TODAY

Belgium’s Brussels and Liege airports were forced to shut down twice due to mysterious drone sightings on Tuesday.

Belgium’s air traffic was severely disrupted after drone sightings forced two major airports to temporarily suspend operations as a security precaution.

A drone was first spotted near Brussels airport at 8pm (19:00 GMT) on Tuesday evening, followed by another incident at the nearby Liege airport, one of Europe’s largest cargo airports, according to Belgium’s public broadcaster RTBF.

Both airports suspended operations for an hour and reopened at 9pm (20:00 GMT), only to shut down again at 10pm (21:00 GMT) after a second sighting, RTBF said. Both airports resumed normal operations at 11pm (22:00 GMT).

Brussels airport said that the shutdowns may still impact air traffic on Wednesday in a notice on its website.

“Following drone sightings on Tuesday evening, flight operations at Brussels Airport were suspended for safety reasons,” the notice said. “This disruption has led to delays and some flight cancellations and might still impact flight operations on Wednesday morning.”

Flight Aware, a US-based flight tracking website, counted 59 cancelled and 43 delayed flights at Brussels airport on Tuesday. Some flights were also diverted to nearby airports, according to RTBF.

Authorities have not released limited information about the drone sightings, but Minister of the Interior Bernard Quintin said that an investigation was under way, according to RTBF.

“We cannot accept that our airports are disrupted by unauthorised drone flights. This requires a coordinated, national response,” he said.

The drone sightings in Brussels and Liege follow a similar incident on Saturday, when three unauthorised drones were spotted near a Belgian military base, according to Minister of Defence Theo Francken.

Francken said on X that he believed the incident was “not a simple flyover, but a clear command targeting [the] Kleine Brogel” airbase in northwest Belgium.

He said the drones were flying at a high altitude and could not be stopped with a drone jammer. They also evaded pursuit by a helicopter and police vehicle, he said.

Since September, Europe has been hit with a wave of mysterious drone sightings near civilian airports and military facilities in Denmark, Germany, and Norway.

Denmark’s intelligence service has linked the drone flights to Russia, and described them as a form of hybrid warfare intended to “put pressure on [Europe] without crossing the line into armed conflict in a traditional sense”, according to Reuters.

Here are the key events from day 1,350 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Here is how things stand on Wednesday, November 5:

Fighting

• Russian and Ukrainian troops have fought battles in the ruins of Pokrovsk, a transport and logistics hub in eastern Ukraine, with Ukraine’s military reporting fierce fighting under way in a part of the city that was key for Kyiv’s front-line logistics.

  Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he visited troops fighting near the eastern city of Dobropillia, where Ukrainian forces are conducting a counteroffensive against Russian troops.

  Russia struck civilian energy and port infrastructure in a massive overnight drone attack on Ukraine’s southern region of Odesa, the region’s governor said in a post on the Telegram messaging app, adding that rescuers extinguished fires and there were no casualties.

• Ukraine has struck an oil refinery in Russia’s Nizhny Novgorod region east of Moscow, the General Staff of Ukraine’s armed forces said in a statement. The extent of damage to the Lukoil refinery in the town of Kstovo, which supplies the Russian military, was not immediately known.

• Ukraine’s military also said that its drones had caused “considerable damage” to a petrochemical plant in Bashkortostan in central Russia. Regional authorities reported an attack on the Sterlitamak petrochemical plant, but added that the facility was still operating.

• Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed a law that allows the use of military reservists to guard oil refineries after Ukrainian drone strikes have led to fuel shortages in some regions of the country.

Weapons

• Putin lauded his country’s development of new weapons, including the Burevestnik cruise missile and Poseidon super torpedo, describing them as faster and more effective, with the Burevestnik said to be capable of reaching more than three times the speed of sound.
• Putin also said that Russia was proceeding with the mass production of its Oreshnik missile, which Moscow said was first used to attack Ukraine in November 2024.

• Zelenskyy again urged the United States to remain open to supplying Kyiv with long-range weapons for its war effort against Russia’s invasion, while also calling for more sanctions on Moscow’s gas and nuclear sectors.

• Norwegian munitions maker Nammo has signed a letter of intent with a Ukrainian industrial partner to produce, develop and sell ammunition in Ukraine, Norway’s government said.

Sanctions

• Kazakhstan’s state-owned oil and gas company Kazmunaygaz and the sanctioned Russian oil and gas firm Lukoil are continuing work on joint projects in accordance with contractual obligations, despite Western sanctions, Russia’s Interfax agency reported.

• Japan’s investment firm Marubeni plans to follow the guidance of the Japanese government regarding its involvement in Russia’s Sakhalin-1 oil project after the US government sanctioned the project’s key shareholder, Rosneft, Marubeni’s CEO, Masayuki Omoto, told a briefing in Tokyo.

• Turkish fuel supplier Guzel Enerji has announced that it will raise the price of diesel after Western sanctions on Russian oil companies led to issues with supply and increased insurance and financing costs, according to a document seen by Reuters news agency.

Politics and diplomacy

• Zelenskyy called on Hungarian leader Viktor Orban to stop blocking Kyiv’s bid to join the European Union.
• The European Commission said that the EU could welcome new member countries as early as 2030, as it praised Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine and Moldova for their progress on reforms needed to join the bloc.
• The EU may need to come up with a bridging solution to keep Ukraine financed in early 2026 if a deal on an EU loan, based on frozen Russian assets held in EU accounts, continues to be delayed, European Commissioner for Economy and Productivity Valdis Dombrovskis said.

• Germany plans to increase its financial aid to Ukraine by about 3 billion euros ($3.5bn) next year, a spokesperson for the Federal Ministry of Finance said. Germany has already contributed about 40 billion euros ($46bn) since the full-scale Russian invasion began in 2022.

• Maxim Oreshkin, a deputy chief of staff in Russia’s presidential administration, will lead Moscow’s delegation to the G20 summit in South Africa later this month, according to a decree signed by Putin. The Kremlin earlier said that Putin, who is facing an International Criminal Court warrant for arrest, would not travel to the summit in Johannesburg on November 22-23.

• The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is constantly working as a mediator between Ukraine and Russia over Ukraine’s nuclear power plants, including in Zaporizhzhia, IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi said.

The body of a hostage returned by Hamas via the Red Cross in Gaza has been identified as Israeli-American soldier Itay Chen, Israel has confirmed.

The 19-year-old soldier’s remains were returned on Tuesday as part of a Gaza ceasefire deal brokered by US President Donald Trump last month.

“Following the completion of the identification process… IDF representatives informed the family of the fallen hostage, Staff Sergeant Itay Chen, that their loved one has been returned to Israel and positively identified,” the Israeli prime minister’s office said.

Earlier, Hamas’s military wing said it had recovered the body of an Israeli soldier in the eastern Shejaiya neighbourhood of Gaza City.

Israel had allowed members of the group and Red Cross staff to search for the remains in the area, which is inside territory still controlled by Israeli forces.

Chen was working at his base on the Gaza border when Hamas and its allies launched their attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023.

His family lost communication with him after he told them his base was under attack.

Chen was initially believed to have been taken hostage by jihadists was actually killed in the 7 October attacks, the Israeli military said in March 2024. It said he had died in combat and his body had been taken to Gaza.

The Israeli government has accused Hamas of deliberately delaying the recovery of the dead hostages since a US-brokered ceasefire deal took effect on 10 October.

Hamas has insisted it is difficult to locate the bodies under rubble.

Under the ceasefire deal, Hamas agreed to return the 20 living and 28 dead hostages it was still holding within 72 hours.

All the living Israeli hostages were released on 13 October in exchange for 250 Palestinian prisoners and 1,718 detainees from Gaza.

Israel has handed over the bodies of 270 Palestinians in exchange for the bodies of the 19 Israeli hostages returned by Hamas, along with those of two foreign hostages – one of them Thai and the other Nepalese.

Five of the seven dead hostages still in Gaza are Israelis, one is Tanzanian, and one is Thai.

All but one of the dead hostages still in Gaza were among the 251 people abducted during the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, during which about 1,200 other people were killed.

Israel responded by launching a military campaign in Gaza, during which more than 68,800 people have been killed, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry.

Earlier on Tuesday, a hospital official in Gaza City said a man was killed by Israeli fire in the Jabalia area of northern Gaza.

The Israeli military said its troops killed a “terrorist” who had crossed the “Yellow Line”, which demarcates Israeli-controlled territory, and posed a threat to them.

A high-ranking Russian lawmaker claims his government recently sent Venezuela air defense systems and could provide ballistic and cruise missiles in the future. The comments, to an official Russian media outlet, are a response to the ongoing buildup of U.S. forces in the region aimed at narco-traffickers and Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro. Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford is now in the Atlantic, heading for the Caribbean, which you can read more about later in this story. You can catch up with our latest coverage of the Caribbean situation in our story here.

“Russian Pantsir-S1 and Buk-M2E systems were just recently delivered to Caracas by Il-76 transport aircraft,” Alexei Zhuravlev, First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee, told Gazeta.Ru earlier this week.

“Russia is actually one of Venezuela’s key military-technical partners; we supply the country with virtually the entire range of weapons, from small arms to aircraft,” Zhuravlev added. “Russian Su-30MK2 fighters are the backbone of the Venezuelan Air Force, making it one of the most powerful air powers in the region. The delivery of several S-300VM (Antey-2500) battalions has significantly strengthened the country’s ability to protect important installations from air attacks.”

The delivery of Pantsir-S1 systems would appear to be a new development; however, without visual proof, we cannot independently verify Zhuravlev’s claim. An Ilyushin Il-76 airlifter, owned by the Russian Aviacon Zitotrans air transport company, did arrive in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas on Oct. 26 after a circuitous route from Naberezhnye Chelny in Russia, according to FlightRadar24. It is not publicly known what, if any, cargo was delivered. Defense News was the first to report the flight. It’s unclear is other flights have occurred, as well.

Russia has previously provided Venezuela with Buks and S-300VMs. It has also received 21 Su-30MK2 Flanker fighters that are capable of air defense missions, but they can also sling supersonic anti-ship missiles, as well as flying other types of missions.

Just how Maduro’s air defenses could affect any U.S. military strike on Venezuela is something we examined in our deep dive on the topic.

“Venezuela has an unusually varied collection of air defense assets, including smaller numbers of more capable systems. However, even most of the older surface-to-air missile systems have been upgraded and, as stated earlier, are generally highly mobile, meaning they can appear virtually anywhere, disrupting carefully laid mission plans. They could still pose a threat that would have to be taken seriously during any kind of offensive U.S. air operation directed against Venezuela.”

In addition to military aid already given to Venezuela, Zhuravlev suggested that Moscow, which recently ratified a mutual aid agreement with Caracas, could also provide long-range strike weapons.

“Information about the volumes and exact types of what is being imported from Russia is classified, so the Americans could be in for some surprises,” the Russian parliamentarian proferred. “I also see no obstacles to supplying a friendly country with new developments like the Oreshnik or, say, the proven Kalibr missiles; at least, no international obligations restrict Russia from doing so.”

The Oreshnik, a large, intermediate-range ballistic missile system, has been used against Ukraine by Russia. In August, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that production had started on the Oreshniks and reaffirmed his plans to deploy them to ally Belarus later this year. The Kalibr cruise missile, which can be launched from surface combatants and submarines, has been frequently used by Russia in its full-on war against Ukraine. 

With a reported maximum range of about 3,400 miles and a minimum effective range of about 400 miles, the Oreshnik could theoretically threaten much of the continental United States as well as Puerto Rico, which is being used as a staging base for the Caribbean operations. The Kalibr is thought to have a range of between 930 and 1,550 miles, which could possibly threaten the southern continental U.S., as well as facilities throughout the Caribbean.

Whether Russia can actually deliver any meaningful supply of these weapons remains unclear. The country is facing a shortage of air defenses after waves of attacks by Ukraine. Meanwhile, though Russia is still making them, it is unknown how many Kalibrs it still has after nearly four years of hitting Ukrainian targets. International sanctions have stymied advanced standoff weapon production in Russia. The rate at which new Kalibrs are being delivered isn’t known. Regardless, these standoff weapons are far more precious than they once were. The Oreshnik is an experimental weapon in very limited supply. That could change if Russia can produce them in meaningful quantities, but they are also larger and more complex to deploy. They would also be far more threatening to the United States than cruise missiles if they were perched in Venezuela, but that seems more like a questionable possibility in the future, not today.

While the exact extent of Moscow’s supply of new arms to Venezuela is also unknown, Putin has threatened in the past that Russia could provide standoff weapons to America’s enemies. As debate swirled last year about whether Ukraine’s allies would deliver long-range weapons to Kyiv, Putin said Russia could supply similar “regions” around the world where they could be used for strikes against Western targets. Venezuela came up as a possibility for where these weapons could go at the time.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s Caribbean buildup could give Putin a pretext to carry out his threat, and in America’s backyard. Trump has also been mulling giving Tomahawk Land Attack cruise missiles (TLAMs) to Ukraine, which would also fit into a potential narrative from Moscow to justify standoff weapons transfers. Clearly, some would draw direct parallels to the Cuban Missile Crisis just on the thought of such a notion. While there are clear similarities to that historic series of events, there are major differences too. It’s also possible Russia could give lower-end, but still long-range ‘deterrence’ weapons to Venezuela in the form of Shahed-136 one-way attack drones, which it has an increasingly large supply of.

We reached out to the White House and Pentagon for further context about the Russian lawmaker’s claims and will update this story with any pertinent details shared. The Pentagon referred us to the White House, which did not directly answer our questions.

Meanwhile, the Ford and one of its escorts, Arleigh Burke class guided missile destroyer USS Bainbridge, have passed through the Strait of Gibraltar and are now in the North Atlantic, a Navy official confirmed to The War Zone Tuesday morning. As we have previously reported, the Ford has been dispatched by Trump to take part in the ongoing operations in the Caribbean.

The rest of the carrier strike group’s Arleigh Burke class ships, however, are not with the Ford, according to the Navy. 

The USS Winston S. Churchill is the closest to the carrier, currently in the North Atlantic above Morocco, the Navy official told us. The USS Forrest Sherman and USS Mitscher are in the Red Sea while the USS Mahan is in Rota, Spain.

In addition, the San Antonio class amphibious transport dock ship USS Fort Lauderdale is now north of Cuba, the Navy official added. A U.S. official told us the ship is headed south to the Caribbean to rejoin the rest of the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group (ARG)/22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) operating as part of the enhanced counter-narcotics operation. There are now eight surface warships, a nuclear-powered fast attack submarine, and the MV Ocean Trader – a roll-on/roll-off cargo ship modified to carry special operators and their gear – assembled in the region. There is also an array of aviation assets, among them F-35B stealth fighters, AC-130 gunships, airlifters and MQ-9 Reaper drones, deployed for this operation.

Amid all this signaling by the U.S. and Russia, the Trump administration has “developed a range of options for military action in Venezuela, including direct attacks on military units that protect Maduro and moves to seize control of the country’s oil fields,” The New York Times reported on Tuesday, citing multiple U.S. officials.

Trump “has yet to make a decision about how or even whether to proceed,” the newspaper noted. “Officials said he was reluctant to approve operations that may place American troops at risk or could turn into an embarrassing failure. But many of his senior advisers are pressing for one of the most aggressive options: ousting Mr. Maduro from power.”

The president’s aides “have asked the Justice Department for additional guidance that could provide a legal basis for any military action beyond the current campaign of striking boats that the administration says are trafficking narcotics, without providing evidence,” the publication added. “Such guidance could include a legal rationale for targeting Mr. Maduro without creating the need for congressional authorization for the use of military force, much less a declaration of war.”

Trump is also directing staff to brief more members of Congress on the aggressive anti-narcotics tactics in the Caribbean and Pacific, Axios reported on Tuesday.

“The unprecedented military maneuvers off Venezuela and the continual extra-judicial killings of unarmed suspects —at least 64 of whom have died in 15 boat sinkings— have sparked bipartisan calls for more intel on the White House’s decision making,” the news outlet posited.

While the U.S. is blowing up alleged drug boats in the Caribbean, it is also seizing them in the Pacific.

“MORE WINNING,” Trump posted on Truth Social Monday. “U.S. military captures another drug speedboat and seizes over 5,000 lbs of drugs and apprehends nearly 60 narco terrorists as part of its Operation Pacific Viper.”

In addition to operations against Venezuela’s drug trafficking organizations, NBC News on Monday reported that the U.S. was planning kinetic actions against cartels in Mexico. On Tuesday, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum pushed back on that possibility.

“It’s not going to happen,” Sheinbaum said during her daily morning news conference on Tuesday. “We do not agree with any process of interference or interventionism.”

It remains unknown at the moment if or when Trump will order an attack on Venezuela. He has previously suggested strikes on ports and other facilities associated with narcotraffickers. However, he has also delivered mixed messages, saying he doubts there will be an attack but that Maduro must go.

Contact the author: [email protected]

This November marks 108 years since the Balfour Declaration, a promise written in London by men who had never walked the soil of Palestine. Authored by Arthur Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary at the time and signed on 2 November 1917, it became the seed of a new state and the undoing of another people. For the Jewish world, it offered recognition after centuries of exile. For Palestinians, it marked the beginning of erasure.

To fully grasp its significance and the controversies surrounding it, it is essential to understand three key concepts that underpin the narrative: Zionism, antisemitism, and Edward Said’s concept of Orientalism. These terms not only illuminate the motivations behind the declaration but also help to elucidate the subsequent century of strife in the region.

Zionism: A Response to Antisemitism in the Quest for a Jewish Homeland

The Balfour Declaration did not emerge from nowhere. It came from fear, exile, and the slow death of faith in Europe’s conscience. In 1882, Leon Pinsker, a Jewish physician, wrote Auto-Emancipation after watching mobs tear through Jewish towns in Russia. Houses burned. Families fled. The pogroms of 1881 ended any illusion that Jews could ever belong in Europe. Pinsker saw what others refused to see: no law, no revolution, no education could protect a people the world had already decided to keep apart.

Safety would come only through self-determination, through land rather than tolerance. A generation later, Theodor Herzl carried that truth into politics through the Dreyfus Affair, when a Jewish French officer was condemned for a crime he did not commit, stripping away Europe’s mask of enlightenment. Even in Paris, the supposed capital of reason, antisemitism ruled the crowd. Watching from Vienna, Herzl understood what Pinsker had already warned: emancipation without equality is another form of captivity. Herzl built what Pinsker imagined. He turned despair into movement, organisation, and speech. Through the Zionist Congresses, he tried to make safety tangible. He pleaded with ministers and kings, searched for land across the globe that could hold both memory and survival. He even wrote to the Ottoman Sultan, Abdul Hamid II, for a homeland in Palestine. He refused.

Still, Herzl kept going. For him, it was not about conquest but about the right to live without permission. By 1917, when Britain issued the Balfour Declaration, Europe’s so-called “Jewish question”, a term used in European discourse to discuss the integration, segregation, or expulsion of Jews, had already revealed the sickness at its core. To Jews, it was a plea for existence. To the imperial powers, it was a strategy, another chance to extend control into the Ottoman world. One side sought a home. The other saw an opportunity. Between them, a promise was made that would change the fate of a land neither side fully understood.

Orientalism and Imperial Hubris

The Balfour Declaration was not only a promise; it was an act of power. Edward Said’s idea of Orientalism helps us see it for what it was, a colonial document disguised as moral duty. Britain spoke of creating a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, yet never paused to ask what that meant for those already living there. In its language, Palestine became an empty space waiting to be claimed, not a land of families, farmers, and memory.

The indigenous Arab population was reduced to a single phrase, “non-Jewish communities,” stripped of name, voice, and history. They were spoken about, not spoken to. It turned people into categories, presence into absence. That is the logic of Orientalism: to see the East not as a living world, but as material to be moulded by Western power and imagination. It is a way of thinking that empties lands of their people and people of their history.

British Strategic Interests and French Complicity

The arrogance that engineered the Balfour Declaration was rooted in Britain’s hunger for power. Behind its moral language lay a simple aim: control. The declaration was issued in the chaos of the First World War, when the British imperial power was fighting not only for victory but for territory. Palestine, with its trade routes and proximity to the Suez Canal, became part of a larger chessboard. The British saw the region not as a motherland for its people but as a prize to be managed.

Diplomacy and Dispossession

The Sykes-Picot treaty had already shown the pattern. Britain and France distributed the Arab world in secret, drawing borders that cut through language and kinship. These lines were not meant to unite but to divide and rule. The Balfour Declaration followed the same logic. It decided the fate of a land without asking its people. In London, it was called diplomacy. In Palestine, it became dispossession. For European Jews, it brought a fragile hope after generations of fear. They saw it as recognition, a long-awaited right to safety and belonging. For Palestinians, the same words felt like a sentence. Their land was discussed in foreign rooms, their future sealed in other people’s languages. What gave one people deliverance took away another’s birthplace. From that moment came a century of struggle. Two people, bound to the same soil, were caught in a story written by the colonial power.

Empire’s Shadow

The promise made to the Zionists through the Balfour Declaration exposed a truth that the imperial power could never admit. Western powers spoke of liberty while deciding who was human enough to deserve it. Their idea of freedom had borders. Beyond Europe, it turned into permission: granted, withdrawn, and traded according to interest. In that imagination, Palestine was stripped of its reality. It ceased to be a land of people and became a metaphor, a stage on which Europe could perform its moral ambitions. The men who wrote the declaration did not see villages, harvests, or prayer calls at dawn. They saw space, something to be promised, parcelled, and redeemed through the colonial idea of moral duty. The Balfour Declaration was more than policy. It was philosophy turned into power, the belief that history could be rewritten without the consent of those who lived it.

The Paradox of Liberation

The result was a century of grief, exile, and resistance that still shapes the region’s every breath. Theodor Herzl’s dream began in anguish. He wanted a shelter for Jews who had none, safety after centuries of persecution. His longing was human and urgent. But like many who lived under colonial rule, he saw the world through its gaze. In The Jewish State, Herzl wrote of building a homeland that would stand as a frontier of civilisation in what he saw as a backward East. This idea mirrored the Orientalist belief that the East was lesser, waiting to be corrected by the West. Herzl used that language to win Europe’s approval, presenting Zionism as a cause aligned with the imperial project. It revealed a deeper paradox: a movement born from the search for safety, adopting the very logic that had long denied it to others. The legacy of that choice lives on. Liberation cannot grow from someone else’s domination, and no people can find peace by inheriting the instruments of colonial power.

Revisiting Said’s Themes

Edward Said’s ideas on Orientalism help reveal what lay beneath the Balfour Declaration. He showed how the colonial system justified itself by turning the East into an object of control, stripping people of voice and history so that their land could be claimed in the name of development. The declaration was one such act. It spoke the language of promise but was written in the logic of empire. Palestine and its people disappeared behind the visions of those who believed they understood the region better than those who lived in it. Through that document, Britain set two peoples on a path of collision. What began as a political statement became a century of exile, fear, and mistrust. For Palestinians, the realisation of Balfour’s promise led to the Nakba of 1948, when hundreds of thousands were driven from their homes, their lives suspended between memory and survival. That wound never closed. Today’s war in Gaza is not separate from that history. It is its continuation.

Conclusion

The legacy of the Balfour Declaration shows how imperial power reshapes entire worlds. It reminds us how Western ambitions, guided by power and wrapped in Orientalist myths about “the East,” can alter the fate of nations for generations. To confront what followed, one must begin with understanding, not slogans. Real peace requires more than diplomacy; it needs a philosophical honesty about history itself. The prejudices that shaped a century of Western policy, the habit of deciding for others, of seeing one people’s freedom as another’s threat, must be broken

Peace will only come when we step out of Balfour’s shadow. Each home destroyed leaves its trace; each life taken leaves a silence that others now carry. The wound belongs to both. Peace is not a ceremony. It is a choice made in the smallest moments: to see, to stay, to listen. When that choice is shared, the land may grow still. Not with conquest, but with recognition.

The secretary-general of the United Nations has described the latest wave of atrocities reportedly committed by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces in Sudan’s city of el-Fasher as “a nightmare of violence and a horrifying crisis”.

Thousands of people are believed to have been killed, and many more displaced, after the paramilitary group took over the army headquarters and other key installations in el-Fasher last month.

The United States says that Sudan’s warring sides have agreed, in principle, to work towards a three-month humanitarian truce.

But with violence spreading to other areas beyond North Darfur, can Washington’s plan succeed?

Presenter:

Adrian Finighan

Guests:

Amgad Fareid – executive director, Fikra for Studies and Development

Mathilde Vu – advocacy manager for Sudan, Norwegian Refugee Council

Susan Page – former assistant of the US special envoy for Sudan

New York City – For Jessica Dejesus, deciding who to vote for as the next mayor of New York City came down to the final minutes.

The 40-year-old resident of the Mott Haven neighbourhood in the Bronx admittedly had not been following the race closely, but planned to vote for former Governor Andrew Cuomo. She recalled his near-nightly television appearances when he was governor of New York State amid the ravages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“He was our guy during the pandemic,” she reflected.

But a day before the election, Dejesus saw a video on TikTok detailing US President Donald Trump’s endorsement of Cuomo.

While her feelings towards the candidates in the mayoral race may be ho-hum, Dejesus knows she is no fan of Trump. The nod made her give upstart candidate Social Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist, a closer look.

“We can’t have that. I don’t disagree with everything Trump does, but he cut back on food stamps, and that affects a lot of people,” she said, referring to restrictions on US Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits in a bill passed by Trump and Republicans earlier this year.

“I understand you have to stop bad people coming over the border, but there are a lot of good immigrants here as well,” she said, referring to Trump’s mass deportation drive.

Walking into her voting site, she told Al Jazeera she still had not made up her mind. “I’ll have to wait until that paper’s in front of me,” she said.

Moments later, she emerged: “I voted for Mamdani!” she said.

‘You really have no choice’

A neighbourhood like Mott Haven, which was solidly mixed during the June primary in its turnout for Mamdani and Cuomo, shows just how reactive Trump’s endorsement could be to the race: a poison pill for some and a final nail in the coffin for others.

Trump, meanwhile, hoped his endorsement, soon followed by that of billionaire Elon Musk, would help rally conservative New Yorkers who came out in atypically large numbers in the city’s 2024 presidential election.

“Whether you personally like Andrew Cuomo or not, you really have no choice,” Trump said in a social media post on Monday.

“You must vote for him and hope he does a fantastic job. He is capable of it, Mamdani is not!”

Cuomo has also been explicitly reaching out to Republicans, hoping to court their votes. About 11 percent of New York’s 4.7 million voters were registered with the Republican Party in 2024.

Recent polls have shown Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa carrying about 14 percent of the vote – not a huge amount, but potentially enough to close Mamdani’s lead over the former governor.

It remained unclear how successful the action from Trump – who has also threatened to target city funding if Mamdani was elected – would be. But for some staunch supporters of Sliwa, Trump’s intervention did little to change their minds.

“[Trump’s endorsement] doesn’t change my vote. Sliwa is for the people and I have faith in that,” said Artemio Figuero, a 59-year-old city street cleaner, who spoke to Al Jazeera in Jackson Heights, Queens.

“He was a protector of the neighbourhood,” Figuero added, referring to Sliwa’s stewardship of the vigilante anti-crime Guardian Angels group.

Other Republicans who had long grown accustomed to voting outside of their party in the liberal-dominated local elections saw Trump’s support as a positive development, if not a game-changer.

“I like that Trump endorsed him,” Lola Ferguson, a 53-year-old social worker and registered Republican who was already planning to vote for Cuomo, told Al Jazeera in Mott Haven.

“He knows that [Cuomo’s] the better match for the city,” she said.

Cuomo, for his part, has denied Trump’s endorsement counts, noting that Trump had referred to him as a “bad Democrat” compared to Mamdani, whom he falsely called a “communist”.

Still, for Mamdani supporters, Trump’s move was not unexpected. Cuomo has been supported by an array of the city’s wealthiest residents, including billionaires like Bill Ackman and Miriam Adelson, who have also backed Trump.

“Birds of a feather flock together,” said Andre Augustine, a 33-year-old who works at a college access nonprofit, who voted for Mamdani.

“I feel like the signs were already there. All the folks that were financing Trump’s campaign were also financing Cuomo’s, and I feel like [Cuomo] just wouldn’t be honest about it,” he said.

For others, Trump’s endorsement was the feather that broke the camel’s back.

Dominique Witter, 39, a healthcare tech consultant, respected Cuomo’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic in the city, but had been gradually shifting towards Mamdani.

She did not decide on Mamdani until the final sprint of the race.

“It took me a while to get there, but I’m voting for Mamdani,” she told Al Jazeera as she prepared to vote in Mott Haven.

“I’m not gonna lie; the Trump endorsement did not help. Because that’s not what we want, right?” she said.

“Oh no, that’s not an endorsement you want.”

There have already been numerous flight delays as the FAA slows down or stops traffic when it is short of controllers.

United States Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has said that there could be chaos in the skies next week if the government shutdown drags on and air traffic controllers miss a second paycheck.

Duffy made his comments on Tuesday as the US government shutdown dragged into its 35th day, matching the shutdown in US President Donald Trump’s first term as president and which was the longest at the time.

There have already been numerous delays at airports across the country — sometimes hours long — because the Federal Aviation Administration slows down or stops traffic temporarily anytime it is short on controllers. Last weekend saw some of the worst staff shortages, and on Sunday, flights at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey were delayed for several hours.

Duffy and the head of the air traffic controllers union have both warned that the situation will only get worse the longer the shutdown continues and the financial pressure continues to grow on people who are forced to work without pay. FAA employees already missed one paycheck on October 28. Their next payday is scheduled for next Tuesday.

“Many of the controllers said, ‘A lot of us can navigate missing one paycheck. Not everybody, but a lot of us can. None of us can manage missing two paychecks,’” Duffy said. “So if you bring us to a week from today, Democrats, you will see mass chaos. You will see mass flight delays. You’ll see mass cancellations, and you may see us close certain parts of the airspace, because we just cannot manage it, because we don’t have air traffic controllers.”

Most of the flight disruptions so far during the shutdown have been isolated and temporary. But if delays become more widespread and start to ripple throughout the system, the pressure will mount on US Congress to reach an agreement to end the shutdown.

Normally, airlines strive to have at least 80 percent of their flights depart and arrive within 15 minutes of when they are scheduled. Aviation analytics firm Cirium said that since the shutdown began on October 1, the total number of delays overall has not fallen significantly below that goal because most of the disruptions so far have been no worse than what happens when a major thunderstorm moves across an airport.

But on Sunday, only about 56 percent of Newark’s departures were on time, and the Orlando airport reported that only about 70 percent of its flights were on time, according to Cirium.

As of midday Tuesday, there have been 1,932 flight delays reported across the US, according to www.FlightAware.com. That is lower than what is typical, although the FAA did say that flights in Phoenix were being delayed on Tuesday morning because of staffing shortages. Strong winds are also causing delays at the Newark and LaGuardia airports on Tuesday.

David Robinson / Geograph

PA Media

‘Above bigotry’

Christian Concern

The formal transfer of 18 former Dutch F-16 fighters to Romania has been completed, with a price tag of just one Euro (approximately $1.15). The jets are being operated by the European F-16 Training Center, or EFTC, in Romania, where they will continue to be used to train both Romanian and Ukrainian Viper pilots.

The transfer documents were signed in Bucharest, the Romanian capital, by Brig. Gen. Ion-Cornel Pleșa, the chief of the Romanian general armament directorate, and Linda Ruseler, from the Dutch Ministry of Finance.

Added to the purchase price of one Euro was a VAT payment, amounting to 21 million Euros (around, $24 million) based on the declared value of the goods (the aircraft and the logistics support package).

The deal recalls the previous transfer of 22 former German MiG-29 Fulcrum fighters to Poland in 2002 for a symbolic one Euro per aircraft. You can read more about that here.

“I expressed my interest in this acquisition back in June, at the end of the NATO Summit in The Hague, when I signed, together with my Dutch counterpart, the Memorandum of Understanding on the extension of the functioning of the European F-16 Training Center in Romania,” Romania’s Minister of Defense Liviu-Ionuț Moșteanu said.

Putting the F-16s under formal Romanian control means they can now be dedicated to the EFTC, which is obliged to ensure a certain number of training slots on behalf of NATO and Ukraine.

The transfer of the F-16s has been enabled by the Dutch switching to the F-35A, which has now completely replaced the Viper, including taking on the nuclear strike mission.

As we reported at the time, the first five F-16s for the EFTC touched down in Romania almost a year ago, before the Ukrainian Air Force began to introduce F-16s. They are stationed operated the 86th Air Base, near Fetești, in southeast Romania.

“The Netherlands took the initiative to set up the EFTC and is making 12 to 18 F-16s available for this purpose,” the Dutch Ministry of Defense said in a statement in November last year. “The fighter aircraft remain the property of the Netherlands.” With the formal transfer, the F-16s are now in Romanian hands.

I’m grateful to the Netherlands and @MinPres Mark Rutte for leading the way in supporting Ukraine. Today marks a milestone: five Dutch F-16s have already arrived at the training center in Romania. We keep working together to welcome F-16s into Ukrainian skies as soon as possible.

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) November 7, 2023

Under the EFTC initiative, the Romanian Ministry of Defense had been providing the 86th Air Base, as well as training facilities and “host nation support,” while the Netherlands supplied the jets, and Lockheed Martin provided the instructors and the maintenance.

“Considering the current geopolitical context and Romania’s strategic position in the Black Sea area, this center becomes essential for the cross-border cooperation and the strengthening of security and solidarity within NATO,” the Romanian Ministry of Defense said.

At first, the aircraft were used for a refresher course for F-16 instructors who were hired by the EFTC. After that, the training of new pilots began, with missions only flown in NATO airspace.

The path of the 18 F-16s to the EFTC was somewhat convoluted, however.

It appears that 12 of the F-16s, at least, were previously used for training Dutch pilots in the United States. At one time, those dozen jets were to be sold to Draken International, a private contractor that planned to operate them for red air adversary support.

However, although Draken undertook some flight testing from its Lakeland, Florida, base, it never formally took delivery of the aircraft. This coincided with something of a reshuffle in U.S. Air Force contracted adversary requirements. Instead, these F-16s were flown across the Atlantic to Gosselies, in Belgium, where they were overhauled by SABENA, ahead of their transfer to Romania.

In the meantime, Politico reported that Draken was now involved in the EFTC program, citing an unnamed U.S. official.

One part of the EFTC’s role is to prepare F-16 pilots for Romania, which has a growing requirement for training on the type and an increasingly important mission defending NATO’s eastern airspace.

Romania initially acquired 12 second-hand F-16s from Portuguese stocks, followed by another five from the same source, before finally agreeing to buy 32 from Norway.

The other side of the EFTC mission involves training Ukrainian F-16 pilots.

The Ukrainian Air Force has been pledged 87 F-16s from four different European nations, after the United States finally approved the re-export of the aircraft to Kyiv. These F-16s comprise 24 from the Netherlands (separate from the EFTC jets), 30 from Belgium, 19 from Denmark, and 14 from Norway. The first Ukrainian F-16s (from Dutch and Danish stocks) had begun to arrive in the country by late July or early August of 2024.

In a statement, Dutch Minister of Defense Ruben Brekelmans said, “The training center is a textbook example of successful cooperation. We are working with Romania and Lockheed Martin in a unique way to train Romanian and Ukrainian pilots. It is wonderful that our former F-16s have been given a valuable new lease of life at the EFTC. The Ukrainian pilots who have been trained here are already making a significant contribution to protecting their country against the terrible Russian airstrikes.”

The importance of the EFTC is only increasing as the F-16 becomes a dwindling presence among Western European NATO air forces. As of today, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Norway have retired their F-16s entirely, while Belgium is in the process of doing so. There are new operators, specifically Bulgaria and Slovakia, but these are receiving more advanced Block 70 versions, rather than the F-16AM/BM that was the previous European standard, and which is operated by the EFTC.

As such, the EFTC now offers a unique capability in Europe, providing a complete training program for F-16 pilots and, as well as a framework in which instructors and pilots from different NATO countries — as well as Ukraine — can train together, to the same standards.

A small number of Ukrainian pilots have also undergone training on F-16s in the United States, specifically with the 162nd Wing, Arizona Air National Guard.

The long-term future of the EFTC F-16s remains unclear. There had been some speculation that these jets may ultimately still end up in Ukraine, which could still happen, should Romania choose to transfer them.

That would become more likely in the future, since the Romanian Air Force plans to introduce the F-35 after 2030, officials having described the acquisition of the F-16 as “an intermediate stage toward the introduction of a fifth-generation aircraft.”

Ukraine certainly still has a demand for additional fighters, with four F-16s already having been lost in different incidents, as well as continued attrition of its Soviet-era fighter fleets. Meanwhile, Mirage 2000s, supplied by France, have also begun to be used in combat. In the longer term, Sweden and Ukraine have also announced a plan to get as many as 150 Saab Gripen fighters into the Ukrainian Air Force’s hands.

As we have long stressed, the value of F-16s to Ukraine is only as good as the training that is provided alongside them. The European F-16 Training Center, now flying Romanian-owned jets, provides the Ukrainian Air Force with a dedicated facility to prepare its pilots and maintainers to operate the Viper.

Contact the author: [email protected]