comparing itself to for the last 20 years.

From “the East rising” to a measured retreat

Many are familiar with the upbeat version of the story. After 2020, the phrases that framed China’s worldview included “great changes, unseen in a century” (百年未有之大变局) and “the East is rising, the West is declining” (东升西降). The latter, used by Xi Jinping in remarks to senior officials in early 2021 and again in 2023, provided the slogan for the official narrative. The Covid-19 pandemic, the insurrection at the US Capitol, and a decade of US political instability seemed to provide the empirical evidence for a thesis, rooted in Chinese Marxist theory, that capitalist systems contain the principle of their own disintegration. This was rationalized and systemized after the 2008 financial crisis and has remained largely unchanged.

However, the reality is far more complicated than the slogan implies. Researchers who have traced the terminology in Chinese academic publications through the CNKI database have found that scholarly use of “the East is rising, the West is declining” (东升西降) peaked around 2021 and has subsided since then, even though the idea itself remained more prevalent than it was during the entire duration of Donald Trump’s first presidential term. In other words, the slogan was being diplomatically retracted within scholarly circles at the very moment it was most associated with official optimism. When Xi’s speech in 2023, which was published in Qiushi in January 2025, described the West’s decline, it was more a formal, official copy of a sentiment than a newly published speech.

The official rhetoric, however, did not soften. A Brookings study found a near doubling in the use of “American decline” terminology in official Chinese documents from 2025. State Security Minister Chen Yixin wrote in Qiushi in December of 2025, what could be described as a near complete inventory of the ills of the world: the usurpation of unipolar dominance gives way to economic decline and social disintegration, a domestic credit crisis and the collapse of foreign mythic structures. Around the same time, a popular phrase borrowed from gaming, the “kill line” (斩杀线) found its way to official Chinese publications. A Qiushi article from January 2026 described an America, the working class of which had been pushed (beyond the point of no return) along the path of ruin by an unrepairable (decomposing) industrial base while financial capitalism strangled the benefits. The conclusion that was drawn was that we had already entered the post-American world.

The correction of early 2026

Then the story changed once more, and the correction was from within Beijing’s own strategic community.

The consensus in Chinese policymaking following the Busan summit in October 2025, was that China had won the trade war and forced the US into a stalemate. The years of maximum pressure, they said, did not lead to the systemic concessions China had sought, but rather worsened American inflation and reduced productivity. For a few months, the optimism was high. However, by 2026, the optimism was replaced by apprehension. A series of adverse events for China, from losing equity in a German port buyout, to the Nexperia debacle, to the Iran war, led many to wonder if China’s victory was, in fact, a loss. The dominant question that the strategic community was debating was whether American power was in decline or if it was in fact, power rebounding.

What was most interesting was who took the cautious side. Both Chen Wenling and Yan Xuetong argued that the US had, and has, the military and economic capability to project power. In their view, the US had the edge, and Trump’s high stakes, risky policy decisions were based on the belief that the US had the dominant position. The gap was definitely closing, but was not yet a reality. The advice they gave was to be patient. If China was able to “manage its own affairs well,” it was likely that the US would be compelled to return to a more stable relationship.

The key observation regarding prominent intellectuals in Beijing is this. They have never been champions of the triumphalist position. Yan Xuetong has spent a great deal of time dismissing talks of “The East is rising and the West is declining” and multipolarity as delusional. His recently published book, Inflection of History (历史的拐点), which was published by CITIC Press in December of 2025, predicts a US-China bipolarity which, during the next decade, would be expected to stabilise rather than destabilise. In this scenario, over the next decade the gap in capability between the two powers would be expected to converge, although the US would retain an overall advantage. In this scenario, the US would retain overall dominance in services, cyberspace and global influence, while China would retain relative superiority in manufacturing and be dominant in the international arena. In this scenario, Yan does argue that Trump would be expected to damage American power, especially with regards to the international balance, through the closure of laboratories, the loss of researchers, and a declining international trade. However, damage to the leader of the bipolar order is not the same as the collapse of the order, and Yan is very cautious not to make confuse the two.

As China’s foremost authority on US studies, Wang Jisi (王缉思) of Peking University, has placed the greatest emphasis on the need for a clear and level-headed approach. His influential essay, titled, “Has America really declined? Chinese people should hold a sober understanding” ( 美国到底有没有衰落？中国人应有清醒认识), leads with the argument that the most important factors influencing the relationship are domestic political issues, and are not to be found in some quantifiable assessment of relative national strength, or within the confines of the Thucydides Trap. He has argued that the effects of Trump’s immigration restrictions would be more symbolic than real, and would not negatively impact the long-term potential of the US economy. Along with American scholar David Lampton, he wrote, that while both societies have convinced itself that the other is an existential threat, which is a dangerous narrative trap, similar to a noticeable shift of power.

Why AI keeps rewriting the script

If the quest for technological dominance was to be provided as a single reason for the inconsistency in the narrative, it would be the most accurate. The same confidence that characterized 2025 is the same that will characterize the sobriety of 2026. When Trump had his second inauguration in January 2025, DeepSeek had launched their R1. It disrupted the presumption of AI dominance in America and had a day effect of 200 billion on Nvidia’s valuation. For Chinese decision makers, since then, it has been electric. Carnegie researchers described it as the rediscovery of technological confidence. The effect was the realization of the theory of “The East is rising and the West is declining” (东升西降): a monumental achievement with controls on exports from a young lab in Hangzhou.

The second installment was more sobering. The launch of DeepSeek’s next model, V4, in April 2026, was received with indifference. In fact, DeepSeek’s own internal product documentation stated that V4 was between three and six months behind American models. Furthermore, V4 was reliant on domestic chips from Huawei, and was, in most assessments, dependent on American technology that was not easily replaceable. For Chinese analysts, this was not a case of falling behind, but one of the more difficult problems of maintaining the technological edge. Reshoring and tariffs told a similar story. The American industrial base, which the “kill line” (斩杀线) commentary presumed was a terminally stagnated industrial base, was the target of a renewed, aggressive, and partially successful push to bring industry back to America. A competitor with such a focus on rejuvenation and renewal is not, on the surface, a declining competitor.

The G2 Puzzle

There’s another element coming from Washington that adds to the complexity of the story of American decline. This element relates to Trump. Before the Busan meeting, Trump used the term “G2,” and several Washington officials followed suit. The decline thesis cannot account for this. If America is indeed in decline, why is it offering G2 (shared leadership) with China?

Chinese reflexive responses are interesting. The official position, as expressed in Zhou Li’s (周力) December 2025 article, is that G2 as a hegemony is incompatible with China’s commitment to a multipolar world and would alienate the Global South which China is trying to court. These scholars have found their own workarounds. Yan Xuetong and Zheng Yongnian have suggested that G2 is more a description of a scenario of existing bipolarity than a policy to adopt. Xia Liping of Tongji University has suggested that G2 be rephrased as “China-US coordination” (中美协调) instead of “China-US co-governance” (中美共治), which makes it easier for Beijing to accept peer status while not succumbing to a duopoly. The attempt to manage the terminology suggests that the US at 250 is still sufficiently powerful that its offer of co-leadership is significant, even to a China that is more confident than ever.

A mirror, not a verdict

What emerges from five years of this commentary is not a single Chinese view of America at 250 but a layered one. The loudest polemical phrase is that the US, a hegemon, is in an irreversible decline. Within a Chinese context, this serves a purpose unrelated to the US. The state media have found it convenient to juxtapose gun violence and homelessness against the backdrop of Chinese economic performance. The decline of the US economy flouts the-premise, as socialism is the ultimate victor among capitalist competition.

But that was in the loud tier. In the reserved tier, the people in Beijing who are actually relying on reading Washington have converged on a more cautious and, frankly, more accurate assessment. They have described America as a relative decline, but erratic, and still very formidable as well as technologically advanced, especially in the field of the upcoming and new challenges of competition. The assessments have consistently referred to America as “declining but dangerous,” and this phrase has proven to be the most accurate of the lot. Reality has justified the phrase. The same cannot be said of unqualified and total victory.

The inconsistency in narratives can be attributed to the fact that the accounts are serving two purposes simultaneously. They are both analysis and propaganda, and the two types of work are at odds with each other. After AI successes or trade wins, the propaganda is ahead of analysis. After the impacts of reshoring or when a Chinese model stays behind, the analysts bring it back. The occasion is provided by the anniversary, but the underlying reason is that China has not decided, and maybe cannot decide, if they think that simply waiting will work in their favour or if the gap they have slowly been closing over the past 25 years is going to be a stubborn gap.

At 250, in other words, the United States functions in Chinese discourse less as a subject to be judged than as a mirror. What Beijing sees in it, in any given month, tells you a great deal about how confident Beijing is feeling about itself

The greatest geopolitical and economic challenge facing the United States today is the proliferation of international Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs.) While the United States has the “sweet geopolitical spot in the world’s geography and topographic landmass,” its economic dominance is being challenged by the proliferation of international SWFs. It is true, at present, that the United States has the largest reserve of oil and mineral wealth in the world, yet with SWFs gaining traction in the world economy, the oil reserves and mineral wealth may not matter.

Those countries that have initiated SWFs as part of their economic and geopolitical life are on an upward trajectory. The United States, on the other hand, is on a downward path by not marshalling its vast mineral wealth in a comprehensive and dynamic SWF. If things continue on their present course, those countries utilizing their mineral wealth and excess cash surplus will eventually catch up and overtake the size of the US economy. This is an evolving threat to the national security of the United States and to its very polity.

The most immediate threat to the United States is the race to develop mining facilities on the Moon to harvest and transport the critical element of Helium-3 (He-3.)    He-3 is a critical element for the increasing economic demands of a modern world economy. Whoever can establish mining dominance for this critical element will become the world’s leading economic power in the world, regardless of that nation’s mineral wealth on Earth.

However, with its present economic and political strength, the United States has the means to reverse that trend if its two major political organizations can compromise on the very nature of the framework that establishes a United States SWF; this challenge is not easily dealt with.

This article discusses the legislative gridlock surrounding the creation of a United States SWF and the accelerating international competition that challenges the current United States dominance in space technology.

Commonwealth Fusion Systems (CFS) is currently constructing the SPARC at Devens, Massachusetts. CFS is constructing the SPARC to demonstrate to the world that it has solved the fusion problem. Despite some technological setbacks, CFS is on schedule to make the SPARC operational by the end of 2026, or early 2027. At the same time, CFS is currently constructing a fusion reactor (called a tokamak) in Virginia, which is scheduled to go online in the early 2030s. Critical to the ARC’s development is a shortage of the element He-3. He-3 is ignited by radio frequency and is the sparkplug that begins the plasma process, which is fusion energy, in the ARC tokamak.

The Commercial Landscape: U.S. Private Frontrunners

Terrestrial Helium-3 supply—derived primarily from nuclear stockpile maintenance—is severely capped at 22,000 to 30,000 liters annually. With surging demand for ultra-low-term quantum computer cooling, private aerospace firms are leading the transition to lunar harvesting:

• Interlune: Founded by former Blue Origin executives, the company unveiled a full-scale prototype harvester developed with Vermeer to process one hundred metric tons of regolith per hour. Backed by a $6.9 million NASA contract for its Prospect Moon payload, Interlune secured a historic $300M+ supply agreement with Finnish quantum firm Bluefors. Its first mapping payload is scheduled for an upcoming commercial lunar launch.
• Lunar Helium-3 Mining (LH3M): This firm holds five U.S. patents on a non-invasive, gas-separation architecture designed to extract solar wind volatile gases while bypassing traditional, high-wear mechanical regolith excavation.

The U.S. Sovereign Wealth Fund Gridlock

While Helium-3 is valued at roughly $20 million per kilogram, the asset cannot currently be utilized to seed an American Sovereign Wealth Fund due to severe political domestic gridlock:

• The Legislative Catch-22: The U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act explicitly protects private enterprise, granting corporations exclusive ownership over extracted space resources. To capture this value, Congress would need to enact “space-severance taxes” or equity-for-infrastructure deals—both of which face massive ideological pushbacks in a deeply divided legislature.  It should be noted that American taxpayers have invested some $1.9 trillion (adjusted for inflation) in technology developed by NASA. Since the American people invested this money, they should be entitled to a return on investment.
• The Deficit vs. Surplus Dilemma: Traditional SWFs rely on state-managed resource surpluses (e.g., Norway’s oil). The U.S. operates at a massive structural deficit. Republicans propose seeding a fund via tariffs or fossil-fuel extraction, while Democrats demand funding via corporate wealth taxes or clean-energy equity. These disputes, combined with immediate 2026 midterm election priorities, have stalled the SWF framework completely.

Global Geopolitical Competitors: State-Driven Alternatives

While the U.S. model depends heavily on the private market, international adversaries are leveraging unified state power to establish dominance over lunar resources:

• China (CNSA): China’s Chang’e lunar exploration program is systematically mapping Helium-3 concentrations. Unlike the U.S. focus on near-term quantum cooling, Beijing explicitly views lunar He-3 as a long-term strategic energy priority to fuel Earth-based Deuterium-Helium-3 nuclear fusion reactors.
• The China-Russia Coalition: Beijing and Moscow have formalized a binding industrial partnership to construct an automated nuclear reactor on the Moon’s South Pole by 2035–2036. This autonomous reactor is designed to resolve the “Lunar Night” problem, providing continuous power to massive, automated mining rovers and scientific labs under the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) framework.
• Japan (ispace): In the allied sector, Japanese lunar robotics firm ispace has partnered with European mining tech developers to pioneer its own automated, energy-efficient recovery models for lunar Helium-3.

·        Conclusion

·        The race for Helium-3 represents a critical shift from symbolic space exploration to deep-space industrial supply chains. While U.S. commercial tech is moving quickly, domestic policy gridlock risks ceding permanent, state-backed infrastructure dominance to the China-Russia ILRS coalition.

·        While the concept of using outer space resources to build national wealth is actively discussed by think tanks, Congress has separate, targeted pieces of legislation addressing artificial intelligence revenue, foreign transparency, and space resource exploration rules.

·         

·        The primary draft bills and legislative vehicles currently stalled in committee reveal how Congress is attempting to navigate these frameworks:

The American A.I. Sovereign Wealth Fund Act (S. 4825)

Introduced in June 2026 by Senate Finance Committee member Bernie Sanders (I-VT), this is the most direct legislative attempt to create a federal wealth fund.

• The Mechanism: The bill proposes imposing a specialized excise tax on systemically critical artificial intelligence models and automation infrastructure. The revenue would seed a citizen-owned national wealth fund.
• Why It’s Stalled: It is currently deadlocked in the Senate Finance Committee. The bill faces severe pushback from lawmakers who argue that taxing emerging domestic tech sectors will cause the U.S. to lose the AI race to China, preferring instead to seed a potential fund via tariffs or natural resources.

2. The Sovereign Wealth Fund Transparency Act (S. 1488)

Introduced by Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), this bill tackles the national security and foreign policy side of state-owned investment vehicles.

• The Mechanism: Rather than creating a U.S. fund, this bill forces heavy disclosure requirements, financial auditing, and security screening on foreign sovereign wealth funds operating within U.S. critical infrastructure, high-tech, and aerospace sectors.

Why It’s Stalled: Referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, it has remained stagnant due to concerns that over-regulating allied sovereign wealth funds (such as those from Gulf state allies or Singapore) could chill necessary foreign direct investment into U.S. tech startups.

3. Space Resource Extraction & Regulatory Frameworks (CRS / Commerce Committee Review)

There is currently no singular active bill trying to place federal royalties on lunar Helium-3 mining. Instead, the debate is gridlocked during budget reconciliation and agency authorizations within the House and Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committees.

• The Conflict: Congressional research reports on space resource extraction outline a widening gap in regulatory authority. NASA’s Artemis framework pushes heavily for in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) via public-private partnerships. However, some factions in Congress are pushing for strict government-owned procurement models to prevent private monopolies over lunar sites, effectively freezing long-term policy development
• Midterm Postponements: Broad commercial space bills have been repeatedly delayed because committee attention is entirely consumed by urgent federal budget reconciliation battles and defense appropriations.development.

Summary of Bill Statuses

Conclusion

Until the two major political organizations can begin to compromise for the good of the American people, the United States will eventually revert to a second-class power.