NEWS

London, United Kingdom – The United States and Israel’s war on Iran was largely unexpected, given the repeated warnings from most US allies, as well as their lack of enthusiasm for a potential conflict.

Iran’s retaliation, too, has been unexpected, particularly Iranian missile strikes on several countries not party to the conflict, in the Gulf, and more recently, Jordan.

Beyond the immediate regional sphere, the Iranian military has reportedly attempted to hit targets as far as the joint US-UK military base on the island of Diego Garcia, 2,350 miles (3,780 kilometres) away from Iran.

And Tehran has recently threatened southeastern Europe – in particular, Bulgaria.

Bulgaria’s Bezmer airfield

In July, Bulgaria’s parliament approved the use of its Bezmer Air Base for refuelling US military aircraft, an agreement that functions as a support mechanism for the US military operations in the Middle East and against Iran.

Speaking to his Bulgarian counterpart, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that any country aiding US “aggression” against Iran would be considered a legitimate target of retaliatory attack by Tehran.

According to a recent report in the Financial Times, citing unnamed Iranian sources, Tehran will consider attacking Europe if Washington escalates the conflict.

According to Armida van Rij, a senior fellow at the Centre for European Reform, southeastern Europe could be seen as an attractive target.

“[The region] is the soft underbelly of Europe as it is strategically important, hosting a number of NATO bases and key supplies to Ukraine and being on the Black Sea”.

In Bulgaria, the Iran war is perceived as something “remote”, Angel Petrov, a Sofia-based journalist who covers southeast Europe and the Middle East for the news website, Dnevnik.bg, told Al Jazeera.

Bulgarians do not view the Iran war “as important as Ukraine, and whose implications in terms of oil prices seem bearable, given general inflation”.

According to Petrov, Sofia lacks the institutional capacity to defy a brash administration in Washington while managing the war in Ukraine and an increasingly active Russia. So it was not surprising when Bulgarian leaders obliged the Trump administration’s request for the use of the Bezmer Air Base.

By firing missiles at Bezmer Air Base, Iran might hope to raise the costs of that cooperation and possibly drive a wedge between Bulgaria and the US. Bulgarians would find themselves under threat from the Iran war, to which they are indifferent, at the behest of a US ally that has shown increasing reluctance to support them in the war in Ukraine that they consider more important.

Could Iranian missiles reach Europe?

While Iranian missiles could indisputably reach parts of Europe, whether those attacks would further Iranian goals is less clear.

Ali Bakir, a senior non-resident fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said an Iranian attack on Europe would play into Trump’s hands and intensify Iran’s isolation.

In the event of an attack on countries such as Bulgaria, Iran would effectively force an additional front on Europe to a conflict that many European leaders have resisted joining, much to the irritation of the US leader.

According to Bakir, engaging Europe in the Iran conflict would likely benefit Russia’s war in Ukraine, aided by further straining Europe militarily, “potentially triggering a much wider and more dangerous war with serious international economic and security consequences”.

It may be that, for Tehran, the threat of an attack on a less powerful European country is worth more than missiles actually fired towards Europe.

The threat could shape domestic politics in Europe, keeping focus alive on a conflict that is farther than the immediate war in Ukraine and making European leaders and populations more hesitant to give passive support to the US military effort against Iran.

Iran’s declared aim is to prise Europe away from the US campaign.

However, an actual strike on a member of both the European Union and NATO would turn Europe from a hedging bystander into a belligerent party, trigger Article 4 – which quite possibly results in military retaliation, and hand Washington the European coalition it has so far failed to assemble.

For now, a reasonable conclusion is that Iran has held back by calculating that an Iranian missile attack on Europe could hand Washington a strategic victory.

However, several factors keep the risk of an attack on Europe above zero.

The first is the credibility trap. Having declared that any base used to attack Iranian territory is a legitimate target, Tehran has threatened to extend its retaliation beyond the Middle East if pressed further by the US, but that threat will only remain effective as long as US allies believe Iran is actually willing to do so.

Another factor is that Iran would not consider itself to be attacking Europe at all, but US assets that happen to stand on European soil. Tehran has used a similar distinction in missile attacks against other countries in the region, such as GCC countries. Gulf nations have rejected that notion, saying their nations, populations and infrastructure should not be assaulted amid a war they did not launch, but have not thus far retaliated against Iran directly.

Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, the cohesion of the command and control mechanisms in Iran matters deeply. If the decision to attack is not made by those who devise political strategy, retaliation could be unpredictable. The desire to respond to renewed US attacks by attacking a perceived weak point could result in disastrous overreach.

The longevity of the conflict is arguably a greater threat to Europe than Iranian missile capabilities that NATO defences over Europe could well protect against.

As the war drags on, the real danger for Europe is a prolonged US-Iran war that Washington treats as dormant, with financial effects being felt in European streets and support diverted away from Russia and the Ukraine war.

Two teenagers have been seriously injured after a sword attack on a high school in Sweden, authorities have said.

Police were called to the Brinell School in Fagersta shortly after 14:00 local time (13:00 BST) on Friday, where officers arrested one man.

A third person was wounded in the attack but the extent of their injuries has not been confirmed, while reports in local media say the suspect was shot in the leg by police.

Eight other schools in the area were placed under lockdown measures – which have now been lifted – while a state of high alert was declared in the Vastmanland region following the attack.

Police have said there is currently no danger to the public.

In a post on X, Sweden’s Prime Minsiter Ulf Kristersson described the attack as a “serious incident,” and said “we do not know what lies behind the act, but we know that police are working very intensively”.

Students at Brinell School had only just returned to the classroom following the summer break, with the new term beginning either on Monday or Wednesday this week, depending on the academic year.

The school has just under 500 students on its roster, according to Sweden’s public broadcaster SVT, and is located 170km (105 miles) north-west of the capital, Stockholm.

Sweden has experienced a number of attacks on educational institutions in recent years.

The country experienced it’s worst-ever mass shooting in 2025, where 11 people, including the gunman, died at an adult education centre in Orebro.

This led to the government tightening the country’s gun laws after it was found that the suspect legally owned four rifles, three of which were found in the school where attack took place.

Two teachers were killed in a violent attack on a secondary school in Malmo in 2022 – an 18-year-old student later confessed to the attack.

In 2015, a teacher and a pupil were killed in a sword attack at a school in Trollhattan.

Russian ballistic missile attacks have begun to cause record civilian deaths in Ukrainian cities without any Patriot interceptors to stop them, but Ukraine’s long-range strikes have destroyed Russian fuel supplies.

With the Russian economy struggling, a top expert warned that social unrest could unfold in a matter of time – and consequently lost his job.

On Tuesday, Russian missiles killed at least 10 people in Pechenihy, a town 40km (25 miles) east of Ukraine’s northern city of Kharkiv. On Thursday, they killed 15 people in Kyiv, three in the western city of Zhytomyr and injured 40 at a border crossing between Odesa and Moldova.

Russia said it was targeting weapons manufacturing sites in Kyiv, but Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Russian forces struck 30 residential buildings, a school and a children’s hospital.

The United Nations said Russia killed a record 437 people in July and injured 2,610, surpassing its previous record in June by 30 percent.

Civilian casualties have continued in August, because Ukraine has run out of Patriot interceptors and has been unable to stop incoming ballistic missile attacks since the beginning of the month.

As Zelenskyy pointed out, Ukraine’s interception rate of cruise missiles and drones is still in the 90-percent range. But Russia is doubling down on the use of ballistic missiles and has brought in an additional 50 North Korean weapons, according to Ukrainian military intelligence.

Ukraine strikes back

Since June 25, Ukraine has launched a campaign of mid-range strikes to disrupt Russian logistics and has harassed fuel and ammunition supplies so effectively that it has made 233sq km (90 square miles) of territorial gains this year.

By August 16, Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces announced it had put 228 supply ships out of action in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov, as well as destroying 243 power stations, electricity substations and gas distribution nodes in Crimea.

They have also been striking relay antennas used to guide Russian drones and radar stations that detect Ukrainian counterstrikes. On August 20, Ukraine struck drone launch sites in Donetsk City and Primorsko-Akhtarsk on the Sea of Azov, as well as a fuel terminal in the Kerch Strait used to supply Crimea.

Ukraine’s long-range strikes have served a different purpose – to undermine the Russian economy’s ability to fund its war.

On August 15, Ukraine managed to fly two of its Flamingo cruise missiles into the Progress Rocket and Space Centre, 800km (500 miles) east of Moscow, despite Russia’s use of four A-50 early warning aircraft and its reported downing of 822 Ukrainian drones that day.

Ukraine said it hit an engine assembly workshop for Soyuz rockets, causing a fire covering half a hectare.

Russia is using Soyuz to launch satellites for its Rassvet constellation to replace dependence on the US Starlink system, after Ukraine managed to cut Russian access to Starlink on February 1 . Russia needs satellites to increase the speed and precision of its counter-battery fire on Ukrainian positions. Its loss of that capacity has been partly responsible for Ukrainian gains this year.

“One Soyuz-2.1b launch vehicle can put 20 satellites into orbit,” said Ukrainian electronics expert Serhiy Beskrestnov. “To create a basic satellite constellation in orbit, Russia needs to carry out 12-15 launches.”

The following day, Ukraine set ablaze a 25-hectare warehouse belonging to the Wildberries online retail chain, Russia’s equivalent of Amazon, and said it had destroyed seven out of Wildberries’ ten largest logistical hubs.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on July 28 that the Kremlin was monitoring the damage to Wildberries.

Russian President Vladimir Putin implied on Thursday that he might provide government funds for Wildberries to rebuild, saying “logistics and warehousing capacity certainly needs to be restored, including with government support”.

Ukraine has also succeeded in destroying Russian oil refineries and starving its economy of petrol

It has recently struck the Ust-Luga refinery, the Taneco refinery in Tatarstan and the Perm refinery, 1,500km (930 miles) from its borders.

Similar strikes this year have so reduced petrol supply in Russia. The Izvestia newspaper reported that only 28 percent of petrol stations across the country could supply fuel this week, citing mobile app GdeBENZ, which monitors real-time fuel availability.

Izvestia said only five petrol stations in Moscow were selling high-octane AI-98 fuel. Russians posted video of Rosgvardia police units sitting outside petrol stations to avert some of the fights involving motorists in recent months.

Deputy Prime Minister, Alexander Novak, said lower-grade fuel was being supplied to ease market tensions, and confirmed that Russia is now importing refined fuel for the domestic market.

“We expect a number of oil refineries to complete maintenance work soon and the situation to improve significantly,” Novak told Vesti journalist Pavel Zarubin, but that may be wishful thinking. Ukraine has struck Russia’s largest refineries not once but repeatedly. On Wednesday [August 19 ], it struck a refining unit at Ufa, which was undergoing repairs from a previous strike. It is 1,300km (810 miles) from Ukraine.

Ukraine also struck significant military targets during the week, including the Kamenyy Kombinat plant in Rostov, which makes solid rocket fuel for missiles, and the Savasleika airfield, from where MiG fighters armed with Kh-47M2 ballistic missiles take -off.

Russian economy in trouble

Some Russian economists have begun to warn of impending social and political upheaval as a result of the slowing economy.

Andrey Klepach, chief economist at Vnesheconombank, a state bank that finances the Kremlin’s national projects, warned on August 18 that, “Losses from Ukrainian military strikes … are already becoming a significant macroeconomic barrier to Russian economic growth.

“I believe Russia won’t collapse, but I’m almost certain we’ll reach a social crisis.”

He was removed from his post after making the comments during a discussion at the Moscow Exchange’s Nikitsky Club.

Russians are withdrawing savings in increasing amounts, reported The Washington Post. While businesses are increasing “voluntary” donations to the state defence budget, in addition to having to pay for their own air defences, putting further strain on the economy.

At a meeting of the Council for Strategic Development and National Projects this week, Putin acknowledged that Ukraine’s strikes are “certainly” causing damage, adding that “overall economic performance is modest but positive”.

That damage took financial form in the $1.18bn Putin newly released to aid regional budgets, in addition to previous financial assistance. Some $52m of that was destined for Crimea.

Ukraine’s defence ministry estimated that every dollar spent on drone strikes caused five times that amount in costs to the Russian economy.

China’s new medium-sized tactical airlifter is emerging from the shadows, as much clearer imagery becomes available. Previously widely referred to as the “Y-30,” the four-turboprop transport now appears to be designated the Y-15, a change reflected by the prototype’s apparent “15001” serial number and increasingly supported by open-source reporting.

New imagery provides a much better appreciation of the aircraft’s configuration. Developed by Shaanxi Aircraft Corporation (SAC), the Y-15 is intended to provide a modern replacement for older Y-8-series transports and, eventually, the Y-9, while giving China a more capable turboprop airlifter suited to operations from relatively austere airfields. While the Y-9 is a modernized Y-8, the older design is a direct copy of the Soviet Antonov An-12, first flown in 1957.

The new Chinese aircraft first became publicly associated with the Y-30 designation after a model appeared at the 2014 Zhuhai Airshow. That designation subsequently became widely used in reporting about the program.

The program then went quiet, before unofficial reports in 2023 that work had resumed at SAC. The first flight-test imagery of the prototype appeared in December 2025, as we reported at the time.

The Y-15 has four turboprop engines driving six-blade high-efficiency propellers. Its overall configuration is notably different from China’s larger, jet-powered Y-20 and instead puts it in the same broad operational category as aircraft such as the Lockheed Martin C-130J.

The configuration also has some obvious visual similarities to the Airbus A400M. The Chinese aircraft has a relatively broad fuselage, a rear loading ramp, heavy-duty landing gear, a high-mounted wing, and a T-tail.

Unlike the swept wing of the A400M, the Chinese transport has a comparatively straight high-lift wing, with substantial winglets (lacking on the European design) at the tips. The arrangement should help the aircraft combine useful cruise efficiency with the low-speed performance needed for tactical transport operations.

A400M, the airlifter of the 21st Century

Despite its A400M-like appearance, the Y-15 appears to be a smaller aircraft in a different weight and performance class. The A400M’s four TP400-D6 engines each produce around 11,000 horsepower, while the Chinese aircraft’s WJ-10 turboprops are understood to produce substantially less — around 6,800 horsepower.

That suggests the Y-15 is a more natural counterpart to the C-130J and China’s own Y-9 than to the A400M.

Unconfirmed estimates have suggested a payload of around 30 metric tons, although that figure should be treated cautiously while the aircraft remains in testing. For comparison, the Y-9 is generally credited with a payload of roughly 25 tons, while the C-130J-30 is in the roughly 21-ton range. At the same time, the Y-15 is assessed to have a larger internal cargo space than the Y-9, with a greater height and width to accomodate bulkier payloads.

One of the most obvious features of the flight-test aircraft is the long air-data boom projecting from the nose. Such booms are standard equipment on developmental aircraft, allowing engineers to collect precise measurements of air pressure, temperature, airflow, and other parameters during testing. Previous reports have erroneously identified this feature as an inflight refueling probe.

There is currently no refueling probe fitted to the prototype. That does not necessarily mean the capability will never be incorporated, however, especially as China continues to build its aerial tanker fleet.

Chinese Y-8 and Y-9 derivatives have demonstrated how a common transport airframe can become the basis for substantially different configurations, including aircraft equipped for specialized missions. The same is likely for the Y-15, once it enters People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) service.

For the PLAAF, the aircraft’s rear loading ramp and heavy-duty landing gear will likely be particularly important. The aircraft appears designed not simply to move cargo between major airbases, but to operate closer to the battlefield and from runways that may be shorter, rougher, or otherwise less developed.

The PLAAF still operates substantial numbers of older Y-8-family transports, while the Y-9 has become the more modern turboprop workhorse. At the heavier end, the Y-20 is rapidly replacing remaining PLAAF Il-76 transports and provides the long-range strategic airlift capacity that the older fleet could not match.

Speaking to TWZ, Andreas Rupprecht, an expert on Chinese aviation and contributor to this website, said he expected the Y-15 to replace the Y-9, a type that the PLAAF does not consider adequate for the tactical transport role, on account of its small cargo hold and underpowered engines.

Its turboprop propulsion and apparent emphasis on short-field performance should make it particularly useful for moving troops, vehicles, supplies, and other equipment into locations where operating a large Y-20 would be impractical.

That could include dispersed bases and remote Chinese facilities, as well as the country’s island outposts. The rapid reinforcement of units in remote regions such as Tibet would also be an obvious wartime mission. The aircraft could also provide a useful platform for airborne assault and airdrop missions, capabilities that have become increasingly important as the PLA has expanded the scope and sophistication of its joint operations.

An export drive is also highly likely, especially as the Y-15 will be immune to the tight export restrictions that typically apply to comparable Western designs. In the meantime, the Y-9 continues to win foreign orders, most recently being bought by Kazakhstan, which already operates the A400M — another signal of these two types’ very different capabilities.

Well, that’s an interesting start into the day: Two mayor Y-9 news!!

First, as the Y-9E’s second customer (after Namibia), the Kazakhstan AF has introduced this type. pic.twitter.com/saHqbEF3oN

— @Rupprecht_A (@RupprechtDeino) August 14, 2026

With flight testing now apparently ramping up, the next major questions will be how closely its eventual performance matches the estimates surrounding it, and how quickly China moves from a single prototype to a production fleet.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Prince Harry and a group of six other high-profile figures have been ordered to make an initial payment of £9.54m to the Daily Mail’s publisher after they lost their High Court privacy case.

The seven claimants, also including Sir Elton John and Liz Hurley, must pay the initial figure by 28 August – and could potentially pay up to £25m more after that in a victory for Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).

The group had sued ANL over allegations of unlawful information-gathering, which the publisher had strenuously denied.

On 7 July, Judge Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed the claims and said the public figures had failed to prove the allegations.

It comes just days after the Duke and Duchess announced their plan to return to the UK, with their children Prince Archie, seven, and Princess Lilibet, five, enrolled to start school in September.

The seven claimants who have been ordered to pay an initial £9.5m in the coming week are Prince Harry, Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish, Sir Simon Hughes, Sadie Frost, Liz Hurley, and Baroness Doreen Lawrence.

During the trial, dozens of people gave evidence including Prince Harry and the other claimants. The Duke of Sussex flew in from the US to attend court in person.

Many current and former Associated Newspapers journalists and executives gave evidence denying illegal activity.

In a joint statement following the judge’s ruling last month, Prince Harry and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, another claimant and peer whose son Stephen was murdered in 1993, said: “We came to Court seeking justice and accountability. But we have received neither.”

“It is a complete and obvious whitewash, but sadly not altogether unexpected”, the pair added.

ANL had asked for more than £9.9 million as an interim payment ahead of future hearings to decide its legal costs in depth.

However, lawyers for the claimants said the interim payment should be just over £7.9 million.

Mr Justice Nicklin previously said the claimants would need to pay the interim payment on August 28.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on X, external to get the latest alerts.

Taiz, Yemen – Mohammed Al-Homaidi, a labourer in his 30s, has been working at the al-Makha (Mocha) port in western Yemen since its reopening in 2021.

Even though he was reliant on a daily wage, his earnings provided a decent standard of living for his family.

But things changed on August 9, when the Red Sea port was targeted by Houthi attacks that killed at least seven people.

With the conflict between the Yemeni government and Houthi forces escalating after a long-standing truce collapsed last month, finding daily work was no longer his priority, but his safety.

“It was around 12:30pm when the explosions [were heard] at the seaport, which was full of workers at the time. I couldn’t understand what was happening, and we couldn’t flee because the explosions were continuous,” Al-Homaidi told Al Jazeera. “After about an hour and a half, I ran outside the port and didn’t stop until I reached home.”

Thirty more people were injured in the barrage of Houthi drone and missile strikes that targeted the port and surrounding areas.

Houthi forces have continued to target the port and surrounding areas on a near-daily basis, resulting in dozens of deaths and injuries.

On August 11, the Houthis targeted a vessel at al-Makha port, killing three Pakistani crew members and injuring eight other seamen.

Three days later, the Houthis targeted two cargo ships at the Red Sea port, damaging the facility’s remaining infrastructure.

Due to the repeated Houthi attacks, operations were suspended last Friday to avoid putting the port’s 1,500 workers’ lives in danger.

For Al-Homaidi and other workers whose salaries were dependent on their daily labour, the port’s closure means a new struggle to put bread on the table.

“I am happy that we are safe at home today, but we are jobless now because we rely on daily wages,” Al-Homaidi said. “I don’t have any savings, and our food at home is running out. How can I provide basic needs for my family?”

Life beyond the seaport

Al-Homaidi also has experience working in al-Makha’s other major industry: fishing. But dangerous attacks around the Red Sea mean this is not an option for him and his colleagues at the port either.

Local fishermen have been ordered by local authorities not to go out to sea until further notice – but with money running low, a group of fishermen still ventured out on August 11. Their families are continuing to desperately search for them after they failed to return home.

With near-daily Houthi attacks on al-Makha, public beaches, parks, the coastal walkway and other areas have also been closed.

Families avoid going outside due to the threats of Houthi drones and missiles, and a strict nightly curfew for motorcycles is in place from 11pm to 6am.

Compounding the community’s suffering is a complete blackout of landline and mobile communications. Residents who can afford it use Starlink satellite internet. But for most Yemenis in al-Makha, there is no way to reach the outside world.

Back to square one

Abdulmalik Al-Sharabi, director of al-Makha port, confirmed to Al Jazeera that repeated Houthi attacks have forced the port to halt operations. At least six merchant vessels carrying commercial cargo have been struck since the most recent bout of violence, resulting in casualties among civilians and seamen.

“More than 1,500 port workers lost their jobs, while 16 were killed and 22 injured as a result of the Houthi attacks,” Al-Sharabi told Al Jazeera English.

Missile strikes have specifically targeted civilian infrastructure at the port and in surrounding areas, he said.

“The attacks targeted commercial and service areas, workshops, equipment, and the port pier, destroying it to the point that it ceased operations,” Al-Sharabi noted.

Operations across 30 shipping and customs clearance agencies have ground to a halt, affecting workers.

The port, which was closed between 2015 and 2021, serves as an economic lifeline for Taiz governorate as well as other Yemeni economic hubs such as Lahj, Hodeidah and Ibb. With it now closed, traders there will be forced to route imports via the port of Aden, driving up logistics costs.

“We were happy to have a seaport with such operational capacity, but today we are back to square one,” Al-Sharabi said.

No money, no food

Abdulraoof Abdullah, a fisherman in his 50s from al-Makha, has no source of income for his eight family members other than the fish he caught in the Red Sea. Due to the instability off al-Makha’s coast, he has not been out to sea since August 11.

“We are out of work now, and our homes are almost empty of food. We try to secure meals each day either by going into debt or asking friends for help,” he told Al Jazeera English.

With the port closed and food imports reduced, Abdullah said he expects prices to rise in the market, and he has no choice “but to pray to Allah.”

“We don’t have money to buy food for today, so how could we possibly have money to stockpile food?” he added.

“Most residents in Makha are fishermen, and we are currently out of work,” Abdullah said. “When we have jobs, we can buy food; otherwise, we will have to displace to another area where we can find work to support our families.”

Trading woes

Rashad, a local trader in al-Makha who preferred to be identified only by his first name, was importing goods through shipping agencies at the port since 2021. Given that his warehouses are just a few kilometres from the port, this was by far the cheapest option.

“Our goods are currently held up in Djibouti, and shipping costs have surged due to ongoing tension in the Red Sea,” Rashad told Al Jazeera. “Furthermore, we were just informed that our cargo will now be redirected to Aden, meaning we will have to pay significantly more for overland transport from Aden to al-Makha.”

With the warehouses still stocked with food from earlier orders, prices have not yet risen. But if the port remains closed, traders will be forced to increase prices on future shipments arriving via Aden.

“I am a resident of al-Makha before I am a trader. Any price increase directly impacts my family and neighbours – something I desperately want to avoid. But unless al-Makha seaport reopens soon, price hikes will be inevitable,” he added.

Although Rashad didn’t have any cargo on the ships that were recently hit in Houthi attacks, he said he feels empathy for other traders who suffered financial losses.

“Some people assume traders are financially comfortable, but we are in a state of constant worry. We track our shipments for months until they safely reach our warehouses,” he said.

“No one can imagine the devastation felt by traders who lost everything at al-Makha port. The harsh reality of this war has impacted every single Yemeni, and we are no exception.”

Taiwan Warns Chinese Vessel to Leave Sensitive Waters

Taiwan’s coast guard said on Friday it had warned off and shadowed a Chinese research vessel operating in sensitive waters west of the island, marking the third time the ship has appeared near Taiwan since May.

The vessel, the Tongji, was spotted late Thursday about 24.9 nautical miles northwest of Taiwan’s Penghu islands, which sit in the Taiwan Strait and host important Taiwanese military facilities.

Taiwan views the repeated presence of Chinese vessels near the island as part of a broader campaign of maritime pressure by Beijing.

Coast Guard Monitors Tongji as It Moves South

Taiwan said the Tongji was not seen deploying or towing scientific equipment during its latest appearance.

The coast guard dispatched a patrol vessel to sail alongside the Chinese ship and issued what it described as strong warnings for it to leave the area.

By Friday morning, the Tongji had moved to around 28 nautical miles west-southwest of Liuqiu island in southern Taiwan, continuing southeast through the Taiwan Strait.

Taiwan’s coast guard said it would continue proactively deploying vessels to respond to Chinese ships and protect the country’s waters.

China’s Taiwan Affairs Office had not immediately responded to a Reuters request for comment.

Why Is the Research Ship Significant?

The Tongji was commissioned only last year and has appeared near Taiwan several times since May.

Taiwan previously reported seeing the vessel lowering ropes into the water, raising concerns that it could have been conducting scientific or survey operations without authorisation.

Chinese state media describes the ship as capable of operating in all weather conditions and carrying remotely operated vehicles, laboratories and unmanned systems.

The latest incident is therefore significant because the vessel’s presence comes amid wider concerns in Taipei over Chinese maritime activity around the island.

Taiwan Sees a Broader Grey-Zone Strategy

Taiwan has increasingly described the activities of Chinese coast guard and other vessels around the island as grey-zone pressure.

Rather than directly launching military action, such operations can create persistent pressure through patrols, maritime activity and the repeated presence of Chinese state vessels in disputed or sensitive areas.

Taiwan argues that these activities can gradually create an impression of Chinese jurisdiction while testing Taipei’s ability to monitor and respond to incursions.

The research vessel’s repeated appearances add another dimension to that pressure because scientific and survey activity can have potential strategic value even when a vessel is not openly conducting military operations.

Chinese Military Activity Continues Around Taiwan

The latest maritime encounter comes against the backdrop of China’s almost daily military activity around Taiwan.

Beijing considers Taiwan part of China and rejects the Taiwanese government’s claims to sovereignty. Taiwan’s government rejects Beijing’s sovereignty claims and maintains control over the island.

This has produced an increasingly competitive environment in which military aircraft, naval vessels, coast guard ships and other Chinese platforms regularly operate around Taiwan.

Analysis: Why the Tongji Matters Beyond Scientific Research

The immediate incident does not appear to represent a direct military confrontation. Taiwan said the Tongji was not observed deploying equipment, and the coast guard’s response consisted primarily of monitoring and warnings.

But the repeated appearance of the same vessel is strategically significant.

Research ships can perform legitimate scientific functions, but their ability to operate sophisticated equipment and collect information in strategically important waters means their activities can also have implications for maritime surveillance and future military operations.

For Taiwan, the challenge is therefore to distinguish between legitimate research and activity that could contribute to China’s broader strategic objectives without unnecessarily escalating tensions.

The incident also illustrates the evolving nature of cross-Strait competition. China does not need to launch a military attack to increase pressure on Taiwan; persistent maritime activity can gradually test Taiwan’s responses, expand China’s presence and challenge Taipei’s control over the surrounding waters.

As Chinese vessels continue appearing near Taiwan, incidents involving research ships, coast guard vessels and military platforms are likely to become an increasingly important part of the island’s security challenge.

With information from Reuters.

Iga Swiatek moved into the semifinals of the ATP-WTA Cincinnati Masters as Elena Rybakina was forced to retire with a heel injury less than half an hour into their clash on Thursday.

Rybakina’s withdrawal raised concerns over the fitness of the world number two Kazakh just 10 days before the start of the US Open.

Trailing 4-1 in the opening set of Thursday’s Cincinnati quarterfinal, Rybakina suddenly pulled up short at 40-all, heading to her bench and consulting with the trainer.

She went back out and played one more point before quitting.

“I was feeling anxious watching the whole situation,” said her opponent Swiatek. “I hope she will be fine. Health is always the priority.

“This is an important tournament, but the US Open is the US Open. I hope she is ready for that,” she said, referring to the major which begins in New York on August 30.

“It was a shame she was injured, we were having a good match.”

Had two-time Grand Slam winner Rybakina reached the Cincinnati final, she would have risen to number one in the world for the first time in her career, following incumbent Aryna Sabalenka’s shock exit to 20-year-old Sara Bejlek.

Defending Cincinnati champion Swiatek said she had “gained a lot of confidence in the last weeks,” which have also included her victory over Rybakina in the final of this month’s Toronto event.

“I feel great, ready to play my game … I’m happy to be playing the tennis that I am.”

Poland’s Swiatek now plays a semifinal against Jessica Pegula, who is reportedly carrying a hip niggle after defeating Amanda Anisimova 6-2, 4-6, 7-6 (7/4).

Sixth-seeded Anisimova converted all five of her break points against Pegula, breaking her three times in the second set, before the world number three rebounded to win.

Pegula is setting WTA records at age 32. She is the fourth player since 2009 to reach five or more Masters 1000 quarterfinals after turning 30, along with Li Na, Serena Williams and Svetlana Kuznetsova.

Pegula needed just 34 minutes to pocket the opening set.

But Anisimova struck back in the second, earning a double break for 4-0.

After Anisimova squared the match at one set each, Pegula regrouped with an opening break in the deciding set.

They would each be broken twice as they went to the tiebreaker, where Pegula sealed the win on her first match point.

Pegula’s win was her sixth without a loss to Anisimova.

“I know I have a good record against her, but literally every single match is like it was today,” she said.

‘Sweet’ victory

In the men’s draw, Flavio Cobolli advanced to the final four with a 2-6, 6-3, 6-4 defeat of Tommy Paul, gobbling down a handful of sweets for an unorthodox boost midway through the match.

The Roland Garros runner-up asked for the candy to be brought to the court and seemingly took energy from the pause before dispatching Paul, who had himself eliminated top seed Alexander Zverev 24 hours earlier.

“A sweet with chocolate makes me happy,” Cobolli said. “I’ve tried it in doubles so why not singles?”

Cobolli mounted the comeback after dropping the opening set.

With the match tied at a set apiece, Paul needed an extraordinary effort to hold serve for 4-3 in the final set, battling through five deuces and saving four break points.

But Cobolli ignored the showing and closed out the victory.

“It was a difficult day,” the winner said. “I’m proud of my effort, my game and my mental strength. It is all good practice for the US Open.

Cobelli will play for a place in the final when he faces Arthur Fils, who defeated Thiago Tirante 6-3, 6-2 in just 64 minutes — the shortest men’s match of the event.

Fils, the eighth Frenchman to reach Cincinnati semi-finals in the Open Era, said he was impressed by the weight of his opponent’s big game.

“He has an unbelievable serve; I was surprised by the speed of his ball,” he said.

“I tried to make him play a bit more. I stayed solid in my head and it worked pretty well for me.”

Ex-Australia batter Hussey said he was informally approached by Stephen Flemming, England’s new red-ball coach.

Australian great Mike Hussey could face his own country in the Ashes after saying he was open to joining England as their Test batting coach.

England host Australia in the Ashes in June, July and August next year, looking to take possession of the urn for the first time since 2015.

Hussey has had an informal approach from England’s new red-ball coach Stephen Fleming, the duo having spent 15 years as teammates and then coaches at Indian Premier League side Chennai Super Kings.

“We obviously get on really well and work a lot together,” former Test stalwart Hussey told Fox Sports, where he is employed as a commentator.

“So it was just a bit of a passing comment, really saying, ‘Look, what do you reckon? Would you think about being the batting coach?’”

Hussey, known as “Mr Cricket” for his technical expertise, has just returned home after coaching Welsh Fire in The Hundred and said he had not given it proper consideration yet.

“To be honest, I have not been able to give it any thought whatsoever,” he said.

“Would I? I mean, I wouldn’t say never to anything really. I just love the coaching side of the game, and just to be able to work with different players.”

Should Hussey accept, it could see him plotting the downfall of Australia with Fleming when they tour England for the Ashes series next year.

Hussey admitted it would “feel a bit weird”.

“I have worked with England once before at the T20 World Cup (in 2022), and I must admit it did feel very weird pulling on that training shirt for the first time,” he said.

“But once you get in the nets and you start working with players, you sort of almost forget what shirt you’ve got on.

“So, look, I haven’t fully considered anything at this stage. I’m sort of just trying to take a bit of a break from it all at the moment and will give it some thought in due course.”

Fleming was appointed coach in late July following the sacking of fellow New Zealander Brendon McCullum, who remains in charge of England’s white-ball teams.

Despite being officially retired in 2008, a pocket fleet of U.S. Air Force F-117 Nighthawk stealth jets has continued to operate from the secretive Tonopah Test Range Airport in Nevada. The service has said it plans to keep flying the aircraft for research and development, test and evaluation, and especially training purposes through at least 2034. This, in turn, requires continued maintenance and logistics support, and a recent contracting notice has now put a spotlight on one of the aircraft’s more obscure features: an emergency tailhook that deploys with the help of explosive charges.

Earlier this week, the Air Force released additional details regarding a planned sole-source contract for new “CAD/PAD” – cartridge-actuated devices and propellant-actuated devices – in support of the F-117 fleet. CAD/PAD is a broad category of explosive and other pyrotechnic ‘devices,’ all of which have a shelf life and have to be regularly replaced for reliability and safety reasons.

CAD/PADs found on modern military aircraft are most typically associated with emergency egress systems, especially ejection seats. The Air Force’s planned order for these ‘devices’ for the F-117 fleet does include ones that help blast the canopy clear away from the aircraft so the pilot can safely eject. The Nighthawk’s canopy is a notably heavy component, as highlighted in the video below.

Opening the Canopy of the F-117A Nighthawk

The F-117 CAD/PAD order list also includes what are described as the “Tail Hook Panel Pyrotechnic Assembly” and “Tail Hook Panel Initiator.” These small shaped explosive charges and electrically-initiated detonators, respectively, and are completely unrelated to the F-117’s ejection system.

To take a step back quickly, most land-based combat jets in U.S. service today, as well as many in service elsewhere globally, have tailhooks. Unlike their carrier-based counterparts, these aircraft have the hooks for emergency use in combination with arresting gear installed on runways on land.

On non-stealthy land-based combat jets, the integration of an emergency tailhook system is relatively straightforward since it can simply be installed externally or semi-externally at the rear end of the aircraft. It is a more complicated proposition for stealth designs where a hook protruding, even partially, from the underside of the fuselage would negatively impact the jet’s radar cross section.

On the F-117, the solution to this was to fully encase the emergency tailhook inside a compartment behind a fixed, flush-mounted panel. When the decision is made to deploy the hook, the aforementioned explosive charges send that panel flying, and then it drops down. After deployment, the system has to be reset on the ground.

Did you know the F-117 has a tailhook? #f117 #usaf #pimaairandspacemuseum #boneyardsafari

An actual carrier-based derivative of the Nighthawk, referred to variously as the F-117N/X and the Seahawk, was proposed to the U.S. Navy in the 1980s. The Navy did not ultimately pursue this aircraft, which would have featured a more robust tailhook among a host of other major changes compared to the original F-117.

There are many more fascinating and sometimes obscure aspects of the F-117’s design. This includes accommodation for radar locator antennas that were also designed to flip down only when in use to help preserve the jet’s low-observable (stealthy) characteristics. As the first-ever operational stealth combat jet, the Nighthawk played an extremely important role in laying out basic parameters for what the design of any such aircraft would entail, inside and out.

Today, the Air Force’s F-22 Raptors and F-35A Joint Strike Fighters also have emergency tailhooks tucked away inside compartments with flush coverings to avoid disrupting their stealthy moldlines. It is not immediately clear whether CAD/PADs are part of the tailhook systems on either of those aircraft. As an aside, the carrier-based F-35C variant of the Joint Strike Fighter has a completely different and more robust tailhook system designed for routine use.

F-22 Raptor Catches Aircraft Arresting System • Pearl Harbor-Hickam

Fighter Tail Hooks in Action – Sparks Fly in Emergency Landing Test on Runway

As noted, the Air Force continues to operate the F-117 despite the type’s official retirement, now nearly two decades ago. While the Nighthawk’s design is dated, the jets have distinct radar, infrared, and other signature profiles that continue to offer benefits for various testing and training purposes. Since 2008, the aircraft are known to have been used as ‘red air’ aggressors and as surrogates for stealthy cruise missiles during large-scale exercises. In many of these contexts, the F-117’s signatures are likely to be extremely dissimilar to what pilots and air defense system operators are used to encountering. As a test platform, the Nighthawk also offers something of a control variable, as its baseline signatures are extremely well studied.

Keeping a pocket fleet of F-117s operational has had other knock-on effects, too. This includes the certification of the KC-46 Pegasus tanker to refuel the Nighthawks in flight. The first KC-46 was delivered to the Air Force in 2019, more than a decade after the F-117 left frontline service.

Altogether, the CAD/PAD contracting notice offers a little insight into what must be a fascinating boutique maintenance shop that keeps the remaining F-117s, and their subsystems and stealthy skins, in an operational status.

With the F-117 now set to remain in this more limited service for nearly another decade, at least, the Nighthawk’s story is still far from over. The Air Force will continue to need to sustain the remaining pocket fleet of jets during that time, including with orders for new explosive charges to make sure their emergency tailhook systems remain reliable and safe.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The government has announced investments of about 2.3 billion reais ($444.2m) to bolster its artificial intelligence ecosystem.

Brazil will invest about 2.3bn reais ($444.2m) to bolster its artificial intelligence ecosystem, splitting projects between United States and Chinese tech firms in a strategic move that underscores its efforts to balance ties with both superpowers.

Just more than half the total, 1.3bn reais ($251m), will fund a supercomputing infrastructure project in Rio de Janeiro developed in partnership with China’s Huawei Technologies and iFlytek, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva‘s government said on Thursday.

The infrastructure will be used primarily to develop large language models for general and sector-specific applications, it said.

Separately, about 1 billion reais ($193.1m) will be allocated through a tender for a supercomputer that Brazil expects to rank among the world’s 10 most powerful AI processing machines.

The machine will be installed in the northeastern state of Rio Grande do Norte, chosen for its energy potential. Lula attended an announcement ceremony in the state on Thursday.

The Reuters news agency quoted unnamed government officials as saying they expect US chipmaker Nvidia to win the tender. Science and Technology Minister Luciana Santos told the Folha de S Paulo newspaper last week that she anticipated the company would be the supplier.

“The strategy is not to depend on a single company, technology or country,” Lula’s administration said in a statement, adding that the investments are aimed at strengthening national sovereignty over data.

China, a leading player in AI, has expanded its role as Brazil’s largest trading partner. The US, meanwhile, remains the biggest source of foreign direct investment in Latin America’s largest economy despite losing market share in trade and recently imposing additional tariffs on Brazilian goods.

The investments will be funded by the National Fund for Scientific and Technological Development (FNDCT) through phased disbursements. The government expects the supercomputer to begin operating by the end of next year, while the cooperation agreement with the Chinese companies is scheduled to start in July 2027.

Activist group says the ‘twisted’ Hong Kong judicial system had long ago decided that the pair were guilty.

A Hong Kong court has found two pro-democracy activists guilty on national security charges in a trial widely viewed as exemplifying the erosion of freedom of expression in the Chinese city.

Lee Cheuk-yan, 69, and Chow Hang-tung, 41, former leaders of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, were found guilty of “incitement to subversion” for their role in organising candlelit vigils to mark Beijing’s deadly 1989 Tiananmen crackdown, in a Hong Kong court on Friday. The two had pleaded not guilty and were charged in 2021.

The pair could face up to 10 years in jail. Sentencing is expected at a later date.

Prosecutors argued that the pair “endanger[ed] national security in the name of human rights”.

Chow, a human rights barrister who represented herself, told the court in May that the law itself was on trial.

Friday’s verdict was “no surprise”, said Mark Clifford, president of the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation.

Hong Kong’s “twisted” judicial system had already decided the pair were guilty in 2021, he said. He described Lee and Chow as “true Chinese patriots” who were silenced because they “spoke truth to power” and “held up a mirror to the Chinese Communist Party”.

Hong Kong’s crackdown

For three decades, the candlelight vigil organised by the alliance was the only large-scale public commemoration of the Tiananmen crackdown, drawing tens of thousands of people annually to mourn the victims in China. The event was banned in 2020 during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, weeks before Beijing imposed the security law on Hong Kong to quell the 2019 massive antigovernment protests.

The alliance’s leaders have been behind bars since they were charged.

Chow and Lee “exposed the Chinese government’s fears of the memory of its own atrocities”, Elaine Pearson, Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said, urging governments around the world to hold Beijing to account for erasing Hong Kong’s freedoms.

Earlier this year, Jimmy Lai, 78, a media mogul and high-profile rights campaigner in Hong Kong, was found guilty on national security charges and sentenced to 20 years behind bars.

Led ‘like a dog on a lead’

In a personal blog published in the days leading up to the verdict, Chow detailed her treatment by correctional services, in which she described being led “like a dog on a lead”, shackled at the wrists, waist and ankles.

She described a new method of restraint, with specialised handcuffs, as the source of significant pain during her long detention: “One can only ‘choose’ which part of the body shall suffer in turn” due to the bodily contortions forced by the restraints she has been held in.

Chow is one of the few high-profile political prisoners detained in Hong Kong to continue to speak out publicly against the authorities.

In June 1989, China’s government sent tanks and soldiers to crush a pro-democracy movement that had installed itself in Beijing’s central Tiananmen Square. Hundreds, possibly thousands, of people were killed by soldiers, and many were injured. Beijing has since sought to censor mention of the incident in China.

Lee and Chow were also leaders of the now-defunct Hong Kong Alliance (HKA).

The HKA was founded in May 1989 to support students holding pro-democracy rallies. Weeks later, the Communist Party crushed pro-democracy protests in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square with troops and tanks. Estimates of the death toll range from a few hundred to many thousands.

Over the next three decades, HKA called on authorities to accept responsibility for the crackdown, free dissidents and introduce democratic reform.

The Alliance’s leaders were charged in 2021 and have been behind bars since.

Rights group Amnesty International has said the case “relies on vague, overly broad and arbitrary definitions of ‘subversion'”.

Sarah Brooks, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director, said Chow and Lee had “not committed any recognisable crime”.

“Chow Hang-tung and Lee Cheuk-yan are prisoners of conscience who should never have been prosecuted in the first place. They must be released immediately and unconditionally”, she added.

In a separate case, Chow was arrested in June 2021 for “inciting” the public to take part in that year’s vigil and later found guilty.

However, Hong Kong’s top court overturned that conviction in 2022, with a judge ruling the police hadn’t properly justified the vigil’s ban.

Chow Hang-tung spoke to the BBC in 2021, weeks before her arrest on 4 June 2022.

“I am prepared to be arrested. That is how Hong Kong is now,” she had said.

“I am willing to pay the price for fighting for democracy”.

The El Nino weather phenomenon is expected to increase the likelihood of drought and excess heat across the region.

The Panama Canal is expected to limit traffic starting in early September, as it prepares for lower water levels due to the El Nino weather phenomenon.

On Thursday, the Panama Canal Authority, the body that oversees the waterway, announced that daily transit caps would be set to address concerns about the drier weather conditions ahead.

Under the new measures, 34 vessels will be permitted to sail through the canal as of September 4. A further reduction will start on September 15, when the limit will be 32 ships.

The travel restrictions are a reversal for the Panama Canal Authority. Officials told the news service Reuters in May that they had no plans to limit crossings this year, citing water conservation measures imposed last year.

The canal, which handles about 5 percent of global maritime trade, usually has capacity to accommodate about 40 vessels per day.  Since June, it has seen a daily average of 35 transits.

Any significant decrease in travel through the canal is likely to translate into slower international shipping for industries that rely on the waterway. That, in turn, could increase costs.

A severe drought in 2023, for instance, cut traffic through the Panama Canal by roughly 36 percent, leading to disruptions in global supply chains.

The declining water levels that year were also attributed to El Nino, as well as climate change accelerated by human activities.

El Nino is a naturally occurring weather phenomenon that takes place every two to seven years, when the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean is warmer than usual.

The resulting weather patterns can have an impact across the region and even globally, putting some areas at risk of excessive heat and drought, while others suffer from flooding

Scientists expect a particularly strong El Nino in the coming months, potentially among the strongest on record. That could lead to an increase in cases of extreme weather events.

Panama Canal authorities have previously imposed vessel limits in order to conserve water.

The canal relies on a lock system that lifts and lowers vessels as they travel from the Pacific Ocean to the Caribbean Sea, and vice versa.

But the canal is fed, in part, by freshwater from nearby lakes and reservoirs, most notably Gatun Lake.

Panamanians rely on that lake as well to supply drinking water to nearby cities, including the capital Panama City, putting additional strain on the waterway during times of drought.

The United States has sent about 2,300 Mexican nationals to Guatemala, despite objections from the Mexican government, as President Donald Trump steps up deportations.

Guatemalan President Bernardo Arevalo confirmed on Wednesday that his country has received about 2,284 Mexican nationals deported from the US this year.

“They are arriving on planes carrying Guatemalan returnees,” Arevalo said in a news conference.

“In coordination with the Mexican government, what we have done is bring them through in transit so that we can return them to Mexican territory within 24 hours of their arrival in the country.”

The removals are part of a growing trend of third-country deportations under Trump, who has sent migrants and asylum seekers from the US to countries they may have no connection to.

Largely, the Trump administration has justified such deportations by saying that the immigrants in question are unable to return to their home countries.

But that is not the case with Mexico, which has consistently accepted deportations from the US.

Critics have blasted the third-country removals as a form of punishment, effectively stranding migrants and asylum seekers far from home.

Speaking about the Mexican nationals sent to Guatemala, Arevalo has said that the deportees are quickly repatriated to their country, with the costs covered by either the Mexican or US government.

But Mexican officials voiced concern about the US sending its citizens to third-party countries.

“The Mexican government has expressed its opposition to this practice to US authorities and has reiterated that every Mexican citizen has the right to enter the country,” Mexico’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement on Thursday.

Following a meeting with Guatemalan officials on Tuesday, the Foreign Ministry also said that the two countries are united by shared values including shared security and “human mobility with dignity”.

Guatemala is not the only country to receive Mexican nationals from the US in recent months. Reports have also emerged that some Mexicans have been transported to Honduras as well.

“They didn’t tell us anything, just to get on the flight,” Arturo Trejo, a Mexican man who was deported to Honduras, told the TV channel Telemundo.

Mexico’s National Migration Institute (INM) told The Associated Press news agency that the US had justified the practice as a form of deterrence.

“The reason is that the United States wants to prevent them from crossing back into its territory,” the INM said.

The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), meanwhile, responded to inquiries about the practice by saying that it was “utilising all lawful options to carry out the largest deportation operation in history, just as President Trump promised”.

But many human rights experts view the third-country deportations of Mexicans as an intimidation tactic.

“What we are seeing seems part of [a] broader trend towards a very severe US migration policy where they seek to instill terror and fear in migrants at all costs,” Ana Maria Mendez, the Central America director at migrants rights group WOLA, told the news service Reuters.

As neighbours, the US and Mexico have long had a close relationship. The two countries remain top trading partners for one another, with a cross-border exchange of roughly $964.1bn in 2025 alone.

But since Trump returned to the presidency last year, the Mexican government has had to strike a delicate balance.

It has sought to cooperate with the Trump administration on immigration enforcement, while defending the rights of its citizens against alleged abuse.

Critics have accused immigration agents of using excessive violence during raids, and experts have noted a rising number of deaths while in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Since Trump returned to office, at least 15 Mexican nationals have died in ICE custody, and another three died during enforcement operations.

In response, the Mexican government has filed complaints with state prosecutors in the US. It has also denounced conditions in ICE detention centres as “incompatible with human rights standards” and urged regular visits from Mexican consular officials.

The aircraft carrier USS George Washington transited the Arabian Sea today after arriving in the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) region yesterday, the command announced via X. The move was designed to relieve the overworked USS Abraham Lincoln and comes as the U.S. continues to maintain a naval blockade of Iranian ports amid ongoing tensions with Tehran. However, the deployment also leaves the U.S. bereft of aircraft carriers in the western Pacific, at least for the moment, highlighting the strain on one of its most important assets for American power projection. Extended deployments across multiple carriers is putting extreme stress on the carrier force and could have major cascading effects as maintenance required to reset these ships after deployments draws on longer than originally planned. At the same time, delays in carrier production could also exacerbate the future availability of the force.

The need to redeploy the Washington from Yokosuka, Japan, where it is based, to the CENTCOM region was sparked by concerns about the condition of the crew of the Lincoln. That carrier reportedly endured grueling conditions amid round-the-clock operations without any liberty port calls since deploying last year. The issue sparked outrage from those worried about the mental and physical health of the sailors and Marines aboard, as well as pushback from U.S. officials who claimed the media was blowing the situation out of proportion.

The addition of the Washington comes as the Lincoln has departed. That means there are now two carriers in the Middle East at the moment. The USS George H.W. Bush arrived in the region on April 23.

While the U.S. and Iran have stopped firing at each other, the region remains a tinderbox. Both Washington and Tehran are claiming control over the Strait of Hormuz, and negotiations to end hostilities have broken down. 

With the ongoing blockade, as well as CENTCOM’s efforts to move millions of barrels of oil through its preferred southern route close to Oman, there is still a need for the aviation assets provided by carriers and the strike and defensive missile capabilities provided by their escort ships. This is especially true for contingency operations, deterring Iran, and pressuring them to conform to Washington’s demands.

As we noted earlier in this story, all this leaves Adm. Samuel Paparo, the commander of U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM), with no carrier coverage in theater to deter or counter potential PRC or DPRK aggression. Carrier gaps in the Pacific were rare up until 2024, which marked the first time in decades that the U.S. had no flattops in Asia. Though the U.S. military has been largely focused on the Middle East, the PACOM region remains the top concern among many within the national security apparatus, as China is America’s top pacing threat and North Korea remains unpredictable and dangerous. Russian operations in the Pacific are another issue, among a slew of others.

The extended deployment of the Lincoln, and the need to replace it, didn’t just create an issue, albeit temporary, for PACOM. Typical carrier deployments last about six to seven months, a period designed to ensure the ships can maintain readiness and the crews do not get worn out. When that doesn’t happen, it creates a cascading series of problems that affect not just the ships and crews, but the facilities that have scheduled repairs and lined up workers to make them happen.

The bottom line is that the longer these vessels stay out on cruise, the longer they have to stay in on deep maintenance, and past a certain point, the magnitude of this relationship skyrockets. Extra days out can turn into extra weeks in the yard, and so on. With yard facilities at a premium, especially those capable of dealing with a supercarrier, critical schedules can quickly implode, with work stacking up across multiple vessels, resulting in them being sidelined much longer than planned. You can read all about this in our past feature linked here.

For instance, after returning from a historic 11-month deployment, USS Gerald R. Ford transited to Pier 5N at Norfolk Naval Shipyard in July to begin its first post-deployment Planned Incremental Availability (PIA). Ford’s PIA will take longer than initially expected due to the stress from its journey, including a fire the laundry room that raged for more than 30 hours and will require an additional, concurrent availability. This will likely extend its time in dry dock, a situation experienced by the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower after it had an epic deployment. Of note is that the damage to the Ford meant it had to depart the CENTCOM region in March at the height of the war on Iran. That left just one carrier on station, which, ironically, was the Lincoln.

There are several other issues being faced by the carrier force as the Navy has had to juggle maintenance schedules to make up for construction delays.

The future Ford class USS John F. Kennedy is not scheduled for delivery until March 2027. JFK just completed Acceptance Trials Aug. 15, following a four-day underway period off the Atlantic Coast. The Navy had originally planned to take delivery of the Kennedy in 2022, but that was delayed until March 2027 “to support completion of Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) certification and continued Advanced Weapons Elevator (AWE) work,” according to the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2026 budget request. To offset that, the decommissioning of the USS Nimitz was pushed back.

The entire Ford class program has been running years behind schedule and now the U.S. Navy is reportedly evaluating changes to the Ford class that could add further delays. This includes moving the island superstructure further forward on the flight deck and abandoning the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) catapults and Advanced Weapons Elevators (AWE) on the Ford class, starting with the future USS Doris Miller.

As for what carrier capacity is actually available today, four are currently offline or waiting to enter maintenance availabilities.

The USS John C. Stennis moved to complete a Refueling and Complex Overhaul (RCOH) period at Newport News Shipbuilding in Virginia in May 2021. When the contract was awarded to Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) in February 2021, work was expected to be completed by October 2025, and the downstream effects of the extended delay have rippled across the fleet.

Nimitz class aircraft carriers typically complete RCOH, a lengthy modernization and maintenance period that includes a nuclear refuel, at the halfway point of their expected 50-year service life. The Navy is rethinking its approach to speed up future such overhauls and cut down on labor requirements, beginning with USS Harry S. Truman.

Truman is pierside in Norfolk, Virginia, waiting to enter RCOH following the Stennis, as only one shipyard on the East Coast is capable of conducting such invasive maintenance.

USS Ronald Reagan is the only carrier on the West Coast that is unavailable to deploy today. It was previously forward-deployed to Yokosuka, Japan, completed a hull swap with USS George Washington in mid-2025 and is currently in dry dock at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility in Bremerton, Washington. When the contract for the Drydocking PIA (DPIA) was awarded in 2025, work was expected to be completed by August 2026, and the timeline appears to be on schedule. According to Stars & Stripes, Ronald Reagan is expected to wrap up the 17-month DPIA and return to service by the end of the month.

This leaves three carriers that could be pushed toward the Pacific in an emergency, one of which is largely ready for deployment. The USS Theodore Roosevelt, USS Carl Vinson, and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, are in various states of readiness and working up in preparation for future deployments. Theodore Roosevelt, which completed COMPTUEX in May before participating in large-scale exercise RIMPAC 2026 over the summer, is expected to deploy in the very near term, and is the most likely to be sent to the Pacific. Also homeported out of San Diego, Carl Vinson pulled out of port on August 10 and is underway training off the West Coast. As of publication. Dwight D. Eisenhower finished a 16-month post-deployment PIA and completed sea trials in April, and most recently returned home on July 27 after conducting an ammo onload with dry cargo/ammo ship USNS Medgar Evers.

Lincoln, as we noted earlier in this piece, is heading home to San Diego after leaving the CENTCOM region, but when it will return to service is unknown. There is an upcoming DPIA scheduled for the carrier, according to Fiscal Year 2027 budget documents, but the timeline is unclear. Based on the history of other lengthy carrier deployments, that could be delayed as well.

So, it’s likely another carrier strike group will be heading toward the West Pacific soon and the gap won’t be a prolonged one, but after multiple prolonged deployments, America’s carrier force may be set up for a larger availability crisis down the line.

Contact the authors: howard@twz.com; ian.ellis-jones@recurrent.io

New York City, United States – Mayor Zohran Mamdani is challenging a new law that would give New York City’s teaching aides a one-time $10,000 bonus, arguing it goes against the city’s collective bargaining laws.

On Wednesday, the bill, which was passed by New York City’s City Council, automatically became law because the mayor had opted not to veto it. Instead, Mamdani filed a lawsuit to block it because the City Council had enough votes to override his veto.

The bill, called the Respect Check Act, was backed by the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), a labour union representing teachers across New York City’s public school system and was championed by City Council Speaker Julie Menin, who has often clashed with the mayor.

Teaching assistants are among the lowest-paid workers in the city’s school system, according to a statement released by Menin’s office on Wednesday. Their pay is as low as $32,000. According to MIT’s living wage calculator, the living wage in New York City is $79,469 for Manhattan, $67,558 for Brooklyn, $73,258 for Queens, $67,974 in Staten Island, and $60,341 for the Bronx.

When the bill passed in July, Mamdani argued that the law directly violated a state law called the Taylor Law, a nearly 60-year-old law that gives public sector workers the right to organise. The UFT, which endorsed Mamdani in July 2025 ahead of the city’s election, pushed back on the mayor’s claims. The group argued the City Council did not undermine collective bargaining.

“The City Council would not have introduced – let alone passed – this bill if it were illegal, and we would not have supported a bill that threatened our collective bargaining rights,” Michael Mulgrew, president of the UFT, said in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.

“This moment is an opportunity for Mayor Mamdani to create a new, fairer system and build the kind of city he said he wanted to lead. This administration must keep its promises, and we won’t stop until it does.”

The City Council crafted the law to avoid violating New York’s Taylor Law, a UFT representative told Al Jazeera.

Under a 2023 state appeals court ruling, additional payments to public employees are mandated to be independent of a worker’s regular salary and cannot be tied to collective bargaining, they argue.

“The Court of Appeals has found that the Taylor Law does not prevent a municipality from unilaterally providing an economic benefit,” Beth Norton, general counsel for the UFT, said in testimony in front of the City Council in 2025, provided to Al Jazeera.

Pushing back

New York City Hall sees it differently.

“Council labels these ‘stabilisation’ payments; they effectively function as stipends or salary bonuses and, regardless of terminology, are an additional form of compensation and, as such, a mandatory subject of bargaining,” the 18-page filing obtained by Al Jazeera said.

“I think the mayor is right that this sets a bad precedent,” Adin Lenchner, founder of the New York-based political consultancy Carroll Street Campaigns, told Al Jazeera.

“Him and his team are either posturing, negotiating, or using this as a moment to negotiate toward some other kind of deal. I think everyone would agree that, substantively and philosophically, this is aligned with the mayor’s public policy approach and his vision for the city,” Lenchner added.

“So, if I had to guess, this is, on the one hand, about not wanting to establish a bad precedent and, on the other hand, a step toward a longer-term negotiation.”

Citizens Budget Commission (CBC), a nonpartisan think tank, urged the mayor in July to veto the bill, arguing that City Council should not make this decision. It says the now-law would add $325m in city spending.

“The City should continue to determine employee compensation at the bargaining table, not the legislative chamber,” vice president for research at CBC, Ana Champeny, said in a press release in mid-July.

Mamdani echoed that sentiment when he was asked about the law earlier this month.

“Conversations around compensation are better left at the bargaining table,” Mamdani said in a news conference on August 6.

However, the mayor voiced support on the campaign trail for legislation that would provide support payments to these paraprofessionals. That legislation supported recurring payments, not a one-time payment.

“The version he supported last fall made the payment recurring; what passed last month only guarantees it for one year. That’s the line between then and now, so not much of a flip-flop,” Lenchner added.

“We will not allow the political process to replace the collective bargaining table. The City is filing a lawsuit to protect the right of every union to negotiate on behalf of its members, to fight for the workplace they deserve and ensure that workers – not politicians – determine their own futures,” Matt Rauschenbach, a spokesperson for the mayor, said in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.

“We will work towards a quick resolution that respects workers, protects the City’s finances, and ensures that the Council does not interfere with collective bargaining in the future.”

Rauschenbach declined to provide further comment.

Caracas, August 20, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Venezuelan government has signed agreements with Texas-based Hunt Oil and SLB amid ongoing efforts to court foreign oil firms.

Venezuelan Oil Minister Paula Henao finalized the deals on Tuesday on behalf of Acting President Delcy Rodríguez.

Hunt Oil, originally founded by far-right tycoon H.L. Hunt in the 1930s, signed “Productive Participation Contracts,” which are concession-type deals, to operate the mature Caro and Carisito oilfields in eastern Venezuela. The two projects, belonging to the Oriente branch of state oil company PDVSA, produce light crude and natural gas.

CEO Hunter L. Hunt said in a statement that his firm “wants to play a constructive role in revitalizing and growing Venezuela’s oil and gas production.” Hunt Oil previously leveraged its close ties to the George W. Bush administration to secure energy contracts in Iraqi Kurdistan following the 2003 US invasion.

For its part, SLB, formerly Schlumberger, inked deals focused on reservoir studies and provision of services. SLB is the world’s largest oilfield services provider. According to Reuters, the multinational will work to reactivate 15 oil rigs in the Caribbean nation, with only two onshore rigs presently active.

Crossover Energy, a company created in 2022 with no prior energy track record, is also reportedly close to finalizing agreements to run Venezuelan oilfields, having acquired an operating firm in eastern Venezuela. Crossover Energy had signed a memorandum of understanding with the acting Rodríguez administration in May.

The Colorado-based firm showed no verifiable commercial registration, public website, or operating history before its agreement with the Venezuelan government. Crossover CEO Eric McCrady previously ran Sundance Energy Inc., which filed for bankruptcy in 2021 with over $250 million in debt, before being sold and liquidated in 2022. 

Henao traveled to Houston alongside PDVSA executives to participate in an event titled “Empowering Venezuela: Energy, Investment & Opportunity” on Tuesday as part of the August 17-20 International Meeting for Applied Geoscience and Energy (IMAGE). She was joined by US Energy Undersecretary Kyle Haustveit.

According to Venezuelan state broadcaster VTV, Henao presented “investment opportunities” while also detailing “the benefits of recent reforms and joint work with the US Department of Energy.” The Venezuelan minister went on to hold meetings with US officials to “consolidate the cooperation agenda.”

In parallel, ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL), the overseas arm of India’s state-owned Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC), recently secured a US Treasury waiver to resume its activities in Venezuela. 

“Now we have full freedom to work on the Venezuela project because earlier we were restricting our operations there because of the sanction-related risks,” ONGC executive Anupam Agarwal said in a press conference last week.

OVL owns 40 and 11 percent respective stakes in the San Cristóbal and Carabobo-1 extra-heavy crude ventures in the Orinoco Oil Belt. Agarwal stated that the company was in talks with Venezuelan authorities to renegotiate agreements and assume operational control of the projects.

Furthermore, ONGC is also looking to collect around US $500 million in overdue dividends that state oil company PDVSA was unable to pay due to US sanctions.

Hunt Oil, SLB, and OVL have followed energy majors such as Shell, Chevron, and Repsol in taking advantage of Venezuela’s pro-business overhaul of the energy sector. A reformed Hydrocarbon Law slashed royalties and taxes, turned over control of operations and sales to private corporations, and subjected disputes to international arbitration bodies.

In addition to securing a favorable environment for Western corporations, the Trump administration has also seized control of Venezuelan oil revenues, which are deposited in a US Treasury account before US officials decide when and how much should be returned to Caracas. The White House is also reportedly deducting the costs of its January 3 military operation against Venezuela from the export earnings.

According to Bloomberg, BP received a US Treasury license to join Vitol and Trafigura in lifting and re-selling Venezuelan crude. A BP tanker loaded fuel oil headed for Houston on Tuesday. The intermediary companies secure cargoes at below-market rates and deposit the proceeds into a designated US Treasury account before rerouting them to final customers for a profit.

The London-based multinational is likewise moving forward in multiple offshore natural gas projects in Venezuelan waters. BP, alongside Qatar’s UCC and the UAE’s XRG, is set to develop the second phase of the Loran Field. It will also explore the Cocuina-Manakin Field alongside Trinidad and Tobago’s NGC. The Venezuelan state holds no stake in either project, with the owed royalties and taxes also significantly reduced under the reformed legislation and likewise to be deposited in the US Treasury account.

Edited by Lucas Koerner in Philadelphia.

The mayor of Como has banned riding bicycles in certain areas of the historic Italian city after he was hit by an electric one.

Alessandro Rapinese said the ban was necessary to improve public safety. It means from September, cyclists will have to dismount through an area of around 30 streets.

He told Italian news agency Ansa: “People act based on their own experiences and I know what it’s like to be hit by one of these beasts.”

Several other local authorities around Europe, including in the UK, have restricted where and how e-bikes and other single-person vehicles can be used.

The measure put forward by Rapinese is part of a package of new traffic regulations, establishing a Limited Traffic Zone (ZTL) to manage tourist growth, and which impose stricter rules on cars and vans in the city centre.

Many of the roads covered by the ban are the widest in the old town and are popular with delivery drivers.

The measure applies to both electric and push bikes, as the Italian highway code does not distinguish between models.

Rapinese explained his decision in a video as part of a series of online videos he produces himself, known as RapiNews24.

He recounted an incident in which he had been leaving city hall in July and collided with an e-bike shortly after his administration had discussed traffic restrictions in the city centre.

The cyclist involved in the collision has not been identified.

“In this case, I didn’t even end up in the hospital,” Rapinese said. “I was hit by a bike. I gathered information, and that’s where the measure came from.”

On July 23, Volodymyr Zelensky told Ukrainians that Raytheon wanted to help produce Patriot interceptors on Ukrainian-linked lines. Five days later, Lockheed Martin signed a second license, this one for the PAC-3 MSE — the hit-to-kill missile that has spent three years picking Russian ballistic warheads out of the sky over Kyiv. For a moment it looked like a watershed: the United States handing a country still absorbing nightly missile and drone barrages the blueprint to build its own air defense. Then, within days, the story came apart in public. US Ambassador Matthew Whitaker said Washington would not allow Ukraine to build PAC-3s at all. Donald Trump called the technology transfer “a hard thing to give away.” NATO’s own envoy said no agreement would close before winter. Something had clearly been decided. Nobody could agree on what.

The Patriot system is the closest thing the West has to a proven shield against ballistic missiles, and it is scarce almost everywhere it is needed. Roughly twenty countries now compete for a production line that turns out about 650 PAC-3 MSE interceptors a year worldwide — Lockheed Martin’s entire global output, shared among Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, Gulf states and the US Army’s own depleted stocks. Russia, meanwhile, has been firing 55 to 60 Iskander ballistic missiles a month at Ukraine alone, before counting the nightly Shahed drone waves that push crews to expend scarce interceptors on cheaper threats out of necessity. The Pentagon has spent much of the past two years quietly rationing Patriot allocations across allies, reportedly diverting orders meant for Taiwan and Ukraine to replenish American stockpiles. Against that backdrop, “Ukraine will build its own Patriots” is not primarily a sovereignty story. It is a story about whether the system that makes Patriots for everyone else can keep up at all.

What the deal actually requires

Start with what was actually signed, because the headlines overstate it. Raytheon’s license covers the PAC-2 GEM-T, an older blast-fragmentation interceptor effective against aircraft and cruise missiles. Lockheed Martin’s covers the PAC-3 MSE, the missile that actually stops Iskanders and Kinzhals. Neither license includes the radar, the fire-control system or the launchers; those still come from existing Patriot batteries. And neither company has committed to building these missiles on Ukrainian soil in the near term. Reporting from Reuters and Ukrainian officials both point to Germany, which already runs its own PAC-2 line, as the likely first production site, with capacity shifting to Ukraine only “after the war ends.” What was announced in July, in other words, is not a factory. It is paperwork that keeps a door open.

Even so, the paperwork matters, because of what it concedes. Every PAC-3 MSE round carries a 24-month production lead time for the missile itself and 30 months for its solid rocket motor. Boeing manufactures every active radar seeker that guides it from a single facility in Alabama, capped at 650 to 700 units a year — a bottleneck no amount of Ukrainian factory floor changes. Aerojet Rocketdyne is the sole source for the motor. These are not obstacles a co-production agreement dissolves; they are structural limits on how fast the United States can arm anyone, Ukraine included. A government does not open its most tightly export-controlled missile program to a country still under nightly bombardment unless it has concluded that the existing pipeline, working alone, cannot meet demand. That is the admission buried in the announcement: not that Ukraine’s industrial base is ready, but that Lockheed’s and Raytheon’s are strained, and Washington needs help from a country it would ordinarily be supplying, not licensing.

The contradictions among American officials sharpen the point rather than undermine it. Whitaker’s flat denial that Ukraine would ever build PAC-3s, arriving days after Zelensky announced the license, is not really about Ukraine’s trustworthiness. A Republican congressional official close to the process gave the more candid version: the manufacturers are less worried about Ukraine leaking American technology to Moscow than about Ukraine improving on it and producing it “at scale, faster and for much less money.” That fear has a track record behind it. Fire Point’s Flamingo cruise missile, built in Ukraine during the war, reportedly costs around $600,000 — roughly a sixth of a Tomahawk and a fraction of a $2 million PAC-3 ACE round — while Ukraine’s home-grown Freyja interceptor is priced at roughly a fifth of the Patriot missile it is meant to substitute for. A country that has spent three years learning to manufacture air defense under fire, at a fraction of Western unit costs, is not the industrial partner a legacy prime wants loose inside its own supply chain. The reluctance is commercial before it is strategic.

The strongest objection to this reading is that Kyiv already produces a large share of its own weapons, so extending that into Patriots is a natural next step rather than a crisis signal. Zelensky puts the domestically produced share of Ukraine’s frontline weapons at close to 60 percent, up from roughly 40 percent a year earlier — drones, the Bohdana howitzer, the Neptune and Flamingo missiles. That is true, and it matters. But those are systems Ukraine designed and built from scratch under wartime pressure, with no legacy export-control regime standing in the way. Patriot is different: it is Washington’s most sensitive interceptor program, run by companies that have spent decades keeping production onshore for precisely the security reasons Whitaker cited. Handing over any piece of it, even nominally, to a country under active bombardment breaks with everything the export-control system was built to prevent. That the United States is doing it anyway — however slowly, however contested internally — says less about confidence in Ukraine than about how thin the interceptor pipeline has become.

Three ways this goes

What happens next depends on which of the deal’s obstacles proves harder to move: engineering or politics.

Base case (our estimate: roughly 55 percent probability). The license survives, but production stays offshore. Germany’s existing PAC-2 line absorbs the first Ukrainian-linked output sometime in 2027; Lockheed and Raytheon leave the seeker and motor bottlenecks unresolved; and Zelensky’s own target of “production capability by the end of 2026” slips the way most Patriot-related deadlines have slipped since 2022. The deal functions mainly as a signal — to Moscow, to Congress, to the manufacturers themselves — that the West is willing to widen its supplier base, without actually widening it before the war’s most dangerous phase has passed.

Downside case. Export-control friction, not battlefield risk, kills momentum outright. Boeing declines to license seeker technology, Congress balks at formally notifying an ITAR transfer into an active conflict zone, and the agreement quietly becomes what several earlier Patriot-adjacent announcements already have: a signed memorandum with no factory behind it. Unable to close its ballistic-missile gap through licensed production, Ukraine leans harder into Flamingo and Freyja — cheap and available, but not full substitutes for hit-to-kill interception. Iskander and Kinzhal strikes on Ukrainian cities continue at close to current tempo through 2027.

Upside case. Ukraine’s wartime manufacturing culture forces the restructuring the primes have been resisting. Facing a credible cheaper competitor, Lockheed and Raytheon accelerate second-sourcing of seekers and motors — the actual chokepoints — to defend market share rather than out of goodwill toward Kyiv. Patriot output rises for every operator, not only Ukraine, and Kyiv becomes the proving ground for a lower-cost interceptor variant that outlives the war. This is the scenario in which an admission of scarcity turns into a fix for it — plausible, but it requires the manufacturers to treat competition, not politics, as the threat that finally moves them.

The takeaway

So: is licensing Patriot production to a country under bombardment an admission? Yes — but not the one the announcements were built to convey. It does not say Ukraine’s industrial base has arrived. It says the American one has not kept pace with a war of attrition it did not plan for, and that Washington is now willing to test its most sensitive export controls against the same scarcity that has Israel, Taiwan and its own Army competing for the same missiles.

Watch for: whether groundbreaking on a German or Polish production line actually begins before the end of 2026 — Zelensky’s own deadline for “technical capability.” If it hasn’t started by then, treat every subsequent announcement as the political theatre this one increasingly resembles: a scarcity confession dressed up as an industrial handshake.

A first group of deportees, out of an expected total of 1,200, has landed at the Roberts International Airport in Monrovia, Liberia, from the United States.

Thursday’s flight is part of an expanding trend of third-country deportations under the administration of US President Donald Trump, whereby foreign nationals are sent to countries that are not their own.

The inaugural flight carried 20 people, largely from Latin American countries like Venezuela and Cuba.

After landing, the group boarded a bus and was taken away by Liberian authorities without being allowed to speak to reporters.

The flight follows an agreement, announced on Tuesday, between the US and Liberia that will bring up to 1,200 deportees to the African country over the coming year.

Liberia is part of a growing list of countries striking agreements with the Trump administration.

Since taking office for a second term as US president in 2025, Trump has inked deals with at least 35 countries to accept third-country deportees, according to the nonprofit Human Rights First.

In exchange, some of those countries have received financial aid and trade deals. Senate Democrats in February estimated that at least $40m had been spent on such deals in the first year of Trump’s second term.

The US, for example, awarded Liberia $5m this year for “migration management activities”.

But in announcing the transfer deal earlier this week, Liberia’s Ministry of Information denied any reports that it agreed to the deportations for financial motives.

“The transfer of persons to Liberia is not a transaction with a quid pro quo,” the ministry said in a statement. “Liberia has not demanded or received any compensation or promise of reward in exchange for its consent to participate in the program.”

Liberia’s Information Minister Jerolinmek Piah also told the news agency Reuters that the International Organization for Migration and the United Nations refugee agency would help provide services for the deportees.

Those brought to Liberia will be allowed to apply for asylum and are “free to depart the country when they so desire”, according to Tuesday’s statement.

Liberia has said that the deportees are not “criminals and are not being prosecuted in any manner”.

“Liberia, the first black African independent nation on the African continent, has a long history of accepting people seeking refuge from political and other crises,” the ministry’s statement said.

“As a matter of fact, Liberia itself was founded as a refuge for freed slaves from the United States of America and other parts of the world.”

But critics have questioned whether smaller countries in Africa and elsewhere are being used as a “dumping ground” for US deportees, and whether the immigrants forcibly sent abroad will have adequate access to the resources they need.

Some have characterised such third-country deportations as excessively punitive, stranding migrants and asylum seekers in places where they sometimes cannot even speak the language.

The Trump administration, meanwhile, has framed the third-party deportations as necessary for immigrants whose home countries will not accept them. It has also framed the removals as a form of deterrence.

Guatemalan President Bernardo Arevalo on Thursday estimated that, this year alone, roughly 2,300 Mexican citizens have been deported from the US to his country, as opposed to being sent directly to Mexico.

Media outlets, including CBS News, have reported that the manouevre is part of an effort to disincentivize Mexican nationals from returning to the US without legal immigration status.

Arevalo explained, however, that such deportees are swiftly sent back to Mexico. “They are arriving in planes of Guatemalan returnees, and what we have done is process them as in transit, ‌in coordination with the Mexican immigration authorities,” he said.