conflict

Bomber and several fighters detonate explosives-laden vehicle near security post in Bannu, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, near Afghanistan.

A car bombing at ⁠a police post followed by an intense firefight has killed at least three officers ⁠in northwestern Pakistan, according to police and security sources.

The attack took place in Bannu, a district in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province bordering Afghanistan, late on Saturday.

Police official Zahid Khan told The Associated Press that a suicide bomber and several fighters detonated an explosives-laden vehicle near a security post. Shortly after, multiple explosions were heard and the security post collapsed from the impact of the blast, he said.

Pakistan’s Dawn reported that nearby civilian areas also suffered severe damage due to the blasts, and two civilians were injured.

The Reuters news agency, citing security officials, reported that after the bombing, there was an ambush on police personnel rushing ⁠to the scene to provide backup.

Police official Sajjad Khan told Reuters that more casualties were feared. He added that fighting was ongoing and the extent of the damage would only be known once ‌the operation was over.

Police sources told Reuters ⁠the aggressors also used drones in the attack.

Ambulances from ⁠rescue agencies and civil hospitals were dispatched to the scene, with officials saying a state of emergency has been declared in government hospitals in Bannu.

No group immediately claimed responsibility. However, such attacks have the potential to reignite fighting along Pakistan’s border ⁠with Afghanistan.

The worst fighting in years erupted ⁠between the allies-turned-foes in February, with Pakistani air strikes inside Afghanistan that Islamabad said targeted fighters’ strongholds.

Fighting has since eased, with occasional skirmishes breaking out along the border, but no official ceasefire ‌has been brokered.

Islamabad blames Kabul for harbouring armed groups who use Afghan soil to plot attacks in Pakistan. The Taliban has denied the allegations and ‌said ‌militancy in Pakistan is an internal problem.

The Pakistan Taliban, known as Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), and allied fighter groups have carried out similar attacks in the past. The Pakistan Taliban is a separate group but is often aligned with the Afghan Taliban, who seized power in Afghanistan in 2021.

In the occupied West Bank, a marathon is a political statement. Palestinians ran alongside the separation wall today, a structure that cuts them off from their land, their families, and even the sea. Al Jazeera’s @leila.shw reports from Bethlehem.

Zawiya refinery shut down in ‘precautionary measure’ as emergency declared following explosions and gunfire nearby.

Libya’s largest operational oil refinery at Zawiya has been shut down and ‌an emergency declared following fighting between armed groups nearby.

The National Oil Corporation (NOC) and Zawiya Refining Company announced a “precautionary halt” to operations and evacuated employees from the oil complex and port.

NOC confirmed the safety of all employees and added that fuel supplies would continue as normal.

A Facebook statement said alarm sirens were activated “following armed clashes involving heavy weapons that erupted around the oil complex in the early hours of Friday”.

“These clashes resulted in several heavy weapons projectiles landing in various locations within the oil complex,” adding that no significant damage had been reported.

“However, the clashes have intensified and reached the residential area adjacent to the refinery, making the area a direct target for heavy shelling and significantly increasing the risk of further damage,” it said.

Authorities in Zawiya, west of the capital Tripoli, said they had launched a “large-scale operation” against criminal groups, as fighting and explosions were heard, the AFP news agency reported.

The operation targeted “criminal hideouts and wanted individuals” who were “involved in serious acts”, the authorities said, citing “murder and attempted murder, kidnapping and extortion, drug, arms and human trafficking and illegal migration”.

Videos verified by Al Jazeera showed explosions and gunfire, as well as damage to several cars and facilities inside the refinery. The sound of sirens was audible after shells fell inside operational sites.

The Zawiya Refining Company called on all parties to cease fire immediately and for the Libyan authorities to intervene to protect lives and key facilities.

The refinery, around 40km (25 miles) west of Tripoli, has a capacity of 120,000 barrels per day. It is connected to the 300,000 ⁠bpd Sharara oilfield.

Since Muammar Gaddafi’s downfall in 2011, Libya has been plagued by violence between the Tripoli-based Government of National Unity (GNU), led by Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah, and the eastern-based government, led by military leader Khalifa Haftar which is not internationally recognised.

It is unclear what caused the fighting, but local media said it started following a security operation against armed groups.

Preah Vihear/Siem Reap provinces – When asked how she spends her day, 11-year-old Sokna rattled off a list of chores.

She first fetches water, then washes dishes and sweeps the leaves and dust from around the blue tarpaulin tent her family now calls home, in the grounds of a Buddhist pagoda in northwestern Cambodia.

Sokna and her sister have stopped attending school, their mother Puth Reen said, since moving to this camp for people displaced by the recent rounds of fighting between Thailand and Cambodia.

The two sisters are among more than 34,440 people who remain in displacement camps in Cambodia – 11,355 of whom are children – as of this month, according to the country’s Ministry of Interior.

“I tried to tell them to go to school, but they don’t go,” Puth Reen told Al Jazeera, explaining how precarious life had become since returning to live in Cambodia after fleeing neighbouring Thailand, where she had worked for many years, as the fighting started.

Like Puth Reen and her family, the future looks murky for the tens of thousands of Cambodians – including many schoolchildren – who are still in displacement camps, and their lives remain disrupted months after the last outbreak of fighting between Thailand and Cambodia.

Forced to flee their homes in areas where local troops are now stationed and on high alert, or in areas occupied by opposing Thai forces, Cambodia’s internally displaced say they are surviving off aid donations, while those more fortunate are transitioning from emergency tents into wooden stilted houses provided by the Cambodian government.

But with tension still evident between the leadership in Bangkok and Phnom Penh, the tenuous ceasefire along the Thai-Cambodia border means life cannot yet return to normality.

Some areas on the Cambodian border, such as the villages of Chouk Chey and Prey Chan in Banteay Meanchey province, have become rallying points for nationalists who post on social media about the Thai occupation of Cambodian territory. Their anger is directed at the large shipping containers and barbed wire that Thai forces have used to block access to villages once inhabited by Cambodians and occupied during fighting.

The Thai military-installed containers now form a sort of new frontier between the two countries.

The Cambodian military has also prevented people, such as local farmer Sun Reth, 67, from returning to their homes in front-line areas, which are still highly militarised zones, with troops ready at any moment for a new round of fighting.

“Now the Cambodian military base is just next to [my house],” Sun Reth said, adding that she was not allowed by authorities to sleep in her modest home or pick cashew nuts from her farm to sell for a little income.

Cambodian children more focused on ‘rumours’ of war

The long-held border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia erupted into two rounds of conflict last year, over five days in July and almost three weeks in December.

Dozens were reported killed on both sides, and hundreds of thousands of civilians fled their homes as both countries’ armed forces fired artillery, rockets, and, in the case of Thailand, conducted air strikes deep into Cambodian territory. Thailand has a modern air force, a military capability not possessed by its smaller neighbour.

Cambodian and Thai officials reached a ceasefire on December 27, but the situation remains tense five months on.

For families who fled the fighting, school continues for most children in the displacement camps, but parents say education is fragmented while their lives are still so unsettled.

Mothers at the Wat Bak Kam camp for the displaced in Preah Vihear province told Al Jazeera that primary school students can join classes at a local school, but high school students need to travel daily to the provincial capital, about 15km (9 miles) away.

Now the rising cost of petrol, due to the US-Israel war on Iran, has made it even harder for teenaged students, who have access to motorcycles, to make the journey to school.

Kinmai Phum, technical lead for WorldVision’s education programme, which is providing support to the camps, said school dropout rates and children skipping classes have increased substantially among students from the displaced border regions.

Kinmai Phum said the situation is a perfect storm of problems: Displaced families have been forced to move around for shelters, schools and temporary learning spaces lack facilities, and some students have psychological trauma due to the conflict.

“Local authorities [are] concerned that many children may not return to school at all if displacement and economic hardship persist,” Kinmai Phum said.

Yuon Phally, a mother of two, said she had noticed the impact of the war on her daughter and son, who are in their first and third years in primary school.

When they return from school, Yuon Phally said, they tell her about rumours they had heard about Cambodia and Thailand resuming fighting.

“Their feeling is not fully focused on school; they focus more on these rumours,” she said.

Her children’s world was more impacted by the conflict because their father is a soldier stationed in the Mom Bei area of the border.

During the fighting in December, Yuon Phally said she could not convince her children to go to school because they all waited to see if their father would call on a mobile phone from the front line.

“I couldn’t hold back my tears, and that added more pressure onto my kids,” she said.

“They would ask about their dad and how he is doing now. Then they told me to eat rice. They understood my feelings.”

She said her children’s focus on their studies only improved after their father returned from fighting to the camp where they are staying, to rest and recover from sickness and injuries sustained in battle.

‘Who doesn’t want to have peace?’

Soeum Sokhem, a deputy village chief, told Al Jazeera how his home is located in the militarised “danger zone” along the border, but he feels compelled to return every few days to check on his house, tend crops, sleep an occasional night, and check in with other neighbours doing the same.

“I can’t just stay here”, he said of camp life.

“I have to go back.”

When asked how he felt about the border war, Soeum Sokhem said he had experienced so much war in Cambodia that he did not know how to describe his “inner feeling like I really want to”.

He then listed off all the conflicts he had lived through in Cambodia since the 1960s: The spill over into Cambodia from the US war in neighbouring Vietnam; the US bombing campaign in Cambodia; the genocidal Khmer Rouge regime, and the civil war that followed after Vietnam’s intervention to topple the regime’s leader Pol Pot in 1979, and which lasted until the mid-1990s.

Then in the 2000s, sporadic border fights with Thailand began, he said.

Cambodia’s contemporary history has been anything but peaceful, a fact which might explain why the current Cambodian government so often speaks of peace. Government buildings and billboards proclaim the government’s unofficial motto: “Thanks for peace.”

“But who doesn’t want to have peace?” Soeum Sokhem said, after charting his life and the many conflicts he had lived through.

Now the 67-year-old said he once again hears gunfire occasionally when he returns to check on his home on the front line.

“Before, when I walked there, it was normal,” he said.

“But nowadays, I walk with fear when going back there.”

Israeli attacks killed at least 31 people in southern Lebanon on Friday, including a rescue worker, Lebanon’s official National News Agency said.

Nayef Samaro, 26, left work in Nablus to run errands for his wife, who was hours away from delivering their first son by C-section. He was excited, despite the Israeli army raiding his city.

An Israeli soldier shot Nayef in the head, leaving him to bleed out in the street. He never saw his son.

Talks between Lebanese and Israeli delegations to be held in Washington, DC, next week, the official tells Al Jazeera.

The United States is trying to de-escalate Israel’s actions in Lebanon as it pushes for solidifying an ongoing ceasefire and moving to the next phase of negotiations between the two sides, according to a Lebanese official.

The official, who spoke to Al Jazeera Arabic on condition of anonymity, revealed on Thursday the details of the planned second stage of negotiations between Israel and Lebanon after an initial round in Washington, DC, in mid-April, which led to the current status quo of a ceasefire being declared but attacks continuing.

Delegation-level negotiations will begin on May 17 in the US capital, the official said, adding that the talks will address both security and political tracks to resolve issues of a full Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon, borders, prisoners, displaced people and reconstruction.

The Reuters and AFP news agencies, both quoting an unnamed State Department official on Thursday, reported that the upcoming talks are due to be held May 14 and 15.

Israel continued to pound southern Lebanon on Thursday, killing one person and injuring several, according to Lebanese state-run media, a day after it targeted a commander of Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force in the southern suburbs of Beirut.

The strikes put pressure on the Lebanon ceasefire, which emerged in parallel with a US-Iran truce in the wider war in the Middle East. A halt to Israeli strikes in Lebanon is a key Iranian demand in Tehran’s negotiations with Washington.

No peace agreement: Official

The Lebanese official told Al Jazeera that the country’s presidency has been seeking to discuss a final cessation of hostilities with Israel.

The expected step before May 17 is an extension of the truce and an Israeli commitment to a ceasefire, the official said, adding that the recent attack on Beirut’s southern suburbs was an Israeli message intended to obstruct the negotiation process.

Lebanon is not moving towards signing a peace agreement but towards a nonaggression pact, the official said.

The Lebanon ceasefire, announced on April 16 by US President Donald Trump, has led to a reduction in hostilities. The Beirut area, for example, was not struck by Israel for weeks before Wednesday’s attack.

However, since it went into effect, Israel and Hezbollah have traded accusations of violating the ceasefire in other areas, particularly in southern Lebanon.

More than 2,700 people have been killed in the war in Lebanon since March 2, Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health said. About 1.2 million people have been driven from their homes in Lebanon, many of them fleeing from southern Lebanon.

Israel has announced 17 soldiers have been killed in southern Lebanon along with two civilians in northern Israel.

Maryam watched her goats starve and her crops fail. She buried two of her children before she finally gave up hope and sought help from international aid agencies in southern Somalia.

She left her village with her remaining six children, making the long journey along the Jubba River to one of a clutch of makeshift settlements on the outskirts of Kismayo, the capital of Somalia’s Jubbaland state.

Three consecutive seasons of failed rains have doubled Somalia’s malnutrition rate. Maryam, 46, is among more than 300,000 Somalis forced to leave their homes since January alone.

Several international organisations have stopped operations in the Kismayo camp for internally displaced people (IDPs), largely due to aid cuts ordered by United States President Donald Trump last year.

“We are hungry. We need care and help,” said Maryam.

Haunted by the memory of her dead children’s swollen bellies, she says she will not return to her village, which is under the control of the al-Qaeda-linked armed group al-Shabab. Fighters there have started seizing the limited food supplies available.

But the camp is hardly better. In March alone, five children died of malnutrition, its manager says.

Since the early 1990s, Somalia has endured near-constant civil war, armed rebellions, floods and droughts. The war-torn country ranks among the world’s most vulnerable to climate change, which scientists say is leading to more frequent and more intense episodes of extreme weather such as droughts and floods.

Africa, which contributes the least to global warming, bears the brunt.

The recent cuts in foreign aid have not helped. They have had “a huge impact on our work”, said Mohamud Mohamed Hassan, Somalia director for NGO Save the Children.

More than 200 health centres and 400 schools have closed since last year.

Farmers, whose herds and crops have been decimated, describe one of the worst droughts ever recorded in a country where a third of the population already lacked regular meals. Even if the forthcoming rainy season is normal, it will take months for affected populations to recover.

“We cannot afford to actually address all the needs of these people,” said Ali Adan Ali, a Jubbaland official managing the displaced.

At a mobile health clinic supported by Save the Children, the only one still operating for multiple camps in the area around Kismayo, a woman named Khadija tried to feed a high-calorie solution to her severely malnourished one-year-old daughter.

She came to the camp after last year’s drought killed her livestock, but here also “we have nothing to eat”, the 45-year-old said.

A hospital in Kismayo is the only facility in the region capable of treating the most severe cases of malnutrition. But it is turning patients away due to a lack of space and staff.

Every bed is occupied by starving babies, some on ventilators with intravenous drips in their fragile arms. Cases have tripled since last year, and things are only getting worse.

The US-Israel war on Iran has increased fuel prices, affecting food and water supplies.

Those in the camp seek work in construction or cleaning jobs in Kismayo or sell firewood, but the options are limited.

Meanwhile, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has had to steadily reduce its Somalia programme from $2.6bn in 2023 to $852m this year, especially since Washington slashed its donations. So far, only 13 percent of this year’s target has been raised.

“It’s a toxic cocktail of factors … Things are really, really desperate,” Tom Fletcher, head of OCHA, told the AFP news agency in an interview last week.

“Often we’re having to choose which lives to save and which lives not to save.”

Police have arrested an anti-war protester after he ended a five-day sit-in atop Washington’s Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge. Guido Reichstadter, opposed to the war on Iran, started the protest to rally others into non-violent opposition.

Fighters attack ‘Africa’s Alcatraz’, which detains high-value prisoners, and disrupt crucial supply chains to the capital.

In a new wave of attacks in Mali, an al-Qaeda-linked group has stormed a main prison housing fighters from the armed group and set fire to trucks with food supplies heading to the capital Bamako.

Fighters from the Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM) group stormed the Kenieroba Central Prison, a recently built complex dubbed “Africa’s Alcatraz”, located about 60km (37 miles) southwest of Bamako, Al Jazeera’s Nicolas Haque reported on Wednesday.

The detention centre houses 2,500 prisoners, including at least 72 inmates considered “high value” by the Malian state, Haque said, adding that Malian armed forces were repelling the attack.

Among the prisoners are JNIM fighters and a number of people arrested following large-scale attacks last month by the group’s fighters and Tuareg separatists, the Azawad Liberation Front (FLA).

The fighters attacked several military bases across multiple cities, including areas where senior government officials live, and took control of the northern city of Kidal in a coordinated offensive on April 25 and April 26, which struck at the heart of the West African country’s military government.

One of those attacks killed Malian Defence Minister Sadio Camara and his family in their home in Kati, a garrison town near the capital. On Monday, the leader of the country’s military government, Assimi Goita, took on the role of defence minister. At least 23 others were also killed in the attacks.

Since then, “there has been a wave of arrests of former and current military officers, members of civil society, lawyers, members of the political opposition – all accused of colluding with al-Qaeda fighters,” said Haque, who has been reporting for years on and in Mali. He added that fighters linked to the armed group were also arrested.

Security sources told AFP news agency that opposition figures Mountaga Tall, Youssouf Daba Diawara, and Moussa Djire are among those “abducted”.

According to family members and security sources who spoke to the agency, Tall, a lawyer, was taken on May 2 in Bamako by hooded men on charges of plotting with opposition figures in the Senegalese capital, Dakar, to overthrow the military government. Since his arrest, Tall has been questioned at least once for “attempted destabilisation”.

The security sources said Diawara and Djire were suspected of links with, respectively, the influential imam Mahmoud Dicko and Oumar Mariko, two opposition figures in exile. At least two other civilians who are close to Mariko were also arrested following the attacks, a judicial source told AFP, without giving further details.

The military prosecutor’s office said on May 1 that it had “solid evidence” of the “complicity” of certain military personnel, accusing them of helping with the “planning, coordination and execution” of the attacks.

In a report published on Tuesday, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) said there have also been “gravely concerning reports of extrajudicial killings and abductions, allegedly carried out by members of the security forces” following the attacks.

The violence has set off fighting across Mali’s vast desert north, raising the prospect of significant gains by armed groups that have shown an increasing willingness to strike neighbouring countries.

JNIM has called on Malians to rise up against the government and transition to Islamic law. The group has also pledged to besiege Bamako, and on Friday, it had reportedly set up checkpoints around the city of four million.

Haque said the blockade has the potential to cause a humanitarian disaster.

“These are al-Qaeda fighters that have pointed 12.7mm machine guns on their motorbikes, stopping any outgoing or incoming traffic,” the correspondent said. “We have seen on social media these fighters stopping food trucks trying to enter the area. This blockade is not just affecting people living in Bamako; it’s affecting people throughout Mali.”

On May 3, the mayor of Diafarabe village, in the Mopti region, called on the authorities to act before people started dying of hunger, as the village had run out of food.

Deir el-Balah, Gaza Strip – With a weary expression, Saja arranges her few belongings inside the tent her fiance, Mohammed, has prepared for their wedding in just a few days.

There are two thin mattresses instead of a proper bed, a small cooking corner fashioned from wood and tarpaulin, and a makeshift bathroom that Mohammed also built from scraps of wood and plastic sheets.

The couple, Saja al-Masri, 22, and Mohammed Ahliwat, 27, got engaged a year ago while their families were displaced. They are still living in a camp in Deir el-Balah in central Gaza, forced into displacement by Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Saja agreed to a modest dowry, but even that will only be paid by Mohammed in instalments.

Yet even this “simple beginning” has become unbearably expensive for Mohammed and many young men in Gaza, who are expected to shoulder the majority of the costs in Palestinian culture when they get married.

“I bought the tent for 1,500 shekels [about $509], the wood cost me around 2,500 [about $850], the tarpaulins exceeded 2,000 [about $679], and a simple bathroom cost another 3,000 [about $1,019],” Mohammed tells Al Jazeera. Before the war, apartments had previously been available for rent for between $250 and $300 a month.

“It’s not enough that I’m starting my life in a tent under harsh conditions, even this is unbearably expensive,” adds Mohammed, who works odd jobs like selling bread and canned goods or repairing bicycles.

“Everything I earn barely covers food and water. I tried to save a little for the wedding, but prices are so high, as if I were preparing a luxurious event.”

Before the war, Mohammed lived in a large seven-storey house in Bureij in central Gaza, and owned a fully furnished 170-square-metre apartment.

“When I remember my apartment in our home that was destroyed in the war, I feel deep sorrow … My brothers and I each had fully prepared apartments before marriage.”

“We had stability, and we owned poultry farms that supplied several areas in Gaza,” he says bitterly. “Today, I’m getting married in a tent.”

As for the wedding venue, Mohammed rented a small space that had been used as a cafe, unable to afford a wedding hall.

“A friend helped me rent this small place … for 1,500 shekels [$509],” he says. “It’s not a small amount considering how simple the place is. Wedding halls cost more than 8,000 shekels [$2,717].”

Mohammed’s situation is not exceptional in Gaza. Many weddings are now held in tents, with only the most basic preparations, amid soaring prices and a collapse of basic living conditions brought on by the war and the accompanying economic crisis.

Unemployment in Gaza has reached 80 percent, according to the Gaza Ministry of Labour, and poverty rates have risen to 93 percent.

Incomplete preparations

Saja holds back her tears as she listens to her fiance.

What should have been the happiest moment of her life feels incomplete, and she has nothing to offer to ease Mohammed’s burden.

She understands the situation can’t be helped, and has tried to remain calm. But the difficulty in finding an affordable wedding dress broke her.

Dress shops have quoted her incredibly high prices to rent one – more than 2,000 shekels ($679) for one night.

“Everyone says crossings, goods, and coordination are expensive, so everything is overpriced,” Saja explains.

In an attempt to solve this, Mohammed brought a modest dress from an acquaintance “just to make the wedding happen”, placing her in what she describes as “a painful choice”.

“When I tried the dress yesterday, I felt so sad … I burst into tears. It was worn out, torn at the edges, and outdated,” Saja says, her voice breaking.

“I slept last night with tears on my cheeks … but there’s nothing we can do. This is what’s available.”

She points to the yearlong wait to have the wedding, after postponing it repeatedly because preparations were incomplete.

“The situation doesn’t improve … it only gets worse. Every time we say let’s wait, nothing changes. So we decided to get married next week,” says Saja, who studied graphic design for one year before the war forced her to stop.

Since then, she has been displaced with her family on a long journey that began in Beit Hanoon, in northern Gaza, passed through Gaza City, and ended in Deir el-Balah.

It’s not just the dress that worries her. Beauty salons charge nearly 700 shekels ($238) to prepare a bride.

“They tell us cosmetics are very expensive and unavailable, electricity and generators cost a lot, fuel is expensive … everything is expensive, and people like us are the ones who pay.”

“What did we do to deserve this?” she says.

No taste of joy

Saja’s mother, Samira al-Masri, 49, interrupts gently, trying to console her, saying the conditions are the same for everyone in Gaza, where the majority of Palestinians have been displaced from homes destroyed by Israel, and more than 72,000 have been killed since October 2023.

“I married off four of my daughters: Ilham, Doaa, Ameerah, and now Saja, during the war, without joy,” Samira says, her voice trembling.

“Each wedding felt like a tragedy to me.”

“They all started their married lives the same way … in tents, with almost nothing.”

Samira describes her deep sadness at being unable to celebrate her daughters properly or give them the wedding they dreamed of.

“As you can see, there aren’t enough clothes, no proper items for a bride … no suitable dress, not even a wardrobe or a bed,” she says, while helping Saja arrange her few belongings.

Mohammed adds that bedroom furniture now costs between 12,000 and 20,000 shekels ($4,076 and $6,793) – before the war, the sets had cost around 5,000 shekels.

“Unbelievable prices, and there’s barely any goods in the market. We settled for mattresses on the ground.”

No signs of improvement

In Gaza, weddings are no longer joyful occasions; they are painful experiences repeated over and over.

Despite her natural desire as a mother to celebrate her daughter and give her a dignified start, Samira finds herself powerless, unable even to ask more from the groom.

“The situation is not normal … I can’t pressure him or ask what he did or didn’t bring. Everyone knows the situation … we’re all living it.”

Her worries extend beyond her daughters to her 26-year-old son, who is approaching marriage.

“I put myself and my son in the groom’s place: What does he have? Nothing. The same situation. Every time I see the costs, I step back from arranging his marriage.”

Amid this reality, Samira expresses deep sorrow for young men and women trying to marry today.

“I pray God helps them … our days were much easier … even the simplest costs have become unaffordable.

As her marriage shifts from a moment of joy into a heavy confrontation with reality, Saja tries to hold herself together despite having no real options.

She admits it is not easy, but Mohammed’s presence next to her gives her strength.

“Sometimes, I feel it’s a miserable beginning … but when I see Mohammed with me, I overcome my sadness,” she says with a faint smile as she looks at her future husband.

There are few signs that circumstances will improve anytime soon for the couple. Still, they try to achieve a balance between harsh reality and fragile hope.

“I feel things will stay the same, as is written for us,” Saja says, “moving from one tent to another.”

As Israel faces growing international isolation over its regional wars, President Isaac Herzog is set to visit two countries in Central America – Panama and Costa Rica – to boost ties.

“President Herzog’s visit to Panama and Costa Rica reflects the importance of Israel’s ties with countries across Latin America and the renewed momentum in Israel’s relations with Central and South American nations,” a statement from the Israeli Foreign Ministry reads.

Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, which has prompted an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over alleged war crimes, has made it a source of growing opprobrium around the world.

But a handful of countries, most of them led by allies of United States President Donald Trump, have continued to tout their strong ties with Israel, which has sought to maintain those relationships via diplomatic outreach.

What will Herzog’s visit consist of, what will it seek to accomplish, and what can it tell us about Israel’s diplomatic goals in Latin America?

When will the trip take place?

The Israeli Foreign Ministry has said that President Herzog will depart Israel on May 6 for a four-day official visit to Panama and Costa Rica.

Where will Herzog visit, and who will he meet?

The Israeli president will visit Panama first, meeting with President Jose Raul Mulino and government officials before continuing to Costa Rica to attend the inauguration of President-elect Laura Fernandez Delgado.

Herzog was invited to attend the ceremony by the outgoing pro-Israel President Rodrigo Chaves Robles and will also attend a dinner for heads of state. He will also meet with members of the Jewish community in both countries.

What is the significance of a visit by an Israeli president to Panama?

The Israeli Foreign Ministry has said that the Israeli president’s visit to Panama is the “first in history” and will help bolster ties with a country that it calls a “true friend of Israel and a current member of the UN Security Council”.

The meeting between Herzog and Mulino will follow up on discussions on bilateral ties held by the two leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January.

Is the trip connected to Panama’s status at the UN?

As Israel faces growing isolation on the world stage, it has sought dependable allies at international fora such as the United Nations, and the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s statement notes Panama’s current two-year term as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council.

While votes in the UN General Assembly have often gone overwhelmingly against Israel in recent years, Panama and Costa Rica have been among those who have joined with Israel and the US or abstained from voting.

Panama and Costa Rica both abstained from a 2024 United Nations resolution calling on Israel to end its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory, and Panama was one of just 12 countries to abstain from a September vote in support of a two-state solution.

Herzog’s visit may be an effort to ensure that Panama remains an ally of Israel during its time on the UNSC.

What is Israel’s endgame for this regional tour?

While the United States is, by far, Israel’s most important ally, it has also celebrated partnerships with countries such as the United Arab Emirates in the Middle East and Argentinian President Javier Milei in South America.

Many of Israel’s allies are also close partners of the US, and some countries in Central America — many of them small states that depend on US support and trade — may see a closer partnership with Israel as a means of signalling their alignment with US interests.

Herzog’s visit will seek to strengthen those relationships, with the Foreign Ministry stating that the trip will bolster “strategic partnership between Israel and the countries and peoples of the region” and underscore the status of those countries as important allies.

Israel has celebrated previous steps deepening relations with countries in the region, including a free trade agreement it signed with Costa Rica in December, along with the opening of a trade office in Jerusalem, which Israel claims as its capital but is considered illegally occupied under international law.

The US Department of State expressed support for those agreements, stating that they would “deepen cooperation between Israel and Latin America, grounded in shared interests and real potential for prosperity”.

Is Israel trying to curtail the growing support for the Palestinian cause in Latin America?

Herzog’s trip may also seek to counter outspoken support for Palestine in Latin America, where leaders on the political left, such as Colombian President Gustavo Petro and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, have emerged as vocal critics of Israel.

President Lula recently condemned Israel’s seizure and detention of participants in a humanitarian aid flotilla bound for Gaza that included Brazilian national Thiago Avila, calling it an “unjustifiable action” that should be roundly condemned.

“The detention of the flotilla activists in international waters had already represented a serious affront to international law,” Lula said.

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says ceasefire with Iran remains in place despite growing tensions in the Strait of Hormuz.

Video from Gaza City shows flames rising after an Israeli strike targeted a group of civilians near Al-Jalaa Roundabout in the Al-Oyoun area in northern Gaza City.

The United States has transferred 22 crew members from the Iranian container ship, the Touska, to Pakistan, in what Islamabad describes as a “confidence-building measure” during tension in the Strait of Hormuz.

US Central Command (CENTCOM) spokesman, Captain Tim Hawkins, said the crew had been handed over for repatriation. Pakistan’s foreign ministry confirmed the transfer, saying the sailors would be returned to Iranian authorities.

The Touska was seized by US forces in the Gulf of Oman in the early hours of April 20, in what Tehran described as an act of “piracy”, after the US declared a naval blockade of Iranian ports. Iran had effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz following the start of the US-Israeli war on Iran.

On Monday, tensions continued to escalate in and around the Strait of Hormuz.

First, US President Donald Trump announced that US naval ships would help guide stranded vessels through the strait in an operation he dubbed “Project Freedom”.

Iran issued a new map of the strait with new boundaries further to the east, and warned shipping not to attempt to pass without coordinating with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Then, state media reported that two Iranian missiles struck a US naval vessel near Jask Island in the strait after ignoring warnings from the IRGC to turn back. Washington denied any attack.

Amid continued interceptions and seizures of vessels by both sides, questions remain over whether the two countries can de-escalate and reach a broader peace agreement. Pakistan has been central to these efforts, seeking to keep diplomatic channels open, but talks hosted in Islamabad last month ended without a breakthrough.

Iran’s foreign ministry says it is reviewing Washington’s response to its 14-point proposal aimed at ending the conflict sent via Pakistan on Friday. As Pakistan continues to mediate, Trump previously described Tehran’s offer as “unacceptable”.

What happened to the Touska?

The Iran-flagged Touska was seized by US forces in the Gulf of Oman, close to the Strait of Hormuz, on April 20 after Washington accused the crew of failing to comply with the US naval blockade on Iranian ports. Shortly after midnight local time in Iran, CENTCOM said the USS Spruance fired its 5-inch (127mm) deck gun at the vessel’s engine room, disabling it.

According to the US military, the ship was attempting to transit the Strait of Hormuz en route to Iran’s main commercial port, Bandar Abbas.

The Touska, a small container ship operated by the sanctioned Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL), was boarded near Iran’s Chabahar port. US Marines from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit captured the vessel after what CENTCOM said were repeated warnings over six hours.

Video released by the US military showed Marines descending from helicopters launched from the USS Tripoli and securing the Tusk.

Iran condemned the capture as a violation of international law and an act of “piracy“, before demanding the immediate release of the vessel and its crew.

What does the release of the Touska’s crew mean, diplomatically?

Pakistan has positioned itself as a mediator between Washington and Tehran, and is now framing the transfer of the Touska crew as a step towards de-escalation of tensions. In a statement, the Pakistani foreign ministry said the move reflected a “confidence-building measure” and reaffirmed its commitment to facilitating dialogue.

US and Iranian delegations met in Islamabad last month for their first talks since 1979. Although negotiations ended without a deal, they marked a rare moment of direct engagement.

Pakistan has since coordinated with regional powers, including Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, Qatar and Egypt, while maintaining close communications with China, in an effort to build broader support for de-escalation.

In a call with Iran’s Foreign Minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, on Monday, Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister, Ishaq Dar, reiterated that diplomacy remains the only viable path to stability. Tehran, in turn, acknowledged Islamabad’s mediation efforts.

Will this de-escalate tensions in the Strait of Hormuz?

There are not many signs that it will.

Indeed, tensions in the Strait of Hormuz have continued to increase despite the release of the crew members.

Most notably, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard published a new map on Monday outlining what it claims is an expanded zone of control in the waterway, stretching from Iranian and Omani territory to include the territorial waters of the United Arab Emirates as well.

Analysts say this new claim exceeds internationally recognised boundaries. The UAE has accused Iran of launching drones at an oil tanker linked to Abu Dhabi’s national energy company, while Washington has dismissed Iranian reports of an attack on a US warship as false.

Military analyst Alexandru Hudisteanu, a maritime security expert who served 13 years in the Romanian navy, told Al Jazeera on Monday that the conflicting claims reflect a broader test of resolve. “Any attempt to open the strait will likely be met with resistance from Iran,” he said, adding that Tehran views control of Hormuz as its primary leverage in negotiations.

Hudisteanu warned that the situation carries a high risk of miscalculation, with both sides continuing to operate in close proximity. For Iran, the Strait of Hormuz is the “only leverage” it has for peace negotiations, Hudisteanu said.

Iranian analyst Foad Izadi argued that the ceasefire effectively collapsed when the US imposed its blockade, which he described as “an act of war”. He added that the targeting and seizure of ships along the Strait of Hormuz further undermined any notion of a truce.

“Attacking an Iranian ship’s engine is an act of war as well,” he added, despite the release of the Touska’s crew signalling some short-term goodwill between the US and Iran.

“I have all the cards,” posted the White House on its X account on Sunday, alongside an image of President Donald Trump holding playing cards from the Uno game, in a message appearing to signal Washington’s confidence in its ongoing war on Iran.

Uno is a card game in which the winner is the first to get rid of all their cards.

The post came after Trump announced on his Truth Social platform that the US military would begin guiding ships stranded around the Strait of Hormuz by the war on Monday, in a sign that the conflict could further escalate, despite the near-month-long fragile ceasefire. Tehran has been effectively blocking nearly all shipping from the Gulf for more than two months, after the US and Israel attacked Iran two months ago, disrupting global energy supplies.

“We have told these countries that we will guide their ships safely out of these restricted waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business,” Trump said, dubbing the campaign “Project Freedom”. “They are merely neutral and innocent bystanders!”

The president added that US negotiators were engaged in “very positive discussions” with Tehran, which could lead to “something very positive” without further elaboration.

Iran, however, reacted by insisting that the security of the waterway was in the hands of its armed forces, and warned that “any safe passage and navigation in any situation” should be “carried out in coordination with the armed forces”.

On Monday, the Iranian Fars news agency reported that a US warship had been hit by two Iranian drones, the claim was denied by US Central Command.

So what leverage do the US and Iran hold over each other, and what happens next?

In response to Trump’s “I have all the cards” social media post, Iran’s Consulate General in Hyderabad, India, posted its own image on X.

“Yes, we have less cards,” Iran’s consulate in the Indian city of Hyderabad wrote on X, together with a photo of an Iranian military spokesperson holding four Uno cards compared to Trump’s five, pointing out that usually holding all the cards means you are losing, not winning, in the game of Uno.

In response to Trump’s “Project Freedom” declaration, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) warned that ships deemed to be in breach of its rules in the Strait of Hormuz “will be stopped by force”, while insisting there has been no change in how it manages traffic through the strategic waterway.

On Monday, it issued a new map of the Strait of Hormuz with boundaries extending further to the east than its previous one, and said any ship travelling between the two sides must coordinate with the IRGC first.

“There has been no change in the management process of the Strait of Hormuz,” spokesperson Sardar Mohebbi said, adding that vessels that comply with the “transit protocols issued by the IRGC Navy” will be “safe and secure”.

“Other maritime movements that are contrary to the declared principles of the IRGC Navy will face serious risks. Violating vessels will be stopped by force,” he said.

What leverage does the US have over Iran?

Sanctions

The United States’ most enduring source of leverage over Iran remains its sanctions regime, which was launched in 1979 when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini declared Iran an Islamic Republic.

Successive US administrations over the past 47 years have hit Tehran with a series of financial restrictions targeting Iran’s banking, oil exports and access to international markets – the US says the sanctions are a response to Iran’s nuclear programme.

Sanctions have significantly constrained Iran’s economy, limiting government revenue and contributing to inflation and currency depreciation. Measures enforced through the US Treasury also deter other countries and companies from engaging with Iran, further strangling its economy.

The economic pressure has been central to US strategy towards Iran, particularly during its attempts to force Tehran back to negotiations over its nuclear programme, under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Military power

Beyond economics, the US maintains overwhelming military superiority, especially air power. Aircraft carriers, long-range bombers and precision strike capabilities give Washington the ability to target Iranian infrastructure with relatively low risk to its own forces.

US bases across the Gulf, as well as military partnerships with regional allies – most notably Israel – reinforce this advantage.

American forces, together with the Israeli army, have killed more than 3,000 people, and struck thousands of sites across Iran in the current war, including Iran’s energy and nuclear sites.

Naval blockade

Since mid-April, the United States has enforced a widespread naval blockade of Iranian ports and ships. The operation began on April 13 after talks between Washington and Tehran collapsed, with US forces ordered to stop or divert vessels entering or leaving Iranian ports.

US forces have since intercepted or turned back dozens of ships, and seized a container ship, the Touska. On Monday, the US announced that its crew had been repatriated to Iran from Pakistan, where they were taken after their ship was captured in the Gulf of Oman last month.

According to Trump, the blockade is designed to choke Iran’s oil exports, its main revenue source.

US officials say the measures have severely disrupted Iran’s trade, which relies heavily on sea routes.

What leverage does Iran have?

Strait of Hormuz

The vital waterway is Iran’s most significant strategic asset, the narrow passage ships one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies in peacetime.

Tehran has effectively closed the strait since the war began on February 28, sending global oil and gas prices soaring and energy markets into turmoil. Iran has repeatedly demonstrated its ability to target shipping, seize vessels, or conduct military exercises, demonstrating its ability to close or restrict the strait.

The result is soaring energy prices globally, forcing many countries to implement severe austerity measures to soften the blow.

Last week in the US, the average price of a gallon (3.8 litres) of gasoline (petrol) rose to $4.30, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), up from less than $3 before the war.

Surging energy costs have driven up inflation and deepened economic uncertainty in the US, compounding Trump’s political troubles amid overwhelming disapproval for the war amongst Americans.

Even if the US does begin escorting ships through safely – the threat from mines or Iranian strikes may be enough to prevent tankers from attempting to sail, experts say. Insurance companies are also unlikely to underwrite voyages.

Regional allies

Iran’s network of allied groups across the Middle East is another asset that Tehran relies on heavily. These include armed groups in Iraq and Syria, as well as Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen

Through these groups, Iran has exerted pressure indirectly, targeting US interests and allies without engaging in direct confrontation.

One critical threat Iran has previously made is for the Houthis to disrupt shipping in the Bab al-Mandeb, another vital maritime chokepoint linking the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden.

The Houthis, an Iran-aligned group in Yemen, have previously targeted shipping in this area, most notably during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, further raising concerns about the security of global trade routes.

Roughly 4.2 billion barrels of crude oil and refined petroleum liquids flowed through the strait in 2014, accounting for about five percent of global supply.

Cheap drones and cluster bombs

While nowhere near the military capabilities of the US, Iran’s investment in missile and drone programmes has proven to be an effective means of deterrence. That is particularly through its ability to threaten regional US bases and impose significant costs on regional countries hosting American assets involved in military operations against Tehran.

While the US undoubtedly has a more sophisticated and powerful arsenal at its disposal, the interceptors it uses to combat Iranian drones cost around $4 million each, while Iran’s Shahed drones can be mass-produced at $20-50,000 each.

Furthermore, Iran’s ballistic missiles have proved capable of breaching Israel’s much-lauded “Iron Dome” defence system on several occasions. Iran has also dropped cluster bombs, which divide before they can be intercepted, making them much harder to stop.

So does the US really hold the most cards?

Michael Clarke, visiting professor at the Department of War Studies, King’s College London, said Trump’s overwhelming conventional military strength has failed to translate into strategic leverage on the ground.

“President Trump thinks he is a great poker player,” Clarke told Al Jazeera. “He thought America’s sheer destructive potential put all the ‘cards’ in his hand” when starting the war on Iran.

But Iranian forces have consistently disrupted US expectations through asymmetric tactics, he said.

“At every turn, the Iranians have come up with asymmetric tactics – vicious, reckless tactics – that have negated everything the Americans have tried to do,” Clarke noted, describing a pattern in which traditional US military superiority has been blunted by unconventional responses.

Despite significant American forces and assets in the region – including “no fewer than three US Carrier Strike Groups, two Marine Expeditionary Units, hundreds of combat aircraft and thousands of troops”, Clarke argued that Washington has struggled to find an effective use for its multi-billion-dollar resources at its disposal.

Moreover, he said, domestic pressure on Trump is growing. Trump “can’t find a way to use them [US forces] that will make any real difference to the current stalemate in the limited time he has before his own MAGA base concludes he has lost the game”.

Clarke also highlighted the willingness of Iran’s IRGC to escalate tensions. “Whatever this war might do to Iranian society, the IRGC is prepared to gamble with its own existence in the fight,” he added.

In one of the world’s most deprived and volatile regions, HumAngle’s reporting and experience reveal that journalists in Nigeria are not just observing suffering but are pulled into it as they try to report it. Consequently, they say, they find themselves paying out of pocket to feed the people whose stories they are trying to tell.

In theory, the profession is expected to observe some emotional distance from its sources and the stories they tell. However, that model is inoperable in conflict-affected regions of northern Nigeria and the Sahel.

Journalism here is embedded in environments shaped by violence, poverty, and dense social networks. Since these variables affect people at random, the reporter is not an outsider; sometimes, the conflict directly affects them as well. Ethical decisions are then made under pressure, repeatedly, and often without the comfort of certainty.

HumAngle operates in this space. Its work across Lake Chad, Central Africa, Nigeria’s Middle Belt, the North West, the South East, and other conflict zones forces a confrontation with a difficult question: What does ethical journalism look like when the people you report on are not just sources, but individuals whose survival may intersect directly with your presence?

The limits of imported ethics

Global journalism standards discourage payment for information, and while exceptions exist, they do so under strict editorial oversight, a clear public-interest justification, and transparency. Journalism teachers say that, though these frameworks are expected to provide clarity, they don’t in conflict-affected Nigeria, where the assumed context doesn’t apply. The ideal context has clear distinctions between sources and service providers and functioning identity systems. This is hardly obtainable in conflict-affected environments.

Dr Kabiru Danladi, a Mass Communication scholar with the Ahmadu Bello University in northwestern Nigeria, says, “Our curriculum borrows heavily from Euro-American ethical frameworks – objectivity, detachment, neutrality – principles rooted in relatively stable societies. The failure becomes evident when our graduates are deployed to cover issues that weren’t directly taught in class, or they are sent to cover conflicts in places like Zamfara, Sokoto, Kebbi, Borno, Yobe or Benue, where journalism is not just a profession but a survival exercise.”

Dr Obiora Chukwumba, a researcher and media expert in Abuja, identifies the same problem in the moral obligation created by field contact. “There is no ethical barrier to a journalist intervening on grounds of goodwill to assist a source who is in a vulnerable position,” he said.

The reality of field reporting

A fixer in Zamfara, where terror groups continue to kill, abduct, and loot, is not simply an access broker but may also translate, assess risk, and act as a negotiator in certain environments. A driver in Borno, North East Nigeria, may carry more situational intelligence than any formal briefing. An intermediary in the southeast may navigate relationships across vigilante groups and separatist networks.

These individuals are essential. Without them, our reporters’ access vanishes. But they are also embedded in the same systems the journalist is trying to understand, which creates layered risks, including legal risks that emerge when payments made for legitimate services are later interpreted as material support. 

Barrister Joseph Danboyi, a senior lawyer in Jos, North Central Nigeria, says, “Payment to a fixer creates liability if the journalist knew his connection with criminals. Ordinary payment for information is insufficient. The journalist will be aiding and abetting when payment is purposefully linked to criminal conduct.”

He goes further to add, “The practical bottom line is that a journalist who unknowingly pays a criminal for information is generally not liable… liability requires knowledge… and intent to help or further it.”

This distinction between knowledge and intent anchors the legal reality that sits beneath field decisions. 

Dr Obiora also treats fixers and access arrangements as part of newsroom operations, not automatically as ethical breaches. “Parts of the routine (investigative) costs tied to the operations of a newsroom include such services as engaging fixers, obtaining access to a reasonably considered newsmaker, and appreciation handouts,” he said. “They are all legitimate operational costs.”

There is no procedural checklist that eliminates these risks. What exists instead is a need for structured awareness and disciplined judgment in newsrooms.

The Knifar women: A case that reshapes the debate

HumAngle’s engagement with the Knifar movement brings these tensions into focus. The Knifar women are part of a grassroots movement shaped by prolonged suffering. Their husbands, sons, and brothers were detained during military operations, often for years, without trial. In many cases, these men were the primary providers, and so their absence triggered cascading consequences for these women, including food insecurity, poverty, and social fragmentation. The women organised into a pressure group to demand accountability for the detention of their male relatives.

HumAngle’s reporting amplified their efforts, influencing outcomes that ultimately led to the release of over a thousand men that the women were advocating for. 

Our work required prolonged engagement with the women, whose daily reality was defined by deprivation. In some instances, our journalists provided stipends. In other cases, some of these women became part of the reporting process as fixers and contributors with fixed incomes in our newsroom. We have even given some of them ‘additional reporting’ credit for their work. Since they are both sources and resource persons for our newsroom, we are often clear about what we are paying them for – their work, not their information. We have spoken publicly about the dynamics of our relationship with these women, including in a Pulitzer Centre-supported documentary.

Kunle Adebajo, a renowned award-winning investigative journalist, reflects on his own experience in being moved to provide money to vulnerable sources: “I’ve often had to pay vulnerable sources. This is because the majority of them live from hand to mouth and rely on wages from daily labour to get their sustenance, and so such interviews could be very disruptive and uncomfortable for them. Oftentimes, they also have to transport themselves to meet at the interview location. The sums given were trifling, and there was never an understanding that the interview itself was transactional. 

Dr Obiora agrees that the understanding must always be clear. “If the source or interviewee presents the personal need to overshadow the reason for the meeting with the journalist, then that could be a red flag,” he said, “pointing to potential compromised narrative or ‘adjusted facts’ from the source or interviewee.”

When observation is not enough

Journalists are trained not to pay sources because it could risk distortion and affect credibility, but what happens when the people you are interviewing live in destitute conditions?

“I met residents, elderly men and women who could not feed themselves, who could not afford basic healthcare. I met a father who lost his wife to a particular ailment, and whose two kids are still suffering from the same ailment. Yet, he could not help.”

The award-winning journalist said he felt compelled to help. “I offered to buy meals for some of them through my fixer. Yes, I offered them some cash to buy what they needed. When I got back to my hotel room that evening, I actually cried. I felt the depth of these people’s suffering.”

He is not unaware of the ethical grey spots in giving money to sources. “Ethically, I did not really care at that point whether offering them some cash would be seen as an inducement. I told myself that I had to act as a human being at the moment and drop the toga of ‘a journalist’ at that point.” 

Dr Danladi understands this and says that “Students must be taught that they are a journalist, yes – but they are also human beings. Refusing to help in the name of ‘objectivity’ can itself be an ethical failure.” He says that liability only becomes possible “where the journalist knows or is willfully blind to criminal activity… or where the payment itself is tied to illegal conduct.”

Another journalist from southwestern Nigeria, who declined to be named, described facing similar situations in which his sources were suffering. 

“They had had to eat rotten food sourced from the nearby markets, and sometimes they went days without eating anything because their husbands, who provided for them, had been killed. I saw that most of their children were malnourished and looked so skinny. It was such a touching situation, and I couldn’t help but give them some money that I had with me so that they could buy food and cook.”

The practice of support

Payment for content implies a transaction because it links money to information, but support that exists independently of reporting is different. It protects the integrity of the story while still acknowledging the reality of the environment.

Hauwa Shaffii Nuhu, an award-winning journalist and newsroom manager, said that though in her early days as a journalist, she could not resist the urge to help vulnerable sources, she has now learned to favour long-term external support. “Now, I connect them [the vulnerable subjects of her story] with NGOs… or make it possible for society to donate directly to them or through an independent third party like a fixer.”

In cases where reporters have to provide any form of support, journalism scholars like Obiora say documentation matters. Record decisions and rationale for such actions while in the field. According to Obiora, “one of the most important structures for documenting and reviewing ethical footprints in the newsroom is within the internal editorial space.” He proposed an Editorial Board of Line Editors, chaired by the title editor, and another layer through an Editorial Advisory Board, where “it would be necessary to bring the platform’s legal advisor as a member.”

“These steps will not protect you from state action if authorities choose to act,” a senior security official said. What they only do is to protect the integrity of your journalism, he implied. They help you draw a line between necessary support and inducement, between humanitarian assistance and conduct that could be interpreted as enabling someone directly or indirectly tied to the crime you are investigating.

The unresolved tension

Speaking more to the legal position of a source, unknown to the journalist, being tied to criminal activity, Danboyi reiterates that a journalist who unknowingly pays a criminal is generally not liable, as exposure begins when there is knowledge, or when you consciously ignore signals that should raise concern.

Consider the fixer a journalist has worked with closely. Not a transactional contact, but someone embedded in the reporting process, with days, sometimes weeks, spent together. The journalist has covered his meals, made stops at his home during fieldwork, supported him beyond the assignment, helped with school fees, and contributed when his child was ill. Then, months or years later, the fixer is named in a crime. The record of the journalist’s relation with him exists: Transfers, messages, shared locations. A traceable history of proximity that can be turned into proof of complicity.

A different kind of responsibility

The Knifar women’s story forces a reconsideration of responsibility and demands a different approach to how journalism ethics is taught and judged. “We graduate students who know the code, but cannot survive in the field,” says Dr Danladi.

Dr Obiora returns the question to dignity. “A journalist whose interaction with a source contributes to lifting the source’s dignity has discharged his or her obligation professionally.”

In environments where silence sustains suffering, the act of telling a story, and the way that story is told, carries consequences beyond journalism.

Two activists from the Global Sumud Flotilla arrived in the Netherlands after being released from Israeli custody. The flotilla was intercepted in international waters while carrying aid to the Gaza Strip. Two of their fellow activists remain in Israel for questioning.

The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway once carrying roughly a fifth of the world’s oil and gas, remains effectively closed after the United States and Iran imposed competing blockades.

Naval blockades are one of the oldest weapons in warfare, requiring no ground troops or invasion, just the ability to cut off what an enemy needs to survive. These blockades have reshaped economies, societies and alliances across generations, sometimes with instant shockwaves, sometimes with effects only seen later.

From Israel’s ongoing siege of the Gaza Strip to blockades during World War I, here are some notable naval blockades in modern history:

Israel’s siege of Gaza (2007-present)

Israel’s complete land, sea and air blockade of the Gaza Strip is one of the longest sieges in modern history.

Launched in 2007, Israel has limited the entry of goods and essential supplies, causing a prolonged humanitarian and economic crisis for the Strip’s 2.3 million people, who cannot travel freely.

Before Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza began in October 2023, fishermen were restricted to 6-15 nautical miles (11-28km) from shore, well below the 20-nautical-mile (37km) zone guaranteed by the Oslo Accords.

After 2023, with Israel’s policy of starving the population, fishermen have taken extreme measures to feed their families, leading to many being killed by Israeli fire.

Since 2008, several Freedom Flotilla vessels have attempted to break the Israeli blockade. Since 2010, all flotillas attempting to break the Gaza blockade have been intercepted or attacked by Israel in international waters.

On April 30, Israel raided 22 out of the 58 vessels in the most recent Global Sumud Flotilla campaign in international waters more than 1,000km (620 miles) from Gaza.

Blockade of Biafra (1967-70)

During the Nigerian Civil War, which began in July 1967, the Nigerian federal government imposed a land, sea and air blockade on the secessionist Republic of Biafra shortly after it declared independence.

The blockade led to widespread starvation, widely seen as a deliberate wartime strategy, transforming a territorial conflict into a global humanitarian crisis. Death tolls vary, but it is estimated that one to two million people died, the vast majority from hunger and disease rather than direct conflict.

The nearly three-year-long blockade ended with the Biafran surrender in January 1970.

Beira Patrol blockade (1966-75):

The Beira Patrol was a nine-year-long blockade by the British navy to prevent oil from reaching Rhodesia, present-day Zimbabwe, through the Mozambican port of Beira, enforced under United Nations sanctions following Rhodesia’s unilateral declaration of independence.

The blockade largely failed its strategic goal. Rhodesia continued receiving oil via South Africa and other Mozambican ports, which the UN resolution did not authorise the British navy to intercept.

Additionally, the cost to the United Kingdom was substantial. The operation tied up 76 naval ships over nine years, with two frigates required on station at all times.

The blockade ended in July 1975, when Mozambique’s newly gained independence from Portugal allowed it to credibly commit to blocking oil transit to Rhodesia, rendering the naval patrol redundant.

Cuban Missile Crisis ‘quarantine’ (1962)

In October 1962, the US ordered a naval “quarantine” of Cuba after US U-2 spy planes discovered Soviet nuclear missile sites under construction on the island.

The US deliberately called it a “quarantine” rather than a blockade, which would have been legally an act of war, aiming to prevent the Soviets from bringing in more military supplies and to pressure them to remove the missiles already there.

The quarantine drew a line 500 nautical miles (920km) from Cuba’s coast, with US warships authorised to stop, search, and turn back any vessel carrying offensive weapons if necessary.

The crisis brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. The then-Soviet First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev called the blockade “outright piracy” and an act of aggression, and initially ordered ships to proceed. For several days, Soviet vessels steamed towards the quarantine line as the world watched.

The most dangerous phase of the standoff lasted 13 days. An agreement was reached in which the Soviets would dismantle their offensive weapons in Cuba in exchange for a US public declaration not to invade Cuba, and a secret agreement to remove US Jupiter missiles from Turkiye.

The naval quarantine was formally ended on November 20, 1962, after all offensive missiles and bombers had been withdrawn.

Blockade of Wonsan (1951-53)

During the Korean War, UN naval forces led by the US imposed a blockade of the North Korean port of Wonsan in February 1951, lasting nearly two and a half years.

It aimed to deny the North Korean navy access to the city, which was strategically significant for its large harbour, airfield and petroleum refinery.

The blockade was preceded by a dangerous mine-clearance operation in October 1950. North Korean forces had been well supplied by the Soviet Union and China with sea mines, and during the clearance, the sweepers USS Pledge and USS Pirate were sunk, killing 12 men and wounding dozens.

The operation successfully constrained North Korean and Chinese forces on the east coast, forcing them to divert thousands of troops and artillery pieces away from the front line. UN forces also captured several harbour islands, which strengthened the blockade’s grip on the port.

The blockade ended after 861 days with the signing of the Korean Armistice Agreement in July 1953. By that point, allied naval fire had almost levelled Wonsan.

US submarine blockade of Japan (1942-45)

The US imposed a submarine blockade against Japan during the Pacific War.

The blockade began taking shape in 1942, combining US naval submarine attacks on merchant shipping with minelaying operations to cripple Japan’s war capabilities, disrupt shipping and cut off vital supplies such as food and fuel.

As an island nation, Japan was especially vulnerable, almost entirely dependent on imports of oil, rubber and raw materials. Its economy and military could not function without open sea lanes.

Over the course of the war, US submarines sank some 1,300 Japanese merchant ships and roughly 200 warships. By 1945, oil imports had effectively ceased.

Food imports collapsed, causing significant shortages and malnutrition across Japan by 1945, though the extent of civilian starvation is disputed.

After the US dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima on August 6 and Nagasaki on August 9, 1945, Japan announced its surrender on August 15, bringing the blockade and the Pacific War to an end.

Blockade of eastern Mediterranean (1915-18)

In August 1915, during World War I, the Allied forces imposed a blockade of the eastern coast of the Mediterranean to cut off military supplies and weaken the Ottoman Empire’s war effort.

The declared area ran from the intersection of the Aegean Sea and the Mediterranean Sea in the north to the Egyptian frontier in the south. The blockade was initiated by Britain and France, later assisted by Italy and other Allied powers.

The consequences were devastating. Military supplies, munitions, oil, food and medicine were all targeted. The food crisis was compounded by a locust plague in 1915 and a severe drought, contributing to severe famine across Lebanon and Greater Syria.

Reports suggest the famine led to 500,000 deaths by 1918, mostly civilians, with Mount Lebanon losing an estimated one-third of its population. Mass migration followed.

The blockade remained in place throughout the war and lifted only when Allied forces occupied Beirut and Mount Lebanon in October 1918.

Allied blockade of Germany (1914-19)

The British navy began blockading Germany almost immediately after the outbreak of the war in August 1914.

The naval blockade extended from the English Channel to Norway, cutting off Germany from the oceans.

Britain mined international waters to prevent ships from entering the ocean, creating danger even for neutral vessels.

Germany responded by declaring the seas around the British Isles a “military area”, prompting Britain and France to ban all goods to and from Germany.

The blockade’s most devastating consequence was famine. The winter of 1916-17, known as the Turnip Winter, marked one of the harshest years in wartime Germany.

The blockade had cut off food and fertiliser imports, a failed potato harvest left little to fall back on, and a breakdown in food distribution compounded the crisis. It is estimated that between 424,000 and 763,000 civilians died from diseases related to hunger and malnutrition.

The blockade was not yet fully lifted until July 1919, after the Treaty of Versailles had been signed.

US president says he is considering the 14-point peace plan, but warns strikes could resume if Tehran ‘misbehaves’.

United States President Donald Trump has said he is reviewing Iran’s 14-point proposal to end his war on the country, while warning that Washington could restart air strikes if Tehran “misbehaves”.

Speaking to reporters in Florida before boarding Air Force One on Saturday, Trump confirmed that he had been briefed on the “concept of the deal”.

Despite the diplomatic opening, the US president struck a characteristically blunt tone regarding the possibility of renewed hostilities, which have been paused since the announcement of a ceasefire between the sides on April 7.

“If they do something bad, there is a possibility it could happen,” Trump said when asked if strikes would resume.

Trump added that the US was “doing very well” and claimed that Iran was desperate for a settlement because the country had been “decimated” by months of conflict and a naval blockade.

In a post on Truth Social later, Trump said it was difficult to imagine that the Iranian proposal would be acceptable as Tehran had “not yet paid a big enough price for what they have done to Humanity, and the World, over the last 47 years.”

Tehran’s 14-point plan reportedly calls for the lifting of the US naval blockade, war reparations, and the release of all frozen assets.

It also seeks a 30-day window to finalise the terms of their peace, a timeline at odds with Washington’s preference for a longer transition.

The diplomatic push comes amid a fragile three-week truce that has put a pause on the US-Israel war on Iran, which began in late February.

Despite the ceasefire, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Saturday that it remains on “full standby” for a return to hostilities, citing the US’s lack of commitment to previous treaties.

Tensions have been further stoked by Trump’s recent characterisation of the US naval blockade as a “very profitable business”.

Tehran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs seized on the remarks, labelling them a “damning admission of piracy”.

The impasse is further complicated by technical obstacles to reopening the Strait of Hormuz, including the presence of Iranian sea mines, and a growing rift with NATO allies following Trump’s decision to withdraw 5,000 US troops from Germany.

Social media is full of posts showing off photos and videos of fancy-looking cafes and restaurants in Gaza. Pro-Israeli accounts often use these images to claim that life is back to normal in Gaza, that people are not suffering and that no genocide ever took place.

These cafes and restaurants do exist. I have seen them myself.

In late March, I went on my first visit to Gaza City since the war started. I was shocked to see the destruction wrought on the city. There were piles of rubble at every corner. Unable to recognise the streets, I felt as if I were strolling through a maze. I soon arrived at an area nearby that shocked me even more. It was full of new cafes that did not exist before the war.

These were not makeshift or temporary places as one might expect; they were built with expensive materials, carefully painted, furnished with tables, sofas, and elegant chairs, with glass facades and shining lights. A luxury feel emanated from them. They looked so out of place amid the rubble and the half-collapsed buildings that it felt almost surreal to see them.

These new establishments do not prove that normality is coming back to Gaza. They are a testament to its continuing genocidal abnormality.

The war made some people in Gaza rich, especially those who engaged in illicit activities like smuggling, looting, and hoarding during acute shortages. This wealth is now coming out in various forms, including luxury cafes and restaurants.

In parallel, the vast majority of Gaza’s population has been thrown into abject poverty. While before the war, the average person was able to afford to sit at a cafe and have a drink and a bite to eat, today this is no longer the case.

Most people cannot even look at these new places, let alone enter them and order something. The vast majority of Gaza’s population lives in tents, has no electricity or potable water, and suffers from the loss of livelihoods. They are surviving on what little aid Israel is allowing through.

I am one of them. My family and I live in a tent pitched near the rubble of our home in the Nuseirat camp. We have lost our family livelihood. The comfortable life we used to have is now just a distant memory.

The expensive new establishments reflect the deeply unjust social order that has emerged in Gaza – one where war profiteering has elevated a new privileged class and collapsed the vast majority into misery with no access to proper education, healthcare and even food. The genocide did not just kill and maim people and destroy homes and schools; it eliminated the prospect of a normal life for most people in Gaza.

I could not afford the fancy cafes, so I continued down the street till I reached a more modest restaurant, which used to go to with friends before the war. Entering it felt like stepping back in time to the days before the war; the place was the same, with the same chairs and tables, and the familiar smells that filled the space.

I sat and observed, dwelling on fond memories of spending time there after university lectures. I ordered what I used to order: a chicken wrap, a soda and a small salad plate. The bill was 60 shekels ($20) – more than three times what I would pay before the war, when my family actually had a normal income.

The restaurant bill, together with the fare I paid for a shared ride to get to Gaza City (15 shekels or $5 one way), cost me a fortune. I felt guilty spending all this money to enjoy a glimpse of normalcy.

The few who are fortunate enough to be able to afford going to cafes and restaurants in Gaza may enjoy short moments of relief, a temporary escape from the horrors of reality. Yet these moments are limited, often accompanied by anxiety about returning to the destroyed streets, the bombed-out landscape and the trauma.

As I sat at Al-Taboon, I thought of the friends with whom I used to spend time: Rama, who was martyred and Ranan, who escaped to Belgium. I sat there alone, holding on to these memories amid the greyness of Gaza’s rubble and the lights of the generator-powered cafés.

The genocide has devasted everyone – even those who have profiteered from it. No amount of time spent in shiny cafes and restaurants will ever erase this reality.

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

The UNIFIL has faced a growing number of casualties as Israel continues air raids despite a ceasefire and Hezbollah has responded with rockets and drones.

China’s ambassador to the United Nations, Fu Cong, has said there is a need to re-examine the UN Security Council’s decision to terminate the mandate of the longstanding peacekeeping mission in Lebanon, which is due to end later this year.

Speaking to reporters on Friday at the UN headquarters in New York, Ambassador Fu expressed China’s deep concern about the situation in Lebanon as Beijing assumed the council’s rotating presidency for May.

He observed that a genuine ceasefire did not exist in Lebanon, describing the current state of conflict as merely a “lesser fire”.

“We do believe that we should revisit the decision, actually, to withdraw the UNIFIL,” Fu said, using the acronym for the UN Interim Force in Lebanon.

“I think at least the view of the overwhelming majority of the Security Council is that this is not the time to really, to withdraw the UNIFIL out of that part of the country,” Fu said.

China is waiting for a report from the UN secretariat, expected in June, “before we take our position”, he added.

Fu also said, “It is incumbent on Israel to stop this bombardment of Lebanon.”

Created to oversee the withdrawal of Israeli troops after the 1978 invasion, UNIFIL saw its mandate expanded after the 2006 war between Israel and the Lebanese group Hezbollah and was responsible for a demilitarised buffer between the opposing sides.

However, the UNSC unanimously resolved last year to begin withdrawing the UNIFIL mission’s 10,800 international peacekeepers by December 2026.

According to Lebanese authorities, Israeli attacks on Lebanon since March 2 have killed 2,618 people and forced more than one million to flee their homes.

The UNIFIL mission has also faced a growing number of casualties. According to UN officials, at least six peacekeepers have been killed and many others injured since Israel began its attack on March 2.

The deaths include soldiers from various contributing nations, including Indonesia and France, who have been caught in shelling incidents and roadside attacks.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has condemned these incidents, noting that the UN’s “blue helmets” have come under fire while performing essential duties, such as clearing explosive ordnance and escorting logistics convoys.