TODAY

New Zealand says it, too, will support the UK government if it decides to remove the disgraced prince from succession to the throne.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced that his government is writing to Commonwealth countries about its support to have the United Kingdom’s former prince, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, removed from the line of royal succession over his links to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Albanese’s announcement on Tuesday came as neighbouring Commonwealth member New Zealand declared that it would also support the UK government if it proposes the removal of Mountbatten-Windsor from the line of succession to the throne.

“Australia likes being first, and we have made sure that everyone knows what our position is, and we’ll be writing today to the other realm countries as well, informing them of our position,” Prime Minister Albanese told Australia’s ABC public broadcaster.

Australians were “disgusted” by revelations about late US sex offender Epstein’s relations with public figures, and they want the government to be clear about its position, Albanese told the ABC.

“King Charles has said that the law must now take its full course. There must be a full, fair and proper investigation. And that needs to occur,” he added.

The former 66-year-old prince was arrested last week, detained and questioned as part of an investigation into alleged misconduct in public office following revelations about his dealings with Epstein.

Albanese also said the UK would have to initiate any proposed change to the line of royal succession, and it would need the agreement of the 14 other Commonwealth nations that have King Charles III as head of state.

Albanese wrote to UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and informed him that, “in light of recent events”, the Australian government would “agree to any proposal to remove [Mountbatten-Windsor] from the line of royal succession”, according to Australian media.

“I agree with His Majesty that the law must now take its full course and there must be a full, fair and proper investigation,” Albanese wrote.

“These are grave allegations and Australians take them seriously,” he added.

New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said that if the UK government proposes to remove Mountbatten-Windsor from the order of succession, New Zealand would support it, the UK’s Press Association reports.

“The bottom line is, no one is above the law, and once that investigation is closed, should the UK government decide to remove him from the line of succession, that is something we would support,” Luxon told reporters.

Officials in the UK have told media outlets that any moves to change the line of succession would come after the police conclude their investigation into the former prince, who is eighth in line to the throne.

Starmer’s official spokesman said on Monday that the government was not ruling out any steps in relation to the disgraced prince, but it would not be appropriate to comment further during the police probe.

Mountbatten-Windsor, who was stripped of his royal title last year as news of links to Epstein emerged, has denied any wrongdoing over his relationship with Epstein, who was ruled to have taken his own life in prison in 2019. He has not directly responded to the latest allegations regarding misconduct in public office.

The U.S. Air Force has given us our first look at one of Anduril’s YFQ-44 Fury ‘fighter drone’ prototypes carrying an inert AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM).

“The Air Force has entered the next phase of developmental testing for its Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program, initiating disciplined weapons integration and captive carry evaluations using inert test munitions to validate airworthiness, safety, and systems performance,” according to an Air Force press release put out this evening. “This milestone represents a deliberate step forward in integrating CCA into the Air Force’s future force design.”

“CCA program officials emphasized that this phase remains developmental and focused on safe systems integration — not operational employment,” the release also noted. “The use of inert test weapons allows engineers and test pilots to evaluate performance characteristics and separation safety in a controlled environment without live ordnance.”

“Throughout development and testing, a human retains authority over weapons release decisions,” the Air Force has also stressed. “CCA is designed to operate within established command structures and legal frameworks that govern all Air Force weapons systems.”

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach first announced this new development at the Air & Space Forces Association’s annual Warfare Symposium, at which TWZ is attendence. The YFQ-44 is one of two designs now under development as part of the first phase, or Increment 1, of the service’s CCA program. The other is General Atomics’ YFQ-42A Dark Merlin. No images have yet been released of the YFQ-42A carrying inert munitions.

Renderings have previously been shown of Fury carrying AIM-120s under its wings. The design, at least as it exists now, does not have an internal munitions bay. Anduril has also talked about weapons testing as part of its larger plans for the ongoing development of the YQ-44A in the past.

“We are following the same detailed approach used in every other aircraft developmental test program to validate structural performance, flight characteristics and safe separation,” Wilsbach said in a statement accompanying the release. “This ensures the CCA can safely integrate inert weapons before future employment.”

“CCA is a critical part of a larger, integrated system-of-systems that will give our warfighters the overwhelming advantage,” Wilsbach added. “This program is about delivering a network of effects that will sense, strike, and shield our forces in contested environments. We are empowering our teams to take smart risks and deliver this capability faster, ensuring we can deter, and if necessary, defeat any adversary.”

What other munitions beyond the AIM-120 may be included in the weapons integration and captive carry test plan remains to be seen. The Air Force has said in the past that future operational CCA drones are expected to be armed with AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missiles (JATM). JATM, which is still in development, is the planned successor to the AMRAAM.

The Air Force is not the first to fly a CCA-type drone with an AIM-120. Australian authorities, together with Boeing, announced the first live test shot of an AMRAAM from an MQ-28 Ghost Bat drone in December. You can read more about that milestone here.

Uncrewed MQ-28 Ghost Bat showcases its combat capability

In November, Turkish drone-maker Baykar had also announced a similar test involving its fighter-like Kizilelma. The drone fired a Turkish-made radar-guided Gökdoğan air-to-air missile in that instance.

Bayraktar #KIZILELMA | GÖKDOĞAN Füzesi Atış Testi

The beginning of weapons integration and captive carry testing is still an important development for the U.S. Air Force CCA program, and Increment 1 more specifically. Both the YFQ-42A and YFQ-44A only made their first flights in the second half of last year.

Carrying air-to-air missiles is exactly what these drones were intended to do, at least to start. CCAs will also help increase the sensor reach of crewed fighters they’re teamed with. Overall, the Air Force sees CCAs as providing critical combat mass while helping to reduce risk and providing new tactical possibilities, especially potential high-end fights against opponents such as China.

The Air Force has yet to decide which Increment 1 CCA, or both, it wants to buy in larger numbers. Whatever the Air Force chooses will be set to become its first operational ‘fighter drones’ intended to carry live munitions into real combat alongside crewed companions.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The attack on alleged drug smugglers brings death toll of US military campaign against suspected drug boats to about 150.

The United States military has announced another strike in the Caribbean Sea that it said targeted drug smugglers, killing three people.

The Southern Command of the US military (SOUTHCOM) shared footage of the attack on Monday, showing a small boat exploding and going up in flames after the strike.

“Intelligence confirmed the vessel was transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Caribbean and was engaged in narco-trafficking operations,” SOUTHCOM said in a statement.

“Three male narco-terrorists were killed during this action. No US military forces were harmed.”

The attack brings the death toll from US boat strikes on boats allegedly smuggling drugs, which began last year, to about 150.

Rights advocates have said the US military campaign targeting alleged drug smugglers amounts to extrajudicial killings and risks violating international and domestic laws.

The administration of US President Donald Trump has argued that all the targeted boats were carrying drugs, but it has offered little evidence other than grainy footage of the strikes.

United Nations experts warned last year that the attacks “appear to be unlawful killings carried out by order of a Government, without judicial or legal process allowing due process of law”.

“Unprovoked attacks and killings on international waters also violate international maritime laws,” the experts added.

“We have condemned and raised concerns about these attacks at sea to the United States Government.”

The strikes started in September last year, as the US was building up its military assets in the Caribbean amid tensions with Venezuela. Since then, the attacks have expanded to also targeting boats in the eastern Pacific Ocean.

A separate US strike on an alleged drug-smuggling boat on Friday also killed three people.

The campaign has continued even after US forces abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro early in 2026.

Trump and other US officials have argued, without providing evidence, that each bombing saves thousands of lives from overdose deaths. But it is not clear whether the deadly campaign has significantly affected the drug trade in the region.

The latest attack comes as Mexican authorities push to curb violence by drug cartels after the killing of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel leader, Nemesio Ruben Oseguera Cervantes, also known as “El Mencho”.

Trump has been pushing to present himself as launching a literal war on drugs across the Western Hemisphere.

“Mexico must step up their effort on Cartels and Drugs!” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Monday.

The US has often accused its critics in Latin America, including Colombian President Gustavo Petro, of ties to the drug trade.

Meanwhile, in December, Trump pardoned former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, who was serving a 45-year prison sentence in US jails after being convicted of drug trafficking.

As well as being a key component of Russia’s attack helicopter force in the war in Ukraine, the Mi-28 Havoc has been in the news recently on account of its apparent delivery to Iran. Meanwhile, one lesser-known aspect of the Mi-28 is its ability to transport two or three passengers in a cramped fuselage compartment, a feature that is seen clearly in a recently published video of the rotorcraft.

The footage in question originates with the state-owned Russia Television and Radio channel and shows a Russian Aerospace Forces Mi-28NM — the latest domestic version of the gunship — undergoing pre-flight checks at a forward airstrip somewhere in the Ukrainian conflict zone. The video reportedly dates from this month.

At the start of the video, a technician is seen handling hoses that run into the helicopter’s port-side rear fuselage via an open door. Typically, such hoses are attached to dehumidifier units, which then blow warm, dry air through the aircraft to keep everything dry. This is especially important for sensitive avionics in cold weather, as on this snowy airfield. Once the helicopter is fully powered up, it should keep itself warm enough for moisture not to be a problem.

What’s most interesting, however, is that the open door provides a rare look into this rear-fuselage compartment, which has the capacity to carry two or three people, or an equivalent load of cargo. Of course, this is in addition to the Mi-28’s two crew seated in tandem in the cockpit — the weapon system operator/navigator forward and the pilot to the rear.

The fuselage compartment, unique among in-service attack helicopters, was part of the Mi-28’s design when it was first schemed back in the second half of the 1970s. The Soviet Union had ordered Mil to design a new-generation combat helicopter, equivalent to the U.S. AH-64 Apache, but this feature was all its own.

The Mi-28’s configuration was broadly similar to the AH-64, but marked a significant move away from the philosophy enshrined in the previous Mi-24 Hind. As we have discussed in the past, the Mi-24 had been built around a passenger/cargo cabin — with space for a squad of infantry — although, as it was developed, it expanded its anti-armor capabilities, too.

A walkaround video of a privately owned Mi-24 in the United States. The passenger/cargo cabin is seen in detail from around the 11:30 mark:

Hind MI-24 Helicopter Walkaround Tour

In contrast, the Mi-28 was a tank-killer first and foremost, with no cabin, and better overall performance. However, there was internal space for a much smaller compartment and one that would be very useful for retrieving downed pilots from the battle area, especially for grabbing a pilot who went down within the same flight. Bearing in mind the expected aircraft losses on Europe’s Central Front — especially among low-flying helicopters — this made a lot of sense.

Other tasks could have included moving mechanics and tools to conduct limited repairs of other helicopters in an emergency. Potentially, it could even have been used for inserting and picking up infiltrators or saboteurs.

Having the option of using the Mi-28 as a kind of ad-hoc, or non-traditional combat search and rescue (CSAR) asset would also mean that the aircraft could operate on its own and on the fly if other air or ground assets were not available. Traditionally, CSAR helicopters have to operate with an armed escort. It’s unknown whether the passenger cabin has been used at all in the war in Ukraine, but the limited space, presence of avionics equipment, and complete lack of windows mean it’s only really suited to emergencies. For more typical CSAR missions in the Ukrainian theater, Mi-8 Hips and Mi-24s are typically used, with an escort of Mi-28 or Ka-52 Hokum attack helicopters.

As for other attack helicopter types attempting personnel recovery, the best-known incident is likely that involving two British Army Apache gunships in Afghanistan in January 2007. During that dramatic mission, four Royal Marines strapped themselves to the outside of two Apaches for an attempted combat rescue. Ultimately, they were only able to recover the body of their fallen comrade, Lance Cpl. Ford, who had already been killed.

The Italian Army, too, has explored the concept of using its A129 Mangusta attack helicopters for personnel rescue, strapping a pair of soldiers to the main landing gear struts. Meanwhile, the U.S. Army Special Operations Command operates MH-6M Little Birds with side-mounted planks to externally airlift special operators. A more elaborate modular system, used to transport small numbers of personnel, was schemed for the Bell 360 Invictus armed scout helicopter, as you can read about here.

It’s also worth pointing out another planned ‘survival’ feature of the Mi-28, namely its crew-escape system. Unlike the Ka-52, the Mi-28 doesn’t have ejection seats. Instead, the Zvezda/Tomilino Pamir-K crew seats have belts that tighten automatically when high-g loads are encountered. As originally envisaged, the crew escape system would work as follows: During any kind of catastrophic failure at altitude, the cockpit doors would be blown off, the stub wings would be jettisoned together with their loads, and an inflatable door-sill sleeve would be filled with air. This was to protect the crew from the protruding main landing gear and cannon and help them clear the helicopter, after which they would return to the ground by parachute. In theory, at least.

Ka-52 alligator and its unique K-37-800M ejection seats. Before the rocket in the ejection seat deploys, the rotor blades are blown away by explosive charges in the rotor disc and the canopy is jettisoned. pic.twitter.com/BzPP9SNXMZ

— Владимир З. (@VladZinen) December 11, 2020

In practice, it seems the crew escape system never reached operational status on the Mi-28, likely due to the very limited window in which it would be of practical use.

According to the Oryx open-source tracking group, Russia has lost 19 Mi-28s since launching its full-scale invasion of Ukraine four years ago. This figure could be higher because Oryx only tabulates losses it can confirm visually. Russia began the conflict with a force of around 110 Mi-28s of all versions.

⚡️Video of the destruction of the Mi-28 of the 🇷🇺Russian Air Force using an 🇺🇦FPV drone. The first recorded case pic.twitter.com/LWosDeX2Ah

— 🪖MilitaryNewsUA🇺🇦 (@front_ukrainian) August 7, 2024

The Mi-28 has had a notably protracted history since it was first flown in prototype form in 1982. The original Havoc was abandoned by the early 1990s, and Mil pressed ahead with the radar-equipped, night-capable Mi-28N version. Deliveries of production Mi-28N helicopters to Russia began in 2008, and export versions have since been sold to Algeria, Iraq, Uganda, and, apparently, now also Iran.

For Russia, the basic version remains the Mi-28N, which also undertook combat operations in Syria starting in 2016.

Less common is the Mi-28UB (only 24 of which were produced), which received a mast-mounted radar, lacking on the Mi-28N, and dual controls. As for the latest Mi-28NM version — as seen in the video above — this also has the mast-mounted radar and other changes, including new missiles. As well as having been ordered in quantity for Russia, there are also plans to bring older Mi-28N aircraft up to Mi-28NM standard.

Video of the radar-equipped Mi-28UB during a live-fire exercise in the Krasnodar region, March 2020:

Russian Mi-28UB live fire exercise

For all the changes that the Mi-28 has undergone since it first appeared, its highly compact passenger compartment remains one of its most unusual features.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, six frigates, three light warships, and approximately thirty fighter jets and support aircraft have entered the Middle East by order of Donald Trump who, by repeatedly touting the slogan “I have ended six/seven/eight wars,” has considered (and continues to consider) himself deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize. What objective do all these tensions that the U.S. administration has generated in the region actually pursue? The weakening of Iran, or the overthrow of the incumbent government? Whatever his and his administration’s aim may be, it appears that—within the cost–benefit calculations of his trader’s mindset—he has yet to arrive at a definitive conclusion as to what kind of blow, and at what scale, could deliver the desired outcome. His recent military posturing around Iran and his increasingly threatening rhetoric against the Islamic Republic have placed him in a no-win situation whose end few can predict.

Why a no-win situation for Trump?

First Strike Doubt: Trump and the constellation of officials currently in the White House—who, notably, are far from unified or aligned on how to approach Iran—have reached no certainty regarding the effectiveness of a first strike against Iran or the likelihood of achieving their desired results. It is evident to all that the Islamic Republic of Iran is neither Venezuela, nor Libya, nor Syria, nor Afghanistan, nor Iraq, nor anything akin to the historical cases in which the United States has intervened militarily in the name of democracy verbally and in pursuit of its own interests operationally. This very reality has, thus far, prevented Trump from issuing the order to “open fire” on Iran up to now.

On the other side, there is no sign of the flexibility or concession sought by the United States in the behavior or rhetoric of Iranian officials—a fact acknowledged by American officials themselves. This indicates that pressure, intimidation, and threats have thus far yielded no results. The reason is clear: the Islamic Republic views any potential confrontation as an existential war and is unwilling to grant any concessions. Trump, however—who seeks to manufacture achievements out of even the smallest events and whose penchant for exaggeration is among his defining traits—perceives such circumstances as detrimental to his personal prestige and standing.

Iran’s Resilience: The experience of the Israeli attack and the hybrid war launched against Iran in June 2025, with direct assistance from the United States and indirect support from so many others, demonstrated that the instability they sought within the governing structure of the Islamic Republic and even the internal social fragmentation and rifts that had been cultivated for years through various media tools did not materialize. Despite the blows inflicted on Iran, none of the long-term strategic objectives of the United States and Israel were achieved. Likewise, the unrest and riots of January 8 and 9, despite the violence and damage they caused to the public and the state, were ultimately brought under control and culminated in a multi-million-person rally on January 12 condemning the unrest and supporting the central government of the Islamic Republic.

High costs and Persian Gulf Worries: Operationalizing a military threat would impose heavy costs on the United States and its allies. The Islamic Republic has explicitly declared that any military action against its territory, at any scale, would be regarded as all-out war, and that, consequently, the entire region—as well as U.S. interests wherever they may be—would fall within range of Iran’s retaliatory strikes. This serious warning has also prompted Persian Gulf states to mobilize their capacities to dissuade Trump from attacking Iran. The strikes on U.S. bases at Ayn al-Asad and Al-Udeid entrenched the perception that the Islamic Republic does not shy away from responding to foreign aggression, even if large segments of the world regard the attacking state as a “superpower.”

Global Energy Risks: The ignition of war in the Persian Gulf would amount to a grave threat to global energy supply routes. Roughly 30 percent of the world’s crude oil and 20 percent of liquefied natural gas are supplied by Persian Gulf countries, and 20–25 percent of global crude oil transits the Strait of Hormuz. Any aggressive action by the United States would jeopardize the security of one-fifth of the world’s fuel and profoundly affect the global economy.

Although the U.S. National Security Strategy does not place the Middle East among America’s top strategic priorities, the same document states that: “We (the United States) want to prevent an adversarial power from dominating the Middle East, its oil and gas supplies, and the chokepoints through which they pass while avoiding the forever wars”, which shows Persian Gulf oil is still of high importance for Washington.

Tilting Power Balance: In addition, heightened tensions in the Persian Gulf would endanger China’s economic interests, and any large-scale military confrontation would likely lead to a more pronounced military-security presence by Russia and China in the Gulf—tilting the balance in favor of America’s rivals.

And finally?

The embers beneath the region’s ashes today could be ignited by the slightest breeze, engulfing a vast area. Israel, while likely the first target of Iran’s retaliatory response in the event of a U.S. attack, is nevertheless eager to initiate confrontation based on the calculation that a war waged with the full might of the United States could ultimately erode the very existence of the Islamic Republic or weaken it to the point of capitulation. In this context, it is not far-fetched to suggest that the disclosure of new documents and details concerning Trump’s links to the notorious Epstein case and his mysterious island may have been driven by the Mossad, as such revelations could compel the U.S. president to undertake an irrational action to divert attention elsewhere.

Today, Trump is acting more than ever in contradiction to his own professed principles—from trampling on his signature MAGA slogan and morphing it into MIGA (Make Israel Great Again), to undermining his administration’s efforts to reduce unnecessary international expenditures; from his paradoxical pride in having ended “eight wars” to the strategy of off-shore balancing the Middle East. Should a war of this magnitude and consequence erupt, no country involved—whether through direct action or geographic proximity—would be spared its consequences. Regarding these circumstances, it appears that the only desirable scenario for Trump, the region, and the world at large is the opening of a genuine dialogue, free from the shadow of threats, intimidation, and American bullying.

Slovakia had issued a two-day ultimatum to Ukraine to reopen the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline so that it could receive Russian oil deliveries.

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has said his country will halt emergency electricity supplies to Ukraine until Kyiv reopens a key pipeline transporting Russian oil to Slovakia, making good on an ultimatum he issued to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Fico’s announcement on Monday came two days after he warned Zelenskyy on social media that he would ask state-owned company SEPS to halt emergency supplies of electricity if flows of Russian crude oil via the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline crossing Ukraine did not resume.

“As of today, if the Ukrainian side turns to Slovakia with a request for assistance in stabilising the Ukrainian energy grid, such assistance will not be provided,” Fico said in a video on his Facebook page.

Ukrainian grid operator Ukrenergo said in a statement that it had not been officially informed yet, but that it would “not affect the situation in the unified power system of Ukraine”.

“The last time Ukraine requested emergency assistance from Slovakia was over a month ago and in a very limited volume,” it said.

Fico said the stoppage would be lifted “as soon as the transit of oil to Slovakia is restored”.

“Otherwise, we will take further reciprocal steps,” he said, adding his country would also reconsider “its previously constructive positions on Ukraine’s EU membership”.

He said the stalled oil supply was a “purely political decision aimed at blackmailing Slovakia over its international positions on the war in Ukraine”.

Slovakia and neighbouring Hungary, which have both remained dependent on Russian oil since the Kremlin launched its invasion of Ukraine almost four years ago, have become increasingly vocal in demanding that Kyiv resume deliveries through the Druzhba pipeline, which was shut down after what Ukraine said was a Russian drone strike hit infrastructure in late January.

Ukraine says it is fixing the damage on the pipeline, which still carries Russian oil over Ukrainian territory to Europe, as fast as it can.

Slovakia and Hungary say Ukraine is to blame for the prolonged outage and have declared emergencies over the cut in oil deliveries.

The EU imposed a ban on most oil imports from Russia in 2022, but the Druzhba pipeline was exempted to give landlocked Central European countries time to find alternative oil supplies.

Meanwhile, the European Union failed to agree on new sanctions on Russia for the fourth anniversary of Europe’s biggest war since World War II, after Hungary vetoed the move.

Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban – the friendliest EU leader to the Kremlin – is stalling the sanctions and a 90-billion-euro ($106bn) EU loan to Ukraine until Kyiv reopens the oil pipeline.

Fico also said he has refused to “involve the Slovak Republic” in the latest EU loan due to Zelenskyy’s “unacceptable behaviour”, alluding to Ukraine’s earlier halting of Russian gas supplies after a five-year-old transit agreement expired on January 1, 2025, which Fico claimed is costing Slovakia “damages of 500 million [euros; $590m] per year”.

Hungary and Slovakia have accounted for 68 percent of Ukraine’s imported power this month, according to Kyiv-based consultancy ExPro. It was not immediately clear if emergency electricity supplies were included in that figure.

At the BAFTA Film Awards, a guest with Tourette syndrome involuntarily shouted a racial slur during the BBC’s tape-delayed broadcast, prompting apologies after it aired unedited. The BBC did cut filmmaker Akinola Davies Jr.’s “free Palestine” line, sparking criticism.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum says that calm is being restored and that improvised cartel roadblocks are being removed.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has sought to assuage fears following a government raid that killed one of the country’s most-wanted drug trafficking leaders, prompting a series of violent outbursts by cartels across the country.

Speaking alongside Sheinbaum during a press conference on Monday, Security Secretary Omar Garcia Harfuch said that 25 members of the National Guard had been killed in fighting with criminal groups in the state of Jalisco after the raid.

“What is important now is to guarantee peace and security of all the population, of all of Mexico,” Sheinbaum said, adding that conditions have improved and Mexico “is calm” after the Sunday raid that killed Nemesio Oseguera, also known as “El Mencho”, of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel.

The killing of Mencho comes as Mexico is under growing pressure from the United States to take a more aggressive stance towards drug-trafficking groups, although the killing of top-level cartel figures in the past has had little impact on the drug trade and has often created a leadership vacuum that others violently act to fill.

The raid also set off a wave of reprisal attacks and impromptu roadblocks that have spread fear and uncertainty through Mexico, where criminal groups violently jostle for control of territory.

Garcia Harfuch said that the 25 members of the National Guard were killed in six incidents across Jalisco, adding that 30 people he described as criminal suspects were also killed in the clashes, along with four in Michoacan.

“First there was a huge gun battle, and then another, and another,” an anonymous resident of the town of Aguililla in Michoacan told the news service AFP, saying that cartel gunmen attacked a local outpost of soldiers on Sunday. “But they couldn’t advance because the soldiers stopped them.”

Defence Secretary Ricardo Trevilla said that an additional 2,500 security force members would be sent to Jalisco to reinforce the armed forces already deployed there, and Sheinbaum said that all of the more than 250 roadblocks erected across 20 states in response to the raid have been removed.

Mexican officials have sought to downplay the prospect of long-term disruptions stemming from the raid, with Sheinbaum saying that flights to and from Puerto Vallarta, located in the state of Jalisco, are expected to resume on Monday or Tuesday.

“In Puerto Vallarta, flights continue to be disrupted due to availability of flight crews. The Embassy is in close contact with airlines to monitor their plans,” the US Department of State Consular Affairs said in a social media post on Monday. “All other airports in Mexico are open, and most airports are operating normally. If you are traveling via any airport other than Guadalajara or Puerto Vallarta, we have received no indication of any security-related flight disruptions.”

The Mexican embassy to the US has shared social media posts debunking online rumours of attacks on civilians at Guadalajara airport and US tourists being held hostage.

Attack on Nablus-area mosque is latest in surge of Israeli settler and military violence targeting Palestinians.

Israeli settlers have defaced and set fire to a mosque in the occupied West Bank during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, marking the latest incident in a wave of Israeli violence against Palestinians in the territory.

The Wafa news agency reported on Monday that settlers graffitied racist slogans on the walls of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq Mosque, located between the towns of Sarra and Tal, near Nablus in the north of the West Bank.

Worshippers arriving for the day’s first prayers found the damage and a smouldering fire that spewed black smoke across the mosque’s entrance and stained the ornate doorway, The Associated Press reported.

“I was shocked when I opened the door,” Munir Ramdan, who lives nearby, told the news agency. “The fire had been burning here in the area, the glass was broken here and the door was broken.”

Ramdan told AP that security camera footage showed two people walking towards the mosque carrying gasoline or petrol and a can of spray paint, and running away a few minutes later.

The attackers spray-painted graffiti denigrating the Prophet Muhammad, as well as the words “revenge” and “price tag” – a term used to describe attacks by Israeli settlers against Palestinians and their property.

The assault comes amid a wave of intensified Israeli settler and military violence across the West Bank in the shadow of Israel’s genocidal war against Palestinians in the nearby Gaza Strip.

At least 1,094 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli troops and settlers in the West Bank since the Gaza war began in October 2023, according to the latest United Nations figures.

Last week, the UN Human Rights Council warned in a new report (PDF) that Israeli policies in the West Bank – including “the systematic unlawful use of force by Israeli security forces” and unlawful demolitions of Palestinian homes – aim to uproot Palestinian communities.

“These violations, together with pervasive and growing settler violence committed with impunity, are fundamental to the coercive environment that induces forced displacement and forcible transfer, which is a war crime,” the report said.

It added that these policies are aimed at “altering the character, status and demographic composition of the occupied West Bank, raising serious concerns of ethnic cleansing”.

Back in the West Bank village of Tal on Monday, resident Salem Ishtayeh told AP that the Israeli settlers’ assault on the local mosque was “directed especially” at Palestinians who are fasting during Ramadan.

“So they like to provoke you with words. It’s not that they are attacking you personally, they are attacking your religion, the Islamic faith,” Ishtayeh said.

According to the Palestinian Authority’s Ministry of Religious Affairs, settlers vandalised or attacked 45 mosques in the West Bank last year.

The Israeli military and police said they responded to the latest incident and were searching for suspects.

But human rights groups say the Israeli authorities have allowed the settlers to operate with total impunity in their attacks against Palestinians.

Israeli organisation B’Tselem has accused Israel of actively aiding the settlers’ violence “as part of a strategy to cement the takeover of Palestinian land”.

The UN also warned last year that settler attacks were being carried out “with the acquiescence, support, and in some cases participation, of Israeli security forces”.

Amid the steady drumbeat of reports pointing to the growing likelihood of strikes on Iran, there are indications that officials from Washington and Tehran will meet this week for another round of talks centered on the Iranian nuclear program. While the two sides remain generally at loggerheads, Iranian officials are now openly talking about possible concessions on their nuclear program in return for sanctions relief and the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.

The Iranian foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, told CBS over the weekend that U.S. and Iranian negotiators would likely hold more discussions in Geneva on Thursday, with the aim of making “a fast deal.” Iran and the United States resumed negotiations earlier this month.

Now, Araghchi says that he thinks there is still a good chance of finding a diplomatic solution in planned talks with U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff. However, he added that “If the United States attacks us, then we have every right to defend ourselves.” Iran has repeatedly threatened to strike U.S. bases in the region if it is attacked.

On Sunday, Mexican security forces killed 59-year-old Nemesio Ruben Oseguera Cervantes, alias “El Mencho”, the leader of the notorious Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG), based in western Mexico’s Jalisco state.

The Mexican defence ministry acknowledged that the lethal operation had been conducted with “complementary information” from the United States, whose “peacemaker” president, Donald Trump, has repeatedly threatened to attack Mexico to combat the drug cartels.

Mind you, these are organisations that owe their very existence to US policy and drug consumption in the first place.

US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau greeted the news of El Mencho’s death with glee, taking to X to proclaim: “This is a great development for Mexico, the US, Latin America, and the world.”

And yet things aren’t looking quite so “great” thus far.

As anyone who has ever paid remote attention to global affairs might have predicted, violence has broken out across several Mexican states in the aftermath of the killing – which is generally what happens when you take out a cartel kingpin.

Gunmen have torched vehicles and blocked highways in various locales while various US media have reported sensationally on the plight of American tourists “stranded” in Mexican resort cities on account of the upheaval.

Shortly after his initial enthusiastic post, Landau returned to X with a “PS, I’m watching the scenes of violence from Mexico with great sadness and concern.” But no matter: “We must never lose our nerve.”

The deputy secretary of state ended his “PS” with some words of encouragement in Spanish for the Mexican nation: “¡Animo Mexico!” (Cheer up, Mexico!)

But again, there is hardly room for cheer given that there is not a single example in pretty much the entire history of the world in which the killing of one cartel boss has resolved the narcotrafficking problem – or anything else, for that matter.

Recall the case of Pablo Escobar of the Medellin Cartel, killed in 1993 by Colombian police with a whole lot of help from the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA).

Despite Escobar’s absence, the international drug trade proceeded apace, and ensuing decades played host to spectacular levels of violence in Colombia – much of it coincidentally perpetrated by heavily US-backed state security forces.

In one particularly memorable episode, members of the Colombian army slaughtered an estimated 10,000 civilians and passed the cadavers off as left-wing “terrorists”.

To this day, Colombia remains the world’s top producer of cocaine.

In other words, to hail El Mencho’s demise as a “great development” for Mexico or anyone else is at best preposterously delusional.

On Sunday I phoned a Mexican friend in the southern state of Oaxaca, a supporter of Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, for our requisite argument over the day’s events. In his view, Mexico’s government had simply been “doing its job” in the “war on drugs” by eliminating El Mencho, and the US had nothing substantial to do with it.

Indeed, much like her predecessor and mentor Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, Sheinbaum has perfected the art of doing the gringos’ dirty work while purporting to act in a “sovereign” fashion – and even to defy the imperial overlords to the north.

Granted, she does not have a whole lot of room to manoeuvre given the recent kidnapping by the US of Venezuelan head of state Nicolas Maduro – and the fact that Trump has made it known that he is beholden to no law, whether domestic or international.

But while Sheinbaum may have seen no choice but to temporarily placate the Americans and satisfy Trump’s need for blood, Mexicans will pay a heavy price.

A brief review of contemporary Mexican history confirms as much. No sooner did then-Mexican President Felipe Calderon launch his “drug war” under US guidance in 2006 than homicides and enforced disappearances skyrocketed in the country.

Well over half a million people have since been killed and disappeared, many of them victims of militarised agents of the state who often operate in cahoots with organised crime.

Nary a dent has been put in the northward flow of drugs while the southward flow of US-manufactured weapons continues unabated.

The state of Jalisco itself happens to have the highest number of enforced disappearances in all of Mexico and made headlines last year with the discovery of a clandestine crematorium on a ranch outside Guadalajara, one of the host cities of the upcoming World Cup.

The ranch was reportedly used by the CJNG as a recruitment and training centre as well as an extermination site.

And the removal of El Mencho from the equation will do precisely nothing in terms of pacifying the landscape – just as the respective extraditions to the US of Sinaloa cartel leaders Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman and Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada merely set off an ongoing violent battle for power.

Contrary to lofty soundbites from US officials, the empire is not at all interested in getting rid of either drug trafficking or violence south of the border as both phenomena provide a perennial excuse for US interference in Mexico and beyond.

Were the gringos actually serious about ridding “Mexico, the US, Latin America, and the world” of the whole cartel problem, a decriminalisation of drugs would do much to nip the business in the bud by rendering the movement of drugs far less fantastically lucrative.

A moratorium on the US’s obsessive manufacture of weapons would also help.

Obviously, nothing so much as resembling those potential solutions is even on the horizon. If it were, that would be one hell of a “great development” indeed.

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

Who: Pakistan vs England
What: 2026 ICC Men’s T20 World Cup Super Eight
When: Tuesday, February 24, at 7pm (13:30 GMT)
Where: Pallekele International Cricket Stadium, Kandy, Sri Lanka
How to follow: We’ll have all the build-up on Al Jazeera Sport from 10:30 GMT in advance of our text commentary stream.

Click here to follow our live coverage.

The second Super Eight ties of the 2026 ICC Men’s T20 World Cup starts on Tuesday with an intriguing contest between former champions who both consider themselves legit title contenders: Pakistan and England.

Pakistan, despite being humiliated by India in the group phase, possess a stacked roster who, on their day, can compete with any cricket team in the world.

England, listed as the pre-tournament joint-second favorite to raise the T20 world crown, are slowly building momentum in the competition, as exhibited by their dismantling of host nation Sri Lanka in their Super Eight opener on Sunday.

Al Jazeera Sport takes a look at the matchup, which may turn out to be a pivotal outcome affecting both nations’ semifinal qualification hopes.

What’s at stake in the Pakistan-England Super Eight tie?

Pakistan desperately need a win after their first match against New Zealand was washed out on Saturday.

A defeat would put England, who skittled Sri Lanka out for just 95 runs, through to the semifinals with a game to spare.

Pakistan would then need to beat Sri Lanka in their final Super Eight match and hope other results go their way to reach the last four.

History will be against Pakistan as they have never beaten England in three previous Twenty20 (T20) World Cup clashes.

“We are confident and our morale is high,” said Pakistan batsman Sahibzada Farhan, who scored an unbeaten 100 against Namibia in Pakistan’s final group match.

“We are focused on this match to win and progress.”

Weather watch for Pakistan in Pallekele

Persistent rain in the Sri Lankan capital Colombo forced the abandonment of Pakistan’s opening Super Eight game with New Zealand without a single ball being bowled, forcing the sides to split the points at R Premadasa Stadium.

Pakistan will be hoping that the weather does not play a factor in their crucial second tie as another split result would all but end their semifinal aspirations.

Thankfully, the forecast looks good for Tuesday’s match against England at the Pallekele International Stadium in Kandy, with 33 degrees Celsius (91F) predicted with only a 25 percent possibility of rain. In short, there should be a result and a full match is a strong possibility.

England rounding into form

England kicked off their Super Eight campaign with a 51-run victory over Sri Lanka, a statistically dominant result that vaulted them to the top of the Group 2 standings on net run rate.

The two-time champions have now won their last three matches at the tournament.

Will Jacks has been the breakout star with the bat at the tournament, averaging 65 on a scintillating 195 strike rate.

Pakistan to put England in a spin

Pakistan on Monday warned England’s inconsistent batting lineup to expect a trial by spin when the teams clash.

Farhan told reporters that England struggled to 146-9 against Sri Lanka’s spinners on Sunday.

The in-form opener said that England can expect more of the same from Pakistan’s spinners when they meet on the same Pallekele ground on Tuesday night.

“What we saw in the Sri Lanka-England game was that the ball was gripping and England struggled against spin,” said Farhan on Monday.

“Sri Lanka have one or two spinners, but we have five in all, so we will give England a tough time on a pitch that looks good and will grip,” he added.

Pakistan’s spinners have taken 26 wickets in the four matches so far. Their seamers have dismissed only seven batsmen.

‘Will not be difficult’: Farhan on Archer express

Farhan, who tops the T20 World Cup run-scoring chart with 220, said he was ready for the threat of England’s express pace bowler Jofra Archer.

“Facing Archer will not be difficult because I have faced similar bowlers in Pakistan,” said Farhan.

“So if he has plans against me, I also have plans against him.”

Pakistan team news

Pakistan are likely to bring in spinner Abrar Ahmed in place of seaming all-rounder Faheem Ashraf.

Shaheen Shah Afridi’s omission from the final group stage match against Namibia and the Super Eight opener against New Zealand was a huge shock.

The bowling superstar was expensive in the group phase, with his side pivoting to a spin-dominant strategy.

With Pakistan desperately needing a win against England, the left-arm quick is expected to return to the starting XI.

England team news

England may name an unchanged side for the fifth match in succession with Liam Dawson, Will Jacks, Adil Rashid and Jacob Bethell providing their spin options.

Form Guide:

Pakistan

W-W-L-W-NR (most recent result last)

England

W-L-W-W-W (most recent result last)

What is England’s T20 World Cup record?

England has won the T20 World Cup title twice, in 2010 (defeated Australia) and in 2022 (defeated Pakistan).

They jointly hold the record for the most T20 World Cup titles alongside India (2007, 2024) and the West Indies (2012, 2016).

What is Pakistan’s T20 World Cup record?

Pakistan are three-time finalists, but have only lifted the trophy once.

The first appearance in the final came in the inaugural competition in 2007, when India claimed a five-run win.

The second edition, in 2009, saw Pakistan beat Sri Lanka in the final, but a 13-year wait ensued for the next appearance in the showpiece finale – only for England to sweep to a five-wicket victory.

What happened the last time England played Pakistan in a T20 match?

England and Pakistan have not played each other in a Twenty20 fixture since before the last T20 World Cup in 2024.

The sides competed in a four-game series in England with the home side winning 2-0, capping off their triumph in the last fixture with a seven-wicket victory at The Oval on May 30, 2024.

Head-to-head

This will be the 32nd meeting between the countries in cricket’s shortest format.

England has won more than two-thirds of matches with 21 victories, while Pakistan has nine wins. There has been one “no result”.

Possible Pakistan playing XI

Sahibzada Farhan, Saim Ayub, Salman Ali Agha (c), Babar Azam, Usman Khan (wk), Khawaja Nafay, Shadab Khan, Mohammad Nawaz, Shaheen Shah Afridi, Abrar Ahmed, Usman Tariq

Possible England playing XI

Jos Buttler (wk), Phil Salt, Jacob Bethell, Harry Brook (c), Tom Banton, Sam Curran, Will Jacks, Jamie Overton, Liam Dawson, Jofra Archer, Adil Rashid

United States Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has faced condemnation from Arab and Muslim countries after suggesting Israel has a biblical right to much of the Middle East.

In an interview with prominent right-wing American commentator Tucker Carlson, Huckabee suggested that Israel has a God-given right to land stretching from the Euphrates River to the Nile, which would encompass Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and parts of Saudi Arabia.

“It would be fine if they took it all,” he said, arguing that the geographical borders of Israel are rooted in the Bible, a belief shared by Christian Zionists.

The US diplomat, a self-professed Christian Zionist and staunch supporter of Israel, later walked back his comments, calling them “somewhat hyperbolic” and adding that Israel is not seeking expansion but has a right to security within its current borders.

But were his comments indeed hyperbolic in the Christian Zionist worldview? Or is that precisely what he and his fellow proponents of the ideology believe?

How did Christian Zionism begin, and what are its tenets?

In 1878, William Blackstone, a student of the prominent American evangelist Dwight Moody and a believer in the biblical restoration of Israel, published a book titled Jesus Is Coming. The best-selling work popularised among Americans a belief held by some Christian leaders: that God had given the land of Israel to the Jewish people.

This conviction, often taken from a Protestant evangelical perspective, draws on the ancient biblical idea that, nearly four millennia ago, God promised the land to the Jews, who would rule it until the return of Jesus to Jerusalem for the rapture. According to this theology, Christians will be saved upon Christ’s return while non-Christians who do not convert will face damnation.

The most commonly quoted Bible verse relating to this covenant is Genesis 12:3, in which God tells Abraham: “I will bless those who bless you and I will curse those who curse you and in you all the families of the earth will be blessed,” according to the Religion Media Centre.

According to ChristianZionism.org, a website run by professors, pastors and leaders of church-related organisations, four themes can be found in Christian Zionist thought: One, the founding of today’s nation-state of Israel in 1948 marked the final human era and signals an end of times. Two, the ongoing conflict in the Middle East is a part of God’s plan with a great and final war preceding the second coming of Christ. Three, God’s covenant with Israel is eternal and unconditional. And four, failing to support Israel’s political dominance today will incur divine judgement.

Writer and historian David Swift said that although many Christians – evangelical or otherwise – supported the creation of Israel before 1948, they cannot be called Christian Zionists in the modern parlance.

“This is because Christian Zionism essentially fuses religious belief with a military, strategic and even economic programme,” Swift told Al Jazeera.

“Specifically, Christian Zionism is not just the belief that the biblical land of Israel is the ordained country of the Jewish people but that it is in America’s strategic, military and economic interest to support the expansion of Israel.”

Fathi Nimer, a policy fellow at Al-Shabaka: The Palestinian Policy Network, described the movement as one that “translates into absolute unquestioning support for the Israeli regime”.

He described hearing a podcast about a Christian Zionist woman visiting Bethlehem who, after seeing the separation wall, Israeli soldiers and the harsh conditions in Palestinian refugee camps, remarked: “I feel bad for them, but scripture is scripture.”

“‘Scripture is scripture’ – that overrides everything,” Nimer told Al Jazeera.

“That’s why it’s such a powerful tool for brainwashing.”

How many American Christian Zionists are there?

According to author and academic Tristan Sturm, the largest population of Christian Zionists is in the US, and it numbers more than 30 million. Most are affiliated with evangelical churches in the southeast and south-central regions, often referred to as the “Bible Belt”.

The biggest organisation is Christians United for Israel, which itself boasts 10 million members, Nimer said.

“They are overwhelmingly conservative Republicans, found mostly in the Bible Belt, but also other places in the United States, and they form one of the most formidable voting blocs in the Republican Party,” he said.

Swift stated that only a few million from this group, however, are “fully signed up to the political, military and religious aspects of Christian Zionism”.

What impact do Christian Zionists have on US policy?

Nimer argued that Christian Zionists are “deeply intertwined” with American politics. “A lot of the major donors to the Republican Party and also the Democratic Party are Christian Zionists,” Nimer said.

According to the analyst, Christian Zionists are a cornerstone of Israeli lobbying groups, ranging from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) to the Anti-Defamation League, “that work to spread the Israeli narrative” in American society.

Meanwhile, a lot of members of the US Congress are “openly” Christian Zionist, Nimer said.

“[Politicians like] Mike Huckabee, … they reached the highest echelons of the state. And they bring these beliefs into their politics, into their policies,” the analyst said.

US foreign policy on Israel is, therefore, heavily influenced and shaped around the underlying biblical premise that the Jewish people are divinely destined to be restored to Palestine, he argued.

“When it comes to Palestine and the region in general, as you see right now with the [potential] war in Iran, they’re saying that the ballistic missile programme is now on the table,” Nimer said.

“It has nothing to do with the nuclear deal, … but the idea is that Israel must be able to maintain its superiority over every country in the region, and that’s a decree by God because if Israel prospers, then that’s another step towards the end of the world.”

Christian Zionist groups have also backed Israel’s illegal settlement project in the occupied West Bank and other measures that they see as reinforcing Israeli Jewish sovereignty.

Furthermore, for two decades, organisations such as HaYovel have been bringing in hundreds of American Christian volunteers to work in Israeli settlement agricultural projects, especially during the genocidal war on Gaza, when Jewish Israelis were called for military duty. Many also strongly endorsed US President Donald Trump’s moving of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in 2017.

Swift, however, said Christian Zionists have played only a minor role in shaping US support for Israel and their influence is waning.

He argued that while Christian Zionism is integrated with a “broader neoconservative foreign policy agenda” also tied to the “US defence industry and broader military-industrial complex”, the group does not have much influence in American politics, and, in fact, it is declining.

Traditionally, US government support for Israel was driven by Cold War considerations and by pressure from the Jewish community within the US and lobbying groups like AIPAC. What played less of a role was support for Israel from evangelical Christians and the smaller community of Christian Zionists, Swift said.

“The US president is finally de facto abandoning the previous theoretical support for a two-state solution – although not for Christian Zionist reasons. When Trump talks of ethnically cleansing Gaza and turning it into a beach resort, he uses the language of real estate, not the Old Testament,” the historian said.

According to the analysts, very representative.

“It is pretty representative: Christian Zionists derive their understanding of the proper borders of Israel from the same place as people like [Israeli National Security Minister] Itamar Ben-Gvir and [Israeli Finance Minister] Bezalel Smotrich: the Old Testament. Therefore, they think Israel should expand to include all of the territory of ‘biblical Israel’,” Swift said, referring to the far-right Israeli cabinet members who have worked to expand and protect Israeli settlements and outposts in the occupied West Bank, which are illegal under international law.

Nimer said Huckabee’s statement is also not something that can be criticised within the Christian Zionist community.

“You’re not allowed to criticise that because it’s like you’re criticising prophecy and you’re criticising God and the return of Jesus,” he said.

Huckabee’s comments, therefore, come as no surprise despite infringing upon the sovereignty of US allies in the Middle East, Nimer said.

On Monday, Smotrich said Israel would eventually occupy the Gaza Strip and establish a Jewish settlement there despite a “ceasefire” that went into effect in October.

“We are giving US President Donald Trump the opportunity to do it in his own way. If he does not succeed in eliminating Hamas, the Israeli army will get international legitimacy and American support to do it,” he said in statements to Israeli radio.

How do Jewish Israelis view Christian Zionists?

Mimi Kirk, the director of the Institute for the Study of Christian Zionism and the associate director of Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, writes that “despite the matter of their supposed end-of-times demise according to this view, Jewish Israeli leaders have embraced the money and influence on US foreign policy that Christian Zionists offer,” especially as its adherents include top officials from the first Trump administration, including former Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Nimer said it’s a rather “cynical relationship”, given that the Christian Zionist worldview, which sees all non-Christians going to hell, is “anti-Semitic to the bone”.

“But they support Israel, so it’s fine,” the policy analyst said.

“They care about what they can get out of them right now as the biggest support base in the West currently.”

Israel is further banking on this support because it is quickly losing its “progressive facade” of a “liberal democracy” with “all these progressive rights”, Nimer added.

“This has completely faded over the last few decades, and especially since the genocide in Gaza, this has become completely unacceptable.”

How do Christians in Palestine view Christian Zionists?

Palestinian Christians have long voiced concern that the Christian Zionist position threatens their existence, further entrenching Israel’s occupation while marginalising their community and undermining the historic churches of the Holy Land.

Just last month, the Patriarchs and Heads of the Churches in Jerusalem said activities by local individuals advancing “damaging ideologies, such as Christian Zionism” “mislead the public, sow confusion, and harm the unity of our flock”.

The Christian leaders warned that these efforts could undermine the Christian presence not only in the Holy Land but across the wider Middle East.

The statement came amid growing concern among Palestinian Christians that Israel’s policies – including land confiscation, settlement expansion and pressure on church property – are accelerating the erosion of one of the world’s oldest Christian communities.

Are there critiques of Christian Zionism among other Christians?

Criticism of Christian Zionists from within Christianity is abundant.

In the US, the Institute for the Study of Christian Zionism was created to critique and combat the movement through liberation theology, seeking justice for Palestinians and a resolution to the ongoing conflict.

Swift pointed out that many of the world’s most Catholic countries, from Ireland to those in South America and Southern Europe, “tend to be quite pro-Palestinian”.

Meanwhile, Palestinian Christian scholars “have written very detailed theological critiques of Christian Zionism”, Nimer said, as have pastors from other parts of the Global South.

A prize awarded by the Nelson Mandela Foundation last year was explicitly aimed at initiatives working against Christian Zionism, and a conference next month in Turkiye is being organised to combat the ideology, Nimer said.

“The world is waking up to how insidious this ideology is and how it creeps into societies and makes it impossible to have any kind of solidarity with Palestinians as long as they believe it,” he said.

We finally have something else to call General Atomics’ Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) by other than its formal YFQ-42A designation: Dark Merlin

Dark Merlin is one of two designs that the USAF has officially chosen for development and flight testing under the first increment of its CCA program, which intends to give fighter aircraft a ‘loyal wingman’ uncrewed companion.

General Atomics gives its reasoning for the naming as such:

“Dark merlins, deadly falcons known for their black feathers and devouring of other falcons as prey, often collaborate in groups for maximum effect against their targets. The Cornell Lab of Ornithology describes the merlin as a “small, fierce falcon that uses surprise attacks” to bring down its prey in flight. The dark merlin is native to the Pacific Northwest of the United States, often migrating into southern California, where bird spotters routinely report seeing them near the YFQ-42A’s manufacturing home in San Diego.”

The 1962 book “Profiles of the Future” imagined global technological marvels yet to change the world, offering that “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” It’s no coincidence that the Dark Merlin name also reflects the wizardry of Merlin from
Arthurian legend, paying homage to the somewhat supernatural new era of semi-autonomous
air combat.

“Dark merlins are hunting machines, built for speed and aerodynamics,” said GA-ASI President David R. Alexander. “They harass other falcons for fun, and they eat what they kill. The name sums up our new uncrewed fighter perfectly.”

The name is a very welcome development. We have discussed internally in our newsroom on multiple occasions that the designations for the CCAs, the other being Anduril’s YFQ-44A, which goes by the nickname Fury, carried over from its roots as a ‘red air’ training drone, are a bit hard for the public to follow. Now, with General Atomics giving their ‘fighter drone’ a unique nickname, referring to them as Dark Merlin and Fury will be a bit easier.

Both aircraft are currently in flight testing, and General Atomics has already put Dark Merlin, which is based on the firm’s Gambit chassis-centric family of combat drones concept, into production. This is ahead of the USAF making a decision on which Increment 1 CCA, or both, it wants to buy in larger numbers.

The naming also comes after it was announced that the Marines will use Dark Merlin as a testing surrogate for its own CCA program, which could possibly open the door to the Corps purchasing the ‘drone fighters’ for operational use.

Contact the author: Tyler@twz.com

Remarks from Ministry of Foreign Affairs come after Trump says he is considering an attack if a nuclear deal is not reached.

As a new round of talks between the United States and Iran is scheduled to take place in Geneva, Tehran has reiterated that it wants to find a diplomatic solution with the US on its nuclear programme but will defend itself if Washington resorts to military action.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said on Monday that any US attack, including limited strikes, would be considered an “act of aggression” that would precipitate a response after US President Donald Trump said he was considering a limited strike on Iran.

“An act of aggression would be regarded as an act of aggression. Period. And any state would react to an act of aggression as part of its inherent right of self-defence ferociously, so that’s what we would do,” Baghaei said during a media briefing.

Trump said on Friday that he was considering a limited strike if Tehran did not reach a deal with the US. “I guess I can say I am considering that,” he said in reply to a question from a reporter.

On Sunday, ⁠Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said nuclear talks with the US have produced “encouraging signals” but warned that Tehran is prepared for any scenario in advance of another round of negotiations set for Thursday.

“Iran is committed to peace and stability in the region,” Pezeshkian wrote on X.

The two countries concluded a second round of indirect talks in Switzerland on Tuesday under Omani mediation against the backdrop of the largest US military build-up in the region since the 2003 Iraq war. They resumed talks in Oman this month.

A third round of indirect talks is scheduled for Thursday in Geneva, but the US has yet to confirm. Oman said on Sunday that the talks are set “with a positive push to go the extra mile towards finalising the deal”.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has been leading the negotiations for Iran while the US is represented by envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.

‘Iranians had never capitulated’

Baghaei dismissed any claim that a temporary agreement had been reached with Washington, adding that speculation on the nuclear talks is not uncommon.

“We do not confirm any of the speculation. The details of any negotiation process are discussed in the negotiating room. The speculation raised about an interim agreement has no basis.”

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, reporting from Tehran, said there was a “mixture of optimism and pessimism” in Iran’s capital.

“Let’s call it a pragmatically calibrated cautiousness that we see when it comes to Iran’s statements over the past few weeks, specifically following the major military build-up by the Americans in the region,” he said.

He said Iran is considering both scenarios “on the basis of readiness for diplomatic engagement on the one hand and regional confrontation on the other hand”.

The Trump administration said it has been intensifying its build-up of an array of military assets in the Middle East during the talks with Iran. In an interview with the Fox News TV channel on Sunday, Witkoff said Trump was wondering why Iran has not “capitulated” in the face of the military deployment.

Baghaei on Monday stressed that Iranians had never capitulated at any point in their history.

“This is not the first time we have encountered contradictory claims,” the Foreign Ministry spokesman said.

“We leave the judgement to the discerning people of Iran and the country’s political elites to decide about Iran’s negotiating approach and, in turn, the negotiating approach of the United States,” he added.

“No negotiation that begins with an imposed burden and prejudgement will naturally reach a result,” the official said.

He also stressed that Iran’s positions on its nuclear programme and sanctions relief are clear-cut.

“Any negotiation process requires joint action, and there is hope for results if there is goodwill and seriousness on both sides,” Baghaei said.

After two years of a grinding war, Palestinians in the Gaza Strip are observing the holy month of Ramadan during an unabating economic catastrophe as Israel continues to impose restrictions on the entry of food and other supplies despite a “ceasefire” reached in October.

For most families, the daily struggle to secure a mere loaf of bread has replaced the traditional festive atmosphere before the war. An analysis by Al Jazeera, based on official data, reveals that skyrocketing prices for basic commodities have made a complete iftar meal to break the daily fast a distant dream for the vast majority of the population.

Skyrocketing costs

During periods when Israel tightened its siege or completely closed the crossings into Gaza, food prices spiked by more than 700 percent. While prices have retreated slightly since the “ceasefire” began in October, they remain significantly higher than pre-war levels.

According to Mohammed Barbakh, director general of policy and planning at the Ministry of Economy in Gaza, official data tracking prices from before the war began on October 7, 2023, to the first days of this Ramadan show staggering increases.

Al Jazeera’s analysis of the ministry’s price data reveals the following hikes:

• Chicken: Prices rose from 14 shekels ($4.49) to 25 shekels ($8.01) per kilogramme (2.2lb), an 80 percent increase.
• Frozen fish: Prices jumped from 8 shekels ($2.56) to 23 shekels ($7.37) per kilo, a 190 percent increase.
• Frozen red meat: Prices rose from 23 shekels ($7.37) to 40 shekels ($12.82) per kilo, a 75 percent difference.
• Eggs: A tray of 30 eggs now costs 35 shekels ($11.22) compared with 13 shekels ($4.17), a 170 percent increase.

Vegetables, a staple of the Palestinian diet, have also seen dramatic surges. Tomatoes have doubled in price while cucumbers have jumped by 300 percent, rising from 3 shekels ($0.96) per kilo to 12 shekels ($3.85). Cheese prices have increased by up to 110 percent, directly impacting the cost of suhoor, the predawn meal before the daily fasting during Ramadan begins.

The cost of a meal

Based on data from the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, Al Jazeera estimated the cost of a basic iftar for a family of six. The meal includes two chickens, rice, salad, appetisers, a soft drink, cooking gas and oil.

The price of the meal has risen to about 150 shekels ($48), up from 79 shekels ($25.32) before the war, an increase of 90 percent.

For suhoor, a simple meal of cheese, hummus, falafel and bread now costs 31.5 shekels ($10.10), compared with 18.6 shekels ($5.96) previously.

The combined daily cost to feed a medium-sized family now stands at 181.5 shekels ($58.17), an 88 percent jump from pre-war figures.

Economic obliteration

These price hikes coincide with a collapse in purchasing power. A United Nations report released in late 2025 indicated that the annual per capita income in Gaza plummeted to $161 (503 shekels) in 2024, down from $1,250 (3,900 shekels) in 2022.

The labour market has essentially vanished. In a statement issued in October, Sami al-Amsi, head of the General Federation of Palestinian Trade Unions, said unemployment stood then at more than 95 percent as workshops, farmland and fishing fleets were destroyed.

“The worker is no longer looking for a job because there is no work at all,” al-Amsi said. “Today, the Palestinian worker is looking for a food parcel to survive.”

Blockade and monopoly

Economic researcher Ahmed Abu Qamar attributed the inflation to Israel’s restrictive entry policies and “coordination fees” imposed on trucks.

“The humanitarian protocol stipulates the entry of 600 trucks daily, yet the Israeli occupation effectively allows only between 200 and 250 trucks,” Abu Qamar told Al Jazeera, noting that the Strip actually requires 1,000 trucks daily to meet minimum demand.

He also highlighted a monopoly system under which only about 10 merchants are authorised to import goods through four Israeli companies, restricting competition and keeping prices artificially high. He called for a return to a free market system and the full opening of crossings to alleviate the burden on a population already crushed by conflict.

U.S. trade policy uncertainty has sent shockwaves through global markets, as President Donald Trump moved to impose a 15% tariff following the Supreme Court of the United States ruling invalidating his emergency trade levies. Investors reacted quickly, rotating out of risk assets and the dollar, while seeking shelter in gold, silver, and safe-haven currencies. The turbulence highlights the fragility of global investor confidence when policy reversals collide with high-stakes geopolitical and economic risks.

Wall Street and Currency Volatility

U.S. stock futures fell sharply, with S&P 500 futures down 0.5% and Nasdaq futures slipping 0.6%. The dollar weakened across major pairs, losing 0.21% versus the yen and 0.34% against the Swiss franc, while the euro gained 0.23%. European equities also reflected caution: the STOXX 600 fell 0.19%, Germany’s DAX slid 0.36%, and Britain’s FTSE 100 edged down 0.1%.

Asian markets, however, were mixed. The MSCI Asia index excluding Japan rose 0.83%, while Hong Kong’s Hang Seng surged 2.53% on expectations of lower tariffs for China. Japan’s Nikkei futures fell 0.4% ahead of a holiday, highlighting regional divergence driven by perceived winners and losers in U.S. tariff policy.

Safe-Haven Assets Rally

Amid the uncertainty, investors sought protection in gold and silver, which climbed 0.6% and 2% respectively. Safe-haven currencies, including the Japanese yen and Swiss franc, appreciated as risk-off sentiment grew. Government bonds saw slight gains, with the U.S. 10-year Treasury yield dipping to 4.077%, reflecting flight-to-quality buying. Brent crude prices fell 1.1% to $70.97 a barrel, reversing gains from earlier geopolitical risk sentiment linked to U.S.-Iran tensions.

Tariff Confusion and Its Economic Implications

Trump’s latest tariffs add layers of ambiguity. While the Supreme Court struck down his emergency powers, the new 15% levy relies on Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, an untested statute. Questions remain over timing, exclusions, and applicability by country. Some nations, including the UK and Australia, had lower tariffs under prior rules, while many Asian exporters faced higher duties. The Yale Budget Lab estimates the average effective tariff rate at 13.7% following the announcement, down from 16% pre-ruling, with the 15% rate potentially dropping to 9.1% after 150 days.

“This circular process of tariff announcements, legal challenges, and revisions is creating profound uncertainty for markets,” said Rodrigo Catril, senior FX strategist at NAB.

Market Sentiment and Investor Behavior

The episode reflects broader structural concerns about U.S. trade policy’s unpredictability. Investors are no longer just reacting to tariffs themselves, but to the instability and volatility of policy enforcement. The uncertainty affects supply chains, corporate earnings forecasts, and capital allocation decisions. Nvidia’s upcoming earnings, for example, are being closely watched, given the company’s 8% weighting in the S&P 500, demonstrating how trade policy shocks can amplify market sensitivity to specific corporate results.

Analytical Outlook

Trump’s oscillating trade policy highlights a critical tension between political objectives and market stability. While tariffs are framed as instruments to advance domestic economic priorities, the resulting unpredictability imposes systemic costs: currency swings, equity market volatility, and flight to safe assets. The mixed regional responses Asian equities partially rallying, European markets cautious underscore how interconnected global trade and finance are, and how unevenly shocks are absorbed.

In essence, this episode illustrates a modern economic paradox: protective trade measures intended to strengthen domestic interests can, in practice, destabilize markets worldwide. Investors now must hedge not only against tariffs themselves but also against the policy volatility that accompanies them a scenario likely to persist as long as U.S. trade decisions are made unilaterally and unpredictably.

Trump’s approach has transformed trade from a predictable framework into a high-stakes, reactive arena, forcing global markets to continuously recalibrate. The lesson is clear: in today’s interconnected financial system, the cost of policy uncertainty often outweighs the intended protectionist benefit.

With information from Reuters.

Afghan officials deny claims, as they accuse Pakistan of targeting civilians and violating its sovereignty in Sunday’s border air raids.

A senior Pakistani government official has claimed that its military killed at least 70 fighters in air raids along the border with Afghanistan, claims Kabul has denied, amid escalating tensions between the two South Asian neighbours.

Talal Chaudhry, Pakistan’s deputy interior minister, offered no evidence for his claim in an interview with Geo News on Sunday evening that at least 70 rebels were killed in the attack. Pakistan’s state media reported that the death toll had jumped to 80; however, there was no official confirmation.

Pakistan’s military carried out the air raids early on Sunday, targeting what it called “camps and hideouts” belonging to armed groups behind a spate of recent attacks, including a deadly suicide bombing at a Shia mosque in the capital, Islamabad.

The country’s Information Minister Attaullah Tarar wrote on X that the military conducted “intelligence-based, selective operations” against seven camps belonging to the Pakistan Taliban group, known by the acronym TTP, and its affiliates.

Tarar said Pakistan “has always strived to maintain peace and stability in the region”, but added that the safety and security of Pakistani citizens remained a top priority.

President Asif Ali Zardari said late on Sunday that Pakistan’s recent attacks along the Afghan border were “rooted in [its] inherent right to defend its people against terrorism” after repeated warnings to Kabul went unheeded.

The attacks threaten a fragile ceasefire between the South Asian neighbours, negotiated following deadly border clashes that killed dozens of soldiers, civilians and suspected fighters in October last year.

Pakistan said it has repeatedly urged Afghanistan’s Taliban government to take action to prevent armed groups from using Afghan territory to launch attacks, but that Kabul has failed to “undertake any substantive action”.

Afghanistan has rejected Pakistani allegations that its territory is used by armed groups linked to attacks in Pakistan.

Afghanistan denies claims

The Afghan Ministry of Defence said in a statement that “various civilian areas” in the eastern provinces of Nangarhar and Paktika were hit, including a religious school and several homes. The statement called the attacks a violation of Afghanistan’s airspace and sovereignty.

Taliban government spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid said “people’s homes have been destroyed, they have targeted civilians, they have committed this criminal act” with the bombardment of the two eastern provinces.

Residents from around the remote Bihsud district in Nangarhar joined searchers to look for bodies under the rubble using shovels and a digger, the AFP news agency reported.

“People here are ordinary people. The residents of this village are our relatives. When the bombing happened, one person who survived was shouting for help,” resident Amin Gul Amin, 37, told AFP.

Spokesperson Mujahid also said Pakistan’s claim of killing 70 fighters was “inaccurate”.

Mawlawi Fazl Rahman Fayyaz, the provincial director of the Afghan Red Crescent Society in Nangarhar province, said 18 people were killed and several others were wounded.

Afghanistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned Pakistan’s ambassador in Kabul to protest against the attacks.

In a statement, the ministry said protecting Afghanistan’s territory is its “Sharia responsibility”, warning that Pakistan would be held responsible for the consequences of such attacks.

South Korea and Brazil have agreed to significantly deepen cooperation across key minerals, trade, technology and security, as President Lee Jae Myung hosted Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in Seoul for the first Brazilian state visit in more than two decades. The summit, held at the Blue House, marked a symbolic reset in bilateral ties and produced an ambitious roadmap aimed at elevating relations to a strategic partnership.

The two leaders endorsed a four-year action plan designed to anchor cooperation in strategic minerals, advanced manufacturing, defence, space industries and food security. They also oversaw the signing of 10 memorandums of understanding covering trade and industrial policy, rare earths and other critical minerals, the digital economy including artificial intelligence, biotechnology and health, agricultural collaboration, small-business exchanges, and joint efforts to combat cybercrime and narcotics trafficking.

Critical Minerals at the Core

At the heart of the agreement lies a shared recognition of the growing geopolitical importance of critical minerals. Brazil holds significant reserves of rare earth elements and nickel, both essential to electric vehicles, renewable energy systems and high-tech manufacturing. South Korea, a manufacturing powerhouse heavily reliant on imported raw materials, is seeking to diversify supply chains amid intensifying global competition for resource security.

For Seoul, closer ties with Brasília offer an opportunity to secure stable access to strategic inputs while reducing exposure to concentrated supply routes. For Brazil, the partnership represents a chance to attract South Korean investment into mining, processing and downstream industries, potentially moving up the value chain rather than remaining primarily a raw-material exporter.

Trade Expansion and Industrial Policy Alignment

Brazil is South Korea’s largest trading partner in South America, and both governments signaled an intent to broaden the scope of commerce beyond traditional commodity flows. Industrial policy coordination featured prominently in the discussions, suggesting a shift toward co-development in sectors such as semiconductors, batteries and green technologies.

The emphasis on the digital economy and artificial intelligence reflects a convergence of economic strategies. South Korea’s advanced technological ecosystem complements Brazil’s expanding digital market, creating potential for joint ventures and technology transfers. Cooperation in biotech and health also indicates a recognition of demographic and public health challenges that transcend borders.

Security, Stability and Shared Democratic Narratives

Beyond economics, the leaders framed their partnership within a broader narrative of stability and democratic resilience. Lee emphasized support for peace on the Korean Peninsula, while Lula underscored Brazil’s interest in a balanced and rules-based international order.

Their personal rapport, shaped by shared experiences of early-life factory work and social mobility, added a human dimension to the diplomacy. Lee publicly praised Lula’s life story as emblematic of democratic progress, reinforcing a symbolic alignment that may help sustain political goodwill between the two administrations.

The inclusion of joint policing initiatives against cybercrime and transnational threats signals that the partnership extends into non-traditional security domains. As digital connectivity deepens, cyber resilience and coordinated law enforcement become integral to safeguarding economic integration.

Strategic Diversification in a Fragmented World

The timing of the summit is notable. As global trade faces renewed uncertainty and supply chains continue to recalibrate, middle powers such as South Korea and Brazil are seeking to hedge against volatility by strengthening bilateral and regional ties. By formalizing cooperation in minerals, technology and defence, both governments aim to insulate their economies from external shocks while positioning themselves within emerging industrial ecosystems.

The ceremonial elements of the visit including a state banquet blending Korean and Brazilian cultural traditions underscored the leaders’ intent to broaden engagement beyond transactional trade. Whether the newly signed agreements translate into measurable investment flows and industrial integration will depend on sustained political commitment and private-sector participation. Yet the framework established in Seoul suggests that both countries see strategic partnership not as a symbolic upgrade, but as a practical response to an increasingly fragmented global landscape.

With information from Reuters.