TODAY

For two overs, it appeared things could have been just like 2023 when India were far too tentative on, quite literally, cricket’s biggest stage.

There were five dot balls in the first over, bowled by seamer Matt Henry, and only five runs in the second, off Glenn Phillips’ part-time spin.

But Samson and Abhishek took 15 from Jacob Duffy’s first over and 24 from the next bowled by Lockie Ferguson as the innings, and the crowd, roared into life.

Even with that slow start, Abhishek and Samson took 92 runs from the best powerplay ever seen at a World Cup. In comparison, the Black Caps were 52-3 after their first six overs – a crucial difference.

Abhishek had only made one score over 15 in this tournament but flogged the ball to all parts. Samson was again supreme, backing up his 97 not out against West Indies and 89 against England with another innings that mixed flair with a classical technique.

Together he and Abhishek hit 12 of the innings’ 18 sixes, which took India’s tournament total to 106 – 30 more than any other team here and a record for a T20 World Cup.

When left-hander Kishan followed in raising his bat it was the first time the top three had reached fifty in a men’s T20 World Cup. They had 203 runs after 15.1 overs and Dube’s late burst – after a run of 28 runs in 24 balls – ensured India charged beyond a par score.

They took all the momentum, a batting paradise capitalised upon. Afterwards the chase was a slow coronation.

India were beaten by South Africa in the Super 8s stage but have responded brilliantly with three scores in excess of 250. This was a night of glory for a new generation, after the T20 retirement of superstars Virat Kohli, Rohit Sharma and Ravindra Jadeja.

Former US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Gordon Gray explains the short-term and long-term implications of US-Israeli war on Iran.

Tehran, Iran – Senior religious leaders have signalled that Iran’s government may soon announce a new leader as hardliners and sidelined reformists deliberate their futures amid the quickly escalating United States-Israeli war on Iran.

Mohammad Mehdi Mirbagheri – a top figure in the 88-member Assembly of Experts, which will appoint the new supreme leader after Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in Tehran on February 28 – said the choice had to be made with care so it would be indisputable internally.

“An almost decisive opinion has been reached. A significant majority has been formed, but at the same time, some obstacles have to be removed, which we hope will happen soon,” the head of the Qom Academy of Islamic Sciences said in a video released on Sunday by the Fars news agency, which is affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The top ultraconservative Muslim leader representing the holy Shia city of Mashhad in the Assembly of Experts, Ahmad Alamolhoda, said on Sunday that the leader has been chosen and the secretariat of the Assembly of Experts must soon announce the result.

Abbas Kaabi, a senior member of the Guardian Council, said on Friday that the powerful 12-member constitutional body was not given any names to consider for the next supreme leader by Khamenei during his lifetime, only attributes.

“He said: Among all attributes, the financial piety of the supreme leader is of primary importance because, given the important powers and responsibilities of leadership, if financial deviation occurs, it will spread to all other matters,” Kaabi was quoted as saying by the IRGC-affiliated Mehr news agency.

The religious leader also quoted Khamenei as pointing to “a rooted belief in the fundamentals of the [1979] Islamic revolution, having insight and knowledge of enemies and sedition, and especially being anti-arrogance and having faith and resistance in confronting America and the Zionist regime” as being among other top attributes for a future leader.

Mojtaba Khamenei, the second son of the late supreme leader, is believed to be a frontrunner for the position as he enjoys wide backing from powerful commanders in the IRGC who have been launching missiles and drones across the region over the past week.

US President Donald Trump, who has said he wants to play a role in determining the future leadership of Iran, has objected to the younger Khamenei’s ascension.

The Israeli army has said it will try to assassinate Iran’s remaining leaders and has bombed their offices and gathering spots in Tehran, Qom and other cities. Israel and the US have repeatedly expressed their interest in changing the government of Iran.

Israeli media reported on Saturday that Asghar Hejazi, a senior religious leader who was Khamenei’s acting chief of staff, was killed in a series of overnight air strikes targeting an underground compound in downtown Tehran used by the supreme leader and other officials. Iran has not commented.

Reformists weigh in as Pezeshkian creates row

President Masoud Pezeshkian came under fire after he released a video from an undisclosed location on Saturday and apologised to regional neighbours who have been fighting off Iranian missiles and drones.

The armed forces leading the military attacks, including the Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters of the IRGC and interim leadership council member and chief justice of the Supreme Court, Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei, quickly released statements to emphasise that the strikes would continue, with Iran as well as the US and Israel, saying they are ready for months of war if necessary.

The row prompted more hardliners, including religious leaders, lawmakers and IRGC-affiliated media, to call on the Assembly of Experts to move quickly to announce the next supreme leader. Ayatollah Hossein Nouri-Hamedani said the process should be expedited to “disappoint the enemy and preserve the unity and solidarity of the nation”.

The disagreement has broken out after reformist factions within the establishment have been pushed aside by hardliners in recent years while the conservatives also have lost favour among an increasingly disillusioned public.

Mohammad Khatami, a reformist religious leader who was president from 1997 to 2005, released a statement to mourn Khamenei last week but also signalled that he sees a future for a reformed Islamic Republic.

The establishment is in need of “reforming approaches and practices objected to by the people”, he said without naming any examples.

“Our path is the path of freedom, independence, people-centrism and fair living, and that is a difficult path to tread and requires wisdom and tolerance,” he said.

Khatami and the Reformist Front of Iran also released general calls for reform after thousands of people were killed during nationwide protests in January.

The Iranian government said “terrorists” backed by the US and Israel were responsible for the killings, but the United Nations and international humanitarian organisations blamed state forces for a lethal crackdown against peaceful protesters.

The leaders of the Reformist Front were arrested or summoned by Iranian intelligence and judicial authorities last month for what the establishment called an attempt to “disrupt the country’s political and social order” and working “for the benefit” of Israel and the US during the antigovernment protests.

Most have since been released on bail, but some remain incarcerated as do many of the tens of thousands of people believed to have been arrested during and in the aftermath of the protests.

Hassan Rouhani, the moderate religious leader who was president from 2013 to 2021 and who rejected being part of a reported power grab last month, has remained publicly silent during the deliberations over the next supreme leader.

Former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, another influential figure, survived an assassination attempt last week, according to Iranian media.

Fuel reserves and oil refineries in Tehran were bombed by the Israeli military overnight into Sunday, leaving thick plumes of smoke enveloping the sprawling city of 10 million people during the day as oil residue fell as part of a heavy rain.

The United States-Israeli war on Iran could leave consumers and businesses worldwide facing weeks or months of higher fuel prices even if the conflict, which is now in its eighth day, ends quickly, as suppliers grapple with damaged facilities, disrupted logistics, and elevated risks to shipping.

The outlook poses a global economic threat and a political vulnerability for US President Donald Trump leading into the midterm elections, with voters sensitive to energy bills and unfavourable to foreign entanglements.

Global oil prices have surged by more than 25 percent since the start of the war, driving up fuel prices for consumers worldwide.

The national average petrol price reached $3.41 per gallon ($0.9 a litre) on Saturday, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), rising by $0.43 over the past week. Goldman Sachs warned oil prices could climb above $100 per barrel if shipping disruptions continue.

The US crude oil settled at just below $91 per barrel on Friday – its largest weekly gain on record in data dating back to 1983, indicating prices could continue to rise.

“The market is shifting from pricing pure geopolitical risk to grappling with tangible operational disruption, as refinery shutdowns and export constraints begin to impair crude processing and regional supply flows,” JP Morgan analysts said earlier this week, according to the Reuters news agency.

The conflict has already led to the suspension of about a fifth of global crude and natural gas supply, as Tehran targets ships in the vital Strait of Hormuz between its shores and Oman, and attacks energy infrastructure across the region.

A nearly complete shutdown of the strait means the region’s top oil producers – Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq and Kuwait – have had to suspend shipments of as much as 140 million barrels of oil – equal to about 1.4 days of global demand – to global refiners.

More than 80 percent of global trade moves by sea, according to the World Bank, meaning disruptions in the waterway could increase freight costs and delay deliveries of goods.

Storages in the Gulf filling

As a result, oil and gas storage at facilities in the Gulf is rapidly filling, forcing oilfields in Iraq and Kuwait to cut oil production, with the UAE likely to cut next, analysts, traders and sources told Reuters.

“At some point soon, everyone will also shut in if vessels do not come,” a ⁠source with a state oil company in the region, who asked not to be named, told Reuters.

Oilfields forced to shut in across the Middle East as a result of the shipping disruptions could take a while to return to normal, said Amir Zaman, head of the Americas commercial team at Rystad Energy.

“The conflict could be ended, but it could take days or weeks or months, depending on the types of fields, age of the field, the type of shut-in that they’ve had to do before you can get production back up to what it once was,” he said.

Iranian forces, meanwhile, are targeting regional energy infrastructure, including refineries and terminals, forcing them to shut down too, with some of those operations badly damaged by attacks and in need of repairs.

Qatar declared force majeure on its huge volumes of gas exports on Wednesday after Iranian drone attacks, and it may take at least a month to return to normal production ‌levels, sources told Reuters. Qatar supplies 20 percent of global liquefied natural gas (LNG).

Saudi Aramco’s mammoth Ras Tanura refinery and crude export terminal, meanwhile, has also closed due to attacks, with no details on damage.

Economists warn that the situation could create a combination of higher prices and slower growth.

A year ago, engineers at Snowflake, the American cloud-based data platform, still spent part of their day on routine tasks – such as scanning dashboards to ensure systems were running smoothly and chasing colleagues for data to complete trend analyses.

Now, says Qaiser Habib, the company’s Toronto-based head of Canada engineering, AI agents handle much of that groundwork, allowing engineers to focus on higher-level decisions.

Habib spends 20 to 30 hours a week interacting with five AI agents. Snowflake has built agents to review product design or to help on-call engineers to help during an outage or an incident, among other uses. He estimates the average engineer works with three or four agents daily, using them to carry out coding projects under human supervision.

“You don’t have to bother a human for basic questions any more,” Habib said, noting that he still collaborates with colleagues on more complex work, such as troubleshooting coding problems.

As companies experiment with AI agents – systems designed to plan, reason and carry out multistep tasks – the technology is beginning to reshape office hierarchies across the United States and Canada. Unlike chatbots, which respond to prompts, AI agents can adapt to changing contexts such as business goals and draw on reference tools including calendars, meeting transcripts and internal databases, to complete work with limited human oversight.

In some workplaces, AI systems are not just completing tasks but also assigning them to human workers. As the technology improves, AI agents are also beginning to manage each other. One agent might generate code, for example, while another reviews it for errors and fixes bugs before a human signs off on the final version.

These agent-to-agent workflows can help companies scale faster. But they also intensify concerns that AI is moving beyond assistance into supervision – and potentially, job replacement.

The leaner office

Anthropic recently expanded access to its cowork agents, allowing users without technical expertise to grant Claude – its AI assistant – permission to specific folders on their computers so it can read, edit, create and organise files autonomously.

The growing use of AI agents is transforming how organisations function around the world, even in companies that aren’t focused on building technology products. For example, some companies are using AI tools to track performance, recommend promotions, role changes, and even identify roles for elimination.

The shift comes as white-collar jobs continue to disappear, particularly in the US. A slew of US employers have announced mass layoffs, mostly affecting entry-level and middle-management workers, and executives have pointed to automation and AI-driven efficiency as part of the rationale. When Amazon said in October that it planned to eliminate about 14,000 jobs, executives cited AI’s potential to help the company operate with fewer layers and greater efficiency. UPS, Target and General Motors also announced deep cuts last year, and this January saw more layoffs than any January in the US since 2009. Several more companies, including Pinterest and HP, continued to cite AI initiatives as part of the reason.

Goldman Sachs has estimated that 6 to 7 percent of US workers could lose their jobs due to AI adoption, with higher risks for computer programmers, accountants, auditors, legal and administrative assistants, and customer service representatives. Overall employment effects, the bank said in August, may be “relatively temporary” as new roles emerge.

Middle management squeezed

Early predictions suggested AI would mainly replace entry-level technical jobs, and some experts tie recent high unemployment rates for new graduates to AI adoption. But the bigger disruption, said Roger Kirkness, founder of AI software firm Convictional in Toronto, is occurring in middle management.

His company’s tools translate executive strategy into operational tasks – a role once handled by supervisors – delivering daily assignments and feedback to employees through a user-friendly inbox interface.

In companies of more than 50 people, “where CEOs can’t speak with each manager, our platform continually surfaces the context that the organisation has that is relevant to leadership decision-making”, Kirkness told Al Jazeera.

This doesn’t mean humans have become irrelevant. But there is growing pressure to reskill, and those who thrive in strategic thinking are better-positioned to adapt to AI-integrated work environments, Kirkness said.

“People are basically becoming managers of their prior jobs,” he said, because AI is now able to perform many of the tasks that previously fell within their roles. Instead of completing tasks such as coding or designing marketing assets, humans are focusing on higher-level strategy while monitoring AI systems, he added.

However, recent research indicates that job cuts reflect companies’ anticipation of AI’s potential, rather than its current ability to replace human workers fully.

A December Harvard Business Review survey of 1,006 global executives found that while AI has played little direct role in replacing workers so far, many companies have already cut jobs or slowed hiring in anticipation of its promised impact.

Most CEOs say they’re still waiting on AI’s payoff: 56 percent report no revenue or cost benefits so far, according to consulting firm PwC’s latest Global CEO Survey of 4,454 executives across 95 countries and territories.

Trust and control

Stefano Puntoni, a behavioural scientist at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, has found that AI usage is also already affecting workplace communication habits. His research shows employees are often more willing to delegate tasks to AI than to colleagues, which can help to reduce burnout. “There’s no social cost,” he said. “You don’t worry about burdening an AI.”

Still, Puntoni argues the biggest barrier to adoption is psychological, not technical. Even effective systems can fail if workers do not trust them. Generative AI, he said, can threaten employees’ sense of competence, autonomy and connection.

“If workers feel threatened, they may want the system to fail,” Puntoni said. “At scale, that guarantees failure.”

In other words, deploying AI primarily as a cost-cutting tool can backfire. Layoffs framed as efficiency gains may reduce cooperation and limit the productivity benefits companies hope to unlock with technology, Puntoni said.

Trust, Kirkness agreed, is the real constraint. To build staff confidence in the tools it sells – and to avoid layoffs – Convictional adopted a four-day workweek, framing it as a way to share AI-driven productivity gains with employees.

“Mass layoffs in the name of automation destroy trust,” he said.

The human premium

In the US, lawsuits have begun to challenge AI-driven corporate decisions, particularly in areas such as insurance claim denials and alleged AI-enabled hiring discrimination.

Some experts warn that as AI systems become more autonomous, humans risk losing meaningful oversight – and that these agents themselves could become targets for cyberattacks. Yet regulation has struggled to keep pace with innovation. Neither the US nor Canada has clearly defined rules governing AI agents.

Business leaders are testing which functions can be automated and which still require sustained human involvement. For some workers, that uncertainty has become a source of unease.

One employee at a multinational firm, who is based in Vancouver, said she sometimes wonders whether the online “coach” used to support employee development is an AI system or a human relying so heavily on AI tools that the distinction has blurred. She requested anonymity because of concerns about professional repercussions.

Some organisations are setting boundaries. New Ground Wellness, a Canadian clinical counselling and wellness firm, uses AI tools such as chatbots in its daily operations, but recently declined a 20,000 Canadian dollar ($14,600) proposal for an agentic AI intake system that would match therapists with clients.

After receiving feedback from callers, the company concluded that the efficiency gains would not outweigh potential damage to trust. Their decision also reflects multiple surveys showing a strong preference among Western consumers for human customer service workers.

“We are open to revisiting AI systems in the future,” said New Ground Wellness cofounder Lucinda Bibbs, “but at this stage, preserving human connections remains our highest priority.”

Saurara a: Apple Podcast | Spotify | RSS

Gina Bashir manomiya ce mai shekaru 46 daga Askira Uba a jihar Borno, arewa maso gabashin Najeriya. A lokacin da rikicin Boko Haram ya kai kololuwa, tana zaune a Benisheik, wani karamin gari a Borno, tare da mijinta da ‘ya’yanta shida.

A lokacin wannan rikici, ta rasa dan’uwanta, dan dan’uwanta, da wasu ‘yan uwa shida.

A cikin wannan bidiyo, mun tattauna game da yadda ta tsira da kuma burinta ga ‘ya’yanta.

Mai Gabatarwa: Rukayya Saeed

Marubuciya: Sabiqah Bello

Muryoyin Shiri: Sabiqah Bello

Fassara: Rukayya Saeed

Edita: Aliyu Dahiru

Furodusa: Al-amin Umar

Babban Furodusa: Anthony Asemota

Babban Mashiryi: Ahmad Salkida

Randall took the first wicket of his five in a row at the end of his second over before taking the rest from the start of his third over as Northern Districts slumped from 4-0 to 9-5.

The right-arm medium pacer had figures of 5-2 at that point and also took a wicket with the first ball of his third over to make it six wickets in eight balls.

He dismissed another batter with the fifth ball of his third over and finished with figures of 7-25.

“It gets drummed into us a lot that we don’t want to go searching for wickets, so I was trying to just keep bowling the same ball, and our ‘Plan A’ that we’d talked about, and it came off,” said Randall.

“I had no idea that it was the first time it [five wicket in five balls in first-class cricket] had happened in the world, it’s seriously cool.

“I mean, I don’t really have any words at the moment, to be honest. I’ll take it.”

While it is the first time a player has achieved the feat in first-class cricket, it is not the first time a player has taken five wickets in five balls in all formats.

Ireland international Curtis Campher became the first male player to do so in a professional match in July 2025 in a domestic T20 game.

Zimbabwe Women all-rounder Kelis Ndhlovu previously took five wickets in five balls in a domestic under-19 T20 in 2024.

What is the bandwagon technique?

Bandwagon is a propaganda technique that utilizes the instinct of human participation in a systematic manner. It has a simple but deadly basic idea, creating the impression that “everyone is on this side” and that others will join in not because they think critically, but because they are afraid of being left behind, afraid of being seen as wrong, or afraid of being ostracized. In international relations, this technique not only affects public opinion but is also used to pressure countries to follow certain geopolitical positions, build alliances that seem “inevitable,” and delegitimize anyone who chooses not to participate. Motin (2024), in his study on bandwagoning in international relations, explains the behavior of the bandwagon of small and medium countries that are greatly influenced by the perception of global power distribution. When a great power manages to convince the world that it is “winning” or that its position is already the consensus of the majority, other weaker nations tend to conform to that power to avoid the risk of being on the losing side. This is the essence of the bandwagon in propaganda, manipulating perceptions of who is superior. (Dylan Motin, 2024)

Theoretical Roots: Balancing vs Bandwagon

In the theory of international relations, bandwagoning always coexists with the concept of its opponent, namely balancing. According to Cladi & Locatelli (2015), he explained about the alliance theory that states basically have two choices when facing dominating powers, namely by balancing or following (bandwagoning). These decisions are not always taken solely based on strategic calculations but are greatly influenced by the way information regarding the balance of power is conveyed and perceived. This is where the propaganda bandwagon comes into play: through the manipulation of views about who is stronger and more numerous, countries can be invited to ‘join in’ even though the current has actually been set up. A study on alliance theory, published by OPS Alaska Academic in 2003, confirms that in an anarchist international system, small countries are particularly vulnerable to pressure to join because they do not have the resources to independently verify claims about international consensus. They tend to respond to the signals that are most powerful and appear most often in their information environment. These signals can be easily affected by large forces through various operations. (Cladi & Locatelli, 2015) (Thomas Gangale, 2003)

How Does Bandwagon Work in the Field?

To understand this technique concretely, we can look at the example of Sri Lanka discussed in the International Journal of Humanities and Social Science (2015). The study notes how Sri Lanka, during various periods of internal conflict and international pressure, constantly had to navigate between two great powers, each trying to create a narrative that ‘joins us because all that is rational is here.’ ‘Sri Lanka is a prime example of a small country that is the target of bandwagon propaganda from multiple parties at once, where each major power seeks to create the illusion of consensus that they represent the majority of the world. Nanyang Technological University’s RSIS said that the simple division between balancing and bandwagoning is no longer sufficient to explain the behavior of countries in the now much more complex international system. Countries not only choose to fight or follow but also hedge, that is, pretend to follow while secretly maintaining a strategic distance. In addition, bandwagon propaganda techniques are increasingly being used to complicate these hedging options by creating increasingly strong social and reputational pressure on countries that are reluctant to publicly declare their choice (Gunasekara, 2015) (Ian, 2003) (Ian, 2003).

Bandwagon in the Global Disinformation Machine

One of the aspects that makes the bandwagon even more dangerous today is the way it works, which is integrated with large-scale disinformation operations. In the Journal of Advanced Military Studies, it is explained that contemporary political warfare involves not only conventional military power but also efforts to create an information environment that makes resistance feel illogical and futile. The bandwagon serves as a key psychological mechanism in building such an environment: when all sources of information seem to convey the same message, even the most critical individuals begin to doubt their own judgment. The Oxford Internet Institute notes in their in-depth report that in 2020, at least 81 countries have used organized social media strategies to reinforce the impression that their governments have broad support from the public, both domestically and internationally. Thousands of bot accounts and cooperating accounts are launched to fill public discussion spaces with consistent messages, creating a very convincing illusion of consensus. When people turn to social media and see that ‘everyone’ seems to support a certain narrative, the bandwagon effect automatically takes effect, even without realizing it. (Forest, 2021) (Forest, 2021) (Samantha Bradshaw et al., 2020), (Samantha Bradshaw et al., 2020)

Closing: Thinking Independently as the Last Fortress

The effective bandwagon technique is not because the people or the target country are less intelligent. Its effectiveness lies in the use of something fundamental, namely, the desire to side with the right side and the fear of the consequences of loneliness. In the context of international relations, the consequences can be diplomatic isolation, economic sanctions, or loss of access to security alliances. This pressure prompted many countries to go with the flow even though the currents were made up of the Oxford Internet Institute emphasizing that to counter the modern bandwagon propaganda operation, goodwill alone is not enough. It requires a real combination that includes the state’s ability to detect information manipulation early on and the public’s critical awareness of the narrative it constructs, as well as a serious investment in an analytical capacity that is completely independent of the influence of great powers. The state can verify claims about its own ‘international consensus’ and not only rely on information crowded in the media or digital platforms. A state that has true sovereignty in the era of this global information war. Ultimately, the most effective weapon against bandwagon propaganda is the ability to question things in a simple but critical way: is it true that everyone is involved, or is it just an illusion deliberately created to force your involvement? (Samantha Bradshaw et al., 2020)

Shah’s party represents a reformist wave reshaping the Himalayan nation’s politics since last year’s youth-led uprising.

Nepal’s centrist Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) of rapper-turned-politician Balendra Shah has secured a majority in the direct parliamentary elections and is heading for a landslide, according to official results and election commission trends.

The 35-year-old’s RSP party was also leading in proportional representation vote, according to results declared until early Sunday, in the country’s first election since last year’s youth-led uprising which toppled the government.

Elections on Thursday chose a new 275-member House of Representatives, the lower house of parliament, with 165 seats chosen directly, and 110 by a proportional representation vote.

Shah’s RSP has already won nearly 100 of 165 directly elected seats and is leading in over a dozen other constituencies in the results published by Nepal’s Election Commission early on Sunday.

Shah, widely known simply as “Balen”, himself on Saturday defeated the veteran four-time Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli – whose Marxist-led government was ousted in the protests last year – in his own seat in a southeastern district, securing almost four times as many votes as Oli.

His victory over the 74-year-old Oli, and his rise from the capital Kathmandu’s mayor to potential prime minister, marks one of the most dramatic results in recent Nepali politics.

He highlighted health and education for poor Nepalis as a key focus of his campaign, which rode a wave of public anger towards traditional political parties. He said the vote reflected his refusal to take “the easy way out” and signalled a reckoning with the “problems and betrayals that have affected the country”.

Oil congratulated Shah in a post on X, wishing him a “smooth and successful” term.

[Translation: Balenu Babu, Congratulations to you for the victory! May your five-year tenure be smooth and successful—heartfelt best wishes!]

Neighbouring India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday said the successful and peaceful conduct of elections in Nepal was a “proud moment” in the country’s “democratic journey”.

“It is heartening to see my Nepali sisters and brothers exercise their democratic rights so vibrantly,” Modi wrote on X. “This historic milestone is a proud moment in Nepal’s democratic journey.”

Modi assured of working together with the new government. “As a close friend and neighbour, India remains steadfast in its commitment to working closely with the people of Nepal and their new Government to scale new heights of shared peace, progress and prosperity.”

‘Shake up the status quo’

Shah trained as a civil engineer before breaking through as one of Nepal’s most prominent rappers, releasing conscious music targeting corruption and inequality that later became anthems of the September protests.

His 2022 election as Kathmandu’s first independent mayor was also a major upset for the political establishment at the time. The RSP, his party, founded the same year, was built on a similar anti-establishment platform.

Its campaign before Thursday’s vote was highly organised, with a more-than-660-person social media operation and significant funding from the Nepali diaspora, particularly in the United States.

“The nation was fed up with the old corrupt leaders,” said Birendra Kumar Mehta, a member of RSP’s central committee.

The September protests, initially triggered by a government ban on social media platforms, rapidly escalated into a mass movement against corruption and economic stagnation. At least 77 people were killed.

Shah emerged as a figurehead of the protests, and his song Nepal Haseko, Nepal Smiling, accumulated more than 10 million YouTube views during the unrest. His victory reflects a growing generational divide in the country.

More than 40 percent of Nepal’s nearly 30 million people are under 35, yet the leadership of its established parties has remained in its 70s.

Nepalese journalist Pranaya Rana described Shah to Al Jazeera as embodying “the outsider spirit that many young Nepalis are looking for to shake up the status quo”.

Flames engulfed Kuwait’s Public Institution for Social Security high-rise headquarters after it was hit by a suspected drone amid a wave of Iranian aerial strikes on the country.

As expected, Iran has repeatedly targeted prized missile defense radars across the Middle East in retaliation for the joint U.S.-Israeli air campaign that is ongoing. Iran’s attacks on high-value radars that enable the region’s missile defense capabilities appear to have succeeded on multiple occasions. The irony that lower-end long-range kamikaze drones are perhaps the biggest threat to extremely advanced radars capable of providing telemetry for intercepting targets traveling at hypersonic speeds, sometimes in space, is glaring. The losses of the radars and/or damage to their facilities should finally serve as a stark wake-up call regarding the vulnerability of these critical but largely static assets.

Based on the information at hand, it appears that Iran has been able to destroy one U.S. AN/TPY-2 radar in Jordan and damage the massive American-made AN/FPS-132 phased array radar in Qatar, prompting immediate concerns about available radar coverage to help respond to further barrages. There are strong indications that a number of other similar systems have been destroyed or damaged, as well.

For over a decade, TWZ has drawn attention to the threat of drones to America’s critical military capabilities and infrastructure. And more recently, we specifically discussed the glaring vulnerability of strategic radar systems after a Ukrainian drone attack nearly two years ago on a Russian early warning radar site, as well as after being first to report drone incursions over a U.S. missile defense site on Guam back in 2019.

For some general context to start, Iran and/or its regional proxies have hit targets in a total of 12 countries since the start of the current conflict. Iranian retaliatory attacks utilizing ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as long-range kamikaze drones, have significantly declined in recent days, but are still being carried out. Countries in the region are so far claiming very high interception rates of incoming threats, but some missiles and drones are clearly making it to their targets.

Iran has attacked a wide array of different targets, military and non-military, but there has been a clear concerted effort to go after air and missile defense radars in the region as part of the retaliatory campaign. This is to be expected given that the loss of key radars, even temporarily, risks degrading further efforts to intercept Iranian missiles and drones, hence these weapons can succeed at a higher rate. Taking out missile defense radars at very high-value sites can leave those areas far more vulnerable to follow-on attacks, as well. Striking these radars also reduces their user’s general situational awareness in the region, and can even have strategic implications beyond the region, too.

It’s also worth noting that these radars are extremely expensive and take years to replace.

Iran’s attacks on radars so far

This past week, CNN obtained imagery from Planet Labs showing an AN/TPY-2 radar damaged, or even possibly destroyed, following an Iranian attack on Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan. Muwaffaq Salti has long been a major regional hub for U.S. operations, and is being very actively utilized in the current conflict. It has the greatest concentration of U.S. tactical aircraft in the region, and thus is an extremely important target, where even one ballistic missile landing on an apron could destroy multiple prized fighter aircraft and take the lives of U.S. service members.

NEW: The radar for a THAAD system was struck and apparently destroyed in Jordan while two other THAAD radar systems may have been hit in the UAE, satellite images show – w/ @ThomasBordeaux7 https://t.co/qiuWVQgyda

— Gianluca Mezzofiore (@GianlucaMezzo) March 5, 2026

The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that the U.S. military was rushing to replace the AN/TPY-2 at Muwaffaq Salti, lending credence to the assessment that damage from the Iranian attack was at least substantial. There is a picture, seen below, circulating on social media that is said to show the AN/TPY-2 at Muwaffaq Salti having been clearly knocked out, but it remains unverified and, in an age of increasingly impressive AI fakes, should be treated as such.

Photos have now confirmed the destruction of a AN/TPY-2 Forward Based X-band Transportable Radar operated by the U.S. Army, following an Iranian drone attack earlier this week targeting Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan. The AN/TPY-2 is the primary ground-based air surveillance… pic.twitter.com/54QyQCxNVW

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) March 7, 2026

The active electronically-scanned array AN/TPY-2 is primarily associated with the U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-ballistic missile system, but it also has a demonstrated ability to feed data to Patriot surface-to-air missile systems. THAAD is a key upper-tier defensive system deployed to the Middle East that is capable of swatting down Iran’s most capable missiles from the end of their midcourse stage of flight and through their terminal stage. AN/TPY-2 radars can also be deployed as standalone sensors in a larger integrated air defense network. The radar is trailer-mounted and technically road mobile, but is not designed to be used on the move or very rapidly relocated from one place to another.

CNN has reported that additional Planet Labs imagery indicates that AN/TPY-2 and their infrastructure were also at least targeted and possibly damaged in Iranian attacks on THAAD batteries belonging to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), one at Al Ruwais and another at Al Sader, and another one in Saudi Arabia near Prince Sultan Air Base. The New York Times also obtained satellite imagery showing that the site at Al Ruwais had at least come under attack. The full extent of the damage at any of these sites remains unclear.

A compound was damaged on Al Dhafra Air Base, UAE. Sat dishes were visible at the site as recently as mid-June of last year. It is unclear if they were still there when strikes occurred, but Iran struck the same area again on Monday. pic.twitter.com/nRyb7c6Kj5

— Devon Lum (@devonjlum) March 4, 2026

A satellite image taken on March 1 shows smoke rising from a radar site near the Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, where dozens of American planes are stationed.

At the site, a tent previously used to shelter a radar system for a nearby THAAD battery was badly charred and… pic.twitter.com/rSbEdtOvwf

— Gianluca Mezzofiore (@GianlucaMezzo) March 6, 2026

Satellite imagery from Planet Labs, obtained by the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, has also confirmed that the very large, fully static AN/FPS-132 radar in Qatar was damaged in an Iranian attack on the first day of the conflict. At least one of the radar’s three arrays was hit, and there are also signs of a possible fire.

Confirmed the AN/FPS-132 phased array radar in Qatar was damaged by Iran, thanks to an incredible image from our friends @planet

Debris from the damaged face has fallen on the roof of the main building and there is water runoff from the firefighting effort pic.twitter.com/AxzteEug7P

— Sam Lair (@sam_lair) March 3, 2026

There are multiple versions of the giant AN/FPS-132, all of which are fixed-site solid-state phased array radar systems primarily to provide early warning of incoming ballistic missile strikes. As noted, the one in Qatar has three faces, offering 360-degree coverage, but there are also variants with only two faces. The AN/FPS-132 is part of a larger group of broadly related strategic early warning types that are also in U.S. military service at multiple sites in the United States, as well as in Greenland. The Royal Air Force (RAF) in the United Kingdom operates another one of these radars at its RAF Fylingdales base.

Since the first day of the current conflict, claims have been circulating that Iran was able to at least damage a U.S. AN/TPS-59 active electronically-scanned array ballistic missile defense radar in Manama, Bahrain. This appears to be based on the video below, showing a kamikaze drone hitting a large spherical radome at Naval Support Activity (NSA) Bahrain, a U.S. Navy facility in the country that is home to the headquarters of the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

Footage of an Iranian attack drone slamming into the headquarters of the US Navy’s 5th Fleet at Naval Support Activity (NSA) Bahrain moments ago. pic.twitter.com/wHbje3eiiy

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) February 28, 2026

However, Planet Labs imagery that The New York Times subsequently obtained has been assessed to instead show damage to what are understood to be large satellite communications terminals at NSA Bahrain. Like larger radars, these terminals also often sit inside spherical radomes. There are clear signs that communications arrays like this have been a major target of Iranian retaliation strikes on bases across the Middle East, as well.

A tent surrounded by satellite dishes was destroyed at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. Some of the dishes were most likely damaged as well. Al Udeid is the regional headquarters for the US Central Command, and was similarly struck by Iran last June. pic.twitter.com/TyuqZWHUL3

— Devon Lum (@devonjlum) March 4, 2026

Yesterday, Iran’s PressTV claimed that the Iranian Navy had launched a kamikaze drone attack targeting “strategic carbon-based radar installations at the Sdot Micha facility.” While TWZ cannot independently confirm whether such an attack was launched, let alone was successful, it does highlight continued Iranian targeting of key missile defense radars. Sdot Micha Air Base in Israel hosts Arrow-series anti-ballistic missile defense systems. Elta’s Green Pine, which is analogous in some very broad respects to AN/TPY-2, is the main radar associated with these anti-missile systems.

Costly losses of key capabilities

Concerns have been raised about the immediate impacts from the loss of the AN/TPY-2 and damage to the AN/FPS-132, given that Iranian retaliatory attacks have significantly slowed, but not stopped. There are claims now, said to have originated from a report from Channel 14 in Israel, that malfunctioning and/or damaged U.S. radars have caused delays in early warning alerts about incoming Iranian missiles. TWZ has been unable to find an original source for these assertions, and they remain very much unconfirmed at this time. Regardless, it is hard not to see how losses of these systems could cause at least some degradation in total coverage, even if other land based and sea-based systems (Aegis BMD) can help with filling in some coverage.

The United States, Israel, and Gulf Arab states do have other air and missile defense radars positioned in the Middle East, or that could otherwise help fill any resulting gaps. At the same time, there are only a small number of systems that are at all equivalent to the AN/TPY-2, let alone the AN/FPS-132. Only 16 AN/TPY-2s are understood to have been produced to date, in total, for all customers. The current cost of one of those radars is generally pegged at around $250 to $300 million. When the U.S. government approved the sale of the AN/FPS-132 radar, as well as various ancillary items and services, to Qatar in 2013, that entire package had an estimated value of $1.1 billion, or just over $2.1 billion today when adjusted for inflation. Any of these systems takes years to procure.

🇺🇸 PSA: Fast Facts on AN/TPY-2 (radar system used by THAAD)

16 produced to date, 13 US Army, 2 UAE, 1 KSA, 6 more pending for KSA, none on order for US Army.

8 deployed as part of US THAAD batteries, 5 Forward Based Mode (deployed/operated by US Army in Japan [2], Israel,… pic.twitter.com/bD7gHpA3ib

— Colby Badhwar 🇨🇦🇬🇧 (@ColbyBadhwar) March 7, 2026

Furthermore, the U.S. military and its allies have spent years (and billions of dollars) building a regional missile defense shield, with AN/TPY-2s and the AN/FPS-132 in Qatar being core components thereof. Though Iran and its expanding ballistic missile arsenal have been the driving factors behind those efforts, the U.S. government also sees these assets as being a key element of its global missile defense architecture. As noted, the Qatari AN/FPS-132 provides 360-degree coverage that is not limited to scanning for threats emanating from Iran. Houthi militants in Yemen to the south, long backed by Iran, have amassed a substantial arsenal of ballistic missiles, as well as cruise missiles and long-range kamikaze drones, and have used it to attack Gulf Arab states in the past. As an aside, the UAE was the first to employ THAAD in combat back in 2022, using the system to knock down an incoming Houthi ballistic missile.

More serious ramifications

Strategic air and missile architectures, in general, exist in a world now where the threats they face are not limited to very-long-range standoff capabilities possessed only by peer or near-peer adversaries.

It used to be, generally, that you had to fire a ballistic missile or high-end cruise missile in an attempt to strike one of these systems. Now, long-range one-way-attack drones, as well as increasingly capable cruise and ballistic missiles, continue to proliferate steadily, including to smaller nation-state armed forces and even non-state actors. An attack could even come from a small drone with a C4 charge launched from a fishing trawler 10 miles away from one of these critical radar installations. The threat of these kinds of near-field attacks has largely been overlooked for years, even as the low-end drone threat has exploded and ‘democratized’ precision-guided weaponry, as they did not fit the established aerial threat matrix and the countermeasures used to repel those threats.

Though we have not seen it yet in the course of the current conflict with Iran, the threat of more localized attacks by smaller weaponized drones, in particular, is very real and only set to grow. This was definitely shown by Ukraine’s Operation Spiderweb’s unprecedented covert attacks on multiple airbases across Russia last year. Israel also employed near-field drone and missile attacks to destroy Iranian air defenses in the opening phases of the 12 Day War last June. These operations were massively successful and knocked out Iran’s most critical air defenses, allowing for long-range munitions to strike their targets unimpeded. TWZ had been calling attention to this issue for years beforehand, including back in 2019 after drones were reportedly spotted over the U.S. Army THAAD site, with its AN/TPY-2 radar, on Guam.

СБУ показала унікальні кадри спецоперації «Павутина», у результаті якої уражено 41 військовий літак стратегічної авіації рф

➡️ https://t.co/OSxqEsI9CD pic.twitter.com/aGSZNEsoX3

— СБ України (@ServiceSsu) June 4, 2025

CBS News also reported this past week that quadcopter-type drones may have been surveilling the Shuaiba port in Kuwait before all-out hostilities erupted. Six U.S. service members were killed, and more were wounded, in an Iranian retaliatory attack on a U.S. logistics operations center at Shuaiba on March 1.

Iranian intelligence utilized various means to track service members after they left the base.

➡️ In anticipation of the offensive and expected retaliation to include strikes on Camp Arifjan, the Tactical Ops Center (TOC) was moved to the same facility at the port used during… https://t.co/R8VcPGIESm

— TheIntelFrog (@TheIntelFrog) March 6, 2026

Large, high-value, static and semi-static radars are fragile, to begin with. Domes and other structures can be built around them to help protect them from the elements, but they still need to allow for signals to be sent out and received. This inherently limits options for more physical hardening. Since these radars are typically fixed in place permanently or semi-permanently, their locations are also easier to determine and then target using a set of basic map coordinates. This is highlighted by how quickly news outlets have been able to locate these sites and then assess damage to them from commercially available satellite imagery.

The fragility of large radars also means that what might seem to be minor damage to the casual observer could actually be enough for a mission kill that takes the system offline, or at least degrades its functionality greatly, for a protracted period of time. Depending on the radar, it might not take a very large munition at all to cause a sufficient degree of damage. Just a small drone packing a grenade-sized explosive can punch a hole in one of these fragile arrays, putting it out of action for a very long period of time.

As TWZ wrote back in 2019 in the context of reported drone incursions over Guam:

“With that said, America’s preeminent adversaries in the entire region would make taking out the THAAD battery on Guam a top priority during a conflict or even as part of a limited demonstration of force. Why barrage it with ballistic missiles or attempt a cruise missile launch from a forward-deployed submarine or even a clandestine commando raid when you can just fly a drone loaded with explosives into it? And no, you don’t need some high-end drone system to do this as real-world events have highlighted many times over. Drug cartels are now whacking their enemies with off-the-shelf drone-borne improvised explosive devices and even U.S. allies are actually manufacturing hobby-like drones just for this purpose. Somewhat more sophisticated types can be launched from longer distances and can even home in on radar or other RF emissions sources, like THAAD’s powerful AN/TPY-2 Radar and data-links, autonomously, beyond just striking a certain point on a map.”

“Simply put, ‘shooting the archer,’ in this case an advanced anti-ballistic missile system that protects America’s most strategic base in the entire region, via a relatively cheap drone is both an absurdly obvious and terrifyingly ironic tactic—the U.S. can shoot down ballistic missiles, but the critical systems used to do so remain extremely vulnerable to the lowliest of airborne threats—cheap drones.”

The scale and scope of Iran’s retaliatory attacks so far, while clearly threatening, pale in comparison to what one would expect to see in a major high-end fight between the United States and China in the Pacific. The overall ramifications would also be more severe.

Beyond the more immediate impacts of losing this kind of strategic radar coverage, there are far larger implications. In some cases, these radars are designed to provide critical early warning and verification of incoming nuclear strikes, or other large-scale attacks by a major adversary, targeting a nation’s home soil. They are critical parts of the nuclear deterrent. As such, losing these sensors can have major downstream impacts on strategic decision-making cycles based on concerns about what suddenly is not being seen. Fewer radars also means fewer ways to double-check that a track is not a false positive in a scenario where the total available decision-making time could be seriously truncated, to begin with. These are concerns TWZ explicitly highlighted after Ukraine’s attack on the Armavir Radar Station in Russia in 2024.

A need for deeply layered defenses

It should be clear at this point that threats to strategic radar systems that Iran’s attacks in the past week have thrust into the public eye are not new. Similarly, this highlights how the United States, and others globally, remain behind the curve when it comes to establishing deeper, layered defenses to better protect these prized assets. This was already evidenced by Ukraine’s attack on the Armavir Radar Station in Russia in 2024.

A notable exception is Taiwan’s Leshan radar station, which houses an AN/FPS-115 Pave Paws phased array early warning radar that would be a top target for Chinese forces during any cross-strait conflict. It is protected by an array of defensive capabilities, including a ground-based Phalanx Close-in Weapon System (CIWS), which is more typically found on warships. Even so, Iran’s attacks on radars this past week have still notably resonated in Taiwan.

Even a layered defense posture might not be enough, especially in the face of a large volume and/or complex attack involving multiple types of missiles and/or drones. Those threats could also be coming from very different vectors at once, and fired from very disparate launch points on land, at sea, or in the air. Achieving overmatch against fixed defenses is also a glaring vulnerability. An enemy can calculate how many munitions, and what mix of munitions, are required to overwhelm known defenses at a key location. This is especially true for largely static defensive arrangements. Once critical terrestrial sensors are taken out, attacking other targets that were under the defensive umbrella they helped enable can become far easier.

New eyes in space

Perhaps the biggest takeaway here is that the combat actions by Iran this week provide heft to the arguments for migrating missile tracking capabilities outside of the atmosphere. While advanced and resilient missile tracking layers in space may not replace all their terrestrial counterparts, they would provide much-needed redundancy and augmentation of their capabilities.

The U.S. military does have space-based early warning sensors that are integrated into its existing ballistic missile defense architecture, and have been for decades. But these warn of launches, they don’t track a weapon throughout its flight cycle. For some years now, work has been underway to substantially expand on those capabilities, to include the start of the fielding of a new satellite constellation to help track ballistic missiles, as well as hypersonic boost-glide vehicles and other threats, during the mid-course portion of their flights.

The U.S. Air Force and U.S. Space Force are also very eager to move most, if not all, of the airborne target warning sensor layer into orbit, and to do the same when it comes to persistent tracking of targets on the ground and at sea. Relevant space-based capabilities are still years away from becoming a reality, at least at the required scale.

Shifting the focus to sensors in orbit is not without its own risks, either. U.S. officials regularly highlight ever-growing threats to assets in space, and are now openly talking about the need for satellites to be able to fight back, as you can read more about here. As part of its work on new space-based sensor infrastructure, the U.S. military has been investing heavily in new distributed constellations with large numbers of smaller satellites to increase resiliency to attacks.

Regardless, the Pentagon is very bullish in moving missile tracking into orbit, and doing so with more resilient constellations than with a handful of traditional satellites. Work is deeply underway in proving out this technology, which would enable the entire missile defense architecture globally. President Trump’s Golden Dome initiative will need this capability in order to accomplish its lofty goals. But accelerating the development and deployment of this kind of capability is very costly and we may see a major boost in funding for it after this war ends.

Overall, more details about the scope and scale of damage to radars and other assets from Iranian retaliatory attacks are likely to continue to emerge. What we’ve already seen points to a need for a further reassessment of the vulnerabilities of critical strategic air and missile defense radars and what is needed to adequately defend them, including moving them outside of the Earth’s atmosphere.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE report more attacks despite assurance from Iran’s president that the strikes will stop.

United States President Donald Trump has posted on social media that he does not need the United Kingdom to deploy aircraft carriers to the Middle East, amid the ongoing war with Iran.

Saturday’s post on Truth Social follows a statement from the UK’s Ministry of Defence that one of its two flagship aircraft carriers, the HMS Prince of Wales, has been placed on “high readiness”.

“The United Kingdom, our once Great Ally, maybe the Greatest of them all, is finally giving serious thought to sending two aircraft carriers to the Middle East,” Trump wrote.

“That’s OK, Prime Minister Starmer, we don’t need them any longer — But we will remember. We don’t need people that join Wars after we’ve already won!”

The post, with its reference to the UK as a “once great ally”, signals a deepening rift between the two countries that has emerged since Trump returned to office last year.

The divide appears to have deepened over the past week, as the US and Israel continue to hammer Iran as part of a war they launched on February 28.

The conflict has sparked fears across the Middle East, as retaliatory strikes from Tehran target US allies across the region.

Already, an estimated 1,332 people have been killed in Iran, and the US has confirmed the deaths of six of its service members. More deaths have been reported in countries like Lebanon, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq.

The UK government has increased its involvement in the war on Iran, widely considered illegal under international law.

The UK Defence Ministry, for instance, said on Saturday that the government of Prime Minister Keir Starmer had allowed the US to use its military bases for what it termed “limited defensive purposes”.

The bases include RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire and the Diego Garcia site in the Chagos Islands, located in the Indian Ocean. Initially, there had been reports that Starmer had blocked the US use of the bases.

In the immediate aftermath of the initial US-Israeli strike, Starmer appeared to blanche at the prospect of joining the war.

He and the leaders of France and Germany issued a joint statement, underscoring that any actions they might take would be defensive in nature.

“We will take steps to defend our interests and those of our allies in the region, potentially through enabling necessary and proportionate defensive action to destroy Iran’s capability to fire missiles and drones at their source,” the joint statement said.

“We have agreed to work together with the US and allies in the region on this matter.”

But Starmer has had to push back on domestic criticism both for and against joining the war.

On Monday, he told the UK Parliament, “We are not joining the US and Israeli offensive strikes”, citing the need to protect “Britain’s national interest” and “British lives”.

The war in Iran remains largely unpopular in the UK. The polling firm Survation conducted a survey over the last week of 1,045 British adults, in which 43 percent of respondents called the war not justifiable.

When asked if they supported Starmer’s initial decision not to allow the US to use UK bases, 56 percent of respondents approved. Only 27 percent said it was the wrong choice.

Thousands of protesters gathered outside the US Embassy in London on Saturday to call for an end to the ballooning conflict.

The US president, meanwhile, has upped his criticism of Starmer over the past week, further fraying relations with the UK government.

On March 3, for instance, Trump held an Oval Office meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, in which he said repeatedly he was “not happy with the UK”.

Of Starmer, Trump said, “This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with.”

Trump has long admired Churchill, and last year installed a bust of the late UK wartime leader in the Oval Office, just as he had during his first term.

By contrast, Trump has issued a flood of criticism against Starmer, particularly for his 2024 decision to transfer control of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.

The transfer came after the International Court of Justice found the UK acted unlawfully in 1965 by separating the islands from Mauritius to create a separate colony.

The deal with Mauritius allows the US and the UK to maintain a military base on Diego Garcia, part of the archipelago.

However, Trump has repeatedly slammed the transfer, writing on social media that “giving away extremely important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY”.

Tensions between the US and UK also rose in January after Trump told Fox News that NATO allies had “stayed a little off the front lines” during the US war in Afghanistan.

Starmer had responded that he found Trump’s comments “to be insulting and frankly appalling”.

The Trump administration has signalled it is pivoting away from its traditional European allies in favour of more politically aligned countries.

At a summit on Saturday with right-wing Latin American leaders, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio appeared to praise the attendees while casting shade on other allies.

“At a time when we have learned that, oftentimes, an ally, when you need them, maybe may not be there for you, these are countries that have been there for us,” Rubio told the summit.

Aimee Zambrano is a Venezuelan anthropologist, researcher, and consultant who has made significant contributions to the struggle against gender-based violence in the country. She is currently pursuing a master’s degree in Women’s Studies. She is the founder of the Utopix Femicide Monitor, a platform that collects data on femicides from open sources. In this interview, Zambrano sheds light on the main challenges to advance a feminist agenda in Venezuela.

How has gender-based violence evolved in Venezuela in recent years?

It is difficult to answer precisely because there are no official figures. The former Attorney General, Tarek William Saab, presented some figures, but he did not break them down; rather, he spoke in general terms about a period during his tenure. So it is very difficult to assess what changes have occurred, especially in quantitative terms. 

We undertake a partial registry based on cases that appear in the media, so these are not official figures. But it is enough to see patterns emerging. We have been monitoring since 2019 and saw an increase in femicides in 2020 due to the lockdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, which also led to an increase in all types of gender-based violence, not only in Venezuela but in most countries around the world. In 2019, when we began monitoring, we recorded 167 femicides, then in 2020 we recorded 256. In 2021, there was a decrease and we counted 239 cases. In 2022 and 2023, there were 240 and 201, respectively. In 2024, we recorded 188 femicides, and for 2025, we estimate that the figure will be around 165.

There has been a decrease in the number of perpetrated femicides. However, when we look at other forms of violence, such as attempted femicides, we are seeing an increase compared to previous years. This is a warning sign because these are attempts to murder women that leave physical, psychological, and social consequences on both the survivor and her environment. We have also seen an increase in femicides of Venezuelan women abroad year after year. We are also witnessing a large number of cases of sexual abuse, especially child sexual abuse and trafficking, both abroad and in our country. Similarly, here in Venezuela, the disappearance of women is not classified as a type of gender-based violence, but according to various investigations we have carried out, disappearance or abduction, in the specific case of women, girls, and teenagers, is directly related to gender-based violence, and many of these disappearances are associated with femicides where the bodies are hidden, or cases of gender-based violence where the aggressors end up confining the victim. At the same time, we have seen a large number of cases of vicarious violence, where the aggressor inflicts violence on children, family members, or even pets.

So, a decrease in the number of femicides does not mean that other forms of violence are not on the rise. It is also important to talk about political violence. In the context of the July 2024 presidential elections, two femicides occurred and we saw threats against many community leaders by right-wing groups, who persecuted and harassed them. The same goes for media violence, social media, and artificial intelligence. In fact, there need to be changes in the laws so that these new forms of violence can be punished.

How does the lack of official and updated figures from the Venezuelan government affect the implementation of effective public policies to combat gender-based violence?

It has a huge impact. It’s not that there are no figures, but that they are not public. In fact, several public programs such as the Mamá Rosa Plan for Gender Equality and Equity, the various homeland plans, and even the Organic Law on Women’s Right to a Life Free of Violence, mandate that the state must create an observatory for gender-based violence. 

The absence of data means that we cannot measure the efficacy of the public policies that are being enacted. Statistics could also allow organizations to develop proposals, not only legislative ones, but also from women’s groups, which must also participate in the elaboration of these policies.

It is often said that the deterioration of living conditions in Venezuela disproportionately affects women, but what does this mean in practice? Does it also impact the number of femicides?

Yes. We were affected by the rentier culture, the crisis, and economic sanctions. It has been a multifactorial phenomenon. The rentier culture did not change, public policies depended on oil revenues, and a series of US-led unilateral coercive measures were imposed on us that affected all aspects of life. In crises, it is always women’s bodies that pay the price. Currently, we have to work four or five jobs, usually informal ones, to make ends meet. For those of us with children, it is even worse, because we also have the burden of unpaid work in the home. The same is true for the care of the elderly or people with disabilities, which always falls on our shoulders. 

In Venezuela, the vast majority of heads of households are women, who are either alone or part of extended families of women living together and raising children. In addition to this, women are the ones who make up a large part of the social fabric, they are grassroots leaders. At the same time, the country is experiencing a crisis in services, electricity, water, and gas, which further increases the burden of care work. Women have to figure out how to get water for cooking, washing, and bathing their children, how to cope when there is no electricity, or how to cook without gas, especially in the interior of the country, where public services are in a more dire state. 

Does this have an impact on the number of femicides? It does. Violent, aggressive men find themselves in the midst of an economic crisis, where there is unemployment or underpaid work, they become increasingly frustrated, and where do they take out all this frustration? On women, their partners, their families, their homes. It would be interesting to see if GDP figures or periods of high inflation correlate with peaks in femicides. 

With the US attacks on January 3, we saw the kidnapping of Cilia Flores and also the rise to power of the first female president, albeit in an acting capacity, Delcy Rodríguez. How can this be interpreted from a feminist perspective?

The bombing of Venezuela was a flagrant violation of international law, but we also saw how National Assembly Deputy Cilia Flores appeared during the arraignment hearing in New York with bruises on her face and body. Her attorney requested medical attention, which indicates that during the operation she was the victim of violence by the US military. This, of course, is indicative of what foreign powers do when they bomb and invade other countries, especially in the Global South, where they do so to extract natural resources. 

Talking with friends, I have realized that many of us feel violated, as women, by everything that has happened. Now the acting president, Delcy Rodríguez, has a very difficult task: to take the reins of the state with a gun to her head. It takes a lot of courage to face this. In addition, after the bombing, Trump’s threat to her was very direct: do what I want or you will be worse off than Maduro. It is difficult to take on that role and have the responsibility of preventing more lives from being lost. 

In the current context, what are Venezuela’s main challenges in terms of the feminist agenda? You have suggested, for example, the need to create a structural feminist emergency plan. What would that look like?

The first thing is to define what that feminist agenda is, because in Venezuela there are different grassroots movements and organizations with different political stances, and polarization sometimes makes it very difficult to unify the points. Sometimes we try, but the efforts can get fragmented again due to specific political events. I would say that there is the issue of gender violence and also the decriminalization of abortion in Venezuela, as common ground that unifies many of us. We also demand a justice system that has a gender and feminist perspective because the current one is built from an androcentric, patriarchal perspective; that is, it is a justice system created by men and for men. An amnesty law is currently being implemented, so this has to be included in it. 

By a feminist emergency structural plan, we mean that the Ministry for Women and Gender Equality should not be the only institution responsible for public policies relating to women and the LGBTIQ+ population. It should rather involve the entire state. I am not saying anything new because this already appears in the Organic Law on Women’s Right to a Life Free of Violence and also in the Mamá Rosa plan, which was supposed to culminate in 2019, but almost nothing that was stipulated ended up being implemented. All ministries, all affiliated entities, all state institutions, including governors’ and mayors’ offices, must address gender issues, and a robust budget is needed for this. For example, the Ministry of Communication must run ongoing campaigns in the media and on social networks about the different forms of violence and the telephone hotlines and websites where incidents can be reported. The Ministry of Housing must focus on creating shelters for victims. The Ministry of Education must review the curriculum to include gender studies, comprehensive sexuality education, and different types of violence, as well as implement protocols for care in schools, high schools, and universities. In addition, all state officials have a duty to educate themselves on the issue.

How do you assess the retreat of the state in certain areas and the growing “NGOization” leveraged by Western funding?

It’s complex because initiatives, activities, marches, etc., require resources, and many of our organizations don’t have them. In addition, there is another factor at play here, which is the proliferation of religious groups, especially Pentecostal evangelicals, who have grown significantly in Venezuela, have a presence within the state and within political parties, and are also very wealthy, which allows them to carry out campaigns, mobilizations, etc. Feminist movements face many obstacles because most of us also have to work several jobs and take care of our homes and communities. So it is difficult to keep up with evangelical and conservative right-wing groups. 

I think we need to identify who the enemies are, who targets our rights, and then assess the contradictions and coordinate women’s and feminist movements. I make the distinction because there are women’s organizations that do not necessarily identify as feminist. But we have to grow, see what issues unite us, and begin a series of actions. I always make this call: despite our political differences, let’s try to unite around an agenda that unites us all.

How does social media influence the proliferation of violence, and gender violence in particular?

I believe that violence has always been present, but now it is exposed because some forms of violence that we used to consider normal or common have been explained or denormalized. In addition, social media and the internet allow us all to learn about different cases in different parts of the world. But, on the other hand, we have the issue of anonymity and lack of accountability, meaning that people can say outrageous things, threaten, insult, and commit violence facilitated by technology. Social media also allows virtual groups to come together to commit violence, and there are also certain influencers on Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok spreading crazy ideas. Guys like El Temach in Mexico, who speak to you from their machismo, what some call “toxic masculinity” but I call “the healthy descendant of patriarchy.” 

There is also another point here: the algorithm. For example, a teenager starts searching for content about exercise, and soon after, the algorithm will introduce them to these influencers, thus creating mass communities such as incels, which organize themselves through forums like Reddit. This also breaks down the entire social fabric of face-to-face interactions, and people end up isolated but believing they are “accompanied on social media.” All of this leads to disorders such as anxiety and depression. In addition, teenage girls and women become caught up in the aspirational idea of having a certain type of body, aesthetic violence, etc. In short, I’m not saying this from a moralistic point of view, but social networks have encouraged a lot of violence. Besides, who owns these networks? What ideology do they profess? What are they using them for? We have to investigate so we can arm ourselves and fight this battle.

Introduction

In 1974, Muhammad Yunus began experimenting with an initiative to give small loans to impoverished rural women to foster a sense of empowerment through entrepreneurial start-ups – an initiative that was institutionalised through the famous Grameen Bank. In just a couple of years, this initiative had snowballed into the United Nations declaring 2005 the International Year of Microcredit, with Yunus winning the Nobel Peace Prize for economic development.

In an age of international globalisation and neoliberal theories, microcredit seemed to be the solution to the ills of the developing world. Economists, development theorists, and journalists began to discuss the multiple success stories from the Grameen Bank and the vast impact small loans were having on people.

But a much darker reality came to take place. Although Yunus said that credit is a human right, he failed to address the fact that debt follows. Stories like Razia’s became far too frequent.

The Feminisation of Debt: Razia’s Story

Razia had taken out an initial microcredit loan of around $50 from Grameen Bank to put food on the table and pay for her children’s education; to her, this money was a lifeline to meet her family’s immediate needs. She was offered an interest rate of 20%, which she did not initially realise due to her limited fiscal literacy, and she could not pay.

Loan sharks targeted her family with violent threats when they were unable to meet payment deadlines; she had to sell her heirloom jewellery, her belongings, and eventually her home to make the payment – and even now, she continues to face threats from the loan sharks.

Razia’s story is not uncommon and illustrates how a linear model of microcredit has led to the feminisation of debt: women took out these loans to cover basic needs and fulfil their societal roles as caretakers, only to be uniquely burdened and targeted because they were unable to meet deadlines. This led women to be prone to economic vulnerability, social shame due to the procurement of debt, and violence from debt collectors.

Questioning the Efficacy of Microfinance

In addition to Razia’s story, the reality of the Grameen Bank’s efficacy is also up for debate. More and more economists became wary of the narrative that microfinance helps start income-generating enterprises, and recognised that this led many to feed their families or afford education. Another fundamental assumption was that microfinance would empower the poor, especially women, through microenterprises, given their financial bargaining power within the community. The neoliberal social policies used to model microenterprises for poor rural women to sell their labour or to ‘sub-contract’ their services were broadly not adopted, and forced women into disempowering roles in the informal sector.

Dr. Lamia Karim conducted research on the particular claims on gender empowerment by microcredit programmes and ended up creating a ‘local economy of shame’; repayment of these loans was tied to a woman’s standing and honour within the community, and these norms created environments of disempowerment, subjugation, and stress to repay the loans.

Theoretical Frameworks: From WID to GAD

Yunus’s microcredit initiative followed the theoretical prescriptions of Women in Development (WID), which sought to address gender-based economic disparities and integrate women into existing economic systems. The Grameen Bank was able to meet these goals; however, the linear model of empowerment used and the integration of women within the neoliberal economic market failed to meet the overall goals of empowerment.

As organisations, advocates, and economists saw the initial model struggling to meet the holistic goals of empowerment, they integrated theoretical prescriptions from Gender and Development (GAD), which sought to confront the root causes of gender inequality and to meet both the practical and strategic needs of women. This empowers women not only to meet economic goals to ensure survival, but also to develop collective action skills to confront power structures that lead to their subjugation.

Proshika: A New Model for Empowerment

Proshika was formed in 1979 under the WID model and focused on targeting rural communities, but realigned its goals with a GAD model in 2009. Their mission statement was revised to reflect the integration of collective-action training into their microcredit initiatives. As an organisation, they planned to “develop their capacity, so they can claim their due rights from the government” and “ensure life security” – a revolutionary shift within the broader conversation about microcredit.

Proshika had a model very similar to the Grameen Bank microcredit programmes; however, they added organisational spaces for women to meet and discuss community issues, embedding collective action within the programme. When a woman signed up for a loan, she was connected with other women in her community and asked to discuss pressing issues. Proshika organised a total of 42,809 groups; these various groups looked into important societal issues, such as the prevention of child marriage, the prevention of violence against women, and the abolition of dowry practices.

These trainings connected women with existing government systems and taught them how to access the judicial system, enabling them to pursue institutional avenues of change.

Building Social Capital and Political Agency

These spaces within the community allow women to build social credit, serving as places where information flows and as essential spaces for building trust and relationships. They increase social awareness, social interaction outside of one’s family unit, and increase domestic power and civic participation.

Dr Paromita Sanyal studies the role of microfinance agencies in Bangladesh, and credits NGOs such as Proshika for building both vertical and horizontal lines of social credit. Vertical social credit enables women to build essential connections within their own communities, and horizontal social credit allows them to connect with NGOs, politicians, and governing bodies. This axis of power builds political agency within communities and empowers women to challenge restrictive gender norms.

Proshika operates in 8,784 villages, 1,639 unions, 266 sub-districts, 42 districts, and 7 divisions within Bangladesh – they have organised 33,982 female groups across the nation. Through their collective action programmes, they were able to see a statistically significant decrease in child marriages, dowries, and gender-based violence within rural villages.

Towards True Empowerment

Proshika’s microfinance initiative not only enabled income-generating activities in rural villages but also empowered women to make a difference in their communities. Proshika’s success story should serve as a model for reforming existing microfinance institutions and incorporating collective action mechanisms into programmes.

Unlike the Grameen Bank, which focused solely on women’s practical needs, Proshika made an effort to address women’s and community members’ strategic needs. This led to statistically significant decreases in domestic violence and child marriages, as well as increased awareness of government systems and the justice system as a whole, with civic engagement opening accessible avenues for change.

Dr. Andrea Cornwall’s critical feminist analysis of women’s empowerment suggests that true empowerment is about changing asymmetrical power relations and requires building critical consciousness to help people recognise fundamental inequalities. Empowerment is relational and involves the interplay between personal and political to create a process, rather than focusing on an outcome.

Unlike the Grameen Bank, Proshika focused more on the various aspects of empowerment, without adopting a linear view of tangible results. This led to successful grassroots movements that brought attention to women’s structural needs and raised awareness of women’s value to community spaces.

Empowerment comes from changing power relations within the community, and Proshika met both women’s practical and strategic needs. It is essential to address the extreme poverty that women face, but also to build avenues for them to challenge the institutions they participate in.

At the inaugural “Shield of the Americas” summit in South Florida, United States President Donald Trump announced the creation of what he calls the Americas Counter-Cartel Coalition: a group of a dozen politically aligned countries committed to fighting drug trafficking.

But as he signed a declaration to cement that commitment, Trump signalled that it came with the expectation that cartels would not be confronted with law enforcement action, but instead military might.

“ The only way to defeat these enemies is by unleashing the power of our military. So we have to use our military. You have to use your military,” Trump told the audience of Latin American leaders.

“You have some great police, but they threaten your police. They scare your police. You’re going to use your military.”

Saturday’s summit was the latest step in a larger foreign policy pivot under Trump.

Since taking office for a second term, Trump has distanced himself from some of the US’s traditional allies in Europe, instead forging tighter partnerships with right-wing governments around the world.

The attendance at the Shield of the Americas summit reflected that shift. Right-wing leaders, including Argentina’s Javier Milei, El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele and Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa, were among the guest list.

But notably absent was top-level leadership from Mexico, the US’s biggest trading partner, and Brazil, the largest country in the region by economy and population.

Both Mexico and Brazil are led by left-wing presidents who have resisted some of Trump’s more hardline policies.

The growing rift between the US and some of its longtime partners was a feature in the brief remarks delivered by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who praised attendees for their cooperation.

“They’re more than allies. They’re friends,” Rubio said of the leaders present.

“At a time when we have learned that oftentimes an ally, when you need them, maybe may not be there for you, these are countries that have been there for us.”

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, meanwhile, reiterated his view that criminal networks and cartels pose an existential crisis for the entire Western Hemisphere, which he described as sharing the same cultural and religious roots.

“ We share a hemisphere and geography. We share cultures, Western Christian civilisation. We share these things together. We have to have the courage to defend it,” Hegseth said.

A military-first approach

Latin America is one of several areas where Trump has launched military operations since returning to office in January 2025.

His rationale for authorising deadly operations in the region has centred primarily on the illicit drug trade.

Trump has repeatedly argued that Latin American criminal networks pose an imminent threat to national security, through the trafficking of people and drugs across US borders.

Experts in international law have pointed out that drug trafficking is considered a criminal offence — and it is not accepted as justification for acts of military aggression.

But the Trump administration has nevertheless launched lethal military strikes against alleged drug traffickers in Latin America.

Since September, for instance, the Trump administration has conducted at least 44 aerial strikes on maritime vessels in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, killing nearly 150 people.

The victims’ identities have never been publicly confirmed, nor has evidence been publicly released to justify the deadly strikes.

Some families in Colombia and Trinidad and Tobago have stepped forward to claim the dead as their loved ones, out on a fishing expedition or travelling between islands for informal work.

In Saturday’s remarks, Trump justified the attacks by arguing that cartels and other criminal networks had grown more powerful than local militaries — and therefore necessitated a lethal response.

“Many of the cartels have developed sophisticated military operations. Highly sophisticated, in some cases. They say they’re more powerful than the military in the country,” Trump said.

“Can’t have that. These brutal criminal organisations pose an unacceptable threat to national security. And they provide a dangerous gateway for foreign adversaries in our region.”

He then compared cartels to a disease: “They’re cancer, and we don’t want it spreading.”

A ‘nasty’ operation in Venezuela

In late December and early January, Trump also initiated attacks on Venezuelan soil, again defending his actions as necessary to stop drug traffickers.

The first attack targeted a port Trump linked to the gang Tren de Aragua. The second, on January 3, was a broader offensive that culminated in the abduction and imprisonment of Venezuela’s then-leader, President Nicolas Maduro.

On Saturday, Trump reflected on that military operation, which he characterised as an unmitigated success.

Maduro is currently awaiting trial on drug-trafficking charges in New York, though a declassified intelligence report last May cast doubt on Trump’s allegations that the Venezuelan leader directed drug-trafficking operations through groups like Tren de Aragua.

“America’s armed forces also ended the reign of one of the biggest cartel kingpins of all, with Operation Absolute Resolve to bring outlaw dictator Nicolas Maduro to justice in a precision raid,” Trump told Saturday’s summit.

He then described the military operation as “nasty”, though he underscored that no US lives were lost.

The early-morning raid, however, killed at least 80 people in Venezuela, including 32 Cuban military officers, dozens of Venezuelan security forces, and several civilians.

“We went right into the heart. We took them out, and it was nasty. It was about 18 minutes of pure violence, and we took them out,” Trump said of the operation.

Trump has since held up Venezuela as a model for regime change around the world, particularly as it leads a war with Israel against Iran.

Maduro’s successor, interim President Delcy Rodriguez, has so far complied with many of Trump’s demands, including for reforms to the country’s nationalised oil and mining sectors.

Just this week, the two countries re-established diplomatic relations for the first time since 2019, under Trump’s first term as president.

In Saturday’s remarks, however, Trump reiterated that his positive relationship with Rodriguez hinged on her cooperation with his priorities.

“She’s doing a great job because she’s working with us. If she wasn’t working with us, I would not say she’s doing a great job,” he said.

“In fact, if she wasn’t working with us, I’d say she’s doing a very poor job. Unacceptable.”

‘We’ll use missiles’

Trump did, however, express consternation with other presidents in the Latin American region, accusing them of allowing cartels to run amok.

“Leaders in this region have allowed large swaths of territory, the Western Hemisphere, to come under the direct control” of the cartels, Trump said.

“Transnational gangs have taken over, and they’ve run areas of your country. We’re not going to let that happen.”

He even delivered an ominous warning to the summit’s attendees: “Some of you are in danger. I mean, you’re actually in danger. It’s hard to believe.”

Many of the leaders in attendance, including El Salvador’s Bukele, have launched their own harsh crackdowns on gangs in their countries, employing “mano dura” or “iron fist” tactics.

Those campaigns, however, have elicited concerns from human rights groups, who have noted that presidents like Bukele used emergency declarations to suspend civil liberties and imprison hundreds of people, often without a fair trial.

Still, Trump dismissed alternative approaches in Saturday’s speech. Though he did not mention Colombia by name, he was critical of efforts to negotiate for the disarmament of cartels and rebel groups, as Colombian President Gustavo Petro has sought to do.

Instead, he offered to deploy military might throughout the region.

“We’ll use missiles. If you want us to use a missile, they’re extremely accurate — pew! — right into the living room, and that’s the end of that cartel person,” Trump said.

“A lot of countries don’t want to do that. They say, ‘Oh, sure. I’d rather not have that. I’d rather not have it. I believe they could be spoken to.’ I don’t think so.”

A call to ‘eradicate’ Mexico’s cartels

One country he did single out, though, was Mexico. Trump suggested that it had fallen behind other countries in the region in its efforts to combat crime.

“We must recognise the epicentre of cartel violence is Mexico,” he said.

“The Mexican cartels are fueling and orchestrating much of the bloodshed and chaos in this hemisphere, and the United States government will do whatever’s necessary to defend our national security.”

Since the start of his second term, Trump has pressured Mexico to step up its security efforts, threatening tariffs and even the possibility of military action if it does not comply.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has responded by increasing military deployments throughout the country.

In February 2025, for instance, she announced 10,000 soldiers would be sent to the US-Mexico border. For the upcoming FIFA World Cup, her officials have said nearly 100,000 security personnel will be patrolling the streets.

Just last month, her government also launched a military operation in Jalisco to capture and kill the cartel leader Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, nicknamed “El Mencho”. She has also facilitated the transfer of cartel suspects to the US for trial.

But Trump reemphasised on Saturday his belief that Sheinbaum had not gone far enough, though he called her a “very good person” and a “beautiful woman” with a “beautiful voice”.

“I said, ‘Let me eradicate the cartels,’” Trump said, relaying one of his conversations with Sheinbaum.

“We have to eradicate them. We have to knock the hell out of them because they’re getting worse. They’re taking over their country. The cartels are running Mexico. We can’t have that. Too close to us, too close to you.”

‘Last moments of life’ in Cuba

Trump also used his podium to continue his threats against Cuba’s communist government.

Since the January 3 attack on Venezuela, Trump has increased his “maximum pressure” campaign against the Caribbean island, which has been under a full US trade embargo since the 1960s.

His administration severed the flow of oil and funds from Venezuela to Cuba, and in late January, Trump announced he would impose steep economic penalties on any country that provides the island with oil, a critical resource for the country’s electrical grid.

Already, the country has been struck with widespread blackouts, and the United Nations has warned Cuba is inching closer to humanitarian “collapse”.

But Trump framed the circumstances as progress towards the ultimate goal of regime change in Cuba.

“As we achieve a historic transformation in Venezuela, we’re also looking forward to the great change that will soon be coming to Cuba,” he told Saturday’s summit.

“Cuba’s at the end of the line. They’re very much at the end of the line. They have no money, they have no oil. They have a bad philosophy. They have a bad regime that’s been bad for a long time.”

He added that he thinks changing Cuba’s government will be “easy” and that a deal could be struck for the transition of power.

“Cuba’s in its last moments of life as it was. It’ll have a great new life, but it’s in its last moments of life the way it is,” Trump said.

But while Trump’s remarks largely focused on governments not represented at the summit, he warned that there could be consequences even for the right-wing leaders in attendance.

Trump’s “Shield of the Americas” coalition comes as he seeks to bring the whole of Latin America in line with US priorities. It’s a policy he has dubbed the “Donroe Doctrine”, a riff on the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine, which claimed the Western Hemisphere as the US’s sphere of influence.

To Trump, that means ousting rival powers like China as they seek to forge relationships and economic ties with Latin America. Trump has even mused about retaking the Panama Canal, based on his allegation that the Chinese have too much control in the area.

“As these situations in Venezuela and Cuba should make clear, under our new doctrine — and this is a doctrine — we will not allow hostile foreign influence to gain a foothold in this hemisphere,” Trump said.

He then made a pointed remark to Panama’s president, Jose Raul Mulino, who was in the audience.

“That includes the Panama Canal, which we talked about. We’re not going to allow it.”

Two children he found while fleeing the Ngoshe attack clung to his hands, struggling to keep up as they stumbled across the uneven ground. Behind them, armed terrorists pursued, closing in. 

From the distance, smoke rises, and shouts echo. The children stumbled again. Solomon Ali Talake pulled them and kept running. He could not run at full speed, and yet the terrorists would kill him if they caught up. So, he made a quick decision. 

“Run that way,” he told the children, pointing toward the bush, while he turned in the opposite direction. He was spotted, however. He darted behind a tree, his chest pounding. 

For a moment, he froze there, whispering a prayer under his breath.

Some hours before, Solomon could not have imagined that his life would change so completely. He is a primary school teacher in Ngoshe, a community in Borno, northeastern Nigeria, where he spends his days teaching pupils to read and write. On the evening of March 3, his routine unfolded like it always had. He returned home from school, sat with his family in the compound, and had dinner.

Then the gunfire began.

Terrorists stormed Ngoshe that evening, attacking a military base before spreading through the town, setting houses ablaze. Reports say the attackers killed over 100 and abducted over 300 more, but survivors said the casualty is too many to count. They said the assault, which lasted for several hours, forced thousands to flee the community that had been resettled only a few years ago as part of the government’s post-conflict programme. 

“They attacked around 6:25 p.m.,” Solomon recalled.

His house sits close to the military base, so the first sounds came from there. The attackers, he said, struck the base before moving toward the community.

The military returned fire, according to Maina Bukar, another resident of Ngoshe who is now displaced in Maiduguri.  “But they were overpowered, so they withdrew.”

When residents saw soldiers pulling back from the base, panic spread through the village. Families ran in every direction, but the terrorists followed. They caught up with some people and opened fire. Others were cut down as they tried to escape.

Solomon ran towards the bush, along the path leading to Pulka. The terrorists pursued and almost caught up. He hid behind a tree, three houses away from home. The terrorists spotted him but got distracted by movements in a nearby house. They rushed in to search.

Solomon seized the moment. “I climbed the tree and hid among the branches,” he recalled. “I remained there throughout the night.” The sound of the chaos echoed through the night. 

Hours earlier, the village had been filled with children returning from school, farmers preparing their evening meals, and Muslim families preparing to break their fast.

The sounds of the attack did not remain confined to Ngoshe. Residents in Pulka, about ten kilometres away, also heard the gunfire.

“We heard it as soon as it happened,” said Muhammad Tela, a resident of Pulka.

Pulka sits close to Ngoshe, separated largely by a stretch of land and the hills of the Mandara Mountains. Both communities are towns in the Gwoza Local Government Area of Borno State.

“Ngoshe to Pulka is about a 25-minute drive because of the condition of the road,” Maina explained.

The two communities are closely connected. Every Tuesday and Friday, traders from Ngoshe travel to Pulka for trade under military escort, Maina said.

On the night of March 3, however, the market routes fell silent.

A return that promised safety

For Solomon’s family, returning to Ngoshe once felt like the beginning of a new chapter.

In October 2020, the Borno State government resettled displaced people in the town after rebuilding homes, schools, clinics, and other public facilities destroyed by Boko Haram insurgents in their violent and prolonged effort to topple democracy and establish what they believe to be an Islamic state. The activities of the terror group has killed over 35,000 people and displaced millions. 

The Borno State government’s move was presented as part of a broader transition into what officials described as a post-conflict recovery phase. Solomon’s father, Ali Talake, believed in that promise.

Years earlier, when the insurgents first overran Ngoshe and neighbouring communities, he had fled across the border into Cameroon. From there, he eventually made his way to Maiduguri, where he lived inside the Federal Government College, volunteering as a security guard.

But his thoughts rarely left Ngoshe.

“My father was a farmer and a livestock rearer,” Solomon said.

When news spread that the government had begun resettling displaced residents, Ali Talake decided it was time to return. “We returned to Ngoshe on October 15, 2020,” Solomon said. Like many others, the family began rebuilding their lives there.

For six years, Ngoshe once again stood as home.

The community had access to basic facilities. “There is a clinic,” Maina said. “There are doctors and drugs.” The town also had clean water and schools.

Security presence was also significant. Residents say the formation consisted of personnel from the military and volunteer outfits like the Civilian Joint Task Force (CJTF), Nigeria Forest Security Services (NFSS), and surrendered terrorists, popularly called “the hybrid.” Solomon said there were about 300 soldiers stationed in Ngoshe. Maina corroborated this. In addition, “there are about 400 personnel of the CJTF, NFSS, and vigilantes,” he said. Before the attack, Maina estimated, about 10,000 people lived in the community.

“They patrol the town at night,” he said of the security operatives. “They would start patrolling by 6 p.m. until 6 a.m. the next morning.”

Despite that, residents said they did not always feel safe.

The town had faced insecurity before. “A similar major one [attack] happened on June 21, 2025,” Solomon recalled. Like in the recent attack, the community was overrun. “They did not kill anyone or burn buildings during that attack,” Solomon said.

Security later improved, and the town gradually returned to normal. But residents, especially farmers, could rarely venture beyond one kilometre from the town, Maina said. “Those who go beyond that are often abducted or killed by terrorists.” 

For large-scale cultivation, people often travelled to Monguno and communities on the outskirts of Maiduguri, the state capital, such as Jakana. Adamu Zakariya, a resident of Ngoshe who had returned to Maiduguri months earlier to harvest his crops, agreed. “After harvest, we would return with the crops to Ngoshe,” he said. But this time, he decided to remain in Maiduguri because of a security job he recently got, while his family stayed in Ngoshe.

“Two weeks ago, they abducted some girls who had gone behind the mountains to gather firewood,” Maina said. “No ransom was demanded, and they were never returned. We later heard they had been married off, including a 12-year-old.”

Young boys were also at risk. “They would kill young boys who go out of town,” Maina said.

Before the recent Ngoshe attack, some residents had heard rumours. “Although we don’t know the authenticity, there were rumours that the terrorists would come to break their fast with us,” Solomon recalled. Such rumours circulated within the community and even reached security personnel. Some residents relocated. Others stayed.

The night of the violence

From the top of the tree Solomon climbed, he could see the village below. “They burnt all our houses, including my own room. I saw them,” he said. The attackers moved through the settlement, setting homes ablaze and pursuing residents who tried to escape. 

At one point, several terrorists gathered beneath the tree where Solomon was hiding. “They were arguing,” he said. He held his breath and prayed. “I asked God to cause confusion so they would not look up.”

One of the fighters suggested firing at the tree. “Let me have this gun and scatter this tree,” Solomon remembered him saying. Another replied, “No, just leave it.” A third asked for a torch to check the branches. Again, someone stopped him. The men eventually moved away.

From his hiding place, Solomon said he saw about 27 attackers moving through the area. Some carried cutlasses and knives, others held guns. He recognised rifles such as AK-47s, although some weapons were unfamiliar to him.

Maina and his family also fled towards Pulka when the attack began. 

“They came on motorcycles,” Maina said of the attackers. “Bullets were flying everywhere. The whole place was lit with gunfire.”

He arrived Pulka around 1 a.m., barefoot.

Media reports of March 6 state that a yet-to-be-identified terror group has claimed responsibility for the attack. However, testimonies from survivors revealed that the attack is suspected to have involved terrorists from both the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) and Jama’atu Ahlussunnah Lidda’awati Wal Jihad (JAS).

“Those who attacked the military base left immediately after taking vehicles and weapons,” Solomon said. They withdrew toward the direction of Pulka but veered into the bush before reaching the town.

“It was those on the mountain who attacked the community,” Solomon said, referring to JAS fighters based in the Mandara Mountains. “Afterwards, they climbed back up.”

For the JAS terrorists, residents believe the attack may have been retaliation. On Dec. 19, 2025, the Nigerian Army announced that troops of Operation Hadin Kai had killed a terrorist commander and several fighters in the Mandara Mountains the previous day. Maina said the commander was later beheaded by members of the CJTF.

“They cut the heads of some of them,” Solomon said of the soldiers killed during the recent attack. “I was told they killed about ten soldiers.”

Adamu said some former JAS members who had previously surrendered were living in Ngoshe with their families. “When those members of JAS from Ngoshe attacked the town with their colleagues, they took away some of their family members,” he said. “Especially young men and women of reproductive age.”

He added that the attackers also killed some who had previously defected from the group. Tracking and killing defectors has been a recurring tactic among the JAS terror group. In November 2025, HumAngle reported cases of former terrorists being tracked and assassinated across Borno.

“The terrorists took what they could carry from the military armoury and set what they could not carry ablaze,” Maina said.

“It was said the soldiers from Pulka drove into buried mines on the way to Ngoshe,” he said. “Two of the soldiers were my friends. One died, and the other was injured.”

The road between the towns has long been dangerous. “The terrorists dig holes along the road and bury mines inside them,” Maina said.

The use of roadside explosives has become increasingly common in recent months. In April 2025, Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) planted along the Maiduguri-Damboa road killed at least seven passengers and injured several others.

Muhammad said soldiers from Pulka remained near the border and helped injured survivors reach the hospital in Pulka.

On March 6, Nigeria’s President, Bola Tinubu, condemned the attack, describing it as a “heartless assault on helpless citizens.” The president then charged “the military and other security agencies to work urgently to rescue those kidnapped by the terrorists.” As well as “intensify their efforts to protect civilians nationwide and prevent attacks on military installations in the North East.”

At dawn, Solomon saw the attackers switch on a generator and begin the call to prayer. He realised it might be his chance to escape.

“I climbed down at 5:10 a.m. and ran,” he said. “When I heard them saying they would check trees and uncompleted buildings after burning the houses, I knew I had to leave when I got the chance.”

He hid again until about 6 a.m.

The morning after

By 7:10 a.m., he had reached Pulka, where many survivors had gathered.

“Most people came barefoot,” Muhammad Tela said. “Others carried the elderly on push carts. Some even brought the corpses of loved ones.”

Many arrived carrying whatever they could salvage: bags of clothes, goats, and small belongings gathered in haste. Others fled further: toward Maiduguri, Cameroon, and Abuja.

Media reports later suggested that about 100 people were killed and more than 300 abducted. Survivors say the numbers are difficult to confirm.

“They cannot be quantified,” Maina said. “But the people I reached Pulka with and those we met at the entrance, including women, children and the elderly, were about 2,000 from my estimation.”

Solomon saw two children being abducted while they were fleeing.

Two of Solomon’s nephews were also taken during the attack. One is 14 years old and the other is 11.

Later, when soldiers briefly returned to Ngoshe, Solomon returned as well. His father had been killed. “He was 68,” he said. From his father’s body, Solomon collected two small items: a cap and a wallet.

“They are something to remember him with,” he said. Victims like Solomon’s father were buried two days later in a mass burial.

The new fear

Recent months have seen a wave of attacks by ISWAP fighters across Borno, particularly targeting security formations.

A member of the Nigerian Forest Security Service (NFSS) said terrorists attacked a military base in Konduga on March 5 and burned several buildings. The base, located near an area known as “High Bridge,” lies close to Malari.

According to him, the terrorists killed several soldiers and took away vehicles and weapons.

Earlier, on Feb. 14, terrorists attacked a military base in Pulka. Two days later, troops launched a counter-operation that reportedly killed a commander and recovered ₦37 million. On Feb. 5, terrorists attacked a military base in Auno, a community close to Maiduguri along the Maiduguri-Damaturu road, according to a military source who asked not to be named. On Jan. 26, terrorists attacked a military base in Damasak, killing seven soldiers and capturing 13 others, including their commanding officer. Eleven managed to escape. 

Earlier, on Nov. 14, 2025, terrorists ambushed a military convoy along the Damboa-Biu road. Two soldiers and two CJTF members were killed. Brigadier General M. Uba, the Brigade Commander of the 25 Task Force Brigade, was abducted and later killed. On Nov. 20 of the same year, they attacked a CJTF base in Warabe, killing eight people and leaving three others missing. And on Dec. 25, a suicide bomber detonated at a mosque in the Gamboru Market area of Maiduguri. Five people were killed, and 35 others were injured.

Terrorists have also targeted reconstruction projects.

On Jan. 28, about 30 construction workers were killed in Sabon Gari, Damboa. Earlier, on Nov. 17, 2025, workers fled after terrorists stormed a construction site in Mayanti, Bama.

Resettled communities have also come under repeated attack. On Sept. 5, 2025, fighters attacked Darajama in Bama, killing at least 63 people, including five soldiers, and burning about 24 houses. Many residents fled again.

Umara Ibrahim, a professor of International Relations and Strategic Studies at the University of Maiduguri, said the attacks may be intended to undermine government resettlement efforts.

“Because their movements are observed and monitored, and perhaps challenged, it is not in their interest for resettlement to proliferate,” he told HumAngle in a February interview.

He added that such violence may also serve a political purpose. “It may be a way to counter government efforts by shaping public perception that the authorities cannot be trusted on security,” he said.

Pulka itself had once been abandoned when insurgents seized the town. After the military retook it in 2017, residents gradually returned. More recently, the government resettled refugees from Cameroon there. On Jan. 28, the government resettled about 300 Nigerian refugees from Cameroon. On Feb. 8, it resettled 680 more.

But the Ngoshe attack has revived old fears. “People don’t feel secure,” Muhammad said. “They think the community could be displaced again. Everyone is thinking about where to go.”

Communication also became difficult. For several days, residents said, there was no network across Gwoza, leaving families struggling to confirm whether relatives were alive.

Adamu’s brothers later travelled from Maiduguri to Pulka to retrieve their displaced relatives. Maina did not remain in Pulk as his parents urged him to leave immediately for Maiduguri. Still, he worries about those left behind. He believes the community needs stronger security.

In the days that followed, Solomon also travelled to Maiduguri. Though he is the seventh child in his family, he is now the only available adult son able to organise their next steps. His stepmother and siblings remain displaced. 

“I am looking for a house to rent so I can bring them here,” he said. Looking back, Solomon says he had always worried about returning to Ngoshe.

“We had no neighbouring villages,” he said. “We were surrounded by bushes and mountains.” Sometimes, he warned his family. “One day these people might take over,” he recalled telling them. Now the village has emptied again.

And Solomon, a teacher who once spent his days in a quiet classroom, is searching for shelter in a distant city while carrying the memory of a night he survived by hiding in a tree.