TODAY

Drone attacks target vehicles in Nabatieh amid fragile ceasefire negotiations between Iran and the US.

Multiple Israeli strikes have killed at least four people in southern Lebanon’s Nabatieh governorate, according to Lebanon’s National News Agency (NNA), despite a ceasefire and a recent understanding between the United States and Iran to end the war on all fronts.

Tuesday’s killing took place as separate drone attacks targeted two vehicles in Mayfadoun. A third vehicle was also targeted in the village of Shoukin, the agency said.

Throughout the often fragile negotiations between Iran and the US, Iranian officials repeatedly said that any ceasefire arrangement would need to include an end to Israeli attacks on Lebanon.

While the final text of the memorandum of understanding has not yet been made public, the prime minister of Pakistan, which is acting as one of the mediators in the conflict, said on Monday that the agreement envisaged an immediate halt to military operations “on all fronts, including Lebanon”.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Tuesday that Israel’s continued occupation of southern Lebanon would violate the deal, adding that “without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories they occupied during this war, the war has not fully come to an end”.

In a phone conversation with Lebanon’s Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, called for the US to compel Israel to end its war on Lebanon, stop home demolitions, and withdraw from occupied Lebanese territory.

Soon after the announcement of the deal between the US and Iran, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel will continue to occupy southern Lebanon.

Meanwhile, Lebanese group Hezbollah says it has received ⁠assurances ⁠from Iran that Tehran will demand ⁠a withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon ⁠in its next phase of talks with the US, the Reuters news agency reported.

Since the resumption in fighting on March 2, at least 3,826 people have been killed by Israeli attacks in Lebanon and 11,851 wounded, according to the country’s health ministry.

Mérida, June 16, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Venezuelan government has signed two agreements with foreign companies as part of efforts to bolster the country’s National Electric System (SEN).

On Monday, Acting President Delcy Rodríguez penned a memorandum of understanding with GE Vernova, a company formed from the 2024 breakup of US conglomerate General Electric, at Miraflores Palace in Caracas.

“This memorandum is historic for Venezuela, so we can recover such an essential service for the Venezuelan people,” she stated during a televised broadcast. “I have asked the teams to convert this memorandum into a contract as soon as possible and start the works.”

According to Rodríguez, the agreement will incorporate 1,000 Megawatts (MW) into Venezuela’s electricity grid in the next 24 months, and 5,000 MW over four years. The acting president added that GE technicians have spent “six weeks” in the country assessing conditions of electric equipment.

Rodríguez did not disclose what the deal entails, nor what components of the electric grid will be turned over to GE Vernova, but stated that the plan concerns generation, transmission, and electricity substations.

The Venezuelan acting leader went on to thank US Chargé d’Affaires John Barrett, who was present at the ceremony, for promoting engagement with major US corporations like GE. Company executives Roger Martella and Eric Gray were likewise in attendance. Martella stated that GE’s objective was to quickly reactivate electricity generation. 

“We want to move quickly so the system can work as best as possible in a few months. We already have an agreement on technical details,” he said.

Two days earlier, Venezuelan authorities announced a separate accord with Argentina-based firm Industrias Metalúrgicas Pescarmona (IMPSA) to rehabilitate the Manuel Piar and Antonio José de Sucre hydroelectric projects, known as the Tocoma and Macagua dams. Both are located in the Caroní river, in Bolívar state, which also supplies the Simón Bolívar Hydroelectric Plant, known as the Guri Dam.

The official release indicated that the agreement aims to inject 2,640 MW into the grid. IMPSA President Jorge Salcedo clarified on social media that the company’s initial target is to restore 672 MW of capacity from Tocoma within 19 months. 

“This agreement launches a broader effort to strengthen Venezuela’s power system through a comprehensive plan that could deliver up to 2,160 MW at Tocoma and 480 MW at Macagua over the next five years,” he wrote.

The Tocoma project dates back to the 2000s. In 2008, Venezuela’s state electricity company CORPOELEC hired a construction consortium headed by Brazilian firm Odebrecht to build the dam, with IMPSA tasked with supplying machinery. 

However, despite costs running over US $9.3 billion, more than triple the original $3 billion budget, the project was not culminated. Venezuelan authorities reported that construction was at 90 percent completion in 2016. A $1.2 billion debt owed by CORPOELEC saw IMPSA suspend activities with only two of the ten projected turbines partially installed.

According to Reuters, IMPSA is holding most of the contracted equipment in storage and will replace the missing or obsolete ones with new technology.

IMPSA was temporarily owned by the Argentine state before being privatized by the Milei administration in February 2025. The company was acquired by the US-based consortium Industrial Acquisition Fund (IAF). IAF’s main partner is ARC Energy, headed by close Trump ally and donor Jason Arceneaux.

Venezuela’s electrical system has suffered under years of US sanctions as well as underinvestment, lack of maintenance, and corruption. Around 40 percent of its installed 30,000 MW capacity is currently operational, with generation deficit around 3,000 MW meaning regular blackouts in most of the country.

Strengthening the electrical supply is a precondition for the country’s economic recovery, with growing oil production placing an additional burden on the grid.

The Rodríguez acting government has sought to address the issue by opening the electricity system to the private sector, with GE and IMPSA the first corporations formally engaged. 

On June 4, the National Assembly preliminarily approved a reform of the Organic Law of the National Electricity System. The new legal framework breaks with the 2007 legislation under Hugo Chávez that centralized the grid under CORPOELEC and defined all stages of electricity generation and distribution as “strategic for the nation.”

The reform allows for private sector participation in generation, transmission, distribution, and commercialization ativities through concessions lasting up to 25 years. It also envisions new tariff structures based on “real costs and reasonable returns” for investors.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

Though the U.S. and Iran have reached a preliminary agreement to end the war, the U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports remains in place, a source familiar with operations told TWZ on Monday morning. The statement offers additional clarity to comments President Donald Trump and Iranian officials have made about the deal and its impact on shipping.

Meanwhile, shipping companies, the U.N. and a maritime security company tell us they are taking a wait-and-see attitude before changing current operations or offering advice to do so. As Trump noted over the weekend, the Strait needs to be fully de-mined while Iranian officials say they will still impose fees for transit.

“The blockade is ongoing and is expected to remain in place until the signing [of the memorandum of understanding] on Friday,” the source, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss operational details, told us. 

The official declined to tell us whether that means the U.S. will fire on vessels trying to run the blockade or turn ships back, as they have in the past.

As of June 12, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) said it disabled nine vessels trying to run the blockade and redirected 139 others. You can read more about how those ships were disabled here.

Iran’s reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, combined with the U.S. ending the blockade that went into effect on April 13, is a major component of the U.S.-Iran agreement. Iran closed the Strait to most shipping after it was attacked by the U.S. and Israel on Feb. 28. As we have frequently reported, that had a cascading effect on the global economy, sending oil prices higher.

During a press conference and in a message on Truth Social, Trump on Monday said the Strait of Hormuz was already “partially opened.”

“Ships are starting to move, many loaded up with Oil, out of the Strait of Hormuz,” the president said on his social media site. “They are going along the Southern ‘Highway,’ which is totally safe, secure, and pristine. There are other areas of travel, also!!!”

“Ships are starting to go out now,” Trump added later at a press conference in France. “By Friday it will completely opened.”

As we previously reported, ships had been transiting the Strait via a southern route close to the United Arab Emirates and Oman under the overwatch of the U.S. military. Last week, Trump revealed that the U.S. had enacted a secret plan to get hundreds of ships out of the Strait; however, that still pales in comparison to the number of ships transiting before the war broke out.

As for the blockade, Iranian officials on Monday said it was their understanding it would be lifted right away.

“Under the agreements reached, the war and military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon, will come to an immediate and permanent end beginning tonight,” the Secretariat of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council stated early Monday morning EDT, according to Iran’s official IRNA media outlet. “Furthermore, the naval blockade against Iran will be lifted immediately and completely.”

Gaza’s football fans once watched the World Cup from the comfort of their homes. Now, displaced in schools and tents, they face power cuts, sparse internet access and the threat of Israeli attacks.

The court found he had controlled her through threats of violence and security cameras. He was convicted of offences including attempted rape, aggravated pimping, assault and unlawful threats following a trial in Härnösand, on Sweden’s eastern coast.

The US-Iran memorandum of understanding expected to be formally signed in Switzerland on Friday could allow for the establishment of a $300bn investment fund for Iran, as part of a broader settlement to end the war that triggered a global energy crisis and upended markets worldwide.

US Vice President JD Vance told CBS News on Monday that the incentives would be connected to Iran’s “performance” in adhering to the deal, which was digitally signed by both sides on Sunday.

The scale of the financial incentives grabbed the headlines due to US President Donald Trump’s longstanding criticism of a 2015 nuclear accord that he claimed delivered economic benefits to Tehran.

In a bid to manage perceptions around this politically sensitive issue, Trump took to his Truth Social platform to claim that “the story that the US is paying Iran 300 million Dollars is Fake News,” while Vance told CBS News that the money would not be a US payout in exchange for Iran’s enriched uranium.

“When people say that billions of dollars of assets will be released, that’s not true,” the vice president told the CBS Morning programme. “What is true is that Iran will have a much better and much more prosperous future if they meet the obligations they make in this agreement.”

What do we know about the $300bn investment fund?

Vance said the deal “fundamentally extends a hand to Iran and says, ‘Look, if you guys are willing to honour your obligations, if you’re willing to allow real inspections of your nuclear programme, then we will welcome you back into the world economy.’

“That’s the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf Coast coalition, so long as they honour their end of the obligation,” Vance told CBS. He also claimed that while US money would not be injected, economic opportunities could arise once Iran repositions itself in the global economy.

The New York Times quoted sources saying the fund would not come from governments but be created for companies eager to invest in Iran.

Muhanad Seloom, a non-resident senior fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said the setup was a no-lose solution for Washington. “If Iran reforms, the administration owns the peace; if it doesn’t, the US loses nothing and the Gulf carries the risk,” he told Al Jazeera.

What about the Iranian frozen assets?

Seloom said the idea of an investment fund was built precisely to escape the optics of releasing Iran’s frozen funds. While the exact amount of Iran’s frozen assets is unclear, official Iranian reports and experts have set the total amount at more than $100bn.

Iran’s economy has been crippled due to years of sanctions imposed on the country by the United States and other nations following the Islamic revolution in 1979, and then amplified over Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missiles programmes. These measures have restricted Tehran’s ability to access its own assets, such as revenues from oil sales, which have been frozen in foreign banks.

Tehran was granted sanctions relief in the wake of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal signed under President Barack Obama, but Trump tore it up in 2018 during his first term. The 2015 deal had put limits on Iran’s nuclear enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief.

Iran’s state-affiliated Mehr News agency reported on Sunday that the 14-point draft memorandum of understanding provided for the release of $24bn in frozen Iranian assets.

Pressed by CBS News on the possibility of releasing frozen funds, Vance said the $24bn figure “just doesn’t appear anywhere in any of the texts that we’ve talked about with the Iranians”.

“What we have said is that we’re willing to talk about unfreezing assets, but a much, much bigger deal is unsanctioning their economy – so long as they make the long-term commitments on the nuclear programme,” the vice president added.

For Iran, where the war inflicted an estimated $29bn damage and the population is struggling with the highest inflation rate since 1942, the investment fund may constitute a much-needed lifeline.

But the optics will not be as favourable, raising a “dignity problem”, Seloom said. “Tehran reads this as supervised, conditional money rather than sovereign relief,” the analyst told Al Jazeera.

Which other contentious issues will be discussed after signing the deal on Friday?

One of the US’s main declared objectives has been to assuage concerns surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme, including a stockpile of more than 440kg (970lbs) of enriched uranium.

The memorandum extends an existing ceasefire arrangement for another 60 days, during which the two sides are expected to hold further negotiations on issues including the disposal of the enriched uranium.

Vance said Tehran had agreed to surrender its stockpile, undergo regular inspections and refrain from producing or buying nuclear weapons, but the full text of the memorandum of understanding has yet to be disclosed.

The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which has been subject to competing blockades by the US and Iran, has also been a point of contention. Trump suggested an agreement to reopen the waterway had been reached when he announced a deal on Sunday with the words: “Let the oil flow!”

Speaking to CNBC, however, Vance acknowledged that not all sticking points surrounding the passageway had been resolved. “Well, our expectation is that the strait is gonna be opened in a toll-free way for the long term, and that’s the sort of thing that we’re gonna figure out in these technical negotiations,” he said.

Israel’s ongoing aggression on Lebanon is also expected to create friction, as Iran has insisted any ceasefire deal must include the allied nation. Israel has so far rejected any arrangement that would limit its ability to strike what it says are Hezbollah targets. Defence Minister Israel Katz on Friday said the military would continue operating in Lebanon regardless of any agreement with Tehran.

Mixed reactions to the agreement

Iranian ⁠⁠Foreign ⁠⁠Minister Abbas Araghchi said the memorandum of understanding would reap economic benefits for Iran but stressed that Tehran would not rely on those benefits for all of its needs.

“We have a history of broken promises, non-compliance, and the tearing up of agreements,” Araghchi said on Monday, according to Press TV. He said discussions about the lifting of US sanctions and Iran’s nuclear programme would be held during a 60-day period of negotiations following the official signature on Friday.

Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has yet to comment. Some Iranian observers objected to the timing of the announcement, which coincided with Trump’s birthday. Referring to the assassination of former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei at the beginning of the US-Iran war, conservative journalist Parisa Nasr wrote on X: “Was giving a birthday gift to the killer of the martyred Leader also one of the unwritten conditions of the deal?”

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said Iran’s Supreme National Security Council had approved the deal so that “America’s genuine commitment to respecting the rights of the Iranian nation could be tested in practice.”

Speaking at the G7 summit in France on Tuesday, Trump described the deal with Iran as “fair”, “good”, and under which Iran “can’t have a nuclear weapon” or “they get blown up.”

Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, who is also attending the summit, said the Iran-US agreement will result in positive outcomes for the region.

“This is a very important deal, there’s still a lot of work to be done, but with this momentum – if we continue like that, Mr President – I think we can achieve and do great things in the region,” Sheikh Tamim said.

US Democratic lawmakers welcomed a deal to halt the war with Iran but stressed that its terms must be made public. Senator Gregory Meeks said “any final agreement must be durable, enforceable, transparent” and more than “vague announcements or political spin”.

US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham on Sunday said he was “pleased” about the deal but also “somewhat concerned that Iran’s view of the agreement seems different than what the American negotiating team is claiming”.

Seloom, at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said the different narratives underlined that the two sides were “not really talking to each other”. “They’re talking past each other, to domestic audiences,” he said. “Each side has to sell this as a victory it cannot sell honestly.”

The saga of the Constellation class frigate is emblematic of so many chronic issues with the Navy’s way of procuring warships. The vessel that was supposed to make the wrongs of the Littoral Combat Ship debacle right failed spectacularly and the timing couldn’t have been worse. Now Constellation is dead and the Trump administration is building a different frigate from a different yard. While the Navy has said why it is moving on, we wanted the other side of the story. We recently had a conversation with George Moutafis, CEO of Fincantieri Marine Group, to get exactly that.

Before we get to the questions and answers, however, here is the backstory.

The U.S. Navy needed the Constellation class frigate, badly, and the program to construct it seemed built to deliver. Rather than a clean-sheet design, the service chose the proven Franco-Italian FREMM as its parent design, betting that adapting an existing platform would be far faster and cheaper, and overall less risky than starting from scratch.

It wasn’t. Among the issues plaguing the program, constant change orders pushed the design far from its origins. Two years into construction, the first ship was barely 10% complete while its design was still being finalized. Meanwhile, costs and schedules blew well past original projections.

As a result of these issues, the Navy late last year cancelled the program. That left Fincantieri’s Wisconsin yard sidelined while a contract to replace the Constellation class frigate went to rival Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula.

In the wake of the program’s implosion, the Navy created the Vessel Construction Manager (VCM) system. It uses a hired manager to hold the prime contract and run the show, overseeing shipyard performance, controlling subcontracts, and acting as a buffer between the service and the builder to keep costs and schedules on track.

In a wide-ranging, hour-long exclusive interview, Moutafis – appointed CEO on July 1, 2025 as the wheels were already falling off this project – gave us unique insights into Fincantieri’s version of how Constellation turned into a debacle and what needs to change as a result. He also touched on an array of other topics, which we will address in future installments.

Some of the questions and answers have been edited for clarity.

Q: Why was the Constellation class frigate cancelled from your point of view? What happened that caused the program – which was seen as a must-succeed endeavor, and hugely promising – to get to the point where it was shuttered?

A: It’s for sure a tricky situation. On one hand, the way the Constellation class program was initially laid out and envisioned – potentially a lot of the things that were driving it may have been ahead of its time.

So, while you’re saying you want to attempt to do one thing, but at the same time you’re not evolving the way you execute can lead you to an undesired effect. And I say this because in my eyes, some of those lessons learned out of Constellation are being manifested in the things that the Navy has been rolling out the past few months – a new approach that empowers PAEs [Navy Portfolio Acquisition Executives] to make decisions, to minimize change, to embrace innovation and new technologies. All these elements that we see now being rolled out, I think to a certain degree, connect back to lessons that have been learned out of the Constellation class journey.

Q: What lessons, specifically?

A: Figure out what you want to prioritize, to what extent you want to prioritize schedule, and what’s the best way to say this. When you know when you need something delivered and at what pace, then enable the right level of decision-making. Because otherwise – I don’t want to sound this the wrong way – but perfection sometimes is the enemy of more than good enough.

Going beyond the Constellation class, now the needs are for vessels to be out there for the warfighter as soon as possible. For sure, we will see many cases where it will be considered that a vessel with these capabilities – even though potentially, in some areas, it may not have enough tons of steel on its sides, or whatever – it will be good enough to assist the warfighter as they head into harm’s way.

Those trade-offs are now being placed at the PAE level, allowing Navy leaders at that level to make the right decisions – figuring out whether to continue going down a design spiral versus just moving out with production and enabling us to have the right capabilities on time for the warfighter.

You can see former Navy Secretary John Phelan announce the cancellation of the Constellation class in the following video.

Q: Could the Constellation class have been salvaged? What would have needed to change to get it to a place where it was affordable, on time and efficient?

A: I think the initial and envisioned approach was a healthy one. Had we kept on track with what was, back then, the principles that led to the selection – but also how it was originally set up – we probably would have kept closer to the original design. And thus allowing [us] to be closer to the original schedule. And thus allowing [us] also to build the vessel that was desired, without delays or major changes.

On our end, from day one or day two – let me say that once the Navy decided their shift, we opted to consciously become a true partner and showcase that we are a true partner to the Navy and the nation. We said, ‘Okay, we will adjust, we will move forward.’ And it’s a clear reality that what we have in Wisconsin is an asset for the Navy, especially in a time like this that leaves all of us eager to serve the way you would need us to serve – whether it’s today through serial production of landing ships and/or icebreakers or others. And in the future, should the small surface combatant segment have additional needs, it’s obvious that the infrastructure [in Wisconsin] has been built to ideally serve that type of vessel, so we’re ready to answer the calling.

Q: Why didn’t the Navy just take the base class and do minimal modifications to it? It became what seemed like a totally new ship.

A: That’s a great question, Howard, but I would need to speculate to answer that one, and I wouldn’t want to do that, because you’re right. But at the same time – what’s the saying? Hindsight is 20/20. It’s probably one of those occasions at this point. But it’s a great question. I’d love to be with you when we pose it to the right folks.

Q: But what do you think is the answer to that question, from your point of view?

A: From our point of view – from the get-go, when the award was made, it was made because there was a review of the requirements, a review of the design, and a review of all the elements that led to recognition that the parent design possessed exactly the right features to represent the path forward. So collectively, we had marched on that path. We might find ourselves in a different situation right now, but like I said, it’s one thing asking somebody to change their M.O. and adopt a new approach without fully empowering them or doing something drastic to signal that type of transformation. And it’s another where we said ‘we will try this new approach.’ But there was a lot of follow-through that was needed.

Everybody has developed experiences in certain ways, and everybody – especially when you have folks that have been doing it for decades – has developed their own rules of thumb and approaches to dealing with certain situations. It’s not easy to pivot an entire structure to a new idea or a new approach. So like I said, probably it was the right idea, but a little bit ahead of its time.

Q: What do you think of the lessons that should be learned from the Constellation class’s story?

A: I want to be a glass-half-full type of guy, so that’s why I connected back the things that I’ve been seeing being rolled out by our Navy the last few months as indeed adopting some of those lessons learned. So I’ll go back to the fact that they’ve decided to find new ways to apply the principle that schedule is king. And those new ways include changes that are not just at the leadership level, not just at the level following that, but indeed of restructuring and reorganizing the teams that are there to implement those guidelines – because that’s key in order to be able to change your ways and adopt lessons learned.

So I’m hopeful that this new approach of the PAE setup will be an enabler to adopt the lessons learned: of how to move fast, of how not to mess with a design especially when it’s meeting and exceeding requirements, of how to manage change – not in the rollout of a change, but in the decision-making of whether to adopt change or not. So a lot of those new ideas that they’ve been trying to apply are promising to that effect.

Q: The Navy adopted the new VCM program to oversee construction of the new Landing Ship Medium (LSM) vessels you are working on. This is a direct result of what happened with the Constellation class, right?

A: I would definitely think so, because it indicates the whole idea that the Navy is recognizing – instead of applying the typical layers of full team presence in the shipbuilder’s yard, additional layers of engineering design, etc. – we’re saying, ‘Okay, in a case where we want to go fast, let’s make our decisions ahead of time, select the design, check it quickly ahead of time, and assign it as a production-related design in the hands of that VCM, and allow an industry set of characters between the VCM and the shipbuilder to deliver.’

Q: What does Fincantieri have to give up in this VCM approach?

A: Thinking on this – Fincantieri, as a global group, likes to be end-to-end with the end customer. Our strategy is to develop the design according to the needs and requirements, move forward all through construction, and even post-construction to provide full support throughout almost the entire lifecycle of a vessel. That’s the Fincantieri model around the globe.

In this case, we’re looking to adjust to the approach that the Navy is looking to apply – and we can view it as a benefit. We can take it on as a build-to-print: be the shipbuilder that respects this design, doesn’t try to mess with it, just works out all the kinks to ensure producibility, and then moves swiftly into quick serial production.

From that perspective, we’re not really giving up something – we’re just placing at the disposal of the nation the assets that are already in place, and looking to produce as many vessels as quickly as possible.

Q: How will this speed up U.S. shipbuilding?

A: How I interpret this strategy is the Navy saying: in programs that work, find an approach that allows them to almost get out of the picture. They recognize schedule is priority number one and a quality vessel is priority number two. In order to enable that ‘build more and build fast’ approach, they’re seeking to place somebody – the VCM – to take on the construction, provide them with a mature, production-ready design with no changes to it, and enable the kind of interaction you’ve seen in commercial shipbuilding. That allows those two parties – the VCM and the shipbuilder – to work fast through daily decision-making in a way that favors schedule without compromising quality.

They’re seeking to equip the VCM with a design that will not be touched – a build-to-print situation – and empower them to make these types of decisions daily, so that at the end of the day they simply deliver a vessel to the Navy, minimizing the Navy’s need or propensity to intervene.

It’s an innovative approach, and it definitely requires all parties to give up habits and practices that have taken hold in the past. As long as parties stick with this new approach, it has a great chance of success. On our end, we’re trying to be disciplined in respecting it and pushing forward.

Our next installment of this interview focuses on how Fincantieri is planning to help build Trump’s Golden Fleet and the challenges ahead.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The World Cup on Tuesday features tournament heavyweights Argentina and France, who are beginning their campaigns.

France, the 2018 World Cup winners, take on Senegal in East Rutherford, New Jersey, in a repeat of their famous opener in the 2002 edition while Lionel Messi’s reigning champions Argentina face Algeria in Kansas City, Missouri. In Tuesday’s other matches, Norway return to the World Cup for the first time in 28 years against Iraq, and Austria meet Jordan in the day’s final fixture.

Away from the games, Cape Verde are still celebrating their historic draw with Spain while Iraq’s return to the tournament has sparked both happiness and frustration among their supporters.

Here’s what to watch on Day 6 of the World Cup:

What is the schedule for Tuesday?

Four more teams begin their campaigns on Tuesday.

France vs Senegal at New York New Jersey Stadium is scheduled to kick off at 3pm (19:00 GMT).

Later, Norway return to the World Cup for the first time since 1998 when they take on Iraq at Boston Stadium in Massachusetts with kickoff at 6pm (22:00 GMT).

And Argentina will also play against Algeria at Kansas City Stadium at 8pm (01:00 GMT on Wednesday) before Austria meet Jordan at San Francisco Bay Area Stadium in California at 9pm (04:00 GMT on Wednesday).

What are the predictions for France vs Senegal?

France head into the tournament as one of the favourites, sitting third in FIFA’s world rankings. But African powerhouse Senegal, ranked 16th, are expected to provide a stern early test in their opening match.

The teams’ only previous World Cup meeting came in the opening match of the 2002 tournament when tournament debutants Senegal stunned defending champions France 1-0. Papa Bouba Diop’s memorable winner sparked celebrations across Dakar, and then-President Abdoulaye Wade declared a national holiday. Senegal went on to reach the quarterfinals while France exited without winning a game.

Opta’s supercomputer still gives France a clear edge at New York New Jersey Stadium, assigning Les Bleus a 64.8 percent chance of victory. Senegal’s chances of pulling off another upset stand at 14.9 percent while the probability of a draw is put at 20.3 percent.

What are the predictions for Iraq vs Norway?

Tuesday’s Group I clash will be the first meeting between Iraq and Norway, and it will be the Nordic country’s first World Cup match against a team from the Asian Football Confederation.

Norway have relished their return to the World Cup after a long hiatus from the tournament. Fans have drawn attention with their synchronised “Viking row” celebrations while Erling Haaland shared a Viking-themed team photo on social media, describing the tournament as “a dream 28 years in the making”. Led by Haaland and Martin Odegaard, the Norwegians arrive with high hopes.

Opta’s supercomputer expects Norway to start strongly, giving them a 77.4 percent chance of victory. A draw is rated at 14 percent while Iraq have an 8.6 percent chance of pulling off an upset.

What are the predictions for Argentina vs Algeria?

Argentina and Algeria have never faced each other at the World Cup although they did meet in a friendly in 2007 when Argentina came from behind to secure a thrilling 4-3 win at Barcelona’s Camp Nou. A teenager by the name of Lionel Messi scored the first two goals of his international career that day.

History also favours the South Americans. Argentina have won each of their last six World Cup matches against African opponents, rebounding from their shock 1-0 defeat to Cameroon in 1990. Algeria, meanwhile, have enjoyed mixed fortunes against South American sides at the tournament, beating Chile in 1982 before losing to Brazil four years later.

Opta’s supercomputer expects Argentina to make a winning start in Group J. After 25,000 simulations, Lionel Scaloni’s side emerged victorious 68.2 percent of the time. Algeria were given a 13.2 percent chance of causing an upset while a draw was the outcome in 18.6 percent of the projections.

What are the predictions for Austria vs Jordan?

Austria enter the match as the clear favourites on paper. Ranked 25th in the world, they sit 39 places above Jordan, who are 64th in FIFA’s standings, and the Europeans are widely expected to challenge for a place in the knockout rounds.

Opta’s supercomputer strongly backs Austria to open their campaign with a victory in San Francisco, giving them a 70.3 percent chance of taking all three points. Jordan have been assigned a 12.9 percent probability of pulling off an upset while the likelihood of a draw stands at 16.9 percent.

Looking beyond this match, Austria are considered Argentina’s main challengers in Group J. They have an 18 percent chance of finishing top of the group, compared with just 2.9 percent for Jordan.

What else is shaping the World Cup?

Cape Verde celebrate historic point

Cape Verde’s 0-0 draw with Spain led to wild celebrations among fans, including in Boston, home to a large Cape Verdean community. Supporters said they were proud to see their country shine on the World Cup stage.

“Everyone thought Spain would beat us,” one fan said. “We’re a small country, but we have a big heart.”

According to a report on the NBC TV network, goalkeeper Vozinha also became an overnight social media sensation with his Instagram following soaring after the game. NBC said the goalkeeper went from 50,000 followers on Instagram to 4.9 million.

Saudi Arabia deny Uruguay victory

Saudi Arabia looked set for another famous World Cup upset after Abdulelah Alamri gave the Green Falcons the lead against Uruguay, four years on from their shock win over Argentina.

But Uruguay’s Maximiliano Araujo struck 10 minutes from time to earn Uruguay a 1-1 draw. Saudi goalkeeper Mohammed Alowais then made several key saves to preserve the point, leaving Group H finely balanced after the opening round of matches.

Tunisia sack coach after heavy defeat

Tunisia have dismissed Sabri Lamouchi after their 5-1 loss to Sweden in their World Cup opener. Mondher Kebaier is set to take over on an interim basis as Tunisia try to revive their campaign before matches against Japan and the Netherlands.

Meet Merlin, Mexico’s unlikely mascot

A duck named Merlin became one of the World Cup’s first viral stars after appearing in Mexico City celebrations dressed in the national team’s colours. Fans on social media called the two-year-old a “national treasure” and even called for him to attend matches as the tournament’s unofficial mascot.

Norway embrace their Viking roots

Norway have brought Viking fever to the tournament. Fans have debuted a synchronised “Viking row” celebration in the stands while the team posed for a Viking-themed photoshoot that sparked both excitement and debate back home. The images, shared by Erling Haaland, have become one of the tournament’s early talking points.

FIFA clears VAR official Shaun Evans

FIFA said it found “no evidence” to support allegations that video assistant referee Shaun Evans breached its disciplinary code after he was accused of making a white supremacist hand gesture during Germany’s World Cup opener against Curacao. Evans, an Australian, said the gesture was an involuntary movement and denied any intent to communicate a racist message.

For many Iraqis, qualifying for the World Cup has brought a rare moment of joy after decades of conflict and hardship.

Fans said the team’s return to football’s biggest stage after more than 40 years offers people a chance to unite and move away, even briefly, from the tensions in the region.

“We haven’t felt this happy in a long time,” Ahmed Salman, an Iraqi fan, told Al Jazeera.

“This is a chance for people to come together and move away from the atmosphere of war, especially given the tense situation in the region.”

But the celebrations have also been mixed with frustration over restrictions that some said have prevented Iraqi supporters from attending the tournament in the United States.

“Banning the fans is a very negative step because sports have nothing to do with politics,” Salman said. “People are coming to celebrate.”

Another Iraq supporter described the emotions as bittersweet.

“As Iraqis, after more than 40 years, we have qualified for the World Cup,” Taha Mohamed said. “It brings a feeling of joy and comfort, … but regarding the fans, it is frustrating.”

Since Israel launched its latest war on Gaza, Palestinian activist Mohammad Hannoun has been a figurehead in demonstrations across Italy.

Wrapped in a keffiyeh and waving the national flag, as head of the Palestinian Association in Italy he delivered impassioned speeches condemning the Italian government’s military cooperation with Israel and demanding an end to the genocide in Gaza.

The 63-year-old Jordanian national, who lives in the port city of Genoa and is an architect by profession, was arrested in December, under the accusation of having raised around 7 million euros ($8.1m) through his non-profit Association of Solidarity with the Palestinian People (ABSPP) that allegedly ended up in Hamas’s coffers.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni expressed “appreciation and satisfaction” when the so-called “Operation Domino” led to the arrest of nine people, including Hannoun, described by investigators as the “head of the Italian cell of the Hamas organisation”.

But Italy’s Supreme Court of Cassation last month demanded a “comprehensive re-evaluation” of the evidence, describing it as too “generic”, according to the ruling seen by Al Jazeera.

The material presented in court consisted of Israeli intelligence sent to Italian authorities, as well as open-source online information whose provenance and reliability had not been established.

Hannoun’s case is not an isolated one.

Last month, Amin Abu Rashid, a Dutch national of Palestinian origin, was acquitted in the Netherlands by the Rotterdam District Court of financing Hamas, after a years-long legal battle landed him in jail for a year. Similarly, the evidence had relied on Israeli government reports and unverified newspaper articles.

The UK-based advocacy organisation CAGE International described Abu Rashid’s acquittal as a “direct rebuke of the use of Israeli intelligence as the basis for prosecuting Palestinian humanitarian organisers in Europe”.

Anas Mustapha, head of public advocacy at CAGE, told Al Jazeera that relying on Israeli evidence to prosecute Palestinians was tantamount to relying on Chinese information to try Hong Kong dissidents.

This practice constitutes a “major threat to the rule of law in Europe”, he said.

“Israeli intelligence is being laundered through European legal systems to suppress Palestinian civil society,” said Mustapha. “The aim is to disrupt and restrict activism and action against the state of Israel.”

‘Battlefield evidence’

Nicola Canestrini, who is among the lawyers representing the nine defendants including Hannoun, liaised with Abu Rashid’s representatives over the course of several months to challenge the use of so-called “battlefield evidence” in both Italian and Dutch courts.

The term refers to evidence collected by military forces during active hostilities or combat operations. Just like a standard crime scene, the collection of this type of evidence under European requirements must be presented with a chain of custody – the chronological documentation of the seizure, transfer, analysis, and storage of the materials.

In Hannoun’s case, the files alleging cooperation between the ABSPP and Hamas’s military wing were not accompanied by a chain of custody, but sent by an Israeli official “whose personal details remain confidential”, according to court documents.

The only indication of their provenance was the word “Avi”, which Canestrini said was later found to mean Israeli intelligence official Avi Abramson.

The evidence purportedly originated from hard drives found in Gaza’s hospitals as they were taken over by Israeli forces, namely in al-Shifa, al-Rantisi and Jabalia, as well as the Maghazi refugee camp and other locations across the Gaza Strip.

United Nations experts and organisations, including Human Rights Watch, have found that Israeli military actions in Gaza, including the forcible displacement of patients from those hospitals, amount to war crimes.

Canestrini and his legal team argued in court that unverifiable evidence collected by a state undergoing trial at the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) was inadmissible.

“There’s a short-circuit in the legal system that is very troublesome for the rule of law,” the lawyer told Al Jazeera. “We’re seeing a foreign state under investigation for war crimes and crimes against humanity bringing evidence forward, and Italian authorities copying and pasting it in their reports.”

Additionally, rather than file an arrest warrant through established international cooperation channels, Israel sent the documents through a “spontaneous information exchange”. That measure bypasses oversight mechanisms established by the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and the UN Military Evidence Guidelines.

“I believe this was done wilfully to avoid checks and balances that guarantee the respect of human rights,” the lawyer said.

Al Jazeera contacted Italian officials Riccardo Perisi, director of the Service for Combatting Extremism and External Terrorism, and District Attorney Marco Zocco, who declined to comment on Hannoun’s case due to ongoing legal proceedings. Avi Abramson, the Israeli intelligence official identified as the source of the evidence, did not respond to requests for comment.

Crackdown on dissent

Palestinian solidarity has been repressed across Europe since Hamas’s attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, with protest bans, police violence and a wave of legal prosecution.

According to the European Legal Support Center (ELSC), an independent organisation offering legal assistance to organisations and individuals advocating for Palestine, European states have systematically deployed “counterterrorism” and “public order” measures against Palestine solidarity efforts.

ELSC found a pattern of repression to “demobilise opposition to the Israeli genocide against Palestinians” in the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, and France, “advanced through alliances between state actors, Zionist lobby groups, and arms manufacturers”.

In Italy, activities around Palestinian solidarity are increasingly “equated with terrorism,” Italo Di Sabato, the national coordinator of Osservatorio Repressione (Observatory on Repression), an Italian organisation focused on tracking state control and defending the right to protest, told Al Jazeera.

The observatory documented cases in which pro-Palestinian activists were targeted by lawsuits, searches and administrative sanctions. “The objective is stifling any real form of solidarity with the Palestinian people,” Di Sabato said.

He argued that accepting opaque evidence to be used against Hannoun would have created a dangerous legal precedent.

“Israel’s aim was to have a free zone where everything is permitted,” Di Sabato said. “The political meaning of the Supreme Court of Cassation’s ruling is that the rule of law cannot be suspended when we deal with Palestine.

“What today constitutes the basis for the repression of Palestinian activism could tomorrow be the basis for the repression of any form of dissent.”

Venezuela has signed an agreement with General Electric Vernova aimed at boosting electricity generation as the country seeks to improve a power system plagued by years of outages. Officials say the deal could add 5 gigawatts of capacity over four years.

Here’s TWZ’s weekly carrier tracker monitoring America’s flattop fleet, including deployed Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) and Amphibious Ready Groups (ARG), using publicly available open-source information. Check out last week’s report here.

The U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports remains in full effect, for now, pending the execution of the ceasefire agreement, scheduled to be formally signed on Friday in Geneva, according to a notice released today by NAVCENT. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces launched multiple waves of strikes last week against Iran following the shootdown of a U.S. Army Apache helicopter, and disabled an additional two commercial vessels that tried to skirt the blockade, bringing the total to nine. Two carriers, USS Abraham Lincoln and USS George H.W. Bush, embarked with a combined seven squadrons of F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, two squadrons of EA-18G Growlers, and one squadron of F-35C Lightning IIs, continue to support “self defense” strikes and blockade operations.

The Lincoln CSG has been deployed for nearly seven months and would likely be among the first naval assets to rotate out of the theater if the blockade winds down. The details, and scale, of the drawdown of forces in the CENTCOM area of responsibility (AOR), as agreed upon in the memorandum of understanding (MOU), are murky as of publication. More than 20 U.S. Navy surface combatants have been operating in the region.

U.S. Navy fighter jets and command and control aircraft prepare to take off from USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) as the ship transits the Arabian Sea. pic.twitter.com/SAGl2e7y0e

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) June 13, 2026

USS Nimitz entered the final leg of her homeport shift to Norfolk, operating off the east coast in U.S. 2nd Fleet AOR after a monthslong circumnavigation of South America, according to flight tracking data and public AIS. Nimitz conducted operations northwest of Cuba and the Bahamas last week. On Thursday, six Super Hornets, attached to the “Kestrels” of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 137, carried out an air power demonstration and show of force, dropping MK-82/BLU-111 bombs on a simulated target in the Gulf of America.

On the west coast, USS Theodore Roosevelt continues working up in preparation for a future deployment. The flattop got underway on June 10 for INSURV inspections to verify readiness and returned to San Diego the following day. The group was also spotted conducting a live fire exercise with the Mk 38 25mm machine gun. USS Carl Vinson got underway for sea trials after a nine-month Planned Incremental Availability (PIA) and moored at port in San Diego on June 13.

In the Western Pacific, USS George Washington is on a summer patrol and operating in the Philippine Sea. The CSG conducted a replenishment-at-sea with USNS Earl Warren and helo operations while underway in the vicinity of Guam last week. Destroyer USS Shoup, part of the CSG, pulled into Apra Harbor early this morning, according to AIS.

Eyes in the sky.

An MH-60S Sea Hawk assigned to Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 12 operates above Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73) while underway in the Philippine Sea.

The George Washington Carrier Strike Group is operating in the @US7thFleet… pic.twitter.com/l4UWAVHUAW

— U.S. Navy (@USNavy) June 15, 2026

Two ARG-MEUs are currently deployed. Forward-deployed USS Tripoli continues operations in the CENTCOM AOR, and USS Boxer is underway in the Indo-Pacific (INDOPACOM) AOR, operating in the South China Sea. For a detailed review of America’s amphibious assault fleet, check out our recent report here.

Note: Positions are general approximations. Non-deployed LHA/LHD amphibious warships are not shown.

Contact the author: ian.ellis-jones@teamrecurrent.io

Ukraine has officially opened the first phase of membership talks with the European Union on Monday. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy welcomed the opportunity and said it sent a clear message that “Europe’s progress cannot be stopped.”

From his hometown of Sao Vicente in Cape Verde, Vozinha has been his jersey name throughout his club career.

Cape Verde goalkeeper Vozinha broke down in tears at the end of the 0-0 draw with Spain after the 40-year-old was mobbed by his teammates following a stunning display as he denied the European champions victory in their World Cup opener.

Cape Verde were pinned back in their own half for much of Monday’s game, but whenever Spain broke through their dogged rearguard, Vozinha came to the rescue.

His heroics earned him the player of the match, pulling off a string of saves at the end of the first half to deny Ferran Torres, Pedri and Aymeric Laporte.

Here’s everything we know about the Cape Verde goalkeeper:

Where does Vozinha play?

Vozinha goalkeeps for Chaves in Portugal’s second-tier football league.

The World Cup is by far the biggest stage he has reached, but Vozinha began his club career at home with Batuque FC, before transferring to CS Mindelense.

The veteran player’s experience comes from the myriad clubs he has represented – from Progresso in Angola to Zimbru Chisinau in Moldova, Gil Vicente in Portugal, AEL Limassol in Cyprus and AS Trencin in Slovakia, before arriving at Chaves.

Is Vozinha his real name?

No, Vozinha is a moniker for Josimar Jose Evora Dias. It came from his grandparents, whom he spent most of his time with as his father was in the military and his mother was working. The name checks out, since it means “little granny” in Portuguese.

From his hometown of Sao Vicente in Cape Verde, Vozinha has been his jersey name throughout the nomadic club pilgrimage across Africa and Europe.

“When I arrived in Angola, there was another goalkeeper named Josimar, and I said, ‘I am not going to put Josimar II on the shirt’. If everyone knew me as Vozinha in Cape Verde, that’s what I would be,” he told FIFA in an interview earlier this year.

What did Vozinha say after the match?

The Cape Verde keeper was reduced to tears by his heroics and fairytale World Cup debut.

“Very proud… It is an honour for me to represent my country,” Vozinha told reporters of his island nation, the third smallest nation to qualify for a World Cup.

“I cried because I grew up with my grandparents and, unfortunately, they were not here; they died a few years before, and they did everything for me and my life,” he added.

“Also, my mum, she didn’t manage to be here because of the visa. The money for the visa, we didn’t manage on time, and I would like her to be here.”

Is Vozinha world-famous now?

Yes, on all counts.

The goalkeeper’s Instagram following jumped from a modest 500,000 to nearly 5 million within a few hours of full-time in the Spain match.

His quiet brilliance was spotlighted on the world’s biggest stage for all to see.

French football star Paul Pogba took to social media after the match in praise of Vozinha.

“The Cape Verde goalkeeper is really something, waaaaw,” he wrote.

Maxi Araujo scored a late equaliser to salvage a 1-1 draw for Uruguay in their World Cup opener against Saudi Arabia, preventing another stunning upset in Group H after Spain’s earlier goalless draw with Cape Verde.

The Saudis famously beat Argentina 2-1 in their 2022 tournament opener, and they looked on course for another shock, courtesy of Abdulelah Alamri’s 41st-minute strike, until winger Araujo stepped up 10 minutes from time at Miami Stadium on Monday.

Uruguay coach Marcelo Bielsa certainly viewed it as a missed opportunity after European champions Spain dropped two points earlier in the day.

“An opponent we should have beaten; we gave away minutes in the first half that suggest we didn’t do things right,” he said. “We had to win this match.”

The Green Falcons ultimately had goalkeeper Mohammed Alowais to thank for their point, which will give them confidence they can progress to the knockout stage for the first time since the United States last hosted the World Cup in 1994.

“We were very tired at the end, but to play this type of game with this opponent, and to get a point, it’s a positive for us,” said Saudi Arabia coach Georgios Donis.

“I like the spirit and the passion of my players, but I think we have the quality to play better.”

Uruguay, World Cup winners in 1930 and 1950, started the match with the swagger of favourites, and in the fifth minute, left winger Araujo turned on the edge of the box and angled a shot at goal, which Alowais parried away.

But barring a Federico Vinas diving header on the half-hour mark, which Alowais also pushed away, the Uruguayans lacked accuracy going forward and often looked a bit casual at the back.

Donis had promised his side would be courageous, and their attack sparked into life in the 36th minute, when left-back Moteb Alharbi skipped through the midfield before being cynically cut down 30 metres (about 30 yards) from goal.

Alamri had a shot from the centre of the box well saved by Fernando Muslera two minutes later, but the Uruguay goalkeeper was powerless to prevent the Saudis from going ahead soon afterwards.

Mohamed Kanno got on the end of a Musab Aljuwayr corner, and although Muslera managed to save his powerful header, Alamri was on hand to tap the ball into the net.

Bielsa made two changes at the break, and Uruguay’s game plan immediately looked more coherent – getting players down the flank to put crosses into the box and producing a string of headers for Alowais to deal with.

Defensive midfielder Manuel Ugarte came within inches of an equaliser when he beat the Saudi keeper in the 60th minute, only for his drilled shot to bounce off the far post.

Vinas had been Uruguay’s best aerial threat all game, and it was no surprise that the breakthrough came from one of his headers 10 minutes from full-time.

Alowais again denied the target man, but the ball fell straight to Araujo, who did well to control it and clip it into the net at the near post.

Uruguay poured forward, looking for a winner in a frenetic finish; Federico Valverde and Jose Maria Gimenez coming closest with rasping shots from either side of the box, which Alowais did well to push past his posts.

“I think the nerves of the debut worked against us, as did the need to go out and score,” said Vinas.

“In the second half, we did a bit more of what the manager wanted. I’m frustrated and angry, but as captain, I’m happy with my teammates’ work.”

Australian referee Shaun Evans says he didn’t intend to ‘communicate a message, affiliation, game or belief of any kind’.

FIFA says it has found “no evidence” that one of the referees at the World Cup breached its code of conduct after he was accused of making a white supremacist hand gesture during one of the games.

“FIFA’s independent Disciplinary Committee can confirm that, after looking into the matter involving support video assistant referee Shaun Evans, it has found no evidence of breaches of the FIFA Disciplinary Code,” football’s global governing body told Al Jazeera in an emailed statement on Monday.

Earlier, FIFA’s discrimination monitor at the World Cup called for Evans, working as a VAR official in the tournament, to be removed for appearing to make a hand gesture resembling a white supremacist sign.

When the official broadcast of Germany’s opening game against Curacao on Sunday cut pre-game to show the team of video review analysts, Australian official Evans made an “OK” symbol with his right hand in front of his right leg.

Though the game was played in Houston, video officials work in Dallas at the World Cup broadcast centre.

Evans said the hand gesture was not intentional, nor did he make it to “communicate a message, affiliation, game or belief of any kind”.

“The only explanation I can offer is that the movement was an involuntary, subconscious twitch and I was unaware I had done it at the time,” the official said in a statement shortly before FIFA announced its decision.

“Images taken later during the match showed that I repeated this movement many times while holding a pen between my fingers,” Evans went on to add.

“The coverage following this incident simply does not reflect who I am. Of course, I understand how the gesture has been interpreted and I regret this; however, I want to be very clear and categorically say that I did not knowingly or deliberately make the hand symbol suggested.”

It was midnight on April 12 when Modu Baluye woke to the sound of gunfire.

He was asleep with his family inside a classroom at Government Girls’ Secondary School (GGSS), in Monguno, Borno’s north, in northeastern Nigeria, which now serves as a temporary displacement camp, when the first shots rang out. Then came another burst, and another, cutting through the night in rapid succession.

“These people are attacking again,” he remembered saying.

He whispered a prayer and stayed awake. Around him, other displaced families were stirring as well. In the darkness, people listened without speaking, measuring the distance of the violence by the sound of the guns. The attack went on for hours.

By Modu’s account, the gunshots lasted about four hours. He later learned it was a gun battle between terrorists and military officers at the nearby Sector 3 base. As the troops pursued the terrorists along the exit route between Gana Ali, another displacement shelter, and the GGSS, they drove over buried explosives, which detonated and killed the commanding officer and six other soldiers.

By morning, fear had settled over the communities.

The military, residents said, became suspicious of the settlements around the base. The attackers had entered on foot under the cover of darkness, and the communities were not far from the military formation.

“They suspected we were hiding some of them,” Modu said. In the days that followed, soldiers raided Gana Ali and the GGSS camp. Residents told HumAngle that five suspected informants in the communities were arrested, and weapons were recovered. Then came an order for the communities to leave.

“They told us: leave or we will kill you all and burn down your houses,” Modu recounted. Within two days, families began dismantling their makeshift shelters. They packed what they could carry and left. Some were moved to a government settlement on the outskirts of Monguno, along the Monguno-Gajiram road, which is about a 30-minute walk from town.

“It is two weeks today,” Modu said when he spoke to HumAngle on May 10. “The place was torched after we left. I am not sure who torched the buildings.”

For Modu, displacement is not new. He fled Ala, his village in the Marte Local Government Area (LGA) of the state, in 2016 as insurgent violence spread across northern Borno. At the time, he was unmarried and found refuge with his parents at the ‘Water Board’ displacement camp in Monguno, where they lived for about six months. He later moved to the GGSS settlement after securing his own shelter and spent nearly a decade there. In 2024, he got married. By the time soldiers ordered residents to leave the community in April, he had begun building a mud house on a piece of land he purchased the previous year. It was there, in the unfinished house, that he and his family began rebuilding their lives after years of displacement.

A war returning to the bases

The Monguno attack came during a renewed wave of terror assaults on military formations and rural settlements across Borno.

In recent months, terrorists from Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’awati wal-Jihad (JAS), commonly known as Boko Haram, and the Islamic State West Africa (ISWAP) have repeatedly targeted troops, bases, weapons, and supply routes. The attacks have killed soldiers, including senior military officers, and Civilian Joint Task Force (CJTF) members. 

In Nov. 2025, terrorists ambushed a military convoy along the Damboa-Biu road. Two soldiers and two CJTF members were killed. Brigadier-General M. Uba, commander of the 25 Task Force Brigade, was abducted and later killed.

On Jan. 26, terrorists attacked a military base in Damasak, killing seven soldiers and capturing 13 others, including the commanding officer. Eleven later escaped. Five days later, on Jan. 31, another terror attack on an army base in Sabon Gari killed nine soldiers and two CJTF members; about 16 injured security personnel were evacuated for treatment.

On March 10, a military base in Kukawa came under attack; the commanding officer, Lt. Col. Umar Farouq, and several of his soldiers were killed. 

On April 9, three days before the Monguno attack, terrorists launched a joint assault on the headquarters of the 29 Task Force Brigade in Benisheikh, killing its brigade commander, Brigadier-General Oseni Braimah.

The attacks have already weakened the military formations in rural areas. In some places, troops have withdrawn or consolidated around larger garrison towns, leaving smaller settlements more exposed. But when soldiers are killed, residents say the anger does not end on the battlefield. It returns with the troops.

The trails of suspicion

In rural Borno, civilians are often trapped between two armed powers. Terrorists demand information about troop movements, military positions, and security operations. Soldiers, in turn, demand information about insurgent hideouts, movements, and informants. Refusing either side can be deadly.

Those suspected of helping the military may be abducted or killed by the terrorists. Those suspected of helping terrorists may be arrested, detained, displaced, or punished by security forces. As a result, civilians often face impossible choices, with serious consequences regardless of whom they cooperate with.

Despite these risks, communities have at times provided intelligence to the military. In March, for example, residents of Doro, a rural community in Kukawa LGA on the shores of Lake Chad, reportedly alerted troops after observing suspicious insurgent movements, helping security forces prepare for an attack.

The consequences of such actions can be severe. In March 2022, ISWAP executed four civilians in communities within the same local government area after accusing them of spying for government troops. Residents said the killings were intended to deter others from sharing information with security forces. For many civilians, the message was clear: speaking to the military could carry a death sentence. 

The Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), Gen. Olufemi Oluyede, recently argued that residents in Borno and Yobe knew some of those behind the attacks during an operational visit to Maiduguri in March, reflecting a long-held security assumption that residents in affected communities often know more than they admit. The CDS said communities must take ownership of the crisis, citing Kukawa, where he claimed two of the attackers were from within the village.

But for many civilians, knowing does not mean consenting. They say  in places where terrorists move freely, buy food, collect supplies, and threaten residents, silence is often a currency for survival.

Professor Abubakar Mu’azu, former director of the Centre for Peace, Development, and Diplomatic Studies at the University of Maiduguri, said this suspicion has existed since the early years of the insurgency.

“Right from the start, there was suspicion by the security agencies that the people who are living in areas where these terrorist activities were happening are also supporting the terrorists,” he said. “They never considered the fact that there is a majority of people who disagree with these terrorists’ activities.”

Mu’azu said the reactionary nature of security operations has prevented the military from building a reliable system of trust with local communities.

“They assume that the locals are giving information to the terrorists willingly,” he said. “But they keep saying they want the people to give them information about the terrorists.”

For him, this contradiction is at the heart of the crisis.

The military needs civilian intelligence to fight terrorism, but if civilians fear that any contact with terrorists, even under duress, will be treated as collaboration, they may stop speaking altogether.

Life under duress

In Monguno, residents say terrorists still move in and out of town despite the presence of security forces.

Koso Abubakar, a displaced farmer, said the terrorists often enter on motorcycles, buy food items, and leave.

“They come and leave at will,” he said. “Sometimes, they come to kidnap people. They don’t attack the military, and the military does not confront them. But on other days, they attack the military. That is when the military retaliates.”

According to Koso, most residents live with the knowledge that they can be accused by either side at any time.

“People are living in fear because everyone is a potential target,” he said.

In many rural communities, even work has become dangerous. A farmer going to his field, a fisher heading towards the water, or a trader moving goods through bush paths may first have to pay those who control the routes. The payments are called taxes, levies, or sometimes simply “settlement”, but residents understand what they are: money paid under fear. To refuse is to risk punishment, in lighter cases, or killing and abduction, in extreme cases, from terrorists. To pay is to risk being seen by soldiers as someone sustaining the insurgency. In this way, even the small acts people perform to feed their families can become evidence against them.

Professor Mu’azu said this fear terrorists use violence to discipline communities.

“They are very good at setting a very deadly example by killing or eliminating people, with or without evidence,” he said. “If they are attacked by security agencies and they did not hear anything from people living in these settlements, they would assume the people gave information about their positions.”

This was what many residents believe happened in Ngoshe in March, when terrorists attacked the community, killed many residents, and abducted others, including women and children. The attack was suspected to be retaliation for a previous military operation in the Mandara Mountains that killed some terrorist commanders. The terrorists reportedly believed residents had given up their location.

For civilians, the lesson is brutal: giving information can kill you. Not giving information can also kill you.

When protection becomes punishment

The military has long accused some civilians of aiding terrorists.  In the early years of the war, many young men were arbitrarily detained. Some disappeared. Some were killed. In April 2014, soldiers arrested 42 adult men from Gallari, a village in the Konduga LGA of Borno, on suspicion of links to the insurgency. They were taken to the Giwa Barracks detention facility in Maiduguri. Twelve years later, only three have regained their freedom after years in detention and alleged torture. Through months of on-the-ground investigation and analysis of satellite imagery, HumAngle has also previously reported on disappearances and mass graves linked to military operations, while the wives of detained and disappeared men later formed the Knifar Women movement to demand justice.

For communities already carrying the memory of those years, new raids and forced evacuations reopen old wounds.

Mu’azu said security forces should approach communities with more care, especially when allegations of collaboration arise.

“One would assume that when security forces are dealing with situations like this, they would not come with the mindset that the people are sympathetic to the terrorists, or that all the people are giving information to the terrorists,” he said.

He added that soldiers have a difficult job and deserve sympathy for the burden they carry. But he argued that this does not justify indiscriminate punishment.

“They are the ones who are supposed to protect the civilians,” he said. “If there are people they suspect, they should arrest them and hand them over to the police for proper investigation, without compromising the little support they have in the community.”

When communities are burned or displaced after attacks, the consequences go beyond the immediate loss of shelter. Food stocks disappear. Children are pulled out of school. Families scatter. People who had already fled violence once are forced to flee again.

In resettled or displaced communities, where people have spent years coping, another displacement can mean the collapse of everything they had slowly rebuilt.

A dangerous silence

After the Monguno raid, Koso said some residents became so afraid of the military that they fled into the bush.

“Many people, about 30, also left for the bush,” he said. “Most of them fear the military. The military does not trust them.”

Mu’azu warned that this kind of fear can damage counterterrorism efforts.

“They will lose trust, respect, and block chances of receiving information,” he said. “This could also push them to be recruited by the terrorists.”

For Mu’azu, the solution is not to abandon intelligence work, but to make it safer and more systematic. He said the military should cultivate trusted informants within communities, create secure channels of communication, and protect residents when terrorists retaliate.

“This is the gap,” he said. “Oftentimes, communities are attacked after successful military operations. The patterns should be studied. They should do a statistical analysis. They should be mindful of the time and be prepared against such actions.”

He also called for stronger collaboration among the military, DSS, police, civil defence, and intelligence agencies in neighbouring countries such as Cameroon, Chad, and Niger, because terrorists move across borders.

But for Modu and others displaced from Gana Ali and the GGSS, these policy questions remain distant. What they know is simpler: they fled one danger and met another. They were told to leave the place they had made into a home. Then they watched, or heard, that what remained had been burned.

In Borno’s war, civilians are often asked to prove their loyalty to the state while surviving under the shadow of terrorists, and in that narrow space between fear and suspicion, many are losing everything.

A journalist for Press TV has been hit by shrapnel while filming a report on Israeli attacks in southern Lebanon. Hadi Hoteit said he was targeted despite wearing a ‘Press’ vest, and is in hospital receiving treatment.

In SpaceX’s case, appetite was exceptionally high. The underwriters, which included Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and JPMorgan, exercised the option in full, purchasing an additional 83.3 million shares directly from the company to meet the huge demand.