TODAY

Discover the latest happenings and stay in the know with our up-to-date today news coverage. From breaking stories and current events to trending topics and insightful analysis, we bring you the most relevant and captivating news of the day.

Microsoft, Nvidia invest in Anthropic in cloud services deal | Technology News

The announcement underscores AI industry’s insatiable appetite for computing power as companies race to build systems that can rival or surpass human intelligence.

Microsoft and Nvidia plan to invest in Anthropic under a new tie-up that includes a $30bn commitment by the Claude maker to use Microsoft’s cloud services, the latest high-profile deal binding together major players in the AI industry.

Nvidia will commit up to $10bn to Anthropic and Microsoft up to $5bn, the companies said on Tuesday, without sharing more details.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

A person familiar with the matter said both the companies have committed to investing in Anthropic’s next funding round.

The announcement underscores the AI industry’s insatiable appetite for computing power as companies race to build systems that can rival or surpass human intelligence. It also ties major OpenAI-backer Microsoft, as well as key AI chip supplier Nvidia, closer to one of the ChatGPT maker’s biggest rivals.

“We’re increasingly going to be customers of each other. We will use Anthropic models, they will use our infrastructure and we’ll go to market together,” Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said in a video. He added that OpenAI “remains a critical partner”.

The move comes weeks after OpenAI unveiled a sweeping restructuring that moved it further away from its non-profit roots, giving it greater operational and financial freedom.

The startup has since then announced a $38bn deal to buy cloud services from Amazon.com as it reduces reliance on Microsoft. Its CEO, Sam Altman, has said OpenAI is committed to spending $1.4 trillion to develop 30 gigawatts of computing resources – enough to roughly power 25 million US homes.

Still, three years after ChatGPT’s debut, investors are increasingly uneasy that the AI boom has outrun fundamentals. Some business leaders have noted that circular deals – in which one partner props up another’s revenue – add to the bubble risk.

“The main feature of the partnership is to reduce the AI economy’s reliance on OpenAI,” D A Davidson analyst Gil Luria said of Tuesday’s announcement.

“Microsoft has decided not to rely on one frontier model company. Nvidia was also somewhat dependent on OpenAI’s success and is now helping generating broader demand.

AI industry consolidating

Founded in 2021 by former OpenAI staff, Anthropic was recently valued at $183bn and has become a major rival to the ChatGPT maker, driven by the strong adoption of its services by enterprise customers.

The Reuters news agency reported last month that Anthropic was projecting to more than double and potentially nearly triple its annualised revenue run rate to around $26bn next year. It has more than 300,000 business and enterprise customers.

As part of Tuesday’s move, Anthropic will work with Nvidia on chips and models to improve performance and commit up to 1 gigawatt of compute using Nvidia’s Grace Blackwell and Vera Rubin hardware. Industry executives estimate that one gigawatt of AI computing can cost between $20bn and $25bn.

Microsoft will also give Azure AI Foundry customers access to the latest Claude models, making Claude the only frontier model offered across all three major cloud providers.

“These investments reflect how the AI industry is consolidating around a few key players,” eMarketer analyst Jacob Bourne said.

Despite the looming deal, Microsoft shares are down 3.2 percent in midday trading. Nvidia is also trading 1.9 percent lower than at the market open, and Amazon has fallen 4 percent. Tech stocks remain under pressure after a cloud services outage earlier on Tuesday. Neither OpenAI nor Anthropic is publicly traded.

Source link

The Ashes 2025: Steven Finn on what it’s like to tour Australia as an England player

In that first Test of 2010 we conceded a first-innings deficit of 211 runs. 35,000 Australians were stamping their feet in the vast concrete stadium baying for English blood in a procession toward another Australian win.

Alastair Cook, Andrew Strauss and Jonathan Trott famously pushed back against the noise to amass 517-1 in our second innings. The Test was drawn, but it felt like we had won.

You could feel the rhetoric towards us change. The people who had taken great joy in telling us we were going to be annihilated were slowly starting to say how they respected the way we had fought back and that they loved seeing the competition.

Planning is important, but so is living in the moment. Too many times England teams have gone to Australia with pre-conceived ideas about the conditions they are going to face.

Being able to read the conditions and adapt is crucial. At the Melbourne Cricket Ground in 2010, David Saker, the England bowling coach, had absolute conviction bowling first was the way to win the Test.

We bowled Australia out for 98 and won by an innings. Being bold with decision-making will serve England well.

Finally, luck is also a huge part of being successful in Australia.

In 2010 Australia didn’t have a set spinner, there were question marks around the great Ricky Ponting coming towards the end of his career and uncertainty about the seam bowlers.

Australia picked a 17-man squad for the first Test, more players than we had for the entire three-month tour to the country. Catching Australia in a period of transition can be critical.

On this occasion, injuries to Pat Cummins and Josh Hazlewood have given England an opportunity to face an Australia team with the cracks maybe just starting to show for the first time since 2010.

There are many challenges that come with playing in an away Ashes series, on and off the field.

The stars may just be aligning for England to have a real crack at winning in Australia for the first time in 15 years.

Source link

F-22 Pilot Controls MQ-20 Drone From The Cockpit In Mock Combat Mission

An MQ-20 Avenger drone flew a mock mission at the direction of a pilot in an F-22 Raptor during a demonstration earlier this year, General Atomics has disclosed. The company says this is part of a larger effort to lay the groundwork for crewed-uncrewed teaming between F-22s and Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) drones. General Atomics and Anduril are currently developing CCA designs for the U.S. Air Force, and that service expects the Raptor to be the first airborne controller for whichever types it decides to buy in the future.

General Atomics made its announcement about the MQ-20/F-22 teaming demonstration today, around the opening of the biennial Dubai Airshow, at which TWZ is in attendance. The actual event, which the company internally funded, took place back in October in the skies over the U.S. Air Force’s sprawling Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR). Lockheed Martin, the prime contractor for the F-22, and L3Harris also took part.

A stock picture of a General Atomic Avenger drone. General Atomics

“We recently teamed Avenger with a badass fighter jet for a true airborne, crewed-uncrewed internal demo, where the human pilot commanded the autonomous Avenger from the cockpit for a hypothetical mission,” C. Mark Brinkley, a spokesperson for General Atomics, told TWZ. The “MQ-20 Avenger continues to serve as an autonomy accelerator, routinely flying in a CCA configuration, pushing the envelope.”

“The [crewed-uncrewed teaming demonstration] effort integrated L3Harris’ BANSHEE Advanced Tactical Datalinks with its Pantera software-defined radios (SDRs) via Lockheed Martin’s open radio architectures, all integrated and shared from an F-22 Raptor,” according to a General Atomics press release. “Two L3Harris Software‑Defined Radios (SDRs) supported the demonstration. The first SDR was installed into the General Atomics MQ‑20 Avenger, and the second was integrated in the Lockheed Martin F‑22 Raptor.”

A composite image highlighting the integration of the BANSHEE datalink, at far lower left, and a Pantera-series radio, onto the Avenger drone. L3Harris

“Through the Pilot Vehicle Interface (PVI) tablet and the F‑22’s GRACE module, the system provided end‑to‑end communications, enabling the F‑22 command and control of the MQ‑20 in flight,” the release adds. “The collaborative demonstration showcased non-proprietary, U.S. government-owned communications capabilities and the ability to fly, transition, and re-fly flight hardware that is core to the Open Mission Systems and skills based unmanned autonomy ecosystem.”

The “GRACE” mentioned here refers to the Government Reference Architecture Compute Environment. This is a previously announced open-architecture systems module for the F-22 that is designed to make it easier to integrate new software packages onto the aircraft, including ones to support the airborne drone controller role.

The explicit mention of a tablet-based in-cockpit control interface is also worth highlighting. General Atomics and Lockheed Martin have both been working for years now on control systems to allow crewed aircraft to direct drones in flight, with tablet-like devices being the typical user interface. However, both companies have themselves raised questions to varying degrees about the long-term viability of that arrangement, especially for pilots in single-seat fighters, who already have substantial workloads during real-world missions.

“We started with [the Air Force’s] Air Combat Command with tablets … There was this idea that they wanted to have this discreet control,” Michael Atwood, vice president of Advanced Programs for General Atomics, said during an appearance on The Merge podcast last year. “I got to fly in one of these jets with a tablet. And it was really hard to fly the airplane, let alone the weapon system of my primary airplane, and spatially and temporally think about this other thing.”

An image General Atomics released in the past of a tablet-like device being used to control drones in mid-air. General Atomics

“There’s a lot of opinions amongst the Air Force about the right way to go [about controlling drones from other aircraft],” John Clark, then-head of Lockheed Martin’s famed Skunk Works advanced projects division, had also told TWZ and others at Air & Space Forces Association’s (AFA) main annual conference in September 2024. “The universal thought, though, is that this [a tablet or other touch-based interface] may be the fastest way to begin experimentation. It may not be the end state.”

A view from the backseat of an L-39 Albatros light jet being used as a drone controller in a past Skunk Works test. Note the touch-screen type user interface. Lockheed Martin

These are the kind of questions that demonstrations like the one General Atomics conducted in October over the NTTR could help answer. As TWZ regularly notes, there is still much to be worked out when it comes to how future CCA fleets are structured, as well as how they are deployed, launched, recovered, supported, and otherwise operated, let alone employed tactically.

“General Atomics is in a pretty unique situation here, given that we already have operational uncrewed jets to use for experimentation,” Brinkley, the General Atomics spokesperson, told TWZ. “The MQ-20 Avenger, tricked out with mature mission autonomy software, is a perfect CCA surrogate and allows us to move fast and move first.”

It’s important to stress here that Avenger drones have been heavily utilized as testbeds for advanced autonomy and other developments related to CCA-type uncrewed aircraft for years now. The jet-powered drones have some low observable (stealthy) features, as well as an internal payload bay. Much of this work has been in cooperation with the U.S. Navy, as well as the U.S. Air Force. How much crewed-uncrewed teaming testing involving the F-22 and the MQ-20, or other surrogates, may have already been done in the classified realm is unknown.

Another stock picture of an Avenger drone. The example seen here has a Lockheed Martin Legion Pod with an infrared search and track (IRST) sensor installed under its right wing. General Atomics

“We’re leaning forward, because we already know where this is headed,” Brinkley added. “We don’t want to wait for the CCA fleet to be fielded to begin leaning in on F-22 teaming. We already know the F-22 will play a critical role in crewed-uncrewed teaming operations, and General Atomics is in a unique position to get started now.”

As mentioned, the F-22 is slated to be the U.S. Air Force’s first airborne CCA controller, something the service revealed this past summer in its 2026 Fiscal Year budget request. This was further confirmed in an unclassified Air Force report to Congress in October, which otherwise outlined a highly aspirational 10-year plan for the service’s fighter fleets that puts significant emphasis on CCAs.

“F-22 remains the threshold platform for CCA but integration with F-16, F-35A, F-15E, and F-15EX is an emerging consideration,” according to that report. “Ultimately, CCA will be paired with [the sixth-generation] F-47 to meet highly contested mission demands.”

A graphic the Air Force released earlier this year with details about its current and future fighter fleets, the two CCA designs now in development. USAF

“America’s adversaries are countering US air power with greater mass and a challenging air defense laydown that limits the United States’ ability to project combat power in traditional ways,” the report adds. “CCAs allow for risk-tolerant aircraft at a lower price point and serve as a force multiplier.”

A more detailed rundown of the benefits the Air Force expects to see from future CCA fleets from the fighter force structure report submitted to Congress in October. USAF

The fighter force structure report also says that details about exactly how many CCAs the Air Force currently plans to buy and across what timeline are currently classified. Air Force officials have said in the past that between 100 and 150 drones will be ordered under the CCA program’s first phase, or Increment 1, with hundreds more expected through future incremental development cycles. Whether the service plans to down-select to a single type or buy multiple designs for the first tranche remains unclear. As mentioned, General Atomics and Anduril are currently developing drones for Increment 1, which are now designated the YFQ-42A and YFQ-44A, respectively. General Atomics announced that the YFQ-42A had made its first flight in August. The YFQ-44A took to the skies for the first time last month. The goal is for operational Increment 1 CCAs to begin entering service around the end of the decade.

General Atomics’ YFQ-42A in flight. GA-ASI
Anduril’s YFQ-44A seen during its first flight. Anduril Courtesy Photo via USAF

CCA drone developments are not limited to the U.S. Air Force, either. The U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Navy have their own CCA efforts ongoing. All three services are directly collaborating on common control architectures and other elements. General Atomics is also one of several companies now developing conceptual CCA designs for the Navy. The company is now actively pursuing foreign sales of drones in this general category, leveraging its Gambit family of highly modular designs, as well. Other companies in the United States and elsewhere globally are eyeing steadily growing opportunities in this market space, too.

“There are companies all over the world making big promises while they figure all of this out for the first time. How to build an airplane, how to incorporate autonomy, how to team that with manned aircraft,” General Atomics spokesperson Brinkley told us. “We’ve been putting our own money into uncrewed jets for 17 years. This [the MQ-20/F-22 demonstration] is just one more milestone in a long history of leaning forward. We’re not out here saying ‘I think I can, I think I can.’ We know we can.”

With the F-22 set to be the Air Force’s first airborne CCA controller, work to continue proving out the Raptor’s crewed-uncrewed teaming capabilities will be especially important.

Update, 1:45 PM EST:

Lockheed Martin has now provided its own remarks regarding the MQ-20/F-22 teaming demonstration.

“Lockheed Martin Skunk Works led and orchestrated this crewed-uncrewed teaming flight test with GA-ASI [General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc.] and L3Harris. This demonstration involved an F-22 Raptor, an MQ-20, and Skunk Works’ flexible and hardware-agnostic pilot vehicle interface to showcase capabilities critical to the U.S. Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft family of systems,” the company told TWZ. “Lockheed Martin’s phased approach to building, testing, and improving teaming capabilities is at the forefront of innovation, developing the future of air combat today.”

“This effort represents Skunk Works bringing its diverse and unique expertise to the table to lead the way, demonstrating the future of air combat, where single-seat aircraft command and control drones with simple and intuitive interfaces in the cockpit,” O.J. Sanchez, Lockheed Martin Vice President and General Manager of Skunk Works, also said in a statement to TWZ.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Joseph has been a member of The War Zone team since early 2017. Prior to that, he was an Associate Editor at War Is Boring, and his byline has appeared in other publications, including Small Arms Review, Small Arms Defense Journal, Reuters, We Are the Mighty, and Task & Purpose.


Source link

Trump Hosts Saudi Crown Prince on a Visit Centered on Deals and Display

President Donald Trump is set to welcome Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia at the White House, emphasizing the rehabilitation of the crown prince’s global standing after the controversial assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, and the strengthening of U.S.-Saudi relations. This visit marks bin Salman’s first return to the White House in over seven years, and he will experience a grand ceremonial reception orchestrated by Trump. The discussions are anticipated to enhance security cooperation, promote civil nuclear collaboration, and explore substantial business opportunities, including issues around a $600 billion investment commitment made during Trump’s earlier visit to Saudi Arabia.

However, despite these discussions, major advancements in Saudi Arabia’s normalization of relations with Israel are not expected. This meeting highlights the critical partnership between the U.S., the world’s largest economy, and Saudi Arabia, the leading oil producer, a relationship that has become a focal point for Trump during his presidency, particularly as the international outrage related to Khashoggi’s murder has diminished over time. While U.S. intelligence indicates that bin Salman sanctioned Khashoggi’s assassination, he has publicly distanced himself from the act, accepting accountability only in his capacity as leader.

The agenda includes strategic talks at the White House, a lunch in the Cabinet Room, and a formal black-tie dinner. Notably, Trump has indicated plans to approve the sale of F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, a significant policy adjustment that would be the first U.S. sale of these aircraft to the nation, potentially shifting the military dynamics in the region. Alongside military discussions, Saudi Arabia seeks new security guarantees, with expectations of an executive order from Trump forming a defense pact similar to that offered to Qatar, but less comprehensive than a NATO-style treaty.

Experts express that Trump is keen to forge a diversified partnership that secures Saudi Arabia’s alignment away from China’s influence, thereby deepening cooperation across security, finance, and technology sectors. Additionally, Trump is likely to push for Saudi involvement in the Abraham Accords to normalize relations with Israel, a notion the Saudis are hesitant to embrace without clear advancements towards Palestinian statehood amid current regional conflicts.

The overarching goal for Trump regards solidifying a broader Middle East peace arrangement through Saudi participation in the Accords, which represent a crucial geopolitical pivot. While pressure on bin Salman regarding normalization with Israel is expected, analysts believe that a U.S.-Saudi security agreement could still be established independently of significant progress on this front. Overall, the visit aims to reaffirm the longstanding U.S.-Saudi alliance while navigating the complex regional context.

With information from Reuters

Source link

Trump’s war on South Africa betrays a sinister threat | Opinions

When US President Donald Trump declared that South Africa “should not even be” in the G20 and then took to Truth Social on November 7 to announce that no American official would attend this year’s summit in Johannesburg on account of a so-called “genocide” of white farmers in the country, I was not surprised. His outburst was not an exception but the latest expression of a long Western tradition of disciplining African sovereignty. Western leaders have long tried to shut down African agency through mischaracterisations, from branding Congolese nationalist Patrice Lumumba a “Soviet puppet” to calling anti-apartheid leader Nelson Mandela a “terrorist”, and Trump’s assault on South Africa falls squarely into that pattern.

As Africa pushes for a stronger voice in global governance, the Trump administration has intensified efforts to isolate Pretoria. South Africa’s growing diplomatic assertiveness, from BRICS expansion to climate finance negotiations, has challenged conservative assumptions that global leadership belongs exclusively to the West.

On February 7, Trump signed an executive order halting US aid to South Africa. He alleged that the government’s land expropriation policy discriminates against white farmers and amounts to uncompensated confiscation. Nothing could be further from the truth. South African law permits expropriation only through due process and compensation, with limited exceptions set out in the Constitution. Trump’s claims ignore this legal reality, revealing a deliberate preference for distortion over fact.

Soon after, the administration amplified its rollout of a refugee admissions policy that privileged Afrikaners, citing once again discredited claims of government persecution. What is clear is that Washington has deliberately heightened tensions with Pretoria, searching for any pretext to cast South Africa as an adversary. This selective compassion, extended only to white South Africans, exposes a racialised hierarchy of concern that has long shaped conservative engagement with the continent.

Yet, for months, South African officials have firmly rejected these claims, pointing to judicial rulings, official statistics, and constitutional safeguards that show no evidence of systematic persecution, let alone a “genocide” of white farmers. Indeed, as independent experts repeatedly confirmed, there is no credible evidence whatsoever to support the claim that white farmers in South Africa are being systematically targeted as part of a campaign of genocide. Their rebuttals highlight a basic imbalance: Pretoria is operating through verifiable data and institutional process, while Washington relies on exaggeration and ideological grievance.

At the same time, as host of this year’s G20 Summit, Pretoria is using the platform to champion a more cooperative and equitable global order. For South Africa, chairing the G20 is not only symbolic, but strategic, an attempt to expand the influence of countries long excluded from shaping the rules of global governance.

Trump’s G20 boycott embodies a transnational crusade shaped by Christian righteousness. Trump’s rhetoric reduces South Africa to a moral backdrop for American authority rather than recognising it as a sovereign partner with legitimate aspirations. The boycott also mirrors a wider effort to discredit multilateral institutions that dilute American exceptionalism.

This stance is rooted in a long evangelical-imperial tradition, one that fused theology with empire and cast Western dominance as divinely sanctioned. The belief that Africa required Western moral rescue emerged in the nineteenth century, when European missionaries declared it a Christian duty to civilise and redeem the continent. The wording has changed, but the logic endures, recasting African political agency as a civilisational error rather than a legitimate expression of sovereignty. This moralised paternalism did not disappear with decolonisation. It simply adapted, resurfacing whenever African nations assert themselves on the world stage.

American evangelical and conservative Christian networks wield significant influence inside the Republican Party. Their political and media ecosystem, featuring Fox News and the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), routinely frames multilateral institutions, global aid, and international law as subordinate to American sovereignty and Christian civilisation. These networks shape not only rhetoric but policy, turning fringe narratives into foreign policy priorities.

They also amplify unproven claims of Christian persecution abroad, particularly in countries such as Nigeria and Ethiopia, to legitimise American political and military interference. Trump’s fixation with South Africa follows the same script: a fabricated crisis crafted to thrill, galvanise, and reassure a conservative Christian base. South Africa becomes another stage for this performance.

In this distorted narrative, South Africa is not a constitutional democracy acting through strong, independent courts and institutions. Instead, Africa’s most developed country is stripped of its standing and portrayed as a flawed civilisation in need of Western correction. For conservative Christian nationalists, African decision-making is not autonomous agency but a supervised privilege granted only when African decisions align with Western priorities.

By casting South Africa as illegitimate in the G20, invoking false claims of genocide and land seizures, and penalising Pretoria’s ICJ case with aid cuts, Trump asserts that only the West can define global legitimacy and moral authority, a worldview anchored in Christian-nationalist authority. Trump’s crusade is punishment, not principle, and it seeks to deter African autonomy itself.

On many occasions, I have walked the streets of Alexandra, a Johannesburg township shaped by apartheid’s spatial design, where inequality remains brutally vivid. Alexandra squeezes more than one million residents into barely 800 hectares (about 2,000 acres). A significant portion of its informal housing sits on the floodplain of the Jukskei River, where settlements crowd narrow pathways and fragile infrastructure. Here, the consequences of structural inequality are unmistakable, yet they vanish entirely within Trump’s constructed crisis.

These communities sit only a few kilometres from Sandton, a spacious, leafy, and affluent suburb that is home to some of the country’s most expensive properties. The vast and entrenched gulf between these adjacent lands is essentially a living symbol of the profound inequality Trump is willing to overlook and legitimise as a global norm, built on selective moral outrage and racialised indifference.

In Alexandra, the struggle for dignity, equality, and inclusion is not a religious American fantasy, but a practical quest for the rights that apartheid and wider global injustice sought to deny. Their struggle mirrors the wider global fight against structures that concentrate wealth and power in a few hands. They, too, deserve better.

This is the human condition Trump’s pseudo-morality refuses to acknowledge. This is why South Africa’s global leadership matters.

Earlier this year, South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa commissioned a landmark G20 Global Inequality Report, chaired by Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz. It found that the world’s richest 1 percent have captured more than 40 percent of new wealth since 2000 and that more than 80 percent of humanity now lives in conditions the World Bank classifies as high inequality.

The Johannesburg G20 Summit seeks to reform multilateral development banks, such as the World Bank, to confront a global financial system that sidelines developing countries and perpetuates economic injustice. While South Africa turns to recognised multilateral tools such as the ICJ and G20 reform, the US has moved in the opposite direction.

Under Trump, Washington has sanctioned the International Criminal Court, abandoned key UN bodies, and rejected scrutiny from UN human rights experts, reflecting a Christian-nationalist doctrine that treats American power as inherently absolute and answerable to no one.

South Africa offers an alternative vision rooted in global cooperation, shared responsibility, equality, and adherence to international law, a vision that unsettles those invested in unilateral power. The US recasts decolonisation as sin, African equality as disruption, and American dominance as divinely ordained. Trump’s attacks reveal how deeply this worldview still shapes American foreign policy.

Yet the world has moved beyond colonial binaries. African self-determination can no longer be framed as immoral. Human rights are universal, and dignity belongs to us all.

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

Source link

What is the international stabilisation force for Gaza? | Explainer News

On Monday, the UN Security Council passed a US-sponsored resolution which backs US President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan for ending Israel’s war on Gaza.

Among the clauses was one that supported the creation and deployment of an international stabilisation force (ISF) to provide security and oversight of the ceasefire agreement in Gaza.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

In theory, this security body will work with Israel and Egypt to “demilitarise” the Gaza Strip and will reportedly train a Palestinian police force.

Despite the passing of a resolution that “acknowledges the parties have accepted” the Trump plan, Israeli air strikes on Gaza continued, including on areas on the Palestinian side of the yellow line.

So what is the ISF, and what does it mean for Gaza? Here’s what you need to know:

What is the ISF?

The ISF is envisioned as a multinational force that would deploy to Gaza to help train police, secure the borders, maintain security by helping demilitarise Gaza, protect civilians and humanitarian operations, including securing humanitarian corridors, among “additional tasks as may be necessary in support of the Comprehensive Plan”.

Essentially, the force would take over many of the security responsibilities that have been managed by Hamas over the last 19 years.

Since 2006, Hamas has been in charge of governing the Gaza Strip, including managing its social and security services.

Trump’s Comprehensive Plan was formulated with no input from Palestinian parties.

Who makes up the force?

That is still unclear, though under the resolution, the forces will work with Israel and Egypt and a newly trained Palestinian police force that will not be under Hamas or the Palestinian Authority.

A senior adviser to Trump said Azerbaijan and Indonesia had offered to send troops.

He also said Egypt, Qatar and the UAE were in talks about contributing, though a senior Emirati official, Anwar Gargash, said his country would not participate. Reports have said Egypt could lead the force.

In October, Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said his country was ready to provide support to Gaza.

But as tensions have heated up between Turkiye and Israel, the latter’s Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said Israel would not agree to Turkish troops on the ground in Gaza.

And how did the vote go?

It passed with a 13-0 vote.

But Russia and China abstained, expressing concern over the lack of Palestinian participation in the force and the lack of a clear role for the UN in the future of Gaza.

Russia had earlier proposed its own resolution that was “inspired by the US draft”.

Russia’s version requests that the UN secretary-general be involved in identifying potential options to participate in the international stabilisation force for Gaza.

It did not mention Trump’s so-called “board of peace” that would act as a transitional administration in Gaza.

What was Hamas’s response?

They rejected the resolution. The group released a statement on social messaging app Telegram, saying the vote “imposes an international guardianship mechanism on the Gaza Strip”.

Under Trump’s plan, Hamas would have no role in Gaza and would be disarmed, with its personnel offered two options: either commit to coexistence or be granted safe passage out of Gaza.

Hamas has repeatedly said it would give up governance but is not willing to give up its arms.

For his part, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, recently that the war “has not ended” and that Hamas would be disarmed.

What did Israel say?

Israel focused on the disarmament of Hamas, with its UN envoy Danny Danon saying his country would “demonstrate … determination in ensuring that Hamas is disarmed”.

In Israel, the resolution led at least one opposition party to lambast Netanyahu’s government.

“What happened tonight at the UN is a result of the Israeli government’s failed conduct,” Avigdor Lieberman, an ultranationalist politician who leads the Yisrael Beytenu party, wrote on X.

“The decision led to a Palestinian state, a Saudi nuclear [programme] and F-35 planes for Turkey and Saudi Arabia.”

Source link

MI5 warns MPs and peers over risk of Chinese espionage

BBC 'Breaking' graphicBBC

MPs and members of the House of Lords have been warned by MI5 that they face a significant risk of espionage from the Chinese state.

Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle and his counterpart in the House of Lords, Lord McFall, have circulated a new “espionage alert” issued by the security services.

Writing to MPs, Sir Lindsay said Chinese state actors were “relentless” in trying to “interfere with our processes and influence activity at Parliament”.

He said the Chinese Ministry of State Security was “actively reaching out to individuals in our community”, and that they wanted to “collect information and lay the groundwork for long-term relationships, using professional networking sites, recruitment agents and consultants acting on their behalf”.

Security Minister Dan Jarvis will address the House of Commons later on measures the government is taking to combat Chinese espionage.

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

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

Source link

Pressure On Maduro Cranked Up As USS Gerald R. Ford Arrives In Caribbean

The world’s largest aircraft carrier and its dozens of fighter aircraft are now in the Caribbean Sea, joining the largest U.S. military buildup in the region since the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. Meanwhile, the State Department announced Sunday that it plans to designate the drug cartel allegedly headed by Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) on Nov. 24, widening the aperture for potential military actions. These moves are the latest escalation of pressure on the South American leader, as the world awaits U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision on what, if any, further military actions he will take.

Sunday night, Trump appeared to offer a carrot to Maduro, saying he would be willing to open up a dialogue with the embattled Venezuelan leader.

“We may be having some discussions with Maduro,” Trump told reporters before boarding Air Force One in West Palm Beach. “They would like to talk… I talk to everybody.”

President Donald Trump said he is open to speaking to Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro amid rising tension with the country. This follows another deadly U.S. strike over the weekend. pic.twitter.com/zuvonOHbtJ

— USA TODAY Politics (@usatodayDC) November 17, 2025

Trump did not elaborate; however, in private, he has talked to aides about Venezuela’s huge oil reserves, estimated at 300 billion barrels, the largest in the world, The New York Times claimed in a recent article. Trump has reportedly had an offer from Maduro that would give the U.S. rights to much of that oil in return for forestalling military action. While the American president called off those talks, a senior administration official told the Times that they were not entirely dead. The deployment of the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford and three of its escort ships, the official added, was a means to gain leverage over Maduro.

The U.S. Navy’s Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group, including the flagship USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), left, USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG 81), front, USS Mahan (DDG 72), back, USS Bainbridge (DDG 96), and embarked Carrier Air Wing Eight F/A-18E/F Super Hornets assigned to Strike Fighter Squadrons 31, 37, 87, and 213, operates as a joint, multi-domain force with a U.S. Air Force B-52 Stratofortress, Nov. 13, 2025. U.S. military forces, like the Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group, are deployed in support of the U.S. Southern Command mission, Department of War-directed operations, and the President’s priorities to disrupt illicit drug trafficking and protect the homeland.
The U.S. Navy’s Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group, including the flagship USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), left, USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG 81), front, USS Mahan (DDG 72), back, USS Bainbridge (DDG 96), is now in the Caribbean, the Navy announced on Sunday. (Petty Officer 3rd Class Tajh Payne) Petty Officer 3rd Class Tajh Payne

Trump on Sunday added that while he will notify Congress about what he will ultimately decide, he doesn’t need their permission to strike Venezuela.

“We’re stopping drugs from coming into our country,” the U.S. president continued. “I told [Secretary of State] Marco [Rubio]  – go to Congress and let them know we’re not letting drugs come through Mexico, we’re not letting them come through Venezuela, and let Congress know about it. We don’t have to get their approval. But I think letting them know is good. The only thing I don’t want them to do is leak information… and they put our military at risk.” 

On Sunday, the administration also announced two major sticks it could use against Maduro.

The Ford and its escorts – the Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyers USS Bainbridge, USS Mahan, and USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG 81) – arrived in the Caribbean, according to a Navy release. A U.S. official told The War Zone on Monday that the aircraft carrier was in the vicinity of Puerto Rico, which puts it roughly 700 miles north of the Venezuelan capital of Caracas and the epicenter of the military buildup in the region.

The Ford brings with it a great deal of additional capability to the newly named Joint Task Force Southern Spear, the enhanced counter-narcotics operation for which these forces have ostensibly been gathered. There are four squadrons of F/A-18 Super Hornets, a squadron of E/A-18 Growler electronic warfare jets, a squadron of E-2D Advanced Hawkeye airborne command and control aircraft, MH-60S and MH-60R Seahawk helicopters and a detachment of C-2A Greyhound carrier onboard delivery planes.

From front to back, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), Royal Moroccan Navy FREMM multipurpose frigate Mohammed VI (701), and Military Sealift Command fast combat support ship USNS Supply (T-AOE 6), steam in formation while transiting the Strait of Gibraltar, Oct. 1, 2025. Gerald R. Ford, a first-in-class aircraft carrier and deployed flagship of Carrier Strike Group Twelve, is on a scheduled deployment in the U.S. 6th Fleet area of operations to support the warfighting effectiveness, lethality and readiness of U.S. Naval Forces Europe-Africa, and defend U.S., Allied and partner interests in the region. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Apprentice Alyssa Joy)
The Ford brings with it dozens of tactical aircraft in nine squadrons. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Apprentice Alyssa Joy) Seaman Alyssa Joy

There were already seven Navy surface warships plus support vessels, a special operations mothership and aircraft, including F-35B stealth fighters, MQ-9 Reaper drones, P-8 wartime patrol aircraft, AC-130 Ghostrider gunships and about 15,000 U.S. personnel deployed to the region. Beyond that, there are “site surveys ongoing to see if even more military assets should be sent to the region,” a U.S. official told The War Zone on Nov. 7.

A U.S. Marine with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 225, U.S. Marine Corps Forces, South, guides a U.S. Marine Corps F-35B Lightning II assigned to VMFA-225 after its landing at Jose Aponte de la Torre Airport, Puerto Rico, Sep. 22, 2025. U.S. military forces are deployed to the Caribbean in support of the U.S. Southern Command mission, Department of War-directed operations, and the president’s priorities. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Michael Gavin)
A U.S. Marine with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 225, U.S. Marine Corps Forces, South, guides a U.S. Marine Corps F-35B Lightning II assigned to VMFA-225 after its landing at the former Roosevelt Roads Navy base, now Jose Aponte de la Torre Airport, Puerto Rico. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Michael Gavin) Lance Cpl. Michael Gavin

As the Navy highlighted that the Ford had crossed into the Caribbean, Rubio on Sunday announced that he “intends to designate Cartel de los Soles as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), effective November 24, 2025.”

“Based in Venezuela, the Cartel de los Soles is headed by Nicolás Maduro and other high-ranking individuals of the illegitimate Maduro regime who have corrupted Venezuela’s military, intelligence, legislature, and judiciary,” according to a State Department release. “Neither Maduro nor his cronies represent Venezuela’s legitimate government. Cartel de los Soles by and with other designated FTOs including Tren de Aragua and the Sinaloa Cartel are responsible for terrorist violence throughout our hemisphere as well as for trafficking drugs into the United States and Europe.”

.@StateDept intends to designate Cartel de los Soles as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO). Headed by the illegitimate Nicolás Maduro, the group has corrupted the institutions of government in Venezuela and is responsible for terrorist violence conducted by and with other…

— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) November 16, 2025

Venezuelan political circles see the State Department’s move “as an ultimatum: a final window for Maduro to negotiate his exit or face what many see as the most serious U.S. threat to his rule to date,” The Miami Herald reported, “as the U.S. deploys the largest concentration of military assets in the Caribbean in decades.”

Trump on Sunday said designating Cartel de los Soles as a foreign terrorist organization allows the U.S. military authority to target Maduro’s assets and infrastructure inside Venezuela.

“It allows us to do that, but we haven’t said we’re going to do that,” Trump explained. 

ÚLTIMA HORA | Trump dice que designación del Cartel de los Soles “permite” que Washington ataque los activos de Maduro en Venezuela.

“Nos permite hacer eso, pero no hemos dicho que vamos a hacer eso, y podríamos discutir (con Venezuela)”, aseguró. https://t.co/qgzJv2atKC pic.twitter.com/j6zeVpWIDp

— AlbertoRodNews (@AlbertoRodNews) November 17, 2025

U.S. Rep. Carlos A. Gimenez, a Republican from Miami and fierce Maduro critic, lauded the State Department action.

“Remember that by designating the Cartel of the Suns as a foreign terrorist organization, it allows us to attack them militarily within the framework of U.S. law,” he stated on X. “Then they can’t say they weren’t warned. It’s almost over.”

🚨#SOSVenezuela Acuérdense que al designar al Cartel de los Soles como una organización terrorista extranjera, nos permite atacarlos militarmente dentro del marco legal estadounidense.

Luego que no digan que no se les avisó.

Queda poco.

— Rep. Carlos A. Gimenez (@RepCarlos) November 17, 2025

While he said on Friday that he “sorta made up my mind” on what to do about Maduro, Trump appeared noncommittal on Sunday.

So far, U.S. kinetic actions against the cartels have been limited to strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats. On Nov. 15, the U.S. carried out the 22nd known attack, which combined have killed at least 80 people. The majority of those strikes were carried out by the MQ-9s and some by the AC-130 Ghostriders, as we have noted.

These attacks, however, have been criticized for being extrajudicial strikes without Congressional authorization. The administration has justified the strikes by declaring drug cartels to be “unlawful combatants,” and Trump has claimed, without proof, that each sunken boat has saved 25,000 American lives, presumably from overdoses. 

On Nov. 15, at the direction of Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Joint Task Force Southern Spear conducted a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization. Intelligence confirmed that the vessel was involved in illicit narcotics smuggling,… pic.twitter.com/iM1PhIsroj

— U.S. Southern Command (@Southcom) November 16, 2025

If expanded strikes on land targets occur after the November 24th horizon, they could be limited to strictly cartel and drug production target sets that do not include state facilities. These could include labs, logistical nodes, such as port facilities, and cartel personnel. Striking military installations and other state infrastructure that the U.S. believes actively facilitate the drug trade would be a further escalation. Going directly after the Maduro regime and its military capabilities as a whole would be the farthest rung up the escalation ladder.

For his part, Maduro seems to be wavering between acquiescence and bravado.

On Nov. 15, Maduro sang John Lennon’s iconic peace anthem “Imagine” during a rally with supporters. Maduro urged calm, repeating “Peace, peace, peace” while government officials made peace signs on stage.

However, at the same rally, Maduro showed defiance, essentially telling the Trump administration to mind its own business.

“The U.S. wants to rule the world but ignores its own millions without housing, food, education, or battling addiction,” the Venezuelan strong man proclaimed. “They want to ‘save’ others with weapons. First, save yourselves; we know what to do with Venezuela.”

Venezuelan President Maduro:

The U.S. wants to rule the world but ignores its own millions without housing, food, education, or battling addiction.

They want to “save” others with weapons.

First save yourselves; we know what to do with Venezuela. pic.twitter.com/ml1CoNfCeN

— Open Source Intel (@Osint613) November 16, 2025

What will happen next is anyone’s guess. By law, Congress has seven days to review the State Department’s designation of Cartel de los Soles as an FTO. However, as we noted earlier in this story, Trump has hinted that he doesn’t need Congressional approval to attack Venezuela. In addition, it should be noted that Trump’s reported suggestions that potential adversaries want to talk are not necessarily a sign of impending calm.

On June 15, during the crisis about Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions, Trump said Iran would “like to make a deal. They’re talking. They continue to talk,” adding that there was “no deadline” on the talks. Just six days later, the U.S. attacked three Iranian nuclear facilities in an operation dubbed Midnight Hammer.

As tensions in the Caribbean continue to simmer, we will provide updates when warranted.

Update 3:46 PM Eastern –

Speaking to reporters at the White House Monday afternoon, Trump was asked if he has ruled out putting U.S. troops in Venezuela.

“No, I don’t rule out that,” he answered. “I don’t rule out anything.”

Contact the author: [email protected]

Howard is a Senior Staff Writer for The War Zone, and a former Senior Managing Editor for Military Times. Prior to this, he covered military affairs for the Tampa Bay Times as a Senior Writer. Howard’s work has appeared in various publications including Yahoo News, RealClearDefense, and Air Force Times.




Source link

UN Endorses Trump’s Gaza Plan, Greenlights International Force

The UN Security Council adopted a U.S.-drafted resolution endorsing President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza, which includes a ceasefire, hostage-release deal, and the creation of an international stabilization force. The resolution aims to legitimize a transitional governance body, known as the Board of Peace, that would oversee reconstruction, economic recovery, and demilitarization efforts in the Palestinian enclave. Israel and Hamas agreed to the plan’s first phase last month, but Hamas has rejected disarmament, raising concerns about potential clashes with the international force.

Why It Matters

The resolution represents a significant step in stabilizing Gaza after years of conflict, offering a framework for reconstruction and a potential pathway to Palestinian self-determination. For the U.S., it is a diplomatic milestone showcasing leadership in Middle East peace efforts. For Israel and Hamas, the resolution intensifies scrutiny over control, security, and political authority in the region. It also highlights the influence of major powers at the UN, as Russia and China abstained rather than vetoing, signaling cautious acceptance despite reservations.

Key stakeholders include the Palestinian Authority, which welcomed the resolution and pledged cooperation; Hamas, which rejects disarmament; Israel, which opposes the recognition of Palestinian statehood and remains focused on security concerns; and the international community, including countries potentially contributing troops to the stabilization force. The U.S. plays a central role in steering the plan, while UN diplomats monitor compliance and oversee the legitimacy of the governance and stabilization mechanisms.

What’s Next

Implementation of the Board of Peace and the international stabilization force will be closely watched in the coming weeks, with announcements expected on participating countries and operational details. The success of the plan depends on Hamas’ cooperation, reconstruction progress, and adherence to the demilitarization agenda. Diplomatic tensions are likely to continue as Israel balances internal political pressure with compliance, while the Palestinian Authority works to advance reforms and rebuild Gaza under international oversight.

With information from Reuters.

Source link

Hundreds of hospice beds unused amid financial crisis

Some 380 hospice beds out of around 2,000 lie empty in England because of financial pressures, say bosses.

Hospice UK has told BBC News this is up from 300 a year ago and illustrates the severe challenges facing the sector.

Beds are left empty to save money – since staffing and caring is costly – and so are unavailable to patients.

Hospices are run by charities, raising between two-thirds and three-quarters of their income from donations and private fund raising. They depend on the rest from the NHS, and managers say this funding has not kept pace with costs, such as employer national insurance.

Hospice leaders say their organisations are “on the brink of a financial crisis”.

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said the government had already invested £100 million to improve hospice facilities and had committed £80 million for children’s and young people’s hospices over three years.

“We recognise there is more to do and we are exploring how we can improve the access, quality and sustainability of all-age palliative care and end of life care in line with the 10-Year Health Plan,” a spokesman added.

Hospice UK says five of its members have announced “cost reductions” or cutbacks since early October. In some cases job losses are being made.

One of them is Ashgate Hospice in Derbyshire which has warned staff that 52 are at risk of redundancy. Bed numbers are also being reduced – from 15 to six – and the proposals would mean 600 fewer patients being cared for each year.

The hospice has blamed energy bills and rising staff salaries with NHS funding not matching the increases.

Meanwhile, Arthur Rank Hospice in Cambridge says a cut in NHS funding will mean inpatient beds being reduced from 21 to 12 – what it described as “a devastating decision”.

Garden House Hospice Care in Hertfordshire has announced what it calls “the most serious financial challenge in its history” and has launched a consultation process which may lead to more than 20 redundancies.

Charlie King, director of external affairs at Hospice UK, said: “The financial situation facing hospices is untenable, with even more beds out of use this year than last year.

“We know many hospices have waiting lists and demand for end of life care is rising, so it’s not a case of lack of demand. Hospices desperately want to reach everyone who needs them, but financial pressure is holding them back.”

Mr King argued that an overhaul of hospice funding was needed because ministers were pushing for more care to be shifted from hospitals into the community. He added that with assisted dying potentially on the horizon, well-funded end of life care would be a vital safeguard.

Ministers unveiled an emergency funding plan this year with £100 million available for hospices in England. But the money was specifically for capital spending on improving buildings and facilities rather than for day to day running costs. Funding for future years for adult hospices has yet been announced though the government has come up with an £80 million three year plan for children’s hospices.

Source link

Fake Alerts, Dubious Stunts: The Digital Scams Draining Nigeria’s POS Economy

No one really expects to be defrauded by someone dressed like an army officer.  Ikanyi Stephen certainly didn’t. But last year, at his small point-of-sale (POS) stand in Nyanya Park, Abuja, in North Central Nigeria, a man in military uniform approached him, seemingly with an innocent intention of withdrawing cash. Unknown to Stephen, the uniformed customer had foul play.

“He wanted ₦300,000,” Stephen recalled. “And the day he came, there were two other customers. My [sales assistant] was trying to attend to him,  and since I was with another customer, I couldn’t monitor them. Some customers like to hold the device to see if their transaction is successful, and that’s what I assumed the officer was doing. He slotted his card, entered his PIN, and after returning the machine to her, he urged her to hurry and give him his money so he could leave quickly.”

Stephen initially thought the man was simply in a rush, perhaps due to official duties. But it was only after he had left that the POS agent realised the real reason for his hurried departure. “I checked the transactions, but noticed nothing had come through. He had put the wrong PIN and hadn’t paid one naira, but by the time I noticed, I could not trace where he had gone,” he said. 

The incident cost Stephen more than he could have imagined — a quick trick pulled off by someone who knew how to exploit trust. Though the deceit seemed simple, many POS agents in Nigeria are increasingly falling victim to similar digital scams. 

The POS agent crisis

While scammers have long targeted these agents, the issue became more widespread with the rapid growth of the POS business in early 2023. That was the year the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) implemented a cashless policy, which limited the amount of cash that individuals and corporate bodies could withdraw at a time. As the queues in the banking halls grew and ATMs quickly emptied, millions turned to their neighbourhood POS agents for transactions.

By the end of that year, the Nigerian Inter-Bank Settlement System (NIBSS) reported that POS transactions had reached record heights, with a 27.85 per cent increase from 2022 and approximately ₦10.73 trillion transacted. The transactions have continued to rise since then, and as of 2025, NIBSS reported that  POS transfers reached a record-breaking ₦10.75 trillion in the first quarter of the year.

There are thousands of POS agents per square kilometre in the country, who process approximately ₦4.87 billion per hour. These agents are responsible for essential financial services, especially in rural areas where banks are scarce. The POS business provides steady, flexible employment that doesn’t require workers to possess intricate skills.

As favourable as the line of work is to the country, however, fraud, like what Stephen encountered, taints the endeavour. Although what happened to him appears straightforward, more sophisticated means of defrauding POS agents have raised growing concerns among the community, all of which is spurred on by the growing digital age.

Sunday Ohoji, an investigator at the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), told HumAngle that far more digital POS scams have occurred in recent years than physical thefts. “The increase in digital trends and information technology has led to an increase in the vices attached to them. POS scams are one such vice,” he said.

A common scam related to POS transactions is reversal fraud. In this scheme, a POS agent receives a transfer via a card or phone transaction. However, the money that initially appears to be deposited in their account is later reversed, leading to a bounce-back of the funds hours after the customer has left. Several agents believe there are malicious intentions behind these reversals. For instance, a union of POS agents at Jabi Park in Abuja recently warned over 100 of its members to stop permitting phone transactions, as this method is suspected to be the most common way for scams to occur, according to a member of the union.

Fake alerts

Yunusa Adamu, a member of the union, explained the reason for their suspicion after a personal experience left him wary.

“I was sitting at my POS machine, three or four people just came to me, wearing good clothes that would make you think they are reasonable people, even though they aren’t. One of them said he needed about ₦30,000 and asked me to transfer it to him so he could receive the cash. It didn’t go through, so his friend quickly stepped in and did the transfer,” he recounted.

“Without even pressing my phone too much, I received an alert stating that the money had entered my account, but it was a fake alert. The men quickly said they wanted ₦20,000 of their money to go and buy something, but that they would come back for the rest. When they left, I checked my bank account and realised the money had never actually entered, as the alert had reversed. I sat there till evening, but the men never returned.”

Yunusa said he had no clue how such a scam was possible. He now knows better, especially after another agent, Munkaila Mohammed, spoke bitterly of a similar experience.

“My daughter, Aminatu, gave ₦120,000 to one customer who had made a digital transfer. As he got his money, the man rushed away. Later, when we checked her transactions, we saw that the money had reversed. Till today, nobody knows how scammers are doing it, but we know it’s not a mistake or network error,” Munkaila narrated.

Munkaila was right in his detection of foul play. The rise of digital hacking has led to scammers creating complex systems to defraud unsuspecting POS agents. 

After years of working as an ICPC’s investigations official, Sunday Ohoji has the mechanics of this scheme laid out: “The people who do these scams already have a cloned system that makes it look like they are actually sending money out to the agents,” he explained.

“So what happens is that they give the agent their card to do a transaction, and because the platform the POS operates on  is also internet based, it’s very, very easy for the scammers to reroute whatever transaction they do on that account and card to a dummy account, which automatically generates an alert sent to the POS agent as if a transaction has occurred, but it is not actually tied to the financial system.”

Many customers don’t wait to take such a complicated route. Some swindlers quickly cancel their PIN to avoid paying; others hold the machine and lower the initial cost inputted by the operators. One POS agent, Alice Omenene, recounted how a customer attempted to pay only 1 per cent of what he had promised through this nefarious method.

“One time, one man requested ₦40,000, and I put that price for him in my POS. But little did I know he secretly changed the amount to ₦400 when he got hold of the machine,” she said. “I’ve been defrauded in the past, but this time I caught him. All he kept saying was, ‘I’m a Muslim, I can’t cheat you,’ but I didn’t hear that one. How would I let him go with my money?”

The cost of scams

The cases of POS fraud continue, with a 31.12 per cent increase in 2024, according to the Report of Fraud and Forgeries in Nigerian Banks. However, this problem doesn’t just appear negative on paper. POS agents typically bear the long-term consequences of one-time thefts.

“When I lost ₦300,000, I was so depressed during that period,” said Stephen, “I really planned the money for something special, but when the theft happened, I was stuck. I tried to go through diabolical means to get it back, but I couldn’t dare to do that.”

The negative effects reach beyond just one person. Many of these agents either work for others or buy back the cash they can no longer track, leading to a ripple effect where the consequences of the theft impact other relationships and businesses.

Somalia Nwadiugwu, whose mother was swindled out of ₦30,000 with a fake alert, told HumAngle that the loss impacted their supplier, the one who had given them the cash. “We needed that money to meet up with payments, budgets, and stuff. The man who sold my mum cash needed some of his profit. It’s just because he was nice that he gave us time to pay it back, but he complained that he also had children to feed, and this was seriously limiting him.”

No way out?

Despite the extensive challenges they face, many POS agents are reluctant to pursue other employment opportunities, claiming that no alternative jobs are available to them. With a striking 86 per cent of Nigeria’s working population engaging in self-employment and non-paid jobs, according to the Nigerian Economic Summit Group, it is evident that the lack of formal job opportunities is a significant issue for many individuals in the country.

David Aliyu*, a POS agent at Kabusa, who regularly loses between ₦5,000 and ₦10,000, sees no viable way to leave the business that has caused him so much financial loss. “No man can stay without doing something,” he told HumAngle. “That’s why some people keep on pushing with this business the way it is. In any business, there is loss, even Dangote [referring to the richest Black man] loses daily, more than POS people, I’m sure.”

Alice expressed a similar sentiment, saying, “This is where I’ve found myself, and it’s all that God has given me to do. Every morning, I pray not to fall for any 419 scam and that no scammer will see me. In this POS business, it’s not about being too wise; this scamming thing is an experience. You bring your head down, calm down, and pray.”

Prayer appears to be a common form of self-protection among those who have been scammed, as many POS agents refuse to seek external help, not trusting the Nigerian system to provide them with adequate assistance. 

When Stephen lost ₦300,000, it seemed natural that his next course of action would be to seek official intervention, but when he tallied the cost of processing it, he decided it was wiser to keep the matter to himself.

“If you have a loss and you want to seek help from the court, they’ll ask you to provide an affidavit. And sometimes, in processing the case, you spend more money. With those two things, you’ll still be spending more money than you lost. So the money you spend on getting help, along with the time lost trying to get that help, is almost equivalent to what you lost. So you just let it go,” he said.

Some members don’t even get to court. The cost of travelling to get help often halts them in their search for aid. Charity Eze*, a POS agent in Kabusa, who lost ₦50,000 after a customer changed the price on her POS from ₦55,000 to ₦ 5,000, explains why she had to make the painful decision to let it go. 

“We didn’t go to court, but because we had the customer’s name, my boss went to the bank. They froze his account and then told my boss he needed to come back again, but the banks are far from us, and the cost of transport is now high. When he calculated everything, he knew he would be at a loss. My boss let it go, but if not for the fact that he was a nice man, I would have had my salary taken away for God knows how long.”

Even without the cost of transport, legal justice still incurs a fee. The Virtual Affidavit Registration System (VARS) allows people to print various Affidavits online. It prices the affidavit of Loss of Documents/Items at ₦5,245. 

This is without going through any other court processes or the issue of extortion with the affidavit system that many complain about. Whether in person or online, expenditures rise higher than many of the losses POS personnel face at once. While some, like Stephen, are unfortunate enough to lose ₦300,000 at a time, most of the POS agents reported petty thefts, ranging from ₦2,000 to ₦10,000. 

While these smaller scams may seem inconsequential enough to let go, over time, these thefts add up, and without proper aid, POS agents may lose more than what they expected, crippling their business in the long run. 

The expensive solution

Ohoji, the ICPC investigator, sees a better way out, saying: “You can report to the police, you can report to the ICPC, you can report to the EFCC, all for free.  A few agents have come forward with genuine reports, and more are expected to follow, as the government is there to support them.

“The government doesn’t just want to help them, but the whole nation, because if they do not handle it immediately, it might become cancerous to the system tomorrow. Therefore, they should address the issue now. So, at every point in time, they should report. When they report, something will be done, even if it’s slow, something will be done,” he said.

He advised POS agents to upgrade their machines to detect cards that are not registered in the financial system. 

“It will go a long way to help curb the issue, because the truth is this: if someone comes and gives you a fake POS transaction and says they’re in a hurry to go, you wouldn’t have time to start checking if it’s genuine, but with an automatic detector, there will be no need to check manually.”

This is a simple solution in theory. In practice, however, few POS agents can afford to upgrade their machines due to their limited earnings. Many of them have reported that on a good day, they make up to ₦5,000, but these occasions are rare. More often than not, they typically make no more than ₦2,000 daily.

One of them, Charity, claimed that sometimes she sits down in the sweltering heat all day and earns only ₦500 for her efforts.

With an average profit of  ₦60,000 monthly, where the market cost of a single POS terminal is  ₦21,500, based on prices gotten from Moniepoint Microfinance Bank, a prominent POS terminal provider, as well as the added expense of buying the cash that will eventually be sold, squeezing in the cost of improvements may not be a viable option for many. 

For now, survival in the minds of many POS agents is a matter of caution and faith, and that seems to be enough for them. With around three million POS terminals existing in Nigeria as of 2024, according to the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), and many more popping up daily, it is clear that most POS agents remain unshaken in the face of mounting insecurity. 


*Names marked with an asterisk have been changed to protect the identities of sources. 

Source link

MQ-28 Ghost Bat To Fire AIM-120 Missile In First Live Weapons Test Next Month

Boeing says its MQ-28 Ghost Bat drone is on track for its first live-fire weapons shot, which will be of an AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM), next month. The company says the MQ-28’s development is otherwise now “hitting its stride,” amid talk of new customers, possibly including the U.S. Navy and Poland. Boeing’s Australian subsidiary first began development of the Ghost Bat for the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF), which has already conducted extensive flight testing with its fleet of eight prototypes.

Steve Parker, president and CEO of Boeing Defense, Space, and Security, provided a general update on the MQ-28 program at a media roundtable ahead of the 2025 Dubai Airshow in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), at which TWZ was in attendance. Boeing officials had said on various occasions earlier this year that the AMRAAM shot could come in late 2025 or early 2026.

A Royal Australian Air Force MQ-28 seen during earlier testing. Australian Department of Defense

At the Avalon Air Show in Australia in March, “I talked about doing a weapons shot off the MQ-28 later this year, or early in 2026. We are on track for next month,” Parker said during his opening remarks. “This weapon shot is something we’re really excited about.”

In addition to being a first for the MQ-28, the planned shot also looks set to be a first for any CCA-type drone, at least that we know about.

“It’s an air-to-air missile, and if you were to guess it was an AMRAAM, AIM-120, you would be correct,” he added later on during the roundtable when asked for more specifics.

A stock picture of an AIM-120 AMRAAM. USAF

The test itself will be carried out over the sprawling Woomera Range Complex (WRC) in southern Australia and reflect “a tactically relevant scenario,” according to Parker. The MQ-28 will attempt to down a real airborne target with the AIM-120.

An MQ-28 at Woomera. Royal Australian Air Force

Parker did not offer any specific details about how the engagement might be prosecuted, including how the drone would find and track the target. The MQ-28 is a highly modular design intended to allow for the ready integration of various munitions, sensors, and other payloads. The entire nose can be swapped out. It is worth noting here that at least two of the RAAF’s initial batch of MQ-28s have been spotted with an infrared search and track (IRST) sensor in the nose, which would be very relevant for this upcoming air-to-air weapons test.

A quartet of MQ-28s, the two in the middle having IRST sensors on top of their noses. Boeing

Broadly speaking, IRST sensors offer a valuable means of spotting and tracking aerial threats, especially stealthy aircraft and missiles, which can be used as an alternative and/or companion to radars. IRSTs have the additional benefit of being immune to electronic warfare attacks and operating passively, meaning they don’t emit signals that could alert an opponent to the fact that they are being stalked.

“I’m not going to get ahead of the customer here, but we’re well positioned for this,” Parker continued in his response to the question about the AIM-120 shot at the roundtable. “We’ve been sort of testing out some of these capability demonstrations. You would know that the Wedgetail [Boeing’s E-7 airborne early warning and control aircraft] has already controlled two live MQ-28s with a digital, virtual MQ-28 in the pattern, as well, [and] with a target. We’ve already been doing this. So, we’ve already been doing a bunch of multi-ship activities.”

Boeing announced the MQ-28/E-7 team testing back in June. This was one of a number of Ghost Bat capability demonstrations that the company conducted in cooperation with the RAAF this year, as you can read more about here.

A rendering of an RAAF E-7 Wedgetail flying together with a pair of MQ-28s. Boeing

“This program is really hitting its stride,” Parker said.

As noted, the RAAF has already acquired eight MQ-28s, all pre-production prototypes, also referred to as Block 1 Ghost Bats. The service has also awarded Boeing a contract to deliver at least three more examples in an improved Block 2 configuration. The Block 2 drones are seen as a pathway to an operational capability, though when that might actually materialize is unclear. Australian officials have also raised the prospect in the past of an expanded family of Ghost Bats, which might include versions that are substantially different from the baseline design. Boeing itself has hinted at the potential for the drones to get significant new capabilities down the road, including the ability to refuel in mid-air.

Regardless of how the MQ-28 itself evolves, Boeing clearly sees potential opportunities for sales beyond the RAAF, as well. The U.S. Air Force has utilized at least one Ghost Bat in the past to support test work related to its Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) drone program, which is structured around multiple iterative development cycles. Boeing did take part in the initial stages of the first phase of that program, or Increment 1, but was cut last year in a down-select. The company could compete in the next cycle, or Increment 2, with the MQ-28 or another design.

In September, the U.S. Navy announced it had hired Boeing, as well as Anduril, General Atomics, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman, to develop conceptual designs for carrier-based CCA-type drones. Boeing has so far declined to share specifics about what it is working on under that contract, but the Navy has said that there is “strong interest” in the Ghost Bat in the past. Boeing has previously pitched a carrier-capable version of the design at least to the United Kingdom, as well.

Yesterday, ahead of the opening of the Dubai Airshow today, Aviation Week reported that Boeing now sees an emerging market for CCA-type drones like the MQ-28 in the Middle East. There is a burgeoning interest in drones in this general category elsewhere globally.

“I think our Ghost Bat is uniquely positioned here, both from an air-to-air [and] air-to-ground perspective, as well as all the things we’ve already talked about, from an EW [electronic warfare] payload, radar, and so forth,” Boeing Defense, Space, and Security CEO Parker said at the roundtable. “The cold, hard facts of the matter are the customers are still trying to determine how they will employ these CCAs, and tactics, and what you need.”

TWZ routinely highlights the many questions that any future CCA operator has to answer when it comes to basic force structure, as well as structured, as well as how the drones are deployed, launched, recovered, supported, and otherwise operated, not to mention employed tactically.

Boeing has also been increasingly touting the MQ-28 as a particularly good uncrewed companion for the F-15EX. The company has reportedly been actively pitching the two aircraft as a paired purchase to Poland. For years now, TWZ has been highlighting how well-suited the two-seat tactical jet is to the airborne drone controller role, in general. At the roundtable, Boeing’s Parker again highlighted the ability to control CCA-type drones as being among the F-15EX’s key features.

Take a peek into the future.

With the F-15EX’s future manned-unmanned teaming capabilities supported by an advanced cockpit system, communication networks and two-seat configuration, the superior fighter could serve as a battle manager and joint all domain command and control. pic.twitter.com/07oRhGdIjV

— Boeing Defense (@BoeingDefense) September 4, 2025

With the planned AIM-120 shot next month, the MQ-28 is now set to take another important step toward a real operational capability for the RAAF, and potentially other operators.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Joseph has been a member of The War Zone team since early 2017. Prior to that, he was an Associate Editor at War Is Boring, and his byline has appeared in other publications, including Small Arms Review, Small Arms Defense Journal, Reuters, We Are the Mighty, and Task & Purpose.


Thomas is a defense writer and editor with over 20 years of experience covering military aerospace topics and conflicts. He’s written a number of books, edited many more, and has contributed to many of the world’s leading aviation publications. Before joining The War Zone in 2020, he was the editor of AirForces Monthly.




Source link

The Politics of Fear: Uruapan and the Unravelling of the Mexican State

Political assassinations have long punctuated Mexico’s democratic trajectory, often surfacing at moments when institutional fragility becomes impossible to ignore. The murder of Uruapan’s mayor is therefore not an unprecedented shock but the latest manifestation of a recurring pattern in which local political authority collapses under the weight of criminal power. The country has witnessed similar moments in past electoral cycles, in rural municipalities, and along contested economic corridors. What is different today is the increasing regularity and visibility of these attacks, signalling not just isolated episodes of violence but a systemic erosion of governance. The killing of Carlos Manzo crystallises a truth that communities in Michoacán, Guerrero, Guanajuato, Sinaloa, Zacatecas and beyond have recognised for years: insecurity has metastasised into a political condition.

Michoacán has long been a barometer for national security. The state’s geography, agricultural wealth, and fragmented political networks have made it a battleground for groups competing for control. Yet the recent escalation in places like Uruapan signals a worrying transformation. Local reports of extortion, blockades, and increasingly public displays of force reflect criminal organisations behaving as de facto authorities. Entire communities have adapted to a logic of survival shaped by invisible borders, curfews, and negotiated coexistence with whoever wields power at any given moment. The assassination of public figures in such an environment is not simply a political act but a show of ownership over territory, demonstrating that the real lines of authority do not run through government offices but through armed structures with the capacity to enforce their will.

What is unfolding today is not an isolated deterioration but a worsening trend that has become more explicit during the last two federal administrations. The promise that security would be reimagined through social policy and a rejection of past militarised models never materialised into real control of territory or a coherent strategy for dismantling criminal governance. While the language changed, the underlying problem deepened. The country saw more regions where the state operates only partially or symbolically, where elections proceeded under intimidation, and where local authorities lacked the means or autonomy to resist the pressures around them. The result is an increasingly fragmented political geography in which criminal groups influence candidate selection, determine which campaigns can operate, and regulate economic flows at the community level.

Under Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the narrative of moral regeneration through social investment was presented as a long-term answer to entrenched violence. Yet the gap between discourse and reality widened every year. Homicides remained persistently high, disappearances continued to haunt families, and entire municipalities came under the shadow of armed groups. The federal government’s insistence that security indicators were improving often clashed with the everyday experience of citizens navigating threats, extortion, and territorial disputes. Even as official statistics were reinterpreted to show progress, the lived reality in regions such as Michoacán, Guerrero, Zacatecas, and Guanajuato suggested that criminal organisations had consolidated their presence more deeply than before.

It is against this backdrop that Claudia Sheinbaum assumed the presidency, carrying forward a security model that was already failing. Her early months in office reveal how far the government still is from containing the expanding insecurity. Despite official claims of reduced violence, these figures jar with how people actually experience their lives. A majority of citizens continue to feel unsafe, and communities in high-risk states report no perceptible change. Her reliance on social prevention ignores how firmly criminal networks have embedded themselves in local political and economic systems. In several regions, armed groups continue to operate openly, even during federal visits, reinforcing the perception that national security strategy is more rhetorical than practical. The dissonance between optimistic messaging and deteriorating public trust reveals a government that has yet to confront the structural nature of the problem. In doing so, it risks turning its security agenda into little more than political theatre rather than a meaningful plan to reassert state authority.

Federal responses, while immediate and visible, reveal a deep structural weakness. Large-scale deployments, announcements of multi-sector investment packages and public proclamations of institutional coordination have become the standard repertoire of crisis management. These interventions create the appearance of control but rarely alter the conditions that allow criminal groups to flourish. The persistent challenges of corruption, politicised policing, fragmented prosecutorial capacity and limited municipal autonomy remain largely unresolved. Without addressing these deficits, security operations risk becoming cyclical performances rather than durable solutions.

National security trends further complicate the picture. Although certain aggregate indicators suggest stabilisation or marginal declines, the broader trajectory reflects a shift towards diversified criminal governance. Extortion, territorial control, interference in municipal administration and the permeation of legitimate industries reflect forms of violence that escape simple statistical capture. Thus, a focus on homicide figures alone obscures the structural deterioration of Mexico’s security landscape. The issue is not merely how many people are killed or disappeared, but how violence shapes political participation, economic activity and civic behaviour.

The deterioration of security in Mexico is inseparable from the erosion of its democratic foundations. Criminal groups no longer just threaten individuals — they infiltrate political processes, influence elections, and shape economic life. Municipalities under their sway become more than battlegrounds; they become laboratories of parallel governance. Political pluralism suffers when competition is skewed by coercion; the meaningful choice of leaders erodes when citizens know that certain voices are too dangerous to raise. Freedom of expression, too, is undermined. Journalists, activists, and community leaders operate in climates where challenging criminal-political alliances can entail serious risks. Self-censorship becomes a survival strategy, and public debate narrows under the weight of unspoken fear. When participation becomes dangerous, political representation becomes illusory.

This is not how democratic life is supposed to function. Institutions — from city halls to courts — ought to guarantee protection, justice, and participation. Yet in many places, the real source of power lies outside constitutional structures, in the hands of groups that command both arms and economic influence. This isn’t a temporary crisis; it is a systemic breakdown: when violence is structural, the response must be institutional.

Civil society responses illustrate both the potential and the limits of civic resistance. The mobilisation of Generation Z represents an important shift: a young, digitally connected cohort demanding accountability, transparency and meaningful security reform. These demonstrations are grounded in lived experience. For many young people, insecurity is not an abstract policy concern but an organising principle of daily life. Their protests reflect a rejection of narratives that normalise violence, minimise institutional failure or reduce insecurity to political rhetoric. Yet their activism also highlights a worrying reality: younger generations increasingly turn to extra-institutional forms of political expression because formal channels appear unresponsive.

The erosion of freedom is not only visible in the public sphere but in private life. Decisions that should be routine — attending a festival, organising a community meeting, even taking certain roads — have become political acts shaped by calculations of risk. This gradual internalisation of fear constitutes a subtle but profound form of democratic regression. When citizens adapt their behaviour to avoid harm, the space for free expression, open debate and community participation contracts. Democracy loses not through abrupt authoritarian shifts but through the slow, everyday retreat of civic life.

Addressing this crisis requires an institutional response that moves beyond episodic militarisation. Prosecutorial structures must be capable of pursuing cases that reveal networks rather than producing symbolic arrests. Municipal police forces must be professionalised, insulated from political interference and equipped with oversight mechanisms. Transparency must also be central in any reform. Citizens need access to clear, verifiable information about investigations, budget allocations, and the performance of security institutions. Without this, trust will remain a casualty of rhetorical solutions. Economic regulation must prevent criminal control of supply chains, especially in high-value sectors. Without reform of these foundational elements, any security strategy will be short-lived and vulnerable to the next surge in criminal activity.

At the national level, political leadership must recognise that security, democracy and economic development are interdependent. Reducing violence without strengthening democratic institutions will merely shift the form that insecurity takes. Conversely, institutional reforms that ignore security realities will remain aspirational. The state must rebuild public trust not through proclamations but through transparent evidence of institutional effectiveness.

International cooperation can play a supporting role, particularly in intelligence and financial tracing, but it cannot substitute for domestic institution-building. Sovereignty requires the capacity to govern effectively; reliance on external actors to fill institutional gaps risks reinforcing perceptions of state weakness.

Mexico stands at a juncture where insecurity threatens more than physical safety. It challenges the very conditions that make democratic life possible. The murder of Uruapan’s mayor is therefore not simply another entry in a long record of violence but a sign of cumulative democratic decay. If unchecked, this trajectory will entrench parallel systems of governance in which criminal groups continue to expand their authority while formal institutions recede.

The country’s future depends on rejecting this drift. A more honest political narrative is needed — one that acknowledges institutional failure, confronts criminal power directly and recognises that democracy cannot coexist indefinitely with pervasive fear. The question is whether political leaders will choose the difficult path of structural reform or continue to rely on reactive measures that mask, rather than resolve, the crisis.

Mexico cannot allow political assassination to become an unremarkable feature of its democratic life. Public institutions must assert their authority not through spectacle but through competence. Reversing the current trajectory will require political courage, institutional reconstruction and a renewed commitment to pluralism and freedom. The alternative is stark: a political landscape where democracy is reduced to procedures while real power is negotiated through violence, and where the politics of fear become the politics of the state.

Source link

Russia-Ukraine war: List of key events, day 1,363 | Russia-Ukraine war News

Here are the key events from day 1,363 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Here is how things stand on Tuesday, November 18:

Fighting

  • A Russian missile strike on the eastern Ukrainian city of Balakliia killed three people and wounded 10, including three children, a regional military official in the Kharkiv region said on Telegram on Monday.
  • At least two people were killed and three were injured in Russian shelling of the Nikopol district in Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk region, Vladyslav Haivanenko, the acting head of the Dnipropetrovsk Regional Military Administration, wrote on Facebook.
  • Russian troops captured three villages across three Ukrainian regions, the RIA news agency cited the Russian Ministry of Defence as saying on Monday. The villages are Hai in the Dnipropetrovsk region, Platonivka in the Donetsk region and Dvorichanske in the Kharkiv region.
  • Russia’s air defence forces destroyed 36 Ukrainian drones overnight, RIA reported on Monday, citing the Defence Ministry’s daily data.
  • A Russian attack on Ukraine’s southern region of Odesa sparked fires at energy and port infrastructure facilities, Ukraine’s emergency services said on Monday.
  • The attack damaged port equipment and several civilian vessels, including one carrying liquefied natural gas, and forced Romania to evacuate a border village, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha wrote on X.
  • A 68-year-old man has died after he was injured in a Russian drone attack in Ukraine’s Kherson region, the head of the regional administration, Oleksandr Prokudin, wrote on Telegram.
  • Two Ukrainian nuclear power plants have been running at reduced capacity for 10 days after a military attack damaged an electrical substation needed for nuclear safety, International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi said in a statement.
  • The Kremlin said on Monday that Russia’s port of Novorossiysk resumed export activities after a Ukrainian attack caused a two-day suspension of its oil loadings.
A firefighter stands at the site of apartment buildings hit by Russian missile strikes, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in the town of Balakliia, Kharkiv region, Ukraine November 17, 2025. REUTERS/Anatolii Stepanov
A firefighter stands at the site of apartment buildings hit by Russian missile strikes in the town of Balakliia in Ukraine’s Kharkiv region on November 17, 2025 [Anatolii Stepanov/Reuters]

Military aid

  • Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed a deal with French President Emmanuel Macron at France’s Velizy-Villacoublay Air Base for Ukraine to obtain up to 100 French-made Rafale warplanes over the next 10 years.
  • Macron said France’s rail transport manufacturer Alstom and Ukrainian Railways have signed a 475-million-euro ($551m) contract on delivering 55 electric locomotives to Ukraine, according to the Interfax news agency.

Regional security

  • Polish Interior Minister Marcin Kierwinski said on Monday that one confirmed and one likely act of sabotage occurred on Polish railways after an explosion damaged a Polish railway track on a route to Ukraine over the weekend.
  • Polish Special Services Minister Tomasz Siemoniak added during the same news conference that chances are very high that the people who conducted the sabotage were acting on orders of foreign intelligence services. He appeared to be pointing fingers at Russia although he did not name the country.

Politics and diplomacy

  • During a joint news conference in Paris, Macron said he was confident Zelenskyy could improve Ukraine’s anticorruption track record and institute reforms to clear its path to European Union membership.
  • German Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil told Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng during a state visit to Beijing on Monday that the two countries “should work together to finish the war in Ukraine” and “China can play a key role”.
  • He responded by saying, “China will continue to play a constructive role in the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis.”
  • The Kremlin said on Monday that there was an ongoing conversation about a possible prisoner-of-war exchange with Ukraine but declined to provide details.
  • Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Monday that Russia hoped for another summit between President Vladimir Putin and United States President Donald Trump soon.
  • Peskov added that Moscow took a very negative view of a bill that Trump said Republicans in the US were working on that would impose sanctions on any country doing business with Russia.
  • Russia’s financial watchdog added former Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov and leading economist Sergei Guriev – both critics of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – to its list of “extremists and terrorists”, its website showed on Monday.

Economy

  • European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a letter to EU members on Monday that the bloc had three options or a combination of them to help Ukraine meet its financing needs: “Support … financed by member states via grants, a limited recourse loan funded by the union borrowing on the financial markets or a limited recourse loan linked to the cash balances of immobilised assets”.
  • The Chevron oil company is studying options to buy international assets of sanctioned Russian oil firm Lukoil after the US Department of the Treasury gave clearance to potential buyers to talk to Lukoil about foreign assets, five sources familiar with the process told the Reuters news agency.

Source link

‘Disturbing pattern’: US judge rebukes ‘missteps’ in James Comey indictment | Donald Trump News

A magistrate judge in the United States has issued a stern rebuke to the administration of President Donald Trump, criticising its handling of the indictment against a former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), James Comey.

On Monday, Judge William Fitzpatrick of Alexandria, Virginia, made the unusual decision to order the release of all grand jury materials related to the indictment.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

Normally, grand jury materials are kept secret to protect witnesses, defendants and jurors in cases of grave federal crimes.

But in Comey’s case, Fitzpatrick ruled there was “a reasonable basis to question whether the government’s conduct was willful or in reckless disregard of the law”, and that greater transparency was therefore required.

He cited several irregularities in the case, ranging from how evidence was obtained to alleged misstatements from prosecutors that could have swayed the grand jury.

“The procedural and substantive irregularities that occurred before the grand jury, and the manner in which evidence presented to the grand jury was collected and used, may rise to the level of government misconduct,” Fitzpatrick wrote in his 24-page decision.

Fitzpatrick clarified that his decision does not render the grand jury materials public. But they will be provided to Comey’s defence team, as the former FBI director seeks to have the indictment tossed.

“The Court recognizes that the relief sought by the defense is rarely granted,” Fitzpatrick wrote, underscoring the unusual nature of the proceedings.

“However, the record points to a disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps.”

Scrutiny of US Attorney Halligan

The decision is the latest stumble for interim US Attorney Lindsey Halligan, a former personal lawyer to Trump whom he then appointed as a top federal prosecutor.

A specialist in insurance law with no prosecutorial background, Halligan was tapped earlier this year to replace acting US Attorney Erik Siebert in the Eastern District of Virginia.

Trump has indicated he fired Siebert over disagreements about Justice Department investigations.

According to media reports, Siebert had refrained from seeking indictments against prominent Trump critics, such as Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, citing insufficient evidence.

But that appears to have frustrated the president. Trump went so far as to call for Comey’s and James’s prosecutions on social media, as well as that of Democratic Senator Adam Schiff.

“They’re all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done,” Trump wrote in a post addressed to Attorney General Pam Bondi. “We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility.”

Halligan took up her post as acting US attorney on September 22. By September 25, she had filed her first major indictment, against Comey.

It charged Comey with making a “false, fictitious, and fraudulent statement” to the US Senate, thereby obstructing a congressional inquiry.

A second indictment, against James, was issued on October 9. And a third came on October 16, targeting former national security adviser John Bolton, another prominent Trump critic.

All three individuals have denied wrongdoing and have sought to have their cases dismissed. Each has also accused President Trump of using the legal system for political retribution against perceived adversaries.

Monday’s court ruling is not the first time Halligan’s indictments have come under scrutiny, though.

Just last week, US District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie heard petitions from James and Comey questioning whether Halligan’s appointment as US attorney was legal.

As she weighed the petitions last Thursday, she questioned why there was a gap in the grand jury record for Comey’s indictment, where no court reporter appeared to be present.

Inside Fitzpatrick’s ruling

Fitzpatrick raised the same issue in his ruling on Monday. He questioned whether the transcript and audio recording of the grand jury deliberations were, in fact, complete.

He pointed out that the grand jury in Comey’s case was originally presented with a three-count indictment, which it rejected. Those deliberations started at about 4:28pm local time.

But by 6:40pm, the grand jury had allegedly weighed a second indictment and found that there was probable cause for two of the three counts.

Fitzpatrick said that the span of time between those two points was not “sufficient” to “draft the second indictment, sign the second indictment, present it to the grand jury, provide legal instructions to the grand jury, and give them an opportunity to deliberate”.

Either the court record was incomplete, Fitzpatrick said, or the grand jury weighed an indictment that had not been fully presented in court.

The judge also acknowledged questions about how evidence had been obtained in the Comey case.

The Trump administration was facing a five-year statute of limitations in the Comey case, expiring on September 30. The indictment pertains to statements Comey made before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020.

To quickly find evidence for the indictment, Fitzpatrick said that federal prosecutors appear to have used warrants that were issued for a different case.

Those warrants, however, were limited to an investigation into Daniel Richman, an associate of Comey who was probed for the alleged theft of government property and the unlawful gathering of national security information.

No charges were filed in the Richman case, and the investigation was closed in 2021.

“The Richman materials sat dormant with the FBI until the summer of 2025, when the Bureau chose to rummage through them again,” Fitzpatrick said.

He said the federal government’s use of the warrants could violate the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution, which prohibits the unreasonable search and seizure of evidence. He described the Justice Department’s actions as “cavalier” and asserted that no precautions were taken to protect privileged information.

“Inexplicably, the government elected not to seek a new warrant for the 2025 search, even though the 2025 investigation was focused on a different person, was exploring a fundamentally different legal theory, and was predicated on an entirely different set of criminal offenses,” Fitzpatrick wrote.

He speculated that prosecutors may not have sought a new warrant because the delay would have allowed the statute of limitations to expire on the Comey case.

“The Court recognizes that a failure to seek a new warrant under these circumstances is highly unusual,” he said.

Fitzpatrick also raised concerns that statements federal prosecutors made to the grand jury may have been misleading.

Many of those statements were redacted in Fitzpatrick’s ruling. But he described them as “fundamental misstatements of the law that could compromise the grand jury process”.

One statement, he said, “may have reasonably set an expectation in the minds of the grand jury that rather than the government bear the burden to prove Mr. Comey’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt at trial, the burden shifts to Mr. Comey to explain away the government’s evidence”.

Another appeared to suggest that the grand jury “did not have to rely only on the record before them to determine probable cause” — and that more evidence would be presented later on.

Calling for the release of the grand jury records on Monday was an “extraordinary remedy” for these issues, Fitzpatrick conceded.

But it was necessary, given “the prospect that government misconduct may have tainted the grand jury proceedings”, he ultimately decided.

Source link

Calls for answers grow over Canada’s interrogation of Israel critic | Israel-Palestine conflict News

Montreal, Canada – Canadian human rights activists are demanding answers from their government after a former United Nations special rapporteur who investigated Israeli abuses against Palestinians was interrogated at the Canadian border on “national security” grounds.

Richard Falk, 95, was stopped at Toronto Pearson International Airport on Thursday and questioned for several hours. He said a security official told him that Canada had concerns that he and his wife, fellow legal scholar Hilal Elver, posed “a danger to the national security of Canada”.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The treatment of the couple has sparked anger and calls for an explanation from Ottawa.

“We need answers – and from the highest levels of government,” said Corey Balsam, national coordinator at Independent Jewish Voices-Canada, a group that supports Palestinian rights.

Despite the outcry, Canadian authorities have not publicly addressed the incident. But the office of Minister of Public Safety Gary Anandasangaree, who oversees the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), has acknowledged the case in a statement to Al Jazeera, saying he is seeking more information about what happened.

“National security safeguards are an integral part of our immigration and border-management framework and, while we cannot comment on specific cases, we are committed to ensuring that our border screening processes respect due process and international obligations,” Simon Lafortune, a spokesperson for Anandasangaree, told Al Jazeera in an email.

“To that end, Minister Anandasangaree has asked the CBSA to provide more specific details on how this particular incident occurred.”

Falk told Al Jazeera on Saturday that he and Elver were asked about their work on Israel, Gaza and genocide as well as about their participation in an event in Ottawa looking into Canada’s role in Israel’s war on Gaza, which a UN inquiry and numerous rights groups have described as a genocide.

After more than four hours of questioning, the pair – both US citizens – were allowed to enter Canada and take part in the Palestine Tribunal on Canadian Responsibility.

‘Patently ridiculous’

Alex Paterson, senior director of strategy and parliamentary affairs at the advocacy group Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East, called the government’s treatment of the couple “patently ridiculous”.

“I think it just lays bare for everyone the reality that they wanted to hamper the tribunal’s work and try and keep Canadian complicity in Israel’s genocide … in the shadows,” Paterson told Al Jazeera on Monday.

He added that the Canadian government “has been trying to avoid questions of its complicity in arming the genocide, and that’s reason enough to do this”.

Since Israel’s war on Gaza began in October 2023, Canadian human rights advocates have been calling on the government to apply pressure on Israel, a longstanding ally, to end its attacks on the Palestinian enclave.

Those calls for concrete action from Canada have grown as Israel’s military assault and restrictions on aid have killed tens of thousands of people and pushed Gaza into a humanitarian crisis.

Last year, the Canadian government announced it was suspending some weapons export permits to Israel amid the atrocities in the territory.

Prime Minister Mark Carney, who took office in March, also voiced opposition to Israel’s blockade on aid to Gaza and a surge in Israeli military and settler violence in the occupied West Bank.

Meanwhile, along with several allies, Carney’s government recognised an independent Palestinian state in September.

But researchers and human rights advocates said loopholes in Canada’s arms export system have allowed Canadian-made weapons to continue to reach Israel, often via the United States.

They have also urged Canada to do more to stem continued Israeli attacks against Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and to support efforts to hold Israel accountable for serious abuses, including at the International Criminal Court.

‘Climate of governmental insecurity’

In his interview with Al Jazeera on Saturday, Falk, who served as UN special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory from 2008 to 2014, said he believed his interrogation was part of a wider push to silence those who speak the truth about what is happening in Gaza.

“It suggests a climate of governmental insecurity, I think, to try to clamp down on dissident voices,” he said.

Al Jazeera has contacted multiple relevant Canadian government agencies to ask whether Ottawa views the 95 year old as a threat to national security – and if so, why.

A CBSA spokesperson said in an email on Monday that the agency could not comment on specific cases, but stressed that “secondary inspections are part of the cross-border process”.

“It is important to note that travellers referred to secondary inspection are not being ‘detained,’” spokesperson Rebecca Purdy said.

“Foreign nationals seeking entry into Canada can be subjected to a secondary inspection by an officer to determine admissibility to Canada. In some instances, the inspection may take longer due to information being gathered through questioning.”

Global Affairs Canada, the Canadian foreign ministry, has not yet responded to a request for comment from Al Jazeera sent on Saturday.

Balsam of Independent Jewish Voices-Canada said treating someone like Falk as a security threat sends a message that “actually none of us are safe from the suppression of dissent and crackdown on voices that are critical of the Israeli regime“.

“We all deserve an answer and an explanation from the government as to this incident, which casts a chill for all Canadians that are speaking out about human rights in general and Palestine in particular,” he told Al Jazeera.

Source link

Tuesday 18 November National Day in Latvia

Latvian Independence Day commemorates the declaration of independence of the Republic of Latvia from German and Russian occupation on November 18th 1918 after the end of the first world war.

The People’s Council of Latvia proclaimed independence in the building that today houses the National Theatre in Riga.

The country remained an independent state until the Second World War, when forces from the Soviet Union occupied the country in June 1940.

Like the other Baltic republics, full independence from Soviet Russia occurred on August 21st 1991. The restoration of Independence of the Republic of Latvia was proclaimed on 4 May 1990.

This second independence declaration is commemorated in the Restoration of Independence of the Republic of Latvia holiday on 4th May each year.

Many festive events take place through the country on Latvia’s National Day, including a nationally televised address to the people by the President of the Republic of Latvia. In recent years this speech is given before large crowds in the square by the Freedom Monument in Riga.

A military parade takes place that goes past the Freedom Monument, where people lay flowers to honour those who lost their lives in the fight for independence. In the evening, free outdoor concerts by children’s choirs and musicians take place. Tens of thousands of people also take part in a torchlight procession, and enjoy a stroll through the decorated streets of Riga.

To mark the day, people enjoy dishes like pīrāgi (bacon pies), rupjmaize (rye bread) and the national dish pelēkie zirņi ar speķi (a stew made of grey peas and bacon).