Discover the latest happenings and stay in the know with our up-to-date today news coverage. From breaking stories and current events to trending topics and insightful analysis, we bring you the most relevant and captivating news of the day.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has insisted he has “never directly racially abused anybody”, following complaints from 20 people he went to school with.
A Guardian investigation spoke to contemporaries at Dulwich College who alleged Farage made racist and antisemitic remarks to them, which a spokesperson denied.
Speaking directly to a journalist about the allegations for the first time, Farage, 61, was pressed on what he meant by “directly” and replied: “By taking it out on an individual on the basis of who they are or what they are.”
He also ruled out holding an investigation into his own party, following the jailing of former Welsh Reform UK leader Nathan Gill for taking pro-Russian bribes.
Among the allegations in the Guardian are that Farage joked about gas chambers and put another pupil in detention, when he was a prefect, for the colour of their skin.
When asked about the claims, Farage responded: “Have I said things 50 years ago that you could interpret as being banter in a playground, that you can interpret in the modern light of day in some sort of way? Yes.”
He added: “I’ve never directly racially abused anybody. No.”
Pointing towards “political disagreements” with some of his school peers, Farage also denied having “ever been part of an extremist organisation or engaged in direct, unpleasant personal abuse, genuine abuse, on that basis”.
Pressed on whether he would say categorically that he did not racially abuse fellow pupils, Farage said: ” I would never, ever do it in a hurtful or insulting way.”
Asked whether he had perhaps said things to fellow pupils that he had not intended to be hurtful or racist, but they took it that way, he said: “I hope not.”
And asked whether he had said things at school that people might have taken offence to, he replied: “Without any shadow of a doubt.
“And without any shadow of a doubt I shall say things tonight on this stage that some people will take offence to and will use pejorative terms about.
“That is actually in some ways what open free speech is. Sometimes you say things that people don’t like.”
When asked if he would apologise to the people claiming he had been racist towards them, Farage replied: “No, I’m not, because I don’t think I did anything that directly hurt anybody.”
Farage, who was an MEP from 1999 until 2020, and was UKIP leader from 2006 to 2009 and 2010 to 2016, was also questioned about his former UKIP MEP colleague Nathan Gill, who was jailed for ten and a half years last Friday after admitting taking bribes to make pro-Russian interviews and statements when he was an MEP.
Gill was first elected to Brussels as a UKIP MEP in 2014, becoming a Brexit Party MEP in 2019, sticking with the party when it became Reform UK, and becoming Welsh leader in 2021, although he failed to get re-elected shortly afterwards.
Speaking at a Reform UK rally in Llandudno, north Wales, Farage said Gill was “briefly… leader of Reform Wales”.
The fact Gill took bribes “is of course an absolute and total disgrace,” he said.
“We disown his actions and we disown what he has done in every single way.”
In a separate interview,Farage was asked if he needed to investigate any other Russian links within his party, but said: “I’m not a police force, I haven’t got the resources.”
He added he thought there should be a broader investigation into Russian and Chinese interference in British politics, suggesting MI5 should conduct it.
Farage said he was as confident “as I can be” that no one else in Reform past or present had done similar things to the former Reform Wales leader, labelling the issue a “very minor embarrassment for Reform”.
He said: “I’m very shocked about Gill – he was in UKIP for a very, very long time – albeit it his time in Reform was very, very short…
“I’ve had no engagement with him and nobody in my leadership team has had any engagement with him whatsoever.”
Asked if that meant he could not rule out that there might be people in the party that might have spoken to him since his arrest, he added: “Nobody in authority.”
Responding to the accusations of racism during Farage’s schooldays, Liberal Democrat President-Elect Josh Babarinde MP said: “The Reform leader’s refusal to deny that he’s said these racist remarks is unbecoming from someone who wants to be our next prime minister.
“The British people deserve a straight answer.
“It looks like the mask has slipped and fact-of-the matter-Farage is turning into no-answers-Nigel.”
And Labour accused Nigel Farage of claiming “you can racially abuse people without it being hurtful and insulting”.
Lord Mike Katz, a Labour peer and former Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement, called on Farage to “come clean” about the claims and said “failure to do so would be yet more evidence that Farage is simply unfit for office”.
He said: “Just when you thought Nigel Farage couldn’t sink any lower, he is trying to say abhorrent racist comments, including vile antisemitic insults, doesn’t matter.
“He seems to think that you can racially abuse people without it being hurtful and insulting. Let’s be crystal clear: you can’t.”
Weekly insights and analysis on the latest developments in military technology, strategy, and foreign policy.
The U.K. Ministry of Defense is facing growing questions about the progress of its F-35 program, after key shortcomings were outlined in a recent critical report from the Public Accounts Committee, a body that examines the value for money of government projects. As well as the adverse effect on the program of years of cost-cutting, the F-35B still critically lacks a standoff strike capability.
In particular, the committee found that a shortage of maintenance engineers is having a profound effect on F-35B availability and output. During Parliamentary questions in the House of Commons, Ben Obese-Jecty, a Conservative member of parliament, asked the Ministry of Defense how long it would take to fix these issues.
A U.K. F-35B during Operation Highmast earlier this year. Under Highmast, 18 British F-35Bs were embarked in the Prince of Wales, which sailed to the Indo-Pacific region. Crown Copyright
In response, Luke Pollard, minister of state at the Ministry of Defense, said that the maintenance engineer shortages would not be fixed for three to four years, although steps had been taken in this direction, including a “significant” increase in the recruitment of engineers over the last two years. These efforts have included boosting training capacity as well as sign-on bonuses for new recruits.
According to the Public Accounts Committee report, The U.K.’s F-35 capability, the shortage of qualified engineers in the Royal Air Force (RAF) came about due to a failure to determine exactly how many of these critical staff would be needed. As a result, this is now one of the main reasons behind the F-35’s availability being judged “poor” and the jet consistently failing to meet targets.
“The Ministry of Defense has introduced a program of surging recruitment for the RAF so that it returns to workforce balance across every specialization,” Pollard explained. “This activity includes a significant focus on the engineer profession where, over the last two years, the RAF has offered joining bonuses and increased the capacity of technical training schools to enable more recruits to be trained. To improve retention, the RAF has implemented a Financial Retention Incentive for engineers. The recruitment and retention of personnel remains one of the top two priorities for the chief of the defense staff.”
While it’s true that the U.K. Armed Forces, in general, are suffering from a lack of technical support staff, it remains embarrassing that, in the case of the F-35B, the Ministry of Defense simply “miscalculated how many engineers would be needed per plane,” by failing to take into account staff taking leave and performing other tasks.
A pair of F-35Bs landing on board HMS Prince of Wales during Operation Highmast in May 2025. Crown Copyright
Overall, the Public Accounts Committee judges the F-35 “the best fast jet the United Kingdom has ever had.”
The jet is currently operated by two frontline units, the RAF’s No. 617 Squadron, the “Dambusters,” and the Royal Navy’s 809 Naval Air Squadron (NAS), as well as a training unit, No. 207 Squadron, RAF, which serves as the Operational Conversion Unit (OCU). All of these are home-based at RAF Marham in England, the main operating hub when the jets are not embarked in one of the two Royal Navy aircraft carriers or deployed on operations. As of this summer, 38 F-35Bs had been delivered, with one of these lost in a carrier accident in the Mediterranean.
The report found that a history of “cost-cutting” throughout the U.K. F-35 program “has caused significant problems in its use,” which have affected the jet’s “capability, availability to fly, and value for money.”
While these issues relate to the in-service F-35B, the short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) version of the jet, the same report also warns that the plan to introduce the conventional takeoff and landing F-35A version, which is nuclear-capable, is also likely to run into problems relating to costs and timelines.
When it comes to RAF Marham, the Public Accounts Committee slams the airbase for its “substandard accommodation,” which it described as “shabby, sometimes lacking hot water, and lacking bus access to a local town.”
The report notes that work on infrastructure at Marham won’t be finished until 2034, a “very complacent date,” and one that could further exacerbate problems in personnel retention.
Crown Copyright
Turning to the aircraft itself, one of the most significant problems caused by the cost-cutting relates to the facility that is required to assess the F-35’s stealth capability. This is critical to ensure that the fighter’s low-observable characteristics are functioning as they should. After all, the jet’s stealth features are key to its evading high-end air defense systems. More broadly, it should be noted that this type of infrastructure is a core requirement of the F-35’s unique capabilities, and constructing and sustaining it comes at an added cost.
To reduce the spending on the program, the Ministry of Defense delayed the investment in the facility, which provided a savings of £82 million (around $107 million) by 2024-25. However, due to inflation, the final cost of completing the facility will add another £16 million (around $21 million) on top of that by 2031-32.
British F-35Bs at RAF Marham. Jamie Hunter
In another effort to save cash in the short term, in 2020, the Ministry of Defense chose to slow down the delivery schedule of the F-35Bs, which had the effect of reducing the number of jets available on the flight lines today. The situation was then compounded by a lack of funds for buying new aircraft in 2020; this meant that seven aircraft were delivered a year late.
Finally, the Ministry of Defense took the decision to delay the full establishment of the first Royal Navy F-35B squadron, 809 NAS, again on budgetary grounds. This means the squadron has to wait until 2029 to get its full infrastructure at Marham. As a result, capability has been reduced and, once again, the eventual spend will be even greater: from £56 million (around $73 million) to a likely £154 million (around $201 million).
With this history of financial mismanagement in the program, the Public Accounts Committee is skeptical about how the Ministry of Defense will manage the introduction of another version of the jet, the F-35A.
“The new fast jets will be based at RAF Marham, with the Government expected to procure 138 F35s over the lifetime of the programme.” Everything else aside, this is about as clear a commitment to the UK’s full programme of record as you’re ever going to get……
After years of speculation, the United Kingdom finally announced this summer that it will buy 12 F-35As. As we have discussed in the past, this jet offers a number of advantages over the F-35B, but the Ministry of Defense has specifically highlighted its ability to join the NATO nuclear mission, which would see the jets armed with U.S.-owned B61-12 nuclear gravity bombs. On top of this mission, the RAF says that the new jets will be assigned to the training unit and will primarily be used in that role.
According to the Public Accounts Committee:
“Becoming certified for the NATO nuclear mission will add new requirements to training, personnel, and possibly infrastructure, but discussions in this area are at an early stage, and no indication of forecast costs has been provided by the Ministry of Defense.”
A U.S. Air Force F-35A drops a B61-12 during a test at Edwards Air Force Base, California. U.S. Air Force
One of those costs could well relate to the secure underground weapons vaults that are required to store the nuclear bombs. Whether such vaults did exist at RAF Marham in the past, it’s unclear whether this infrastructure remains intact or what degree of work it might need to accommodate the B61-12s. Some reports suggest the vaults have been dismantled or even filled in completely. Making use of U.S.-operated vaults at nearby RAF Lakenheath could be another option.
A Weapons Storage and Security System vault of the type used at NATO airbases in Europe, seen here in the raised position holding an older B61 variant. Public Domain/WikiCommons
When the F-35A decision was announced, TWZalso highlighted the potential disadvantages of a mixed fleet, especially with only a dozen of these versions, which represents very much a token force:
“A fleet of just 12 jets adds another type with some different maintenance and infrastructure requirements, and a relatively low availability rate, at least historically. At the same time, the training that it offers is not 1:1 for the STOVL F-35B, and it is questionable whether it will save money in the long run. That would change, however, if the British were to buy A-models in bigger numbers.”
Night flying aboard the British aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth. Lockheed Martin
The question of numbers is one that has surrounded the U.K. F-35 program for many years now.
So far, firm orders have only been placed for 48 F-35Bs. The previous Conservative government confirmed it was negotiating to buy another 27 F-35Bs for delivery by 2033. However, this batch of 27 jets will now be divided between F-35As (12) and F-35Bs (15).
At the very least, it seems the planned number of STOVL F-35Bs to be purchased will be reduced.
This could lead to problems, since it is widely considered that significantly more than 48 F-35Bs are required to meet the ambition of 24 jets available for the baseline Carrier Strike mission, across both carriers. Considering training and other demands, a figure of 60-70 jets is generally thought to be reasonable. In the meantime, U.S. Marine Corps F-35Bs have, on occasions, been relied upon to make up the required aircraft numbers during carrier cruises, although this wasn’t the case for the recent embarkation of 24 jets on HMS Prince of Wales.
A U.S. Marine Corps F-35B operates from HMS Queen Elizabeth during the U.K. Carrier Strike Group 21 deployment. Crown Copyright
Reports of Ministry of Defense financial mismanagement on the F-35 program also hardly inspire confidence in the even more ambitious plan for the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP), the United Kingdom’s future air combat initiative at the heart of which is the Tempest crewed stealth fighter.
As we have discussed before, the future of the GCAP program is by no means certain.
In the past, we have suggested that, should the F-35A prove itself with the RAF, that could open up the possibility of a follow-on purchase, and larger numbers of this version that would be a very obvious threat to the future of the Tempest.
A rendering of a pair of Tempests overflying the U.K. coastline. BAE Systems
That, however, likely depends on the Ministry of Defense solving the issues with the ongoing fielding of the F-35.
In summing up the U.K. F-35 program, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, the chair of the Public Accounts Committee, likened the mismanagement to a homeowner choosing to delay making repairs to a leaky roof, noting that “making short-term cost decisions is famously inadvisable … and yet such decisions have been rife in the management of the F-35.”
The Public Accounts Committee doesn’t provide a final figure for the U.K. F-35 program’s whole-life cost but does state that the Ministry of Defense’s projection of £57 billion (around $75 billion) through to 2069 “is unrealistic.”
Meanwhile, the additional capabilities that are promised under the latest Block 4 standard will represent another huge investment, but one that is required to ensure the jets perform to their fullest potential. The implications of Block 4 are also yet to be fully understood in terms of cost perspective, but will certainly be very significant.
By way of comparison, the United Kingdom expects to pay £31 billion (around $40 billion) for the design and manufacture of its four new Dreadnought class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, including inflation over the life of the program.
The committee also notes that the Ministry of Defense’s figure does not include costs for personnel, fuel, and infrastructure.
While the financial side of the program is worrying, of more immediate concern for the U.K. Armed Forces is the fact that key capabilities are still missing from its F-35s. While full operating capability was recently declared, after demonstrating the ability to put 24 U.K.-owned F-35Bs on a single carrier, this milestone remains somewhat aspirational, since the personnel shortages are still to be properly addressed.
Alarmingly, for a jet that is the backbone of the Carrier Strike role, the Public Accounts Committee reiterates that the F-35 “will also not have the ability to attack ground targets from a safe distance until the early 2030s.”
This, according to the Chief of the Defense Staff, is the biggest concern of all.
The U.K. F-35’s current lack of long-range standoff weaponry has long been acknowledged as a significant shortfall.
Earlier this year, the National Audit Office (NAO), the U.K.’s independent public spending watchdog, stated the following:
“There are some important capabilities that the Ministry of Defense has delayed into the next decade. Most significantly, the F-35 does not have a standoff weapon to attack ground targets from a safe range, which will impact its effectiveness in contested environments.” The NAO added that this capability isn’t expected in full until the early 2030s.
Currently, the U.K. F-35B relies on the Paveway IV precision-guided bomb to attack surface targets.
Ultimately, it plans to integrate the Selected Precision Effects At Range (SPEAR) 3 standoff weapon, but this process has been repeatedly delayed, as you can read about here.
An artist’s impression of an F-35 armed with SPEAR 3 plus Meteor air-to-air missiles. MBDA
As an interim measure, the United Kingdom is now looking to provide its F-35Bs with the GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) II, a weapon better known as StormBreaker.
“To acquire a more capable interim air-to-surface weapon, the U.K. F-35 program has requested funding for Small Diameter Bombs,” the NAO said, referring to the SDB II.
However, the NAO also noted that the Ministry of Defense “has yet to provide this funding.”
When it comes to standoff air-to-ground weapons, it is important to note that, while the F-35 is hard to detect using fire-control radars, it is not invisible. In some cases, making a direct attack on a target is impossible in terms of survivability, making it necessary to employ standoff munitions to degrade hostile air defenses.
All in all, the Public Accounts Committee report paints a sorry picture of the U.K. F-35 program, with a culture of cost-cutting constraining its capabilities in the short term, while also increasing costs in the long term.
In order for the U.K. Armed Forces to get the most out of the F-35, which it describes as “the best fighter jet this nation has ever possessed,” the report concludes that the Ministry of Defense “must root out the short-termism, complacency, and miscalculation in the program.”
The United States is asking the European Union (EU) to change its tech regulations before reducing U. S. tariffs on steel and aluminum from the EU. EU ministers wanted to discuss their July trade deal, which included cuts to U. S. tariffs on EU steel and removing them from goods like wine and spirits. However, U. S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick stated that the EU must first create a more balanced approach to its digital sector rules.
After a meeting with EU ministers, Lutnick mentioned they could address steel and aluminum issues together if the EU improved its regulations. European Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic noted that he didn’t expect any immediate breakthroughs with the U. S. but was hopeful to begin discussions about steel solutions. The July trade agreement set U. S. tariffs at 15% on many EU goods, while the EU agreed to lower some of its duties on U. S. imports, with potential implementation not expected until March or April pending approval from European leaders.
The U. S. currently has a 50% tariff on metals and has also applied tariffs on related products, raising concerns in the EU about the impact on their trade agreement. The EU seeks to have more of its products subjected only to low tariffs and is open to discussing regulatory cooperation in various areas, including energy and economic security, particularly related to China.
The federal government seeks to develop tailored artificial intelligence (AI) solutions and drive significant cost savings by leveraging AWS’s dedicated capacity.
Published On 24 Nov 202524 Nov 2025
Share
Amazon is set to invest up to $50bn to expand artificial intelligence (AI) and supercomputing capacity for United States government customers, in one of the largest cloud infrastructure commitments targeted at the public sector.
The e-commerce giant announced the investment on Monday.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
The project, expected to break ground in 2026, will add nearly 1.3 gigawatts of new AI and high-performance computing capacity across AWS Top Secret, AWS Secret and AWS GovCloud regions through new data centres equipped with advanced computing and networking systems.
One gigawatt of computing power is roughly enough to power about 750,000 US households on average.
“This investment removes the technology barriers that have held the government back”, Amazon Web Services (AWS) CEO Matt Garman said.
AWS is already a major cloud provider to the US government, serving more than 11,000 government agencies.
Amazon’s initiative aims to provide federal agencies with enhanced access to a comprehensive suite of AWS AI services. These include Amazon SageMaker for model training and customisation, Amazon Bedrock for deploying AI models and agents and foundational models such as Amazon Nova and Anthropic Claude.
The federal government seeks to develop tailored AI solutions and drive significant cost savings by leveraging AWS’s dedicated and expanded capacity.
The push also comes as the US, along with other countries such as China, intensifies efforts to advance AI development and secure leadership in the emerging technology.
Tech companies, including OpenAI, Alphabet and Microsoft, are pouring billions of dollars into building out AI infrastructure, boosting demand for computing power required to support the services.
On Wall Street, Amazon’s stock was up 1.7 percent in midday trading.
Other tech stocks surged amid the recent investments. Alphabet, Google’s parent company, closed in on a $4 trillion valuation on Monday and was set to become only the fourth company to enter the exclusive club. Its stock was up 4.7 percent.
Last week, Nvidia announced expectations of higher fourth-quarter revenue — a month after the tech giant announced a partnership to build supercomputers for the US Department of Energy — a deal that sent the company’s valuation topping $5 trillion.
Nvidia stock was up by 1.8 percent in midday trading.
European allies of Ukraine have given a cautious welcome to efforts to refine a United States peace proposal initially criticised for appearing to be weighted in favour of Russia’s maximalist demands.
The leaders Germany, Finland, Poland and the United Kingdom were among those agreeing on Monday that progress had been made in the previous day’s talks between Washington and Kyiv in Geneva that yielded what the US and Ukraine called a “refined peace framework”.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Still, the European leaders stressed work remained to be done.
“It was possible to clear up some questions, but we also know that there won’t be peace in Ukraine overnight,” said German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, adding that the peace plan initially drafted by the US had been “modified in significant parts”.
He welcomed the “interim result”.
“The next step must be that Russia must come to the table,” he said from Angola, where he was attending a summit between African and European Union countries. “This is a laborious process. It will move forward at most in smaller steps this week. I do not expect there to be a breakthrough this week.”
US President Donald Trump had blindsided Kyiv and its European countries last week with a 28-point peace plan criticised by some as a Russian wish list that called for Ukraine to cede more territory, accept limits on its military and abandon its ambitions to join NATO.
Britain, France and Germany responded by drawing up a counter-proposal that would cease fighting at present front lines, leaving discussions of territory for later, and include a NATO-style US security guarantee for Ukraine, according to a draft seen by Reuters news agency.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that Ukraine’s allies in the “coalition of the willing” – a broad term for about 30 countries supporting Kyiv – will hold talks about the negotiations on Tuesday by video.
The German Foreign Office said that chief diplomats of Germany, Finland, France, the UK, Italy and Poland consulted Monday with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha on further steps toward ending the war.
Also attending the summit in Angola, European Council President Antonio Costa said there was “new momentum” in negotiations.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the European Union would “engage further tomorrow with our partners from the coalition of the willing”.
‘Big progress’
On Monday, Trump indicated Sunday’s talks had gone well.
“Is it really possible that big progress is being made in Peace Talks between Russia and Ukraine??? Don’t believe it until you see it, but something good just may be happening,” the US President wrote on Truth Social.
Trump had given Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who is under the doubled pressure of Russia’s continued advance on the front line and a corruption scandal that has tainted his administration, until Thursday to agree to a framework to end the war. He also accused Zelenskyy of showing “zero gratitude” for peace efforts.
Zelenskyy said on X on Monday that he was expecting a full report that evening on the Geneva talks.
“To achieve real peace, more, more is needed. Of course, we all continue working with partners, especially the United States, and look for compromises that strengthen but not weaken us,” he said.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk also said on Monday that negotiations were a “delicate matter” since “no one wants to discourage Americans and President Trump from having the United States on our side in this process”.
The Kremlin said it had not been informed of the results of the Geneva talks, but that it was aware that “adjustments” were made to the US proposal.
In a call with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin repeated his view that the initial US plan could “serve as a basis for a final peace settlement”.
During the call, Erdogan said Turkiye was ready to support efforts to bring Russia and Ukraine together, including helping to facilitate direct talks between the two.
However, Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov said the European plan appeared “entirely unconstructive and unsuitable for us”, according to a report in the Russian state-run TASS news agency.
Reporting from Moscow, Al Jazeera’s Yulia Shapovalova said Russia was unlikely to accept the European revisions.
“If all Russian conditions and interests are not taken into account, Russia is ready to continue fighting because, according to Vladimir Putin, Russia is pretty successful on the battlefield and it wants to achieve its goals,” she said.
In comments made by video to a meeting at the Swedish Parliament, Zelenskyy had indicated that territory would still be a key sticking point, accusing Russian President Vladimir Putin of seeking “legal recognition for what he has stolen”.
Grim reality
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has decimated the east of the country, forcing millions to flee their homes, ravaging towns and cities, and killing tens of thousands in Europe’s worst conflict since World War II.
On Monday, the war continued to grind on, with Russian forces keeping up their deadly and devastating strikes on civilian areas while making battlefield advances in Ukraine’s southeastern Zaporizhia region.
Russian drones hit residential areas of Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city overnight, killing four people and wounding 13, including two children, authorities said.
On Monday, Russian forces struck the city of Pavlohrad in Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk region with drones, wounding three people and damaging industrial facilities, according to regional authorities.
That morning, Russian shelling killed a 61-year-old woman in Kherson, according to the military administration of the city in southern Ukraine.
Across the border, Russian air defences downed Ukrainian drones en route to Moscow, forcing three airports serving the capital to pause flights.
A reported Ukrainian drone strike on Sunday knocked power out for thousands of residents near Moscow, a rare reversal of Russian attacks on energy targets that regularly cause power blackouts for millions of Ukrainians.
Young Palestinians in Gaza have used parts and fuel from abandoned Israeli military vehicles to create a pump to supply clean water for their community.
Talks in Geneva between the US and Ukraine aimed at ending the war with Russia have concluded, with officials from both sides reporting “progress” and an intention to continue working.
However, no details have emerged on how to bridge the considerable divide between Moscow and Kyiv over territorial issues and security guarantees for Ukraine.
Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky welcomed the “important steps” that had been made but warned that the “main problem” facing the peace talks was Vladimir Putin’s demand for legal recognition of Russian-occupied territories in eastern Ukraine.
“This would break the principle of territorial integrity and sovereignty,” he said, highlighting concerns that Moscow could be rewarded for its aggression with land it seized by force.
Meanwhile, President Donald Trump suggested on social media that “something good just may be happening”, but with the caveat: “Don’t believe it until you see it.”
The Geneva talks did not involve Russian representatives and the Kremlin said it hadn’t received any information on the outcome of the discussions. Spokesman Dmitri Peskov noted Moscow was aware that “adjustments” were made to the plan that had been welcomed by Putin.
A 28-point peace plan drafted by US and Russian officials was presented to Ukraine last week. Several of its elements seemed heavily geared towards Moscow’s longstanding demands, sparking consternation in Kyiv and its European allies.
Comments by Trump which suggested Ukraine had until Thursday to accept the deal or face serious cuts in US support contributed to creating a sense of urgency across Europe and talks between Ukraine and US officials were hastily convened.
By Sunday evening US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said a “tremendous” amount of progress had been made at the talks. “I honestly believe we’ll get there,” he said.
But some European leaders have been more cautious. “I am not sure if we are closer to peace,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said, while German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said discussions would be a “lengthy, long-lasting process” and that he did not expect any breakthroughs this week.
Europeans were left scrambling for a seat at the table last week, after they were seemingly caught unawares when the US draft peace plan was presented.
A counter-proposal – reportedly drafted by Britain, France and Germany – excluded any recognition of Russian-held regions, raised Ukraine’s allowed army size and left the door open to Ukraine joining Nato.
Rubio said he was not aware of the plan and on Monday Kremlin foreign policy aide Yuri Ushakov rubbished it as “completely unconstructive”.
Since launching its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Russia has consistently demanded full Ukrainian withdrawal from the whole of the eastern Donbas region.
But Kyiv and its European partners are weary of any settlement which would jeopardise the principles of territorial integrity and sovereignty – and Zelensky has repeatedly warned that giving up the Donbas would leave Ukraine vulnerable to Russian attacks in the future.
Despite last week’s frenzied diplomacy the next steps in the process are unclear.
The expectation is that Zelensky will soon personally speak to Trump, after which a new draft peace plan will be eventually presented to Moscow. There were no plans for a meeting this week between Russian and US negotiators, the Kremlin said.
British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said there was still work to do for a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. A virtual “coalition of the willing” meeting will take place on Tuesday to discuss developments, he added.
China and Germany have moved quickly to mend trade tensions that escalated after Beijing restricted exports of rare earths and chips, disruptions that have snarled German production lines and prompted calls to “de-risk” supply chains. Premier Li Qiang met German Chancellor Friedrich Merz on the sidelines of the G20 summit in South Africa, pitching closer collaboration in strategic industries including new energy, smart manufacturing, biomedicine, hydrogen technology, and intelligent driving. German Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil and top diplomat Johann Wadephul have also resumed high-level dialogue with their Chinese counterparts. China is Germany’s top European trade partner, with German auto, chemicals, and pharmaceutical firms heavily reliant on Chinese markets.
Why It Matters
Rare earths and other strategic components are critical to global high-tech and industrial production. China’s curbs on exports earlier this year revealed vulnerabilities in Germany’s manufacturing base, including autos and electronics, and underscored Europe’s reliance on Chinese supply chains. Restoring dialogue signals Beijing’s willingness to stabilize industrial flows while asserting its role as a global supplier. For Germany, balancing economic dependence on China with political pressure from allies like the U.S. highlights the ongoing challenge of managing strategic supply risks without alienating a key trading partner.
German industry particularly automakers, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and advanced manufacturing stands to benefit directly from eased export controls. German policymakers, led by Chancellor Merz and Finance Minister Klingbeil, are focused on securing reliable access to rare earths and high-tech inputs while navigating geopolitical tensions. China’s government and state-backed firms aim to maintain Germany as a top European market and investor, leveraging bilateral ties to offset U.S. trade and technology pressure. The European Union observes closely, given implications for broader supply-chain strategies and collective European responses to China’s industrial policies.
What’s Next
Chancellor Merz is expected to visit China soon to meet President Xi Jinping, while diplomatic channels with Foreign Minister Wadephul are resuming. Both countries are likely to deepen engagement in strategic industries to reduce bottlenecks in rare earths, chips, and emerging tech sectors. Germany will continue to balance economic pragmatism with pressure from EU allies and the U.S. on issues like human rights, industrial subsidies, and supply-chain resilience. China may also push for policy alignment or reduced interference on geopolitical matters as a precondition for deeper cooperation.
A boy who grew up during Syria’s war reveals the untold origins of the conflict and the fight for his nation’s freedom.
In 2017, Al Jazeera broadcast a documentary by Clover Films that sought to highlight the true origins of the Syrian civil war. By that year, international sympathy for the rebel cause had diminished dramatically as Western media adopted the accepted mainstream position that groups such as al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front and even ISIL (ISIS) had been behind the revolution. (ISIL didn’t even exist at the time of the uprising.) The Boy Who Started the Syrian War would change the narrative.
Now, with the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime along with its army and militia, the Shabiha, it’s time to meet once again with the surviving characters from the original film. One of those is Mouawiya Syasneh, who had laid down his school satchel and picked up a gun to fight with the Free Syrian Army.
Leading tech companies are in a race to release and improve artificial intelligence (AI) products, leaving users in the United States to puzzle out how much of their personal data could be extracted to train AI tools.
Meta (which owns Facebook, Instagram, Threads and WhatsApp), Google and LinkedIn have all rolled out AI app features that have the capacity to draw on users’ public profiles or emails. Google and LinkedIn offer users ways to opt out of the AI features, while Meta’s AI tool provides no means for its users to say “no, thanks.”
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
“Gmail just flipped a dangerous switch on October 10, 2025 and 99% of Gmail users have no idea,” a November 8 Instagram post said.
Posts warned that the platforms’ AI tool rollouts make most private information available for tech company harvesting. “Every conversation, every photo, every voice message, fed into AI and used for profit,” a November 9 X video about Meta said.
Starting December 16th, Meta will start feeding all your data to AI. This video is an instructional on how to turn these settings off. pic.twitter.com/BUJagaMr5b
Technology companies are rarely fully transparent when it comes to the user data they collect and what they use it for, Krystyna Sikora, a research analyst for the Alliance for Securing Democracy at the German Marshall Fund, told PolitiFact.
“Unsurprisingly, this lack of transparency can create significant confusion that in turn can lead to fear mongering and the spread of false information about what is and is not permissible,” Sikora said.
The best – if tedious – way for people to know and protect their privacy rights is to read the terms and conditions, since it often explicitly outlines how the data will be used and whether it will be shared with third parties, Sikora said. The US doesn’t have any comprehensive federal laws on data privacy for technology companies.
Here’s what we learned about how each platform’s AI is handling your data:
Social media claim: “Starting December 16th Meta will start reading your DMs, every conversation, every photo, every voice message fed into AI and used for profit.” – November 9 X post with 1.6 million views as of November 19.
The facts: Meta announced a new policy to take effect December 16, but that policy alone does not result in your direct messages, photos and voice messages being fed into its AI tool. The policy involves how Meta will customise users’ content and advertisements based on how they interact with Meta AI.
For example, if a user interacts with Meta’s AI chatbot about hiking, Meta might start showing that person recommendations for hiking groups or hiking boots.
But that doesn’t mean your data isn’t being used for AI purposes. Although Meta doesn’t use people’s private messages in Instagram, WhatsApp or Messenger to train its AI, it does collect user content that is set to “public” mode. This can include photos, posts, comments and reels. If the user’s Meta AI conversations involve religious views, sexual orientation and racial or ethnic origin, Meta says the system is designed to avoid parlaying these interactions into ads. If users ask questions of Meta AI using its voice feature, Meta says the AI tool will use the microphone only when users give permission.
There is a caveat: The tech company says its AI might use information about people who don’t have Meta product accounts if their information appears in other users’ public posts. For example, if a Meta user mentions a non-user in a public image caption, that photo and caption could be used to train Meta AI.
Can you opt out? No. If you are using Meta platforms in these ways – making some of your posts public and using the chatbot – your data could be used by Meta AI. There is no way to deactivate Meta AI in Instagram, Facebook or Threads. WhatsApp users can deactivate the option to talk with Meta AI in their chats, but this option is available only per chat, meaning that you must deactivate the option in each chat’s advanced privacy settings.
The X post inaccurately advised people to submit this form to opt out. But the form is simply a way for users to report when Meta’s AI supplies an answer that contains someone’s personal information.
David Evan Harris, who teaches AI ethics at the University of California, Berkeley, told PolitiFact that because the US has no federal regulations about privacy and AI training, people have no standardised legal right to opt out of AI training in the way that people in countries such as Switzerland, the United Kingdom and South Korea do.
Even when social media platforms provide opt-out options for US customers, it’s often difficult to find the settings to do so, Harris said.
Deleting your Meta accounts does not eliminate the possibility of Meta AI using your past public data, Meta’s spokesperson said.
Google
Social media claim: “Did you know Google just gave its AI access to read every email in your Gmail – even your attachments?” – November 8 Instagram post with more than 146,000 likes as of November 19.
The facts: Google has a host of products that interact with private data in different ways. Google announced on November 5 that its AI product, Gemini Deep Research, can connect to users’ other Google products, including Gmail, Drive and Chat. But, as Forbes reported, users must first give permission to employ the tool.
Users who want to allow Gemini Deep Research to have access to private information across products can choose what data sources to employ, including Google search, Gmail, Drive and Google Chat.
There are other ways Google collects people’s data:
Through searches and prompts in Gemini apps, including its mobile app, Gemini in Chrome or Gemini in another web browser
Any video or photo uploads that the user entered into Gemini
Through interactions with apps such as YouTube and Spotify, if users give permission
Through message and phone calls apps, including call logs and message logs, if users give permission.
A Google spokesperson told PolitiFact the company doesn’t use this information to train AI when registered users are under age 13.
Google can also access people’s data when they have smart features activated in their Gmail and Google Workplace settings (that are automatically on in the US), which gives Google consent to draw on email content and user activity data to help users compose emails or suggest Google Calendar events. With optional paid subscriptions, users can access additional AI features, including in-app Gemini summaries.
Turning off Gmail’s smart features can stop Google’s AI from accessing Gmail, but it doesn’t stop Google’s access to the Gemini app, which users can either download or access in a browser.
A California lawsuit accuses Gemini of spying on users’ private communications. The lawsuit says an October policy change gives Gemini default access to private content such as emails and attachments in people’s Gmail, Chat and Meet. Before October, users had to manually allow Gemini to access the private content; now, users must go into their privacy settings to disable it. The lawsuit claims the Google policy update violates California’s 1967 Invasion of Privacy Act, a law that prohibits unauthorised wiretapping and recording confidential communications without consent.
Can you opt out? If people don’t want their conversations used to train Google AI, they can use “temporary” chats or chat without signing into their Gemini accounts. Doing that means Gemini can’t save a person’s chat history, a Google spokesperson said. Otherwise, opting out of having Google’s AI in Gmail, Drive and Meet requires turning off smart features in settings.
LinkedIn
Social media claim: Starting November 3, “LinkedIn will begin using your data to train AI.” – November 2 Instagram post with more than 18,000 likes as of November 19.
The facts: LinkedIn, owned by Microsoft, announced on its website that starting November 3, it will use some US members’ data to train content-generating AI models.
The data the AI collects includes details from people’s profiles and public content that users post.
The training does not draw on information from people’s private messages, LinkedIn said.
LinkedIn also said, aside from the AI data access, that Microsoft started receiving information about LinkedIn members – such as profile information, feed activity and ad engagement – as of November 3 in order to target users with personalised ads.
Can you opt out? Yes. Autumn Cobb, a LinkedIn spokesperson, confirmed to PolitiFact that members can opt out if they don’t want their content used for AI training purposes. They can also opt out of receiving targeted, personalised ads.
To remove your data from being used for training purposes, go to data privacy, click on the option that says “Data for Generative AI Improvement” and then turn off the feature that says “use my data for training content creation AI models.”
And to opt out of personalised ads, go to advertising data in settings, and turn off ads on LinkedIn and the option that says “data sharing with our affiliates and select partners”.
Business leaders face a nervous final few days before the chancellor’s second Budget, having borne the brunt of a brutal set of tax hikes this time last year.
Firms are still reeling from those: the £25bn National Insurance increase and an inflation-busting rise in the minimum wage.
Confidence in boardrooms has grown increasingly fragile as the Budget nears. Almost all measures of sentiment among chief executives and finance bosses in the last six months have shown alarm bells ringing.
So what can nervous business owners and leaders expect from Rachel Reeves?
We are certain taxes will rise, and that takes money out of the economy. Research firm Capital Economics estimates the Budget will knock 0.2% off GDP in 2026 – a meaningful hit to an economy that only grew 0.1% in the third quarter of this year.
However, as the chancellor pulls money out of the economy, the Bank of England is likely to push money back in by lowering interest rates, encouraging people and businesses to borrow and spend.
And, as one senior government adviser told the BBC, that means a lot of the “big things” that affect business confidence, including inflation, are expected to fall next year. I would expect the chancellor to accentuate those positives.
When it comes to business, the government will in part want to be judged on what it does not do in this Budget: no more nasty surprises, no blanket tax rises.
The head of the CBI business group, Rain Newton-Smith, has said “stability is the only road to growth” and urged the government not to hit businesses with more taxes.
Speaking to the CBI’s annual conference, she said the government needed to make “hard choices for growth now before they get harder, having the courage to take two tough decisions rather than 20 easier ones”.
“It means one or two broad tax rises, rather than death by a thousand taxes.”
PA Media
Budget ingredients
So what might be in the mix?
Business rates are a bug-bear. Many firms have seen their bills almost double, after a pandemic-era discount of 75% for retail, hospitality and leisure businesses was cut to 40% last year.
The chancellor has previously promised reform. She could make the existing discounts permanent and remove cliff edges that see small businesses’ rates bills shoot up when they expand. That could be partly paid for by increasing rates on the largest retail properties.
Business Secretary Peter Kyle addressed the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) conference on Monday, and had a couple of business-friendly policies to announce.
He pledged to lower electricity bills for 7,000 British businesses, and said the British Business Bank would focus its lending on the eight “high potential” sectors identified in the industrial strategy.
He told the conference: “Let’s not kid ourselves — actual growth, real growth, comes from enterprise and wealth creation.
“We will build a pro-business, pro-wealth creation, pro-growth Britain. This week’s budget will take the fair and necessary choices to embed that further.”
The chancellor is also likely to point to the upcoming Planning and Infrastructure Bill, a piece of legislation that she has described as “probably the biggest thing we will do this parliament”, as a way of removing barriers to growth.
Bank profits are a tempting target and there have been mixed messages on whether she might hike taxes there. But ministers are concerned it does not fit the pro-growth, pro-investment narrative.
It is possible that the Treasury will reduce payments to the Bank of England that cover their losses on the sales of government bonds that were bought to support the economy during the pandemic and financial crisis.
That in turn reduces payments to commercial banks and would be seen by them as a bank tax in all but name.
The oil and gas industry has lobbied hard for some respite on the “windfall” taxes on their profits, arguing that, with oil prices low, there is no windfall profit to tax. They say investment in the North Sea is shrivelling fast, with knock-on effects in refinery and chemical plant closures. Firms say relief could preserve jobs.
The additional 38% tax, which is on top of a 40% tax rate specific to the industry, is due to expire in 2030. There is a chance it could be phased out earlier.
Getty Images
Among bosses there is still concern over the government’s flagship Employment Rights Bill, which promises sick pay and protection from unfair dismissal for new workers from day one.
Rain Newton-Smith told the CBI conference that the government should “change course” on the bill and that businesses were not being listened to.
There is no sign the government is backing off, but Kyle recently told a committee of MPs that there were 26 consultations to come on exactly how these measures will be implemented.
The business secretary told the BBC’s Today programme on Monday that any changes to the law would “be implemented in a way that is benefiting business and benefiting the people who work in business”.
“We do not see this as zero-sum,” he said.
The chancellor is also expected to speak in the Budget about consumers having the “confidence to spend”.
Some in the business community will interpret this as possibly heralding another higher-than-inflation rise in the national living wage, which also tends to push up other salaries in a firm’s wage structure.
One other policy that will hit both employers and employees is a cap on salary sacrifice schemes which allow workers to put some of their pre-tax earnings into their pension pots.
Such schemes are widely used in larger companies and there is concern that cutting them will mean less generous workplace pensions in the years to come.
Restoring faith
What the government wants business to hear is that it is on their side, that it knows a lot was asked of them last time, and that this time they are being spared, even helped at the margin where possible.
After months of anxious waiting business may then breathe a collective sigh of relief.
According to a recent survey by Barclays, 55% of business leaders say they are delaying investment decisions until they have seen the Budget. But 43% say they expect to increase investment after it, a sign of possible pent-up optimism.
But confidence is still very fragile. The chancellor will need to handle with care.
Russia is framing artificial intelligence as a geopolitical technology on par with nuclear weapons, with Sberbank First Deputy CEO Alexander Vedyakhin warning that only nations capable of building their own large language models will hold real influence in the 21st century. Speaking at Moscow’s flagship AI Journey event, Vedyakhin said Russia considers it a strategic achievement to be among the few countries with home-grown AI and insists the state must rely exclusively on domestic models for sensitive sectors like public services, healthcare, and education. His comments echo President Vladimir Putin’s recent remarks that indigenous AI is essential for Russian sovereignty. While Sberbank and Yandex lead Russia’s push to compete with U.S. and Chinese AI giants, sanctions and limited computing power continue to restrain Moscow’s capability.
Why It Matters
Russia’s framing of AI as a sovereignty-defining technology signals a hardening global divide in the race for digital power. By likening AI to nuclear capability, Moscow is underscoring the strategic leverage it believes advanced models can confer over national security, economic competitiveness, and societal infrastructure. For Western policymakers, the statement highlights how AI is increasingly entwined with geopolitical rivalry, sanctions regimes, and technological self-reliance. For markets, the message is more nuanced: despite the rhetoric, Russia admits it cannot match global leaders in compute or scale, and it warns investors that AI infrastructure spending may not repay itself quickly, raising questions about the economic viability of high-intensity AI development.
Russia’s state institutions, security apparatus, and public-service sectors are central consumers of domestic AI models as Moscow seeks digital autonomy. Sberbank and Yandex are the primary corporate developers, tasked with building national-scale models under sanctions constraints. Western governments and AI firms remain part of the geopolitical backdrop, as Russia’s push for self-sufficiency follows restricted access to advanced chips and cloud hardware. Russian businesses, from healthcare to education providers, will increasingly rely on domestic AI systems while international partners watch how far Russia can expand its capabilities without global supply chains.
What’s Next
Russia aims to expand from one or two national AI systems to several independent models, but its development will remain limited by restricted access to high-performance computing. Moscow will continue steering AI regulation toward data sovereignty, banning foreign models from handling state or sensitive information. As Russia ramps its rhetoric around AI power, expect greater global pressure for technological blocs, digital “non-alignment,” and AI export controls. Meanwhile, the Kremlin’s caution about an “AI bubble” hints that its investments will be narrower and more state-directed than those in the U.S. or China, potentially slowing innovation but avoiding the risk of overextension.
Move offers potential cover as Trump eyes expanded operations against Venezuela’s Maduro.
Published On 24 Nov 202524 Nov 2025
Share
The United States is set to designating Venezuela’s “Cartel de los Soles” a foreign “terrorist” organisation (FTO).
President Donald Trump’s administration will add the “cartel”, which it asserts is linked to Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, to the list on Monday.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
However, the entity is not actually a cartel, but rather a common reference to military officers and officials involved in corruption and other illegal activities.
The move, which comes amid a huge military buildup in the Caribbean Sea near Venezuela by the US, could offer legal cover to potential direct military action.
Trump is reportedly mulling the next step in his campaign against the South American country. A strike on Venezuelan territory would constitute a major escalation of the months-long US operation in the region, which has seen more than 80 people killed in strikes on boats accused of trafficking drugs.
UN officials and scholars of international law have said that the strikes are in clear violation of US and international law and amount to extrajudicial executions.
Washington is poised to launch a new phase of operations in the coming days, unnamed US officials told the Reuters news agency.
The report said the exact timing and scope of the new operations, and whether Trump had made a final decision to act, was unclear.
A senior administration official said they would not rule anything out regarding Venezuela.
Two of the officials said covert operations would likely be the first part of a new action against Maduro, with options under consideration including an attempt to overthrow the longstanding Venezuelan leader.
Cartel de los Soles
Venezuelans began using the term Cartel de los Soles in the 1990s to refer to high-ranking military officers who had grown rich from drug-running.
As corruption later expanded nationwide, first under the late President Hugo Chavez and then Maduro, the use of the term loosely expanded to include police and government officials, as well as activities like illegal mining and fuel trafficking.
The “suns” in the name refer to the epaulettes affixed to the uniforms of high-ranking military officers.
The umbrella term was elevated to a reported drug-trafficking organisation allegedly led by Maduro in 2020, when the US Department of Justice in Trump’s first term announced the indictment of Venezuela’s leader and his inner circle on narcoterrorism and other charges.
Maduro, in power since 2013, contends that Trump seeks to topple him and that Venezuelan citizens and the military will resist any such attempt.
However, the US campaign and the fears of potential military action continue to raise the pressure on Caracas.
Six airlines cancelled their routes to Venezuela on Saturday after the US aviation regulator warned of dangers from “heightened military activity”.
Spain’s Iberia, Portugal’s TAP, Chile’s LATAM, Colombia’s Avianca and Brazil’s GOL suspended their flights to the country, said Marisela de Loaiza, president of the Venezuelan Airlines Association (ALAV).
Turkish Airlines said on Sunday it was also cancelling flights from November 24 to 28.
Jude Bellingham’s 87th minute equaliser rescued Real Madrid from defeat at Elche as Los Blancos return to top of ladder.
Published On 24 Nov 202524 Nov 2025
Share
Jude Bellingham struck late on to secure Real Madrid a 2-2 draw at Elche on Sunday, taking his team top of La Liga by a point.
Xabi Alonso’s side struggled against their mid-table opponents in an entertaining battle in which Madrid twice came from behind.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Aleix Febas fired the hosts ahead before Dean Huijsen levelled for the league leaders, with Bellingham stabbing home from close range after Alvaro Rodriguez blasted Elche back in front.
Barcelona cut Madrid’s lead by two points over the weekend after they thrashed Athletic Bilbao 4-0 on Saturday in their first match back at Camp Nou.
Alonso afforded Rodrygo Goes a rare start as part of the attack, while benching Vinicius Junior. The coach also gave Trent Alexander-Arnold his first start since August.
The England international missed several weeks injured and is yet to find form following his summer switch from Liverpool.
Alexander-Arnold was also partly to blame for Febas’s goal, with the midfielder sneaking in behind him to break the deadlock in the second half.
Forward Alvaro Rodriguez, third from right, scores his team’s second goal in the 84th minute to put Elche ahead of Real Madrid 2-1 [Alberto Saiz/AP]
Elche sets the tone
Elche impressed against Barcelona a few weeks ago and gave Madrid a tough night at the Martinez Valero stadium.
Madrid goalkeeper Thibaut Courtois made a fine early save to deny Andre da Silva after Hector Fort teed him up.
The forward was involved in an unfortunate incident earlier in the day at Real Madrid’s annual general meeting, when Los Blancos displayed his photograph by accident in a tribute to former Liverpool striker Diogo Jota and his brother Andre Silva, who both died in a car crash in July.
Former Barca goalkeeper Inaki Pena denied Kylian Mbappe after the French forward broke through on goal and then stopped the French superstar’s volley in Madrid’s best chance of the first half.
Elche stunned Madrid early in the second half with a slick move to take the lead.
German Valera’s superb backheel allowed Febas to dart behind Alexander-Arnold and squeeze a shot across the goal, past Courtois and in off the post.
Alonso responded by sending on Vinicius Jr and then young striker Gonzalo Garcia. Alexander-Arnold earned some redemption with his contribution to Madrid’s equaliser.
His cross was deflected against his own crossbar by a defender and behind for a corner. Alexander-Arnold whipped it in and Bellingham flicked it on into Huijsen’s path to bash home.
Elche took the lead again when Rodriguez caught out Courtois with a powerful drive from the edge of the box.
However, three minutes later Madrid equalised for a second time, with Mbappe only just keeping the ball in for Bellingham to convert from point-blank range.
The England midfielder was in the spotlight back home earlier in the week after he was unhappy to be taken off by national team coach Thomas Tuchel.
Bellingham was not at his best against Elche but was involved in both Madrid goals, highlighting his game-changing ability in the box even when otherwise quiet.
Real Madrid’s Bellingham scores in the 87th minute to level the contest at 2-2 [Angel Martinez/Getty Images]
Star forward Lionel Messi played a part in all four goals as Inter Miami moved on to the MLS Eastern Conference finals.
Published On 24 Nov 202524 Nov 2025
Share
Tadeo Allende scored a second-half brace, Lionel Messi scored and picked up three assists and Inter Miami pulled away a 4-0 victory over Cincinnati in Sunday’s Major League Soccer (MLS) Eastern Conference semifinal.
Mateo Silvetti, 19, also had a goal and an assist for No 3 seed Miami, which continues its deepest MLS Cup Playoff run in club history by advancing to its first East final. It will host No 5 seed New York City FC, which shut out top-seeded Philadelphia Union 1-0 on Sunday night.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Cincinnati was eliminated in a home match for a third consecutive postseason while falling a match short of reaching its second East final.
Miami’s second consecutive 4-0 playoff win – after earning a home victory over Nashville in the decisive game of the round one series two weeks ago – came as manager Javier Mascherano decided not to return key striker Luis Suarez to the starting lineup.
Suarez, who was previously Messi’s longtime teammate at Barcelona, served a red-card suspension in the final Nashville match, but had 10 goals and 10 assists in the regular season.
But Messi and a more youthful Miami front four have appeared to reach another level over the last 180 minutes.
Messi has six goals and six assists this postseason – contributing to every single Miami tally – after he scored 29 goals and added 19 assists during what is likely to be a second consecutive MLS MVP-winning regular season.
Messi, right, scores Miami’s first goal as Cincinnati goalkeeper Roman Celentano, third from left, tries to defend during the first half of their Eastern Conference semifinal [Tanner Pearson/AP]
Messi dominates East semifinal
On Sunday, Messi scored his goal in the 19th minute during what was an evenly poised opening to the match.
Jodi Alba created the opportunity when he stepped forward from his left back position to intercept a Cincinnati pass and create a transition opportunity.
Eventually, Silvetti got the ball in space on the left and delivered an outswinging cross that Messi met in stride with a firm header past goalkeeper Roman Celentano.
Silvetti doubled Miami’s lead in the 57th minute on a sequence that began from a throw-in on the right. Allende did extremely well to receive the throw, then turn his body quickly to elude a defender and spot Messi in space near the penalty arc. Messi kept the ball moving right to left with a layoff into Silvetti’s path, who dispatched an excellent curling finish beyond Celentano and inside the far right post.
Allende added his brace in the 62nd and 74th minutes, both on transition opportunities. Messi took the ball off Evander on the first to create the break, and the final through ball on both.
Liverpool captain Virgil van Dijk said after Saturday’s loss that “everyone in the team has to take responsibility” and with Slot’s team mustering just one win in their past seven league matches, the shadow of his predecessor is beginning to loom over the Dutchman.
“I think Slot’s got a big job to get them back playing and winning,” said Rooney.
“The big thing is when he has a run of results like this, Klopp’s name keeps getting brought up.
“It’s a bit like the presence with Sir Alex Ferguson. For instance, when David Moyes came in [at Manchester United] and [Louis] Van Gaal, Fergie’s name would always get brought up.
“With Slot, Klopp keeps getting brought up. ‘He’s not Jurgen Klopp, he’s not as good as Jurgen Klopp’.
“But I think the Liverpool fans just need to move away from that and get behind him.”
When South Africa opens the 2025 G20 Summit on November 22nd in Cape Town, the meeting will not simply be another high-level diplomatic gathering. It will be a test of what global leadership looks like in an era defined by debt crises, climate shocks, and geopolitical fragmentation. It will also be a summit shaped as much by who is present as by who is absent.
For the first time since leaders began to regularly attend the G20, the United States is not expected to attend at the presidential level. That absence will hang heavily over a summit built around three themes that South Africa has placed at the core of its G20 hosting: solidarity, equality, and sustainability. This is not symbolic branding. These are principles that directly challenge the structure and priorities of the current international system and America’s decision not to participate will only magnify their political weight.
South Africa’s Vision for a More Equal Order
South Africa has been clear about what it wants this G20 to represent. The country’s diplomats have framed the summit as an opportunity to “rebalance global governance” and restore trust between advanced economies and the Global South. That begins with solidarity, not as a moral appeal but as a practical necessity in a world where the gaps in competition are tightening across virtually every sector.
South African officials have emphasized that the world is too interconnected, through supply chains, energy markets, debt exposures, and climate shocks, for any nation to pursue growth alone. Solidarity, in their framing, means shared responsibility for global risks and shared input into global rules.
Expect to see debt restructuring as a key component of the weekend. Dozens of low and middle-income countries are approaching insolvency. Many see the G20 as the only venue capable of compelling creditors, including China, Western banks, and the IMF to negotiate jointly. South Africa intends to push for more predictable mechanisms, faster timelines, and deeper reductions of overall debt.
The theme of equality is expected to be even more pointed. Pretoria has argued that the international financial system remains structurally biased. Voting power at the IMF does not reflect modern economic reality. Climate finance packages distribute risk upward and accountability downward. Supply chain standards reflect the priorities of wealthy states far more than those of producing states.
South Africa wants this summit to pressure advanced economies to move beyond incrementalism and to recognize developing nations as cooperators, not beneficiaries, of global economic design.
Sustainability as an Economic Imperative
As noted in the central theme of the summit, sustainability is the key talking point of the weekend. South Africa is expected to focus on climate adaptation financing, food security resilience, renewable infrastructure gaps, green industrialization, and the economic displacement climate change is already causing.
Pretoria’s message is blunt: sustainability is not the environmental chapter of the global economy, it is the global economy. The safeguards nations build today will determine whether their populations can withstand the shocks of the coming decade.
The Symbolism of America’s Absence
While the summit’s themes are forward-looking, the headlines thus far are dominated by one glaring issue; The United States is boycotting the event, and not sending a single delegate.
This absence is certainly meant to be received as a bold statement. In a moment when most of the global agenda is being rewritten around solidarity, shared burdens, debt relief, and climate vulnerability, the United States is choosing not to stand at the table.
Many delegations will read this as confirmation of what they already suspected: that the U.S. is prioritizing bilateral leverage and transactional deals over multilateral governance. In other words, America is choosing power over partnership.
That decision will have ripple effects. If Washington is not present to influence the language of solidarity or the scope of sustainability targets, other powers will be. The U.S. forfeits not only visibility, but the ability to shape norms that will define the next phase of global cooperation. The strongman tactic will prove less effective as the world continues to accelerate towards a multipolar world, as opposed to a unipolar order where D.C. stands above the rest.
China and India Eager to Fill the Vacuum
China is expected to enter the summit with a confident posture, despite Xi Jinping not attending. Beijing has spent the past several years positioning itself as the Global South’s premier development partner. A G20 centered around equality and solidarity aligns perfectly with China’s messaging: that it represents a more inclusive, less conditional model of global cooperation. This message will be even more prominent with an absentee America. To capitalize on the overall theme of moving away from Western dominated structures, it would be reasonable to assume that many lending systems denominated in the Yuan will be discussed on the sidelines.
India, meanwhile, will frame itself as the democratic partner of choice for developing economies. Expect New Delhi to emphasize supply chain diversification, digital equality, and climate-resilient infrastructure. India will also push for greater representation of Global South nations in multilateral institutions, a message that will resonate strongly in Africa and Southeast Asia.
Europe Attempts to Lead
European leaders will arrive prepared to engage deeply on sustainability and climate finance, but without Washington their influence will be limited. Europe cannot match America’s financial firepower nor China’s development machinery.
While Europeans tend to embrace the rhetoric of solidarity, they remain cautious about large-scale debt forgiveness, new climate financing mandates, and reforms that would dilute their institutional voting power. That tension prevents Europe from presenting itself as the natural successor to U.S. leadership, but rather an extension of it in the eyes of many developing nations.
A Summit That Signals a Changing Global Order
If South Africa succeeds in shaping the weekend around solidarity, equality, and sustainability, the summit could represent the most significant shift in G20 philosophy since its creation.
Tomorrow’s G20 will not be remembered for dramatic breakthroughs. It will be remembered for something subtler but more consequential; a turning point in global governance where the United States stepped back and the rest of the world showed it could step forward.
Move comes as a growing number of countries are rolling out measures to limit children’s exposure to digital platforms.
Published On 24 Nov 202524 Nov 2025
Share
Malaysia plans to ban social media for users under the age of 16 starting from next year, joining a growing list of countries choosing to limit access to digital platforms due to concerns about child safety.
Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil said on Sunday the government was reviewing mechanisms used to impose age restrictions for social media use in Australia and other nations, citing a need to protect youths from online harms such as cyberbullying, financial scams and child sexual abuse.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
“We hope by next year that social media platforms will comply with the government’s decision to bar those under the age of 16 from opening user accounts,” he told reporters, according to a video of his remarks posted online by local daily The Star.
The effects of social media on children’s health and safety have become a growing global concern, with companies including TikTok, Snapchat, Google and Meta Platforms – the operator of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp – facing lawsuits in the United States for their role in driving a mental health crisis.
In Australia, social media platforms are poised to deactivate accounts registered to users younger than 16 next month, under a sweeping ban for teenagers that is being closely watched by regulators around the world.
France, Spain, Italy, Denmark and Greece are also jointly testing a template for an age verification app.
Malaysia’s neighbour Indonesia said in January it planned to set a minimum age for social media users, but later issued a less stringent regulation requiring tech platforms to filter negative content and impose stronger age verification measures.
Malaysia has put social media companies under greater scrutiny in recent years in response to what it claims to be a rise in harmful content, including online gambling and posts related to race, religion and royalty.
Platforms and messaging services with more than eight million users in Malaysia are now required to obtain a license under a new regulation that came into effect in January.
The United States and Ukraine have announced a revised framework for ending the Russia-Ukraine war after an earlier proposal by Washington drew criticism for being too favourable to Moscow.
US and Ukrainian officials said on Sunday that they agreed that any deal to end Russia’s war should “fully uphold” Ukraine’s sovereignty as they unveiled an “updated and refined peace framework” that was scant on details.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
“Both sides agreed the consultations were highly productive. The discussions showed meaningful progress toward aligning positions and identifying clear next steps,” officials said in a joint statement following talks in Geneva, adding that the sides agreed on the need for a “sustainable and just peace”.
Washington and Kyiv also reiterated their readiness to keep working together to “secure a peace that ensures Ukraine’s security, stability, and reconstruction”, the joint statement said.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier on Sunday said the sides had made “tremendous” progress during the talks, though their joint statement offered no specifics for resolving the many thorny points of contention between Moscow and Kyiv.
Rubio said negotiators had made some changes to US President Donald Trump’s 28-point peace plan, including around the role of NATO, to narrow the differences between the sides.
“I can tell you that the items that remain open are not insurmountable. We just need more time than what we have today. I honestly believe we’ll get there,” Rubio told reporters at the US mission in Geneva.
Rubio declined to go into specifics about the amendments to the draft proposal, including whether Kyiv had agreed to compromise on key Russian demands, such as territorial concessions.
“But I can tell you, I guess, that I feel very optimistic that we can get something done here because we made a tremendous amount of progress today,” Rubio said.
Rubio’s cautiously optimistic remarks came after Trump, who has given Ukraine until Thursday to accept his 28-point plan, had earlier accused Kyiv of being insufficiently grateful for his administration’s assistance.
“UKRAINE ‘LEADERSHIP’ HAS EXPRESSED ZERO GRATITUDE FOR OUR EFFORTS, AND EUROPE CONTINUES TO BUY OIL FROM RUSSIA,” Trump posted on his social media site, Truth Social.
Shortly after Trump’s comments, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on X that he was grateful to the US and “personally to President Trump” for Washington’s assistance in repelling Moscow’s invasion.
Trump’s leaked blueprint for ending the war has caused consternation in Kyiv and European capitals due to its alignment with many of Moscow’s hardline demands, including that Ukraine limit the size of its military and give up Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk.
Zelenskyy said in a sombre national address last week that the plan put Ukraine in the position of having to choose between “losing dignity” or “losing a key partner”.
European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said on Sunday that any peace plan needed to respect Ukraine’s freedom to “choose its own destiny,” including to join the bloc.
“It starts with the country’s reconstruction, its integration into our Single Market and our defence industrial base, and ultimately, joining our Union,” von der Leyen said in a statement.
Asked whether a deal could be reached by Trump’s Thursday deadline, Rubio said “we want to get this done as soon as possible”.
“Obviously, we would love it to be Thursday,” he said.
Rubio said the peace plan was a “living, breathing document” and would continue to change.
The top US diplomat also said the deal would need to be presented to Moscow for its approval.
“Obviously, the Russians get a vote here,” he said.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday that Trump’s plan could form the basis for a final peace settlement, but warned that Moscow would advance further into Ukrainian territory if Kyiv refused to negotiate.
Budget week is upon us and many of Monday’s papers focus on Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s upcoming statement on Wednesday. The Metro writes that repeated leaks in the build-up to the Budget have damaged the economy. It quotes Bank of England chief economist Andy Haldane as saying there is “paralysis among businesses and consumers” due to a flurry of reports about its contents in recent weeks.
The Daily Express says pensioners will “lose £800 a year” if the Chancellor does not lift income tax thresholds. The paper reports that Reeves is expected to keep the tax-free allowance at its current level until 2030, extending a freeze first introduced by the previous Conservatives government and is due to expire in 2028. That would mean some people on state pensions being forecast to pay tax on part of their pension when the allowance increases as expected next year.
The Mirror leads with a poll suggesting some want Reeves to “hit the super-rich in her autumn budget”. The Labour-supporting paper reports on a poll conducted by centre-left campaign group 38 Degrees, which indicates that “64% of voters back tax hikes on wealth”.
The Chancellor is “set to target universities” in the Budget according to the i Newspaper. Plans to raise international student fees to fund “grants for poorer British students” have been floated ahead of the statement, the paper says.
The Daily Telegraph says £15bn in extra welfare spending will be included in the Budget, which leads with reports Reeves plans to scrap the two-child benefit cap and confirm increases to other benefits and pensions. The proposals will be “funded by a tax raid on the middle classes”, the paper reports, referring to an expected extensions to the thresholds freeze.
The Times reports that the chancellor plans to “hit more than 100,000 of Britain’s most expensive properties with a surcharge worth an average of £4,500”. The property tax was initially slated to apply to properties worth at least £1.5 million, but the Treasury is now looking at a £2 million threshold, according to the paper, due to concerns it could have impacted people who are “asset rich but cash poor”.
The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) says businesses face “death by a thousand taxes”, the Independent reports. It refers to comments made by the group’s director, Rain Newtown-Smith, who said the “UK risks a Groundhog Day scenario in which politics is more important than growth”.
Meanwhile, the Financial Times leads with the latest on US efforts to mediate a deal between Ukraine and Russia to end the war. It focuses on comments by Donald Trump, who said Kyiv had shown “zero gratitude” to Washington. However, the White House later said the Geneva talks had been a success and there had been progress.
The Guardians claims the BBC is planning to “overhaul the way it investigates editorial concerns”. It says the broadcaster will create a new deputy director general as part of its response to a row which saw two of its most senior leaders quit this month. The BBC has not commented on the Guardian’s story.
The Daily Mail leads on Lord David Cameron’s revelation that he was diagnosed with and successfully treated for prostate cancer in 2022. The paper says the former prime minister was initially encouraged by his wife Samantha Cameron to get a prostate test after listening to a BBC radio interview. Lord Cameron now supports “targeted screening”, the paper says.
Strictly Come Dancing’s Shirley Ballas “almost died” after choking on a fishbone moments before Saturday’s live show, the Sun reports. The paper says the 65-year-old “struggled to breathe for 20 minutes backstage in Blackpool”.
And finally, the Daily Star continues its campaign for viewers to get behind former model Kelly Brooks on I’m a Celebrity… Get Me Out of Here.
