NEWS

Reporters must promise not to publish unauthorised material to obtain press credentials.

Major media organisations, including conservative outlets, say the Pentagon is placing unlawful restrictions on journalists and their ability to cover the US military under a new set of reporting guidelines.

The guidelines were first announced in a September memo from the Department of Defense, and said that reporters must sign an affidavit pledging they would not publish unauthorised material – including unclassified documents – to keep their Pentagon press credentials.

Following pushback from the media, the wording was modified last week to say that reporters must simply “acknowledge” the new rules, but many organisations remain critical of the latest version of the rules.

Media companies, including public broadcaster NPR, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, CNN, and the Reuters and Associated Press news agencies, have all said they will not sign the rules in recent statements.

They also say the rules violate the US Constitution, which offers broad protections for freedom of speech and freedom of the press under the First Amendment. These rights were reaffirmed in a landmark 1971 Supreme Court case, New York Times Co v United States, that allowed US media to publish classified military documents during the Vietnam War.

“The proposed restrictions undercut First Amendment protections by placing unnecessary constraints on gathering and publishing information. We will continue to vigorously and fairly report on the policies and positions of the Pentagon and officials across the government,” said Matt Murray, executive editor of The Washington Post, in a statement on X.

Conservative news outlets The Washington Times and Newsmax, a cable news channel and competitor to Fox News, also said they would not sign the rules.

Newsmax cited “unnecessary and onerous” rules in a statement to Axios.

The Pentagon Press Association, an industry group representing defence reporters, said in a statement on Monday that the Pentagon has the right to make its own reporting rules, but they cannot set “unconstitutional policies as a precondition” to report there.

The association previously said the rules were “designed to stifle a free press”, and could open reporters up to legal prosecution.

The Pentagon reporting rules have been championed by US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, a former Fox News presenter who was sworn into his post in January under President Donald Trump.

Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said the department had “good faith negotiations” with the Pentagon Press Association, but that “soliciting [military] service members and civilians to commit crimes is strictly prohibited” in a statement on X.

The Palestinian Resistance Movement (Hamas) has expressed its deep condolences to the State of Qatar, its Emir, government, and people, following the deaths of three Qatari diplomats in a traffic accident near Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. The diplomats were part of Qatar’s delegation engaged in ongoing ceasefire negotiations related to the Israeli war in the Gaza Strip.

In a statement issued on Sunday, Hamas conveyed its “sincere condolences and solidarity with the sisterly State of Qatar,” praying for “God’s mercy” upon the deceased and a swift recovery for the injured.

“We ask God Almighty to bestow His mercy and forgiveness upon them, grant the injured a speedy recovery, and inspire their families and the brotherly Qatari people with patience and solace. To God we belong and to Him we shall return,” the movement said.

Hamas also affirmed its “absolute solidarity” with Qatar and its people, praying that the Gulf state be “protected from all harm and evil.”

According to Egyptian security sources, the accident occurred approximately 50 kilometres from Sharm El-Sheikh, when the diplomats’ vehicle was traveling to attend the anticipated announcement and signing of a Gaza ceasefire agreement.

The victims were identified as Abdullah bin Ghanem al-Khayarin, Hassan al-Jaber, and Saud bin Thamer Al Thani. Two others — Abdullah bin Issa al-Kuwari and Mohammed al-Buainain — were injured and remain in critical condition at a nearby hospital.

Sig Sauer says it has been able to trim the weight of the Army’s new 6.8x51mm M7 service rifle by nearly a pound, or just over 10 percent, in response to feedback from servicemembers. The M7’s weight compared to the gun it is set to replace, the 5.56x45mm M4A1, was among the criticisms that an Army captain very publicly leveled against the gun earlier this year. Sig had subsequently issued a vehement rebuttal, but acknowledged that the design was still evolving.

Jason St. John, senior director of strategic products for the Defense Strategies Group at Sig Sauer, gave an update on the M7 rifle, as well as the companion 6.8x51mm M250 machine gun, to TWZ‘s Howard Altman on the show floor at the Association of the U.S. Army’s (AUSA) main annual symposium today. Sig Sauer has also been working on a shorter and lighter carbine variation of the M7 for the Army. Sig Sauer did show the lightened “product-improved” M7, also known as the PIE M7, at the biennial Defense and Security Equipment International (DSEI) exhibition in London earlier this year, but does not appear to have had the carbine on display at that event.

The M7 and M250 (previously designated the XM7 and XM250), together with the associated family of 6.8x51mm rounds and the computerized XM157 optic, form the Army’s Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW) ‘system.’ The service selected Sig Sauer as the winner of its NGSW competition in 2022 and now plans to replace a substantial portion of its M4A1s and M249 Squad Automatic Weapons (SAW) with M7s and M250s, respectively. Sig is also supplying the ammunition, but the XM157s are being procured separately from Vortex Optics.

“So, we’re talking about the Army’s and our continued teaming effort to improve the M7 and the M250, based on our recommendations, and their suggestions, and feedback from the field,” Sig Sauer’s St. John said.

“There’s basically two combined efforts going on within the M7,” he continued. “We have a carbine version, and then we have a lighten, improved version of the M7. And so when you look at the standard M7 that’s been issued to the troops, the overall weight of the firearm was 8.3 pounds. Now, the improved M7 is 7.6 pounds, and the carbine version weighs 7.3 pounds. So we’re getting closer and closer to [a] rifle weight system similar to the M4.”

The PIE M7 also has a 13.5-inch barrel, while the one on the carbine version is 10 inches long. A standard M4A1 with its 14.5-inch barrel, as well as just a sling and a loaded magazine, weighs in at 7.62 pounds, according to the Army. It is important to note that optics and other accessories add appreciable weight to both the M7 and M4A1. The XM157 optic is notably larger and heavier than the ones the Army typically issues for use on M4A1s.

In terms of how the PIE M7 was lightened, “there’s the upper receiver, we’ve redesigned and taken some weight out of it. We’ve lessened the barrel profile slightly to get some weight out of it,” according to Sig’s St. John. “We’ve done some lightening efforts within the operating system, as well as remove the folding stock hinge. By removing that hinge, we save some weight.”

The original M7 featured a stock that was both adjustable in length and could be folded to one side. The M4A1’s stock is only adjustable in length.

“What we just found is really that the Army and the soldiers have fed back … [that] they’d rather have the weight savings than the folding stock,” St. John added. “They aren’t using the folding stock enough to justify that additional weight.”

The video in the Tweet below shows a placard with additional details about the PIE M7 and the carbine version at around 0:41 in the runtime.

Sig Sauer has also made important changes to the M250’s design based on discussions with the Army and feedback from soldiers.

“You’re going to see, instead of having a removable front handguard, now you have a hinged captured handguard, so it stays on the weapon system – rotates forward and away,” St. John explained. “The feed tray cover is extended with the big rail, so that now I have more adjustability for the optics that I put on there, and eye relief to the individual soldiers, and now I can move my optic further back or forward depending on what’s wanted.”

“I’ve got improved bipods. I’ve got [an] improved gas valve,” he continued, also highlighting improvements to how the M250 can be fitted to a tripod and how ammunition is carried on the gun. “Basically the feedback from everyone is, what can we do to improve this weapon system, make it more easy [sic] to use, and more robust and reliable.”

Work has also been done to improve the common sound suppressor for the M7 and M250.

“We’ve also redesigned our suppressor to make it shorter,” per St. John. “We’ve added a titanium heat shield on it that does two-fold [things].”

The heat shield helps reduce the chance of contact burns as the suppressor heats up during use. It also reduces thermal bloom, which could make it easier for enemies to spot friendly forces from their heat signature. St. John cautioned that no one should be rushing to grab the suppressor, especially with bare hands, after sustained use, even with the new heat shield.

When it comes to the M7, St. John said that the Army is now in the process of deciding how to proceed in fielding the PIE and/or carbine versions.

“You could see there’s probably a couple of decision points. Do they stick with the standard length M7 that’s been lightened by 0.7 pounds? Or do they and or do they move to the carbine completely?” he said. “Do they keep the carbine for specialty troops and still issue the M7, or do they take the carbine and utilize that as the new rifle across the board? So they’re trying to make those decisions.”

St. John pointed out that the Army had gone through a similar evolution in thinking in the decades that followed the fielding of the A1 variant of the M16 in the 1960s. The service adopted a succession of full-size rifle versions before transitioning to the shorter and lighter M4A1 as its standard service weapon.

That the Army is looking at lighter variations of the M7 at all is significant. The weight of the rifle was among the criticisms that Army Capt. Braden Trent had highlighted in an unclassified report he wrote while he was a student at the Expeditionary Warfare School, which is part of the Marine Corps University in Quantico, Virginia. Trent also called attention to the comparative size and weight of the 5.56x45mm and 6.8x51mm rounds, as well as the shorter barrel on the M7 compared to the M4A1. Trent’s findings, which raised safety concerns about the rifle and cited other issues that called its operational utility into question, came to more widespread attention after he presented them at the annual Modern Day Marine conference earlier this year.

There is one particular “major fault in the XM7, and that’s the UBL … or universal basic load. It’s a metric that can be applied to almost any weapon system, and it essentially means the amount of magazines and associated ammunition that a system uses and is expected to be carried into battle,” Trent said at Modern Day Marine. “So the XM7 [and] the M4A1 actually have the same number of magazines in their UBL seven, but remember, we’re talking about that capacity difference. The total round count a soldier carries into battle with the XM7 is 140 rounds compared to the 210 rounds of the M4A1. Now again, a 70-round difference may not seem significant, but to the soldier in the fight, it absolutely is a difference. Not to mention that every magazine added to the XM7, each 20-round loaded magazine adds another 1.25 pounds to the soldier’s load, meaning that if troops equipped with the XM7 tried to match their old UBLs [in terms of round count], they’re going to have even more weight being carried.”

“The final thing I’d like to mention is the Chief of Army Infantry’s stated goal of a 55-pound total soldier load,” he added. “If we just take the XM7 and its seven UBL magazine load, we’re almost at half that weight, and that’s before the soldier is put on body armor, water, a rucksack, or anything else that they’ll need in the fight.”

The Army’s position has been that the M7 and its new cartridge offer improved accuracy, range, and terminal effectiveness that are worth the added bulk. Concerns about soldiers being outranged, as well as improvements in adversary body armor, were key drivers behind the NGSW program. Trent’s report also calls this into question based on data he collected regarding expected infantry combat engagement distances.

Sig Sauer had also provided a lengthy rebuttal to the technical issues that Trent raised. You can read more about all of this in TWZ‘s in-depth report on the ensuing controversy following his presentation.

“I think that soldiers and citizens should want Sig Sauer, the U.S. [Army] program office to continue that practice of continually evolving and developing and improving their soldiers’ weapons systems. And I think we anticipate that we’re going to undergo those improvement processes for the next 25 to 30 years,” the company’s St. John had told TWZ at the time. “There’s going to be improvements in manufacturing [and] materials processes. The soldiers on the ground and the U.S. Army are going to dictate different operational requirements and standards for the weapons systems, and we’re going to have to react to those modifications that are going to optimize that weapon system as that evolves through time and history.”

“It should be no surprise, in my opinion, that specifically in the infancy of a weapons program that there’s a very aggressive improvement effort to ensure that the Army and the soldiers get the weapon system that they deserve,” he added.

From what we know now, the Army’s plans for the M7 are already evolving significantly, with criticisms about the rifle’s weight, in particular, having been taken to heart.

Howard Altman contributed to this story.

Contact the author: [email protected]

The majority of the deaths have occurred in the states of Veracruz and Hidalgo.

At least 64 people have died in Mexico after heavy rains and flooding hit five states last week.

The National Civil Protection Coordination (CNPC) chief, Laura Velazquez Alzua, speaking during President Claudia Sheinbaum’s daily news briefing on Monday, said another 65 people were still missing.

The state of Veracruz on the country’s southeastern coastline has confirmed 29 deaths, followed by 21 in Hidalgo, 13 in Puebla and one in Queretaro, Alzua said.

Forty-three people are also reported missing in Hidalgo, along with 18 in Veracruz and four in Puebla.

Thousands of military troops have been deployed to offer assistance across the five affected states, and governors are also working together to coordinate support, Sheinbaum said.

Early estimates show that about 100,000 houses have been affected, she added, with some near rivers having “practically disappeared”.

Facing questions about Mexico’s alert system, Sheinbaum said there were no meteorological signs “that could have indicated to us that the rain was going to be of this magnitude”.

Meteorologists have said the rains occurred thanks to the remnants of Hurricane Priscilla and Tropical Rainstorm Raymond, which caused rivers to rapidly rise, leading to flooding and landslides.

The heaviest rainfall was reported on Wednesday in Veracruz’s city of Cerro Azul and Puebla’s Cuetzalan del Progreso, which saw 280mm and 286mm of rain, respectively, Alzua said.

The Mexican Army, Air Force and National Guard have jointly implemented response efforts, distributing food and clean water, sometimes by air, to locations otherwise made inaccessible by landslides and road closures.

Nearly 400 repair workers have restored more than 80 percent of the electricity supply across the five states, where about 263,000 users lost power, electricity officials said during the briefing.

Signing comes as families in Israel and Palestine reunite with their loved ones released from captivity in Gaza and Israeli jails.

House Speaker Mike Johnson says that he will not negotiate with Democrats until they drop healthcare demands.

Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Mike Johnson has said that the current government shutdown could become the longest in history, as an impasse between the Democrats and Republicans drags on with no end in sight.

Speaking to reporters on Monday, Johnson, a Republican, said that he would not negotiate with Democratic lawmakers until they suspended policy demands related to healthcare, a dispute at the core of the shutdown.

“We’re barreling toward one of the longest shutdowns in American history,” said Johnson, who leads Republican lawmakers in the House.

The administration of President Donald Trump has used the shutdown, now in its 13th day, as a pretext for pushing forward a series of cuts and layoffs to government services and agencies, although its legal authority to do so remains in dispute.

Trump has plainly stated that such cuts will target his political rivals, saying last week that he would reduce “Democrat programmes” if the party refused to drop its demands on healthcare subsidies.

Recent polls have shown that US voters blame Democrats, Republicans, and Trump himself in roughly equal measure for the shutdown.

Democrats have called for an extension of subsidies under the Affordable Care Act that millions of people in the US rely on to buy healthcare plans.

Republicans have said that the issue can be addressed after the government is reopened, but Democrats have expressed doubt that the Republicans will honour that pledge.

Earlier this year, Republican lawmakers passed a huge tax and spending bill that is set to result in the loss of healthcare access for more than 15 million people.

While government shutdowns have become a routine occurrence in US politics in recent years, they can disrupt or reduce access to key services and force employees to work without pay for uncertain periods of time.

The US military said over the weekend that it would use unspent funds originally set aside for research and development to ensure that military personnel continue to receive pay.

The mass layoffs pushed by the Trump administration are a relatively new addition to shutdowns. Vice President JD Vance has warned that more “painful” cuts are ahead, even as government employee unions launch legal challenges against the terminations.

When Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto stood beside his Egyptian counterpart Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi at Al-Ittihadiya Palace in Cairo on Saturday, the joint declaration they signed marked more than a diplomatic formality; it signalled the rebirth of a transcontinental bond, anchored in history, redefined by pragmatism, and sharpened by today’s geopolitical realities.

Indonesia and Egypt have agreed to elevate their long-standing ties to a “strategic partnership”, setting a new tone for bilateral cooperation in sectors as wide-ranging as defence, education, trade, energy and cultural exchange. While this may read like a typical diplomatic communiqué, Prabowo’s visit and the deepening of ties with Cairo reflect a broader and more deliberate shift: Indonesia is seeking to diversify its global alliances, particularly in the Middle East, at a moment when traditional poles of power — Washington and Beijing — are both proving increasingly precarious partners.

Indonesia’s expanding outreach in the Middle East is no coincidence. Cairo is the third stop on Prabowo’s tour through the region, which includes high-level meetings in the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Qatar and Jordan. This multi-nation effort is part of Jakarta’s evolving strategy to forge a more independent and dynamic foreign policy, one that not only resists alignment with the world’s dominant powers, but also prioritises partnerships grounded in mutual benefit and shared values.

For Egypt, too, the move makes sense. In a world destabilised by trade wars, multipolar realignments and ongoing regional tensions, Cairo is increasingly looking eastward. Egypt’s active engagement with ASEAN — a bloc wherein Indonesia is the largest economy — underscores its ambitions to tap into the economic dynamism of South-East Asia, particularly in areas like trade, food security and digital infrastructure.

The economic logic is compelling.

Bilateral trade between Indonesia and Egypt reached $1.7 billion in 2024, making Egypt Indonesia’s top trading partner in North Africa. Indonesian exports — palm oil, coffee beans and coconut oil — flow steadily into Egyptian markets, while Egyptian companies have invested in nearly 100 projects in Indonesia, including major ventures in energy and infrastructure. Egypt sees Indonesia not just as a partner, but as a regional hub, a gateway to the ASEAN market and a conduit for broader Afro-Asian collaboration.

READ: Over 1,500 Israeli armoured corps troops demand end to Gaza war, return of hostages

But economics alone don’t define this partnership. A key pillar of this Cairo visit was a joint call to address one of the most urgent and morally pressing issues of our time: the war in Gaza.

Both nations are aligned vocally in their support for Palestine. Prabowo, whose administration is bound constitutionally to uphold the end of colonialism in all its forms, made it clear that Indonesia sees the plight of the Palestinian people not just as a regional tragedy, but also as a universal injustice. Al-Sisi, leading a country that shares a border with Gaza and has played a crucial role in mediation efforts, echoed the urgency of halting Israeli aggression and beginning immediate reconstruction.

The joint statement from the summit rejected the forced displacement of Palestinians, condemned illegal Israeli settlements and reaffirmed commitment to a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state. This alignment is more than rhetorical; it is strategic. As the United States continues to waver in its Middle East posture and China treads cautiously, Indonesia and Egypt see an opening to act, not as neutral observers, but as active proponents of peace grounded in regional legitimacy.

There is another dimension here that deserves attention: defence cooperation. While, traditionally, Indonesia has focused its military relationships on ASEAN allies and Western powers, its partnership with Egypt opens the door to a different kind of military diplomacy, one rooted in shared challenges and experiential learning. Egypt’s unique experience dealing with border tensions in Libya, Sudan and the occupied Palestinian territories offers valuable lessons for Indonesia as it recalibrates its security doctrines in a more unpredictable global landscape.

President Prabowo’s visit to the Egyptian Military Academy and his praise for the country’s training programmes were not just photo opportunities; they were symbolic gestures pointing toward future collaborations in defence education, joint training and possibly co-development of security technologies.

Cultural and educational exchange, too, are seeing renewed investment.

Egypt already hosts more than 15,000 Indonesian students, most notably at Al-Azhar University, a vital bridge in Islamic education and interfaith dialogue. The announcement that Egypt will expand its scholarship programme for Indonesians speaks to a soft power relationship that transcends politics; a commitment to building enduring people-to-people ties.

So why now? The answer lies in the shifting sands of geopolitics. As the world drifts toward a post-American and post-unipolar order, middle powers like Indonesia and Egypt are reasserting themselves, not as followers of global hegemons but as architects of their own regional futures.

For Indonesia, forging deeper ties with Cairo is not about choosing sides in the new Cold War between the US and China. It is about transcending that binary altogether; about carving a space where developing nations, through solidarity and strategic pragmatism, can assert agency on the world stage.

The strategic partnership between Indonesia and Egypt may not dominate global headlines. It could, though, offer a template for how nations of the Global South collaborate, not through dependency, but through dignity. And in a world sorely lacking in moral clarity, Jakarta and Cairo’s unified call for peace in Palestine may well be one of the few voices speaking with both principle and purpose.

Below the radar: Is the Trump-Netanyahu ‘unthinkable’ about to happen?

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

Joy turned to devastation for many after Israel added a twist to its release of almost 2,000 imprisoned Palestinians as part of the ceasefire deal. It’s sending 154 into exile, refusing to let them back into Gaza or the occupied West Bank.

US President Donald Trump has made a last-minute trip to the Middle East in the wake of the Gaza ceasefire deal. 

He landed in the Egyptian resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh late on Monday after flying in from Israel, where he addressed the Israeli Knesset.

The first phase of Trump’s 20-point ceasefire plan has now been completed, with Hamas releasing all 20 living Israeli captives in Gaza and Israel freeing Palestinian prisoners in the occupied West Bank.

So will this deal finally bring peace to the region?

And what does Trump’s plan mean for the broader Middle East?

Presenter: Neave Barker

Guests:

Sarah Eltantawi – Professor at Fordham University in New York City; political analyst and writer

Yezid Sayigh – Senior fellow at the Malcolm H Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut

Kenneth Katzman – Senior fellow at The Soufan Center and former senior analyst with the US Congressional Research Service

Kyiv has announced that it is sending a delegation to Washington for talks on strengthening its defence and energy resilience as Russian forces continue targeting Ukraine’s power infrastructure ahead of the cold winter months.

The departure of a senior delegation, led by Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko, was announced on Monday, just as Ukraine’s Energy Ministry said it had imposed power outages across the country in a bid to reduce pressure on the grid in the wake of damaging Russian attacks.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Monday that he would meet with his US counterpart, President Donald Trump, in Washington on Friday to discuss Ukraine’s air defence and long-range strike capabilities.

Speaking to reporters in Kyiv, Zelenskyy said that he had shared with Trump a “vision” of how many US Tomahawk missiles Ukraine needs for its war effort against Russia and that the two leaders would further discuss the matter on Friday.

The comments came after recent remarks by Trump that he might consider giving Ukraine long-range precision strike Tomahawk missiles if Russia did not end the war soon, and as Zelenskyy has urged Trump to turn his attention to ending his country’s war with Russia, after having brokered a deal in Gaza.

Attacks on energy grid

The renewed talk of escalating pressure on Moscow comes in the wake of intensified Russian attacks on Ukraine’s energy facilities, prompting Ukraine’s Energy Ministry to announce that it was introducing restrictions across seven regions in an effort to reduce pressure on the damaged grid and preserve supply.

For the past three years, Russia has targeted Ukraine’s energy infrastructure in a bid to demoralise the population, leaving millions without power amid brutally cold conditions.

“Due to the complicated situation in Ukraine’s Unified Energy System caused by previous Russian strikes, emergency power outages were implemented” across seven regions, the energy ministry said in a post on Telegram.

It listed territories mainly in the centre and east of the country, including the Donetsk region, where officials have encouraged civilians to leave due to the targeted attacks on power facilities.

“The emergency power cuts will be cancelled once the situation in the power grid has stabilised,” the statement said.

The escalating attacks left more than a million households and businesses temporarily without power in nine regions on Friday, while overnight attacks on Saturday night left two employees of Ukraine’s largest private energy company wounded.

“Russia has … made its attacks on our energy more vicious – to compensate for their failure on the ground,” Zelenskyy said on Sunday.

Delegation to Washington

In response to the attacks, Zelenskyy’s Chief of Staff Andriy Yermak said on Monday that a delegation, including Svyrydenko and National Security and Defence Council Secretary Rustem Umerov, had left for talks in Washington.

“We’re heading for high-level talks to strengthen Ukraine’s defence, secure our energy resilience, and intensify sanctions pressure on the aggressor,” he posted on X.

“The ultimate goal remains unchanged – a just and lasting peace.”

The delegation came after Zelenskyy said on Sunday that he had spoken to Trump for the second time in two days, in discussions that covered “defence of life in our country” and  “strengthening our capabilities – in air defence, resilience, and long-range capabilities”.

“We also discussed many details related to the energy sector. President Trump is well informed about everything that is happening,” he said, adding that their respective teams were preparing for the talks.

Tomahawks on the table

Following the conversation, Trump told reporters on board his flight to Israel that he might consider giving Ukraine long-range precision strike Tomahawk missiles if Russia did not end the war soon.

“They’d like to have Tomahawks. That’s a step up,” Trump said, referring to the Ukrainians.

“The Tomahawk is an incredible weapon, very offensive weapon. And honestly, Russia does not need that,” Trump added.

On Monday, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov responded to the suggestion that Washington could provide the missiles to Kyiv by saying such a move could have serious consequences.

Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev went even further, warning Trump on Monday that supplying Tomahawks to Ukraine could “end badly” for him.

Moscow has long expressed its concern over the prospect of advanced weapons transfers to Ukraine, saying such deliveries would entail direct US involvement in the conflict.

Getty Images

BBC News

‘Dropped off the internet’

When Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto stood beside his Egyptian counterpart Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi at Al-Ittihadiya Palace in Cairo on Saturday, the joint declaration they signed marked more than a diplomatic formality; it signalled the rebirth of a transcontinental bond, anchored in history, redefined by pragmatism, and sharpened by today’s geopolitical realities.

Indonesia and Egypt have agreed to elevate their long-standing ties to a “strategic partnership”, setting a new tone for bilateral cooperation in sectors as wide-ranging as defence, education, trade, energy and cultural exchange. While this may read like a typical diplomatic communiqué, Prabowo’s visit and the deepening of ties with Cairo reflect a broader and more deliberate shift: Indonesia is seeking to diversify its global alliances, particularly in the Middle East, at a moment when traditional poles of power — Washington and Beijing — are both proving increasingly precarious partners.

Indonesia’s expanding outreach in the Middle East is no coincidence. Cairo is the third stop on Prabowo’s tour through the region, which includes high-level meetings in the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Qatar and Jordan. This multi-nation effort is part of Jakarta’s evolving strategy to forge a more independent and dynamic foreign policy, one that not only resists alignment with the world’s dominant powers, but also prioritises partnerships grounded in mutual benefit and shared values.

For Egypt, too, the move makes sense. In a world destabilised by trade wars, multipolar realignments and ongoing regional tensions, Cairo is increasingly looking eastward. Egypt’s active engagement with ASEAN — a bloc wherein Indonesia is the largest economy — underscores its ambitions to tap into the economic dynamism of South-East Asia, particularly in areas like trade, food security and digital infrastructure.

The economic logic is compelling.

Bilateral trade between Indonesia and Egypt reached $1.7 billion in 2024, making Egypt Indonesia’s top trading partner in North Africa. Indonesian exports — palm oil, coffee beans and coconut oil — flow steadily into Egyptian markets, while Egyptian companies have invested in nearly 100 projects in Indonesia, including major ventures in energy and infrastructure. Egypt sees Indonesia not just as a partner, but as a regional hub, a gateway to the ASEAN market and a conduit for broader Afro-Asian collaboration.

READ: Over 1,500 Israeli armoured corps troops demand end to Gaza war, return of hostages

But economics alone don’t define this partnership. A key pillar of this Cairo visit was a joint call to address one of the most urgent and morally pressing issues of our time: the war in Gaza.

Both nations are aligned vocally in their support for Palestine. Prabowo, whose administration is bound constitutionally to uphold the end of colonialism in all its forms, made it clear that Indonesia sees the plight of the Palestinian people not just as a regional tragedy, but also as a universal injustice. Al-Sisi, leading a country that shares a border with Gaza and has played a crucial role in mediation efforts, echoed the urgency of halting Israeli aggression and beginning immediate reconstruction.

The joint statement from the summit rejected the forced displacement of Palestinians, condemned illegal Israeli settlements and reaffirmed commitment to a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state. This alignment is more than rhetorical; it is strategic. As the United States continues to waver in its Middle East posture and China treads cautiously, Indonesia and Egypt see an opening to act, not as neutral observers, but as active proponents of peace grounded in regional legitimacy.

There is another dimension here that deserves attention: defence cooperation. While, traditionally, Indonesia has focused its military relationships on ASEAN allies and Western powers, its partnership with Egypt opens the door to a different kind of military diplomacy, one rooted in shared challenges and experiential learning. Egypt’s unique experience dealing with border tensions in Libya, Sudan and the occupied Palestinian territories offers valuable lessons for Indonesia as it recalibrates its security doctrines in a more unpredictable global landscape.

President Prabowo’s visit to the Egyptian Military Academy and his praise for the country’s training programmes were not just photo opportunities; they were symbolic gestures pointing toward future collaborations in defence education, joint training and possibly co-development of security technologies.

Cultural and educational exchange, too, are seeing renewed investment.

Egypt already hosts more than 15,000 Indonesian students, most notably at Al-Azhar University, a vital bridge in Islamic education and interfaith dialogue. The announcement that Egypt will expand its scholarship programme for Indonesians speaks to a soft power relationship that transcends politics; a commitment to building enduring people-to-people ties.

So why now? The answer lies in the shifting sands of geopolitics. As the world drifts toward a post-American and post-unipolar order, middle powers like Indonesia and Egypt are reasserting themselves, not as followers of global hegemons but as architects of their own regional futures.

For Indonesia, forging deeper ties with Cairo is not about choosing sides in the new Cold War between the US and China. It is about transcending that binary altogether; about carving a space where developing nations, through solidarity and strategic pragmatism, can assert agency on the world stage.

The strategic partnership between Indonesia and Egypt may not dominate global headlines. It could, though, offer a template for how nations of the Global South collaborate, not through dependency, but through dignity. And in a world sorely lacking in moral clarity, Jakarta and Cairo’s unified call for peace in Palestine may well be one of the few voices speaking with both principle and purpose.

Below the radar: Is the Trump-Netanyahu ‘unthinkable’ about to happen?

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

China has accused the United States of “double standards” after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose an additional 100 percent tariff on Chinese goods in response to Beijing’s curbs on exports of rare earth minerals.

China says its export control measures announced last week were in response to the US restrictions on its entities and targeting of Beijing’s maritime, logistics and shipbuilding industries.

Trump’s tariff threats, which come weeks ahead of the likely meeting between the US president and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, have the potential to reignite a trade war months after Washington lowered the China tariffs from 125 to 30 percent.

The actions by the world’s two largest economies threaten to ignite a new trade war, adding further uncertainty to global trade. So what’s the recent history of US trade measures against China, and will the two countries be able to resolve their differences?

Why did China tighten export controls on rare earths?

On October 9, China expanded export controls to cover 12 out of 17 rare-earth metals and certain refining equipment, effective December 1, after accusing Washington of harming China’s interests and undermining “the atmosphere of bilateral economic and trade talks”.

China also placed restrictions on the export of specialist technological equipment used to refine rare-earth metals on Thursday.

Beijing justified its measures, accusing Washington of imposing a series of trade curbs on Chinese entities despite the two sides being engaged in trade talks, with the last one taking place in Madrid, Spain last month.

Foreign companies now need Beijing’s approval to export products containing Chinese rare earths, and must disclose their intended use. China said the heightened restrictions come as a result of national security interests.

China has a near monopoly over rare earths, critical for the manufacture of technology such as electric cars, smartphones, semiconductors and weapons.

The US is a major consumer of Chinese rare earths, which are crucial for the US defence industry.

At the end of this month, Trump and Xi are expected to meet in South Korea, and experts speculate that Beijing’s move was to gain bargaining advantage in trade negotiations with Washington.

China’s tightening of restrictions on rare earths is “pre-meeting choreography” before Trump’s meeting with Xi, Kristin Vekasi, the Mansfield chair of Japan and Indo-Pacific Affairs at the University of Montana, told Al Jazeera.

How did Trump respond?

On October 10, Trump announced the imposition of a 100 percent tariff on China, effective from November 1.

“Based on the fact that China has taken this unprecedented position … the United States of America will impose a Tariff of 100 percent on China, over and above any Tariff that they are currently paying,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform.

He added that this would come into effect on November 1 or before that. Trump added that the US would also impose export controls on “any and all critical software”.

Earlier on October 10, Trump accused China of “trade hostility” and even said he might scrap his meeting with Xi. It is unclear at this point whether the meeting will take place.

“What the United States has is we have a lot of leverage, and my hope, and I know the president’s hope, is that we don’t have to use that leverage,” US Vice President JD Vance told Fox News on Sunday.

How did China respond to that?

China deemed the US retaliation a “double standard”, according to remarks by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesperson on Sunday.

China said that Washington had “overstretched the concept of national security, abused export control measures” and “adopted discriminatory practices against China”.

“We are living in an era of deeper intertwining of security and economic policies. Both the US and China have expanded their conceptions of national security, encompassing a range of economic activities,” Manoj Kewalramani, chairperson of the Indo-Pacific Studies Programme at the Takshashila Institution in Bangalore, India, told Al Jazeera.

“Both have also weaponised economic interdependence with each other and third parties. There are, in other words, no saints in this game.”

Kewalramani said that China started expanding the idea of “national security” much earlier than others, especially with its “comprehensive national security concept” introduced in 2014.

Through this, China began to include many different areas, such as economics, technology, and society, under the term “national security”. This shows that China was ahead of other countries in broadening what counts as a national security issue.

China threatened additional measures if Trump went ahead with his pledge.

“Willful threats of high tariffs are not the right way to get along with China. China’s position on the trade war is consistent: we do not want it, but we are not afraid of it,” the Chinese Commerce Ministry spokesperson said in a statement.

“Should the US persist in its course, China will resolutely take corresponding measures to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests,” the statement said.

What trade measures has the US taken against China in recent history?

2025: Trump unleashes tariff war

A month after taking office for his second term, Trump signed an executive order imposing a 10 percent tariff on all imports from China, citing a trade deficit in favour of China. In this order, he also imposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada. China levied countermeasures, imposing duties on US products in retaliation.

In March, the US president doubled the tariff on all Chinese products to 20 percent as of March 4. China imposed a 15 percent tariff on a range of US farm exports in retaliation; these took effect on March 10.

Trump announced his “reciprocal tariffs,” imposing a 34 percent tariff on Chinese products. China retaliated, also announcing a 34 percent tariff on US products. This was the first time China announced export controls on rare earths.

Hours after the reciprocal tariffs went into effect, Trump paused them for all his tariff targets except China. The US and China continued to hike tit-for-tat levies on each other.

Trump slapped 145 percent tariffs on Chinese imports, prompting China to hit back with 125 percent tariffs. Washington and Beijing later cut tariffs to 30 percent and 10 percent, respectively, in May, then agreed to a 90-day truce in August for trade talks. The truce has been extended twice.

December 2024: The microchip controls are tightened

In December 2024, Trump’s predecessor, former US President Joe Biden, tightened controls on the sale of microchips first introduced on October 2022.

Under the new controls, 140 companies from China, Japan, South Korea and Singapore were added to a list of restricted entities. The US also banned more advanced chip-making equipment to certain countries. Even products manufactured abroad with US technology were restricted.

April 2024: Biden signs the TikTok ban

Biden signed a bill into law that would ban TikTok unless it was sold to a non-Chinese buyer within a year. The US government alleged that TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance was linked to the Chinese government, making the app a threat to national security.

ByteDance sued the US federal government over this bill in May 2024.

In September this year, Trump announced that a deal was finalised to find a new owner of TikTok.

October 2023: Biden introduces more restrictions on chips

In October 2023, Biden restricted US exports of advanced computer chips, especially those made by Nvidia, to China and other countries.

The goal of this measure was to limit China’s access to “advanced semiconductors that could fuel breakthroughs in artificial intelligence and sophisticated computers that are critical to [Chinese] military applications,” Gina Raimondo, who was secretary of the US Department of Commerce during the Biden administration, told reporters.

Prior to this, Biden signed an executive order in August 2023, creating a programme that limits US investments in certain high-tech areas, including semiconductors, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence, in countries deemed to be a security risk, like China.

October 2022: Biden restricts Chinese access to semiconductors

Biden restricted China’s access to US semiconductors in October 2022. The rules further expanded restrictions on chipmaking tools to include industries that support the semiconductor supply chain, blocking both access to American expertise and the essential components used in manufacturing the tools that produce microchips.

Semiconductors are used in the manufacturing of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. The US government placed these restrictions back then to limit China’s ability to acquire the ability to produce semiconductors and advance in the technological race.

The restrictions made it compulsory for entities within China to apply for licences to acquire American semiconductors. Analysis by the US-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace described these licences as “hard to get” back then.

Recently, some US lawmakers are calling for even more restrictions, warning that China could quickly reverse-engineer advanced semiconductor technologies on its own, outpace the US in the sector, and gain a military edge.

May 2020: Trump cracks down on Huawei

In May 2020, the US Bureau of Industry and Security intensified rules to stop Huawei, the Chinese tech giant, from using American technology and software to design and make semiconductors in other countries.

The new rules said that semiconductors are designed for Huawei using US technology or equipment, anywhere in the world, would need US government approval before being sent to Huawei.

May 2019: Trump bans Huawei

Trump signed an executive order blocking Chinese telecommunications companies like Huawei from selling equipment in the US. The Shenzhen-based Huawei is the world’s largest provider of 5G networks, according to analysis by the New York City-based think tank the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Under this order, Huawei and 114 related entities were added to a list that requires US companies to get special permission (a licence) before selling certain technologies to them.

The rationale behind this order was the allegation that Huawei threatened US national security, had stolen intellectual property and could commit cyber espionage. Some US lawmakers alleged that the Chinese government was using Huawei to spy on Americans. The US did not publicise any evidence to back these allegations.

Other Western countries had also cooperated with the US.

March 2018: Trump imposes tariffs on China

During his first administration, Trump imposed sweeping 25 percent tariffs on Chinese goods worth as much as $60bn. In June of 2018, Trump announced more tariffs.

China retaliated by imposing tariffs on US products. Beijing deemed Trump’s trade policies “trade bullyism practices”, according to an official white paper, as reported by Xinhua news agency.

In September 2018, Trump issued another round of 10 percent tariffs on Chinese products, which were hiked to 25 percent in May 2019.

During the Obama administration (2009-2017)

In 2011, during US President Barack Obama’s tenure, the US-China trade deficit reached an all-time high of $295.5bn, up from $273.1bn in the previous year.

In March 2012, the US, European Union, and Japan formally complained to China at the World Trade Organization (WTO) about China’s limits on selling rare earth metals to other countries. This move was deemed “rash and unfair” by China.

In its ruling, the world trade body said China’s export restraints were breaching the WTO rules.

In 2014, the US indicted five Chinese nationals with alleged ties to China’s People’s Liberation Army. They were charged with stealing trade technology from American companies.

What’s next for the US-China trade war?

Trump and Xi are expected to meet in South Korea on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), which is set to begin on October 31.

But the latest trade dispute has clouded the Xi-Trump meeting.

On Sunday, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, downplaying the threat: “Don’t worry about China, it will all be fine! Highly respected President Xi just had a bad moment. He doesn’t want Depression for his country, and neither do I. The U.S.A. wants to help China, not hurt it!!!”

In an interview with Fox Business Network on Monday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said, “President Trump said that the tariffs would not go into effect until November 1. He will be meeting with [Communist] Party Chair Xi in [South] Korea. I believe that meeting will still be on.”

When it comes to which of the two players is more affected by the trade war, Kewalramani said that he thinks “what matters is who is willing to bear greater pain, endure greater cost”.

“This is the crucial question. I would wager that Beijing is probably better placed because Washington has alienated allies and partners with its policies since January. But then, China’s growing export controls are not simply aimed at the US. They impact every country. So Beijing has not also endeared itself to anyone,” Kewalramani said, pointing out how Trump’s tariffs and China’s rare earth restrictions target multiple countries.

“The ones affected the most are countries caught in the midst of great power competition.”

On Sunday, US VP Vance told Fox News about China: “If they respond in a highly aggressive manner, I guarantee you, the president of the United States has far more cards than the People’s Republic of China.”

Kewalramani said that so far, Beijing has been more organised, prepared and strategic than the US in its policies.

“That said, it has overreached with the latest round of export controls. US policy, meanwhile, has lacked strategic coherence. The US still is the dominant global power and has several cards to play. What matters, however, is whether it can get its house in order.”

Renewed fighting between rival leaders forces mass exodus across South Sudan’s borders as fears of wider war rise.

About 300,000 people have fled South Sudan so far in 2025 as armed conflict between rival leaders threatens civil war, the United Nations warns.

The mass displacement was reported on Monday by the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan. The report cautioned that the conflict between President Salva Kiir and suspended First Vice President Riek Machar risks a return to full-scale war.

The commission’s report called for an urgent regional intervention to prevent the country from sliding towards such a tragic event.

South Sudan has been beset by political instability and ethnic violence since it gained independence from Sudan in 2011.

The country plunged into civil war in 2013 when Kiir dismissed Machar as vice president. The pair agreed a ceasefire in 2017, but their fragile power-sharing agreement has been unravelling for months and was suspended last month amid outbreaks of violence among forces loyal to each.

Machar was placed under house arrest in March after fighting between the military and an ethnic Nuer militia in the northeastern town of Nasir killed dozens of people and displaced more than 80,000.

He was charged with treason, murder and crimes against humanity in September although his lawyer argued the court lacked jurisdiction. Kiir suspended Machar from his position in early October.

Machar rejects the charges with his spokesman calling them a “political witch-hunt”.

Renewed clashes in South Sudan have driven almost 150,000 people to Sudan, where a civil war has raged for two years, and a similar number into neighbouring Uganda, Ethiopia and as far as Kenya.

More than 2.5 million South Sudanese refugees now live in neighbouring countries while two million remain internally displaced.

The commission linked the current crisis to corruption and lack of accountability among South Sudan’s leaders.

“The ongoing political crisis, increasing fighting and unchecked, systemic corruption are all symptoms of the failure of leadership,” Commissioner Barney Afako said.

“The crisis is the result of deliberate choices made by its leaders to put their interests above those of their people,” Commission Chairwoman Yasmin Sooka said.

A UN report in September detailed significant corruption, alleging that $1.7bn from an oil-for-roads programme remains unaccounted for while three-quarters of the country faces severe food shortages.

Commissioner Barney Afako warned that without immediate regional engagement, South Sudan risks catastrophic consequences.

“South Sudanese are looking to the African Union and the region to rescue them from a preventable fate,” he said.

“We have to die so people can keep working.” Canada’s Grassy Narrows First Nation is taking on the government over a local employer’s poisoning of their water.

Hull KR’s Grand Final-winning trio Mikey Lewis, Jez Litten and Joe Burgess have all been named in England’s final 24-man squad for the autumn Ashes Test series against Australia but there is no place for Super League’s Man of Steel winner Jake Connor.

Litten’s only previous cap arrived against France in 2023, while Burgess, who scored two tries in Hull KR’s triumph over Wigan on Saturday, returns to the England set-up after a 10-year absence.

But Connor, who was also omitted from the squad get-together in June, has been unable to convince head coach Shaun Wane he deserves a spot amid fierce competition in the halves.

Wane’s stellar options in those berths include captain George Williams, Wigan’s Harry Smith and Lewis, who won the Rob Burrow Award for man of the match with a sparkling performance at Old Trafford.

Australia face England at Wembley on 25 October, at Everton’s Hill Dickinson Stadium on 1 November and at AMT Headingley on 8 November. All three matches are 14:30 kick-offs and will be live on BBC One.

“I’m really excited by the 24 players we have selected ahead of this upcoming Ashes Series,” said Wane.

“There were some tough decisions to be made given the quality we have across both Super League and the NRL and that’s never easy, but I am confident that the 24 selected will give us the best chance of winning this series.”

England squad: John Bateman (North Queensland Cowboys), AJ Brimson (Gold Coast Titans), Joe Burgess (Hull KR), Daryl Clark (St Helens), Herbie Farnworth (Dolphins), Ethan Havard (Wigan Warriors), Morgan Knowles (St Helens), Matty Lees (St Helens), Mikey Lewis (Hull KR), Jez Litten (Hull KR), Mike McMeeken (Wakefield Trinity), Harry Newman (Leeds Rhinos), Mikolaj Oledzki (Leeds Rhinos), Tom Johnstone (Wakefield Trinity), Kai Pearce-Paul (Newcastle Knights), Harry Smith (Wigan Warriors), Morgan Smithies (Canberra Raiders), Owen Trout (Leigh Leopards), Alex Walmsley (St Helens), Jake Wardle (Wigan Warriors), Kallum Watkins (Leeds Rhinos), Jack Welsby (St Helens), George Williams (Warrington Wolves), Dom Young (Newcastle Knights)

The cold bites harder at night. Nathaniel Bitrus* feels it on his face as the motorcycle roars along the dirt path to Sunawara, a small community in the Toungo area of Adamawa State, North East Nigeria. A chainsaw sits carefully on his lap, and with two other men, he disappears into the forest.

Nathaniel has spent nearly half of his 45 years taking this three-hour trip. It has helped feed his family, but it has also taken lives and stripped the forest bare. Once, he says, the forests were so dense that the sun barely touched the ground at noon. Now, there are clearings everywhere. Loggers like him have carved paths through the vast Gashaka-Gumti National Park, cutting less lucrative trees to reach the prize – rosewood.

The forest is patrolled, Nathaniel says, checkpoints mounted along the main routes. But with a government permit and the usual bribe, he says, a passage can be bought. 

The men prefer the cheaper way, the secret trails that slip past the eyes of rangers and guards, the paths only loggers know. One such road is called Yaro Me Ka Dauko, a Hausa phrase meaning, “Boy, what are you carrying?” It is the road of the daring. Nathaniel takes it again in silence tonight. He does not have a choice.

When farming is no longer enough 

Nathaniel was a farmer first, or at least he tried to be. He grew maize on a small plot outside Toungo, enough to feed his wife and children. But then the seasons turned. The rains came late or did not come at all, and so the harvests shrank.

In 2001, some men from Lagos, South West Nigeria, came asking for people who could supply rosewood. They showed pictures of the trees they wanted. The locals knew exactly where to find them. Nathaniel was in his twenties then, strong enough to swing an axe all night, and the pay was good – ₦1,000 (about $10 then) per tree log. It was enough to buy food, pay school fees, and buy fertilisers and insecticides, he recalls. 

He signed up.

Soon, there were chainsaws, trucks, and high-paying middlemen. They cut faster and worked into the nights.

David Isaac*, another Toungo farmer-turned-logger, tells us he has been at it for 15 years. “I cut trees to feed my family,” he says. “Farming does not pay anymore. This one does.”

In Baruwa, a forest community tucked in the Mambilla Plateau in the Gashaka Local Government Area of neighbouring Taraba State, George Johnson* has been logging for three decades. He first came to Gembu, a cold town on the plateau, to work on people’s farms. But farming paid too little. 

“Things were expensive,” he says. Logging was better. Sometimes he harvests eucalyptus for local farmers. Other times, when dealers call, he travels three hours to Baruwa to log rosewood.

“The work is dangerous,” Nathaniel says.

They spend days deep in the forest, cutting trees. At night, they sleep with one eye open in makeshift tents. Wild animals prowl close. 

“Sometimes people die or get injured,” says David. “Trees fall on people.”

It happened to him once. He lived. Others were not so lucky.

Rosewood is heavy. When a tree falls, the men loop chains around the trunk and drag it out of the forest until it reaches the dirt road, where trucks wait to transport the logs to a depot outside Sunawara. But as more people died, they pooled money for a crane.

“We did not choose this job,” Nathaniel says softly. “We went to school. But there is no work. If I had a choice, I would not do this.”

Road to China

The real money is not in Toungo or Gashaka or the Mambilla Plateau.

It is in the hands of dealers, foreign buyers, and complicit officials who turn forests into fortunes.

When a dealer receives a consignment request, he calls loggers like Nathaniel.

“We have dedicated loggers, the ones we contact anytime there is demand,” says Charles Ekene*, a Gembu-based dealer. The buyers rarely visit, he says. “They communicate over the phone.”

The dealer commissions the loggers, supplies chainsaws and trucks, sets the prices, pays the transporters, and handles all the paperwork.

Loggers like Nathaniel have their own tools and work independently. “We meet with loggers at a place called ‘Kan Cross, where we negotiate prices,” says  Aliyu Muhammad, a 20-year-old Toungo-based motorcyclist. A trip into the forest costs about ₦4,000 ($2.68), he explains. 

Inside the forest, the loggers cut the trees, paint their initials onto the stumps to mark ownership, and drag the trunks to the roadside. From there, trucks carry them to depots beyond Sunawara.

“They pay about ₦20,000 [$13.40] per log,” Nathaniel says. 

The logs are measured with tape, he adds. 

“And since we do not have access to the buyers in Lagos, we accept whatever the dealers pay us,” says David. 

George says he gets ₦40,000 ($26.81) no matter the size of the log. This is where the real profit begins.

“A truck could fetch ₦3 million [about $2,100] or more on a good day,” Charles says.

From Taraba and Adamawa, the trucks head southward. “From Baruwa, we drive to Jalingo,” Hamma Yusuf*, a 38-year-old truck driver, tells us. And from Jalingo, they reach Lagos, passing through Abuja. 

“It is close to the water,” he says vaguely of the final location. “There are a lot of containers there.”

Logs from Sunawara follow a similar path, passing through Yola, the Adamawa State capital, then Abuja. “Other drivers head first to Kano,” David explains. “A few take the hilly roads through Gembu before reaching Baissa in Taraba.”

Hamma has been transporting timber since 2010. It is mostly intrastate – moving logs from Baruwa and Nguroje, another logging hotspot in Taraba, to a major depot in Baissa, a town in the Kurmi Local Government Area. Occasionally, he makes the longer trip to Lagos.

Hamma works under someone else. They handle the paperwork and negotiate with the dealers, he explains. He carries the documents only to present at checkpoints. 

“Most of the money goes to the owner,” he says. 

Like with the loggers, truck owners decide the pay. Hamma says he earns what could sustain him and his family.

A 2022 Arise News investigation confirmed what Hamma and David describe: rosewood from the region pass through Shagamu, Ogun State, before reaching Apapa Port in Lagos, where cargo ships carry it to China. Our GIS analysis corroborates this route.

Between 2014 and 2017, an average of 40 shipping containers – about 5,600 logs, or 2,800 trees – left Nigeria for China every single day, according to the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA). In 2016 alone, the EIA reported, more than 1.4 million rosewood logs worth $300 million were smuggled into China, despite the species being listed under Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), a classification requiring strict permitting and oversight.

Today, the financial losses remain unquantified. Neither the National Strategy to Combat Wildlife and Forest Crime (2022–2026) nor Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) performance reports estimate how much Nigeria loses annually to timber trafficking. 

In search of clarity, we filed Freedom of Information (FOI) requests to the Federal Ministry of Finance and the NCS, asking for revenue-loss data. Neither agency had responded at press time.

China’s official 2025 import figures are also unavailable. However, Statista reports that in 2023, China imported $17.1 billion worth of wood products, second only to the United States. Meanwhile, the Enhancing Africa’s Transnational Organised Crime (ENACT) 2017 report estimates that Africa loses about $17 billion annually to timber smuggling.

Much of this demand traces back to China’s enduring cultural fascination with rosewood, known as hongmu. Once reserved for emperors of the Ming and Qing dynasties, rosewood furniture became a coveted status symbol, admired for its deep hues, durability, and capacity for intricate carving. That appetite lives on. 

But China’s own forests could not sustain this demand. Large scale logging was banned decades ago. The hunger simply shifted elsewhere. First to Southeast Asia, and more recently to Africa, which now supplies the lion’s share. A 2022 Forest Trends report shows that by 2020, 83 per cent of China’s wood imports came from Africa, while shipments from Southeast Asia declined. CITES data adds that over 41 per cent of China’s rosewood log imports from range states – more than 2.2 million cubic meters worth about $1.037 billion – came from Africa. The scale of demand is staggering: Forest Trends noted that between 2000 and 2015, China’s rosewood imports surged by 1,250 per cent, with the value nearly doubling in a single year between 2013 and 2014, reaching $2.6 billion.

Laws exist, only on paper

Nigeria’s laws against illegal logging look formidable on paper. The Endangered Species Act (1985, revised 2016), the Nigerian Customs Act (2023) prohibiting the export of endangered timber, the pending Endangered Species Conservation and Protection Bill (2024), and multiple state laws ban or criminalise rosewood trafficking. Yet in 2022, CITES issued a rare Article XIII intervention, citing “persistent governance failures” and warning of possible trade sanctions if enforcement did not improve.

State-level bans tell the same story of power without teeth. Taraba State outlawed rosewood logging in 2023. Yet, George insists he pays ₦10,000 ($6.70) each to both local and state governments for annual permits. When asked for proof, he claimed he left the permit at home and promised to send a photo later – a promise he never kept.

Our attempts to verify his claim led nowhere. Officials at the Taraba State Ministry of Environment and Climate Change declined to comment. The ministry’s director of planning, research, and statistics, Fidelis Nashuka, told us, “We have a department of forestry which has no more details on this.”

That same year, Adamawa State governor Ahmadu Fintiri announced a tree-felling ban but framed it as a measure against burning trees “in the name of charcoal,” without naming specific species. Loggers say the ban changed nothing. 

“We obtain permits from the local government,” David says. 

A permit used to cost ₦30,000 ($20.11), he adds, but now goes for ₦50,000 ($34). Nathaniel agrees. “Officials could even issue them at ₦70,000 [$47],” he says, “because the business became competitive.”

When asked to produce these permits, none of the loggers could. They claim carrying the documents is risky, so they leave them at home unless heading deep into the forest. HumAngle wrote to the Adamawa State Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources to verify these claims. However, we got no response. 

On paper, Nigeria has the laws to end this trade. In reality, enforcement bends under corruption.

“We pay money at every security check point for us to be allowed to pass,” David claims.

The problem runs far deeper than local bribes. In 2017, the EIA revealed that Nigerian officials retrospectively issued about 4,000 CITES permits for rosewood logs seized in China, allegedly after payments of over a million dollars to senior officials, with the involvement of the Chinese consulate. Former Environment Minister Amina Mohammed reportedly signed the documents in her final days in office before becoming UN Deputy Secretary-General.

And this is not just a West African story. In 2021, a Kenyan court ordered the country’s Revenue Authority to return $13 million worth of confiscated rosewood to alleged traffickers. The timber had been seized at the Port of Mombasa while in transit from Madagascar through Zanzibar to Hong Kong

A 2022 report by the Institute for Security Studies argued that illegal African rosewood trafficking thrives on corruption, weak enforcement, and legal loopholes across Madagascar, Malawi, Tanzania, Zambia, and Kenya, with China’s demand as the engine driving it all. The report shows how high-level officials, court decisions, and lax port regulations across East and Southern Africa have turned enforcement into theatre, allowing traffickers to sidestep both domestic laws and CITES restrictions.

The Nigeria-Cameroon border tells the same story. Porous and poorly monitored, it serves as both source and smuggling corridor. Once, Nathaniel crossed the border into Cameroon. The locals there, he recalls, are not as deeply involved as those in Nigeria. The trees felled in Cameroon find their way into Nigeria, he explains.

A 2022 investigation traced the journey of logs from the forests of northern Cameroon through Taraba and Adamawa, showing how the wood, cleared to look Nigerian, made its way to export points. Forest Trends’ Illegal Deforestation and Associated Trade database confirms Nigeria’s role as both a major source and transit country.

People were caught along the way, Nathaniel says. “Our people were beaten, locked up. Some died in prison. At one point, we had to run to save our lives. Our equipment was even set on fire after clashes with security officials in Cameroon.”

There is some success. Occasionally, government officials seize illegal timber, arrest a handful of loggers and dealers, or burn trucks on the spot.

In Taraba, officials insist the 2023 logging ban is being enforced. 

“There are mobile courts, attached with a task force, that go round penalising illegal loggers,” says Fidelis. “They are stationed on major roads. Once the task force apprehends timber poachers, the mobile court immediately fines.”

Penalties, however, rarely go beyond fines. “No jail terms at the moment,” Fidelis admits. “We are still working on the law to include that. There have been arrests, almost every day. But I cannot mention the scale of these arrests, as I am not part of the team.”

Yet on our reporting trip, we saw no sign of these mobile courts or task forces. Only the usual immigration, military, and police checkpoints lined the roads.

At the federal level, the Nigeria Customs Service touts large-scale seizures across ports, border posts, and inland commands. Its 2024 performance report claims that from January to June 2024, the agency made 2,442 seizures with a Duty Paid Value of ₦25.5 billion ($17 million), 203 per cent higher than the same period in 2023.

The National Park Service (NPS) also points to progress. In an April interview with HumAngle, Surveyor-General Ibrahim Musa Goni said the NPS was working with agencies like the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency, the NCS, and others to curb trafficking in wildlife species and plants.

At the end of 2023, Goni said, the NPS made 646 arrests across all national parks, with Gashaka-Gumti recording the highest number, a sign of persistent clashes between park rangers and illegal loggers, poachers, and other intruders in the reserve’s forests and buffer zones.

Regionally, Nigeria is working with the African Protected Area Directors (APAD), ECOWAS, and other regional blocs in East and Central Africa, Goni says. “We take our issues to the European Union and other regional bodies. This way, we get to reach the governments of various countries.”

Yet the logging continues.

The human and ecological toll

The scars are everywhere.

“Before, this place was covered with trees,” says Mary, a 45-year-old farmer in Sunawara, pointing to the bare stretch where stumps now stand like broken teeth. We flew a drone over the hills above Toungo. We could see the empty patches where forests once stood like walls.

Gathering firewood has become a daily struggle. “We have to walk a long distance now just to find enough for cooking,” Mary says.

But the loss is deeper than firewood.

“Rosewood belongs to the Fabaceae family,” explains Ridwan Jaafar, an ecosystem ecologist from the Mambilla Plateau and lead strategist for the Nigerian Montane Forest Project. “This group of species fixes atmospheric nitrogen and enriches the soil. When the trees are gone, that function disappears too.”

Farmers feel the loss directly. “It hardly rains anymore,” says Juris Saiwa, a 68-year-old farmer in Sunawara. “Maybe it is because of cutting down trees,” he adds, convinced that history links deforestation with drought.

Yields have shrunk. “We could cultivate even without fertiliser before,” says Jauro, the Sunawara village head. 

Mary agrees: “Now our crops do not grow well. The land does not produce the way it used to.”

Dr Hamman Kamale, a geologist at the University of Maiduguri in Borno State, confirms what the farmers sense. “Deforestation degrades soil fertility. Organic matter declines, soils compact, and land degradation spreads,” he says. HumAngle reported in July that farmers in Taraba complained of dry spells withering their crops.

The damage spirals outward. Ridwan explains that trees play a key role in carbon storage. “Forests act as terrestrial carbon sinks, absorbing carbon dioxide and locking it in biomass and soil,” he says. Remove the trees, and you release carbon while erasing that storage capacity.

The dangers multiply with floods and erosion. “Deforestation removes root reinforcement, increasing landslide risk, accelerates runoff, and triggers gully formation,” says Dr. Kamale. “Sediment loads rise in rivers, channels destabilise, groundwater recharge drops, and water quality declines.” 

In Adamawa, floods now come almost every year, destroying homes and displacing thousands.

The damage extends to wildlife.

“The animals we used to see, such as gorillas and monkeys, are gone,” says Jauro. “We don’t know if they left or died out.” 

Rosewood provides shelter for these animals, ecologist Ridwan says. “They are also a food source as their leaves are rich in nitrogen. Their disappearance means animals and birds migrate.”

Satellite analysis reveals what the farmers, scientists, and ecologists are saying. Our Landsat data analysis (USGS, 2023) shows a dramatic transformation of the Gashaka-Gumti National Park between 2010 and 2023. Bare land expanded by more than 1,800 km² between 2010 and 2015 alone, a fourteen-fold increase in just five years. Farmland and sparse vegetation actually shrank by nearly 80 km² during the same period, proving that this was no slow encroachment by farmers but a rapid, organised logging boom. By 2020, cleared land exceeded 2,050 km². Even after a slight recovery by 2023, dense forest cover stood at just 39.8 km², far below pre-boom levels, leaving the park deeply scarred.

Experts say the solutions must begin where the damage began. “Even some security agents don’t understand the environmental laws,” Ridwan laments. “The government must involve the communities, enlighten them on the risks, and provide sustainable alternatives like beekeeping or shea butter processing. These are more profitable and ecologically sound. But the key is community ownership.”

Dr. Kamale recommends protecting riparian zones and steep headwaters, restricting logging on fragile soils, building erosion control structures like check dams, reforesting degraded slopes with native species, enforcing low-impact harvesting, and strengthening Nigeria–Cameroon cooperation on monitoring.

But money remains the missing piece. NPS boss Goni admits enforcement cannot rely on security agencies alone. “Half the success depends on local communities,” he says. “We have begun training people with new skills and giving starter packs for alternative livelihoods. It has reduced hunting and logging in some areas. But we need more resources to make this sustainable.”

The last ride

It is dawn. Nathaniel and his crew emerge from the forest, three men on a motorcycle, just as they had gone in. 

They will not make this trip again for months, Nathaniel says. The trees are thinning out. The dealers have moved south, to Cross River, where rosewood still grows in abundance. 

“The market is no longer like it used to be,” he tells us. “The people from Lagos don’t come anymore. The foreigners too, we don’t see them like before.”

He sits on the stump of a felled rosewood at the depot outside Sunawara, where he speaks to us.

The air here is damp and cold; fog drifts between the few remaining trees. We can feel the cold, despite putting on jackets. The temperature is below 19°C. A few birds call from somewhere deep inside the remaining trees in the forest, their songs thinner than was described before our trip.

Nathaniel looks towards the forest. He has made this journey hundreds of times, yet each one leaves him with a hollowness he cannot name. The money never lasts. The danger grows each season.

It is hard to picture the world Ridwan, the ecologist, dreams of, a world where bees hum between restored trees, where tourists come to see the wildlife instead of empty clearings. Harder still to imagine a government willing to stop the trade not only with arrests but with real work for men like Nathaniel.

A tricycle moves past, stacked with rosewood planks. It disappears down the road, leaving behind a ribbon of smoke and the smell of fuel hanging in the cold morning air.

*Names with asterisks were changed to protect the sources.

Satellite image analysis and map illustrations were done by Mansir Muhammed. Imagery was sourced from Google Earth Pro and the multi-decade Landsat archive of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), with official park boundaries obtained from the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA).

This story was produced by HumAngle with the support of Internews’ Earth Journalism Network.

The bus, travelling from the Eastern Cape to Zimbabwe and Malawi, tumbled down a steep embankment.

A bus has crashed in a mountainous region in the north of South Africa, killing at least 42 people.

The vehicle veered off a steep mountain road on the N1 highway near the town of Makhado in Limpopo province on Sunday evening, before tumbling down an embankment and landing upside down.

The vehicle was travelling from Gqeberha in South Africa’s Eastern Cape province to Zimbabwe and Malawi.

Emergency crews worked through the night to pull victims from the wreckage and transport survivors to nearby hospitals.

More than 30 injured passengers received medical treatment. Authorities said some people may still be trapped inside the overturned bus.

According to public broadcaster SABC, the dead included 18 women, 17 men and seven children.

A 10-month-old baby was among the victims, Violet Mathy, a transport official for the Limpopo province, told Newzroom Afrika.

The road, a major highway connecting South Africa to Zimbabwe, remained closed in both directions on Monday as rescue operations continued.

Limpopo Premier Phophi Ramathuba visited the crash site before meeting survivors in hospital.

“Losing so many lives in one incident is painful beyond words,” she said, offering condolences to families in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Malawi.

Authorities are investigating what caused the driver to lose control, with initial assessments pointing to possible fatigue or mechanical failure as potential factors.

The provincial government is providing counselling support to survivors while working with diplomatic missions from Zimbabwe and Malawi to assist bereaved families.

South Africa’s roads are among the most dangerous in the world, with thousands of people dying in crashes each year.

Long-distance buses carrying migrant workers between countries in Southern Africa are frequently involved in serious accidents on the region’s highways.