TODAY

One of the most enigmatic weapons in the arsenal of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF), the PL-17 very long-range air-to-air missile, appears to have been shown for the first time at close quarters. The missile has been around for a relatively long time, but next to no official details about it have been released. Meanwhile, the threat that it and other Chinese air-to-air missiles pose has triggered a flurry of weapons development in the United States.

As is often the case with such images, we must note that the photo of the PL-17 appears authentic, but we cannot be certain of that. The date and location of the image are also unclear, but it shows a PL-17 (more accurately, a full-size mock-up of one) on a display stand at a tradeshow or exhibition. A man poses in front of the missile, face censored, while behind the weapon is a board promoting the J-20 stealth fighter.

We have become accustomed to ‘leaks’ out of China over many years when it comes to new military aircraft designs and their weaponry. Combined with the fact that the PL-17 was first publicly revealed in a blurry photo close to 10 years ago, its appearance at a tradeshow at this point might not be entirely surprising.

For its part, the PLAAF has published official imagery of the PL-17 (albeit showing the missile at a considerable distance, with no real detail visible). The release of the PLAAF photo, seen below, in 2023, was taken as confirmation that the missile was in operational service, or close to it, arming the J-16 Flanker.

When the missile first appeared in public, in 2016, it was dubbed PL-XX in the West; subsequently, the PL-20 designation was suggested, but PL-17 is now confirmed, at least based on the new photo. There are reports that the missile received the Western reporting name CH-AA-12 Auger when it entered service.

From the start, the PL-17 was considered to be a very long-range AAM, based on its prodigious size, roughly 20 feet long. For a missile with this reach, key targets are likely high-value, larger assets, including tankers and airborne early warning aircraft.

In detail, the PL-17 features a dual-pulse rocket motor, while control is provided by four relatively small tail fins and a thrust-vectoring nozzle. Reportedly, the missile has a range of around 250 miles, although that number is dependent on a huge array of factors, and actual range can vary dramatically based on the engagement circumstances. It is thought to have a top speed of at least Mach 4.

Guidance is thought to be achieved through a combination of a two-way datalink and an active electronically scanned array (AESA) seeker, which is said to be highly resistant to electronic countermeasures. There are also reports of a passive anti-radiation seeker to supplement the main seeker. This could be especially useful against airborne early warning and ground moving target indicator (GMTI) radar aircraft.

However, using the PL-17 to its full potential, in terms of range, engagements would likely involve targeting data provided by standoff assets, such as friendly airborne early warning aircraft (a capability set that China has invested heavily into), other aircraft closer to the target, ground and surface-based radar, or even satellites.

In the past, there had been speculation about a possible optical window on the side of the nose of the missile that could indicate an additional infrared seeker, although there is no sign of that in the full-size mock-up version.

So far, the PL-17 has only been seen carried by the J-16, although there has been an assumption that it would be adapted for external carriage on the J-20, too.

Certainly, it seems too large to be used to arm the J-10 series or even the J-35, which would seem to raise a big question about its potential export prospects. On the other hand, the missile may well be envisaged as armament for forthcoming Chinese combat aircraft, most notably the J-36 sixth-generation jet, which features extensive internal weapons capacity.

Regardless, the existence of the PL-17, along with other advanced Chinese air-to-air missile developments, has become a very serious issue for the U.S. military. Concerns about China eroding the ‘missile gap’ with the West have driven work on the still highly classified AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile, among other long-range air-to-air missile initiatives.

Last year, the U.S. Navy introduced, at least on a limited scale, an air-launched version of the Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) under the AIM-174B designation. The range of this weapon is classified but should be far in excess of that of the AIM-120D Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM), probably at least double and perhaps even triple the range, against large targets. This would imply an ability to hit some types of aerial targets over multiple hundreds of miles.

How The Navy’s New Very Long-Range AIM-174 Will Pierce China’s Anti-Access Bubble

For now, many questions remain about the full capabilities and technical features of the PL-17. Should the new photo be genuine, however, it would confirm that Beijing is willing to expose at least some aspects of the big missile to a broader audience. With that in mind, we might well learn more about this weapon soon.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The president says Mexico’s decision ‘to sell or give oil to Cuba for humanitarian reasons’ was a ‘sovereign’ one.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum says her country will continue to show “solidarity” with Cuba after media reports that her government halted a shipment of oil to Havana.

Mexico has in recent years become a top supplier of oil to Cuba, which relies on cut-price oil supplies from its allies to survive a US trade embargo and keep the lights on through a severe energy crisis.

Venezuela had been a major supplier of discounted crude to Cuba, but US President Donald Trump said he would halt the shipments after the United States military abducted long-term Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro this month.

As recently as December, Mexico was still sending oil to Cuba, but several media outlets, including Bloomberg and the Mexican newspaper Reforma, have reported that a shipment planned in January was called off.

Sheinbaum refused to confirm or deny the reports on Tuesday. She told reporters during her regular morning news conference that Mexico’s decision “to sell or give oil to Cuba for humanitarian reasons” was a “sovereign decision”.

“It is determined by [Mexican state oil company] Pemex based on the contracts, or, in any case, by the government, as a humanitarian decision to send it under certain circumstances,” Sheinbaum said.

When asked if Mexico would be resuming oil shipments to Cuba, the president sidestepped the question and said, “In any case, it will be reported”. She also said Mexico would “continue to show solidarity” with Cuba.

The Reuters news agency last week reported that the Mexican government was reviewing whether to keep sending oil to Cuba amid growing concerns within Sheinbaum’s government that continuing the shipments could put the country at odds with the US.

Trump on Tuesday told reporters that “Cuba will be failing very soon”, adding that Venezuela has ‌not ‌recently sent ⁠oil or money ‌to Cuba.

According to shipping data and internal documents from state company PDVSA, Venezuela has not sent crude or fuel to Cuba for about a month.

Last year, Mexico sent approximately 5,000 barrels per day to Cuba. With Venezuela’s shipments now offline, Mexico’s supplies are critical.

Demanding the release of Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores, South Africa’s largest trade union marched to the US consulate in Johannesburg on Saturday, January 24.

“In defending Venezuela, we defend the sovereignty of all nations,” concluded the memorandum read aloud outside the consulate by Irvin Jim, general secretary of the over 460,000 members-strong National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA).

“It is Venezuela today … It will be South Africa tomorrow,” Jim warned in his address to the demonstration. US President Donald Trump, who has bombed parts of Nigeria after concocting a false story about a “Christian Genocide” in the country, has also been spinning tales about a “White Genocide” underway in South Africa.

“This is not a joke,” NUMSA warned in a statement. “Donald Trump can easily use the lie of a White genocide in South Africa to invade South Africa, capture South Africa’s president and transport him to a jail in the US, and declare that he is now in charge of our country and all its natural wealth, whilst controlling all trade and natural wealth … After the US criminal military invasion of Venezuela, it is foolish to ignore” this threat to South Africa.

“There is a madman in the White House”

“There is a madman in the White House. There is a fascist in the White House,” NUMSA’s president, Andrew Chirwa, said in his opening address to the demonstration. “Today, it is Venezuela that was attacked by this international criminal. Tomorrow it is” Cuba, Iran, Nigeria,  South Africa. “All over the world this man” is baying “for blood.”

In parallel, the Trump administration is also attempting to strangle South Africa’s economy, threatening to exclude it from the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which provides tariff-free access to the US market, on which the country’s automotive sector is heavily dependent.

“Our members and workers across various sectors are losing jobs” because “he has imposed 30% tariffs against South Africa,” Jim added in his speech.

Stressing the need for “an anti-imperialist front to mobilize the workers” across party and union affiliations, Jim said that NUMSA “will soon be convening a political colloquium”, inviting all progressive political parties. “It is about time to unite the working class … behind a  revolutionary agenda,” as South Africa faces increasing US aggression.  

South Africa punished for taking the genocidal state of Israel to the ICJ

South Africa, the union maintains, “is being punished by Trump for taking the genocidal state of Israel to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).” Reaffirming that “this was the correct position … in defense of the people of Palestine,” NUMSA called on the South African government not to cave in to the pressure by Leo Brent Bozell III, Trump’s new ambassador to South Africa.

At his Senate confirmation hearing, he had stated that if appointed, “I would press South Africa to end proceedings against Israel,” and the ICJ itself to stop what he deemed a “lawfare” against Israel.

“If he continues to insult our national sovereignty … by demanding that South Africa must withdraw its case in the ICJ against Israel,” NUMSA insists, “the South African government must act swiftly, and ensure that he packs his bags and leaves the country.”

The South African government must also “continue to demand the release of Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro and Comrade Cilia Flores in all international forums,” added the memorandum, which was also copied to the Minister of International Relations.

Demanding that the football governing body “cancel all World Cup matches in the US this year,” a copy of the memorandum was also sent to the FIFA President.

It further called on the African Union (AU) and the BRICS to urgently convene and formulate a coordinated and collective response to the US imperialist aggression.

“No country is safe from America’s greedy appetite”

Recalling the European leaders defending unipolarity under the cover of “rules-based order” at last year’s G20 summit in South Africa, the US had boycotted Alex Mashilo, spokesperson of the South African Communist Party (SACP) said in his address to the protest: “Little did they know that just after a few weeks, that unipolar power will turn against them and demand Greenland.”

Under “the mad Trump administration”, NUMSA emphasized in its statement, “no country is safe from America’s greedy appetite”.

​The US has now even “become extremely dangerous to itself” and “its citizens”, with Trump “brutalizing the American people daily” using “his personal ‘Gestapo’ police commonly known as ICE.”  ​

Expressing “solidarity with American citizens who are being brutalized by ICE,” NUMSA insisted, “This is a moment when all people of the world, including well-meaning US citizens and all South Africans, must unite” against imperialism.

Source: People’s Dispatch

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian emphasised that regional instability ‘benefits no one’ during the call.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has held a phone call with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman after a United States aircraft carrier arrived in the region amid growing fears of a new conflict with Israel or the US.

The US has indicated in recent weeks that it is considering an attack against Iran in response to Tehran’s crackdown on protesters, which left thousands of people dead, and US President Donald Trump has sent the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier to the region.

Pezeshkian hit out at US “threats” in the call with the Saudi leader on Tuesday, saying they were “aimed at disrupting the security of the region and will achieve nothing other than instability”.

“The president pointed to recent pressures and hostilities against Iran, including economic pressure and external interference, stating that such actions had failed to undermine the resilience and awareness of the Iranian people,” according to a statement from Pezeshkian’s office on Tuesday.

The statement said that Prince Mohammed “welcomed the dialogue and reaffirmed Saudi Arabia’s commitment to regional stability, security, and development”.

“He emphasised the importance of solidarity among Islamic countries and stated that Riyadh rejects any form of aggression or escalation against Iran,” it said, adding that he had expressed Riyadh’s readiness to establish “peace and security across the region”.

The call between the two leaders comes after Trump repeatedly threatened to attack Iran during a deadly crackdown on antigovernment protests this month. Last week, he dispatched an “armada” towards Iran but said he hoped he would not have to use it.

Amid growing fears of a new war, a commander from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on Tuesday issued a warning to Iran’s neighbours.

“Neighbouring countries are our friends, but if their soil, sky, or waters are used against Iran, they will be considered hostile,” Mohammad Akbarzadeh, political deputy of the IRGC naval forces, was quoted as saying by the Fars news agency.

Israel carried out a wave of attacks on Iran last June, targeting several senior military officials and nuclear scientists, as well as nuclear facilities. The US then joined the 12-day war to bombard three nuclear sites in Iran.

The war came on the eve of a round of planned negotiations between the US and Iran over Tehran’s nuclear programme.

Since the conflict, Trump has reiterated demands that Iran dismantle its nuclear programme and halt uranium enrichment, but talks have not resumed.

On Monday, a US official said that Washington was “open for business” for  Iran.

“I think they know the terms,” the official told reporters when asked about talks with Iran. “They’re aware of the terms.”

Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group, told Al Jazeera that the odds of Iran surrendering to the US’s demands are “near zero”.

Iran’s leaders believe “compromise under pressure doesn’t alleviate it but rather invites more”, Vaez said.

But while the US builds up its presence in the region, Iran has warned that it would retaliate if an attack is launched.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson warned on Tuesday that the consequences of a strike on Iran could affect the region as a whole.

Esmaeil Baghaei told reporters, “Regional countries fully know that any security breach in the region will not affect Iran only. The lack of security is contagious.”

United States President Donald Trump’s $5bn lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase resurfaces his accusations of debanking – the act of removing a person or organisation’s access to financial services.

The complaint, filed in a Florida court on Thursday, alleges that the bank singled him out for political reasons and closed several of his accounts following the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, which was perpetrated by his supporters.

“JPMC does not close accounts for political or religious reasons. We do close accounts because they create legal or regulatory risk for the company. We regret having to do so, but often rules and regulatory expectations lead us to do so,” the bank said in a statement.

While the lawsuit was filed in his personal capacity, the concept of debanking has long been in the crosshairs of the Trump White House.

Late last year, the White House launched a high-profile effort targeting the nation’s largest financial institutions, accusing them of closing accounts based on political bias. Within days, Trump signed an executive order restricting banks from denying accounts on those grounds.

Trump has long framed “debanking” as a systemic effort targeting conservatives. But evidence for this claim is limited.

A Reuters news agency review of more than 8,000 complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) found only 35 related to political or religious reasons, let alone targeting Christians or conservatives specifically.

The push by banks centres on the use of “reputational risk” as a standard that allows them to weigh the social or political fallout of doing business with a client.

Critics say this practice makes banks arbiters of morality – freezing, withholding, or closing accounts based not on financial considerations but on social and geopolitical concerns. This approach has pulled financial institutions into the middle of cultural and geopolitical debates.

While often cast as a partisan issue, data show that Trump’s core base, evangelical Christians, are not the ones typically targeted by debanking efforts.

A report from the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), a research organisation that looks at the experience of the US Muslim community, found that 27 percent of Muslim Americans and 14 percent of Jewish Americans have faced trouble banking, compared with negligible rates among Christian denominations, especially with Trump’s core base, evangelicals, at 8 percent.

Overall, 93 percent of Muslim Americans reported experiencing trouble with banking access. In one situation involving Citibank, the New York Chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) accused the financial institution of not opening the account of a Muslim woman because of her husband, whom she wanted to nominate as a beneficiary and who is a Palestinian Muslim. CAIR did not release the name of the woman at the centre of the complaint.

“It [debanking] is a huge barrier for actually Muslims fulfilling philanthropic goals,” Erum Ikramullah, a senior research project manager at the ISPU, told Al Jazeera.

“It’s a huge barrier for the actual Muslim-based, Muslim-led organisations who are managing relief both domestically and overseas.”

Between October 2023 and May 2024, at least 30 US nonprofits providing humanitarian aid to Gaza have had accounts closed.

“Muslim Americans and Armenian Americans have faced de-banking on account of their last names,” Senator Elizabeth Warren, the Democrat from Massachusetts who founded the CFPB in 2013, said in a Senate Banking Committee hearing last year.

But Trump continues to allege that groups like Christians and conservatives are the ones discriminated against.

Among them include the National Committee for Religious Freedom, led by former Republican Senator and Kansas Governor Sam Brownback. Brownback alleges that Chase closed his account on religious grounds, a claim the bank denies.

Regardless, the push to take on the problem of debanking is a rare spot of bipartisanship in Washington, with Trump and Warren both agreeing that banks should change their ways.

Industry turmoil

A US banking regulator said last month that the nine largest US banks put restrictions on industries that it deems risky, but this has been a long-term issue for several industries.

Operation Choke Point, under the administration of former Democratic President Barack Obama, targeted exploitative industries like payday lenders and arms dealers. The initiative pushed banks to consider entire categories of businesses – and the individuals who worked in them – as reputationally risky, even when that view lagged cultural sentiment.

In response, Frank Keating, the then-CEO of the American Banking Association, slammed the move in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, saying that the “Justice Department [is] telling bankers to behave like policemen and judges”.

Ultimately, that scrutiny affected people working in several industries over the last decade, most particularly in adult entertainment, cannabis, and cryptocurrency.

Within months of the new guidance from the Obama administration, hundreds of adult performers lost access to banking services from Chase Bank. The ability to keep a bank account persisted for adult performers. In 2022, adult performer Alana Evans penned an op-ed for The Daily Beast describing how Wells Fargo closed her account.

The Free Speech Coalition, an adult industry trade group, found that 63 percent of adult workers have lost access to a bank account because of their work in the legal industry, and nearly 50 percent have been rejected for a loan because of the nature of the profession.

“I think that when I talk to a lot of people about this issue, or when I’ve talked to even legislators about this, they really can’t believe it, because it’s never been anything that they’ve encountered personally. The idea that a bank could shut off your account because they disagreed with the type of work you do is sort of inconceivable to most people,” Mike Stabile, the director of public policy for the Free Speech Coalition, told Al Jazeera.

The cannabis business has faced similar problems. Over the last decade, both laws and public sentiment around marijuana use have drastically changed. Now, more people use marijuana daily than drink alcohol, and recreational use is legal in 24 states as well as Washington, DC.

Yet, legitimate businesses that cater to this growing market share and those who work for them have been subject to debanking.

Kyle Sherman, the CEO and founder of Flowhub, a cannabis payment processing company, testified in front of the Senate Banking Committee last year that his employees are routinely discriminated against in consumer banking. He alleged that one of his employees was denied a mortgage because of what he does for a living, as well as others who have had their personal accounts closed.

While state laws have shifted on marijuana’s stance, federal laws have not kept up, making it harder for banks to navigate the reputational risk.

Trump recently eased pressure on the marijuana industry by reclassifying the substance as Schedule III, which means it is less harmful, but it does not change the legality of sale and interstate commerce on the federal level.

“In some of the states that have recently gone legal with recreational and medical cannabis, the individual entrepreneurs [there] were previously considered outlaws. It is hard for a banker to get over the perception that yesterday, you were an illegal activity, and today, you’re a legal activity,” said Terry Mendez, the CEO of Safe Harbor Financial, a financial services company for the cannabis industry.

There has been a bigger about-face with regard to the cryptocurrency industry. At first, crypto was seen as a safe haven for illicit transactions because the underlying technology allowed for anonymous transfers, making it difficult for banks to determine which transactions were legitimate and legal and which ones were not.

As the industry began to move into the mainstream, the challenges were amplified. Exchanges and startups faced debanking or sudden account closures, and even major platforms like Coinbase struggled to maintain reliable banking partners.

“Historically, banks were kind of more naturally averse to crypto companies, going back to like 2018, to 2020, 2021. Crypto companies would often, when registering for accounts with banks, say that they were software development companies to try and avoid the mention of crypto because of fear of not being able to open a bank account, which, of course, then means it’s harder to make a payroll. It’s hard to take in funds from investors; you can’t pay vendors,” Sid Powell, the CEO of the asset management firm Maple Finance, told Al Jazeera.

That was not helped by the collapse of FTX, the notorious cryptocurrency exchange, pushing banks to pull back from working with the crypto industry.

Sentiment is shifting now. Under Trump, who has embraced crypto, financial regulators last year withdrew guidance that suggested that banks should be careful when working with the crypto industry. Powell says the executive order could help crypto avoid debanking in the future.

“It [the executive order] kind of signals to the FDIC and the OCC that they should act in a more balanced way when it comes to crypto companies and crypto startups, instead of taking a more hostile approach, or the approach of kind of lumping everyone in with the worst of the industry, which tended to happen post-FTX,” Powell added.

Powell was referring to the The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, an independent agency created by Congress to maintain stability in the nation’s financial system, and The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, an independent bureau of the US Department of the Treasury, which charters, regulates, and supervises all national banks, federal savings associations, and federal branches and agencies of foreign banks.

Trump’s personal gripes

Trump has also accused banks of not doing business with him, the primary driver of his interest in the debanking issue.

Banks can generally refuse to create accounts for potential customers who could be deemed as high risk.

“The president’s companies have filed [for] bankruptcy repeatedly. There have been years of reporting about financial institutions’ concerns with suspicious financial activity, and the president was found civilly liable for inflating the value of his assets that served as collateral for loans from financial institutions,” Graham Steele, an academic fellow at the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford University, told Al Jazeera.

Reuters reported last year that banks gauged Trump as a financial risk due to his plethora of legal challenges after his first term, including the suit brought by E Jean Caroll, which found Trump liable for sexual abuse. He has declared bankruptcy six times.

He also defaulted on loans totalling hundreds of millions of dollars several times, including a loan to Deutsche Bank. In 2024, a New York court ruled that the president fraudulently inflated his financial worth by more than $2bn.

“Notwithstanding the fact that the president is an inherently political figure, a financial institution could reasonably rely on any of these concerns, grounded in financial and legal risks, not ‘political’ beliefs, as a basis for declining to do business with a customer,” Steele said.

That did not stop the president from pointing fingers at banking giants, including Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan.

“I hope you start opening your bank to conservatives, because many conservatives complain that the banks are not allowing them to do business within the bank, and that includes a place called Bank of America,” Trump told the executive during a Q&A session at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last year.

The Trump family also sued Capital One last March. The lawsuit alleged that it debanked The Trump Organisation after Trump incited an insurrection at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, after spreading misinformation alleging that he won the 2020 presidential election even though he had lost by a significant margin.

Trump debanks ‘liberal’ causes

Trump’s rhetoric on debanking is among his latest attempts to punish entities for political bias, while actively pushing actions that punish those who have viewpoints that oppose his own.

Trump has argued that debanking disproportionately targets conservatives and conservative-leaning businesses like firearms manufacturers. His pressure has moved the needle at Citibank. In June, it lifted its ban on banking services to gun sellers and manufacturers, a policy it put in place in 2018 after the shooting in Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, that left 17 people dead.

In March, his administration announced it would shut down a set of climate grants under the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund – known as the “green bank” – a $20bn programme created through the bipartisan Inflation Reduction Act signed by his predecessor, President Joe Biden, in 2022 to channel financing for climate projects into underinvested regions.

Environment and Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Lee Zeldin justified the decision by citing “misconduct, conflicts of interest, and potential fraud”, allegations he offered without evidence, and forced Citibank, which was holding the fund’s money for nonprofit distribution, to return the funds to the EPA.

The decision faced legal hurdles. But earlier this month, a US court of appeals allowed the Trump administration to continue axing the programme. The 2-1 ruling was decided by two judges appointed by Trump.

Last year, the White House also pressured companies seeking federal contracts to abandon diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes, which it has long portrayed, without evidence, as undermining merit-based hiring.

Citigroup, historically one of the most vocal supporters of DEI in the financial services sector, scrapped its programme. Citibank holds multiple federal contracts with agencies including the Department of Defense and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Bank of America and Wells Fargo followed suit in February, scaling back their initiatives as well, as did many other companies.

As part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdowns, the White House has also pressured banks to cut financial services to immigrants. The administration is doing so by trying to cancel the social security numbers of migrants who have legal status in the US, which would essentially cut them off from access to basic financial services, including bank accounts and credit cards, The New York Times reported.

At the time, Leland Dudek, then the Social Security Administration’s acting commissioner and a Trump administration appointee, said the move to cut access would end their “financial lives”.

“There’s a real telling disconnect. They are saying, on the one hand, we wanna put a thumb on the scale and ensure that conservative groups are included in the financial system, while actively working to push out liberal coded groups by either freezing them out of the bank accounts when they get government grants, or trying to investigate and potentially bring criminal charges against the payment platform that serves liberal groups,” Steele said.

Steele questioned if taking on political bias would actually help communities that do not align with the Trump administration’s stated values and conservative viewpoints.

“I think one of the other concerns here is that a lot of this depends on how the executive order is going to be enforced,” Steele said.

Four decommissioned U.S. Navy Avenger class mine countermeasures ships have left Bahrain on what may be their final voyage aboard a larger heavy lift vessel. Avengers had been forward-deployed to the Middle Eastern nation for years, where critical mine countermeasures duties have now passed to Independence class Littoral Combat Ships (LCS).

The public affairs office for U.S. Naval Forces Central Command (NAVCENT) and U.S. 5th Fleet first released pictures of the M/V Seaway Hawk, a contracted semi-submersible heavy lift vessel, carrying the former Avenger class ships USS Devastator, USS Dextrous, USS Gladiator, and USS Sentry last Friday. The Navy released more images and a brief statement yesterday. The date stamps on the pictures show the Avengers were physically loaded onto the Seaway Hawk in Bahrain on January 9.

The Navy acquired 14 Avenger class ships between 1987 and 1994. Four of them are still in service, all of which are forward-deployed in Japan, but are also slated for decommissioning in the coming years.

“Decommissioned Avenger class Mine Countermeasures ships were safely moved as part of ongoing U.S. Navy force transition efforts in the region,” per the statement from NAVCENT. “The movement evolution required detailed planning, coordination, and disciplined execution to ensure the safe transport of the decommissioned MCM’s.”

“Mission partners worked together to maintain operational standards, prioritize safety, and ensure accountability throughout each phase of the evolution,” the statement adds. “These efforts support continued fleet readiness and responsible transition of legacy platforms, while sustaining operational momentum and mission effectiveness across the maritime domain.”

A Navy contracting notice last year said the four decommissioned Avengers would head from Bahrain to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Sealift, Inc. subsequently received a contract valued at approximately $7 million for work through February of this year, according to USNI News. In addition, the Navy had said it previously intended to scrap the USS Devastator, USS Dextrous, USS Gladiator, and USS Sentry following their decommissioning. If the ships are due to be broken down, why the decision was made to return them to the United States first is unclear.

The USS Devastator was the last of the Avenger class ships in Bahrain to be decommissioned, which was marked by a ceremony last September.

“For more than three decades, USS Devastator, USS Dextrous, USS Gladiator and USS Sentry have been critical to maritime missions around the globe – defending the freedom of navigation, promoting stability and deterring and defeating efforts by adversaries to harm the innocent,” Navy Vice Adm. George Wikoff, then commander of NAVCENT and 5th Fleet, said at that time. “To all, past and present, who have served on [these ships], thank you for standing the watch, being true trailblazers in the fleet and maintaining a constant presence in our area of operations… what a proud legacy you leave in your wake.”

The 224-foot-long and 1,312-ton-displacement Avengers are designed to both hunt for and neutralize moored naval mines, as well as those sitting on the sea floor.

Each of the ships is equipped with a mine-hunting sonar and surface search radar. Each Avenger can deploy towed minesweeping gear that can mimic the acoustic and magnetic signatures of warships, causing certain types of mines to detonate prematurely. They also have remotely-operated underwater vehicles capable of cutting mooring lines and otherwise interacting with underwater objects to help with rendering mines safe, as well as finding and categorizing them in the first place.

The ships themselves have fiberglass-coated wooden hulls to reduce their own vulnerability, particularly to mines that detect targets by their magnetic signature.

The Navy has long intended to replace the Avenger class ships with LCSs configured for the mine countermeasures duties. However, delays with the LCS mine countermeasures and other mission packages, or “modules,” as well as other persistent issues with both subclasses of those ships, repeatedly delayed those plans. The LCS program had also originally envisioned it being possible to readily reconfigure the ships for different mission sets by swapping out modules. However, the Navy is now deploying LCSs in largely fixed configurations. As it stands now, the LCS mine countermeasures configuration includes towed mine-hunting sonar for the ships, Common Unmanned Surface Vehicles (CUSV) with mine-sweeping gear, and mine detection and neutralization systems carried by embarked MH-60 Sea Hawk helicopters.

CUSV®

Airborne Laser Mine Detection System (ALMDS) Video

The Navy only fielded its first two operational mine countermeasures modules, installed on the Independence class LCSs USS Santa Barbara and USS Canberra, last year. Canberra arrived in Bahrain in May 2025. At that time, Santa Barbara, as well as the Independence class USS Tulsa and another ship to be named, were slated to comprise the inaugural rotational deployment of mine countermeasures-configured LCSs in the region. The USS Canberra notably sailed together with the M/V Seaway Hawk for a time after it departed Bahrain with the decommissioned Avengers.

Questions and criticism about the suitability of metal-hulled LCSs to take on the mine countermeasures mission have come up in the past. Both subclasses of LCS are also much larger than the Avenger class design, which could impose limits on how close they can get to mined or potentially mined areas. LCSs are better able to defend themselves against other threats than the Avengers, but they still have relatively limited firepower, which has been a separate source of criticism for years now. There would still be a significant need for tertiary support to protect LCSs during mine-clearing operations, which are slow and complex, and carry significant risks, even in benign environments.

The continued critical importance of naval mine-clearing capacity in the Middle East is underscored now by a new surge in geopolitical friction between the United States and Iran. The regime in Iran regularly threatens to blockade the highly strategic Strait of Hormuz in response to foreign attacks, especially ones that could present an existential danger to the regime in Tehran. The Strait of Hormuz links the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea, and is a huge chokepoint for oil and natural gas exports from the Middle East to other countries globally. Naval mining would be central to any blockade, but Iran’s capacity and willingness to launch such an operation, which would have worldwide ramifications, is an open question. TWZ previously explored this issue in depth following the start of the 12 Day War between Iran and Israel last year.

If the Navy has to launch its own mine-clearing operations in and around the Persian Gulf for any reason going forward, LCSs will be front and center now that the Avenger class ships have left the region.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Coco Gauff, who lost to Elina Svitolina in the quarterfinals of the Australian Open, was filmed smashing her racket.

Coco Gauff looked for a place without cameras to channel her frustration after a straight-sets loss to Elina Svitolina in the Australian Open quarterfinals, but was unhappy to find out that a video of her smashing her tennis racket ⁠on the floor was broadcast to viewers worldwide.

Twice Grand Slam winner Gauff was visibly upset ​with her performance on Tuesday, as she committed 26 unforced errors and ‍lost the match 6-1 6-2 in 59 minutes.

The American third seed went behind a wall near the match call area inside the venue, where a camera caught her hitting the racket repeatedly against the floor.

“I ‍tried to go ⁠somewhere where there were no cameras,” the 21-year-old told reporters.

“I kind of have a thing with the broadcast. I feel like certain moments – the same thing happened to Aryna [Sabalenka] after I played her in the final of the US Open – I feel like they don’t need to broadcast.”

World number one Sabalenka, who will take on Svitolina in the semifinals, had smashed her racket in a training area after ​losing to Gauff in the 2023 US Open final, and video ‌of the incident was also made public.

“I tried to go somewhere where they wouldn’t broadcast it, but obviously they did. Maybe some conversations can be had, because I feel like at this tournament the only private ‌place we have is the locker room,” Gauff added.

“I think for me, I know myself, and I don’t want to lash out ‌on my team. They’re good people. They don’t deserve ⁠that, and I know I’m emotional,” Gauff said.

“I just took the minute to go and do that. I don’t think it’s a bad thing. Like I said, I don’t try to do it on court in front of ‌kids and things like that, but I do know I need to let out that emotion.

“Otherwise, I’m just going to be snappy with the people around me, and I don’t want ‍to do that, because like I said, they don’t deserve it. They did their best. I did mine. Just need to let the frustration out.”

Whoever is nominated from the two Kurdish parties still needs the approval from the Shia and Sunni blocs in the parliament.

Iraq’s parliament has postponed the election for the country’s next president to allow for more consultations between the two Kurdish parties to agree on a candidate.

The Iraqi News Agency (INA) said the parliamentary vote scheduled for Tuesday was delayed at the request of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK).

Iraq follows a sectarian quota system, according to which the post of the prime minister goes to a Shia, the parliament’s speaker is a Sunni, and the largely ceremonial presidency goes to a Kurd.

Usually, in an agreement between the two main Kurdish parties, a PUK member holds the presidency. In contrast, the president and regional leader of the semi-autonomous Kurdish region are selected from the KDP.

However, in this instance, the KDP announced its own candidate, Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein, for the election.

Reporting from the capital, Baghdad, Al Jazeera’s Mahmoud Abdelwahed said whoever is nominated from the two Kurdish parties still needs the approval from the Shia and Sunni blocs in the parliament.

After the election, the new president will have 15 days to appoint a prime minister, who is widely expected to be the former leader, Nouri al-Maliki.

Al-Maliki, 75, has already served as Iraq’s prime minister for two terms from 2006 to 2014 before he quit under pressure from the United States. He is seen as being close to Iran.

On Saturday, the Coordination Framework, an alliance of Shia parties which holds a parliamentary majority, endorsed Maliki. The next day, the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned against a pro-Iranian government in Iraq.

An Iraqi source close to the Coordination Framework told the AFP news agency that Washington had conveyed to it that it “holds a negative view of previous governments led by former Prime Minister Maliki”.

In a letter, US representatives said that while the selection of the prime minister is an Iraqi decision, “the United States will make its own sovereign decisions regarding the next government in line with American interests”.

Another Iraqi source confirmed the letter, adding that the Shia alliance had still moved forward with its choice, confident that Maliki could allay Washington’s concerns.

Iraq has long been a proxy battleground between the US and Iran, with successive governments negotiating a delicate balance between the two foes.

Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s tax and spending pledges in advance of snap elections next month have sent jitters through global markets.

Japanese government bonds and the yen have been on a rollercoaster since Takaichi unveiled plans to pause the country’s consumption tax if her Liberal Democratic Party wins the February 8 vote.

The market turmoil reflects concerns about the long-term sustainability of Japan’s debt levels, which are the highest among advanced economies.

The volatility has extended beyond Japan, highlighting broader fiscal sustainability worries in an era in which the United States and other major economies are running huge deficits.

What has Takaichi promised on the economy?

Takaichi said last week that she would suspend the country’s 8 percent consumption tax on food and non-alcoholic beverages for two years if her government is returned to power, following her dissolution of the House of Representatives.

Based on Japanese government data, Takaichi’s plan would result in an estimated revenue shortfall of 5 trillion yen ($31.71bn) each year.

Takaichi, a proponent of predecessor Shinzo Abe’s agenda of high public spending and ultra-loose monetary policy, said the shortfall could be made up by reviewing existing expenditures and tax breaks, but did not provide specific details.

Takaichi’s tax pledge comes after her Cabinet in November approved Japan’s largest stimulus since the COVID-19 pandemic.

The package, worth 21.3 trillion yen ($137bn), included one-time cash handouts of 20,000 yen per child for families, subsidies for utility bills amounting to about 7,000 yen per household over a three-month period, and food coupons worth 3,000 yen per person.

Why have Takaichi’s pledges unnerved markets?

Japan’s long-term government bond yields soared following Takaichi’s announcement.

Yields on 40-year bonds rose above 4 percent on Tuesday, the highest on record, as investors exited from Japanese government debt en masse.

Bond markets, through which governments borrow money from investors in exchange for paying out a fixed rate of interest, are closely watched as a gauge of the health of countries’ balance sheets.

While typically offering lower returns than stocks, government bonds are seen as low-risk investments as they have the backing of the state, making them attractive to investors seeking safe places to park their money.

As confidence in a government’s ability to repay its debts declines, bond yields rise as investors seek higher interest payments for holding riskier debt.

“When Prime Minister Takaichi announced a planned reduction in consumption taxes, this made existing bond-holders of Japan’s debt uneasy, requiring a higher compensation for the risk they bear,” Anastassia Fedyk, an assistant professor of finance at the Haas School of Business of the University of California, Berkeley, told Al Jazeera.

“As a result, bond prices dropped and yields rose. And yes, this is a general pattern that applies to other countries, too, though Japan has an especially high level of debt, making its position more vulnerable.”

Japan’s debt-to-GDP ratio already exceeds 230 percent, following decades of deficit spending by governments aiming to reverse the country’s long-term economic stagnation.

The East Asian country’s debt burden stands far above that of peers such as the US, UK and France, whose debt-to-GDP ratios are about 125 percent, 115 percent and 101 percent, respectively.

At the same time, the Bank of Japan (BOJ) has been scaling back bond purchases as part of its move away from decades of ultra-low interest rates, limiting its options for interventions to bring yields down.

“Bond investors reacted because her headline package looks like large, near-term fiscal loosening at exactly the moment the BOJ is trying to normalise policy,” Sayuri Shirai, a professor of economics at Keio University in Tokyo, told Al Jazeera.

How does all this affect the rest of the world?

The sell-off in Japanese bonds reverberated through markets overseas, with yields on 30-year US Treasuries rising to their highest level since September.

As Japanese bond yields rise, local investors are able to earn higher interest payments at home.

That can incentivise investors to offload other bonds, such as US Treasuries.

As of November, Japanese investors held $1.2 trillion in US Treasuries, more than any other foreign group of buyers.

In an interview with Fox News last week, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent expressed concern about the impact of Japan’s bond market on US Treasury prices and said he anticipated that his Japanese counterparts would “begin saying the things that will calm the market down.”

Japan’s long-term bond yields fell on Monday amid the expectations that Japanese and US authorities would step in to prop up the yen.

On Friday, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal reported that the Federal Reserve Bank of New York had inquired about the cost of exchanging the Japanese currency for US dollars.

“Japan matters globally through flows. If Japanese government bond yields rise, Japanese investors can earn more at home, potentially reducing demand for foreign bonds; that can nudge global yields and risk pricing,” Shirai said.

“This is why global-market pieces have framed Japan’s bond move as a wider rates story.”

Higher bond yields in Japan, the US and elsewhere raise the cost of borrowing and servicing the national debt.

In a worst-case scenario, a sharp escalation in interest rates can lead to a country defaulting on its debts.

Masahiko Loo, a fixed income strategist at State Street Investment Management in Tokyo, said that the reaction of international investors to Takaichi’s plans reflects growing sensitivity to fiscal credibility in highly indebted economies.

“Yes, Japan may be the spark, but the warning applies equally to the US and others with large structural deficits,” Loo told Al Jazeera.

Is Japan on the verge of a financial crisis?

Probably not.

While Japan is more indebted than its peers, its fiscal position is more sustainable than it might appear due to factors specific to the country – at least in the short to medium term – according to economists.

The vast majority of Japan’s debt is held by local institutions and denominated in yen, reducing the likelihood of a panic induced by foreign investors, while interest rates are far lower than in other economies.

“The debt situation is more manageable than a lot of people think,” Thomas Mathews, head of markets for Asia Pacific at Capital Economics, told Al Jazeera.

“Net debt-to-GDP is on a downward trajectory, and Japan’s budget deficit isn’t all that big by global standards.”

Loo of State Street Investment Management said that the turmoil surrounding Japan had more to do with a “communication gap around fiscal sustainability and policy coordination” than the country’s solvency.

“That said, markets are likely to continue testing the feasibility of the agenda, as even fiscally sanguine countries have, at times, been disciplined by market forces,” Loo said.

Aaron David Miller, former US senior adviser on Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, says Benjamin Netanyahu’s emphasis on Hamas’s demilitarisation will be a challenge for the next phase of the Gaza ceasefire.

Dilling, a key route for supply lines, had under the paramilitary group’s control for nearly two years.

Sudan’s military says it has broken a nearly two-year siege by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) on a key town in the Kordofan region, gaining control over major supply lines.

In a statement late on Monday, the military said it had opened a road leading to South Kordofan province’s Dilling town.

“Our forces inflicted heavy losses on the enemy, both personal and equipment,” the statement said.

There was no immediate comment from the RSF, which has been at war with the army for control of Sudan for nearly three years.

Dilling lies halfway between Kadugli – the besieged state capital – and el-Obeid, the capital of neighbouring North Kordofan province, which the RSF has sought to encircle.

Al Jazeera’s Hiba Morgan, reporting from the Sudanese capital Khartoum, described the army’s takeover of Dilling as a “very significant gain” that may lead to more advances in the province.

“The army is trying to make use of this momentum to take territory not just from the RSF, but also from its ally, the SPLM-N, led by Abdel Aziz al-Hilu, which controls territory and has forces in South Kordofan,” Morgan said.

Paramilitary troops were likely to fight back and attempt to retake the lost territory by relocating fighters from el-Obeid and Kadugli, according to Morgan.

Morgan added that the humanitarian situation in Dilling would likely improve as the army will now be able to bring in medical supplies, food and other commercial goods that had been prevented from entering during the RSF’s siege.

After being forced out of Khartoum in March, the RSF has focused on Kordofan and the city of el-Fasher, which was the military’s last stronghold in the sprawling Darfur region until the RSF seized it in October.

Reports of mass killings, rape, abductions and looting emerged after el-Fasher’s paramilitary takeover, and the International Criminal Court launched a formal investigation into “war crimes” by both sides.

Dilling has reportedly experienced severe hunger, but the world’s leading authority on food security, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, did not declare famine there in its November report because of a lack of data.

A United Nations-backed assessment last year already confirmed famine in Kadugli, which has been under RSF siege for more than a year and a half.

More than 65,000 people have fled the Kordofan region since October, according to the latest UN figures.

The conflict has killed tens of thousands of people and created what the UN describes as the world’s largest displacement and hunger crisis. At its peak, the war had displaced about 14 million people, both internally and across borders.

Over the past year, United States President Donald Trump has pursued “peace-making” all across the world. A prominent feature of his efforts has been the belief that economic threats or rewards can resolve conflicts. Most recently, his administration has put forward economic development plans as part of peace mediation for Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, the war in Ukraine and the conflict between Israel and Syria.

While some may see Trump’s “business” approach to “peace-making” as unique, it is not. The flawed conviction that economic development can resolve conflicts has been a regular feature of Western neoliberal peace initiatives in the Global South for the past few decades.

Occupied Palestine is a good example.

In the early 1990s, when the “peace process” was initiated, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres started advocating for “economic peace” as part of it. He sold his vision of the “New Middle East” as a new regional order that would guarantee security and economic development for all.

The project aimed to place Israel at the economic centre of the Arab world through regional infrastructure — transport, energy and industrial zones. Peres’s solution for the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict” was Palestinian economic integration. The Palestinians were promised jobs, investment, and improved living standards.

His argument was that economic development and cooperation would foster stability and mutual interest between Israelis and Palestinians. But that did not happen. Instead, as the occupation continued to entrench itself after the US-brokered Oslo Accords and the establishment of the Palestinian Authority (PA), anger in the Palestinian streets grew and eventually led to the outbreak of the second Intifada.

This neoliberal approach was tested again by the Quartet – consisting of the United Nations, the European Union, the US and Russia – and its envoy Tony Blair in 2007. By then, the Palestinian economy had collapsed, losing 40 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) in eight years and plunging 65 percent of the population into poverty.

Blair’s “solution” was to propose 10 “quick impact” economic projects and fundraise for them in the West. This went hand-in-hand with the policies of then-Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, in what came to be known as “Fayyadism”.

Fayyadism was sold to Palestinians as a pathway to statehood through institution-building and economic growth. Fayyad focused on generating short-term economic gains in the occupied West Bank while simultaneously rebuilding the Palestinian security apparatus to meet Israeli security demands.

This model of economic peace never addressed the root cause of Palestinian economic stagnation: the Israeli occupation. Even the World Bank warned that investment without a political settlement ending Israeli control would fail in the medium and long term. Yet the approach persisted.

There were Palestinians who benefitted from it, but they were not common Palestinians. They were a narrow elite: security officials who gained privileged access to financial institutions, contractors tied to Israeli markets, and a handful of large investors. For the wider population, living standards remained precarious.

Rather than preparing Palestinians for statehood, Fayyadism replaced liberation with management, sovereignty with security coordination, and collective rights with individual consumption.

This economic approach to conflict resolution merely gave Israel time to entrench its colonial enterprise by expanding its settlements on Palestinian land.

The latest economic plan for Gaza, presented by Trump’s adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner, is unlikely to bring economic prosperity to the Palestinians either. The project reflects two deeply contradictory dynamics: it foregrounds opportunities for investment and profit for global and regional oligarchies while systematically ignoring the fundamental national and human rights of the Palestinian people.

Security is framed exclusively around the needs of the occupying power, while Palestinians are compartmentalised, securitised, and surveilled — reduced to a depoliticised labour force stripped of social and national identity.

This approach views people as individuals rather than as nations or historically established communities. Under this logic, individuals are expected to acquiesce to oppression and dispossession once they obtain jobs and improve their living standards.

These strategies are failing to build peace not just in Palestine.

In the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, the US has proposed expanding the demilitarised zone and converting it into a joint economic zone, featuring a ski resort. The US approach seems designed not only to pressure Syria to relinquish its sovereign rights over the territory, but also to recast it as a security project in ways that primarily benefit Israel. Under this framework, the US would act as the security guarantor. Its close alliance with Israel, however, puts its impartiality and true intentions in doubt.

In Ukraine, the US has proposed a free economic zone in parts of the Donbas region, from which the Ukrainian army would have to withdraw. This would allow Moscow to expand its influence without direct military confrontation, creating a buffer zone favourable to Russian security interests.

The Donbas has historically been one of Ukraine’s industrial bases, and transforming it into a free economic zone would deprive Ukraine of a critical economic resource. There are also no guarantees that the Russian army would not simply advance after the Ukrainian withdrawal and take the whole region.

These neoliberal “solutions” to the conflicts in Gaza, the Donbas and the Golan Heights are doomed to fail just like the economically-driven peace initiatives of the 1990s and 2000s in occupied Palestine.

The main problem is that the US cannot really provide credible guarantees that the areas would remain stable, so investors can secure returns on their investments. That is because no solid political settlement would be in place, given the fact that these proposals ignore the political, cultural and most importantly, national interests of the people living in these regions. As a result, no serious or independent investor would commit capital to such an arrangement.

Nations are not made up of consumers or labourers; they are made up of people with a common identity and national aspirations.

Economic incentives should follow, not precede, a political resolution that secures the self-determination of indigenous peoples. Any conflict-resolution framework that ignores collective rights and international law is therefore bound to fail. Political settlements must prioritise these rights, a requirement that stands in direct opposition to the logic of neoliberalism.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

India and the European Union have agreed on a huge trade deal creating a free trade zone of two ‌billion people, European ​Commission President Ursula ‍von der Leyen and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have said.

In a post on X during her visit to New Delhi on Tuesday, von der Leyen said the two parties were “making history today”.

“We have concluded the mother of all ​deals. ‌We have created a free trade zone of two ‌billion people, with ‌both sides ⁠set to benefit,” she added.

Modi said the landmark agreement, following nearly two decades of on-and-off ​negotiations, had been reached, hailing its benefits before a meeting with von der Leyen and European Council President Antonio Costa.

“This deal will bring many opportunities for India’s 1.4 billion and many millions of people of the EU,” he said.

The deal will cover about 25 percent of the global gross domestic product (GDP), Modi said, adding that India will get a boost in sectors including textiles, gems and jewellery, and leather goods.

The trade pact comes amid a push by Brussels and New Delhi to open up new markets in the face of tariffs imposed by the United States and Chinese export controls.

It will pave the way for ‍India, the world’s most populous nation, to open up its huge, protected market to free trade with the 27-nation EU, its biggest trading partner.

The EU views India as an important market for the future, while New Delhi sees Europe as an important potential source of technology and investment.

The formal signing of the deal will take ‌place after legal vetting, expected to last five to six months, the Reuters news agency reported, quoting an Indian government official aware of the matter. The official said the deal was expected to be implemented within a year.

EU exports ‘expected to double’

The EU said it expected its exports to India to double by 2032 as a result of the deal.

Bilateral trade between India and the EU in goods has already grown by nearly 90 percent over the past decade, reaching 120 billion euros ($139bn) in 2024, according to EU figures. Trade in services accounts for a further 60 billion euros ($69bn), EU data shows.

Under the agreement, tariffs on 96.6 percent of EU goods exports to India would be eliminated or reduced, EU officials said. The deal would save up to 4 billion euros ($4.74bn) a year in duties on European products, officials said.

Among the products that would have tariffs all or mostly eliminated were machinery, chemicals and pharmaceuticals.

Tariffs on cars would gradually reduce to 10 percent with a quota of 250,000 vehicles a year, officials said, while EU service providers would gain privileged access to India in key areas such as financial and maritime services. Tariffs on EU aircraft and spacecraft would be eliminated for almost all products.

Tariffs would be cut to 20-30 percent on EU wine, 40 percent on spirits, and 50 percent on beer, while tariffs on fruit juices and processed food would be eliminated.

“The EU stands to gain the highest level of access ever granted to a trade partner in the traditionally protected Indian market,” von der Leyen said on Sunday. “We will gain a significant competitive advantage in key industrial and agri-good sectors.”

Last-minute talks on Monday had focused on several sticking points, including the impact of the EU’s carbon border tax on steel, sources familiar with the discussions told the AFP news agency.

Talks on the India-EU trade deal were launched in 2007, but for many years made little progress. However, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine led to the relaunch of talks in 2022, while United States President Donald Trump’s aggressive tariff policy spurred rapid progress in negotiations.

India and the EU also announced the launch of a security and defence partnership, similar to partnerships the EU has with Japan and South Korea, as von der Leyen said Brussels and New Delhi would grow their strategic partnership further.

The moves come as India, which has relied on Russia for key military hardware for decades, has tried to reduce its dependence on Moscow by diversifying imports and pushing its domestic manufacturing base, while Europe is doing the same with regard to Washington.

The EU-India deal comes days after Brussels signed a key pact with the South American bloc Mercosur, following deals last year with Indonesia, Mexico and Switzerland. During the same period, New Delhi ​finalised pacts with the United Kingdom, New Zealand and ‌Oman.

Fatima Abdullahi stands beside a group of children with a bowl balanced in her hands. As the children rally around her, she tries to give them instructions. “The pap is small, so you must be patient and take turns,” she tells the children, who are each holding a plastic spoon. 

The 30-year-old mother of five then places the bowl on the ground, and the children swing into action, scooping and scraping. Inside is pap made of corn flour and plain water.

“It was never this bad,” Fatima tells HumAngle, glancing at the children whose spoons were colliding in the wooden bowl. “There was a time when each child had their own bowl, and the pap had sugar in it, but things got worse.”

In 2015, Fatima and her family fled the Boko Haram insurgency that ravaged her hometown in Gwoza Local Government Area, Borno State, in northeastern Nigeria, and claimed the lives of over 350,000 people and displaced millions of others. They were transported by the Nigerian Army to Malkhohi, a displacement camp in Yola, the Adamawa State capital. 

Like Fatima and her family, most of the over 360 people living in the camp were displaced from communities in Borno State, such as Gwoza, Askira Uba, and Damboa.

Back at home, she was an entrepreneur who sold akara and chin-chin, earning money to support her family. Fatima’s husband was an accomplished farmer. Their displacement halted all of these efforts, but things were better when they arrived in Malkhohi. At first, many structures were put in place to make life easier for residents. 

Each family was provided with a tent, mosquito nets, blankets, and sufficient food. Donations in cash and kind were made regularly. Fatima said there was a United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)-run clinic, and the Red Cross was always on the ground to address emergency health needs. Local civil society organisations were also available to offer support. 

“There were organisations that came from time to time with food,” she recounts. “Some of them came and taught us different skills.” 

However, things eventually began to change. 

When the aid stopped

UNICEF was the first agency to exit the Malkhohi IDP camp in 2023, a move that led to the closure of the camp’s clinic. A few months later, the Red Cross also withdrew. In 2024, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) closed its office at the camp. 

It was at this point that residents began to realise the gravity of their situation. 

The departure of these agencies that had provided healthcare and other essential services to the IDPs significantly affected the community, with conditions worsening steadily over time. 

That decline deepened in 2025, when other local organisations providing aid in the camp, particularly those dependent on USAID funding, also began to leave, shortly after the US government suspended foreign aid.

For families in the camp, the impact has been tough. 

“Before, my children had regular three square meals, but now they eat depending on how available food is. Sometimes, it’s breakfast and nothing till the next day. Other times, we go to bed like that,” Fatima said. She noted that starvation has made her children aggressive. “Whenever they see food lately, they start fighting over it, each wanting the largest share.”

As food became scarcer, meals grew more basic.

“These days, I mostly make pap for them with just plain water and corn flour, and sometimes, we make tuwo with the corn flour and eat without soup,” she added. 

The withdrawal of aid also disrupted services beyond food. In addition to basic healthcare, UNICEF had played a key role in education, with about 285,000 Borno children reportedly trained in numeracy and literacy after being orphaned by the Boko Haram insurgency.

With the clinic closed, access to medical care has become increasingly difficult.

“We used to access free medicines and other healthcare services until the camp’s clinic closed,” Fatima told HumAngle. “If our children get sick these days, we go to the nearest clinic inside Malkhohi village. They charge a lot.” 

She explained that private clinics require an upfront deposit of about ₦6000 before examining a sick child, a sum many families cannot afford. “If we are paying for malaria drugs, then it’s ₦6000, but if the child requires a drip, then it is ₦9000 and above,” she added. 

Although there is a primary healthcare centre in Malkhohi, IDPs say it is far from the camp and difficult to access during emergencies, often taking hours to reach on foot.

“So when there is a health emergency, we just go to the private clinic closer to us,”  Fatima said. 

Living conditions in the camp have also worsened. Salome Ijarafu, the women’s leader at Malkhohi IDP Camp, told HumAngle that there are only a few standard toilet facilities in the camp. 

“Sometimes, we have to wait till it is dark so that we can go and take our bath outside in the bushes because the bathrooms are not in good condition. Even then, we have to queue up and wait for others to get out before we make use of the good ones,” she said. 

Following a rise in vaginal infections at the camp, some women don’t use the toilets; they now relieve themselves in nearby bushes. 

“Our toilets and bathrooms are all worn out. We rely on the few in better condition, but there are a lot of us relying on them, so it gets messy all the time. Before, we used to receive soaps, detergents, and Izal from the organisations, but since the aid stopped, we just clean the floors with water,” Fatima said. 

The women’s leader also noted that pregnant women in the camp have become increasingly vulnerable since the closure of the UNICEF clinic, as access to antenatal care and delivery services is no longer readily available. 

“When women want to give birth, there is no way it can be done here, so they have to be rushed to the distant primary health care, and sometimes when the primary healthcare centre can’t handle it, we have to look for a means to transport them to Yola town,” Salome said. 

Beyond healthcare, women in the camp are also grappling with rising costs of sanitary materials.

“Sanitary pads are expensive now, so we use rags during our period. Before, we used to receive donations of sanitary pads, but we no longer get them,” she said.

‘We hustle to survive’

Buba Ware, Chairperson of the residents at Malkhohi displacement camp, told HumAngle that the Adamawa State government ceased communication with the camp five years ago, bringing an end to the donations from the State Emergency Management Agency (ADSEMA), but the IDPs didn’t feel much of that impact until the international agencies began to exit, followed by local humanitarian organisations. By the end of 2025, no organisation remained in the camp.

It has made it difficult for residents to renovate their tents, a responsibility that was carried out by IOM. “They fixed the leakages on our tents and replaced old structures, but now that they are gone, our tents are collapsing,” Buba said. “Even the local NGOs that came before no longer come, and that is why we go out and hustle so we can take care of ourselves.”

For many parents, that hustle has become a daily struggle to feed their children.

Forty-five-year-old Jummai Ali, a displaced person from Gwoza, has lived at the camp for the past decade. With seven children to care for, she has intensified her efforts to find food, especially now that aid is no longer forthcoming. 

Every morning, Jummai joins other women in the camp to search for leftover grains on harvested farms. The women leave the camp at 6 a.m.. Each of them carries a basin, a broom, a sack, a hoe, and a small gallon of water. 

“We don’t have a destination or specific location,” she said. “We just keep walking, scouting for farms where work has already been done. We pluck out grains that farmers have mostly overlooked during harvest. Some of them are bad, and sometimes it’s just husk, but we sieve out and try to gather the ones that are edible.”

The women, Jummai said, walk in groups and stop at certain fields. When work at one site is done, they move to the next field until they have gathered enough. They mostly labour on rice farms because that’s where they can collect more grains. 

“When we return, we sieve out the grain, work on it and cook. It’s not easy. There are times we walk for three hours to get to certain communities where there are large farms and then walk back to the camp when we are done,”  she added, stressing that the search for food has become increasingly exhausting. 

In addition to foraging, some women in the Malkhohi IDP camp prepare local foods such as akara, groundnuts, and moi moi, which they hawk in neighbouring communities to earn an income. According to Salome, the women’s leader, most of what the women earn from petty trading goes into buying medicines, especially during the harmattan season, when many children in the camp suffer from colds.

“We catch colds all the time. Our blankets are worn out. We’ve been using the same ones for the last ten years. Since the tent floor is not plastered, it’s easier for the sand to get cold and penetrate our mats,” Fatima said. 

As women struggle to cope, many men in the camp have also turned to risky forms of labour.

HumAngle learned that a growing number of men have taken up logging. With the Malkhohi IDP camp located on the outskirts of Yola and surrounded by dense forest, the men venture into the bush to cut down trees, chop them into pieces, and sell the wood to survive.

Adam Agalade, one of the loggers, said hardship in the camp pushed him into the trade.  Formerly a businessman and farmer back home in Gwoza, Adam said he had never swung an axe until last year. 

“Sometimes, we spend days in the bush, trying to gather enough timber for sale,” he said. “We stopped during the rainy season but resumed in December.” 

Once the trees are chopped, the men transport the wood in wheelbarrows into Malkhohi, where it is stacked along the roadside and sold to households and local food vendors. 

“We sell some batches for ₦1000 while some for ₦2000,” Adam said. 

While the trade has helped him support his family of ten, he noted that the income is uncertain. “There are days when we spend the whole day without selling anything,” he said. 

Adam is currently injured after a log fell on his leg while he was cutting a tree in the forest. With his leg swollen, he said his life has come to a standstill as he is unable to join other loggers in the forest. 

The rain will come

Beyond daily survival, residents say they fear what lies ahead.

Some IDPs told HumAngle they are particularly anxious about the approaching rainy season, given the deteriorating condition of their tents. “All these planks supporting our tent have stayed for 10 years and have been eaten by termites. When the wind blows, the tents start to shake because the planks supporting them are worn out,” Adam said.

According to Buba, the camp chairman, most tents are leaking and require urgent repairs or replacement. IOM used to handle the maintenance, but they have left. While IDPs have made temporary fixes using sandbags to stabilise the structures, they say these measures are unsustainable.

“Once it is the rainy season, we get scared because of the condition of the rooms,” he said. 

Buba added that heavy rains often cause tents to flood, forcing families to vacate them and seek shelter under trees until the storms subside. He recalled instances where tents collapsed on families, causing injuries, though no deaths were recorded. 

Waiting for a way out

For years, residents of the Malkhohi displacement camp have waited for clarity on what comes next. 

While the Borno State Government began closing displacement camps across Maiduguri in 2021, a move aimed at reducing long-term aid dependency, restoring dignity, and reviving local economies, those efforts have not reached displaced persons from Borno living outside the state. 

Some IDPs within Borno were relocated to homes around their ancestral towns, but families in Malkhohi say they have been left behind. Still, even those in Borno who have been resettled complain of insecurity in their new location, lack of government support, and an absence of basic amenities.

However, for displaced persons from Borno living outside the state, such as those in Malkhohi, talks of resettlement have not reached them. The residents of the camp told HumAngle they no longer wish to remain there, but the lack of alternative shelter holds them back. 

According to the camp chairperson, the IDPs have had no contact with the Borno State Government since their evacuation from the state over a decade ago. “They have never checked up on us. Our closest means to the government is the ADSEMA, but we have lost touch with them for more than five years now,” he said. 

He added that the displaced persons had written several times to the Adamawa State government about the prevailing hardship in the camp, particularly the dilapidated condition of their tents, but had received no response to date. 

“If the government will carry us back to where they took us from, then we are ready, because it’s not our wish to live here,” the camp chairperson added. “Alternatively, if the government can give us a place outside the camp or maybe build houses for us, we would prefer that, because once we have our homes, our struggles will reduce, and we will focus on providing food and other basic needs for our families.”

HumAngle reached out to the Adamawa and Borno Ministries of Humanitarian Affairs for comments, but received no response at the time of filing this report. 

The government will announce a cap on ground rents paid by leaseholders in England and Wales on Tuesday morning, the BBC understands.

Labour’s 2024 election manifesto promised to “tackle unregulated and unaffordable ground rent charges”.

However, there had been suggestions the government could retreat from its pledge due to concern about the potential impact on pension funds.

The government has not yet confirmed where it will set the cap, but campaigners have said they believe £250 a year is likely.

Earlier this month, former Housing Secretary Angela Rayner had urged the government to stick to its manifesto pledge on ground rents.

There are around five million leasehold homes in England and Wales, where people own the right to occupy a property via a lease for a limited number of years from a freeholder.

Leaseholds is the default tenure for privately-owned flats, and the Land Registry estimates that 99% of flat sales in 2024 in England were leasehold.

Ground rents were abolished for most new residential leasehold properties in England and Wales in 2022, but remain for existing leasehold homes.

The English Housing Survey has estimated that in 2023/24, leasehold owner-occupiers reported paying a median annual ground rent of £120 a year.

In 2024, when Labour were in opposition, the current Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook said his preference was for ground rents to be capped at effectively zero.

Recent reports have suggested that the Treasury and the housing department have been at loggerheads over the issue, with concerns over how a cap would impact pension funds which own freeholds.

Last week, former Labour minister Justin Madders told the BBC that the prime minister could face a “mass rebellion” if the government abandoned its pledge on a ground rent cap.

He said setting the limit at a peppercorn rate would be his preferred choice but that he could accept a £250 cap due to the “risk of elongated legal challenge”.

A spokesperson for the Residential Freehold Association has previously said that capping ground rents “would be an unprecedented and unjustified interference with existing property rights, which would seriously damage investor confidence in the UK housing market”.

Harry Scoffin, founder of the Free Leaseholders campaign group, has said: “At the election, Labour promised to end the feudal leasehold system and if they backtrack on reducing ground rates to a peppercorn or zero financial value they’re not ending the leasehold scam.”

Social media influencer Sammy Yahood is known to spread Islamophobic content online.

Australia has cancelled the visa of an Israeli social media influencer who has campaigned against Islam, saying it will not accept visitors to the country who come to spread hatred.

Australian Minister for Home Affairs Tony Burke said in a statement on Tuesday that “spreading hatred is not a good reason to come” to Australia, hours after influencer Sammy Yahood announced that his visa was cancelled three hours before his flight departed from Israel.

People who want to visit Australia should apply for the correct visa and come for the right reasons, Burke said in a statement to the AFP news agency.

Just hours before his visa was cancelled, Yahood had written on X, “Islam ACCORDING TO ISLAM does not tolerate non-believers, apostates, women’s rights, children’s rights, or gay rights.”

He also referred to Islam as a “disgusting ideology” and an “aggressor”.

Australia tightened its hate crime laws earlier this month in response to a mass shooting at a Jewish celebration at Sydney’s Bondi Beach, which left 15 people dead.

In a recent post, Yahood, a native of the UK and a recent citizen of Israel, had also advocated for the deportation of United States Representative Ilhan Omar, a Somali-American, who is Muslim.

In another, he ridiculed the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, which is responsible for coordinating relief for Palestinians and Palestinian refugees in the occupied West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.

Israel began bulldozing UNRWA’s headquarters in occupied East Jerusalem last week, a move strongly condemned by the world body and Palestinian leaders, who said the flattening of the site marked a “barbaric new era” of unchecked defiance of international law by Israeli authorities.

Despite the cancellation of his visa to Australia, Yahood said he flew from Israel to Abu Dhabi, but was blocked from getting his connecting flight to Melbourne.

“I have been unlawfully banned from Australia, and I will be taking action,” he wrote on X.

“This is a story about tyranny, censorship and control,” he added in another post.

Yahood’s visa was reportedly cancelled under the same legislation that has been used in the past to reject people’s visas on the grounds of disseminating hatred.

Sky News Australia reported that Minister Burke previously revoked the visitor visa of Israeli-American activist and tech entrepreneur Hillel Fuld over his “Islamophobic rhetoric”, as well as the visa of Simcha Rothman, a lawmaker with Israel’s far-right Mafdal-Religious Zionism party and a member of Netanyahu’s governing coalition, amid concerns that his planned speaking tour in the country would “spread division”.

The conservative Australian Jewish Association, which had invited Yahood to speak at events in Sydney and Melbourne, said it “strongly condemned” the visa decision by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government.

An elite U.S. Navy test and evaluation squadron, the VX-9 “Vampires” based out of NAWS China Lake, are now flying the U.S. Air Force’s F-35A model. The Navy traditionally flies the carrier-capable F-35C and the Marines fly both the short-takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) F-35B and the F-35C.

The news that the seagoing service is operating the A model of the Joint Strike Fighter came from aviation photographer @Task_Force23, who captured the VX-9 F-35A as it did a low-approach at Mojave Air and Space Port on January 23rd. He was kind enough to share his photos with our readers.

The aircraft in question was 17-5240, an F-35A that had previously served in a test capacity with the USAF’s 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron based at Nellis Air Force Base. As for how the jet ended up being flown by the USN, the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) tells us:

“We have a service agreement whereby the Air Force can loan the Navy an aircraft and they have done that before.”

We have asked additional questions about the arrangement to the JPO, we will update this post when we hear back.

Regardless, it makes sense that Navy can pull from the Air Force’s much larger F-35A fleet for test and evaluation duties, the activities of which often benefit both services due to the joint nature of the F-35 program. The entire F-35C production target for the Navy and Marines is 273 aircraft (as of 2024), and many of those aircraft are yet to be ordered and delivered. In comparison, the USAF had well over 500 F-35As in its inventory at the start of fiscal year 2025. That number has only grown.

The F-35C that the Navy flies has much larger wings than the A, allowing it to approach the carrier at lower speeds. It also has a beefier landing gear for carrier operations, a robust tail hook, and it carries more fuel, among other tweaks. While the two fly similar and conversion from F-35C to A is likely relatively seamless, the C model is restricted to 7.5Gs compared to the A’s 9Gs. Due to the big wing and G restriction, they perform different in areas of the envelope, such as turns. High speed performance is also a bit different due to the big wings on the C. But those differences are fairly minimal, especially for test duties of a relatively mature aircraft that often have more to do with avionics, software, and weapons integration than raw performance and flying qualities. There are other use cases VX-9 could have for F-35As, as well, but generally this would be a capacity issue.

Still, it is certainly… different… seeing an F-35A emblazoned with NAVY on its side and VX-9’s iconic bat on its tail.

Contact the author: Tyler@twz.com

The U.S. Air Force is in the process of taking back responsibility for the Airborne Command Post (ABNCP) mission, better known by the nickname Looking Glass. ABNCP is a nuclear command and control mission set, which involves relaying orders to nuclear-capable bombers and silo-based Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles. In turn, the service is working up new requirements for future aircraft serving in this role, which are commonly referred to as ‘doomsday planes,’ and one option might be the forthcoming Boeing 747-based E-4C Survivable Airborne Operations Center (SAOC) jets.

Air Force Gen. Stephen Davis, head of Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC), talked about the future of Looking Glass and the E-4C during an exclusive interview with TWZ‘s Howard Altman. The U.S. Navy is separately working to retire its fleet of Boeing 707-based E-6B Mercury jets that currently serve in the Looking Glass role with joint crews that include Air Force personnel. The E-6Bs also perform the Navy’s Take Charge And Move Out (TACAMO) mission, which entails the ability to relay orders to Ohio class nuclear ballistic missile submarines, even if they are submerged. The Navy’s replacement E-130J Phoenix II aircraft will only be configured for the TACAMO mission.

This is Davis’ first interview since taking up his current post last November. He also discussed ongoing work on the B-21 Raider and other areas of interest for his command.

“In terms of the Looking Glass platform, we did get recently assigned, the Air Force did, that mission [and] that will come to Global Strike,” Davis said. “We’re currently developing the capabilities documents, the requirements for that.”

“No decision has been made on if that will be a separate platform, or that might be collocated or brought into the SAOC program,” Davis added. “So, no decision on that at this point.”

The E-4Cs are set to supplant the Air Force’s current fleet of four E-4B Nightwatch aircraft, also known as the National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC). Three of those planes started their careers in the 1970s as E-4A Advanced Airborne Command Posts (AACP) before being upgraded to the E-4B standard. The fourth E-4B was acquired separately in the 1980s. The E-4Bs are all based on the older 747-200 models that have become steadily more difficult to operate and maintain. Boeing shuttered the 747 production line entirely in 2022. As such, the Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) is converting newer 747-8is acquired second-hand from Korean Air into E-4Cs.

The E-4Bs and future E-4Cs are both also described as ‘doomsday planes,’ but are also capable of acting as larger and more robust flying command centers than the E-6Bs.

For the Looking Glass mission, the current E-4Bs do lack a key feature: the Airborne Launch Control System (ALCS). With the ALCS, the E-6Bs can directly command the launch of Minuteman III missiles while in flight. This creates an additional obstacle to any adversary that might seek to prevent the use of these silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles with a first strike targeting ground-based command and control links. It is worth noting here that the main purpose of the Minuteman III force is as a ‘warhead sponge’ that would require an opponent to expend substantial resources on trying to neutralize it in any nuclear exchange.

Witness History: Unarmed ICBM Test Launch – 625th Strategic Operations Squadron

One E-4B was test-fitted with ALCS in the past, at a time when the Air Force envisioned those aircraft taking over the Looking Glass mission from EC-135Cs used in that role at the time. The service subsequently decided it was too expensive to use the NAOCs for that mission. Looking Glass passed to the Navy’s E-6s after the EC-135Cs were retired in the late 1990s.

The prospect now of using the E-4C in this role raises similar cost, as well as capacity questions. As noted, the SAOCs will be configured from the outset as more capable flying command centers for use by top U.S. officials, including the President of the United States. Looking Glass has somewhat similar, but different mission requirements, including when it comes to aircraft that have be available at all times.

All that being said, the SAOC fleet is set to be larger than the NAOC fleet. AFGSC’s Gen. Davis confirmed in the interview that the Air Force is looking to acquire six E-4Cs, at a minimum, and potentially up to eight of the jets. Previously released U.S. Army Corps of Engineers contracting documents had already discussed plans for improvements at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska to accommodate as many as eight SAOC jets. Offutt is currently home to the E-4B and E-6B fleets.

The Air Force could still look to other platforms to perform the Looking Glass mission. Last year, Congress pushed to have the service report back on whether a C-130 Hercules-based design like the one the Navy is now pursuing for TACAMO could be another option. A business jet might be another starting place. It is even possible that part of the mission could migrate in another direction entirely with the help of space-based communications capabilities.

Last month, the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC) announced it would be hosting an industry day for a Looking Glass-Next (LG-N) program to provide information to prospective vendors.

“The LG-N program is aimed at recapitalizing missions currently executed on the E-6B,” according to the notice. “The Government is seeking information on industry’s ability to deliver a complete weapon system to include aircraft, mission systems, training systems, system integration lab, training, and ground support systems.”

Whether or not the E-4Cs end up being part of the LG-N solution, and what other aircraft might serve in this role in the future, remains to be seen. Regardless, the Air Force is now well on its way to taking back control of the Looking Glass mission.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com