TODAY

Ditching his plans to make digital ID mandatory for workers in the UK is an almighty backtracking and dilution of one of the prime minister’s flagship policy ideas of the autumn.

I remember the first time Sir Keir Starmer talked publicly about his plans, because he was talking to me when he did so.

It was September, and we were sheltering from the pouring rain, in an outside metal stairwell next to a giant ship being built by BAE Systems on the banks of the Clyde in Glasgow.

What he had to say that day was rather overshadowed by the swirling storm around his then Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, who 24 hours later was out of a job.

What those around him were describing as “phase 2” of his government was already off to a bumpy start, but digital ID was seen as a defining idea of the parliament that the prime minister could own and then lean into the arguments it provokes with his opponents, within his party and beyond it.

The thing is it provoked a lot of arguments, perhaps more than he had anticipated, including among some Labour MPs.

It was the mandatory element that became the magnet for the stickiest criticisms.

The idea cratered in popularity. It revived so many of the arguments that nuked the last Labour government’s plans for ID cards about two decades ago.

The sense from critics of an overbearing state, a ‘show us your papers’ society.

So what have ministers done? They have junked the mandatory element of it.

People will still have to digitally prove they have the right to work – but could use other things to do it.

This new government digital ID will not be essential.

The argument I hear within government is they are ditching the bit that is unpopular, but keeping something people might choose to use themselves because it could make accessing public services easier, for instance.

In short, the whole initial public pitch for why digital ID was a good idea – cracking down on illegal migration and illegal working – has been shelved.

The emphasis now is on digital ID being an aide to consumers.

“Let’s remove the whole culture war thing entirely and focus on the pragmatic element plenty of people will like and will choose to use,” is how one government figure put it to me.

Others say if the prime minister really is going to focus on the cost of living when he is addressing domestic policies, he needed to junk unpopular stuff that was getting in the way of that.

The opposition parties have piled in with their criticisms, while welcoming the government’s change of heart.

Here is the political challenge for Downing Street: the climbdowns, dilutions, U turns, about turns, call them what you will, are mounting up.

In just the last couple of weeks, there has been the issue of business rates on pubs in England and inheritance on farmers.

Before that, among others, income tax, benefits cuts and winter fuel payments.

Sir Keir Starmer’s critics, external and internal, are taking note.

Just hours before this latest backtracking, the Health Secretary Wes Streeting – who’d quite fancy being prime minister himself one day – said it was important the government “gets it right first time”.

That, to put it very politely, is a work in progress for Sir Keir Starmer.

But car makers have urged an extension to the USMCA, saying it is crucial to US auto production.

US President Donald Trump says the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) is not relevant to the US, but that Canada wants it, as he pushed for companies to bring manufacturing back home.

“There’s no real advantage to it; it’s irrelevant,” Trump said about the trade agreement on Tuesday, during a visit to Detroit, Michigan.

“Canada would love it. Canada wants it. They need it.”

Detroit’s three big automakers, Ford, General Motors and Stellantis, are heavily reliant on supply chains that include significant parts production in Mexico and Canada, and all three produce hundreds of thousands of vehicles annually in both countries.

Major car makers, including Tesla, Toyota and Ford, in November also urged the Trump administration to extend USMCA, saying it is crucial to US auto production.

The American Automotive Policy Council, representing the Detroit Three automakers, said the USMCA “enables automakers operating in the US to compete globally through regional integration, which delivers efficiency gains” and accounts “for tens of billions of dollars in annual savings”.

Mark Reuss, president of General Motors, said at an event on Tuesday, “Our supply chains go all the way through all three countries. It’s not simple. It’s very complex. The whole North American piece of that is a big strength.”

Trump made his comments as he toured a Ford factory in Dearborn, Michigan, ahead of a speech he is delivering on the economy in Detroit on Tuesday.

“The problem is, we don’t need their product. You know, we don’t need cars made in Canada. We don’t need cars made in Mexico. We want to take them here. And that’s what’s happening,” he said.

Stellantis said in November that under the 15 percent tariffs with Japan, US vehicles complying with North American content rules “will continue to lose market share to Asian imports, to the detriment of American automotive workers”.

The USMCA is up for review this year on whether it should be left to expire or another deal should be worked out.

The trade pact, which replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement in 2020 and was negotiated during Trump’s first term as president, requires the three countries to hold a joint review after six years.

On Wall Street, two of Detroit’s major automakers are trending downwards. Ford is 0.25 percent below the market open and Stellantis is down 2.9 percent, while General Motors is up by 0.6 percent.

Former Chelsea and Blackburn Rovers striker Chris Sutton agreed with Guardiola and Silva and said Kavanagh’s verdict looked like a “sheer guess”.

“I think the game has gone,” added Sutton. “Is Thiaw really going to stop that? The distance from Semenyo is a yard, a yard and a half. Thiaw is not going to react to that.”

Ex-Liverpool and England midfielder Jamie Redknapp and Newcastle defender Dan Burn said it was the correct call to rule out Semenyo’s effort, though both criticised the process.

“If they had given the goal there wouldn’t be one person that looked at this and thought it shouldn’t have been allowed,” said Redknapp.

“But by the letter of the law, whether we like it or not, it is the right decision.”

Meanwhile, Burn, who missed the game through injury, added: “I do think it is the right decision, I just don’t like the subjective offside. It’s either offside, or it’s not.

“We don’t want to see that, but by the letter of the law it should be disallowed.”

Former Manchester City defender Micah Richards said: “I understand the process but VAR wasn’t brought in for this reason here.

“This is anti-goal which they said they weren’t going to do, they said they weren’t going to re-referee the game.

“This for me is re-refereeing the game. They are both going at it. It might be right, but I don’t think we should be taking away goals for this. Why take five minutes?”

In October 2024, Israel passed a law banning the agency for Palestinian refugees in Israel and occupied East Jerusalem.

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he could take his country to the International Court of Justice if it does not repeal laws targeting the UN Palestinian refugee agency (UNRWA) and return its seized assets and property.

In a January 8 letter to Netanyahu, Guterres said the UN cannot remain indifferent to “actions taken by Israel, which are in direct contravention of the obligations of Israel under international law. They must be reversed without delay.”

Israel’s parliament passed a law in October 2024 banning UNRWA from operating in Israel and prohibiting Israeli officials from having contact with the agency. It then amended the law last month to ban electricity or water to UNRWA facilities.

Israeli authorities also seized UNRWA’s occupied East Jerusalem offices last month. The UN considers East Jerusalem occupied by Israel. Israel considers all of Jerusalem to be part of the country.

Guterres said that UNRWA is “an integral part of the United Nations”, and highlighted that “Israel remains under an obligation to accord UNRWA and its personnel the privileges and immunities specified in the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UN”.

The convention states that “the premises of the United Nations shall be inviolable”.

Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, dismissed Guterres’s letter to Netanyahu.

“We are not fazed by the Secretary-General’s threats,” Danon said in a post on X on Tuesday.

“Instead of dealing with the undeniable involvement of UNRWA personnel in terrorism, the Secretary-General chooses to threaten Israel. This is not defending international law, this is defending an organization marred by terrorism,” he added.

Israel has long sought the dissolution of UNRWA, which was created by the UN General Assembly in 1949 following the war surrounding the founding of Israel. It has since provided aid, health and education to millions of Palestinians in Gaza, the occupied West Bank, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan.

Israel has alleged that a dozen of the agency’s employees were involved in the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel, in which 1,139 people were killed, and about 240 were taken into Gaza as captives.

In response to the attack, Israel launched a devastating genocidal war against the Palestinian people of Gaza, killing more than 71,400, according to Gaza’s health authorities.

The UN has said that nine UNRWA staff who may have been involved in the Hamas-led attack on Israel have been fired. A Hamas commander in Lebanon, killed in September by Israel, was also found to have had a UNRWA job.

The UN has also promised to investigate all accusations made against UNRWA, and has repeatedly asked Israel for evidence, which it says has not been provided.

According to a January 5 UN report, Israel’s war on Gaza has killed 382 UNRWA employees in the enclave, which is the highest number of UN casualties since the world body was founded in 1945. Some have been killed in Israel’s deliberate, repeated attacks on UNRWA hospitals and schools, which shelter more than one million displaced Palestinians in Gaza.

Top UN officials and the UN Security Council have described UNRWA as the backbone of the aid response in Gaza, where Israel’s war has unleashed a humanitarian catastrophe.

In October 2025, the ICJ reiterated Israel’s obligation to ensure full respect for the privileges and immunities accorded to the UN, including UNRWA and its personnel, and said Israel should ensure the basic needs of the civilian population in Gaza are met.

The ICJ opinion was requested by the 193-member UN General Assembly.

Advisory opinions of the ICJ, also known as the World Court, carry legal and political weight, but they are not binding, and the court has no enforcement power.

It was December 23, 2025. A group of young men mounted motorcycles and rode through the warring communities of Lamurde Local Government Area in Adamawa State, northeastern Nigeria, to deliver the governor’s message. A peace accord had been signed, they announced, and all hostilities between the Bachama and Tshobo tribes had ceased.  

“We don’t expect further damage. Enough is enough,” Ahmadu Fintiri, the state governor, said during the signing. “With this, I want to declare, there is no victor and no vanquish.”

In the days that followed, residents who had fled to neighbouring towns began returning home. Commercial farming, which had largely stopped after the July 2025 clashes between the two tribes, was slowly resuming after months of standstill.

Eager to resume work, Grace Joshua, a 35-year-old Tshobo woman based in Lamurde Town, and her group of friends secured a contract at a commercial rice farm on the outskirts of the town. On Jan. 3, they set out. But as they were about to commence work, a man appeared. 

“We were all frightened, and we immediately stood up,” Grace told HumAngle, taking laboured breaths over the phone.  The man, she said, was tall and dressed in black, wearing a mask. 

“Two of us started running [to the opposite direction] towards Tingo Village, and then we saw two other men in front of us. That was when we realised that it was an ambush,” she recalled.  

Gunshots broke out. Grace was hit in the thigh and fell to the ground, but the other woman reached the village unharmed. “I thought I was going to die until I saw people coming from my village, and that was how I was rescued,” she said. 

By the time a rescue team arrived on the farm, the attackers had fled, leaving the other three women dead in a pool of their own blood. The villagers rushed Grace to a clinic for treatment, while the other women were buried that same day. 

As Grace continues to receive treatment, the question echoes in her mind: when will the attacks cease?

The clashes 

For centuries, the Tshobo and Bachama tribes coexisted peacefully, living side by side, sharing schools, markets, water sources, health centres, and even marriages. Situated barely a kilometre apart, both tribes fall under the same local government council, with most of the shared social infrastructure located in Lamurde Town, the local government headquarters. 

However, this long-standing harmony was breached in July 2025, when a dispute over land ownership broke out. Locals say the farmland at the centre of the recent crisis is in Waduku and has been disputed for several years. The claimants — Mallam England Waduku, Afiniki Monday, and Engeti — are members of the same extended family, linked through intermarriage between the Tshobo and Bachama tribes. The violence reportedly began when members of the Engeti family, from the Tshobo tribe, went to work on the land, which they said was allocated to them through inheritance. Members of Mallam England’s family, from the Bachama tribe, confronted them and attempted to stop the farming, insisting that the land also belonged to them. What began as a family disagreement soon escalated into communal violence.

The Tshobo people primarily inhabit the mountainous areas of Lamurde Local Government Area, including communities such as Wammi, Lakan, and Sikori, which stretch toward the border with Gombe State. The Bachama, on the other hand, are largely settled in Rigange, Waduku, and other lowland communities. In towns such as Waduku and Lamurde, members of both tribes live side by side and often speak one another’s languages.

The violent land dispute has shattered daily life in these communities. Two months after the violence, HumAngle extensively documented the impact: some locals had fled to stay with relatives in other towns, while those who remained lamented being trapped within their communities, unable to move freely. Access to healthcare and other social services became difficult, especially for Tshobo communities, which had long depended on clinics in Lamurde town, a Bachama stronghold. 

The crisis deepened communal divisions, as both tribes began avoiding routes and activities that previously brought them together, such as trading. By September 2025, social and economic ties were being severed. Despite several peace talks and reconciliation efforts by the government and stakeholders, both communities continued to clash. 

In early December, both communities violently clashed again, prompting the intervention of the Nigerian Army. Tragically, the intervention resulted in casualties when the military allegedly opened fire on a group of Bachama women who had come out in Lamurde Town to protest the violence. Seven women and a man were killed, while many others sustained injuries. The Nigerian Army denied shooting protesters, but locals insist otherwise.

Hensley Audu, whose wife was killed in the protest, said his mind will never be at peace until justice is served. “Our house was burnt to the ground in Rigange, so we moved to Lamurde Town for safety, but then another incident broke out in the township in December, and my wife joined a group of women to protest peacefully on that day,” he said.

Hensley told HumAngle that he wasn’t at the protest ground, but eyewitnesses said it was the military who shot at his wife and the other women. “She was 63 years old. She left behind five children and two grandchildren,” he added. 

While calm seems to have been restored in Lamurde Town, Hensley said locals no longer trust the military officials patrolling the area. “They were the ones who shot our women,” he stated. 

He said his family has relied on support from relatives since his wife’s death. 

“The government also came to check on us. They offered a token, but until the military takes responsibility and my wife gets justice, my mind will never be at rest,” he said. 

The accords that keep failing 

Since the conflict began, community leaders and residents have told HumAngle that the warring sides have signed three peace agreements, yet new clashes continue to erupt. 

Hyginus Mangu, the leader of the Tshobo tribe, said that the first accord was signed in the office of the state’s Commissioner of Police when the clashes first broke out around July 2025, in the presence of all the state’s security heads. The other two, he said, were signed in the state governor’s office in September and December 2025. 

“It was agreed that there would be interactions between the two communities. And it was unanimously signed like that without any argument,” Hyginus said. 

Simon Kade, a Bachama stakeholder, corroborated the account. He noted that the accords were meant to bring a definitive end to the recurring clashes. However, with the recent attack on the Tshobo women, Hyginus said, the accord has been breached yet again.

To Hensley, the peace accord is just a piece of paper: “The government is not tackling the main issue. They need to arrest those who incite the conflict despite agreements to maintain peace.” 

HumAngle learned that two suspects linked to the attack were arrested by security operatives and are now in custody. 

Trading blames

Hensley accused some Tshobo youths of using social media to provoke hostility against the Bachama. Hyginus, on the other hand, blamed the Bachama for instilling fear among his people. He said Tshobo farmers who own land in Lamurde Town, Tingo, and other Bachama-dominated areas have yet to resume dry-season farming. Civil servants from Tshobo communities have also stayed away from the Lamurde secretariat, fearing attack.

Simon disputed this, claiming Tshobo residents around Tingo provoke Bachama people with insults, which he fears could spark renewed clashes. He added that Bachama residents living in Tshobo-dominated areas do not feel safe.

At night, Simon said, locals do not sleep despite the presence of security officials in the area. He explained that the community has set up its vigilante to patrol the area every night. Hyginus said the same situation exists in the communities where his subjects live. 

Ready to embrace peace?

Wilson Ezra, who lost his wife in the Jan. 3 attack, said he feels hopeless without his wife, who left behind six young children. The last of them, he said, is barely a year old. “Even the other two women who died were breastfeeding mothers,” he told HumAngle. 

While he grapples with the loss of his wife, he prays that more attacks do not happen in the future. “There is nothing I want in this life more than peace,” Wilson said. 

The recent incident has sparked a new wave of displacement among both tribes. Residents are leaving communities such as Rigange and Waduku, which were significantly affected in previous clashes. 

“We have left our home in Rigange and moved into Lamurde Town because we don’t know what might come next,” said Azurfa Morisson, a Bachama native from Rigange who lost her son in the December clash. Since the town houses the local government secretariat, she feels safer. 

This displacement comes at a high cost for families like Azurfa’s, as they have abandoned their farmlands and businesses. But she is willing to do anything to stay alive. 

Lamurde LGA is known for its rich cultural heritage, agricultural productivity, and trade. Before the violent conflict, locals across Adamawa and neighbouring states flocked to Tingo, home to one of the state’s largest markets. Recently, however, the area has become increasingly inaccessible. Roads leading to Lamurde Town, the Tingo market, and nearby villages are largely deserted. Business in Tingo is gradually coming to a standstill. 

Simon, a commercial farmer who lost his home in one of the clashes, said economic activity has collapsed. “This situation has changed the market in Tingo. A  lot of people used to bring their farm produce here, but as a result of this conflict, even the big trucks that come to buy and pack our goods and take them to other states have stopped coming,” he noted. 

Hyginus, the leader of the Tshobo tribe, said they are ready to embrace peace. “There will be peace if today the Bachama’s will stop harassing, attacking, or provoking us, so that there’s a peaceful movement of people from my area, wherever they want to go,” he said. 

He called on the government and the leadership of the Bwatiye Traditional Council, which comprises leaders of both tribes, to investigate the recurring incidents. 

Simon argues that the Bachama tribe also want peace, but the Tshobo doesn’t want to let their guard down. “Everyone should hold on to what they own and stop trying to take over other people’s lands or property,” he said.

HumAngle reached out to the Adamawa State government for comments, but no response had been provided at the time of filing this report. 

As both parties fail to maintain the fragile peace, many lives are strained. 

Prosecutors say Yoon, who was impeached over a failed 2024 martial law declaration, threatened ‘constitutional order’.

South Korean prosecutors have asked for ousted President Yoon Suk Yeol to face the death penalty over his failed attempt to impose martial law in 2024.

Special prosecutor Cho Eun-suk’s team made the request to the Seoul Central District Court during court on Tuesday, accusing Yoon of threatening the “liberal democratic constitutional order” with his “self-coup”.

“The greatest victims of the insurrection in this case are the people of this country,” said the prosecutors. “There are no mitigating circumstances to be considered in sentencing, and instead, a severe punishment must be imposed.”

Yoon plunged South Korea into a crisis with his martial law declaration in December 2024, prompting protesters and lawmakers to swarm parliament to force a vote against the measure.

The decree was quickly declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, and Yoon was subsequently impeached, removed from office and jailed.

Yoon’s criminal trial for insurrection, abuse of power, and other offences linked to the martial declaration ended on Tuesday after 11 hours of proceedings.

The court is expected to deliver a verdict on the case on February 19, according to the Yonhap news agency.

Yoon says investigations ‘frenzied’

The former president has denied the charges against him, arguing that he was acting within his authority to declare martial law in response to what he described as opposition parties’ obstruction of government.

Speaking in court Tuesday, Yoon criticised investigations into the rebellion charges as “frenzied” and mired in “manipulation” and “distortion.”

If found guilty, Yoon will become the third South Korean president convicted of insurrection, following two ex-military leaders convicted over their roles in the 1979 coup.

But even if Yoon is handed a death sentence, it is unlikely to be implemented, as South Korea has observed an unofficial moratorium on executions since 1997.

Yoon also faces several other trials over various criminal charges related to the martial law attempt and other scandals during his time in office.

A Seoul court is expected to deliver a verdict on Friday on an obstruction of justice case, which could see Yoon facing 10 years in prison.

And he faces a trial on charges of aiding the enemy over allegations he ordered drone flights over North Korea to justify his martial law declaration.

The office of President Lee Jae Myung, who ‍was elected after Yoon was removed from office, said in a statement that it “believes the judiciary will rule … in accordance with the law, principles, and public standards.”

Manchester United have appointed former player Michael Carrick as their caretaker head coach until the end of the season.

Carrick will be assisted by former England number two Steve Holland, with Jonathan Woodgate, Jonny Evans and Travis Binnion also part of his staff.

Former United midfielder Carrick, 44, had a three-game stint as United’s temporary boss after Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s dismissal in 2021.

He will be back in the Old Trafford dugout for Saturday’s Premier League derby against Manchester City.

United sacked Ruben Amorim on 5 January after 14 months in charge, and Darren Fletcher took charge as caretaker boss for two matches.

Carrick held face-to-face talks with United officials last Thursday and is understood to have impressed chief executive Omar Berrada and director of football Jason Wilcox with his vision for the team.

He is set to play a 4-2-3-1 formation – a move away from the three-at-the-back set-up employed by Amorim.

Norwegian Solskjaer, who has played for and managed United, also held talks with the club about the vacancy.

But Carrick has been chosen as he is more of a hands-on coach than Solskjaer.

Fletcher, who took charge of the games against Burnley and Brighton immediately after Amorim’s exit, will return to the under-18s.

United view him as a key part of their coaching staff moving forward but it was mutually agreed a return to the under-18s is best to continue his development.

US president issues latest threat to midwestern state, where protests have continued after ICE agent killed woman.

United States President Donald Trump has said that a “day of reckoning and retribution” is coming to Minnesota, as outrage and protests have continued days after an immigration agent fatally shot a woman in the state’s largest city, Minneapolis.

Trump did not provide further details on the statement, which came at the end of a lengthy screed on the president’s Truth Social account on Tuesday.

The apparent threat represented the latest pledge to come down hard on the midwestern state in the wake of the killing of Renee Nicole Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent last week.

The administration on Monday promised to send hundreds more ICE agents to Minneapolis, where federal officer ranks already dwarf local law enforcement, in what city and state leaders have called a dangerous escalation.

“All the patriots of ICE want to do is remove them from your neighborhood and send them back to the prisons and mental institutions from where they came, most in foreign Countries who illegally entered the USA though Sleepy Joe Biden’s HORRIBLE Open Border’s Policy,” Trump said, referring to his predecessor, US President Joe Biden.

“FEAR NOT, GREAT PEOPLE OF MINNESOTA, THE DAY OF RECKONING & RETRIBUTION IS COMING!” he said.

The phrase was quickly quoted by the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees domestic US immigration enforcement, in a post on X.

Later on Tuesday, a federal judge was set to hear arguments in a lawsuit filed by Minnesota’s Attorney General and the cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, alleging that the surge of immigration agents violates residents’ freedom of speech while trampling on the state’s constitutionally protected authorities.

“People are being racially profiled, harassed, terrorised, and assaulted,” the state’s attorney general said in a statement upon filing the lawsuit.

“Schools have gone into lockdown. Businesses have been forced to close. Minnesota police are spending countless hours dealing with the chaos ICE is causing.”

“This federal invasion of the Twin Cities has to stop, so today I am suing DHS to bring it to an end,” it said.

Ongoing outrage

Daily protests have continued across the state since Good’s killing during an enforcement operation in Minneapolis.

Within moments of the shooting, the Trump administration labelled Good a “domestic terrorist”, while claiming the officer was acting in self-defence after the 37-year-old “weaponised her vehicle”.

Widely circulated video evidence quickly cast doubt on their claims, with many observers saying recordings appeared to show Good attempting to flee the scene in her Honda Pilot SUV when the agent opened fire. Questions have also been raised over the conduct of the agents involved, including a series of actions that appeared to escalate the situation.

Last week, local officials decried the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) unorthodox move to block an independent state investigatory body from taking part in a probe of Good’s killing. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said the move – coupled with the Trump administration’s comments – raises questions over the integrity of any conclusions reached.

On Tuesday, the UN Human Rights Council also called for a “prompt, independent and transparent” investigation into the incident.

Prior to Good’s killing, the Trump administration had surged immigration agents to Minnesota as the president increasingly focused on alleged fraud in the large Somali-American community in the state, at times employing racist rhetoric as he sent 2,000 immigration agents to the area.

On Wednesday, the Trump administration announced it was revoking so-called Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Somalia, a special designation that protects individuals from deportation due to unsafe conditions in their home country.

In a statement on X, US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) said the move means Somalis who had been on TPS are required to leave the country by March 27.

The Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective’s Red Paper series takes on the pressing issues of our time with urgency and principled clarity. We are at the frontlines of the Battle of Ideas and we use anti-imperialist methodology to clarify the stakes, intensify the contradictions, challenge the propaganda, and defend the Resistance.

We, the Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective (AISC), condemn in the strongest terms possible the US imperialist attack against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The US kidnapped President Nicolás Maduro and First Combatant Cilia Flores in a blatantly criminal breach of international law on January 3, 2026, while violently assaulting the sovereignty of Nuestra América. We stand firmly with the Venezuelan people and their revolutionary Bolivarian State as they defend their sovereign right to self-determination. We unequivocally recognize Nicolás Maduro as the legitimate president of Venezuela and demand the United States government immediately release him and First Combatant Flores. As an organization committed to challenging US-led imperialism and supporting the sovereignty and national liberation of the Global Majority, AISC calls on anti-imperialist forces in the US and across the world to unite in defense of President Maduro and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

In Red Paper #1, AISC provides a critical analysis of the current US attack on Venezuela, demonstrating that it must be understood as an existential conflict between US imperialism and the sovereignty of the peoples of the Americas.

Introduction: The Two Fronts of Imperialist War

The US is waging war against Venezuela on two inter-related levels. First, this war constitutes a renewed escalation of a decades-long “counter-revolutionary” attack on revolutionary forces and states in the region that have overturned imperialist property structures.[1] Second, this war represents an escalation of US imperialism’s attempt to weaken and subjugate the architects and backers of an emergent polycentric world order in which the US will no longer be the sole, hegemonic superpower.[2] The two “fronts” of the US imperialist war are inter-related. The fracturing of the alliances driving forward the polycentric world order provides a necessary condition for isolating, and destroying, the sovereign development projects of the revolutionary states of the Americas. These projects are marked for destruction as they pose an existential challenge to US imperialism. They disrupt the ability of capital in the imperialist core to superexploit labor and dominate resources while also contesting the definitive basis of imperialist power: the control over the flow of resources and capital between territories.

The attack against Venezuela and the Trump regime’s escalated war footing have generated a broad spectrum of criticism and opposition. However, the terms of the opposition have often risked delegitimizing the Venezuelan state—and thus supporting the objectives of US imperialism. In particular, there is a return to a register of anti-war opposition that posits a fundamental distinction between the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and a generic category of the Venezuelan “people.” This is a self-defeating move at best, a complicit one at worst. It is not possible to defend the “Venezuelan people” while aligning with the imperialists in delegitimizing the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela as a “dictatorship.” It is not a generic category of the “Venezuelan people” that is under attack, but a specific state formation structured upon reorienting the nation’s resources in the service of national development rather than imperialist wealth appropriation. To delegitimize this state structure is to lay the groundwork for legitimizing US imperialist interventions. The questioning of an anti-imperialist state’s legitimacy, particularly by imperialist forces, should never serve as a basis for violating its state sovereignty.

As imperialist forces sow confusion, it is thus imperative that we respond with clarity as to why Venezuela has been attacked and move with a principled commitment to the defence of its sovereignty. This is a war on a revolutionary state that has challenged imperialism by reclaiming both its “internal” and “external” bases of sovereign power: it has constructed a sovereign national development project and forged sovereign international relations with other anti-imperialist states.

Socialism with Bolivarian Characteristics: Resource Sovereignty, Communal Power and Popular Defense

In the late twentieth century, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela emerged as a revolutionary challenge to the foundational bases of US imperialism. The Bolivarian Republic has deepened and sustained Venezuelan sovereign-popular ownership over its own resources, reclaiming control over its oil wealth from US corporations such as ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips.[3] It subsequently directed its oil wealth into sovereign national development projects[4] as well as into regional and international “South-South” frameworks[5] that fundamentally challenge the dependent relations that have kept Global South states at the mercy of the US-led imperialist order.

The formation of communes has been at the heart of the sovereign national development projects advanced by the Bolivarian Republic. Emerging out of the historic social missions launched by President Hugo Chávez in 2004—which virtually eliminated illiteracy via Misión Robinson and built a nationwide, free community healthcare system via Misión Barrio Adentro and significantly reduced poverty—the commune project advanced the revolutionary process towards what Chávez termed “communal socialism.”[6] In these grassroots structures, communities legislate, administer resources, and manage their own means of production. Forged under the pressure of the US economic blockade and imperialist hybrid warfare, the communes now collectively control productive resources in close coordination with the state. They have played a central role in mitigating the deleterious impact of sanctions by meeting urgent community needs and advancing food sovereignty.[7] Even under escalating US attack, President Nicolás Maduro’s government deepened the state’s commitment to the communes by launching a new strategic plan in November 2025 based on over 36,000 proposals from a national popular consultation intended to fortify national unity and resilience.[8]

This same communal infrastructure that sustains daily life under siege also forms the material and organizational basis for Venezuela’s national defense. In December, building on the grassroots power of the communes, the Bolivarian National Militia activated Nicolás Maduro’s doctrine of “Guerra de Todo el Pueblo,” distributing rifles and other weapons to millions of civilians.[9] The intent of the militia is to involve the whole of the Venezuelan people in the national defense against imperialist aggression. Maduro warned that any large-scale US invasion will face a “new Viet Nam,” a prolonged campaign of guerrilla war characterized by cascading hit-and-run attacks springing from compact urban areas, foreboding mountains, and immense jungles. While the US military retains immensely destructive technological capacities, it is increasingly evident that it is not capable of engaging in such a land war. By its own admission, it has not trained in tropical environments in decades, having just revived its “jungle warfare” training program in Panama for the first time in over 20 years.

It is the popular basis of the Bolivarian Revolution, renewed and reforged through the communes and the National Militia, that grounds the legitimacy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The “qualitative basis” of the sovereignty of the Bolivarian Republic is to be found in the empowerment of Indigenous, Afro-Venezuelan, and working class peoples, and the reorientation of the nation’s land and resources in service of a popular form of national development that meets the needs of all its peoples. This qualitative force provides the Bolivarian Republic with its greatest source of legitimacy and deepest power in resisting US imperialism.

Venezuela v. US Imperialism

It is precisely this combination of sovereign development, popular power, and territorial defense that the US led capitalist imperialist world order could never accept. Capitalist imperialism requires a consistent drain of cheap resources and goods from the periphery into the imperialist core as a means of both stabilizing class relations in the core and appropriating surplus value from the periphery.[10] Imperialism has historically established the conditions for such appropriation through military force and imposing economic dependency on the peripheries. Time and again, when the peoples of the imperially subjugated Global Majority have sought to reclaim their sovereign right over both their territories and the flow of economic capital into and out of their territories, they have been subjected to imperialist war and economic sanctions.[11] This is the fundamental rule of the capitalist imperialist system, as seen in the economic warfare and blockades imposed on Haiti in the 19th century, Cuba in the 20th century, and now Venezuela in the 21st century.

The emergence of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has been all the more threatening to the US imperialist order because it is a key insurgent challenge to the “end of history” Washington consensus that the US sought to impose on the entire planet at the close of the twentieth century. The structural adjustment programs that the United States enforced across the Global South destroyed national economies, undermined social reproduction capacities, and in so doing produced massive pools of cheap labor and resources for exploitation and appropriation by the imperialist core.[12] But what US imperialism did not foresee at the time was the strength of the anti-imperialist challenge that would be launched against the IMF-World Bank neocolonial program. Key among these challenges included the anti-IMF Caracazo movement in Venezuela that led to the Bolivarian socialist revolution and the rise of the communes;[13] Venezuela’s PetroCaribe Energy Agreement program that leveraged the country’s oil wealth for the socio-economic development and the integration of Caribbean countries;[14] the resilience of the Cuban socialist revolution in the face of the collapse of the Soviet Union;[15] the Lavalas program in Haiti demanding reparations and higher wages;[16] the struggle in Zimbabwe that led to the reclamation of stolen land by dispossessed Zimbabweans;[17] the anti-privatization water wars in Bolivia that led to the rise of MAS;[18] and the Palestinian second intifada that brought the Washington consensus Oslo framework to crisis.[19] The US has systematically sought to destroy each and every one of these challenges to the foundations of imperialist-core accumulation.

US imperialism has, over the past twenty five years, attempted coups d’etats and imposed punitive economic sanctions as a means to try to overthrow the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Among the longstanding aims of the US are to deny Venezuela sovereign control over its oil wealth and to hand it over instead to US oil majors, including through persistent demands that Venezuela pay “compensation” for the nationalization of its oil industry. Rather than cooperate with an increasingly sovereign Venezuelan oil sector, US oil majors escalated legal warfare, aggressively suing Venezuela for so-called “lost assets” and demanding compensation payments for the 2007 oil nationalization.[20] This demand for compensation to the expropriator—to the colonizer, to the imperialist—coupled with sanctions against national liberation projects, is a structural feature of imperialism. The roots of colonial-imperialist “compensation” lie in the blockades imposed against Haiti and Cuba, which demanded that colonial property owners be compensated for the “losses” incurred when the Haitian and Cuban peoples reclaimed sovereign power over their territories and lives.[21] Similar demands were imposed against Zimbabwe earlier this decade.[22] What is at stake today, however, is not only resource domination and colonial-imperialist compensation, but also control over the country’s financial flows as finance capital aims to dominate future revenues, debt, and collateral streams.

However, the US has failed time and again in its attempts to destroy the sovereignty of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The first Trump administration rolled out a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign, which led to a severe economic crisis in Venezuela.[23] Its GDP contracted by close to 90 percent between 2013 to 2020, resulting in 40,000 deaths due to the devastating impact of the sanctions regime on Venezuela’s public health system.[24] The economic crisis also triggered massive economically motivated emigration from the country. The Venezuelan state not only withstood the sanctions campaign, but has achieved a small degree of economic recovery in recent years. In fact, Venezuela is forecasted to lead GDP growth in Latin America for both 2024 and 2025.[25] It is in light of the failure of the US economic sanctions regime to achieve its objectives of regime change and complete subordination that we must view the turn to military force against Venezuela. This latest wave of US imperialist intervention seeks to extract concessions from the Venezuelan state—particularly access to its oil and mineral wealth—and to curtail its independent, South-South solidaristic international relations. The attack on Venezuela is informed by the same strategic objectives that drove the US attack on the Islamic Republic of Iran this past summer. In both cases, the US has sought to destroy a sovereign state that has provisioned regional economic or military strategic depth to anti-imperialist forces.

The Revival of the Monroe Doctrine and the Recolonization of Nuestra América

The US imperialist attack on Venezuela has been identified as an enactment of the “Trump corollary to the Monroe doctrine” that animates the 2025 US National Security Strategy.[26] At its core, the revival of the Monroe doctrine is centered upon expelling what it identifies as “non-hemispheric rivals”—China, Russia, and Iran—from the Americas and re-consolidating the region under full spectrum US domination.[27] The Trump corollary is premised upon a claim that the “non-hemispheric rivals” threaten both regional prosperity and US power, and their removal and replacement with full spectrum US “leadership” will benefit the region’s economic development and security. What the attack on Venezuela reveals, however, is that the Trump corollary is primarily concerned with these “non-hemispheric rivals” for the role they have played affording Venezuela and other states in the region greater space for constructing and sustaining projects of sovereign development. Sovereign development advances the utilization of national resources for national development, and thus threatens the reproduction of cheap labor and resource pools for appropriation by capitalist imperialist modes of accumulation.

A clearer understanding of the relationship between sovereign development and the region’s engagement with an emergent polycentric world order can be grasped if we recall the key role played by these so-called “non-hemispheric rivals” in the consolidation of the gains of the Bolivarian Revolution. After the Bolivarian Revolution, the Venezuelan state identified deepening relations with non-Western powers as central to reducing dependency on US investment and export markets.[28] This strategy became particularly urgent and pronounced after Venezuela deepened the nationalization of its oil sector in 2007. Western capital, as mentioned above, refused to accept nationalization and instead sought to contest it by suing for “compensation” and effectively conducting a “capital strike” by withdrawing investments from the country.[29] While such measures have historically been used by imperialist powers to force concessions from peripheral states after they achieve independence – i.e. the capital strike will only be ended after the targeted state relents on its nationalization program – Venezuela was able to withstand this financial imperialism by drawing on support from China, Russia, and Iran. China and Venezuela created the “China-Venezuela Joint Fund” in 2007 that received significant injections of capital from Chinese state development banks that proved essential for maintaining state oil revenues in the service of infrastructure development and social spending.[30] Russia’s state-owned oil company, Rosneft, similarly injected significant levels of investment that sustained the Venezuelan state oil sector and provisioned funds for social spending.[31] Iran and Venezuela have deepened relations across multiple sectors such as healthcare and food production, and have forged cooperative economic relations through which they support each other in withstanding US sanctions. Iran, in particular, has transferred vital technical expertise, refinery parts, and catalysts to help sustain Venezuela’s blockaded oil industry.[32]

We see here the outlines of a world premised upon sovereign cooperation and solidarity. Venezuela’s ability to sustain its nationalization program provisioned the means for strengthening the cooperative relations with regional anti-imperialist states, most notably Cuba. Venezuela’s provisioning of discounted oil flows to Cuba has been essential to the latter’s own ability to withstand the nearly 70 year US blockade.[33] Venezuela has further taken leadership in regional integration efforts such as the Bolivaria Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). Venezuela and Cuban solidarity would, in turn, serve as an anchor for a growing Latin American anti-zionist bloc which raised its voice loudly, and took concrete material action, in opposition to the escalating US-zionist genocidal war against Palestinians. Both states have severed ties with the zionist entity. The US-zionist imperialist alliance has, in turn, made the defeat of the anti-zionist bloc in the Americas a key component of its larger strategy to overcome the zionist entity’s increasing international isolation.[34] We note here the commitment of the US backed Venezuelan regime change leader, Maria Corina Machado, to restore full Venezuelan diplomatic support for the zionist entity.[35] In addition, US secretary of state Marco Rubio has demanded that Venezuela sever its relations with anti-zionist forces in West Asia, namely the Islamic Republic of Iran and Hezbollah, as a condition for the ending of the US blockade on Venezuelan oil exports.[36]

These two inter-related levels of anti-imperialist sovereign expression—“internal” sovereign national development and “external” cooperation and solidarity with other anti-imperialist states—pose existential challenges to the US led imperialist world order. Sovereign national development reduces the capitalist core’s access to cheap labor and resources in the Global South, while deepening anti-imperialist inter-state cooperation counteracts the threat of “isolation” that imperialism seeks to impose on anti-imperialist states.

It is for this reason, above all, that the “Trump corollary to the Monroe doctrine” seeks to remove “non-hemispheric rivals” and why it has targeted Venezuela as its first act. It seeks to remove from Venezuela the strategic economic depth through which it has been able to withstand decades of hybrid warfare—capital strikes, international lawfare, sanctions, attempted coups—and sustain its sovereign development project. The attack on Venezuela explicitly takes as its aim the re-routing of oil flows away from China and Russia and towards the US.[37] This will open the door to windfall profits for Western finance and mining capital, severely curtail the sovereign development capacity of the Venezuelan state, and provision the US with a stronger control over international oil and capital flows. Controlling Venezuelan oil would, in turn, provide US imperialism with a powerful instrument with which to intensify its squeeze on the Cuban economy and advance its longstanding aim of rolling back the Cuban revolution. It could further be deployed to exercise leverage against China, the major source of strategic economic depth for anti-imperialist forces in the world today.

US imperialism’s strategic renewal of the Monroe doctrine is thus propelled, in significant part, by an awareness that the US has rapidly lost economic leadership in the world economy. China has demonstrated it is pulling away from the US in economic and technological sectors shaping the future of the world economy.[38] The superior efficiency and performance of its Artificial Intelligence (AI) sector has threatened the valuation of US AI sectors and firms that have received hundreds of billions of dollars in capital investment.[39] In contrast to the US doubling down on oil and gas as a means to power its AI sectors,[40] China is demonstrating a future that ties AI to the accelerated development of its renewable energy sector.[41] This represents a decisive shifting of the world away from dependence on oil and gas, which will not only challenge the basis of US imperialist power—resource dominance and dollar hegemony—but open greater space for more sustainable futures. China has further consolidated its command over the global supply chain for the transition to AI and renewable energy, securing control of both the access to, and the advanced technology required to process, the essential rare earth minerals renewable energy economies demand.[42] It bears emphasizing that China’s strategic control over energy and rare earth supply chains has been anchored primarily in long-term domestic industrial and processing capacity, while its access to upstream resources in the Global South has been sustained through negotiated South–South cooperation frameworks, as seen above in its relations with Venezuela.[43] This contrasts with the coercive sanctions, regime-change operations, and expropriatory demands characteristic of Western imperialism. Recognizing it is incapable of competing with China on economic terms, the US is increasingly using lawfare and military power to seize access to rare earth minerals, deepen control over energy flows, reshape global supply chains and shift capital investment towards US controlled global production lines.

While China has helped sustain Venezuela’s oil nationalization program, US oil majors have for decades sought to undermine and reverse it. In the fall of 2025, when U.S. courts ruled in favor of domestic energy and mining capital by ordering the Venezuelan state to sell its U.S. assets to satisfy colonial-imperialist “compensation” claims from Exxon and ConocoPhillips, the zionist-led “vulture capitalist” firm Elliot Management—owned by the notorious Paul Singer – stepped in and acquired Venezuela’s US assets—largely consisting of CITGO refineries.[44] The rush by the Trump regime to re-route Venezuelan oil to the US will then provision windfall profits to Elliot Management and other US firms involved in refining Venezuelan crude oil in the CITGO refineries.

A similar dynamic exists if the US is able to gain access to Venezuela’s substantial rare earth mineral supply. This will strengthen the “Pax Silica” alliance recently forged by the US. The “Pax Silica” is an explicit framework in which the US has brought together eleven allied states in an attempt to build a supply chain for semiconductor chips and AI technology independent of China.[45] Venezuela’s critical minerals (including coltan) would constitute an important foundation to counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative.[46]

We can thus see how the US imperialist state’s “strategic” move to re-consolidate control over global energy and mineral flows has implications for the profitability and valuation of US capital and firms. It is necessary to be attentive to the motives of US imperialism at both the firm level and the structural level of the world economy in order to grasp the dynamics of the “Trump corollary to the Monroe Doctrine.”

The Contradictions of the Trump Corollary: Tactical Gains versus Strategic Losses

In light of the US attack on Venezuela, it may appear that US imperialism has re-established its primacy in the world-system. However, it remains the case that its crises not only persist, but deepen. Absent a fundamental re-organization of its economic structure, the US will continue to prove incapable of keeping up with China’s productive leaps across a range of sectors, including renewable energy and AI. As the US doubles down on wars for oil, China has decisively opened a post-fossil fuel trajectory wherein its own dependency on oil will enter into secular decline.

The ongoing US-led wars in Ukraine and Palestine have become a resource drain for NATO.[47] Its member nations are suffering cash flow problems and declining economies compounded by exhausted weapons and defense systems that are expensive and slow-to-manufacture.[48] Social unrest across the US and Europe is high and political fragmentation threatens the stability of both.[49] In this context, the desperation of US imperialism betrays itself, manifesting in racist, colonial language, fascist repression, savage violence and abductions of both migrants and heads of state, as well as the accelerating use of concentration camps like the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) in El Salvador. Having lost the ability to conduct long wars as those waged against Viet Nam and Iraq, the US turns to short, sequential wars sprinkled with discrete and barbaric acts of aggression, like the abduction of President Maduro and First Combatant Flores.

The underlying contradiction persists for US imperialism: its immediate tactical victories undermine its longer term strategic objectives. It is notable that the US prepared for six months, then deployed 150 aircraft and dozens of military personnel to capture two people.[50] In the aftermath of this spectacular display of force, however, the Bolivarian Republic remains intact. Interim President Delcy Rodriguez has been sworn in, the Venezuelan armed forces, together with the mass-based Bolivarian militia, have ensured national security and stability, opposition parties have united with President Maduro’s party—Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela (PSUV)—in defense of the nation; and each day has brought growing global and national outcry against the US as a “rogue superpower.”

US-led Western imperialism has once again reaffirmed its refusal to make any space for the sovereign development of the peoples of the Global South. The defeat of US imperialism therefore remains the fundamental task confronting all those who are fighting for a world founded on sovereignty, justice, and peace. In the face of the criminal terrorist attack conducted by US imperialism, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela remains standing and its popular forces remain prepared to defend it. It is imperative that anti-imperialist forces across the world unite in demanding the release of President Maduro and First Combatant Flores, the unconditional lifting of U.S. sanctions and the blockade against Venezuela and Cuba, the full defense of the sovereignty of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, and the recognition of the Venezuelan people’s right to resist imperialist aggression.

Notes

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

Source: Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective

“If we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark,” said Greenland’s PM.

Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen has said the self-governed Danish territory wants to remain part of Denmark rather than join the United States, amid US President Donald Trump’s ongoing push to take over the island.

Speaking at a news conference in Copenhagen alongside Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, Nielsen said the autonomous Arctic territory would prefer to remain Danish.

“We are now facing a geopolitical crisis, and if we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark,” he said.

Frederiksen said it had not been easy to stand up to what she slammed as “completely unacceptable pressure from our closest ally”.

Nielsen’s comments came a day after the government of Greenland rejected Trump’s threats of a takeover.

“The United States has once again reiterated its desire to take over Greenland. This is something that the governing coalition in Greenland cannot accept under any circumstance,” said the island’s coalition government.

“As part of the Danish commonwealth, Greenland is a member of NATO, and the defence of Greenland must therefore be through NATO,” it added.

Trump has insisted that he will seize Greenland, threatening that the territory will be brought under US control “one way or another”.

Those threats have created a crisis for NATO, sparking outrage from European allies who have warned that any takeover of Greenland would have serious repercussions for ties between the US and Europe.

On Wednesday, US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio will host a meeting with the foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland at the White House.

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen and his Greenlandic counterpart, Vivian Motzfeldt, told reporters in Copenhagen on Tuesday that they had requested the meeting with Rubio after Trump’s threats.

“Our reason for seeking the meeting we have now been given was to move this whole discussion … into a meeting room where we can look each other in the eye and talk about these things,” Rasmussen said.

Aaja Chemnitz, a Greenlandic politician in the Danish parliament, told Al Jazeera that a majority of Greenland’s 56,000 people did not want to become US citizens.

“Greenland is not for sale, and Greenland will never be for sale,” Chemnitz, from the Inuit Ataqatigiit party, said.

“People seem to think they can buy the Greenlandic soul. It is our identity, our language, our culture – and it would look completely different if you became an American citizen, and that is not something a majority in Greenland want.”

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has deployed a military radar in the Somali region of Puntland as part of a secret deal, amid Abu Dhabi’s ongoing entrenchment of its influence over the region’s security affairs.

According to the London-based news outlet Middle East Eye, sources familiar with the matter told it that the UAE had installed a military radar near Bosaso airport in Somalia’s semi-autonomous Puntland region earlier this year, with one unnamed source saying that the “radar’s purpose is to detect and provide early warning against drone or missile threats, particularly those potentially launched by the Houthis, targeting Bosaso from outside”.

The radar’s presence was reportedly confirmed by satellite imagery from early March, which found that an Israeli-made ELM-2084 3D Active Electronically Scanned Array Multi-Mission Radar had indeed been installed near Bosaso airport.

READ: UAE: The scramble for the Horn of Africa

Not only does the radar have the purpose of defending Puntland and its airport from attacks by Yemen’s Houthi rebels, but air traffic data reportedly indicates it also serves to facilitate the transport of weapons, ammunition, and supplies to Sudan’s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), further fuelling the ongoing civil war in Sudan.

“The UAE installed the radar shortly after the RSF lost control of most of Khartoum in early March”, one source said. Another source was cited as claiming that the radar was deployed at the airport late last year and that Abu Dhabi has used it on a daily basis to supply the RSF, particularly through large cargo planes that frequently carry weapons and ammunition, and which sometimes amount to up to five major shipments at a time.

According to two other Somali sources cited by the report, Puntland’s president Said Abdullahi Deni did not seek approval from Somalia’s federal government nor even the Puntland parliament for the installation of the radar, with one of those sources stressing that it was “a secret deal, and even the highest levels of Puntland’s government, including the cabinet, are unaware of it”.

READ: UAE under scrutiny over alleged arms shipments to Sudan

The United States has designated Muslim Brotherhood organisations in Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan as “terrorist” groups, the Associated Press news agency reports, as Washington intensifies its crackdown on Israel’s rivals across the world.

The decision on Tuesday came weeks after President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing his administration to start the process of blacklisting the groups.

“These designations reflect the opening actions of an ongoing, sustained effort to thwart Muslim Brotherhood chapters’ violence and destabilisation wherever it occurs,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement, according to AP.

“The United States will use all available tools to deprive these Muslim Brotherhood chapters of the resources to engage in or support terrorism.”

The designations make it illegal to provide material support to the groups. They also largely ban their current and former members from entering the US and impose economic sanctions to choke their revenue streams.

Established in 1928 by Egyptian Muslim scholar Hassan al-Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood has offshoots and branches across the Middle East, including political parties and social organisations.

More to come…

London, United Kingdom – Heba Muraisi, a Palestine Action-affiliated activist who has refused food for 72 days in prison, has told Al Jazeera that she “no longer feels hunger”, is suffering with pain and knows that her death may be imminent.

The 31-year-old responded to questions via a friend who regularly visits her in New Hall prison in northern England.

“Physically, I am deteriorating as the days go by. I no longer feel hunger, I feel pain,” Muraisi said. “I don’t think about my life, I think about how or when I could die, but despite this, mentally I’ve never been stronger, more determined and sure, and most importantly, I feel calm and a great sense of ease.”

Muraisi was arrested on November 19, 2024, over her alleged involvement in a break-in months earlier at the UK subsidiary of the Israeli defence firm Elbit Systems in Bristol.

If she survives, she will have spent at least a year and a half in prison before her trial date, which is reportedly due no earlier than June this year – well beyond the UK’s usual six-month pre-trial detention limit.

She is the longest-fasting hunger striker of a group of eight activists who have joined the rolling protest since early November. Four are currently refusing food, including Muraisi and Kamran Ahmed, a 28-year-old who has not eaten for more than two months.

“Even though the risks may be lifelong consequences or a devastating end, I think it’s important to fight for justice and for freedom,” she told Al Jazeera.

‘I can no longer read like how I used to’

In recent weeks, the British media has intensified its coverage of the prison protest, said to be the largest coordinated hunger strike in British history since 1981, when Irish Republican inmates were led by Bobby Sands. Sands died on the 66th day of his protest, becoming a symbol of the Irish Republican cause. Nine others also died of starvation.

“I’m choosing to continue this because for the first time in 15 months, I’m finally being heard,” said Muraisi.

A Londoner of Yemeni origin who had worked as a florist and lifeguard, Muraisi is reportedly suffering from muscle spasms, breathlessness, severe pain and a low white blood cell count. She has been admitted to hospital three times over the past nine weeks.

At times, she has lost the ability to speak, and her memory is declining, friends who have recently visited her have said.

“Since concentrating has become gradually more difficult, I can no longer read like how I used to, so now I listen to the radio a lot,” she told Al Jazeera via the intermediary. “I love music, and it’s a shame I can’t get the CDs I want, but nonetheless I’m grateful to have songs playing.”

Last week, an emergency physician who is advising the hunger strikers told Al Jazeera that he believes Muraisi and Ahmed have reached a critical phase in which death and irreversible health damage are increasingly likely.

Ahmed’s weight has dropped to 56kg from the healthy 74kg he entered jail at; he is suffering from cardiac atrophy, or heart shrinkage, chest pain and twitching, according to his sister, Shahmina Alam. His speech is slurred, he is now partially deaf in his left ear, and his heart rate has intermittently fallen below 40bpm in recent days, she said.

The group of hunger striking activists are among 29 remand prisoners being held in various jails over their alleged involvement in the Bristol incident and a break-in at the Royal Air Force (RAF) base in Oxfordshire. They deny the charges against them.

Their protest demands include bail, the right to a fair trial and the de-proscription of Palestine Action, which the UK in July designated a “terrorist organisation”, putting it on par with ISIL (ISIS) and al-Qaeda. They are calling for all Elbit sites to be closed in the UK and seek an end to what they call censorship in prison, accusing authorities of withholding mail, calls and books.

Muraisi has also asked to be returned to HMP Bronzefield in Surrey as HMP New Hall, where she was moved in October, is about 200 miles away – much further from home.

Palestine Action, which says it supports direct action without violence and accuses the UK government of complicity in Israel’s atrocities, is fighting against the proscription in courts as six of those charged in the Bristol case are currently on trial.

Asked if she can access news about Palestine from jail, Muraisi, who has family members in Gaza, accused prison officials of “systematically” blocking articles and newspapers “sent in for me”.

“Anything Palestine-related, including the book We Are Not Numbers [an anthology of emerging writers from Gaza], has been deemed inappropriate. I rely on those I call for news,” she said.

At the time of publishing, neither the UK Ministry of Justice nor New Hall prison had responded to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Civil Defence warns of catastrophic repercussions from the storm for Palestinians, who lack adequate shelter, as Israel continues to block aid, critical supplies in violation of truce.

Eight Palestinians have died in war-ravaged Gaza as a new storm has brought cold temperatures, piled on further misery to tens of thousands of displaced people surviving in flimsy shelters and caused strong winds that have toppled buildings damaged by Israeli attacks in its genocidal war on the enclave.

Israel continues to block desperately needed humanitarian aid and critical supplies for shelters from entering the besieged Gaza Strip in violation of a ceasefire that began on October 10.

A spokesperson for Gaza’s Civil Defence told Al Jazeera on Tuesday that four deaths have been recorded due to cold temperatures caused by a severe weather depression that has brought torrential rain and freezing winds to the coastal enclave.

A source at Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in central Gaza’s Deir el-Balah said one of the victims was a one-year-old who died in a tent before being brought to the facility.

Four other Palestinians were killed when war-damaged buildings toppled during the storm, the Civil Defence and officials at al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City’s Remal neighbourhood said.

Three people, including a 15-year-old girl, were killed when one building collapsed in Gaza City while a fourth was killed in a separate building collapse in the city.

Civil Defence spokesperson Mahmoud Basal warned of catastrophic repercussions from the storm for Gaza’s population, the majority of whom have been left without adequate shelter as a result of Israel’s war and its ongoing restrictions on goods entering the territory.

In a statement, Hamas said it was regrettable that the international community was failing to provide relief to Gaza, saying the rising death toll and spread of illness showed the territory was “experiencing the most horrific form of genocide”.

Surge of hospital patients

A Civil Defence spokesperson said hospitals across the territory were observing an influx of patients, particularly children, with cold-related illnesses and the organisation had received hundreds of calls for support due to extreme cold.

He said shelters had been damaged by the storm and were no longer fit for use while other tents were being blown away completely by strong winds in western Gaza City.

Amjad Shawa, director of the Palestinian NGO Network in Gaza, told Al Jazeera that the situation was the worst it had been since the winter storms began.

He said about 10,000 families on Gaza’s coast were exposed to danger and further displacement as a result of the storm.

Shawa said Israel’s restrictions on goods entering the Strip were preventing access to much-needed shelter and medical supplies and hampering the work of aid organisations, endangering Gaza’s hard-hit population.

Gaza City Mayor Yahya al-Sarraj told Al Jazeera that Palestinians in the Strip were trapped in “tragic” circumstances, sheltering in inadequate tents and shelters, many of which were at risk of collapse, with insufficient supplies of medicine to treat those who are ill or wounded.

He called on the international community to pressure Israel to allow aid into the territory so Palestinians would be able to rebuild their homes.

The low-pressure system is expected to bring cold temperatures to Gaza until at least Tuesday evening, forecasters said.

‘Man-made humanitarian catastrophe’

At a briefing on Tuesday, a spokesperson for the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the “man-made humanitarian catastrophe” in Gaza and said Israel should allow aid into the enclave.

The spokesperson said Qatar was working with mediators to advance to the second phase of the Gaza ceasefire.

As the death toll from the storm rose in Gaza, UNICEF said dozens of children have been killed since the start of the ceasefire three months ago.

“More than 100 children have been killed in Gaza since the ceasefire of early October. That’s roughly a girl or a boy killed here every day during a ceasefire,” James Elder, spokesman for the UN children’s agency, told reporters.

He said the children had been killed in air strikes, drone strikes, tank shelling and by live ammunition.

In the dense hill forests along Bangladesh’s border with war-torn Myanmar, villagers are losing limbs to landmines, casualties of a conflict not of their making.

Ali Hossain, 40, was collecting firewood in early 2025 when a blast shattered his life.

“I went into the jungle with fellow villagers. Suddenly, there was an explosion and my leg was blown off,” he said. “I screamed at the top of my voice.”

Neighbours rushed to stem the blood.

“They picked me up, gathered my severed leg and took me to hospital.”

In Ashartoli, a small settlement in Bandarban district, the weapons of a foreign war have turned forests, farms and footpaths into killing grounds.

Bangladesh’s 271km (168-mile) eastern border with Myanmar cuts through forests and rivers, much of it unmarked.

It is crossed daily by villagers, as their families have done for generations, to collect firewood or carry out small-time trading.

Myanmar is the world’s most dangerous country for landmine casualties, according to the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, which has documented the “massive” and growing use of the weapons, banned by many states.

The group recorded more than 2,000 casualties in Myanmar in 2024, the latest full year for which statistics are available, double the total reported the year before.

“The use of mines appeared to significantly increase in 2024-2025,” it said in its Landmine Monitor report, highlighting “an increase in the number of mine victims, particularly near the border” with Bangladesh.

Bangladesh accuses Myanmar’s military and its rival armed groups of planting the mines.

Arakan Army fighters, one of the many factions challenging the junta’s rule, control swaths of jungle across the border.

More than a million Rohingya refugees who fled Myanmar also live in Bangladesh’s border regions, caught between the warring military and separatist forces.

Bangladesh police say at least 28 people were injured by landmines in 2025.

In November that year, a Bangladesh border guard was killed when a landmine tore off both his legs.

Bangladesh’s border force has put up warning signs and red flags, and carries out regular mine-clearing operations.

But villagers say warnings offer little protection when survival depends on entering forests seeded with explosives, leaving communities in Bangladesh to pay the price of war.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces are using the U.S.-made V2X Tempest, a high-mobility vehicle with a launcher for AGM-114 Hellfire missiles that is optimized for the counter-uncrewed aerial systems (C-UAS) role. Mounting Hellfires on a high-mobility vehicle provides a new means of employing these weapons unpredictably, not only against drone threats, but potentially also other aerial targets, too.

The Tempest was showcased in a video put out recently by Ukraine’s Air Force Command Center, suggesting that the flying branch is the likely operator. However, the new weapon was neither announced nor identified. The footage shows a pair of Hellfire missiles being launched, purportedly against Russian drones, with tracer rounds also seen climbing into the night sky.

The related video is posted below, but if it does not appear for you, here is the link to the Facebook reel.

Interestingly, a blurred version of the same video had been published last October, but it wasn’t possible to identify the system involved.

In the last few days, more still imagery has appeared, providing a much better look at the Ukrainian-operated Tempest. These photos reportedly show the combat vehicle while undergoing crew training.

This confirms the identity of the system, which the Virginia-based V2X debuted at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) exhibition last October. The transfer of the Tempest to Ukraine had not been publicly announced.

The Tempest combines a twin Longbow launcher with a radar placed on a highly mobile, modular, lightweight 4×4 chassis — apparently a Can-Am Maverick X3 side-by-side vehicle (SSV). According to V2X, the system is suitable for targeting short- and medium-range drones, in all weather conditions. The radar appears to be an existing counter-drone type that operates in the millimeter wave for active detection and to initially cue the missile. This radar would be ideal for picking up relatively small and relatively slow-moving targets, but it only has a very limited range — similar to that of the Hellfire.

There is no evidence of electro-optical and infrared cameras to supplement the radar, but there are aerials visible on the left rear side of the vehicle. These are almost certainly a passive radio frequency (RF) detection system. This is an independent way to locate some drones that are giving off their own radio emissions. The buggy can do this without emitting its own radio frequency energy, that helps it from being targeted, as well. Passive detection would help mitigate the single radar array, which means the vehicle needs to be pointed in the direction of the target in order to acquire it and fire its missiles. Usually, such radars are arrayed in a group of four, pointing in each direction for 360-degree coverage. Instead, the passive detection system can be used to initially pick up the threat, before the vehicle (and its radar) is oriented toward it for acquisition and firing. Many drones do not give off RF emissions, especially those that run on autopilot or use fiber optic wire control links. In those cases, they would have to pass through the radar’s field of view.

Fundamental to the design is its ability to employ ‘shoot and scoot’ tactics, rapidly moving to a new position after firing, making it less vulnerable to detection and to enemy counterfire.

Since it makes extensive use of commercially available off-the-shelf components, the Tempest is also said to be cheaper and faster to produce than more traditional vehicles of this type.

As well as its primary C-UAS role, the Tempest can also engage helicopters, some cruise missile types, and fixed-wing aircraft, although against the latter target set, in particular, it is limited by the relatively short range of its Hellfire missiles.

V2X also offers a stationary, trailer-mounted variant of the Tempest for the static defense of high-value objectives, such as storage facilities and airfields. It’s unknown if any of these have been delivered to Ukraine.

As for the missile armament, this is understood to comprise the AGM-114L Hellfire Longbow version. Hellfire missiles, the majority of which are laser-guided munitions, are best known as air-to-ground weapons, but the millimeter wave radar-guided AGM-114L variant has emerged as a useful tool for tackling drones in recent years. The AGM-114L has a range of around five miles and carries a roughly 20-pound warhead. This is enough destructive power to deal with many kinds of drones, while also reducing the risk of collateral damage on the ground. While these missiles are now out of production, they were likely substantially more expensive than the laser-guided versions. As of 2020, Hellfire had an average cost, across all variants, of more than $200,000.

The AGM-114L is the same missile that U.S. Army AH-64 Apache attack helicopters are using for C-UAS, with specific modifications made to them for this role. In this application, the missile is initially cued by the Apache’s AN/APG-78 Longbow mast-mounted radar system. AGM-114Ls are also primary weapons for other land-based counter-drone systems, including the Army’s M-SHORAD.

It’s worth noting that a very different version of the Hellfire has already been fielded by Ukraine.

This is the Swedish RBS 17 coastal defense missile system, which uses a derivative of the semi-active laser-guided AGM-114C Hellfire anti-tank missile and was sent to Ukraine by Sweden in an aid package announced in the summer of 2022. Subsequently, further examples were provided to Ukraine from Norwegian stocks.

The protests in Iran are grabbing headlines, with the government and the opposition accusing each other of escalating violence. The government also says that foreign interference is behind the protests.

It is the latest round of demonstrations against Iran’s governing system since the 1979 revolution that toppled the shah and ushered in an Islamic republic.

But the country has also faced other crises, including earthquakes, war, sanctions, nuclear tensions, regional interventions and political drama.

Here is a timeline of some of the major events from the last five decades.

1979

February: Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returns after 14 years of exile in Iraq and France.

April: After a referendum, Iran is declared an Islamic republic

November: The United States imposes its first sanctions on Iran, justified by the seizure of American hostages held at the US Embassy in Tehran. The US had supported the the overthrown shah, or monarch, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and, earlier, helped depose the democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh, in a 1953 coup, also supported by US and UK intelligence agencies.

1980

September: Iraq invades Iran. Estimates put the war’s death toll at approximately 500,000, with Iran suffering the heavier losses. The war was defined by large-scale trenches, machineguns and bayonet uses, similar to World War I. However, Iraq also used chemical weapons against Iranians and Iraqi Kurds.

1981

January: All remaining US hostages are released, ending the Iranian hostage crisis.

June: A bombing at the Islamic Republican Party headquarters in Tehran kills dozens of senior officials, including the head of the judiciary, Mohammad Beheshti, regarded as the second-most important person in Iran after Khomeini.

August: President Mohammad-Ali Rajai and Prime Minister Mohammad Javad Bahonar are assassinated in a bombing attack on a meeting in Tehran. Authorities blame the leftist revolutionary-minded opposition Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) group, which had faced a crackdown the previous year.

1982

June: Israel invades Lebanon. Iran starts funding what will become the Lebanese resistance movement, Hezbollah.

1988

July: The USS Vincennes, a US Navy guided missile cruiser, shoots down a civilian Iran Air Airbus plane over the Gulf, killing all 290 people on board.

August: A ceasefire begins between Iran and Iraq after United Nations-brokered negotiations.

1989

June: Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini dies on June 3.

His successor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is chosen by the Assembly of Experts the next day.

1990

June: Iran is hit by a major earthquake. About 40,000 people are killed.

1995

March and May: The US imposes oil and trade sanctions on Iran. It accuses Iran of sponsoring “terrorism” and seeking nuclear arms.

1998

September: The Taliban admits that eight Iranian diplomats and a journalist had been killed in Afghanistan the previous month, during the group’s takeover of the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif. Iran deploys thousands of troops to its shared border with Afghanistan in response.

2002

January: US President George W Bush names Iran part of the “axis of evil”, alongside North Korea and Iraq, saying the countries are supporters of “terrorism”.

2003

March: The US invades Iraq. Iran begins financing and supporting Shia militias and political groups on the ground. Its influence over such groups is still prevalent today.

November: Iran announces it will suspend its uranium enrichment programme and allow more thorough UN inspections of its nuclear sites. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says there is no evidence of a nuclear weapons programme. This openness is a change after Iranian officials had blocked or impeded past inspections.

December: The Bam earthquake in southern Iran kills up to 40,000 people

2006

December: the UN Security Council (UNSC) imposes sanctions on Iran’s trade in sensitive nuclear materials and technology, after Iran failed to suspend its nuclear programme in exchange for diplomatic and economic incentives from Germany and the five permanent UNSC members – France, China, Russia, the UK, and the US.

2007

October: The US adds additional, increasingly tough sanctions on Iran

2010

June: The UNSC imposes a fourth round of sanctions on Iran over its nuclear programme. The sanctions include an expanded arms embargo and stricter financial regulations.

September: Iran accuses Israel and the US of infecting its nuclear power plant systems after discovering malware on systems used by staff in the nuclear sector.

2011

March: The regime of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria, an Iranian ally, brutally represses a popular uprising that started in March on the back of the Arab Spring protests. Later in the year, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) sends Iranian and foreign militias to support al-Assad.

2012

January: The European Union begins boycotting Iranian oil exports.

September: The IAEA claims it is obstructed from inspecting Iran’s Parchin military site and that Iran has increased the amount of nuclear centrifuges enriching uranium, raising fears that the country is getting closer to obtaining a nuclear weapon.

October: The Iranian rial falls to a record low against the US dollar, losing 80 percent of its value since 2011, largely due to international sanctions.

2015

July: Iran comes to an agreement with the administration of US President Barack Obama, as well as the UK, France, Russia, China and the EU, to limit its nuclear programme in return for sanctions relief. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is widely referred to as the nuclear deal, and the agreement leads to celebrations from Iranians, hoping for an end to the country’s isolation.

2018

May: Obama’s successor, President Donald Trump, withdraws the US from the nuclear deal, arguing that the JCPOA is too lenient on Iran and should be replaced by a “better deal”.

2020

January: Qassem Soleimani, the leader of the IRGC’s Quds Force, is assassinated by a US drone strike in Baghdad.

2024

April: Israel bombs Iran’s embassy in Damascus, killing seven people, including two IRGC generals.

May: Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi dies in a helicopter crash in the country’s East Azerbaijan province.

July: Hamas chief Ismael Haniyeh is assassinated in Tehran, with Israel widely regarded as being behind the attack.

2025

June: Israel attacks Iran, starting a 12-day war between the two sides that kills at least 610 Iranians and 28 Israelis.

U.S. President Donald Trump is “unafraid to use the lethal force and might of the United States military, if and when he deems that necessary” in response to Tehran’s brutal crackdown on Iranian anti-government protestors, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday afternoon. Her comments came as Trump is favoring an attack, according to media reports, which we cannot confirm at this time. Regardless, Trump did lay down a firm warning to the government in Tehran last week that if they started killing protestors, he would act.

You can catch up with our previous coverage of the unfolding events here.

“The greatest leverage the regime had just several months ago was their nuclear program, which President Trump and the United States military totally obliterated through Operation Midnight Hammer,” stated Leavitt, noting that the president would prefer a diplomatic solution to the crisis. “And so what President Trump will do next only he knows. So the world will have to keep waiting and guessing, and we will let him decide. I’m certainly not going to broadcast any future options or decision from the President on national television.”

Leavitt added that airstrikes are among “many, many options.”

“The options could include ordering military strikes on regime sites or launching cyberattacks, approving new sanctions and boosting anti-regime accounts online,” The Wall Street Journal suggested.

Trump announced one of those options on Monday afternoon, declaring on his Truth Social platform an immediate 25% tariff on any nation doing business with Iran.

A major curve ball that has come into play has been the sudden ask by the Iranian regime to restart nuclear negotiations, according to Trump.

Speaking to reporters Sunday aboard Air Force One, Trump acknowledged that the U.S. will meet with Iranian officials after they called seeking negotiations over their nuclear ambitions.

“A meeting is being set up, but we may have to act because of what’s happening before the meeting,” Trump warned.

The tactic could be a ploy by the Iranians to keep the U.S. military at bay during a very vulnerable period. At the same time, the U.S. could end up striking Iran for reasons totally outside of the nuclear issue.

Trump also warned that the government of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is approaching red lines in its harsh response to the uprising and brushed off threats of Iranian attacks on U.S. interests.

“People were killed that aren’t supposed to be killed,” Trump said aboard Air Force One. “These are violent, if you call them leaders. I don’t know if their leaders are just they rule through violence, but we’re looking at it very seriously. The military is looking at it, and we’re looking at some very strong options. We’ll make a determination.”

Trump added that he is getting “hourly reports” about the situation.

Asked about threats that Iran would attack U.S. assets in the region in retaliation for any American military actions on behalf of the anti-government forces, Trump seemed incredulous.

“They wouldn’t,” he proclaimed. “If they do that, we will hit them at levels that they’ve never been hit before. They won’t even believe it. I have options that are so strong. So I mean, if they did that, it’ll be met with a very, very powerful force.”

‼️🇺🇸Trump says, regarding potential attacks on US bases by Iran:

“I will hit them at levels they’ve never been hit before, they won’t even believe it.”

He adds,
“I have options that are so strong.” pic.twitter.com/3rUlr5on3t

— Defense Intelligence (@DI313_) January 12, 2026

Trump’s comments aboard Air Force One came in the wake of reports that U.S. military planners will present him with several options for responding to Iran. He will reportedly meet with senior administration officials on Tuesday to discuss the matter. As we pointed out earlier in this story, the U.S. struck Iranian nuclear facilities six months ago in what was dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer.

While Trump may be considering attacking Iran, there have been no publicly visible signs of a major U.S. military buildup in the region, either in the air or on the sea. There have been no large movements of cargo aircraft, tankers, or tactical aircraft. There are also no aircraft carriers in the region or plans at this point to move any. Even if the decision is made to redeploy a strike group, it would take weeks at the earliest before one could arrive from the U.S. The Lincoln carrier strike group is currently deployed to the South China Sea, and the USS Gerald R. Ford remains on station in the U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) region. If a carrier is called to the region, it will likely be the Lincoln.

The world’s largest aircraft carrier, USS Gerald R. Ford, and the amphibious warships USS Iwo Jima, USS Fort Lauderdale and USS San Antonio remain deployed in the Western Hemisphere. The Marines and Sailors on these lethal platforms stand ready to support @dhs_gov, @statedept and… pic.twitter.com/NnjHzzPA5n

— U.S. Southern Command (@Southcom) January 12, 2026

Though carrier strike groups bring a lot of firepower in the form of embarked aircraft and guided missile destroyers, they are not a requirement to strike Iran or defend against a counterattack it could launch, as we noted over the weekend.

The US military can still operate and have plenty of impact without a carrier in the region folks.

— Tyler Rogoway (@Aviation_Intel) January 11, 2026

Meanwhile, the U.S. still has airpower located on land bases throughout the region, including in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan. In addition, it should be noted that the B-2s that struck Iran flew from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. B-52 and B-1B bombers can make similar flights from the U.S. or forward deploy.

However, given the threats made by Iran, we would likely see cargo flights containing air defense systems and personnel, as well as flights of additional fighters. Tehran still has a large supply of short-range ballistic and cruise missiles that it did not use during the 12-Day War with Israel. As a result, an Iranian response to a new attack could be far worse than the retaliation strike Tehran carried out on a largely empty Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar after Midnight Hammer. The Iranian revenge strike resulted in the largest single-event launch of Patriot interceptors in U.S. military history. At the same time, Iran is not in a particularly good position to fight a huge uprising internally and the U.S. externally at this time.

Meanwhile, despite ample evidence that makes such a claim seem very premature, the Iranian government maintains that it retains “full control” of the country despite the widespread protests. Iranian officials also claim that a million people came out on Monday to rallies in support of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. As we previously noted, the protests represent perhaps the greatest internal threat to the regime since it took power following the Islamic Revolution in 1979. The current uprisings began Dec. 28. 2025, sparked by anger over rising prices, devalued currency, a devastating drought, and brutal government crackdowns.

In a social media posting on Monday, the Ayatollah declared victory.

“Great and Dignified Nation of Iran! Today, you have accomplished a great deed and created a #HistoricalDay,” Khamenei extolled on X. “These massive gatherings, brimming with steadfast resolve, nullified the plans of external enemies that were meant to be implemented by internal mercenaries.”

بسم الله الرّحمن الرّحیم

ملّت عظیم‌الشأن ایران!
امروز کار بزرگی انجام دادید و #روزی_تاریخی آفریدید.

این اجتماعات عظیم و سرشار از عزم راسخ، نقشه‌ی دشمنان خارجی را که قرار بود به دست مزدوران داخلی پیاده شود، باطل کرد./۱ pic.twitter.com/Sy6MZxuc2Q

— KHAMENEI.IR | فارسی (@Khamenei_fa) January 12, 2026

Iran’s top diplomat also said the regime had weathered the uprising.

“Security forces have full control over the situation,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said. “Evidence shows attacks on security forces were staged to inflate casualties, a demand from Trump, and most fatalities, including security personnel, were shot from behind. Armed attackers also killed the injured in ambulances, burned 53 mosques, and sabotaged public infrastructure.”

Araghchi also claimed U.S. and Israeli involvement, “with Mossad and its affiliates linked to killings and riots.”

Still, while saying his nation was prepared for war, Araghchi added Iran was also open to negotiations with Trump “that are fair, with equal rights and mutual respect.”

Amid the turmoil, the communication channel between Araghachi and Trump Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff has remained open, Iranian media reported.

Iran Successful in Stopping this Wave of U.S.-Israeli Attempts to Destabilize the Country

Foreign Minister Araghchi stated that peaceful protests lasted three days, during which the government held direct talks with economic activists.
However, armed terrorist groups soon… pic.twitter.com/iWs6IAXDzU

— Ibrahim Majed (@ibrahimtmajed) January 12, 2026

🇮🇷 BREAKING

Massive nationwide rallies are taking place across Iran in support of the Islamic Republic and against rioters. Crowds are filling the streets showing strong backing for the state.

The footage shared is from the Azerbaijan province in Iran. pic.twitter.com/g4snTzTjpx

— WAR (@warsurveillance) January 12, 2026

On Sunday, the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf took a much more defiant stance, leveling a direct threat against the U.S. and Israel.

“I have a message for the delusional American President,” said Qalibaf. “Be careful that the advice being given to you about attacking Iran is not of the same kind as the ‘consultations’ through which you claimed that Mashhad had fallen.”

“Therefore,” he added, “in order to avoid miscalculations, be aware that if you take action to attack Iran, both the occupied territories [Israel] and all U.S. military centers, bases, and ships in the region will be considered legitimate targets by us.”

The Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, issues a harsh and direct threat against @realDonaldTrump, calling him delusional and a gambler:

“We have heard that you have threatened Iran.
Know that the defenders of Iran will teach you a lesson that will never… pic.twitter.com/4cdwe4fHWF

— The Middle Eastern (@TMiddleEastern) January 12, 2026

On Monday, Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, whose calls for increased action have sparked larger demonstrations, claimed the regime is “on its back legs” and that the “people are ready to topple it.”

Pahlavi, whose fatally ill father, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, fled Iran ahead of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, is now living in exile in the U.S.

As the unrest continues, it remains to be seen how much the uprising has really been quelled. The ferocity of the demonstrations had reportedly compelled the U.S. intelligence community last week to rethink its initial assessment of the situation, recognizing that it is more serious than initially thought. However, it is unknown if that analysis has changed over the weekend.

Given that Iran has largely shut down internet and telephone communications, including jamming signals to and from Starlink dishes, it is impossible to know exactly what is going on in the country at the moment. However, intermittent reports, videos, and images continue to flow from inside Iran.

⚠️ Update: #Iran has now been offline for 96 hours, limiting reporting and accountability over civilian deaths as Iranians protest and demand change; fixed-line internet, mobile data and calls are disabled, while other communication means are also increasingly being targeted ⌛️ pic.twitter.com/Dxe5OlUWqN

— NetBlocks (@netblocks) January 12, 2026

So far, at least 544 people have been killed during the protests, according to the latest data from the Human Rights Activist News Agency (HRANA). The U.S.-based non-governmental organization claims that dozens of additional cases are under review, while more than 10,000 people have been arrested and transferred to prisons. The number of deaths is likely significantly higher because HRANA claims it only tabulates those that can be visually confirmed.

“Protests have taken place at 585 locations across the country, in 186 cities, spanning all 31 provinces,” HRANA stated. The War Zone cannot independently verify these claims.

For the past two weeks, social media feeds about Iran have been dominated by videos and images of huge throngs of people on the streets across the country. Some showed buildings burning, others depicting the mounting death toll as hospitals and morgues became inundated with bodies of those killed during the demonstrations after regime forces opened fire.

Connected with a source tonight in Isfahan, Iran. He described the demonstrations as a ‘battle,’ with security forces using live ammunition. pic.twitter.com/fqRYjgiSKC

— Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) January 12, 2026

Iranian protesters have taken the control of a police station in Tehran, Hafte Tir district, and have set fire to it.

They are chanting “#Javidshah‌” “ Long Live the Shah” pic.twitter.com/gkvlhp0h4S

— Marziyeh Amirizadeh مرضیه امیری زاده (@MAmirizadeh) January 12, 2026

⚠️ 𝐁𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐍𝐞𝐰𝐬 ⚠️

🇮🇷 | MASSACRE FOOTAGE HAS BEEN LEAKED FROM IRAN!

We can see armed forces gunning down unarmed civilians in the streets.

REPOST, RETWEET, RETWEET! pic.twitter.com/NHGWTDuGDL

— Iran Spectator (@IranSpec) January 10, 2026

Footage dated Friday, January 9, shows dozens, if not hundreds, of bodies at the Kahrizak Forensic Medical Center to the south of the Iranian capital of Tehran, as families search for loved ones who have been killed during the ongoing anti-government protests in Iran. pic.twitter.com/PIk9rLsXnF

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) January 11, 2026

Amid the chaos, non-essential staff have reportedly departed the French embassy in Iran.

BREAKING: Non-essential staff have departed France’s embassy in Iran, according to AFP report.

— The Spectator Index (@spectatorindex) January 12, 2026

As the protests continue and rhetoric flows between Washington and Tehran, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed his support for the Iranian people while planning a potential attack, dubbed Operation Iron Strike.

“We are sending strength to the heroic and courageous citizens of Iran — and once the regime falls, we will do good things together for the benefit of both peoples,” he said on Sunday. “We all hope that the Persian nation will soon be freed from the yoke of tyranny. And when that day arrives, Israel and Iran will once again become faithful partners in building a future of prosperity and peace.”

As we have previously noted, an Israeli strike could play into the regime’s claim about foreign interference and galvanize the population behind it; however, that seems less likely with every passing day of violence.

Israel is closely monitoring the events unfolding in Iran. The protests for freedom have spread throughout the country.

The people of Israel, and the entire world, stand in awe of the immense bravery of Iran’s citizens.

Israel supports their struggle for freedom and strongly… pic.twitter.com/ya68R9Q1ds

— Benjamin Netanyahu – בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) January 11, 2026

Regardless of Netanyahu’s intentions, all eyes are on Trump, a senior IDF official told us.

“My assessment is that much ultimately hinges on one individual: President Trump,” he said, offering an unclassified view of the situation. “He has positioned himself as a global decision-maker, and it is likely that he alone will determine whether, when, and how the United States chooses to intervene in Iran, if at all.”

However, Israel could act if it perceives a threat from its arch-enemy.

“From Israel’s perspective, should there be credible early warning of escalation or intervention, I would expect Israel to act swiftly,” said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss operational details. “At present, Israel is maintaining a high level of readiness and immediate operational preparedness. That said, much more remains classified than publicly visible. In many respects, the situation appears to be concentrated in the decision-making of a single individual.”

“It is possible that patience may run thin in the coming 48 hours, but as always, predictions in this environment are inherently uncertain, and I prefer not to speculate beyond that,” the official added.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

A US district judge ruled that Trump’s decision singled out states that voted for Democrats in the 2024 elections.

A United States judge has ruled that the administration of President Donald Trump acted illegally when it cancelled the payment of $7.6bn in clean energy grants to states that voted for Democrat Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election.

In a decision on Monday, US District Judge Amit Mehta said the administration’s actions violated the Constitution’s equal protection requirements.

“Defendants freely admit that they made grant-termination decisions primarily – if not exclusively – based on whether the awardee resided in a state whose citizens voted for President Trump in 2024,” Mehta wrote in a summary of the case.

The grants were intended to support hundreds of clean energy projects across 16 states, including California, Colorado, New Jersey and Washington state. The projects included initiatives to create battery plants and hydrogen technology.

But projects in those states were cancelled in October, as the Trump administration sought to ratchet up pressure on Democratic-led states during a heated government shutdown.

At the time, Trump told the network One America News (OAN) that he would take aim at projects closely associated with the Democratic Party.

“We could cut projects that they wanted, favourite projects, and they’d be permanently cut,” he told the network.

Russell Vought, the Trump-appointed director for the Office of Management and Budget, posted on social media that month that “funding to fuel the Left’s climate agenda” had been “cancelled”.

The cuts included up to $1.2bn for a hub in California aimed at accelerating hydrogen technology, and up to $1bn for a hydrogen project in the Pacific Northwest.

St Paul, Minnesota, was among the jurisdictions affected by the grant cuts. The city and a coalition of environmental groups filed a lawsuit to contest the Trump administration’s decision.

Second legal setback

A spokesperson for the US Department of Energy, however, said the Trump administration disagrees with the judge’s ruling.

Officials “stand by our review process, which evaluated these awards individually and determined they did not meet the standards necessary to justify the continued spending of taxpayer dollars”, spokesman Ben Dietderich said.

The Trump administration has repeatedly pledged to cut back on what it considers wasteful government spending.

Monday’s ruling was the second legal setback in just a matter of hours for Trump’s efforts to roll back the clean energy programmes in the US.

A separate federal judge ruled on Monday that work on a major offshore wind farm for Rhode Island and Connecticut can resume, handing the industry at least a temporary victory as Trump seeks to shut it down.

The US president campaigned for the White House on a promise to end the offshore wind industry, saying electric wind turbines – sometimes called windmills – are too expensive and hurt whales and birds.

Instead, Trump has pushed for the US to ramp up fossil fuel production, considered the primary contributor to climate change. The US president has repeatedly defied scientific consensus on climate change and referred to it as a “hoax”.