TODAY

Simon caps a Pacific season of record-breaking intensity, as deadly storms wreak havoc from Hawaii to Mexico.

At least two people have died in Mexico after Hurricane Simon and former tropical storm Rachel brought torrential rain and catastrophic flooding to Pacific coast communities.

At a Monday news briefing, Guerrero Governor Evelyn Salgado confirmed that a 71-year-old man had died during Hurricane Simon after a retaining wall collapsed under the weight of intense precipitation.

According to the Guerrero-based news agency IRZA, the man, identified by his family as Albino Moreno Jimenez, had been feeding his animals on the western outskirts of Chilpancingo when a wall came crashing down on him.

A second death was announced later in the day in the state of Baja California along Mexico’s western coast. There, Governor Marina del Pilar said that a young girl had died from the effects of what was once Hurricane Rachel, which peaked in early October as a Category 3 storm.

At least 10 more people remain missing in Baja California, according to the governor. Eight were reported missing in the city of Ensenada, on the Pacific coast, and two in the fishing town of San Felipe on the Gulf of California.

The figures remain preliminary, with local newspaper La Jornada reporting a higher death toll of two in Baja California and 11 missing.

Death toll expected to rise

Rachel made landfall in the Mexican state as a post-tropical cyclone, and its remnants have travelled north through southern California in the southwestern United States.

Hurricane Simon, meanwhile, has churned off the coast of Mexico since the weekend. By late Monday morning, it had weakened from a powerful Category 4 storm to a Category 2.

Its maximum sustained winds had slowed slightly to around 155km/h (100mph), according to the US National Hurricane Center. Its centre was about 115km west-southwest of Cabo Corrientes, a cape in the state of Jalisco, drifting west at 3km/h.

Forecasters predict Simon could make landfall on Thursday or Friday. Hurricane warnings remain in effect for western Mexico, which is vulnerable to landslides and deadly surf conditions as a result of the storm.

Experts warn the death toll from both storms could rise, and officials have called on residents to exercise caution amid the devastation wrought by downed trees, high winds and floodwaters.

The Spanish newspaper El Pais reported the death of a cliff diver, Juan Patines, who was killed in Mazatlan, the northwestern state of Sinaloa, after jumping into the sea on Saturday night.

According to Mexican media, the heavy surf hampered his efforts to return to shore amid dangerous coastal conditions associated with Hurricane Simon. Local authorities later halted cliff-diving at the site due to hazardous sea conditions.

Officials have yet to confirm whether his death was directly linked to Hurricane Simon.

A record Pacific storm season

Rachel and Simon have battered Mexico’s western coast as part of an extraordinary stretch of hurricane activity across the Pacific.

The northeastern and central Pacific Ocean has experienced a record storm season this year, fuelled in part by the El Nino weather phenomenon, which results in warming waters in parts of the region. Twenty-one named storms have been recorded in the Pacific so far.

On Sunday, Simon tipped the region to a historic high for accumulated cyclone energy (ACE), a metric of the combined strength and longevity of tropical storms. This year has already surpassed the previous high set in 2018.

The US island chain of Hawaii has been among the hardest-hit places. In August, Hurricane Lala unleashed ruinous flooding on Hawaii’s Big Island as a Category 1 storm, killing a 93-year-old woman and destroying some 100 homes, according to state officials.

A few weeks later, Hurricane Lowell, a Category 4 hurricane at its peak, struck the Hawaiian islands of Kauai and Niihau, where powerful winds, storm surge and flooding overwhelmed towns and roads.

Roughly 90 percent of Kauai’s power customers were plunged into darkness as a result of electricity outages. At least two deaths were linked to Lowell.

In late September, Hurricane Nolo brought another round of flooding and landslides to the Hawaiian islands, though it did not make landfall.

For more than 40 percent of US presidents, the fraternity hall was an early stop on the road to the White House.

Fraternal organisations, more commonly known as fraternities or frats, have a long and storied history on college campuses in the United States.

One industry group, the North American Interfraternity Conference (NIC), represents 58 fraternities spread across 600 schools. It claims nearly 200,000 undergraduate students as active members and an alumni population of 4.2 million.

The draw for college-aged men is the promise of brotherhood, a bond that transcends keg parties and late-night revelry. Like sororities and other members-only student organisations, fraternities are often touted as pathways to personal, academic and professional success.

But critics argue that some fraternities have leveraged their exclusivity to encourage and normalise violence, dangling social acceptance as a reward for compliance.

“This isn’t [some sort of] a hobbyist club,” said anthropologist Aldo Cimino, a Kent State University professor who studies fraternity hazing. “It is the seriousness of the affiliation that has generated the intensity of these induction rituals.”

In recent weeks, one case has renewed debate over fraternity culture and whether the campus organisations use their exclusivity to shield bad behaviour.

In September, an anonymous woman known as Jane Doe filed a civil lawsuit against the Chi Phi fraternity at Cornell University and seven of its members, accusing them of gang raping her during a party on the night of October 19, 2024.

Doe’s sorority, Delta Delta Delta, and Cornell itself are among the co-defendants.

Her lawsuit raises questions about fraternity and sorority culture at US schools, collectively known as “Greek life” for the groups’ use of Greek lettering and symbols.

Upon her admission to Cornell, Doe argues she encountered a “glorified – yet materially false and misleading – facade” for Greek life.

“She arrived on a campus where the University actively promoted Greek membership as a ‘vital’ part of the campus community and endorsed these organizations as well-managed, worthy pathways to new friendships and improving one’s educational and professional opportunities,” the lawsuit said.

The complaint accuses the fraternities of instead perpetuating a pattern of sexual assault and abuse.

What are fraternities?

Now a multibillion-dollar industry, fraternities in the US trace their origins to men-only clubs established at some of the country’s oldest universities.

The tradition began at the College of William and Mary in 1776, when Phi Beta Kappa was founded as a secret society for debate and scholarly exchange.

Its adoption of the Greek alphabet, oath of secrecy, and arcane membership rites helped establish a blueprint for future fraternities and sororities. Often with houses of their own, fraternities eventually grew into informal extensions of the campus residential system.

Historian Nicholas Syrett wrote about the origins of such groups in his book The Company He Keeps: A History of White College Fraternities.

In an interview with Al Jazeera, he explained that fraternities have long embraced so-called masculine ideals. But those ideals have changed from generation to generation.

In the past, fraternities sought to position themselves in “opposition to boyhood” by embracing “independence, strength of character, handsomeness and loyalty”, Syrett explained.

But their modern iteration has shifted to include a greater emphasis on “athleticism, sexual success with women, and recklessness” as well as alpha-male posturing.

Syrett argues that the fraternity system’s cult of toughness reflects a wider matrix of gendered expectations and social hierarchies.

Early fraternity men, Syrett says, prized intellect and academic distinction, provided neither betrayed too much effort. But “this has largely taken a backseat in contemporary fraternities”, he explained.

“When [men] are initiated, they are taught that loyalty to the brotherhood is of the utmost importance,” Syrett said of fraternities today. “This leads to the keeping of all kinds of secrets, including things that are against the rules and/or the law.”

A mark of elite status

In the two and a half centuries since the first fraternities were formed, Greek life has expanded to include different races and identities outside of white men.

Some Greek groups have even eschewed the traditional gender divide altogether to better embrace transgender and non-binary members.

But fraternities and sororities overall tend to act as “microcosms of the larger society”, according to Elizabeth Allan, a professor at the University of Maine and director of its Hazing Prevention Research Lab, “with race, pretty privilege and economic segregation helping shape the system”.

“The [social] stratification that we see in the larger society is going to be reflected, in large part, in many of these organisations, unless they’re actively working to disrupt it,” she added.

Between membership dues and rent at fraternity chapter houses, Greek organisations can price out all but the more affluent students, according to Allan.

“Pretty privilege” – the social bias in favour of those deemed conventionally attractive – can add to the pressure, with sorority applicants in particular shelling out hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars for cosmetic treatments and outfits.

Experts say the sense of exclusivity that many fraternities and sororities cultivate is a powerful draw for incoming students, who see membership as a path to upward social mobility.

That perception is reinforced by the groups’ internal dynamics. Many sororities and fraternities encourage networking among members.

A 2021 Gallup survey commissioned by the NIC and the National Panhellenic Conference found that 42 percent of fraternity or sorority alumni said a fellow member had helped them find an internship or job.

Meanwhile, 51 percent of Greek members reported having a job waiting at graduation or found employment within two months. The rate was much lower among those who were not members of such fraternities or sororities, at 36 percent.

How hazing shapes fraternities

Critics often point to hazing rituals in particular as shaping a culture of violence at some fraternities and sororities.

Hazing is a process through which prospective Greek life members undergo humiliating and sometimes perilous tasks to secure admission.

The phenomenon is prohibited by law in most US states, though the definitions, penalties and scope of such laws vary. The consequences, however, can be deadly.

One of the earliest recorded deaths associated with fraternity hazing took place at Cornell in 1873.

At the time, a group of “pledges” – would-be fraternity members – were blindfolded and led far from campus at night, with instructions to make their way back on their own.

In the dark, one of the pledges, Mortimer M Leggett, and two fraternity members stumbled over a cliff and plunged into the gorge of Six Mile Creek. The two fraternity members survived. Leggett, however, did not.

Secret initiation rituals can forge an “informal psychological social contract in which members feel obligated to protect the organisation”, according to Pietro Sasso, who studies college student experience at Old Dominion University.

Some members may feel the need to rally around the fraternity even when “doing so conflicts with their personal values or responsibilities to others”, Sasso added.

“My research on fraternity cultures suggests that organisational socialisation can normalise behaviours that individuals might otherwise question, making the environment itself an important part of prevention,” he explained.

Inside Doe’s lawsuit against Chi Phi

Doe’s case cites some of the social pressures and incentives that lead young men and women to Greek life on campus.

“She was drawn to the sorority and its promises of sisterhood and lifelong friendships, the status it conferred on its members, and the community it provided on campus when she was over 1,000 miles away from home,” the lawsuit said of Doe.

But Doe said she joined Cornell’s Greek community without being fully aware of the pattern of sexual assault associated with the local fraternities.

During Doe’s first semester, in 2022, there were at least five reported cases of victims at Cornell being drugged, and two alleged cases of sexual assault. All of those cases, according to her lawsuit, took place at fraternities.

Two years later, on the night of the alleged gang rape, Doe claims she was pressured by fraternity members to take drugs like ketamine, marijuana and alcohol. After agreeing to a threesome, she said she found herself in a “room full of predatory, fraternity men” who raped her while she was incapacitated.

A photo of a group chat included in her lawsuit shows one Chi Phi member informing his fellow fraternity brothers that there was “free pussy” in an upstairs alumni room. A member of the chat replies, “I f***ing love chi phi.” Another chimes in, “Like you can walk in and whip it out.”

Several of the men have denied any wrongdoing.

But the case has sparked questions about whether the culture of Greek life contributes to a high rate of sexual assault in fraternities and sororities.

One 2021 survey published by the American Psychological Association tracked male students from high school through their second year of college. It found that fraternity members were 62 percent more likely to report sexual aggression during their first two years of college.

Separately, a 2009 study published in the journal Violence Against Women estimated that 29 percent of sorority members reported suffering sexual assault during college, roughly four times the rate of non-members.

Reforming Greek life

After the alleged gang rape in 2024, Cornell’s Chi Phi chapter was closed, and the fraternity remains barred from campus. Two male defendants in Doe’s lawsuit were expelled, while another two were suspended.

But some student activists say too little is being done to reform Greek life in the wake of Doe’s case. They want stronger measures to enforce accountability within private, members-only groups where secrecy often reigns.

CJ Barles, a junior at the University of California, Davis, is one of the students across the US organising protests in support of Doe. She told Al Jazeera she understands the appeal of the fraternity and sorority systems.

“Affiliated students say it looks good on their resume,” Barles explained. “They see it as a built-in cult, a seat at the table and a crew to call their own.”

But Barles said she has heard troubling reports. Some fraternities, she explained, hold parties “requiring every man” to arrive with several women in tow. That requirement says “a lot about the culture some of these spaces cultivate”, she added.

At a rally last week, Barles and other protesters called on the University of California system to implement new measures to hold fraternities accountable for sexual assault, including enshrining students’ right to withdraw consent during sexual encounters.

But Barles said she left feeling dumbstruck by the accounts of sexual violence shared by women on campus, many of whom spoke from personal experience.

“It’s unbelievably upsetting, the amount of stories I heard,” said Barles. The litany of grievances has fanned her scepticism of the Greek system: “I wouldn’t step within a mile of most of them.”

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Thanksgiving message comes a week ahead of Alberta’s vote on a separatism referendum.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has used his Thanksgiving message to Canadians to call for national unity, a week before the oil-rich province of Alberta is set to vote on a proposal to secede from Canada.

“We can’t build big things on fault lines,” Carney said in his video message on Monday, warning that Canada faces threats to its economy, security and way of life.

“We have to be strong, and we are stronger together.”

His comments come as Albertans head to the polls on October 19 to decide whether to begin the process of seeking independence. The initial referendum is non-binding, but it proposes to hold a binding vote in the future to decide whether Alberta should secede.

The question facing voters is: “Should Alberta remain a province of Canada, or should the Government of Alberta commence the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether or not Alberta should separate from Canada?”

The vote follows a growing push by a vocal group of separatists, fuelled by longstanding grievances over federal energy and environmental policies.

The secessionist movement has accused the Canadian government of unfairly targeting Alberta’s oil and gas industry, the cornerstone of the province’s economy.

The movement is also being watched south of the border, as Canada’s relationship with the United States under President Donald Trump has become strained.

An investigation by The Globe and Mail earlier this month revealed that US Republican operatives met with secession organisers in Alberta to talk about campaign strategies. Separatist leaders had reportedly offered access to the province’s water and oil royalties in exchange for US support for independence. Separatist leaders have disputed those claims.

Carney’s comments also come after another secessionist movement, the Parti Quebecois, won the most seats in a provincial election in Quebec last week, allowing it to return to power after more than a decade.

The Parti Quebecois, however, only won 59 seats out of a total of 129 in Quebec’s National Assembly, leaving it short of a majority government.

Still, following that victory, US tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, considered the richest man on the planet, applauded the results. He has been known to use his wealth and influence to support political causes, particularly on the far right.

“Good. Quebec should separate,” Musk wrote on social media. “They would be better off. Alberta and Saskatchewan should separate too.”

Carney, who grew up in Alberta, said he was filming the message from a classroom at his former school, St Francis Xavier High School in Edmonton.

“I’m back home a lot these days because we are building big things again in Alberta: thousands of new homes, high-speed rail, a new pipeline to the West Coast that will create lasting opportunity and prosperity for hundreds of thousands of people in this province and across the country,” he said.

Despite the secessionist movement’s growing visibility, polls suggest most Albertans oppose independence.

Vatican officials expect a one-week hospital recovery for the 71-year-old religious leader ahead of his scheduled Latin America tour.

Pope Leo XIV is to undergo surgery to remove a lung nodule, the Vatican has announced.

The 71-year-old leader of the Catholic Church will enter Rome’s Gemelli Hospital late on Tuesday morning for the procedure, which is expected to require about a week of inpatient recovery and has forced the cancellation of upcoming papal audiences.

During his weekly blessing in St Peter’s Square on Sunday, Leo told pilgrims that a small nodule was found on his left lung during a routine checkup and said it was “well-contained” and had been spotted early.

“The doctors believe it’s best to take action, so, following their advice, I’ve decided to have surgery to remove it,” he said during remarks delivered in Italian.

Later, the Vatican said a week of recovery time is expected after Leo’s surgery, and his audiences have been cancelled until October 20.

Spokespeople did not clarify whether the nodule is believed to be malignant.

The pope has no reported history of serious illness and is considered physically active, routinely swimming and playing tennis.

The upcoming surgery comes ahead of an official Latin America tour scheduled for November 6–17, with stops planned across Uruguay, Argentina, and Peru.

Whether the operation and subsequent recovery will force changes to the itinerary remains unclear, though the pontiff told reporters on Sunday that he intends to make the journey.

The late Pope Francis, Leo’s predecessor, died at age 88. Francis was hospitalised several times and grew frail in his later years. He did not usually announce his hospital visits in advance, sometimes sparking intense media speculation about his health.

Saracens have sacked Totoa Auvaa, the academy player who was involved in a nightclub incident with England cricketers Ben Stokes and Gus Atkinson in June.

The English Prem club have confirmed that the 21-year-old Samoan forward has left with immediate effect following another incident in St Albans on Saturday.

Auvaa had originally been stood down from all club duties while Saracens investigated the matter.

“The club has determined that his conduct falls short of the standards expected of everyone who represents Saracens, both on and off the pitch,” read a club statement., external

“We take our responsibilities to our supporters, young people and partners seriously and we remain committed to upholding the standards of our conduct expected across the club.”

A disciplinary hearing by the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) found that then England captain Stokes and pace bowler Atkinson breached “contractual obligations” but were blameless for “violent conduct” in an incident in June.

Both were present in a London nightclub when a member of England’s security staff was left bloodied and in need of medical attention after being struck by Auvaa.

Stokes and Atkinson were made unavailable for England’s second Test defeat by New Zealand while Auvaa was not sanctioned.

All-rounder Stokes was restored to the team for the deciding third Test, during which he made a stunning announcement to retire from international cricket at the conclusion of the match.

Who: Atletico Madrid vs Manchester United
What: UEFA Champions League, matchday 2
Where: Estadio Metropolitano, Madrid, Spain
When: Tuesday, October 13, at 9pm (19:00 GMT)
How to follow: Al Jazeera Sport will bring you all the build-up and live updates from 16:00 GMT.

Action in Europe’s premier club competition returns with a matchday two clash between in-form La Liga side Atletico Madrid and Premier League strugglers Manchester United.

There are contrasting moods in the camps ahead of Tuesday’s fixture in the Spanish capital.

Atletico are challenging Barcelona for the top spot in Spain’s top flight, while Man United are in the bottom half of England’s Premier League, several places below all their traditional rivals.

Left winger Alex Baena and striker Jonathan David have been running the show for Atletico, while playmaker Bruno Fernandes and marksman Bryan Mbeumo are trying to keep United’s hopes alive of turning things around.

Atletico and Man United are set to clash for only the fifth time in history and the third in the Champions League.

Here’s all you need to know about the match:

How have Atletico Madrid played this season?

Atletico have made a promising start to the 2026-27 La Liga season, as they sit in second place, five points adrift of leaders and title holders, Barcelona.

Of the eight league games they have played, Atletico have won six, drawn one and lost one.

One of those results included a feisty 2-1 derby win over giants Real Madrid.

How have Manchester United played this season?

United are experiencing one of their worst starts to a league campaign.

They are 12th in the Premier League standings with six points, having won only one of six matches (D3 L2).

Those defeats also include a controversial 1-0 loss to their bitter rivals, Manchester City.

What happened in the first round of Champions League matches?

Atletico suffered a 2-1 defeat to Liverpool at Anfield in their first UCL match of the season, while Man United thrashed Azerbaijani club Sabah 4-0 in their campaign opener.

That keeps Atletico 25th and Man United fourth in the league phase of this year’s Champions League.

The top eight teams at the end of the league phase qualify directly to the knockout rounds.

Atletico Madrid vs Manchester United: Predictions

Opta’s supercomputer has given Atletico a 48.5 percent probability of victory, while Man United have a 27.2 percent chance and a draw is estimated at a likelihood of 24.3 percent.

Atletico Madrid vs Manchester United: Head-to-head

• Matches: 4
• Atletico wins: 2
• Man United wins: 0
• Draws: 2

Encounters:

• March 15, 2022: Manchester United 0-1 Atletico Madrid (Champions League)
• February 23, 2022: Atletico Madrid 1-1 Manchester United (Champions League)
• November 06, 1991: Manchester United 1-1 Atletico Madrid (UEFA European Cup Winners Cup)
• October 23, 1991: Atletico Madrid 3-0 Manchester United (UEFA European Cup Winners Cup)

Atletico Madrid vs Manchester United: Form guide

(Last five matches across all competitions, latest match first)

Atletico Madrid: W-W-W-W-L

Manchester United: D-D-L-L-W

Who are the top players to watch?

Alex Baena and Jonathan David (Atletico): Baena is in good form for club and country, with four goals and two assists for Atletico this season. Further up the pitch, centre-forward David has three goals and two assists.

Bruno Fernandes and Bryan Mbeumo (Man United): Midfielder Fernandes, the United captain, has been the team’s top scorer with four goals in all competitions, while the playmaker also has an assist. Forward Mbeumo, meanwhile, has three goals and an assist.

What have the coaches said?

Diego Simeone (Atletico):

On Julian Alvarez failing to find the net so far this season: “I think strikers with Julian’s characteristics always need goals, not just him. It’s true that beyond his finishing, he’s a team player, a player that can link very well, he can assist and he’s got many more tools than just goalscoring.”

On facing Man United: “The game will be long, it will be tough and we have to manage our efforts to compete well.”

Michael Carrick (Man United): 

On United’s poor form: “We’ve got to stay positive and keep doing the right things. We need to do better and we need more points, of course we do.”

On facing Atletico: “We’ve got big games coming up and are looking forward to Tuesday now. A fresh start, a fresh game and we will go there looking forward to the game.”

Did you know?

• Atleti are unbeaten in the four meetings between the sides (W2 D2). Their most recent encounters came in the 2021-22 Champions League round of 16, where they drew 1-1 in Madrid before winning 1-0 in Manchester.
• Atleti also dethroned United as European Cup Winners’ Cup holders in 1991-92, winning the second-round tie 4-1 on aggregate (3-0 home, 1-1 away).
• United have lost only one of their last 11 matches against Spanish opponents (W7 D3). They beat Athletic Bilbao 3-0 away and 4-1 at home in the last fixtures in the 2024-25 Europa League semifinals to make it three successive victories.
• United’s last 10 matches against Spanish opponents have produced 35 goals, an average of 3.5 per game.

Team news and predicted lineups

Atletico Madrid

Atletico have a fully fit squad.

Predicted starting XI:

Jan Oblak; Marc Pubill, Cristian Romero, David Hancko; Marcos Llorente, Pablo Barrios, Koke, Giuliano Simeone; Kang-in Lee, Alex Baena; Julian Alvarez

Manchester United

As many as five United players are out with injuries. Those include Patrick Dorgu (hamstring), Benjamin Sesko (shin), Tom Heaton (abdomen), Manuel Ugarte (knee) and Matthijs de Ligt (back).

Predicted starting XI:

Senne Lammens; Noussair Mazraoui, Leny Yoro, Lisandro Martinez, Diogo Dalot; Youri Tielemans, Kobbie Mainoo; Bryan Mbeumo, Bruno Fernandes, Matheus Cunha; Marcus Rashford

Muslim governments backed the genocide case against Myanmar. They must now show that their commitment to the Rohingya goes beyond words.

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has made Muslim solidarity central to how it presents itself. Nine years ago, Myanmar’s military massacred Rohingya civilians and drove hundreds of thousands from their homes. The persecution has not ended: the Rohingya remain stateless, face continuing violence and risk death while fleeing by sea. Throughout those years, the OIC has held summits and passed resolutions. Yet it has failed to protect them.

When I founded the Burma Human Rights Network 14 years ago, I believed that if we gathered evidence carefully and put it before institutions with the power to act, they would act. We have gathered testimony from survivors of massacres. We have documented the systematic destruction of Rohingya villages, the denial of their citizenship and the deliberate starvation of a people. Yet despite all this documentation, the situation facing the Rohingya has mostly grown worse. The International Court of Justice is expected to rule later this year on whether Myanmar’s actions constituted genocide.

I have sometimes asked myself whether a ruling could help stop the atrocities. The Rohingya survivors who gave evidence in The Hague relived the worst moments of their lives before international judges because they trusted that their testimony would matter. Many of them are still in Bangladesh, still in limbo, dependent on food assistance worth as little as $7 per person per month. One in every seven Rohingya who attempted sea crossings last year was reported dead or missing. They are unprotected, and governments that could do more have not done so.

People often ask me why we continue. I have never had a satisfying answer. What I know is that without a record of these atrocities, it becomes easier to deny they happened. I continue because, after hearing these accounts and seeing the evidence, I do not know how to walk away from it.

We have published evidence that governments did not want to confront, and we have called the atrocities what they are: genocide. If the court finds that Myanmar committed genocide, it would be the first time in the International Court of Justice’s 80-year history that a state has been held responsible for the crime.

I now address the OIC foreign ministers who will gather in Baghdad on October 17. The OIC backed this case, and your governments supported the effort to hold Myanmar accountable for its treatment of the Rohingya. Many Rohingya, along with many of us who work with them, took those commitments seriously. When the ruling arrives, I expect statements welcoming it and renewed promises of accountability. But another communiqué will not protect anyone. OIC governments should refuse to forcibly return Rohingya to Myanmar, protect Rohingya who reach their territory, sustain support for refugees in Bangladesh and agree on diplomatic and economic measures against those responsible for their persecution. These are choices your governments can make.

The way Rohingya are treated across the region is hard to reconcile with those commitments. Some governments that speak about the Rohingya in international meetings do not offer the same protection to those who arrive at their borders. A government cannot demand accountability from Myanmar and at the same time send people back into danger.

Bangladesh hosts 1.2 million Rohingya and has faced years of pressure to send them back. The OIC must also challenge abuses against the Rohingya by governments outside its membership. In 2025, according to testimony documented by Amnesty International, Indian authorities forced at least 40 Rohingya from a naval vessel into the Andaman Sea, leaving them to swim towards Myanmar. If the OIC says nothing when governments expose Rohingya to that kind of danger, those governments have little reason to change course.

To the Rohingya community organisations that kept working, the journalists who reported despite restrictions on access, those who helped survivors bring their testimony to international forums, and the advocates who stayed with this issue when official attention moved elsewhere, I can only say this: you did work that governments with armies and treasuries should never have left to you. The evidence you preserved is now part of the record.

The 57 governments meeting in Baghdad have repeatedly pledged solidarity with the Rohingya and supported efforts to hold Myanmar accountable for genocide. But solidarity means little if it does not translate into action. A judgment from The Hague will not protect the Rohingya by itself. What those governments do after it will show whether their support for this case has consequences beyond the courtroom.

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

Iran has offered to facilitate talks between Saudi Arabia and Yemen’s Houthi group after a series of deadly attacks on the kingdom, raising questions about Tehran’s diplomatic calculations as fighting intensifies across the region.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi spoke with his Saudi counterpart, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, on Sunday, in their first publicly reported contact since the Iran-aligned Houthis stepped up attacks on Saudi Arabia.

The diplomatic outreach comes after strikes on Riyadh’s international airport over the weekend killed 14 people and wounded hundreds, while Saudi-backed forces continued their offensive against the Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah, in Yemen.

The talks also come against the backdrop of the wider US-Israel war on Iran, with Tehran potentially seeking to avoid being dragged into another confrontation.

“Tehran is an ally of Ansar Allah and has influence with the movement, although it does not control its decisions,” Negar Mortazavi, senior fellow at the Washington, DC-based Center for International Policy, told Al Jazeera.

“By offering to facilitate talks with Riyadh, Iran is positioning itself as an indispensable party to a broader regional settlement.”

So what discussions are happening between Riyadh and Tehran, and why is Iran offering to facilitate talks?

What did Iran and Saudi Arabia talk about?

According to the Saudi state news agency, the two foreign ministers discussed the recent escalation in the region and efforts to reduce tensions. Iran’s Foreign Ministry also confirmed the development.

Following the discussions, Araghchi on Sunday warned against pursuing a military solution to the conflict and offered Tehran’s assistance in facilitating dialogue between Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

“Insisting on a military approach and disregarding a political solution would only further complicate the situation,” Araghchi said, according to Iran’s Foreign Ministry.

On Monday, ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei reiterated Tehran’s willingness to mediate, saying Iran was deeply concerned about developments in the Arabian Peninsula.

“We absolutely do not want hostilities and war to continue between two Islamic countries,” Baghaei said, urging dialogue to resolve the conflict.

What is Iran’s stance on the war in Yemen?

Iran has repeatedly called for a diplomatic settlement to Yemen’s conflict and says it supports a political solution rather than continued military action.

Tehran backs the Houthis, who control Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, and other parts of the country.

The armed group forms part of the Iran-aligned “axis of resistance”, which also includes Lebanon’s Hezbollah and armed groups in Iraq.

Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, has led a military coalition supporting Yemen’s internationally recognised government since 2015.

Baghaei said on Monday that the conflict served Israeli interests, framing a negotiated settlement as preferable to further fighting.

What is the latest in the Yemen fighting?

Fighting has intensified in Yemen, after the internationally recognised government’s forces announced Operation Dawn of Yemen on October 4 to reverse recent Houthi territorial gains, including the capital, Sanaa.

Government forces, backed by Riyadh, have reported advances near the strategic Bab al-Mandeb strait, a vital international shipping route. However, competing battlefield claims remain difficult to independently verify.

The Houthis have responded with missile and drone attacks on Saudi airports, energy infrastructure and other targets.

Two strikes on Riyadh’s King Khalid International Airport on Saturday and Sunday killed 14 people and wounded more than 300. The casualties included foreign nationals from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Palestine.

The escalating violence has also disrupted commercial flights, businesses and schools in Riyadh, underlining the growing economic and civilian consequences of the conflict.

UN Special Envoy for Yemen Hans Grundberg warned on Friday that Yemen had returned to “full-scale war”, with civilians bearing the brunt of the attacks.

Why is Iran willing to facilitate talks between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis?

Iran’s offer to facilitate talks between Riyadh and the Houthis could be an attempt to strengthen Tehran’s diplomatic position and secure a wider regional agreement that extends beyond Yemen.

“I think Iran is trying to turn Yemen from a military liability into a diplomatic asset,” Andreas Krieg, a Middle East security analyst at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera.

He said Tehran recognises that Saudi Arabia is struggling to reverse Houthi territorial gains, particularly around Taiz and Bab al-Mandeb, despite intensifying its military campaign.

“Araghchi’s offer is an attempt to position Iran as part of the solution to a crisis in which it has also helped sustain the problem,” Krieg said.

Analyst Mortazavi, meanwhile, said Iran’s diplomatic outreach is part of a broader effort to link the conflicts unfolding across the region.

“The larger political objective is an informal non-aggression arrangement between Iran and its allies on one side and the United States and its regional partners on the other,” she said.

Such an agreement, she argued, would require an end to hostilities across multiple fronts, including Yemen and Lebanon, rather than a settlement confined to the US-Iran conflict.

Moreover, academic Krieg said there was also an important “Saudi dimension” to the discussions.

“Riyadh is increasingly uncomfortable with its dependence on Washington, frustrated by the limited American willingness to intervene in Yemen and reluctant to become dependent on the UAE again,” he said.

“Iran sees an opportunity to demonstrate that engagement with Tehran can deliver something Saudi Arabia’s traditional security partnerships have struggled to provide.”

There are also economic considerations, the analysts noted. Iran is under significant pressure from the US blockade, while Gulf countries are gradually recovering their energy exports to pre-war levels despite Iranian disruptions.

“Offering Riyadh a way out of Yemen potentially gives Iran leverage well beyond the Yemeni theatre, particularly in negotiations over Hormuz, sanctions relief and the wider regional security architecture,” Krieg said.

However, Krieg cautioned against overstating Iran’s influence over the Houthis, who have their own political ambitions and demands.

“Ansar Allah is not simply an Iranian proxy awaiting instructions,” Krieg said. “Its leadership has its own political ambitions, increasingly sees itself as a regional military actor and believes its recent territorial gains have strengthened its negotiating position. Iran can facilitate talks and potentially influence the intensity of escalation, but it cannot simply order the Houthis to surrender their gains around Mocha or Bab al-Mandeb.”

For Mortazavi, the broader message is that regional security cannot be addressed in isolation.

“Ultimately, Tehran’s message is that regional security cannot be divided,” she said. “Saudi Arabia cannot obtain security from attacks, while Iran and its allies remain under military and economic pressure.”

Russell Brand has appeared in court for the start of his rape and sexual assault trial.

The 51-year-old comedian and actor has been charged with three counts of rape, three charges of sexual assault and one allegation of indecent assault, which are alleged to have occurred between 1999 and 2009.

The trial at Southwark Crown Court in London, which could last up to 10 weeks, has now begun with the process of jury selection.

Brand pleaded not guilty to the charges during pre-trial hearings.

The comedian and actor arrived at court wearing a grey suit and sunglasses, accompanied by his wife Laura.

There was a large media presence at the court for the start of the trial, which is expected to last up to 10 weeks.

Tom Cruise’s latest film Digger is expected to lose around $245m (£185m), Hollywood analysts have said, after the film’s continuing poor performance in cinemas.

Ticket sales for the satirical black comedy, which stars Cruise as oil magnate Digger Rockwell, dropped by around 60% in the movie’s second weekend.

It brings Digger’s total box office takings to around $35m (£26m) globally so far. The film is estimated to have cost its studio Warner Bros around $280m (£211m) to make and market.

But Cruise said last week, external that he “never thought of movies when I’m making them [in terms of] opening weekend,” adding he was instead focused on making films that “hopefully will translate, last and evolve”.

The film’s takings relative to its budget mean it could become one of the biggest film flops in Hollywood history.

Digger’s performance is in sharp contrast to the success of IP-driven hits starring Cruise in recent years, such as new instalments of the Top Gun and Mission: Impossible franchises.

Digger is directed by Alejandro G Iñárritu, best known for films such as Birdman, Babel and The Revenant.

Hollywood trade publication Variety said Digger was expected to end its box office run with around $50m (£38m) worldwide.

The film would need around $350m (£264m) to break even, due to its budget, marketing costs, the portion of ticket sales that go to theatres and the likely spend on an awards season campaign.

However, a Warner Bros spokesman pushed back slightly on the figure, telling Variety the film’s break even point was $300m (£227m).

Digger was the last standalone release for the studio before its recent takeover by Paramount.

Venezuelan provisional president Delcy Rodríguez’s all-smiles photo op with Trump in a Manhattan hotel on September 22 proved too much for some of her erstwhile supporters. For the Spanish leftist Juan Carlos Monedero, a staunch defender of Hugo Chávez, Maduro and at first Rodríguez, her New York appearance “clashed with the previous socialist and anti-imperialist discourse” of her movement.

Shortly before the encounter, Rodríguez evaded a reporter’s question about whether she would visit jailed Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro in Brooklyn. Her decision to stay clear of Maduro is consistent with her attempt to chart a new course for Venezuela.

Rodríguez became interim president following the bloody U.S. military incursion on January 3, 2026 that resulted in the kidnapping of Maduro and the First Lady Cilia Flores. Facing the prospect of a second, more devastating military attack, Rodríguez shifted sharply toward Washington on foreign and oil policy while reshuffling the public administration and military at the expense of hardline pro-Chávez (Chavista) loyalists.

Rodriguez’s strategy goes too far

Rodríguez’s strategy from the outset was to demonstrate that she was not cowardly submitting to Washington’s dictates or acting as a collaborationist a la Vichy France. Her wholehearted embrace of policies pushed by Washington is designed to dispel any impression that she is bowing to U.S. pressure. On many key issues, she has become as Catholic as the Pope with regard to Trump, while retaining the Chavista label. Shortly after January 3, Rodríguez affirmed “there is no foreign agent” governing Venezuela, a claim unconvincingly echoed by the second in command Diosdado Cabello who alleged “we don’t depend on anyone.”

In a different vein, pro-Rodríguez analysts argue that the interim president has zero options given the U.S. threats. Either submit to Washington or expect massive bombardment and/or a return of the old regime.

But there is clear evidence that Rodríguez has some latitude, albeit limited, which she has declined to fully exercise. That’s because Trump is fully wedded to his partnership with her.

Trump decided to recognize Rodríguez rather than right-wing leader María Corina Machado – much to the disappointment of Miami-based anti-Communist hawks – for good reasons. A confidential CIA report requested by the Trump administration prior to January 3 warned that the Venezuelan opposition lacked support within the pro-Chavista armed forces as well as the police force. The conclusion was obvious: turning power over to Machado was a recipe for chaos, if not civil war.

Trump has assimilated the Pentagon’s assessment of “de-Baathification” following the U.S. invasion of Iraq as a “complete disaster,” responsible for the endless internecine conflict in that nation. Trump has repeatedly invoked the Iraq fiasco when discussing the Rodríguez government. At one press conference he noted with reference to Venezuela “We had, as you remember, Iraq, where everybody got fired…And you know what they turned into? ISIS. And we don’t want that.”

Moreover, the decision to recognize Rodríguez rather than Machado was not taken on a whim but rather followed months of careful deliberation at the highest level of the Trump administration. He now touts his partnership with Rodríguez as a major success at a time in which he has very few of them to tout. It is thus unlikely that Trump will readily turn his back on Rodríguez. The upshot is that Rodríguez has some room to maneuver.

How much wiggle room?

The Chavista movement under Rodríguez has retreated from its defining banner: the uncompromising defense of national sovereignty. To its credit, the movement’s leadership continues to cast itself as an opponent of the traditional elite and a defender of the collective production units known as “communes.” But these positive features fall short for a movement that once raised such high expectations. While retaining a sense of realism, Rodríguez could have at least maintained a more neutral position on issues that compromised national sovereignty.

One of the most troubling examples was Venezuela’s collaboration in the extrajudicial killing of Niño Guerrero, leader of the criminal Tren de Aragua, in a U.S. Southern Command missile strike in the state of Bolívar in June 2026. The Venezuelan government, which provided intelligence information to the Southern Command, issued a statement in which it “congratulated” all participants in the operation. In doing so, Caracas lent credence to Trump’s false narrative that drug traffickers are terrorists. At the very least, the Rodríguez government could have stayed out of the operation while maintaining a neutral public posture.

Equally striking was the marked presence of Israeli military officers, including senior army officer Brigadier General Elad Edri, at a formal farewell meeting on July 21 in which Rodríguez thanked Israel for its earthquake relief efforts. U.S. and Israeli military involvement in the recovery operations drew objections from Chavista social movements, such as the famed Caracas barrio-based Coordinadora Simón Bolívar. They especially resented the conspicuousness of the presence of military personnel of both nations, symbolized by a controversial photograph of a beaming Diosdado Cabello shaking hands with U.S. Southern Command chief Francis L. Donovan, who had overseen the January 3 incursion. This, then, was another instance in which the Chavista leadership offered Washington a level of support that went well beyond what was necessary given the circumstances.

Still another example of the lengths to which Rodríguez has gone in accommodating Washington is her willingness to accept the Pentagon’s participation in the Venezuelan oil industry. The mega oil deal reached between Washington and Caracas in late August gives the Pentagon 35 percent ownership of the operating company that is to exploit 17 Venezuelan oil fields representing nearly 150 percent of U.S. proven reserves. But there is no precedent for the Pentagon’s equity ownership of this nature which is of dubious legality. Venezuelan analyst Phil Gunson, who has been briefed on the deal, told the Guardian that the major oil companies “are concerned about the irregularities.” From Venezuela’s viewpoint, the involvement of the Pentagon in the nation’s oil business makes little sense.

From the perspective of the Pentagon and its Israeli counterpart, Rodríguez’s conciliatory stance appears to be a vindication and a reversal of Chavista defiance – if not a payback for past grievances. In January 2000 Chávez turned back a sizable relief operation that the same U.S. Southern Command was in the process of sending in response to catastrophic floods, which had devastated the state of Vargas the previous month. Chávez’s decision was an embarrassing rebuff for the Pentagon, if not humiliating.

Along similar lines, Roni Kaplan, spokesperson for the Israeli armed forces and a member of his nation’s aid mission, told CE Noticias Financieras-English on July 22, “it’s like when you fight with someone and they come to apologize, and when they say they’re sorry, you say, “‘I’ve already forgotten all about it.’” Kaplan’s statement puts in sharp relief the extent to which Rodríguez’s posture breaks with the Chavista past.

Where things now stand

The pro-Chavista think tank Misión Verdad puts a positive spin on Rodríguez’s strategy. According to its take, the Manhattan meeting with Trump marked the point at which “Washington’s asymmetric coercion and the strategic adaptation deployed by the Chavista movement converge.” For both Trump and Rodríguez, the aim was the same: “stabilization… to reduce political costs by sacrificing ideological orthodoxy.” The asymmetry according to the Misión Verdad statement “does not erase the agency of the quantitatively weaker actor; it alters its tactics, shifting it from open confrontation toward strategic adaptation.”

The adaptation demanded by the asymmetry is captured in a slogan championed by Diosdado Cabello: “Venezuela: Reborn United.” Strip away the Misión’s lofty language, and the message is that the Chavista movement needs to make a fundamental break with its past in important ways.

Adaption is understandable given the circumstances of January 3. But if Chavismo abandons the banner of defense of national sovereignty, little remains of what defined the movement. And that is precisely where the strategy of being “as Catholic as the Pope” in accommodating Washington has led.

That’s not to say there are easy answers or that an alternative strategy would necessarily succeed, particularly given Trump’s notorious unpredictability. Nor does it mean that Rodríguez deserves to be demonized as a sellout as so many on the left are doing. Such demonization underestimates the challenges and uniqueness of the situation, at the same time that it divides the solidarity movement. The relative unity of the Chavista leadership has been one of its strengths ever since Chávez’s death in 2013, and the same needs to be preserved in the solidarity movement.

The problem is that the options available to Rodríguez are scarce, whereas Trump has many. He need not pull off another January 3. Nearly all Venezuela’s oil-derived revenue is in a U.S. account handled by Marco Rubio. All Rubio has to do is to withhold it or scale it back whenever Rodríguez steps out of line with Washington.

Even with this reality hanging over her, Rodríguez and other Chavista leaders have put forward two major demands: free Maduro and Flores and an end to the sanctions, which remain largely intact. Rodríguez, however, has not put these two demands front and center in her dialogue with the Trump administration – not by a long shot.

As pressure from Miami grows for Venezuela to set an electoral timetable, the position that elections and harsh sanctions are incompatible would shift responsibility for any delay onto Washington. Last Spring, Chavista leader Ernesto Villegas, who headed the government’s Program for Peace and Democratic Coexistence, called for “elections free of sanctions.” Linking elections explicitly to the lifting of sanctions would allow the Rodríguez government to reclaim some distance from Washington, even as U.S. blackmail severely limits its ability to fully assert national sovereignty.

Steve Ellner is a retired professor of the Universidad de Oriente in Venezuela where he lived for over 40 years and is currently Associate Managing Editor of Latin American Perspectives. He is the author and editor of over a dozen books on Latin American politics and history. In 2018 he spoke in over twenty cities in the U.S. and Canada as part of a Venezuelan solidarity tour.

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

Source: Counterpunch

Israel has expanded its military occupation in the Gaza Strip in violation of a United States-brokered ‘ceasefire’, forcing Palestinians into an ever-smaller share of the besieged territory, devastated by Israel’s ongoing genocidal war.

Nearly two-thirds of Gaza is now under Israeli military control or subject to access restrictions.

The original ‘Yellow Line’, established under US President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan to end the war, marked the area to which Israeli forces initially withdrew. They were expected to make further withdrawals gradually, but instead, they have seized more territory.

On Sunday, Israeli forces moved yellow concrete blocks dozens of metres west in Shujayea, a neighbourhood in southeastern Gaza City, forcing Palestinian families to flee and bringing more of the neighbourhood under Israeli military control.

“It’s not simply about where the ‘Yellow Line’ is today but where it can move next,” Al Jazeera’s Ibrahim al-Khalili said, reporting from Gaza City. “For families who have been repeatedly displaced in the past three years, the situation remains dire, and they have to make the impossible decision of where they can go.”

More than 90 percent of Gaza’s 2.1 million population has been forcibly displaced by Israel’s war, launched on October 7, 2023, after Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel.

Using maps, Al Jazeera shows how much of Gaza Israel has grabbed since the ‘ceasefire’.

Gaza before the war

Before the war, Palestinians were spread across the Gaza Strip, a 365sq km (141sq-mile) territory roughly 41km (25 miles) long and from 6km to 12km (4 to 7 miles) wide.

That made it one of the most densely populated places on Earth with about 6,000 people per square kilometre, similar to Nairobi or London. Each person had, on average, about 160sq metres (1,722sq ft) of land.

Even then, not all of Gaza’s land was accessible. Israel enforced a buffer zone along the fence with Israel, and Palestinians who approached it risked being shot. In 2010, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) estimated that the restricted area covered 17 percent of Gaza’s land and 35 percent of its farmland.

Gaza has been under an Israeli land, air and sea blockade since 2007.

Gaza at the ‘ceasefire’

Under the first phase of the “ceasefire”, Israeli forces were to withdraw to the “Yellow Line” within 24 hours, after which a 72-hour period began for the handover of Israeli captives held in Gaza. Trump first published a map of the line on his Truth Social platform.

The line left Israel in control of 53 percent of the Strip, mostly farmland and border areas in the east, and confined Palestinians to the remaining 47 percent, about 172sq km (66sq miles).

By October 2025, two years of war had killed more than 67,000 Palestinians, and tens of thousands more had left the territory, reducing Gaza’s population to about 2.1 million.

Pushed into less than half of Gaza’s territory under the “ceasefire”, its density doubled to about 12,000 people per square kilometre, comparable to New York City. Each person was left with about 82sq metres (883sq ft).

Gaza today

Since the “ceasefire”, Israeli forces have repeatedly moved the yellow concrete blocks marking the “Yellow Line” farther west, sometimes overnight, expanding the areas under their control. Satellite imagery has also documented continued demolitions in areas held by Israeli forces.

The research group Forensic Architecture estimated that Israel controlled 58 percent of Gaza by December. In March, the Israeli military sent aid agencies maps of a new “orange line”, a restricted zone beyond the “Yellow Line” where humanitarian movements must be coordinated with the army.

According to OCHA, restrictions now cover 65 percent of Gaza. Israel itself said it controls about 70 percent of the territory, a UN official told the Security Council in June.

That leaves 2.1 million people in about 35 percent of the Strip, roughly 128sq km (49sq miles). The population density has nearly tripled since before the war to about 16,000 people per square kilometre, close to central Tokyo.

Each person now has about 61sq metres (657sq ft) of land for everything: shelter, roads, schools, hospitals and farmland.

Unlike Tokyo, Gaza has little space left to house its people. The UN Satellite Centre, UNOSAT, found 82 percent of structures in the Strip are damaged or destroyed. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization says only 3 percent of Gaza’s cropland is both undamaged and accessible.

OCHA says the remaining 35 percent of Gaza is “already overcrowded” and access restrictions are a key obstacle as aid groups try to relocate families before the rainy season. More than 950,000 people live in displacement sites at risk of flooding, according to the UN, most of them in tents and makeshift shelters, as seen in the satellite image below.

Approaching the ‘Yellow Line” can be deadly. Israel treats areas beyond it as a free-fire zone, and Palestinians who come near it have been shot. Nearly 1,500 people have been killed across Gaza since the ceasefire was announced.

Anduril has unveiled Steelfin, a family of surface-to-air interceptor missiles designed to share a common architecture and manufacturing process while being configured for different air and missile defense missions. The company says this approach will enable high-volume production at significantly lower cost than existing weapons, though it has not disclosed prices or detailed performance specifications.

The announcement comes as the U.S. military seeks to expand air defense inventories against an increasingly diverse range of threats, from inexpensive drones to cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and advanced maneuvering weapons, including hypersonic ones. Recent experiences from Ukraine and the Middle East make it abundantly clear that the challenge is not simply developing interceptors capable of defeating those targets but producing enough of them to sustain operations without exhausting stocks of more expensive weapons.

Using high-end interceptors against comparatively inexpensive threats can rapidly consume limited inventories, as it has in the Middle East, especially, even when engagements are necessary to protect personnel and critical infrastructure. A broader range of defensive weapons, matched to different threats and engagement requirements, could help ease that burden.

Anduril’s answer is a family of missiles built around a common two-stage design. The first stage consists of a booster, while the second is a terminal interceptor intended to share a baseline airframe, avionics, software, flight control system, and interfaces across variants. Different boosters and terminal-stage components would allow the company to tailor individual configurations to specific missions without developing an entirely new missile for each requirement. Both hit-to-kill and blast-fragmentation terminal-stage interceptors will be offered, Anduril says.

“It is an open system, so the ability to fly it with different rocket motors, different seekers, to be able to swap these components out, to be able to reconfigure the system for a range of different threats is a feature that we built into this,” explained Christian Brose, who serves as the president and chief strategy officer at Anduril. He was speaking to members of the media, including TWZ, ahead of the official unveiling of Steelfin.

The company says the family is intended to cover missions ranging from point defense and lower-tier integrated air and missile defense to upper-tier ballistic missile defense. It also identifies cruise, ballistic, and hypersonic missiles among the threats the broader family is designed to address. Overall, is an extremely ambitious goal, and something that has not been attempted previously to this degree.

The announcement does not specify which variants would address individual threats or provide engagement envelopes and performance figures with which to assess those claims.

Brose did clarify that the different ranges that the various Steelfin variants will achieve will be based on the booster sizing. “Right now, we’re looking at integrating on 10-inch, 18-inch, and 21-inch boosters, but we’re also looking at quad pack and dual pack for the Mk 41 Vertical Launch System as well for different installations, which imply different range and altitudes.”

Anduril’s emphasis on commonality is also intended to address the industrial challenges associated with conventional interceptor production. Different missile programs traditionally require specialized tooling, manufacturing processes, suppliers, and facilities, limiting opportunities to shift production rapidly as operational requirements change.

Steelfin variants are intended to use shared production lines and equipment, with mission-specific boosters and terminal-stage components incorporated during final assembly. Anduril says this would allow manufacturing capacity to be redirected toward whichever variant is in greatest demand. The company is planning near-term production on the order of several thousand missiles annually, with capacity designed to expand or shift according to requirements.

That remains a production ambition, and Anduril has not provided a detailed production schedule or contracted quantities demonstrating how quickly it could reach that scale.

The company also says Steelfin is designed to be compatible with existing land- and sea-based launch infrastructure, including the M903A2 launcher used by newer PAC-3 series interceptors, the Mk 41 Vertical Launch System, and Typhon, as well as emerging containerized launchers. It cites compatibility with established fire-control systems, including AEGIS and the Army’s Integrated Battle Command System (IBCS).

When it comes to cost, Steve Milano, the lead for Air Dominance & Strike at Anduril, suggested that the “more exquisite version” of the Steelfin would sit somewhere above the PAC-3 MSE and below THAAD, but would accomplish “100 percent of the THAAD mission at a fraction of the cost.” In a different configuration, tailored for the PAC-3-type mission, Steelfin would accomplish 80 percent of that mission at less than 50 percent of the cost, Milano added.

While THAAD is aimed at taking out short, medium, and intermediate-range ballistic missiles in the terminal phase of flight, PAC-3 provides high-altitude, hit-to-kill air and missile defense against tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and aircraft.

Milano continued: “Looking at the lower end of the the spectrum, as far as low-cost interceptors are concerned, I just saw an article on the [aircraft carrier USS Abraham] Lincoln coming back with all of the Shahed markings on the side, and I was contemplating the number of SM-2s that were fired against those assets. When I think of that cost exchange, the Steelfin enters into that market and provides greater than 80 percent of the capability of an SM-2 for a third of the cost.”

For reference, a single THAAD interceptor costs around $15.5 million. The unit price of each PAC-3 MSE interceptor now stands at approximately $5.3 million, according to the Army’s latest proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year. Meanwhile, the price of a single SM-2 Block IIIC interceptor, the most advanced version of that missile currently in service, is around $2.5 million. 

Steelfin is entering a market in which the U.S. military is already pursuing several approaches to expanding its low-cost interceptor inventory.

In May, the U.S. Army sought industry proposals for a Patriot-compatible interceptor with a target unit cost below $1 million. The effort reflects the service’s desire for a less expensive weapon for appropriate engagements, preserving higher-end interceptors for targets that warrant their cost and capabilities. The Army’s solicitation also emphasizes component-level cost targets and competition among suppliers, including for rocket motors, seekers, and guidance systems.

Lockheed Martin has offered a separate industry response with its PAC-3 Adapted Capability Effector (ACE), a lower-cost interceptor intended to operate within the Patriot ecosystem. Unveiled in July, the weapon is intended to cost less than half as much as the PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE), according to the company. The MSE’s unit price is approximately $5.3 million in the Army’s fiscal 2027 budget request, putting the ACE’s implied price at around $2.5 million if Lockheed’s comparison holds.

Its projected price would still be well above the Army’s separate sub-$1 million target, reflecting the different objectives and requirements behind the two efforts.

The Navy, meanwhile, is pursuing a potentially broader shift toward modular interceptor architectures. Its Naval Modular Missile initiative envisions a family of surface-to-air weapons built around a common Terminal Stage Interceptor, with different boosters and canisters producing configurations for different missions and platforms. The plans include variants intended to fit multiple missiles within a Mk 41 launcher cell, as well as a version designed for launch from Virginia class submarines equipped with the Virginia Payload Module.

The Navy’s longer-term vision is to replace its existing Standard Missile family with modular variants, although the effort remains in development. The concept highlights potential operational benefits beyond manufacturing: smaller interceptors could increase the number of weapons carried aboard ships, while other configurations could preserve longer-range capabilities. The Navy has also outlined an ambition to reach production of 1,000 missiles annually within five years of a contract award.

Both the Navy’s modular missile initiative and Steelfin reflect a push toward common architectures that can support multiple interceptor configurations without requiring an entirely new missile for every mission. Steelfin’s stated scope is particularly broad, with Anduril pitching the family for missions spanning point defense through lower-tier air and missile defense to upper-tier ballistic missile defense. That would cover much of the air and missile defense spectrum, although it does not extend to exoatmospheric midcourse interception. Whether the family can deliver that breadth of capability at the promised cost and scale remains to be demonstrated.

Anduril says it has been developing Steelfin for several years with investment from multiple customers and has completed ballistic testing using representative air vehicles. Flight testing of Steelfin variants is planned for 2027.

Already, Anduril says it is working closely with “a number of different customers to to get into the field.” Brose continued: “We feel like this is going to be a critical component of the U.S. and allied inventories to complement the range of exquisite capabilities that all of us are familiar with and know by name.”

Steelfin underscores what is now a broader trend toward lower-cost interceptors that can be manufactured at scale, and plugged into existing ecosystems, often with at least a degree of modularity to tackle new and emerging target sets. Steelfin adds Anduril’s proposal to combine that modularity with a common production system designed to support thousands of weapons annually.

Anduril has yet to develop or produce a surface-to-air missile, although its Roadrunner system gives it experience in the related field of countering aerial threats, including loitering munitions. The company’s ambitions for Steelfin are significant, and modular architectures are certainly attractive. After all, a common baseline should simplify production, reduce costs, and allow interceptors to be tailored to different missions. In practice, however, realizing those benefits has historically proved difficult, and fraught with compromises. Whether Anduril can avoid those pitfalls while delivering the promised combination of capability, affordability, and production scale remains an open question. If it can, Steelfin could put the company in a strong position in the future surface-to-air missile market.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Chancellor John Healey is facing a funding gap of up to £35bn and must set out “credible” spending plans in his first Budget on 28 October, an influential think tank has warned.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said that if the government wants to increase defence spending to 3% of national income by 2030 and lift health spending without squeezing other departments, it will need a “top-up” of billions of pounds.

Higher inflation, caused by the Iran war, could eat into what the government hoped to spend on public services, meaning Healey will have to choose between spending cuts, tax rises, or a mixture of both, the IFS warned.

The Treasury declined to comment on “rumour and speculation”.

The IFS urged the government to ensure its spending plans are credible, as opposed to proposing unrealistic future cuts to make the Budget add up.

The government is under growing pressure to show financial markets that it has a tight grip on finances as the cost of borrowing rises.

The IFS cautioned Healey about making any spending announcements in the 28 October Budget speech he has no intention of honouring.

“A ‘steady-as-she-goes’ Budget is not an option available to the chancellor,” said IFS director Helen Miller.

“Choosing to stay the course with the inherited tax and spending plans would mean allowing inflation to blow departments’ spending plans off course.

“Simply pencilling in implicit cuts that he has no intention of delivering would make the Budget a work of fiction,” she added.

Speaking ahead of the annual International Monetary Fund meeting this week, Healey said: “The consequences of conflict in the Middle East and Europe are hitting countries worldwide, leading to higher prices at the pumps and more expensive mortgages at home.

“But Britain and our allies can face up to these challenges together.”

He said his Budget “will build on this approach with fiscal discipline helping to deliver economic resilience” and give people “breathing space”.

Miller told the BBC’s Today programme that Healey has inherited spending plans for government departments where spending growth would slow in the coming years.

“[It] already looked likely that he would have to make spending cuts just to live within those,” she said. “Now, along comes the Middle East war, inflation goes up and those spending plans look very tight indeed.”

Added to that, the chancellor has said he wants to get defence spending up to 3% of national income. Under Keir Starmer’s leadership, Healey resigned as defence secretary in June in a battle with the Treasury over military spending.

Miller said: “You put all that together, if he wanted to do all of that within current spending plans he’s looking at having to cut some other services by something like £35bn.”

The chancellor does not have to address spending totals in this Budget, and may choose to leave such decisions until future events – for example, next year’s Spring Statement or Spending Review – by which time the outlook for the economy could look very different.

But the IFS warned not addressing it would cast doubt on the credibility of the government’s plans.

Previous chancellors have relied on a similar strategy of pencilling in unrealistic future spending plans to ensure that they meet the fiscal rules on the day – only to change the plans further down the line.

Miller said Healey’s focus on fiscal discipline was a “good first start but what he needs to do is not just say he’s going to cut borrowing in coming years but actually deliver on those plans.”

Main opposition Congress party announces rally to the top court to demand removal of the chief election commissioner.

Chinese foreign ministry cites national sovereignty and Taiwan separatist activities as reasons behind the measures.

China has sanctioned Paraguay’s communications minister and Belize’s foreign minister over ties to Taiwan.

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs made the announcement on Monday, citing the safeguarding of China’s national sovereignty and opposition to Taiwan separatist activities as the reasons behind the measures, which went into effect the same day.

The measures against Paraguay’s Communications Minister Gustavo Villate and Belize’s Foreign Minister Francis Fonseca include the freezing of their assets in China and the denial of entry visas to Hong Kong and Macau.

The sanctions also prohibit Chinese organisations and individuals from engaging in transactions, cooperation or other activities with the ministers.

The Foreign Ministry said that “certain anti-China politicians” who are “driven by self-interest” have pushed their nations to maintain diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

Beijing said the ministers had “taken a series of egregious actions and statements”, which are “damaging China’s core interests”.

Paraguay and Belize are two of 12 countries that maintain formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

China views Taiwan as its territory, a view the island’s government strongly rejects.

The measures come two days after Taiwan’s National Day celebration.

In a National Day speech outside the Presidential Office on Saturday, Taiwan President William Lai Ching-te said the island “cherishes peace” and will “not give up our freedom”.

China’s Taiwan Affairs Office condemned Lai’s speech, saying it “disregards facts, ⁠distorts the truth, misleads the public, and reveals ulterior motives”.

In January, Chinese President Xi Jinping pledged to achieve the “reunification” of China and Taiwan, calling the goal “unstoppable”.

Diplomatic relations

Paraguay’s Communications Minister Villate marked Taiwan’s National Day with a social media post, saying: “Paraguay reaffirms its relationship of friendship and cooperation, based on shared values and principles: the self-determination of peoples, human rights and democracy.”

The Belize embassy in Taiwan also posted a message on its Facebook celebrating the 37th anniversary of their diplomatic relations.

“Together, we look forward to a future of growth, opportunity, and lasting friendship,” the embassy wrote.

Last month, Taiwan’s Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung visited Belize. His ministry said the two sides had agreed to deepen ties.

Taiwan’s other allies in the Americas include Guatemala and Haiti. It also has formal diplomatic ties with three Caribbean islands.

The United States does not have ⁠formal diplomatic ties with Taiwan, but Washington is bound by law to provide the island with the means to ‌defend itself.

Earlier this month, the US delivered two fighter jets to Taiwan as the island seeks to build its defence capabilities to deter a feared attack from China.

Documentary draws on 24 anonymous Israeli sources accusing military of killing Palestinians in Gaza using AI systems.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called for an investigation into the anonymous sources featured in a documentary alleging that Israel’s military killed civilians in Gaza using AI-powered targeting systems.

The award-winning film, NAZA, draws on testimony from 24 unnamed Israeli military whistleblowers accusing the army of using the systems to kill numerous civilians in the besieged territory.

“I demand that the chief of general staff, the head of the Shin Bet, and the attorney general launch a comprehensive investigation into the participants in the film ‘Naza’ and prosecute them for serious information security violations, criminal libel, and harm to Israel’s diplomatic and security interests,” Netanyahu said on X on Saturday evening.

“The film presents a false, misleading, and biased narrative that defames the State of Israel and the [Israeli military] internationally, severely damaging Israel’s standing,” he added.

In a statement last month, the Israeli military said it “categorically” rejected the whistleblowers’ allegations, calling some of their assertions “absurd’ and contradictory.

It insisted that the selection and approval of strikes “are made by human personnel only”, in line with the military’s guidelines.

Israeli army Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir has called for legal action against the participants to be considered and ordered an investigation into suspected leaks of classified military information used in the film’s production.

NAZA takes its name from the Israeli military term for civilian casualties expected in air strikes, an abbreviated form of the Hebrew phrase for “collateral damage”.

The film was awarded a special jury prize at the Venice International Film Festival and received a historic 25-minute standing ovation.

It has also triggered a political storm in Israel.

The film’s directors, Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, have been accused of “treason”. Netanyahu and Culture Minister Miki Zohar have threatened to revoke their Israeli citizenship.

Last week, the head of Israel’s National Public Diplomacy Directorate, Tzipi Hotovely, awarded the creators of another film, NAZA: The Real Story, certificates of recognition for countering the “blood libels” made in the original NAZA film.

According to a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office, NAZA: The Real Story features testimony from soldiers refuting the original claims.

In contrast, 43 Israeli rights groups defended the filmmakers of NAZA and denounced the threats being directed at them, according to Israel’s Channel 12 news.

Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza began on October 7, 2023, after Hamas’s armed wing, the Qassam Brigades, and other Palestinian groups attacked southern Israel, killing 1,139 people and taking about 240 captive.

Since then, Israel has killed at least 74,000 Palestinians, including at least 21,000 children, according to Gaza’s Ministry of Health.