TODAY

In this episode of the “Decline & Fall” podcast, Alexander Mckay and Kit Klarenberg look at the US empire’s abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, the absurd criminal case and the legal challenges ahead.

Mckay and Klarenberg also place the attack on Venezuela within the bigger picture of the Trump administration’s foreign policy.

Source: Decline and Fall

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has vetoed a bill that would have reduced the prison sentence of his right-wing rival and predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, who was convicted of plotting a coup.

On Thursday, Lula followed through with his promise to block the legislation, which had passed Brazil’s opposition-controlled Congress last year.

“In the name of the future, we do not have the right to forget the past,” Lula wrote in a series of social media posts, saying that it would have benefitted “those who attacked Brazilian democracy”.

The veto came on the third anniversary of the 2023 attack on the Three Powers Plaza in the capital of Brasilia, where government buildings representing the presidency, Congress and the Supreme Court stand.

On January 8 of that year, thousands of Bolsonaro supporters stormed the buildings in an apparent attempt to provoke a military response that would remove Lula from power.

In marking the anniversary of the attack, Lula called on Brazilians to stand up for their young democracy, which began after a period of violent dictatorship in the late 20th century.

“January 8th is marked in history as the day of democracy’s victory. A victory over those who tried to seize power by force, disregarding the popular will expressed at the ballot box. Over those who have always defended dictatorship, torture, and the extermination of opponents,” Lula wrote online.

“The attempted coup on January 8, 2023, reminded us that democracy is not an unshakeable achievement.”

Bolsonaro’s sentence

The January 8 attack caused millions of dollars in property damage and dozens of injuries, as police and protesters clashed in the government plaza.

The incident evoked comparisons to the violent riot at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021, where supporters of President Donald Trump attempted to disrupt the certification of his 2020 election defeat.

Likewise, Bolsonaro, a former army captain, had refused to concede his defeat to Lula after a narrow loss in the 2022 elections.

Rather, he and his allies had argued that Brazil’s electronic voting machines were susceptible to fraud, and they challenged the election results in court. Their petition, however, was thrown out for its “total absence of any evidence”.

Still, many of Bolsonaro’s supporters backed his claims and took to the streets to protest the election results. The weeks surrounding Lula’s inauguration in January 2023 were fraught, with reports of a bomb threat and an attack on police headquarters in Brasilia.

Prosecutors later accused Bolsonaro and his allies of leading a criminal conspiracy to overturn the election results.

One of the options the defendants allegedly weighed was to declare a “state of siege” in Brazil, which would allow the military to take control and new elections be held. Another option was reportedly to assassinate Lula and his running mate, Geraldo Alckmin.

Bolsonaro has pleaded not guilty to the charges and denied any wrongdoing, framing the accusations instead as a political hit job.

Still, in September, he was sentenced to 27 years in prison after being found guilty on counts including attempting a coup, causing damage to public property, attempting the violent abolition of the democratic rule of law, participation in a criminal enterprise, and the deterioration of a listed national heritage site.

He began his prison term in November, after he was found to have damaged the ankle monitor used to ensure he was not a flight risk.

Weighing October’s election

Conservative politicians, however, have decried the prison sentence as excessive and called for its reduction.

Bolsonaro’s son Eduardo has petitioned the Trump administration in the US to intervene on behalf of the imprisoned ex-president, and his eldest child, Flavio Bolsonaro, even hinted he might suspend his 2026 presidential bid if his father were released.

On December 10, Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies passed legislation that would reduce the sentences of nearly 1,000 people linked to the January 8 attack, including Bolsonaro.

A week later, on December 17, the Senate followed suit, sending the leniency bill to the president for his signature.

But Lula had repeatedly pledged to reject the bill, risking the possibility that Brazil’s Congress could override his veto.

“ This is a bill that really is a litmus test in Brazilian politics,” Gustavo Ribeiro, a journalist and founder of The Brazil Report, told Al Jazeera. “Conservatives overwhelmingly supported it, while liberals are adamantly against it.”

Still, Ribeiro described the bill as a compromise between Brazil’s centre-right and far-right forces.

“The centre-right tried to work a sort of a middle-of-the-road solution that is not full amnesty but would allow Bolsonaro to leave incarceration after two years, in what we call in Brazil a semi-open prison sentence,” he explained.

He sees Brazil’s general election in October as a significant factor in Congress’s passage of the bill, noting that Bolsonaro remains a popular figure on the right.

“Because Bolsonaro has such a big clout with conservatives, many in Congress – many right-of-centre lawmakers – fear that if they do not lend their full support to any cause that Bolsonaro espouses, they will lose support,” Ribeiro said.

Lula is seeking a fourth term as president in October’s election, and he is expected to face Bolsonaro’s son Flavio at the ballot box.

US president signals he is not ready to back the Israel-aligned opposition figure to lead Iran in case of regime change.

United States President Donald Trump has ruled out meeting with Iran’s self-proclaimed Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, suggesting that Washington is not ready to back a successor to the Iranian government, should it collapse.

On Thursday, Trump called Pahlavi, the son of Iran’s last shah who was toppled by the Islamic revolution of 1979, a “nice person”. But Trump added that, as president, it would not be appropriate to meet with him.

“I think that we should let everybody go out there and see who emerges,” Trump told The Hugh Hewitt Show podcast. “I’m not sure necessarily that it would be an appropriate thing to do.”

The US-based Pahlavi, who has close ties to Israel, leads the monarchist faction of the fragmented Iranian opposition.

Trump’s comments signal that the US has not backed Pahlavi’s offer to “lead [a] transition” in governance in Iran, should the current system collapse.

The Iranian government is grappling with protests across several parts of the country.

Iranian authorities cut off access to the internet on Thursday in an apparent move to suppress the protest movement as Pahlavi called for more demonstrations.

The US president had previously warned that he would intervene if the Iranian government targets protesters. He renewed that threat on Thursday.

“They’re doing very poorly. And I have let them know that if they start killing people – which they tend to do during their riots, they have lots of riots – if they do it, we’re going to hit them very hard,” Trump said.

Iranian protests started last month in response to a deepening economic crisis as the value of the local currency, the rial, plunged amid suffocating US sanctions.

The economy-focused demonstrations started sporadically across the country, but they quickly morphed into broader antigovernment protests and appear to be gaining momentum, leading to the internet blackout.

Pahlavi expressed gratitude to Trump and claimed that “millions of Iranians” protested on Thursday night.

“I want to thank the leader of the free world, President Trump, for reiterating his promise to hold the regime to account,” he wrote in a social media post.

“It is time for others, including European leaders, to follow his lead, break their silence, and act more decisively in support of the people of Iran.”

Last month, Trump also threatened to attack Iran again if it rebuilds its nuclear or missile programmes.

The US bombed Iran’s three main nuclear facilities in June as part of a war that Israel launched against the country without provocation.

On top of its economic and political crises, Iran has faced environmental hurdles, including severe water shortages, deepening its domestic unrest.

Iran has also been dealt major blows to its foreign policy as its network of allies has shrunk over the past two years.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was toppled by armed opposition forces in December 2024; Hezbollah was weakened by Israeli attacks; and Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has been abducted by the US.

But Iran’s leaders have continued to dismiss US threats. Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei doubled down on his defiant rhetoric after the US raid in Caracas on Saturday.

“We will not give in to the enemy,” Khamenei wrote in a social media post. “We will bring the enemy to its knees.”

Federal agents in the United States have shot and injured two people in the city of Portland, Oregon, a city where the administration of President Donald Trump has led an immigration enforcement crackdown.

The shooting was the second time in less than a day that federal immigration authorities claimed to have fired upon a vehicle in self-defence, following a deadly shooting in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

On Thursday, the Portland Police Department announced they had responded to reports of gunfire on southeast Main Street at about 2:18pm local time (22:18 GMT).

“Officers confirmed that federal agents had been involved in a shooting,” the city said in a statement.

Emergency responders then received a call for assistance from one of the shooting victims, a man, at about 2:24pm (22:24 GMT) near Northeast 146th Avenue and East Burnside in Portland’s Hazelwood neighbourhood.

“Officers responded and found a male and female with apparent gunshot wounds,” the statement said. “Officers applied a tourniquet and summoned emergency medical personnel.”

The two shooting victims were transported to hospital. Their conditions remain unknown, according to the police, who were not involved in the shooting.

The local bureau of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) confirmed the shooting in a now-deleted post on social media, saying that the incident involved Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agents.

“This remains an active and ongoing investigation led by the FBI,” Portland’s FBI bureau said in the post.

Later, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) offered its own account of what happened, describing the shooting as self-defence during a “targeted vehicle stop”.

In a social media post, DHS said its target was a passenger travelling inside a vehicle, who was affiliated with a “transnational Tren de Aragua prostitution ring and involved in a recent shooting”. The driver, DHS claimed, was a member of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang.

“When agents identified themselves to the vehicle occupants, the driver weaponized his vehicle and attempted to run over the law enforcement agents,” DHS said in the post.

“Fearing for his life and safety, an agent fired a defensive shot. The driver drove off with the passenger, fleeing the scene.”

Second agent-involved shooting

Details about Thursday’s shooting remain unknown. But the administration of President Donald Trump has faced criticism for misrepresenting incidents where federal agents deployed violence as part of its nationwide immigration crackdown.

The Portland shooting comes one day after an agent with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother of three, in her car in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

“Just one day after the horrific violence in Minnesota at the hands of federal agents, our community here in Portland is now grappling with another deeply troubling incident,” Portland Mayor Keith Wilson said in a statement.

“We cannot sit by while constitutional protections erode and bloodshed mounts.”

Good’s death has triggered widespread outrage, as well as criticism that the Trump administration rushed to disseminate a misleading narrative about the Minneapolis shooting.

Video of Good’s shooting showed the 37-year-old stopped in her SUV on a snowy Minneapolis road, appearing to wave other drivers by.

A vehicle carrying ICE officers stopped next to her vehicle, and agents approached her, reaching for the handle of her car door. One approached the front of her vehicle. As her car appeared to turn and manoeuvre away, that agent fired multiple times into the vehicle, killing Good.

In that case, too, Trump administration officials claim the ICE agent acted in self-defence, despite the fact that the vehicle did not seem to make contact with his body.

Trump asserted – without evidence – that Good was a “professional agitator” who “violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE Officer”. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem also accused Good of a “domestic act of terrorism”, despite there being no evidence Good sought to harm the ICE agent.

Democratic officials have accused the Trump administration of spreading false narratives to distract from its own abuses during the immigration crackdown.

Still, officials in Portland repeatedly called for calm in the aftermath of Thursday’s shooting, while acknowledging the parallels between the incidents.

“We are still in the early stages of this incident,” Portland Police Chief Bob Day said in a statement.

“We understand the heightened emotion and tension many are feeling in the wake of the shooting in Minneapolis, but I am asking the community to remain calm as we work to learn more.”

Mayor Wilson, meanwhile, called for federal immigration agents to leave the city, arguing that they had endangered local citizens with their heavy-handed actions.

“Portland is not a ‘training ground’ for militarized agents, and the ‘full force’ threatened by the administration has deadly consequences,” Wilson said.

“As Mayor, I call on ICE to end all operations in Portland until a full investigation can be completed. Federal militarization undermines effective, community‑based public safety, and it runs counter to the values that define our region.”

Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley, meanwhile, expressed “huge concern” over the incident and suggested that responding with anger would only fuel the Trump administration’s fixation with Portland.

“Trump wants to generate riots,” he wrote. “Don’t take the bait.”

Portland under a microscope

Portland has long been a focal point of Trump’s immigration enforcement actions, and the increased federal presence has ignited largely nonviolent protests in response.

Long seen as a Democratic stronghold, Portland was identified in May as one of the “sanctuary jurisdictions” that the Trump administration identified as resisting its immigration crackdown.

The Republican president hinted he could surge federal agents to the area in response.

In September, those threats appeared to materialise when Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform that he would be sending the US military to support immigration operations in the city.

The announcement came five days after Trump declared antifa – the loose-knit antifascist movement – a “domestic terrorist organisation”.

“I am directing Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, to provide all necessary Troops to protect War ravaged Portland, and any of our ICE Facilities under siege from attack by Antifa, and other domestic terrorists,” Trump wrote. “I am also authorizing Full Force, if necessary.”

It was the latest in the string of instances where Trump attempted to send federal troops to largely Democratic urban areas, including Los Angeles and Chicago, Illinois.

Local officials denounced the deployment as a violation of the law and a misuse of executive authority. But the Trump administration doubled down, describing Portland as overrun by criminal behaviour.

“ In Portland, Oregon, antifa thugs have repeatedly attacked our officers and laid siege to federal property in an attempt to violently stop the execution of federal law,” Trump said at an October roundtable.

In response, some protesters in Portland began arriving in inflatable frog costumes, in an effort to cast Trump’s warnings about violent extremists as absurd. The Portland Frog Brigade, as the protesters were called, inspired similar demonstrations nationwide.

State and local leaders fought Trump’s troop deployment in court, and on November 7, US District Judge Karin Immergut permanently blocked the deployment.

The US Supreme Court in December declined the Trump administration’s appeal to allow National Guard troops in areas where lower courts had barred them.

On Thursday, Mayor Wilson called for accountability in the recent shootings, saying he would protect local residents’ civil liberties.

“ICE agents and their Homeland Security leadership must be fully investigated and held responsible for their violence against the American people, in Minnesota, in Portland, and across the nation,” he said.

He repeated the message that Portland residents should not seek retribution in the aftermath of the gunfire.

“Portland does not respond to violence with violence. We respond with clarity, unity, and a commitment to justice. We must stand together to protect Portland,” he said.

United States President Donald Trump has dismissed international law, saying only his “own morality” can curb the aggressive policies he is pursuing across the world after the abduction of Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro.

“I don’t need international law. I’m not looking to hurt people,” Trump told The New York Times on Thursday.

Asked whether he needs to abide by international law, Trump said he does, but it “depends what your definition of international law is”.

Trump has shown a willingness to use the brute force of the US military to achieve his foreign policy goals.

On Saturday, the US launched an early-morning attack on Venezuela, with explosions reported across the capital Caracas and at Venezuelan military bases.

US troops ultimately abducted Venezuelan President Maduro from Caracas in what critics say was a clear violation of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits “the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state”.

The attack on Venezuela appears to have supercharged the belligerence of the US president, who received the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize Award last month.

In the immediate aftermath of the attack, Trump said the US would “run” Venezuela and exploit the country’s vast oil reserves, though his administration has said it would cooperate with interim President Delcy Rodriguez.

Still, the Trump administration said it would “dictate” policy to the interim government and repeatedly threatened a “second wave” of military actions if US demands were disobeyed.

“If she doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro,” Trump said of Rodriguez in a Sunday interview with The Atlantic.

Earlier this week, Trump also suggested that the US may carry out a strike against Colombia’s left-wing President Gustavo Petro, and he has escalated his campaign to acquire the Danish territory of Greenland.

In June, Trump joined Israel’s unprovoked war against Iran, ordering the bombing of the country’s three main nuclear sites.

Trump aide Stephen Miller has criticised the post-World War II international order, saying that, from here forward, the US would “unapologetically” use its military force to secure its interests in the Western Hemisphere.

“We’re a superpower, and under President Trump, we are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower,” Miller told CNN on Monday.

But experts warn that disregard for international law could have catastrophic consequences for the entire global community, including the US.

International law is the set of rules and norms that govern ties between states. It includes UN conventions and multilateral treaties.

Margaret Satterthwaite, the UN special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, told Al Jazeera earlier this week that US statements dismissing international law are “extremely dangerous”.

Satterthwaite said she is concerned the world may be returning to an “age of imperialism”, stressing that degrading international laws may embolden Washington’s adversaries to launch their own acts of aggression.

“International law cannot stop states from doing terrible things if they’re committed to doing them,” Satterthwaite told Al Jazeera.

“And I think that the world is aware of all of the atrocities that have happened in Gaza recently, and despite efforts by many states and certainly by the UN to stop those atrocities, they continued. But I think we’re worse off if we don’t insist on the international law that does exist. We’ll simply be going down a much worse kind of slippery slope.”

Yusra Suedi, an assistant professor of international law at the University of Manchester, warned against the belief that “might is right” and the trend towards disregarding international law.

“It signals something very dangerous, in that it gives permission to other states to essentially follow suit – states such as China, who might be eyeing Taiwan, or Russia with respect to Ukraine,” Suedi told Al Jazeera.

Ian Hurd, a professor of political science at Northwestern University, said history illustrates the perils of US policies in Latin America.

The region has witnessed more than a century of US invasions and US-supported military coups, leading to instability, repression and human rights abuses.

“There are innumerable examples historically of this, from Panama to Haiti to Nicaragua to Chile in the ’70s and on and on,” Hurd told Al Jazeera.

He added that Trump’s policies in Venezuela are “in line” with how the US has previously attempted to decide how other parts of the Americas are governed.

“You can see that in every one of those cases, the US came to regret its choice to intervene. These never work well.”

Sparked by anger over rising prices, devalued currency, a devastating drought, and brutal government crackdowns, protestors have taken to the streets in cities across Iran. These demonstrations, further fueled by the son of the former Shah, represent perhaps the biggest internal threat to the regime since it took control 47 years ago.

This comes at the same time as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered new plans to attack Iran over concerns about its nuclear weapons ambitions and the rebuilding of the country’s military capabilities. Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump is threatening to “hit [Iran] very hard” should the government of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei carry out a large, deadly response against the protestors in Iran. Still, there have been no observable movements of U.S. forces to the region as of yet due to either of those contingencies.

Videos emerging on social media show fires raging in several cities, huge jeering crowds clogging streets, and people chanting anti-government slogans.

The United States government has said it aims to control Venezuelan oil sales indefinitely.

“We need to have that leverage and that control of those oil sales to drive the changes that simply must happen in Venezuela,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright said on Wednesday.

His comments come days after US forces abducted Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro on Saturday. Since then, the administration of US President Donald Trump has announced a deal under which Venezuela would turn over 30 million to 50 million barrels of sanctioned oil to the US to sell.

That comes against a backdrop of demands that Venezuelan government officials open up access to US oil companies or risk further military action.

On Friday, executives from several major oil companies, including ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, and Chevron, are slated to meet with the president to discuss potential investments in Venezuela.

Can the US control Venezuelan oil sales indefinitely?

“The US federal government can absolutely intervene, make demands, capture what it wants, and redirect those barrels accordingly. I don’t know of anything that would meaningfully interfere with the federal government if that’s what it decided to do,” Jeff Krimmel, founder of Krimmel Strategy Group, a Houston, Texas-based energy consulting firm, told Al Jazeera.

There are, however, geopolitical hurdles. The US has less leverage than it did more than two decades ago when the US military and its allies entered Iraq, another oil-rich country. Today, other superpowers could stand in the way in ways they did not in 2003.

“When we went into Iraq, we were living in a unipolar moment as the world’s only great power. That era is over. China is now a great power, and most experts consider it a peer competitor. That means it has ways to hurt the US economy and to push back militarily, including through proxy conflicts, if it chooses to oppose such actions,” Anthony Orlando, professor of finance and law at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, told Al Jazeera.

China is the largest purchaser of Venezuelan crude, although it only imports about 4 percent of its oil from the South American nation.

“It’s a question of whether they want to draw a line in the sand with the United States and say, ‘You can’t do this, because if we allow it, you’ll keep pushing further,’” Orlando said.

“If you’re a minor power like Venezuela, not China or Russia, you’re a country vulnerable to US intervention. That creates an incentive to align more closely with China or Russia to prevent it from happening, and that’s not a good outcome for the United States,” Orlando continued.

In the days since Maduro’s abduction, members of the Trump administration have also renewed calls to take over Greenland.

How does this compare with Iraq?

The US intervention in Venezuela has been compared to its involvement in Iraq, which began under the administration of former President George W Bush in 2003. At the time, Iraq had the second-largest oil reserves in the world, with 112 billion barrels.

However, production was limited. Prior to the invasion, Iraq produced 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd), rising to 4.5 million bpd by 2018.

While the Iraqi government retained ownership of oil, US companies were often given no-bid contracts to operate there, including ExxonMobil and BP, and the majority of sales went to Asian and European markets.

In 2021, Iraq’s then-President Barham Salih claimed that an estimated $150bn in money stolen through corrupt deals had been “smuggled out of Iraq” since the 2003 US-led invasion.

Unlike during the Bush administration and its aims for Iraq’s oil, the Trump administration has been explicit about the role of oil in its attack on Venezuela.

“The difference between Iraq and this is that [Bush] didn’t keep the oil. We’re going to keep the oil,” Trump said in a conversation with MS Now anchor Joe Scarborough.

Comparatively, in 2002, prior to the US invasion, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld asserted that the operation to take control of post-war reconstruction had “literally nothing to do with oil”.

“When the Bush administration went into Iraq, they claimed it wasn’t about that, even though there was substantial evidence it was a factor. This time it’s more explicit, so it’s clear it will impact oil markets. [But] one lesson from the Iraq war is that it’s easier said than done,” Orlando, the professor, told Al Jazeera.

Will this benefit oil companies?

Analysts argue that investments in Venezuela might not actually benefit oil companies due to rising economic uncertainty, the need for major infrastructure improvements, and the fact that large companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron already have capital programmes planned for the remainder of the decade.

“Either [the companies] will have to take on more debt or issue more equity to raise the capital needed, or they’ll have to divert capital expenditures from other regions into Venezuela. In either scenario, I expect substantial shareholder pushback,” Krimmel, the energy consultant, said.

Increased production will also require infrastructure improvements. Venezuelan oil is dense, which makes it more difficult and expensive to extract compared to oil from Iraq or the US.

Venezuelan oil is often blended with lighter grades from the US. It is comparable in density to Canadian oil, which, despite tensions between Ottawa and Washington, comes from a US ally with more modern extraction infrastructure.

“I don’t think Canada’s going to be too happy about all this,” Orlando said.

However, Chevron, the only US company currently operating in Venezuela, is seeking authorisation from Washington to expand its licence to operate in the country after the US placed restrictions on it last year, the Reuters news agency reported on Thursday, citing unnamed sources.

The US role in energy, particularly oil and gas, has surged in recent years amid the rise of fracking technology. The US is now the largest producer of oil in the world. But recent cuts to alternative energy programmes and increasing energy demands from the artificial intelligence industry have led Republicans to double down on expanding the oil and gas sector.

“There is an oil supply surplus. Even if we were in a supply deficit right now, military action in Venezuela wouldn’t unlock incremental barrels quickly. So even if you were trying to solve a short-term supply deficit, which, to be clear, we do not have, Venezuela wouldn’t be an answer because it would take too long and be too expensive to ramp production up,” Krimmel added.

While Venezuela holds the world’s largest oil reserves, the OPEC member represents only 1 percent of global oil output.

Currently, Chevron is the only US company operating in Venezuela. ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips operated in Venezuela before Hugo Chavez nationalised the oil sector in 2007, leading to a downturn in production over years of disinvestment and poorly run facilities. In the 1990s, Venezuela produced as much as 3.5 million bpd. That has since fallen due to limited investment, with production averaging 1.1 million bpd last year.

“Venezuela’s infrastructure has deteriorated under both the Chavez and Maduro regimes. While they are extracting oil, returning to production levels from 10 or 20 years ago would require significant investment,” Orlando said.

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu announcemed the Bulgarian diplomat as the ‘designated’ director-general for Trump’s ‘board of peace’.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says that former United Nations Middle East envoy Nickolay Mladenov will direct a proposed United States-led “board of peace” in Gaza.

Netanyahu made the announcement after meeting Mladenov in Jerusalem on Thursday, referring to the Bulgarian diplomat as the “designated” director-general for the proposed board, a key part of US President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan to end Israel’s genocidal war on the Palestinian people of Gaza.

Trump’s Gaza plan led to a tenuous ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in October, but Israeli forces have continued to carry out attacks in the territory on a near-daily basis. Since the first full day of the truce on October 11, 2025, Israeli attacks have killed at least 425 Palestinians, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.

In a statement on Thursday, Netanyahu’s office said Mladenov “is slated to serve as Director General of the ‘Peace Council’ in the Gaza Strip”. Israel’s President Isaac Herzog also met Mladenov on Thursday, a spokesperson from his office said, without elaborating.

Under Trump’s plan to end the war, the proposed Board of Peace would supervise a new technocratic Palestinians government, the disarmament of Hamas, the deployment of an international security force, the further pushback of Israeli troops, and the reconstruction of the war-ravaged Gaza Strip.

Trump is expected to announce appointments to the board next week, according to the Axios news outlet, citing US officials and sources familiar with the matter.

“Among the countries expected to join the board are the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt and Turkiye,” Axios reported.

Mladenov, a former Bulgarian defence and foreign minister, previously served as the UN envoy to Iraq before being appointed as the UN Middle East peace envoy from 2015 to 2020.

During his time as Middle East envoy, Mladenov had good working relations with Israel and frequently worked to ease tensions between Israel and Hamas.

The Marine Corps’ pursuit of a fully missionized version of Kratos’ stealthy XQ-58A Valkyrie drone has taken another step forward with a new announcement that Northrop Grumman is now aiding in the effort. Northrop Grumman says it will deliver a “mission kit” that includes its Prism autonomy package, sensors, and other capabilities to help fully turn the Valkyrie into what looks set to be the Marines’ first operational Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA).

Northrop Grumman announced today it has received a competitively awarded deal in relation to what is formally known as the Marine Air-Ground Task Force Uncrewed Expeditionary Tactical Aircraft (MUX TACAIR) Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program. U.S. officials confirmed last year that the Marine Corps was moving to transition its experimental work with the XQ-58 into a full program of record to develop and field an operational CCA-type drone. The Marines have acquired at least three Valkyries since 2023. The U.S. Air Force is the only other known current operator of the XQ-58 and has been using the type for test and evaluation work since its first flight in 2019.

Under the newly announced deal, “Northrop Grumman will develop and rapidly deliver platforms that include” the aforementioned mission kit, “inclusive of sensors and software-defined technologies designed specifically for uncrewed aircraft,” according to a company press release. “The mission kit’s flexible technology can perform various kinetic and non-kinetic effects, making the platform a combat-ready asset.”

“Northrop Grumman’s open architecture autonomy software package – known as Prism – will manage the aircraft’s operations autonomously,” the release adds. The company has already been conducting flight testing involving Prism using the Model 437 Vanguard jet, now also referred to as Beacon, which was developed and built by its subsidiary Scaled Composites.

Discovering the Benefits of a Fully Connected Digital Ecosystem

“Northrop Grumman remains at the forefront of advanced sensing capabilities, delivering innovative solutions that meet the needs of the warfighter with unmatched speed and reliability,” Krys Moen, Vice President for Advanced Mission Capabilities, said in an accompanying statement. “This enhanced capability set ensures optimal performance for both crewed and uncrewed platforms.”

“The integration of the Kratos Valkyrie aircraft system configured with the world’s best multifunction mission systems from Northrop Grumman results in a high-capability CCA at a price point that enables the uncrewed systems to be deployed in mass with crewed aircraft,” Steve Fendley, President of Kratos’ Unmanned Systems Division, also said in a statement included in the release.

Northrop Grumman’s press release also highlights Kratos’ work on a derivative of the XQ-58 with built-in landing gear. As originally designed, Valkyrie is fully runway independent and takes off via a rocket-assisted method from a static launcher. The drone is then recovered via parachute at the end of the sortie. Kratos has also developed a special trolley that allows versions without fixed landing gear to take off from traditional runways.

Northrop Grumman has separately told Breaking Defense that its MUX TACAIR CCA deal is valued at approximately $231.5 million and covers work over a period of 24 months, and that is a so-called Other Transactional Agreement (OTA). The U.S. military uses the OTA mechanism to support rapid prototyping and other research and development work without having to go through more traditional and often more drawn-out contracting processes.

Official U.S. military budget documents released last year said that the Marines were looking to acquire at least one MUX TACAIR CCA prototype in a conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) configuration. Kratos has referred to the fixed landing gear Valkyrie derivative as the CTOL version. However, whether that is the only configuration the Marines are eyeing now is unclear, and TWZ has reached out to Northrop Grumman, Kratos, and the Marine Corps for more details.

“So we’re obviously, we’ve been doing a lot of development work for the Marines, a lot of integration of mission systems, a lot of ground and flight test of those mission systems,” Kratos’ Fendley had told TWZ on the show floor of the annual Modern Day Marine conference in Washington, D.C., last year. “And that’s continued to where we’re pretty close to having a couple final versions of the aircraft.”

TWZ has previously highlighted the value a runway-independent version would bring to the Marine Corps, given the service’s current focus on future expeditionary and distributed operations. Flexibility to operate from traditional runways, which could offer benefits in terms of total payload capacity and maximum range, could still be desirable, as well.

Overall, “the uncrewed weapons systems under development [as part of the MUX TACAIR program] will enhance Marine Corps Aviation’s lethality and ability to support the Stand-in Force (SiF) by delivering air-to-ground, reconnaissance, and Electronic Warfare (EW) capabilities,” per the aforementioned budget documents. “The Marine Corps will use a spiral approach for capability insertion into TACAIR. MUX TACAIR Increment I will rapidly accelerate the time between development and fielding, ensuring rapid and relevant capability delivery of a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) to the warfighter.”

There has also been explicit talk about pairing the XQ-58 with the Marine Corps F-35B Joint Strike Fighters, and flight tests to explore this kind of crewed-uncrewed teaming have been carried out in the past.

Outside of work for the Marine Corps, beyond the aforementioned developments related to launching and recovering the Valkyrie, Kratos has been steadily working to expand the performance and other capabilities of the design. The company is separately working on a miniature cruise missile called Ragnarok, which the XQ-58 can carry in its internal bay and externally under its wings, and that you can read more about here. Renderings have also shown Valkyries with AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) under their wings. Northrop Grumman has put forward the uncrewed aircraft as a notional launch platform for its Lumberjack loitering one-way attack drone, as well.

The XQ-58 has a high degree of modularity baked in from the start. Kratos has long put heavy emphasis on open-architecture systems to make it easier to integrate new and improved capabilities and functionality down the line, as well.

Regardless of the aircraft’s physical configuration, there are many other questions the Marine Corps will still need to answer before it can truly field an operational CCA force, something the service itself has been open about and that TWZ regularly highlights. Much remains to be settled about how CCA-type drones will be deployed, launched, recovered, supported, and otherwise operated on a day-to-day basis, let alone employed tactically in a real-world combat environment.

“We still have a lot to learn simply to get this thing airborne, flying, and executing next to an F-35, and not hitting each other,” Col. Derek Brannon, director of the Marine Corps’ Cunningham Group, said at the Modern Day Marine exhibition last year. “I know there’s a lot of work out there, but that’s important to make sure that we become lethal.”

The Cunningham Group, which falls under the office of the Deputy Commandant for Aviation, is charged with plotting out the overall future course for Marine Corps aviation developments.

This all applies equally to the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy CCA programs. All three services are pursuing their efforts in very close cooperation, including in the development of common command and control architectures. By the Navy’s own admission, the Air Force and Marine Corps CCA programs are much more mature than its effort.

Joining the Marine Corps MUX TACAIR program is an important development for Northrop Grumman as a company, which has been making other inroads in the growing CCA market space recently. In December, the Air Force announced that it had assigned a formal designation, YFQ-48A, to the Project Talon drone design developed by Northrop Grumman and its subsidiary Scaled Composites. The service also said at that time that the YFQ-48A, which had only been unveiled publicly earlier in the month, was a “strong contender” for inclusion in its CCA efforts. Project Talon leveraged lessons from Northrop Grumman’s losing entry in the competition for the first phase, or Increment 1, of the Air Force’s CCA program, as you can learn more about here. Last September, the Navy also confirmed that Northrop Grumman was among the companies it had awarded contracts to for the development of concepts for future carrier-based CCAs.

The Marine Corps moving to field an operational version of the Valkyrie has been significant for Kratos, as well. The company has been very actively pitching versions of the XQ-58 to other customers, including ones overseas. It is working now with Airbus to craft a version for the German armed forces. Kratos has also been seeing growing export success with other designs in its tactical drone portfolio.

When it comes to the Marine Corps CCA plans, the service has said it hopes to take delivery of the first prototype before the end of this year, and Northrop Grumman has now joined Kratos in working to make that a reality.

Update: 5:10 pm EST—

Northrop Grumman has now provided additional details about how it is working together with Kratos in relation to the MUX TACAIR CCA effort, and about what the company will be contributing.

“Northrop Grumman and Kratos teamed up to respond together to the Naval Aviation Systems Consortium Statement of Need Request for White Papers for USMC TACAIR Increment 1 (N00019-24-9-0021).  Northrop Grumman and Kratos have collaborated successfully together on multiple projects in prime and support roles including Valkyrie,” a company spokesperson explained to TWZ. “Due to the collaborative integration needed for this solution, the team jointly decided Northrop Grumman as Lead Systems Integrator and Kratos as airframe subcontractor provided the best approach for MUX TACAIR.”

“The mission kit is a fully integrated sensor suite covering multiple functions and frequency bands,” they added. “Northrop Grumman is integrating both Northrop sensors and a variety of best of breed industry sensors into a low-cost integrated solution.”

“Kratos is teamed with NGC for mission configured Valkyrie derivatives and is also a subcontractor on the MUX TACAIR contract providing Valkyrie aircraft, supporting development and testing including flight testing, and supporting integration of NGC mission systems for the ultimate Marines CCA product, which Kratos will manufacture in Oklahoma City,” a spokesperson for that company also separately told TWZ.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

resh snowfall hit Italy’s Alpine resort of Livigno less than a month before the 2026 Milano Cortina Winter Olympics, where freestyle skiing and snowboarding events will be held, after officials raised concerns over reliance on artificial snow.

The ability to sense and understand activities in the air and on the sea is one of Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) Maj. Gen. Chris McKenna’s main responsibilities as operational commander for the Canadian North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) Region (CANR). However, he faces a number of hurdles to accomplish that mission. Canada has no organic airborne early warning and control aircraft and is relying on an aging satellite system with many users competing for its products.

In the third installment from our exclusive interview last month, McKenna gives us a candid view of what Canada needs to do to modernize its sensing capabilities to get a better handle on the myriad threats NORAD is facing. He also talks about Canadian deliberations over the Trump administration’s Golden Dome missile defense system and how to defend against the threat to military installations from drones. You can catch up with the previous installments here and here.

Some of the questions have been slightly edited for clarity.

Q: Are there any updates to the Trump administration’s Golden Dome missile defense initiative from Canada’s point of view? And does Canada back the placement of kinetic interceptors in space?

A: I think that’s a political decision. So I’m not going to speak to the space-based interceptor piece. That’s up to my politicians to answer that. But certainly, the advocacy that I do is all about integrated missile defense. And how does Canada become a bigger player, a more reliable player, in how we sense things in the Arctic? 

From an integrated missile defense point of view, I think we need to be looking at what ground-based effectors look like. And how do we protect ourselves from an integrated missile defense point of view? How do we be more additive in the NORAD partnership with more capability?

Q: How do you do that? 

A: Well, I think one is the recapitalization and modernizing our command and control and modernizing the way that we sense. I think there’s a lot of opportunity in the space domain as well. Canada signed a partnership between two Canadian companies, MDA and Telsat, that I think will bear fruit, from a polar communications point of view, in the next number of months. We have a project ongoing for space-based ISR [intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance], which is likely to progress in the next month or two, and there’ll be some news on that. So there’s, there’s a lot of money moving, finally, on defense spending.

Why Telesat is expanding in Canada

Q: Are you able to provide any details about the space-based ISR?

A: We currently operate a government-of-Canada-owned constellation of four satellites called RADARSAT Constellation Mission. All the orbital axes are based on [the] Arctic, [but] obviously, it’s global. It’s a Low Earth Orbit constellation and it’s radar. 

It’s all about looking through clouds. And for us, it’s about looking at dark ships [with the AIS transponders turned off] with an actual picture of what ships are out there, and figuring out what ships are being non-compliant, and then queuing either ISR assets or the Coast Guard to go and have a look at those ships. 

That was launched in 2019, and its service life is expected to last until about 2026. It’s still giving us good data, and likely will give us good data until the 2030s. So DESSP, or the Defense Enhanced Surveillance of Space Project, is anchored on having a defense-only constellation of satellites, because you can imagine those are satellites are being looked at for, ‘hey, where are the whales?’ ‘Where’s the ice?’ Environmental pollution control. There’s a lot of demand on it. We do get sort of primacy over it, but we do need more ISR in the Arctic, and I think we need our defense-only constellation. So part of the NORAD modernization project was funded that very significantly.

Q: Back to Golden Dome. Are there any updates from the Canadian point of view?

A: So we look at it as Continental Shield. Golden Dome is the U.S. brand on it. From our point of view, it’s great air missile defense and what we will put on the table to defend the continent with. And so I think there are ongoing negotiations between our governments with respect to what the specific investments will be. We’ve got a good head start, though, with our NORAD [modernization], and I think there’s more to come.

Q: Let’s switch topics for a minute. Has Canada experienced drone incursions over critical facilities like the U.S. and Europe have?

A: Not to the same extent. I’m obviously very attuned to what is going on in Europe and what has been going on in the States, and I talked about it with my commander quite a bit. We’re taking counter-UAS very seriously. As we onboard exquisite things like the F-35, we need to have a better system. We’ve purchased a system called the Leonardo Falcon Shield system. That’s the same one that the RAF uses, and we can place it at two of our wings right now, and I’m rolling it at all my wings as the deliveries roll in. And it’s an RF [radio frequency] sensing, RF interception capability. It’s not kinetic as of yet, but that can be added pretty easily. And I think we need to be thinking about this as a baseline capability. Every one of our air bases to be able to deny airspace for hobbyists and state actors who may wish to fly drones over top.

Falcon Shield – Operationally proven drone mitigation system

Q: Why do you think that Canada hasn’t experienced drone incursions to the extent that the U.S. and Europe are experiencing them?

A: I honestly don’t have an opinion on that. We do have drone issues. We do detect drones once in a while, but I have not had massive incursions in any of my NORAD bases as of yet. That doesn’t mean it’s not coming, though. And I think we can’t be naive about this. The U.S. talks about Golden Dome, and [NORAD/NORTHCOM commander] Gen. [Gregory] Guillot, in front of Congress, has talked about the three domes, with the last, the smallest dome, being counter-UAS domes around the U.S. infrastructure. We see it the same way, in the sense that I need limited air defence around my key infrastructure to protect the assets that I wish to protect.

Q: You talked about your counter-UAS equipment having radio frequency detection and intercept capabilities. What’s Canada’s policy on kinetic counter-drone systems?

A: I think there’s other optionality, right? And I think this becomes a policy and a legal discussion. What are the boundaries for our authorities? And if we need more authorities, we have to go back to the government to get them. We do have some exemptions from [Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada] that manages our spectrum. It’s like the FCC in the States, so we’ve got a bunch of dispensations from them to conduct the interceptions we need for defense installations, which is good news. But I do think there’s probably more to come. I do think kinetic, directed energy, drone-on-drone type [of defenses] would be very useful. I think it’ll depend on what the legal framework we’re allowed to use to protect our facilities.

Q: What are the limitations on your counter-UAS actions?

A: It’s an emerging space now in terms of we’re just getting the installs done, and we’re scratching at the authorities, and having the analysis is fine, but right now, in terms of what we’re going to be able to do, I can do some things. I’m not going to get into the details on that – but I can do some things to deny access to my airspace right now. I do think there’s going to have to be a discussion about the aggregation of additional authorities.

Q: Can you tell me more about the domestic counter-UAS strategy to help mitigate the threats, particularly posed by smaller, lower-end drones?

A: Well, one of the keys is domain awareness to begin with, like understand the problem you’re facing and then pair your defensive design against that. And that really is the basis of integrated air and missile defense. But zoom down into the sub-tactical, force protection lens around each of our bases, and we’re going through that process right now to get that laid down. The good news is I’ve got some systems installed. We’re learning with them, and we’re pushing the policy space to make sure we’re having the right authorities.

Q: Have you had to use any of these defensive systems against drones yet?

A: Not yet.

Q: What space-based capabilities are needed for the mission that you don’t have right now?

A: The one that’s in development is the space-based air moving target indicator. The U.S. is going quite heavily on that. I’m really interested in what that could bring. It would be a nice layer on top of the Over the Horizon radar picture. 

The key question is, how small a thing can it see? That’s the overriding discussion we have now. And you know, could it ever supplant a thing like an airborne early warning aircraft? I think at the current time, no. Maybe 15 or 20 years from now, very much potentially. We’ll see. I think we still need AWACS-like aircraft. So that third basket of policy authorities was received in 2024, they [provided] a bunch of money to us to go and conduct an options analysis, and we are in the middle of that right now, looking at airborne early warning aircraft that would be contributive to the NORAD mission set.

Q: What kind of airborne early warning aircraft are you considering in your review? 

A: There are really three options. You could say four with an E-2D as well. But I think that may not fit for the purpose of the Arctic mission set. We are looking at the Boeing advanced E-7 Wedgetail. We’re looking at the Phoenix [L3Harris airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft]. And we’re looking at the GlobalEye, or variants that Saab has built. Two of them, L3Harris and the Saab offering, are both based on a Canadian biz jet. They’re based on the Global 6500 aircraft that Bombardier produces.

GlobalEye walk-around tour with Saab

Q: When will you make a decision?

A: That’s a good question for my government. We owe them the results of our options analysis. We’re near the end of options analysis (OA). The way that Canada appropriates money is by buying years, almost like your mortgage. It’s very boring, but that’s how you get money apportioned to you. And I believe it was sort of in the early 2030s. I’ll be honest, I have a need almost immediately for it. To think about the state of the E-3  fleet around the world, both in NATO and the U.S., there’s a need.

Q: Has the need for look-down radar capability pushed your airborne early warning aircraft program forward?

A: Because of the austerity of the radar landscape in Canada, I do need a movable, high-power radar in which to be able to cue my fighters and to take electronic custody of anything that was coming close to the approaches to North America, so I have a need for it, absolutely.

Q: So that’s what’s driving your options for the airborne early warning aircraft?

A: I feel quite strongly that we need that. We advocated to the government that we needed it. We made a good case. There are obviously lots of questions, but they bought our analysis, and they obviously provided us with policy coverage and funding to get after that.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

Four observations on the Trump administration’s flagrant lawbreaking in abducting Venezuela’s president, Nicolas Maduro, from Caracas and bringing him to New York to “stand trial” on “narco-terrorism” and firearms charges:

1. It is a sign of quite how much of a rogue state the US has become that Washington isn’t even trying to come up with a plausible reason for kidnapping the Venezuelan president.

In invading Afghanistan, the US said it had to “smoke out” al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden from his mountain lair after the 9/11 attacks. In invading Iraq, the US said it was going to destroy Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction” that threatened Europe. In bombing Libya, the US claimed it was preventing Muammar Gaddafi’s troops from going on a Viagra-fuelled campaign of rape.

Each of these justifications was a transparent falsehood. The Taliban had offered to hand over bin Laden for trial. There were no WMD in Iraq. And the Viagra story was a work of unadulterated fiction.

But earlier US administrations at least had to pretend their actions were driven by humanitarian considerations and the need to maintain international order.

The charges against Maduro are so patently ridiculous you need to be a Trump fanboy, an old-school imperialist or deeply misinformed to buy any of them. No serious monitoring organisation thinks Venezuela is a major trafficker of drugs into the US, or that Maduro is personally responsible for drug-trafficking. Meanwhile, the firearm charges are so preposterous it’s difficult to understand what they even mean.

2. Unlike his predecessors, President Trump has been honest about what the US really wants: control of oil. This is an old-fashioned, colonial resource grab. So why are the media even pretending that there is some kind of “law enforcement” process going on in New York? A head of state has been abducted – that’s the story. Nothing else.

Instead we’re being subjected to ridiculous debates about whether Maduro is “a bad man”, or whether he mismanaged the Venezuelan economy. Sky News used an interview with Britain’s former Labour party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, to harangue him, demanding he condemn Maduro. Why? Precisely to deflect viewers’ attention from the actual story: that in invading Venezuela, the US committed what the Nuremberg trials after the Second World War judged to be the supreme international crime of aggression against another state. Where have you seen any establishment media outlet highlight this point in its coverage?

If Sky and other media are so worried about “bad men” running countries – so concerned that they think international law can be flouted – why are they not haranguing Keir Starmer and Yvette Cooper over Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity? Doesn’t that make him a very “bad man”, far worse than anything Maduro is accused of? Why are they not demanding that Starmer and Cooper condemn him before they are allowed to talk about the Middle East?

When Russia invaded Ukraine, the western media did not weigh the justifications for Moscow’s invasion, or offer context, as they are now doing over the lawless attack on Venezuela. They responded with shock and outrage. They were not calm, judicious and analytical. They were indignant. They warned of “Russian expansionism”. They warned of Putin’s “megalomania”. They warned of the threat to international law. They emphasised the right of Ukraine to resist Russia. In many cases, they led the politicians in demanding a stronger response. None of that is visible in the coverage of Maduro’s abduction, or Trump’s lawbreaking.

3. The left is often censured for being slow to denounce non-western powers like China or Russia, or being too wary of military action against them. This is to misunderstand the left’s position. It opposes a unipolar world precisely because that inevitably leads to the kind of destabilising gangsterism just demonstrated by Trump’s attack on Venezuela. It creates a feudal system of one lord, many serfs – but on the global stage.

That is exactly what we see happening now as Trump and Marco Rubio, his secretary of state, mouth off about which country – Colombia, Cuba, Greenland, Mexico – is going to be attacked next. It is exactly why every European leader, from Keir Starmer to EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, sucks up to Trump, however monstrous his latest act. It is exactly why the United Nations secretary general, Antonio Guterres, speaks so limply about the general importance of “the rule of law” rather than articulating a clear denunciation of the crimes the US has just committed.

Hard as it is for westerners to acknowledge, we don’t need a stronger West, we need a weaker one.

But harder still, westerners need to understand that the very concept of “the West” is an illusion. For decades, Europe has been simply hanging on to the coat-tails of a US military behemoth, in the hope that it would protect us. But in a world of diminishing resources, the US is showing quite how ready it is to turn on anyone, including its supposed allies, for a bigger share of global wealth. Just ask Greenland and Denmark.

European states’ true interests lie, not in prostrating themselves before a global overlord, but in a multipolar world, where coalitions of interests need to be forged, where compromises must be reached, not diktats imposed. That requires a foreign policy of transparency and compassion, not conceit and arrogance. Without such a change, in an era of burgeoning nuclear tripwires and growing climate chaos, we are all finished.

4. Washington’s goal is to make Venezuela once again a haven for private US capital. If the new acting president, Delcy Rodriguez, refuses, then Trump has made it clear Venezuela will be kept as an economic basket-case, through continuing sanctions and a US naval blockade, until someone else can be installed who will do US bidding.

Venezuela’s crime – one for which it has been punished for decades – is trying to offer a different economic and social model to America’s rampant, planet-destroying, neoliberal capitalism. The deepest fear of the West’s political and media class is that western publics, subjected to permanent austerity as billionaires grow ever richer off the back of ordinary people’s immiseration, may rise up if they see a different system that looks after its citizens rather than its wealth elite.

Venezuela, with its huge oil reserves, could be precisely such a model – had it not been long strangled by US-imposed sanctions. A quarter of a century ago, Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chavez, launched a socialist-style “Bolivarian revolution” of popular democracy, economic independence, equitable distribution of revenues, and an end to political corruption. It reduced extreme poverty by more than 70 per cent, halved unemployment, quadrupled the number of people receiving a state pension and schooled the population to reach literacy rates of 100 per cent. Venezuela became the most equal society in Latin America – one reason why millions still turn out to defend Maduro.

Chavez did so by taking the country’s natural resources – its oil and metal ores – out of the hands of a tiny domestic elite that had ruined the country by extracting the national wealth and mostly hoarding or investing it abroad, often in the US. He nationalised major industries, from oil and steel to electricity. Those are the very industries that Maria Corina Machado, the Venezuelan opposition leader feted by the West, wants returned to the parasitic families, like her own, that once ran them privately.

Seeing the way Venezuela has been treated for the past two decades or more should make it clear why European leaders – obedient at all costs to Washington and the corporate elites that rule the West – are so reluctant to even consider nationalising their own public industries, however popular such policies are with electorates.

Britain’s Keir Starmer, who only won the Labour leadership election by promising to nationalise major utilities, ditched his pledge the moment he was elected. None of the traditional main UK parties is offering to renationalise water, rail, energy and mail services, even though surveys regularly show at least three-quarters of the British public support such a move.

The fact is that a unipolar world leaves all of us prey to a rapacious, destructive, US corporate capitalism, which, bit by bit, is destroying our world. The issue isn’t whether Maduro was a good or bad leader of Venezuela – the matter the western establishment media wants us concentrating on. It is how do we put the US back in the box before it is too late for humanity.

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

Source: Jonathan Cook Substack

Al Jazeera witnessed injured civilians arriving at an Aleppo hospital as intense artillery fire streaked across the sky and ricocheted off buildings. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and Syrian army have been engaged in increasingly intense fighting after integration talks broke down.

The comments come as the Kremlin slammed a plan for France and the UK to send peacekeepers to Ukraine after a ceasefire.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said an agreement on a security guarantee from Washington is now “essentially ready” to be finalised by US President Donald Trump, following days of negotiations in Paris.

In a post on X on Thursday, Zelenskyy said the document – a cornerstone of any settlement to end the war, which would guarantee Washington and other Western allies would support Ukraine if Russia invaded again – was almost complete.

“The bilateral document on security guarantees for Ukraine ‍is now essentially ⁠ready for finalisation at the highest level with the president,” he said.

He said the talks in Paris, involving teams from the US and Europe, had addressed “complex issues” from the framework under discussion to end the nearly four-year war, with the Ukrainian delegation presenting possible solutions for these.

“We understand that the American side will engage with Russia, and we expect feedback on whether the aggressor is genuinely willing to end the war,” he said.

Washington, which on Tuesday endorsed the idea of providing security guarantees for Ukraine for the first time, is expected to present any agreement it reaches with Kyiv to Moscow, in its attempt to broker an end to the conflict.

Kyiv says legally-binding assurances that its allies would come to its defence are essential to deter Moscow from future aggression if a ceasefire is reached.

But specific details on the guarantees and how Ukraine’s allies would respond have not been made public.

Zelenskyy said earlier this week that he was yet to receive an “unequivocal” answer about what they would do if Russia did attack again.

Russia slams peacekeeper plan

Zelenskyy’s comments came as Russia rejected a plan that emerged from the Paris talks for European peacekeepers to be deployed to Ukraine as “militaristic”, warning they would be treated as “legitimate military targets”.

On Tuesday, French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer signed a declaration of intent with Zelenskyy in Paris, setting out the framework for troops from their countries to be deployed to Ukraine after a ceasefire was reached with Russia.

But in Russia’s first comments in response to the plan, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova denounced the proposal as “dangerous” and “destructive”, dampening hopes the plan could prove a step in bringing the war to an end.

“The new militarist declarations of the so-called Coalition of the Willing and the Kyiv regime together form a genuine ‘axis of war’,” Zakharova said in a statement.

“All such units and facilities will be considered legitimate military targets for the Russian Armed Forces,” she said, repeating a threat previously made by Putin.

Moscow has repeatedly warned that it would not accept any NATO members sending peacekeeping troops to Ukraine.

Russia attacks energy infrastructure

In his social media post, Zelenskyy also called for more pressure on Russia from Ukraine’s supporters, after further Russian missile attacks on energy infrastructure, which, he said, “clearly don’t indicate that Moscow is reconsidering its priorities”.

“In this context, it is necessary that pressure on Russia continues to increase at the same intensity as the work of our negotiating teams.”

The attacks left Ukrainian authorities scrambling to restore heating and water to hundreds of thousands of households in the Dnipropetrovsk and Zaporizhia regions.

“This is truly a national level emergency,” Borys Filatov, mayor of Dnipropetrovsk’s capital Dnipro, said on Telegram.

He announced power was “gradually returning to the hospitals” after the blackouts forced them to run on generators. The city authorities also extended school holidays for children.

About 600,000 households in the region remained cut off from power in Dnipropetrovsk, Ukrainian energy company DTEK said.

Civilians were seen fleeing several northern Aleppo neighbourhoods en masse as the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces and the Syrian military escalate their fighting after a breakdown in integration talks. Estimates vary widely, but some have placed the number of evacuees at more than 100,000.

Fighting between Syrian government troops and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces continues in Aleppo, where shelling near residential areas has prompted tens of thousands of civilians to flee. Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar was reporting live as shots rang out nearby.

Heartbroken after his team’s loss to Algeria, Mboladinga won over fans and left a lasting impact on the tournament.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo have exited the Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) 2025 after a heartbreaking extra-time loss to Algeria, but their most famous supporter has made a lasting impact on football fans and players.

Michel Nkuka Mboladinga, who became an instant fan favourite and social media star for his unique tribute to his nation’s hero Patrice Lumumba, bid farewell to AFCON after a meeting with the Algerian team at their hotel on Wednesday.

Dressed sharply in bright-coloured suits, Mboladinga stood out among the thousands of DR Congo fans by standing still with his right arm raised during all of his team’s games at the tournament.

“The fan who went viral for standing motionless through the full match becomes an AFCON symbol of pride, memory, and resilience,” a fan wrote in a tribute on X.

At the beginning of every match, Mboladinga would step on his pedestal and hold the pose, emulating a memorial statue of Lumumba in Kinshasa, DR Congo.

But when his team were knocked out of the tournament by Algeria with a 119th-minute goal from Adil Boulbina, he was left devastated.

Nicknamed Lumumba Vea by Congolese supporters, Mboladinga took off his glasses, wiped away his tears and, in his final act, fell back into the crowd at the end of his team’s last-16 tie.

To add insult to injury, Mboladinga was apparently mocked by Algerian player Mohamed Amoura, who ran to the Congolese end, mimicked the fan’s pose and fell to the ground in celebration.

Amoura’s gesture was widely criticised on social media, with fans calling for him to apologise to Mboladinga and the Congolese nation.

“He [Mboladinga] is bringing visibility to a historic figure who fought for Congo’s independence and stood in solidarity with the Algerian revolution against occupation,” wrote sports journalist Leyla Hamed.

The Algerian forward later posted an apology on social media, saying he wasn’t aware of the meaning and history of the gesture of the DR Congo fan.

“I simply wanted to tease, in a good-natured way, without any ill intent,” he wrote.

“I respect Congo and its team.”

In order to make further amends, the Algerian Football Association invited Mboladinga to the team’s hotel on Wednesday. He met with the players and was given a personalised Algerian team shirt with Lumumba emblazoned on the back.

DR Congo are ranked 56th in FIFA’s world rankings and have a shot at qualifying for the World Cup 2026 by booking a spot in the inter-confederation playoff final on March 31.

Russia is continuing to adapt and evolve its copies of the Shahed-136 long-range one-way attack drone, known locally as the Geran, now arming it with a man-portable air defense system (MANPADS). These are more often referred to as shoulder-fired heat-seeking missiles. The development follows a previous version of the drone carrying a single R-60 air-to-air missile, which you can read more about here. It also emerges as Russia makes additional alterations to the drone, including improved line-of-sight control capabilities and self-protection systems.

An example of a MANPADS-equipped Shahed/Geran is seen in recent imagery, including a video, that shows the drone lying in the snow, after it came down intact in Ukraine, reportedly in the Chernihiv region in the north of the country. According to Ukrainian accounts, as well as the rail-mounted missile on the top, the drone is equipped with a camera and a radio-frequency modem.

The missile itself has been widely reportedly as an Igla-S, among the latest models of this widespread MANPADS. Known in Russia as the 9K388, and to NATO as the SA-24 Grinch, the weapon has a maximum range of around 3.7 miles, and improvements over earlier Igla missiles include a more sensitive infrared seeker, a heavier warhead, and an improved fuze.

On the other hand, the inscription on the top of the launch tube appears to read 9K333, which would indicate it is the more modern Verba (SA-29 Gizmo), which was developed as a replacement for the Igla. Its primary advantage is its advanced multispectral seeker, operating in the ultraviolet, near infrared, and mid-infrared bands, for improved discrimination between targets and decoys.

Verba MANPADS

Adapting the MANPADS to the Shahed/Geran appears more straightforward than the R-60, with no need for the launch rail adapter; instead, the MANPADS is simply attached to the drone within its standard launch tube. The complete Igla, for example, is also much lighter: around 40 pounds in its tube, compared to close to 100 pounds for the R-60, minus the launch rail.

Russia started employing Shahed/Geran-type long-range UAVs equipped with air-to-air missiles for combating Ukrainian aviation assets, Ukrainian military radio technology expert Serhii Flash reports.

The remains of a Shahed/Geran-type drone with an R-60 short-range air-to-air… pic.twitter.com/NHBDQQqCK9

— Status-6 (War & Military News) (@Archer83Able) December 1, 2025

As for the drone, the original Shahed-136 is Iranian in origin. Multiple variants and derivatives of the Shahed-136, including a jet-powered type, are now produced in large numbers in Russian factories, where they are known locally by the name Geran, the Russian word for geranium. Steady improvements have been made to these drones, including a degree of dynamic targeting capability, as you can read about here.

As we have discussed in the past, adding a heat-seeking anti-aircraft missile to the Shahed/Geran in theory provides the drone with a means to engage Ukrainian fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters. At the very least, giving the drone the ability to hit back at these threats offers a deterrent capability. Overall, the effectiveness of this combination is questionable. Particular challenges include the need for a high degree of situational awareness, perhaps requiring cameras around the airframe, and the need to maneuver the drone to get it into a boresight location to achieve a lock-on. However, Russia clearly considers that the adaptation is worth exploring, even just as a deterrent strategy to keep drone hunting aircraft at bay.

For some time now, Russia has been working on a man-in-the-loop (MITL) control capability for the Shahed/Geran, a feature that was confirmed when they started to appear with cameras and cellular modems, something TWZ explored in detail at the time. These developments allow the drone to be connected to an operator. Standard Shaheds fly autonomous routes to pre-planned targets on autopilot with no man-in-the-loop control. They are ‘fire and forget’ weapons.

Meanwhile, the range at which MITL can be achieved has been steadily increased. At first, the drones were adapted to exploit patchy cellular networks to provide additional connectivity when available. More recently, Shaheds have been flying with antennas allowing for direct line-of-sight control close to the front lines. This allows them to hit targets dynamically like an FPV drone, while packing a much heavier punch and being able to loiter for long periods of time. You can read all about this development here. Now, the datalink range is being extended using airborne signal relays, possibly creating a mesh network with multiple line-of-sight links. We are also now seeing Russian drones will Starlink terminals, which could provide a vastly superior beyond-line-of-sight capability and could prove to be a big problem for Ukraine if Russia can produce such a configuration in large volumes. These developments are now blurring the classification of the Shahed/Geran from its original long-range one-way attack drone to a loitering munition, with an onboard imaging capability.

Potentially, a Shahed/Geran armed with a MANPADS or an R-60 could use beyond-line-of-sight capabilities to operate the missile. But bearing in mind we know Russia is using the drones closer to the front lines, this would need only a line-of-sight link with operators near the front, or at least by receivers/transmitters placed there. Drone controllers behind the lines could also ‘pick them up’ once in the area, but such an operation is far more complex and fraught with additional risks.

Nevertheless, target acquisition and engagement of a missile-armed drone is still far from straightforward. It’s likely that the modern seeker used by the Igla-S or Verba makes it easier to engage aerial targets, compared to the R-60, with a reduced need to ‘point’ the drone directly at the target. Still, the operator would have to trigger the launch of the missile after receiving the signal indicating a lock-on has been achieved.

At the same time, the Shahed/Geran remains a slow and not particularly agile launch platform, and certainly not one that was designed with air-to-air combat in mind. Adding a top-mounted missile likely also degrades its maneuverability and affects its stability, but less than would be the case with an R-60.

When it comes to finding aerial targets, the most likely scenario involves operating entirely reactively to what is seen visually on cameras around the drone or otherwise searching for targets of opportunity. Another option would involve the drone operator receiving target information from offboard assets, where applicable, but this seems less likely.

Bearing in mind the performance of the Shahed/Geran and the range of the MANPADS, the most likely targets would be the Mi-8/Mi-17 Hip series armed transport helicopters and the Mi-24 Hind series gunships that are routinely tasked with counter-drone missions. We have already seen that lower and slower-flying helicopters face a notable risk from relatively small kamikaze drones that simply fly into them. Ukrainian F-16s, MiG-29s, Su-27s and Mirage 2000s have also been tasked heavily as ‘Shahed hunters,’ but engaging fighters with these weapons would be even tougher. Still their very existence would add a credible threat to fighters approaching them.

Footage showing the door gunner on a Mil Mi-8 Multirole Helicopter with the Ukrainian Air Force using his M134 Minigun to shoot down a Russian Shahed-136 Attack Drone. pic.twitter.com/UWBd8QUXEf

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) November 12, 2025

While it remains to be seen just how effective the combination of Shahed/Geran with a MANPADS (or R-60) is, these developments reflect a previous precedent for arming drones with air-to-air missiles. The deterrent effect of this can be seen in at least one instance from 2002, when a U.S. Air Force MQ-1 Predator drone fired a Stinger heat-seeking anti-air missile at an Iraqi MiG-25 Foxbat fighter that was trying to shoot it down, which can be seen in the video below.

Dogfight between MQ-1 Predator drone and Mig-25 Foxbat.mp4

These measures are also indicative of efforts being made by Russia to better defend the Shahed/Geran drones. Another recent development involves the apparent addition of infrared countermeasures to defeat drone interceptors and possible missiles fired by fighters. Attached to the rear of the drone’s stabilizing endplates, these appear to employ electrically heated cylindrical blocks to generate blooming infrared energy, like the Hot Brick system.

Ukrainian military radio technology specialist and consultant Serhii “Flash” Beskrestnov reported that Russian Geran-2 drones are now capable of blinding interceptor drones and aircraft.

According to him, the Russians are equipping their strike UAVs with infrared searchlights.… pic.twitter.com/dtpnbKIklE

— OSINTWarfare (@OSINTWarfare) January 3, 2026

For now, we have no evidence of a missile-equipped Shahed/Geran attempting to engage a Ukrainian aircraft, let alone bringing one down. However, having long-range one-way attack drones fitted with air defense missiles provides another complicating factor for Ukraine and illustrates the continued modifications being made to these weapons.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The crew of the runaway Russian-flagged oil tanker Marinera released the first video showing a U.S. Coast Guard Legend class cutter in close pursuit. The video was posted online Tuesday by the Russian RT news outlet as the military buildup in England continues, potentially for a future U.S. boarding of the vessel.

Until recently known as the Bella-1 before it was re-registered and the crew painted a Russian flag on it, the Marinera is part of a so-called shadow fleet. These vessels are transporting oil for Russia, Iran and Venezuela in violation of sanctions imposed by the United States and other countries. The Coast Guard attempted to board the ship, which never made it to port in Venezuela and is empty, on Dec. 20. However, the crew refused to allow it. As we noted yesterday, CBS News reported that the U.S. is drawing up plans to interdict the boat. You can catch up to our most recent coverage of the pursuit for this ship in our story here.

The video posted by RT shows the cutter following the Marinera on a roughly parallel course in choppy seas in the North Atlantic. It is unclear from the video which cutter is following the Marinera. The oil tanker is reportedly located between Iceland and Scotland.

The 418-foot-long Legend class cutters often perform interdictions and can accommodate two MH-65 Dolphin helicopters, or one MH-65 or MH-60 Jayhawk helicopter and two vertically launched unmanned aerial vehicles. A Coast Guard official told us that the service is phasing out its Insitu ScanEagle drones in favor of Shield AI V-BAT drones.

It is unclear from the video if any aircraft are embarked.

The cutters are armed with a Mk. 110 57 mm deck gun; a Phalanx 20 mm close-in weapon system (CWIS), a Mk. 53 decoy launching system (NULKA); and four M2 .50-caliber machine guns.

Regardless of how many aviation assets it carries or how it is armed, a lone cutter in the high seas has not proven adequate to board the Marinera. Concerns about the effort have been exacerbated by Venezuelan officials having discussed “the placement of armed military personnel on tankers — disguising them as civilians for defense purposes — as well as portable Soviet-era air defense systems,” CBS reported. That’s likely why the U.S. is planning a much larger and far more capable and well defended force to do so.

In December, when the U.S. boarded the M/T Skipper, another sanctioned Russian oil tanker, law enforcement and military personnel were fast-roped from a Navy MH-65 Seahawk embarked aboard the world’s largest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford, not too far from Venezuela. You can see that boarding in the following video.

Today, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Homeland Security Investigations, and the United States Coast Guard, with support from the Department of War, executed a seizure warrant for a crude oil tanker used to transport sanctioned oil from Venezuela and Iran. For multiple… pic.twitter.com/dNr0oAGl5x

— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) December 10, 2025

As word has spread of a possible U.S. boarding, Russian milbloggers say the Marinera may be headed for the Baltic Sea, “where it will be met and escorted by the Russian fleet, unless the Americans or British manage to board the Marinera beforehand.”

Russian milblogger Military Informant says the tanker Marinera will likely be met and escorted by the Russian fleet once it enters the Baltic Sea. The vessel is currently being pursued by the US in the North Atlantic. pic.twitter.com/occZFLsH8n

— Preston Stewart (@prestonstew_) January 6, 2026

Meanwhile, as the Legend class cutter follows the Marinera on the water, the U.S. and allies continue their aerial surveillance efforts.

According to flight tracking data, U.K. Typhoon fighters, accompanied by KC-2 aerial refueling tankers, flew over the North Atlantic in the area where the tanker was last seen.

The Typhoons join U.S. Navy P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol jets, and Irish Air Corps C-295W maritime search aircraft in tracking the Marinera.

Beyond the ongoing flights, the U.S. is continuing to add aviation assets to the U.K. that could take part in any effort to track and board the Marinera. On Tuesday, a U.S. Air Force U-2 Dragon Lady high altitude surveillance jet was deployed to RAF Fairford, according to online flight tracking data. It isn’t clear if this high-flying asset is there for a potential raiding operation or other taskings. U-2s fly out of RAF Fairford regularly.

10:30~ DRAGON 86 USAF U-2/s Dragon Lady
Inbound RAF Fairford from Beale AFB.
Maintaining FL600 and not yet requested descent.
Calling “DRAGON OPS” uhf 33#.## in the red #DRAGON86 (no mode-s) pic.twitter.com/qOhoHoZ0cR

— Andy (@Andyyyyrrrr) January 6, 2026

The U-2 is the latest U.S. aircraft to be deployed to the U.K. As we noted yesterday, C-17 Globemaster III cargo jets recently arrived at RAF Fairford from Fort Campbell, Kentucky, home of the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (SOAR) Night Stalkers. Local spotters say the cargo jets delivered Night Stalkers’ highly modified MH-47 Chinooks and MH-60M Black Hawks; however, no visual evidence has emerged to confirm that. Further, one of the U.S. Air Force’s shadowy CASA CN-235 intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance planes was also deployed to RAF Fairford, in addition to at least two AC-130J Ghostrider gunships that just arrived at RAF Mildenhall over the weekend.

A future boarding effort is not the only reason these aircraft may have been deployed to England, which you can read about in our previous report. However, those possibilities are looking less probable as the pursuit of the Marinera continues.

Meanwhile, Moscow is watching all this with a wary eye.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said it was “monitoring with concern the anomalous situation surrounding the Russian oil tanker Marinera,” NBC News reported.

“For several days now, Marinera has been followed by a U.S. Coast Guard ship, despite the fact that the vessel is located approximately 4,000 kilometers (2,485 miles) from the U.S. coastline,” the statement added.

“At present, the vessel is navigating international waters of the North Atlantic under the state flag of the Russian Federation and in full compliance with international maritime law,” the Foreign Ministry continued. “At the same time, for reasons that remain unclear to us, the Russian vessel is receiving heightened attention from U.S. and NATO military forces that is clearly disproportionate to its peaceful status. We expect that Western countries, which consistently declare their commitment to freedom of navigation on the high seas, will begin by adhering to this principle in their own actions.”

‘We are monitoring the abnormal situation around the Russian tanker Marinera with concern’ — Russian MFA tells RT

Despite being 4,000 km from US shores, the civilian vessel is shadowed for days by US and NATO assets

Moscow stresses freedom of navigation on the high seas https://t.co/sMgnTIt8Y8 pic.twitter.com/TRe2W76yBJ

— RT (@RT_com) January 6, 2026

Despite any concerns, Russia has yet to deploy ships or aircraft to support the Marinera. Given its location, it will be days before the ship could reach the Baltic. There, a more robust Russian presence not too far from its shores could complicate any interdiction efforts.

For the moment, the oil tanker is making its way toward Russia unimpeded and it remains unknown if President Donald Trump will give the order to board it. Whether that happens is something we will be following closely.

Update: 8:39 PM Eastern –

The Russians have sent a submarine and other naval assets to escort the Marinera, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday night.

Update: 1/7/2026

U.S. forces have now boarded and secured the Marinera. You can find our continuing courage here.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

Russian drone strikes on Ukraine overnight have left more than one million people in the southeastern region of Dnipropetrovsk without heating and water supplies, Ukraine’s deputy prime minister says.

Oleksiy Kuleba added that work was continuing to restore services following the large-scale attack, which damaged infrastructure across the southeast.

Electricity supplies were also disrupted for thousands more people in neighbouring Zaporizhzhia, state grid operator Ukrenergo said late on Wednesday. It has since been restored, according to the energy ministry.

Russia has recently intensified attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, aimed at paralysing power supplies during a harsh winter.

“Repair work continues in Dnipropetrovsk region to restore heat and water supply for more than one million subscribers,” Kuleba said in a statement on Telegram.

Hospitals, water facilities and other critical services were operating on backup systems, the energy ministry said, while residents were urged to limit electricity use to avoid further strain on the grid.

“Ukraine’s energy system is under enemy attacks every day, and energy workers are operating in extremely difficult conditions to provide people with light and heat,” Ukraine’s Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko wrote on Telegram, adding that deteriorating weather conditions were compounding pressure on critical infrastructure.

Andriy Kovalenko, head of Ukraine’s Centre for Countering Disinformation, described the attacks as a “deliberate terror against the civilian population and an attempt to create a humanitarian catastrophe”.

DTEK, Ukraine’s biggest private energy provider, is living in permanent crisis mode because of Russian attacks on the grid, its chief executive told the BBC last month, with most of Ukraine suffering from lengthy power cuts during winter.

Maxim Timchenko, CEO of DTEK, which provides power for 5.6 million Ukrainians, said the intensity of strikes had been so frequent “we just don’t have time to recover”.

As the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion approaches, Timchenko said Russia had repeatedly targeted DTEK’s energy grid with “waves of drones, cruise and ballistic missiles” and his company had found it difficult to cope.

The attacks come as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said European allies have not given him sound guarantees that they will protect his country in the event of new Russian aggression.

Following talks in Paris on Tuesday, the UK and France signed a declaration of intent on deploying troops in Ukraine if a peace deal is reached – a move Moscow warned would make foreign forces a “legitimate target”.

Zelensky also said he believes Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine could be brought to an end in the first half of 2026. Speaking at the opening of Cyprus’s presidency of the Council of the European Union, he said negotiations with European partners and the United States had entered a new stage and stressed that the EU should play a central role in any settlement.