Elections

Trump also said further negotiations with Iran could possibly happen, “but it’s not something we’re looking at”.

The US president initially predicted the war, which is now in its seventh month, would last only a matter of weeks. The conflict, and its knock-on effects on everything from fuel to groceries, has led to a steep decline in his approval ratings – and pressure from those within his party, including devout supporters, to quickly end the war.

Midterm elections will be held on 3 November, and Republicans are in danger of losing their control on Congress.

At the convention, Trump sought to energise the party ahead of November. Historically, a sitting president’s party tends to lose seats in Congress in the midterm elections.

Fighting in the Middle East has intensified in recent days, as oil facilities throughout the region come under attack, driving up the global price of fuel and any item that requires shipping.

The price of oil hit $100 a barrel on Wednesday for the first time since July. Similarly, earlier this week the price of US diesel hit an all-time-high, which is likely to cause a ripple effect on prices across the US.

On Wednesday, the US military said it had attacked five oil tanker ships with ties to Iran. Tehran, in response, launched attacks on two US Navy destroyers and eight oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, causing “heavy damage” to the vessels, according to Iranian state media.

A day earlier, the Iran-linked Houthis in Yemen launched a wave of attacks in Saudi Arabia, sparking fires at oil facilities.

The fighting, which began again recently after a 60-day ceasefire between the US and Iran formally expired last month, has also raised predictions that the rising fuel costs could lead to higher interest rates in the US.

Pennsylvania senator who has clashed with party over Israel support says he will reject ‘the extremes and socialism’.

Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman, a Democrat who has distanced himself from his party, has appeared in a video recording on the first day of the Republican Party’s two-day midterm convention in the United States.

The video on Wednesday was a surprise for those who attended the conservative gathering in Dallas, Texas, where President Donald Trump is seeking to galvanise support ahead of the November elections.

“Yes, I’m Senator John Fetterman, Pennsylvania. Yes, I’m a Democrat. Why am I here talking to you today? Because, well, I’m a common-sense Democrat,” Fetterman said as he introduced his Republican colleague, Senator Dave McCormick of Pennsylvania.

Fetterman, a 57-year-old first-term senator, has cast himself as an outsider within the Democratic Party.

He has offered outspoken support for Israel and the war on Iran, even as voters and progressive voices in his party criticise those elements of US foreign policy.

“I’m always going to stand with America. I’m always going to reject the extremes and socialism and that anti-American way of life,” Fetterman said in the video clip.

But his appearance at the Republican Party’s first-ever midterm convention is likely to exacerbate criticism from his Democratic colleagues.

US Representative Brendan Boyle, another Pennsylvania Democrat, has repeatedly questioned Fetterman’s party allegiance, as well as his commitment to public service. He renewed that sentiment after Wednesday’s video aired.

“A year ago I labeled John Fetterman ‘Trump’s favorite Democrat.’ Tonight, he yet again proves why,” Boyle wrote on social media.

Fetterman has also faced questions about his fitness for office following a series of reports that detail his apparent lack of enthusiasm for his Senate responsibilities.

A recent Wall Street Journal article found that the senator had cancelled meetings with constituents.

In one case, The Wall Street Journal said he skipped a June meeting with injured military veterans, citing illness, only to show up later for a Fox News interview about Israel and its joint war with the US on Iran.

His approval rating is now higher among Republicans in Pennsylvania than among members of his own party.

Last month, a poll from The New York Times, Siena College and The Philadelphia Inquirer suggested that 73 percent of Pennsylvania Republicans approved of Fetterman’s performance, up from 25 percent in 2024.

Meanwhile, Democratic support in the state had slid dramatically over the last two years, slipping from 74 percent to 22 percent. Some 63 percent of Democratic respondents held an unfavourable view of him.

While Fetterman has depicted himself as a maverick within the Democratic Party, he has denied that he would switch parties to become a Republican.

“I’m not going to be a Republican, but I’m going to be a Democrat that’s going to have a conversation with whoever is playing it straight,” he said in a recent interview with Fox News.

Still, speculation about Fetterman’s party credentials has continued as the midterms near.

The election on November 3 will decide which party controls Congress for the final two years of Trump’s term.

Republicans currently hold a small majority in the House of Representatives and Senate, but they could face a setback at the polls as voters express frustration over cost of living issues and Trump’s deepening unpopularity.

Still, reclaiming the Senate especially could be an uphill climb for Democrats. Only a third of Senate seats are up for re-election this year, compared with all 435 House seats.

Fetterman is not up for re-election until 2028.

Dallas, Texas – The Republican midterm convention has represented a gambit for the party: centring US President Donald Trump in the final stretch of the midterm elections, even as the first two years of his second term have cast a polarising political shadow.

That has been particularly true when it comes to the war on Iran, which Trump launched alongside Israel on February 28, and the knock-on effects on affordability in the United States, a key issue for many voters.

As Trump prepared to deliver a keynote address on Wednesday in Dallas, prices for Brent Crude, the global benchmark, rose above $100 a barrel for the first time since July, a reminder of the conflict’s continued fallout for global markets.

Nevertheless, supporters who spoke to Al Jazeera still saw the president as the man to rally Americans to vote Republican in November, as the party fights to hold onto control of the House of Representatives and Senate.

But some voiced concern – or confusion – over the impact of the war.

“This really is a Trump-a-palooza, as people have been saying,” said Carter Eisinger, a 27-year-old electrician who travelled from Fargo, North Dakota.

“I think some people say that in a derogatory way, but I think it’s very much a complimentary phrase,” he added. “The reality of it is we are in a Trump Republican Party.”

Still, Eisinger struggled to see how the war fit into Trump’s “America First” vision.

“In my opinion, I don’t really see the connection of how a war in Iran helps us here in the country,” he said. “If the Iran war is justified, I’m willing to pay the gas prices, but I haven’t seen that justification.”

He felt a similar confusion about the close relationship between the US and Israel.

“At the end of the day, I’m going to come right back to whatever is best for families, young people, anyone in America,” he said. “If it’s helping Israel in a way that helps us, then great… but it needs to help us first.”

Others were more charitable towards Trump’s approach to the Middle East, even if they saw the war on Iran as a misstep.

Bijay Dixit, a 59-year-old photographer from Houston, Texas, gave Trump high marks on his approach to immigration. He also believed Republicans were the party to steward the economy in the years ahead.

But on Iran, he said there had been a “miscalculation”, even if he agreed with the Trump administration’s position that the war was ultimately a necessary response to the totality of Iran’s actions in the 47 years since the Islamic revolution in 1979.

“Iran needed to be stopped at some point,” he said. “When I say miscalculation, what I mean is underestimation of the capacity of the IRGC [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps].”

Helen Vennett, a 65-year-old small business owner from Maryland and the chairman of her county’s Republican Party, likened the convention to a high-school pep rally.

“All of us need to have cheerleaders in our life… It just gets you fired up again. You kind of need to know that you’re not alone, that there are believers,” she added.

But while she said she broadly supported the Trump administration’s justification for the war, she acknowledged the potential political fallout.

“It’s a tough one,” she said.

Polls have regularly suggested widespread disapproval among US citizens of the war on Iran, with independents in particular expressing disapproval. Many, in turn, rank affordability as their top issue heading into the midterm vote.

A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll suggested that only a quarter of Americans think the war is worthwhile.

For its part, the Trump administration has downplayed the prospect of ending the war, focusing instead on efforts to open shipping routes in the Strait of Hormuz, over which Iran continues to assert its influence.

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday as he departed for the convention, Trump sought to temper expectations that the war would end before November’s pivotal vote.

“I think it’s going to take a little bit longer than the midterm,” he said, accusing Iran of intentionally holding out until November.

“They’re desperate to try and affect the election so that we can get a nice weak group of people in there and leave them alone and let them have their nuclear weapons,” he said.

He predicted the war would end swiftly after the final votes have been cast.

“They can’t hold out any longer,” he said.

John Russell, 55, from Rockford, Illinois, who regularly travels to Trump rallies as part of the “Front Row Joe’s” group, said he believed voters would still view the first two years of Trump’s second term as a net positive.

“It’s been a small bump with the gas going up,” he told Al Jazeera from the convention.

“But it had to be done. We can’t allow [Iran] to have a nuclear bomb,” he said, referring to one of the administration’s main justifications for the war.

Tehran has long denied seeking a nuclear weapon, with military analysts generally agreeing that destroying its nuclear programme would require a major military escalation, involving boots on the ground.

Russell predicted that the Republican Party’s bet would pay off at the polls.

“It’s going to fire up the base,” he said of the convention. “It’s going to switch some independents to vote for the Trump-backed candidates, and they will win.”

The United States Republican Party – and its talisman President Donald Trump – is descending on Dallas, Texas, to host a rare convention before the midterm elections in November.

Usually reserved for presidential election cycles, Trump’s call to hold the high-cost event before the November 3 midterm vote has underscored both the president’s unorthodox campaign style and the urgency of the political moment for his Republican Party.

Trump’s approval rating has tanked in the lead-up to the midterm vote, with polls pointing to a panoply of factors, most notably the US-Israel war on Iran and its knock-on economic effects for US consumers.

The lack of enthusiasm threatens what are already considered long-shot odds in the Republicans’ effort to hold on to control of the House of Representatives. Shifting public opinion has also put control of the Senate increasingly in play, although Democrats still face an uphill battle to pull off an upset.

A loss of control in either chamber would serve as a major check on Trump’s authority in the final two years of his second term.

But not all Republicans have bought into Trump and the party’s claims that the convention will spur voter turnout.

Several, particularly those in the tightest races, have kept the event at arm’s length amid concerns that associating with the president could only further mobilise his detractors.

Here’s what to know:

When and where is the Republican midterm convention?

The convention will be hosted at the American Airlines Center in Dallas, Texas, on Wednesday, September 9 and Thursday, September 10.

The event is expected to run from 3pm to 9pm Central Time (20:00 to 02:00 GMT) on both days.

Trump is scheduled to speak on both nights, including a Wednesday address and the convention’s closing keynote on Thursday from 8pm to 9pm Central Time (01:00 to 02:00 GMT on Friday).

US Vice President JD Vance will close out night one with a speech.

Is this a typical political convention?

Not at all.

The Republican National Committee (RNC), the party’s official organising body, has billed the Dallas midterm convention as a “first in American political history”.

Both Democratic and Republican national conventions have historically capped the primary season before a presidential election. The emphasis has historically been on the presidential nomination process during the largely ceremonial events.

During those conventions, so-called “delegates” from every state pledge their votes for a candidate based on the primary election outcome from their home state.

A candidate who secures the required majority of delegates formally becomes the party’s presidential nominee at the convention.

Parties also typically hold several smaller meetings surrounding the event to establish and release the party’s official platform.

Why are Republicans holding a midterm convention in 2026?

To start with, there will be no nominating process – presidential or otherwise – during the event, as there is no presidential election in 2026.

Instead, the convention has taken the shape of a supercharged campaign rally and fundraiser.

It has been pitched as an opportunity to introduce candidates in punishing races to potential donors and to give a clear, if Trump-dominated, party message as the races enter their final stretch.

The RNC has promised “a primetime showcase for President Trump’s success, candidates, and causes that have propelled the 2026 midterms to unprecedented focus”.

What’s on the schedule?

There will be quite a lot. The official programme lists “53 items and speakers” on night one, followed by 56 more on night two.

The first night will focus on issues including tax cuts, healthcare affordability, immigration, border policy, trade and domestic manufacturing.

The second night will focus more on affordability and families, including policies related to taxes on tips, overtime and Social Security.

The subject areas hew closely to Trump’s wider political messaging.

The official programme gives relatively little attention to several other subjects. The US-Israel war with Iran and Trump’s aggressive tariff policy receive scant mention.

Who else is speaking?

Trump and Vance are the convention’s marquee speakers, but an array of prominent Republicans and candidates are expected to feature across the two-day programme.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is likely to get a healthy amount of stage time. Paxton is running for Senate against Democrat James Talarico, whose early lead in polling has raised alarm bells for Republicans. A Democrat has not won statewide office in Texas since 1994.

“We’re going to have a lot of speakers, and the ones we want to focus on will be obviously Ken Paxton,” Trump told reporters last week. “We gotta get him elected.”

The race is particularly personal for Trump, who endorsed MAGA-aligned Paxton over Republican Senator John Cornyn, a four-term incumbent seen by many as the surest challenger for Talarico.

Will Trump’s convention help Republicans in the midterms?

It remains to be seen whether the convention will help to turn out voters in a meaningful way.

Trump has proven a canny campaigner in the past, leveraging his eye for television spectacle to build support and turn out low-propensity voters. But several factors could limit the impact.

Trump’s Thursday night speech conflicts with the opening games of the National Football League (NFL) season. The event also runs up against several memorial events for the September 11, 2001 attacks throughout the week.

Some Republican officials have also reportedly criticised the hasty announcement of the event, which Trump called for in late June, raising questions over whether organisers will indeed be able to achieve the spectacle envisioned.

For his part, Trump enters the convention with his approval rating continuing to tank, hovering at a 38 percent average in major polls. Several of the most recent polls, including a Reuters-Ipsos poll and a Financial Times-Focaldata poll conducted in late August, reflected only a 33 percent approval.

Trump entered office in January 2025 sitting at about 52 percent approval.

Why are some Republicans skipping?

To be sure, several Republicans in key races have said they will attend the convention.

They include former Congressman Mike Rogers, who is running against Democrat Abdul El-Sayed for an open Senate seat in Michigan; Ohio Senator Jon Husted, who is facing an unnerving challenge from former Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown; and Georgia Congressman Mike Collins, who is seeking to unseat Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff.

Others have been wary.

Trump’s policies in his second term have cast a long shadow, leaving many candidates calculating whether attendance could backfire and instead energise voters opposed to Trump.

Democratic primary turnout in several key states – including Michigan, Wisconsin, Texas and Georgia – has soared this year, while Republican turnout has remained steady but unextraordinary, as reported by The Associated Press news agency. That has been a worrying sign for Republicans.

Maine Senator Susan Collins, a Republican incumbent seen as vulnerable in her race against Democrat Troy Jackson, has been among those who have said they will not attend.

Several candidates in key House races have pointed to prior commitments.

Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks told The Bulwark she preferred to spend her time in her home district in Iowa, where she faces a challenge from Democrat Christina Bohannan.

“Because I have a district that I have to be in and take care of, so I’ll be in my district,” she explained about her decision.

Miller-Meeks eked out a victory over Bohannan in 2024, winning by a margin of just 0.1 percent.

Are Democrats countering?

Several left-leaning groups are organising protests.

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries has announced that four Democratic lawmakers will travel to Dallas for counterprogramming during the Republican convention.

However, the cash-strapped Democratic National Committee (DNC) has avoided holding its own midterm convention.

The committee went into debt in the wake of the 2024 presidential election, even putting up its Washington, DC-based headquarters as collateral for a $15m loan, the NOTUS news site reported in July.

The RNC has not yet released a final price tag for its convention.

Allegations of misconduct between two justices threaten to pull court into political battles ahead of upcoming election.

Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Andre Mendonca has ordered the suspension of federal police chief Andrei Rodrigues and the force’s intelligence chief Leandro Almada amid growing divisions that have tested the credibility of the country’s highest court.

The suspensions were announced on Tuesday. Mendonca, appointed by former right-wing President Jair Bolsonaro, has accused Rodrigues and Almada of producing six illegal reports on the activities of justices.

The move was backed by a majority on one of the high court’s five-member panels.

But it is likely to be challenged by the government, possibly pulling the administration of leftist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva into a political battle ahead of October’s presidential election.

“Investigating possible evidence of crimes is correct,” Institutional Relations Minister Jose Guimaraes, a top aide to Lula, said in response to the decision on social media. “But this measure smells electoral to me. That cannot happen.”

Polls show Lula and Jair Bolsonaro’s eldest son, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, in a tight race ahead of the first round of voting on October 4.

The Supreme Court has been roiled by mutual accusations of wrongdoing between Justice Alexandre de Moraes, appointed under centre-right President Michel Temer, and Mendonca, a Bolsonaro appointee.

De Moraes has become a prominent target of right-wing criticism, particularly after he oversaw the case against Jair Bolsonaro for plotting a coup after the 2022 election.

A report detailing possible links between de Moraes and disgraced banker Daniel Vorcaro was made public by Mendonca last week.

De Moraes, however, responded by accusing Mendonca of abusing his power, citing federal police intelligence reports and urging the court to investigate him. Mendonca has now challenged the legality of those reports.

The Vorcaro corruption scandal has widened to include powerful political figures on both the left and right.

Vorcaro was arrested in 2025 for allegedly overseeing one of the largest bank fraud schemes in the history of Brazil, leaving billions in owed money.

Flavio Bolsonaro has also faced scrutiny for his ties with Vorcaro, after he approached the banker for assistance in funding a film about his father. Jair Bolsonaro is currently serving a 27-year prison sentence.

The right-wing senator used Tuesday’s suspension to push his claim that the prosecution of his father was a political “witch-hunt”. The Federal Police had recommended charges be brought against the elder Bolsonaro in November 2024.

“Lula’s special group in the Federal Police officially unmasked,” Senator Bolsonaro wrote in a social media post. “May the honourable and glorious Federal Police regain its autonomy to go after criminals, and not Lula’s political adversaries.”

William Marcel Murad, the federal police’s executive director, released a statement saying that Rodrigues has the agency’s “full confidence” and that agents “will not be shaken by attacks”.

Voters in two US states — New Hampshire and Rhode Island — will head to the polls this week to select Democratic and Republican candidates for this November’s United States midterm elections.

In what’s been a campaign season full of unexpected twists and turns, from the continued growth of the Democrats’ progressive arm to mixed results for President Donald Trump-endorsed Republican candidates, the contests mark some of the last primaries before the US makes a final determination on which party will control both chambers of the US Congress.

Before that happens, candidates in some of these New England states’ most notable races will have to contend with some of this midterm’s biggest themes: How much Republicans should align with Trump, and whether a Democratic incumbent can fight off a primary challenger.

Here are the races to watch:

In New Hampshire, a battle to replace a retiring senator

• When does voting in New Hampshire start? Opening times for polling locations vary across the state, but all polls must open on Tuesday, September 8 by 11am (15:00 GMT).
• When does voting in New Hampshire end? Closing times also vary, but state law stipulates polls cannot close earlier than 7pm (23:00 GMT).

The most notable race in New Hampshire will determine the two candidates who will face off to replace outgoing Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen.

US Representative Chris Pappas has emerged as the frontrunner to win the Democratic nomination. On the Republican side, John Sununu holds the benefit of strong name recognition from being a part of the state’s most prominent political dynasty.

Democrats have hoped to retain this seat, a critical must-keep as they look to take back the US Senate currently controlled by Republicans. But recent polling of likely voters conducted by Senate Republicans’ campaign arm shows Sununu leading Pappas by one point. The survey, conducted in the final days of August, found nearly one in four voters are undecided.

However, both candidates, if they win their primaries on Tuesday, may have to confront actions by their party’s top figures, who could complicate their campaigns.

In the Democratic primary, Pappas remains the favourite, but his lead has dropped by double digits, according to some polls.

Pappas’s closest opponent is democratic socialist Karishma Manzur, who has picked up support, in part, over her calls to “end US complicity in the genocide of Palestinians”. While Pappas has stressed the importance of the current US-Israel relationship, the congressman has also said he supports a two-state solution and “increasing” aid to Gaza.

Manzur has criticised Pappas for connections to political donors, including those connected to Israel.

Former US Vice President Kamala Harris endorsed Pappas last week. Harris’s support, which Pappas said he was “proud” to receive, could help him across the finish line in the state’s Democratic primary, where most of the party’s voters lean more moderate. Pappas has served in the US House since 2019 and has held elected office almost continuously since graduating from college in 2002. He defeated Karoline Leavitt in his 2022 reelection bid before her stint as Trump’s White House press secretary.

In the Republican primary, Sununu is running to recapture the Senate seat he once held before being defeated by Shaheen in 2008. He faces Scott Brown, also a former senator who once held Massachusetts US Senator Elizabeth Warren’s seat, along with seven other opponents.

Sununu has been trying to put distance between himself and Trump. Trump is, however, backing Sununu over Brown in the primary, despite an ongoing war of words he’s had with Sununu’s family over the years — Sununu’s father and brother have both served as governor, and all have been critical of Trump.

Brown won a special election in Massachusetts after the death of Senator Ted Kennedy in 2009, lost his seat three years later, and unsuccessfully challenged Shaheen in 2014. In Trump’s first administration, Brown served as the US Ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa.

In Rhode Island, can an unpopular sitting Democratic governor fight off a challenge?

• When does voting in Rhode Island start? With the exception of one town, voting starts on Wednesday, September 9 at 7am (11:00 GMT).
• When does voting in Rhode Island end? Polls close at 8pm on Wednesday (00:00 GMT on Thursday).

Unlike other states this election cycle, the biggest race in Rhode Island is for governor, not for seats in the US Congress.

Vulnerable Democratic Governor Dan McKee is fighting off a strong primary challenge from pharmacy executive Helena Foulkes.

The highly unpopular incumbent has trailed Foulkes, whose grandfather and uncle were both lawmakers in the neighbouring US state of Connecticut, by as much as 38 points, according to a recent poll. Foulkes has also outraised McKee.

This race is a rematch of a bitter, hard-fought primary four years ago, when McKee, who had been elevated to governor when his predecessor became former US President Joe Biden’s commerce secretary, narrowly beat Foulkes in a crowded race.

While most of this year’s competitive midterm primaries have centred on ideological or generational differences, the outcome of this race could come down to complaints about a freeway bridge in Providence, the state’s largest city, that was partially closed in 2023 due to safety issues.

The resulting congestion and economic fallout caused by the closure have fuelled strong voter resentment towards McKee, one of the most endangered elected Democrats this cycle. Should McKee be unsuccessful in warding off Foulkes, he would become the first sitting US governor to lose a primary in eight years.

In the Republican primary, Aaron Guckian and Elaine Pelino are vying for the nomination. Guckian is a state trade association executive and was the nominee for lieutenant governor in 2022. He won the two-way primary that year with about 68 percent of the vote. Pelino is a former actress and first-time candidate. The state’s  Republican Party has endorsed Guckian.

It’s been 20 years since Rhode Island elected a Republican governor.

For the first time since World War II, a far-right party is within reach of power at state level in Germany, after coming first in Saxony-Anhalt on Sunday.

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) won 44 percent of the vote, stopping short of an overall majority but making clear its wide political significance.

On election night, AfD’s leader in the state called on other political groups to cooperate. “As a democrat, I will reach out to all those who wish to work with us to bring about a fundamental political turnaround,” Ulrich Siegmund said.

Yet, forming a government will prove difficult. The AfD has been classified as “far-right extremist” by the domestic intelligence agency and other political groups remain wary of striking an alliance.

The AfD has dismissed accusations of extremism and mainstream parties have been unable to halt its surge in the polls over recent months. Latest polling indicates the party, which stands for strong restrictions on immigration, restoring ties with Russia, cutting support to Ukraine and quitting the euro, is Germany’s most popular at national level.

The Saxony-Anhalt election could be a harbinger of a historic return of the far-right in the 2029 national election, when forecasts say the AfD stands a realistic chance of finishing first.

What happened in Saxony-Anhalt?

Siegmund, the charismatic 35-year-old who attracted thousands to his campaign rallies, said AfD “made history”.

“The people have made it absolutely clear that they finally want political change and, above all, they have shown that they want it with ⁠us,” he told supporters.

The AfD achieved its best-ever election result in Saxony-Anhalt with 44 percent of the vote, leaving all other parties far behind. The incumbent centre-right Christian Democrats (CDU), led by Chancellor Friedrich Merz, scored less than half of that share with 17 percent.

The AfD is projected to gain 39 of the 83 seats in the state parliament in Magdeburg, leaving it three short of the 42 needed for an absolute majority.

That means the party must find allies, but all other mainstream parties refuse to work with the far-right, a strategy of non-cooperation known as the “firewall”. The AfD has so far never participated in a governing coalition in Germany’s 16 states nor in its federal government.

While he now appears willing to strike deals with other parties to come to power, previously Siegmund signalled unwillingness to find middle ground with other political groups. Leading up to the vote, he stated that he was only interested in governing alone to bring about fundamental political change in Germany.

How did AfD fare in recent elections?

The election takes the AfD one step closer to advancing its agenda, while also reflecting the growing unpopularity of Germany’s ruling coalition.

In Saxony-Anhalt, the party more than doubled its vote share — from 21 percent in the last election. By contrast, the CDU’s vote halved from 37 percent to 17 percent, its worst result ever in the east-central German state.

Federal elections last year similarly resulted in a landmark performance by the AfD, which emerged as the largest opposition faction in the Bundestag, the German federal parliament in Berlin. The party came second with 21 percent of the vote, securing its highest-ever showing.

In state elections in Baden-Wurttemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate earlier this year too, the AfD more than doubled its seats — though it still finished third. In 2024, the AfD emerged victorious in the Thuringia state election and second in the Brandenburg state election — both were firsts for the party.

The AfD’s electoral gains in Saxony-Anhalt mirror growing dissatisfaction among voters — especially in the former East Germany — about the stagnant economy, high unemployment and domestic security, which the party largely pins on immigration.

What challenges lie ahead for AfD?

Since its formation in 2013, the AfD has been embroiled in various scandals and has faced major controversies, including alleged foreign espionage links, secret deportation plans and internal nepotism.

The party went from a fringe Eurosceptic group to the country’s most powerful opposition force in little more than a decade, becoming too extreme even for the European Parliament’s far-right Identity & Democracy group. It kicked the party out in May 2024 after lead AfD candidate Maximilian Krah stated that not everyone in the SS – Adolf Hitler’s infamous Nazi paramilitary organisation – was a criminal.

Krah has also been under investigation by German prosecutors for alleged illegal payments, bribery and money laundering linked to China and Russia. The German parliament last year decided to lift the far-right legislator’s immunity to help investigators.

AfD politicians have also come under fire for employing family members, including in Saxony-Anhalt, where several parliamentarians are reported to have employed relatives.

Bundestag President, Julia Klockner, banned seven AfD employees from entering the German parliament over security concerns, after they failed internal background reliability checks due to their ties to right-wing extremist networks and past criminal convictions.

Senior AfD figures also faced a backlash for attending a secretive meeting to discuss mass deportation plans for people with a migration background.

What are the AfD’s prospects for the national election in 2029?

Pollsters are unanimous in forecasting the AfD as the largest party in Germany in the next national election in 2029, with around 28 percent of the vote.

That would mark a major transformation in the German political landscape from 2025, when the CDU and its ally the Christian Social Union together won 28.5 percent of the vote.

Yet even that outcome would not necessarily give AfD the ability to govern. If other parties maintain a “firewall” policy, that could prevent the far-right party from forming a coalition government.

Still, the Saxony-Anhalt election has been received by some politicians as a call for change. “Politics begins with considering reality,” Cem Ozdemir, head of government in the southwestern state of Baden-Wurttemberg and a member of the Green Party, wrote on X.

“That means the AfD is the election winner in Saxony-Anhalt. And that must mean for all democratic forces that nothing can remain as it is, and we must fundamentally reconsider our politics and our political style.”

WASHINGTON — President Trump has locked in a deal to develop Venezuela’s vast oil resources, an arrangement the White House says will bring a country battered by years of economic collapse to a “place where elections are possible.”

But the agreement — backed by acting President Delcy Rodríguez, a holdover from the Nicolás Maduro government that Washington deems “illegitimate” — is raising new uncertainty about how entrenched the unelected government may become.

In January, when the U.S. military captured Maduro, Trump did not say how long a democratic transition would take but said Rodríguez was “gracious” and “essentially willing to do what we think is necessary.”

Asked by The Times on Wednesday what was stopping him from demanding Venezuela set a firm election date, Trump was blunt: “I just don’t think they are ready yet.”

“It’s very new. We took them out of a dictatorship and we’re getting along great with the government,” Trump said. But he said an election would happen “soon.”

U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright walks alongside Venezuela’s interim president, Delcy Rodríguez, after a news conference on the deal to develop 17 oil fields in the country.

(Jesus Vargas / Getty Images)

Under the deal, the U.S. government is partnering with an oil producer to create a new company, North American Blue Energy Partners, to develop 17 fields with a proven potential of 65 billion barrels. NABEP will have rights to the fields for 100 years.

For many Venezuelans, the lack of urgency around elections — set against a deal that gives the United States majority control over roughly a third of the country’s oil reserves — is starting to feel like a broken promise.

“They tell us we have to wait two years, maybe more, while in the meantime they do business with a government that wasn’t elected, that was imposed on us, and that we don’t want,” Carlos Pérez, a 23-year-old automotive mechanics student, told The Times.

Antonio Marchetti, a 45-year-old plumber and electrician, said that while he sees the removal of Maduro as a “good thing,” the oil deal makes it seem as though Trump’s plans were those of a “cowboy, the invader John Wayne,” all along.

“We were expecting elections,” Marchetti said. “This pact with Trump entrenched the dictatorship that he himself declared war on. But to get rid of Maduro, he left the rest and did business with them. It disgusts me.”

A man holds a sign that reads in Spanish, “Yankee out, murderers” during a protest in Caracas on Aug. 29 against President Trump’s deal giving the United States a stake in Venezuela’s oil reserves.

(Pedro Mattey / Associated Press)

The frustrations go beyond Venezuela. In Washington, Republican lawmakers have praised the oil deal, while calling Rodríguez an “interim dictator” who cannot be trusted.

María Corina Machado, the exiled leader of the Venezuelan opposition and a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, on Thursday raised her own worries about what the oil deal means for the future of Venezuela.

In a video message, Machado stopped short of criticizing Trump’s oil deal, but acknowledged concerns about a pact negotiated with an “illegitimate” government.

“Venezuelans know that there can be no development without strong institutions and a government elected by popular vote,” she said. “That is the only real guarantee of success and stability for any large-scale investment.”

A plan in the works

Trump administration officials have characterized the deal as an economic lifeline that will eventually stabilize a country and prepare it for free and fair elections.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said last week that the United States is facilitating talks between Venezuela’s interim government and Dinorah Figuera, an opposition figure leading Venezuela’s 2015 National Assembly, the last democratically elected legislature recognized by the United States.

Machado has been left out of those talks. They are expected to resume in mid-September.

Rubio says that for any election to be “credible,” the voting system will require an overhaul and political parties will need time to organize. Steps also must be taken to ensure the country has a free press.

Echoing Rubio’s comments, the White House said Friday that Trump wants elections held at the “right time,” but that his top priority is to bring Venezuela “back from the dead and rebuild the country after it was incompetently ruled by a nasty dictatorship.”

U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright meets with Venezuelan acting President Delcy Rodríguez at Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas on Sept. 2.

(Pedro Mattey / Ap Photo/pedro Mattey)

On Wednesday, while Energy Secretary Chris Wright visited Caracas, Rodríguez declined to set a firm date for an election, but added, “I have worked tirelessly to ensure that Venezuela is ready and prepared when the time comes for its electoral process, which will take place — have no doubt about that: There will be an electoral process.”

The open-ended approach to holding an election, however, has drawn criticism from former Trump administration officials, who argue the lack of a timeline essentially lets Rodríguez govern indefinitely.

“Here’s my fear: It makes us Delcy’s partner, and gives the president a reason to want her to remain in power,” Elliott Abrams, who served as U.S. special envoy to Venezuela during Trump’s first term, told The Times.

He contended that the White House so far appears to prefer a pliant interlocutor, and Rodríguez, he says, will do “whatever Trump tells her to do.”

If an election is to take place in Venezuela, a nine-month runway for preparation is likely to be expected, Abrams said.

People shop for produce at a market in Maracaibo, the heart of Venezuela’s oil industry. .

(Ariana Cubillos / Associated Press)

In Washington, some Republican lawmakers have continued to call for elections in Venezuela, arguing that Rodríguez cannot be trusted.

“The only way we will have a prosperous Venezuela is with the end of the murderous regime and the return of democracy,” Rep. Carlos A. Gimenez (R-Fla.) wrote on social media. He also called Rodríguez an “interim dictator.”

In an interview with NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said he does not necessarily think elections should happen before the oil agreement is finalized, but he said they “need to proceed rapidly.”

“I believe they should proceed no later than midway through next year,” he said.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said he is working with Trump and Rubio to ensure “free, fair and transparent elections as soon as possible.” He did not, however, say what would constitute “soon.”

Mixed views on economic hope

In the Lake Maracaibo region, an area that would see renewed investments under the oil agreement, Junior Araujo — a 47-year-old oil worker — sees a “wonderful opportunity to be reborn.”

Araujo, the father of three, is in desperate need of a better economic outlook. He works 120 hours a week and earns only $20. For his family, food alone usually costs about $150 a week.

“We have to get creative and find new ways to make ends meet through side jobs like selling clothes and making yogurt,” he said. “That’s our real financial situation.”

Venezuelans watch oil tankers anchored in Lake Maracaibo on Sept. 4. Much of the country’s oil industry is centered in the Maracaibo region.

(Humberto Matheus/Sipa USA via Associated Press)

For Araujo, the hope for a better economy does not take away his frustrations with the government.

“We’re neither happy nor dancing here, all our benefits have been taken away from us,” he said. “Our main problem is the current government; we need to restore our institutions.”

Nazareth Lezama, a 35-year-old teacher, also sees the oil deal as an economic opportunity but remains concerned that the current government may not have negotiated the best price or conditions for Venezuela. She added this has happened in the past.

“We must be clear that this regime destroyed the oil industry,” she said, adding that Venezuelans “need elections to choose leaders based on merit.”

Marchetti, the plumber from Caracas, says the oil deal is a “100-year chain” on Venezuelans imposed by Trump. He said it has become the “last straw” for him, and he has decided to leave Venezuela and emigrate to Europe.

“With all the pain in my heart, I will leave everything behind. I have a European passport; it won’t be easy to start a life from scratch, but there is no hope left here,” he said.

He does not know where he will land yet. But he knows he needs to leave Venezuela.

“This ship is sinking,” he said.

Times staff writer Ceballos reported from Washington. Special correspondent Mogollón reported from Caracas.

The anti-immigration Reform UK party said two of its senior officials had stepped down on Friday, following allegations that they were secretly filmed appearing to discuss ways to circumvent UK electoral laws on foreign donations.

The far-right party, whose popularity has soared in the past two years, is already embroiled in several other funding scandals involving its leader Nigel Farage. On Friday, it announced an internal probe into the latest case, which was brought to light by a Channel 4 investigation.

Reform is currently holding its annual party conference in Birmingham, central England.

Here’s what we know about the foreign funding claims and how they could affect British politics.

What did the Channel 4 investigation show?

Channel 4, an independent broadcaster, aired footage of senior Reform officials Dan Jukes and James Orr meeting with undercover reporters who were posing as prospective Reform backers from the United States.

In one instance during the programme, which was broadcast on Thursday night, footage was shown of Jukes appearing to talk about a proposal for Reform to receive a 500,000-pound ($675,000) donation from one of the men, who was presenting himself as an American financier, through his son, who he said lives in the UK.

The “son” was actually another journalist from investigative group Verbatim, which recorded the exchange.

In separate footage, Orr appeared to discuss a plan for the US donor to fund opinion polls for Reform UK rather than donating the money directly.

He told the undercover reporter that “we just don’t have British-resident donors, British entities, that would support us”.

During the investigation, Verbatim reported that Reform officials arranged for the US donor to pay more than 30,000 pounds ($40,500) to fund three opinion polls, without disclosing the source of the funds.

Channel 4 said it had verified the findings from Verbatim, an offshoot of the Centre for Climate Reporting.

What are the UK’s rules against foreign funding for political parties?

Under UK electoral law, political parties may only accept donations from British voters or UK-registered businesses. Donations from individuals or organisations based overseas are strictly forbidden.

In a statement on Friday, a UK Electoral Commission spokesperson said political parties must report all “permissible donations” they accept exceeding 11,180 pounds ($15,120) and all “impermissible donations” exceeding 500 pounds ($676).

“Parties are responsible for ensuring their internal processes and controls are fit for purpose,” the spokesperson said. “Information about any potential attempt to evade the controls on donations is for the police to consider.”

How has Reform responded to the allegations?

Following the programme’s broadcast, Reform initially issued a statement denying any wrongdoing and claiming the allegations were a hoax.

In a later statement, however, the party said it was conducting an internal probe and that Orr and Jukes had stepped down pending its outcome.

Orr, the party’s policy head, said he had agreed to step down temporarily and would “cooperate fully” with the investigation.

Jukes, Farage’s long-term aide, denied any wrongdoing but said he had “stepped back from politics in order to clear my name”.

Farage accused the undercover journalists of “entrapment” and told broadcaster LBC, “they got a couple of our contractors to say things that perhaps should not have been said”.

“And as a result of that, you know, they have been removed this morning. And yeah, you know, I’m not happy about it,” Farage said.

“The party has broken no laws, the party has not taken any dodgy money or anything like that whatsoever,” Farage insisted.

Will Reform face legal consequences?

It remains to be seen. The UK’s ruling Labour Party has written to the police asking them to investigate possible criminal offences.

The Metropolitan Police said it was aware of the allegations in the broadcast and would assess any information provided to them.

This does not amount to the formal launch of an investigation.

Why does this matter?

The latest donation scandal is another blow for Reform, which has seen its place as the UK’s most popular party slip in opinion polls in recent months.

Last year, polling by YouGov suggested that Reform had become the most popular political party, and would likely win a UK general election if one had been held then. At that point, Labour was trailing far behind in the polls – projected to win just 27.3 percent of parliamentary seats, compared with Reform’s 41.7 percent. The former ruling Conservative Party stood at just 7 percent.

But a poll this week by YouGov showed Reform now tied with the UK’s left-wing Labour Party with 23 percent support each. The Conservatives have caught up with 20 percent.

This is not the first funding scandal Reform has grappled with, either. In July, Farage dramatically stepped down as Member of Parliament for Clacton amid allegations, also revealed in the UK media, that convicted fraudster George Cottrell, 32, recruited and paid three staff to work on Farage’s social media before the 2024 general election and has continued to allow Farage to use a five-storey Georgian townhouse he rented near Buckingham Palace.

Farage ultimately re-won his seat in Clacton at a by-election but still faces the prospect of a parliamentary inquiry into undeclared funding of 5 million pounds ($6.7m) from Thailand-based billionaire and crypto investor Christopher Harborne, who paid for Farage’s personal security before he announced his candidacy in the 2024 general election. So far, Farage denies all wrongdoing.

This week, Farage told the BBC that the parliamentary inquiry was unfair. He said there was a “wilful attempt, and it’s gone on now for months, to say that everything to do with Reform, that every individual involved with Reform is somehow a crook”.

This is evidence of “the establishment in a very coordinated way fighting back”, he claimed.

However, Justin Fisher, professor of political science at Brunel University of London, told Al Jazeera Reform’s latest donation scandal would further hurt Farage’s standing both within and outside his party, and could cost Reform votes in the next elections.

“If this was an isolated incident, then Reform would probably be able to brush it off,” said Fisher. “But it comes on top of serious questions about a donation to Nigel Farage, and a donation to Reform which allegedly had overseas links. This all contributes to a narrative which Reform is having great difficulty avoiding.”

The Missouri Supreme Court has unanimously blocked a congressional map backed by United States President Donald Trump ahead of November’s midterm elections, restoring the state’s previous districts.

Thursday’s ruling delivered a rare judicial rebuke to Trump in the national battle over redistricting. But it is unlikely to be the final word in the case, with Republican officials already pledging to appeal the ruling.

At the heart of the case is a congressional map signed into law in September 2025, designed to help Republicans win an extra seat in the US House of Representatives this year.

But the partisan redistricting effort prompted a popular backlash, with nearly 300,000 Missouri residents signing a petition to instead put the new map to a vote.

Missouri’s Secretary of State Denny Hoskins rejected the petition as legally insufficient. That set up the legal fight, which the Missouri Supreme Court decided on Thursday.

“The referendum petition was legal, sufficient, and timely, and the secretary incorrectly concluded otherwise,” the court wrote in its ruling.

It added that the Missouri Constitution has made such petitions legal, and “no exception applies”. The court is staffed by seven judges, five of whom are Republican-appointed.

The decision, however, places Missouri in a complicated position. Two months remain until the midterm elections, and ballots will soon be printed.

There are also outstanding legal questions over whether a state’s general election can use different congressional districts than its primaries did.

Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, a Republican, said she would immediately appeal the ruling to the US Supreme Court. She called Thursday’s decision a “full-fledged constitutional crisis”.

“Never before in American history has a court overturned a congressional map after a primary and before a general election,” she said in a statement.

Trump also denounced the ruling in a social media post, calling it “horrible, ridiculous, and unConstitutional”.

“The Missouri Supreme Court just ridiculously ruled in favor of changing the maps back to what they were a long time ago. It’s called, Ancient History,” he wrote.

Last year, Trump triggered the nationwide redistricting fight when he approached Texas state lawmakers to redraw their maps in a way that would give Republicans an advantage.

Normally, congressional maps are redrawn once every 10 years to reflect census results.

But Trump encouraged Republican-led states to issue new maps mid-decade, as a strategy to help the right-wing party maintain control over the House.

Some 10 states ultimately decided to redistrict, including Missouri. Most tilted in favour of Republicans. California, meanwhile, redrew its map to skew Democratic.

Prior to Thursday’s ruling, Missouri’s Supreme Court affirmed that the special legislative action to change the state’s congressional map was lawful. In the US, no federal law bars partisan redistricting, known as gerrymandering.

But Thursday’s decision upheld the legality of the petition campaign to put the map up for a vote.

The Missouri Supreme Court barred the 2025 map from being used in November’s midterm election or any future election until Missouri voters approve it first.

The group People Not Politicians spearheaded the referendum petition. In a statement on Thursday, it applauded the state court’s decision, which overturned a lower court ruling.

“Supreme Court of Missouri has ruled: Missourians will vote on politicians’ rigged map,” the group wrote on social media.

It also blamed Missouri’s secretary of state for any hurdles to restoring the old map.

“Hoskins had the power to prevent all this confusion months ago — and he chose not to,” the group said.

A day before the court’s ruling, hundreds of people rallied outside the state Supreme Court, chanting: “Let us vote!”

Grant Christensen, a resident of Jefferson City and referendum supporter, said he had signed the petition.

“Gerrymandering is the same as voter suppression,” Christensen said. “Cutting up districts in order to steer them to vote one way or the other is not fair.”

Missouri’s 2025 congressional map had already shaped the state’s primary elections. Critics, however, point out that Hoskins did not reject the referendum until August 4, the day of the party primaries.

The outcome of the legal battle is likely to be most pivotal for Missouri’s 5th congressional district, currently held by Democrat Emanuel Cleaver. His district, which encompasses parts of Kansas City, was reshaped to favour Republicans.

Sept. 2 (UPI) — Nicaragua’s National Assembly gave initial approval to a constitutional reform that would bar opposition parties from participating in elections and extend presidential terms from six to seven years.

The measure formally suspends elections scheduled for November, extending the terms of co-Presidents Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo and pushing the country’s next elections to 2028.

Nicaraguan law requires constitutional amendments to be approved by two separate legislative sessions before taking effect.

The reform cleared its first vote in the National Assembly but faces a second round of approval in January, according to Murillo, local news outlet Divergentes reported.

If approved, the reform would consolidate a political system without electoral competition by giving the state the authority to exclude opposition groups under broad and discretionary criteria related to the defense of sovereignty and national security.

The reform also extends the terms of the co-presidents and other elected officials, as well as the heads of the military and police, from six to seven years, HCH reported.

Following the reform’s approval, Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday called on international partners to immediately end business as usual with Nicaragua’s government, warning that repressive regimes should not enjoy the commercial and political benefits afforded to democracies in the region.

In a statement, the State Department condemned the constitutional reform, accusing the Ortega-Murillo-controlled National Assembly of “gutting what was left of Nicaragua’s democracy.”

Washington said it would pursue multilateral action at the next foreign ministers’ meeting of the Organization of American States, or OAS, and reaffirmed its commitment to coordinating and implementing a new round of economic and financial sanctions aimed at curbing abuses by the Sandinista government.

The approved reform builds on constitutional changes enacted in February 2025, when Nicaragua’s National Assembly extended the presidential term from five to six years, created the position of co-president for Murillo, who had previously served as vice president, and reorganized the structure of the state, Infobae reported.

Ortega, 80, has governed Nicaragua since 2006 and publicly declared in July that the country would no longer hold elections in order to prevent the opposition from returning to power.

Germany has formally accused Russia of attempting an attack last month at the Leipzig-Halle airport, a state-owned facility in the eastern part of the country.

On Tuesday, German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt said his country’s intelligence community had determined that a drone discovered at the airport was consistent with Russian technology. The drone had been bearing explosives, according to official reports.

The announcement triggered several retaliatory measures, including the announcement that Germany would shut down a Russian consulate.

The incident is seen as part of a growing trend in Europe, where officials fear Russia is mounting a campaign of intimidation against members of the NATO military alliance.

What was found at the Leipzig airport? How have officials responded? And what does it say about tensions between Europe and Russia as Moscow’s war in Ukraine drags on? Read on for a quick explainer on the basics.

What happened at Leipzig airport?

An explosive-laden drone was found near a cargo plane belonging to the Ukrainian firm Antonov Airlines on the evening of August 4.

An employee flagged the drone, which was located in a cargo area near a runway, resulting in a temporary shutdown at the Leipzig-Halle airport, a major cargo hub in the eastern German state of Saxony.

Specialists were called in to defuse the explosives with a robot. A second drone was reportedly destroyed after it collided with an aeroplane near the airport.

Why does Germany blame Russia?

Dobrindt, Germany’s interior minister, said investigators identified a configuration and components resembling those seen in Russia’s war against Ukraine.

“Taken together, the police investigations, the pattern and intelligence findings prove a Russian responsibility for the attempted attack at Leipzig airport,” Dobrindt said.

Germany’s government has not publicly shared specifics connecting the incident to Moscow or released all the evidence.

But Dobrindt said the device reflected “a high degree of technical expertise”. He added, however, that the task of carrying out the attack appears to have fallen to “low-level agents”, whom he described as people acting “on behalf of Russian state entities”. He did not specify which ones.

How has Germany responded?

Germany has taken a series of retaliatory actions since announcing the intelligence community’s findings.

Starting on September 18, a Russian consulate in Bonn, a major German city on the Rhine River, will be shuttered. The Russian House, a cultural gathering place in Berlin, will also be closed, though the date has yet to be determined.

German leaders said they would also recommend more Russians be added to the European Union’s sanctions list and consider heightening entry controls for Russian citizens.

The German Foreign Ministry has also summoned Russia’s ambassador to the country to discuss the incident.

How has Russia reacted to Germany’s claims?

Moscow has denied it had anything to do with the drone. The Russian Embassy in Berlin called the claims absurd and warned that the accusations would have consequences.

Separately, Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the government of German Chancellor Friedrich Merz of pointing the finger at Moscow to distract from domestic problems and falling approval ratings.

He also suggested that Germany had planted evidence to frame Russia for the drone incident.

How have NATO and European allies responded?

NATO allies like Poland, Italy, the United Kingdom, Sweden and the Czech Republic have all backed Berlin’s claims against Moscow.

“Whenever Russian hybrid activities target one of our allies, we are all exposed,” the Czech Foreign Ministry posted on social media.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said she would discuss the incident with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, and EU foreign ministers are expected to prepare a joint response.

How has Ukraine responded?

Since February 2022, Ukraine has been battling a war that began with Russia’s full-scale invasion of its neighbour.

There has been speculation that Moscow’s increasing military threats in Europe are designed to weaken NATO support for Kyiv.

Ukraine has welcomed Germany’s measures against Russia, with Ukrainian Ambassador Oleksii Makeiev praising Berlin’s response on Tuesday.

Germany has been a key strategic partner for Ukraine, and in April, the two countries unveiled a security cooperation agreement that would strengthen joint air defences.

As part of the deal, Berlin agreed to fund missile contracts for Kyiv, and the two would collaborate on drone co-production.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said that his country’s airspace is becoming increasingly unsafe for civilian aviation, with both sides in the war increasingly relying on drone warfare.

What other actions has Russia been accused of in Europe?

Critics have long warned that Russia is taking an increasingly aggressive stance towards Europe, which has opposed its invasion of Ukraine.

The Associated Press news agency has logged some 200 incidents of sabotage and malign activity in Europe since the 2022 invasion.

Those acts include cyberattacks, espionage, disinformation campaigns, arson and interference with infrastructure.

One case, in March 2024, involved a warehouse in east London being set on fire. The facility stored aid for Ukraine, and prosecutors blamed the attack on members of the Russian-backed Wagner Group, a paramilitary organisation.

Such low-level operations are often called “hybrid” attacks, as they remain below the threshold of open conflict but still succeed in sowing unease through violence.

Why are these tensions erupting now?

Germany says covert operations like the attempted drone attack at the Leipzig airport are meant to undermine the country’s political backing for Ukraine in its defence against Russia.

The war has stretched for more than four years, and Ukrainian officials have warned that the coming winter may prove the most challenging yet.

The attempted drone attack also comes at a pivotal time for German politics.

On September 6, the eastern province of Saxony-Anhalt is holding elections, and the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party is hoping to make gains, building in part on public weariness with the war.

The AfD has called for strengthening ties with Russia and has been critical of support for Ukraine. It is currently leading in public opinion polls ahead of the vote.

Departed Labour Party leader now plans to focus on international affairs.

Former British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced he is to stand down as a member of parliament.

Starmer said on Tuesday that it was the “right time” to resign as the MP for the Holborn and St Pancras seat in London after 11 years, triggering a by-election. The announcement comes six weeks after his resignation as the United Kingdom’s premier, having lost the support of ruling Labour Party MPs.

“It is now time to step aside and focus on other issues: international affairs including defence, security, trade and technology in a fast-changing world,” Starmer wrote on social media.

As party leader, Starmer led Labour to a historic 2024 landslide after 14 years of Conservative rule. However, within two years, U-turns, cuts, a diplomatic scandal, pressure from the radical right-wing Reform UK, and the challenge of Andy Burnham – who became Britain’s seventh prime minister in a decade – eroded Starmer’s authority, and he was forced out.

Starmer had previously said he would remain ‌as a lawmaker until the next general election. But he told the Camden New Journal, a local newspaper in his North London constituency, that he had changed his mind and intended to leave UK Parliament after 11 years, six of those as leader of the party.

The newspaper did not give a timeframe for when an election would be held for ⁠Starmer’s seat in the constituency of Holborn and St ⁠Pancras.

Despite his dwindling popularity at home, foreign affairs were seen by some as Starmer’s strength, particularly for the strong relationships he formed with EU leaders in the wake of Brexit, especially French President Emmanuel ⁠Macron, with whom he established the so-called Coalition of the Willing in support of Ukraine.

Starmer comfortably kept his seat in the 2024 election with a majority of over 11,500 votes, though Andrew Feinstein, an independent candidate who campaigned primarily around his opposition to Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza and Labour’s support for it, took nearly 19 percent of ballots.

Burnham’s accession has led to ‌a ‌bounce in the polls for Labour, though he faces tougher challenges ahead, with Parliament resuming on Tuesday.

Ten months after a coup, military leaders say the referendum is designed to stabilise future civilian governments.

Ballot counting is under way in a referendum in Guinea-Bissau that could significantly boost the presidency’s power.

Citizens of the West African nation took to the polls on Sunday to vote on a new constitution that would reform the country’s political system ahead of elections later this year.

Turnout “exceeded” 55 percent and the poll took place “without any incidents that would call into question the credibility of the vote”, Idrissa Djalo, executive secretary of the National Electoral Commission, told a news briefing on Sunday.

Results are expected on Tuesday.

The referendum comes less than 10 months after the military seized power in a coup.

The military government says it seeks to stabilise institutions before presidential and parliamentary elections, scheduled for December 6, designed to hand power back to a civilian government.

The new constitution, which citizens were asked to approve on Sunday, would switch Guinea-Bissau’s political system from a parliamentary to a presidential one.

It would abandon the system by which prime ministers came from the parliamentary majority, an approach that has led to uncomfortable power-sharing.

The new system would also allow the head of state to appoint and dismiss the prime minister and members of the government, and to dissolve parliament.

On Sunday, voters answered “yes” or “no” to the question: “Do you agree with the entry into force of the new constitution approved by the National Transitional Council?”

“What we want after this referendum is to allow whoever wins the elections to see out their mandate without hindrance,” military leader and transitional President General Horta Inta-A Na Man said.

Under the transitional charter he upholds, Inta-A Na Man is barred from running in elections.

The referendum follows years of political instability. In the November 2025 presidential election, both candidates declared victory and accused each other of electoral interference. The coup happened one day after.

WASHINGTON — Thousands of protesters are rallying Friday on the National Mall in support of voting rights and racial justice ahead of the midterm elections, following a wave of changes to voting laws and redistricting that civil rights groups have condemned as detrimental to Black Americans.

The 2026 “Defend the Vote” March on Washington, organized by the Rev. Al Sharpton and Martin Luther King III, echoes the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s 1963 march. The event follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark April decision in Louisiana v. Callais that reinterpreted key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, allowing Southern states to redraw their congressional maps in a way that erodes equal representation in Black communities.

“We’ve been doing these marches for years, but this is probably the most important because this is the first year we are marching that the voting rights bill has been nullified by the Supreme Court,” Sharpton, founder of the National Action Network, said in an interview with The Associated Press.

“Marches are designed to grab attention and then go into the trenches and organize around that,” he said.

The march opened with prayer and statements from Interfaith Alliance representatives. They spoke on diversity, equity and inclusion practices, voting rights and systemic racism.

“Creator of all, let us draw on each other, with love and mercy, and hold each other up as we march, wipe each other’s tears, heal each other’s wounds,” Ambereen Kahn, an Interfaith Alliance representative, said. “Most compassionate, protect our leaders who guide, instill in their hearts the values of our shared humanity.”

This year’s march, which Sharpton’s group is co-hosting with King’s Drum Major Institute, a progressive think tank and community action group, features dozens of speakers, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.

Sharpton said thousands of civil rights activists from across the southeastern U.S. were traveling to the capital by bus for the rally.

Event echoes iconic Lincoln Memorial rally

On Thursday, Courtney Pope, 48, was marching across the King Bridge to the Civil Rights Museum in Memphis. But on Friday, she and other members of the National Handmaid Army were at the Washington march with plans to travel to New York and New Jersey over the next few days.

For Pope, the rally is about finding community alongside promoting voting rights.

“I know that we’ll only be successful if we band together despite our differences,” Pope said.

Friday’s event harkens back to King Jr.’s historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963, when more than 200,000 people gathered at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial. That march, an inflection point in the Civil Rights Movement, came at a fraught moment for the country, when economic headwinds, civil unrest, political division and the Vietnam War bitterly divided Americans.

Sharpton said the Trump administration’s immigration policy for Haitians and white South Africans, as well as cuts to social programs like Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act’s health subsidies, are unifying policies for this year’s ideologically diverse march attendees. But the redistricting efforts by Republican-led states set to reduce the number of Black lawmakers in Congress loom large over Friday’s march.

“This march is about people who refuse to be counted out. When the courts and the legislature broke apart District 6, they did not just redraw lines,” Rep. Cleo Fields, D-La., said in a texted statement. “They told hundreds of thousands of Black families from Baton Rouge up through the Delta that their voice could be taken away at any moment.”

Fields was the central character in the Supreme Court decision that hollowed out the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The court ruled that his district, created just one term ago to permit a second majority-Black district in a state where Blacks make up 33% of the population, was unconstitutional because it relied too heavily on race.

The court has held that maps can be redrawn for partisan reasons.

Louisiana’s legislature rushed to redraw the district after the high court’s decision, reshaping Fields’ district to cluster it around predominantly white communities in the Baton Rouge area and southern Louisiana.

Fields has opted not to seek reelection to Congress and instead is pursuing a seat in the state Senate.

“The people taking part in this historic march are answering back, and history will remember that they did,” Fields said.

Embattled Black lawmakers see need for continued rights push

Rep. Shomari Figures, an Alabama Democrat whose majority-Black district was targeted by the state’s Republican-led redistricting effort, said the original voting rights fight required local movements, national figures, lots of coordination and strategy. He sees this year’s march as a continuation of that legacy.

“My district includes Montgomery, which was the birthplace of it all. It started with a bus boycott in 1955 and that, ultimately, morphed into a broader struggle for civil rights and led to a more broad Civil Rights Movement,” Figures told the AP.

“It led to a Civil Rights Act, led to the Fair Housing Act, led obviously to the Voting Rights Act, and the voting rights movement,” Figures added.

Ahead of Friday, organizations participating in the march, including the NAACP, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and Black Voters Matter, filed new claims in federal court in their existing lawsuit against President Trump’s executive order restricting mail-in voting. The Supreme Court cleared a path Monday for possible implementation of the order, though it remains unclear how much can be put in place before the midterms.

“We will not stand idly by while the voices of the people are silenced,” NAACP President Derrick Johnson said in a statement Thursday. “We must protect every eligible citizen’s right to cast their ballot.”

Brown and Junkroski write for the Associated Press. AP writers Gary Fields in Washington and Kimberly Chandler in Montgomery, Ala., contributed to this report.

Judge blocks Trump’s mail voting rules for a second time, just days before ballots go out for the midterms.

A United States federal judge has for a second time blocked the Trump administration’s overhaul of election rules aimed at limiting voting by mail.

District Judge Indira Talwani late on Thursday blocked the US Postal Service’s new ballot rules for 14 days, hours after the agency said they had taken effect.

The ruling is part of an ongoing battle prompted by President Donald Trump’s bid to limit voting by mail, which is heating up as the US heads towards midterm elections in November that will decide control of Congress and the Senate.

Nearly a third of American voters cast votes by mail. The first ballots for the midterms are due to be sent out in about a week.

The new rules require states to submit approved voter lists and follow new ballot formatting before USPS can deliver voting slips. The restrictions were enacted on Thursday after the Supreme Court cleared the way for them.

Talwani wrote in a statement late on Thursday that states “have neither time nor funds” to redesign ballots, update election systems or train officials on the new USPS portal before the upcoming election.

The fight traces back to March, when Trump ordered the Postal Service to withhold ballots unless states supplied approved voter lists and new formatting rules.

Voting rights groups and democratic officials sued, arguing only states and Congress, not the president, can set election rules. Talwani agreed, blocking the rules over the summer.

On Monday, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority threw out that earlier ruling on a technicality, saying that the legal challenge on which it was based was filed too early.

Democratic officials and voting rights groups quickly refiled their challenge once the rules became official, allowing Talwani to block them once more in a late-night order.

Separately, attorneys general from 24 states filed a new lawsuit this week making the same core argument: that only the Senate and Congress, not the president, can have constitutional authority to set election rules.

A hearing on the refiled case is scheduled for September 3, just as ballots are set to go out. That timeline means whatever Talwani or a higher court decides next could take effect as voting begins, or after it is already under way.

Voting from home

California’s mail-in voting system has also become a particular target for Trump.

Voting by mail surged during the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021, California passed a law to automatically mail a ballot to every registered voter.

More than 80 percent of the state’s voters cast a mail-in ballot in 2024 alone.

Moreles, the Santa Clara registrar, said his county has an even higher rate. More than 90 percent of voters in his jurisdiction use mail-in ballots to vote.

His county processed more mail-in ballots in the last general election than the entire state of Texas did. While Texas accepted roughly 342,000 mail-in votes, Santa Clara County sent out more than a million.

That widespread use suggests that voters do not share Trump’s scepticism of the mail-in system, according to Moreles. “They like the accessibility of it. They must believe it’s secure as well,” he said.

But mail-in ballots can continue to trickle in after the election ends, causing vote tallies to fluctuate in the days and weeks after polling stations close. In California, all mailed ballots are valid so long as they are postmarked by election day, and must also be received no later than seven days after.

Trump has pointed to those long vote counts and shifting tallies as evidence of fraud.

Even some Democrats have pushed for the process to be faster. By law, elections must be certified within 30 days of the election. But Moreles argued that not rushing can have its virtues, too.

“For the folks who are living here and are used to it, it makes sense and, to a lot of people, is reassuring,” Moreles said. “Taking the time to get it right is something that intuitively makes sense to people.”

Still, on August 24, the Supreme Court opened the door to additional uncertainty surrounding mail-in ballots.

In a six-to-three ruling, the court’s conservative majority allowed the Trump administration to begin implementing a March executive order that would impose new restrictions on mail-in voting.

The order could impact both the design of mail-in ballots and who is eligible to receive one.

But state officials have questioned the feasibility of redesigning and reprinting ballots with so little time before the midterm elections. Early voting in some states starts as early as September.

Others have speculated about whether the legal wrangling with cause confusion or discourage voters who rely on mail-in ballots.

On Wednesday, California announced it was co-leading a group of 24 state attorneys general in filing a new lawsuit to see the executive order blocked.

“Donald Trump does not run elections. States do. And his latest attack on democracy is proof of how weak he has become,” the state’s Governor Gavin Newsom said in a statement accompanying the suit.

“California will continue to lead the way in defending democracy — using every tool at our disposal and every minute in our day. This perilous moment in history demands no less from us.”

A second court order pausing part of Trump’s plan for mail-in ballots remains in effect.

The amended law was an attempt by state Republicans to crack down on unproven claims of voting by noncitizens.

A United States federal court has temporarily blocked an Ohio law that required proof of US citizenship from residents who wanted to register to vote while they obtained a driver’s license.

In his ruling on Tuesday, US District Judge Solomon Oliver Jr granted a preliminary injunction against the law, saying it likely violates the US National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) because it requires more information than necessary to determine a resident’s eligibility to vote.

“Election officials do not need documentary proof of citizenship to assess a voter registration applicant’s citizenship because signed attestation of citizenship is enough,” Oliver wrote.

The judge also pointed to a clause in the act that says each US state’s driver’s license application “shall serve as an application for voter registration with respect to election for Federal office unless the applicant fails to sign the voter registration application”.

Oliver said that Ohio must offer applicants the opportunity to register once they’ve submitted their driver’s license application, not after it’s been approved by the state’s Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV).

“To interpret this section of the NVRA otherwise would allow States to make registering to vote at the BMV more onerous, and could result in fewer voter registrations because the opportunity to apply was not proactively offered to otherwise eligible citizens,” Oliver added.

In 1995, Ohio passed a so-called “motor-voter” law that allowed residents the opportunity to register to vote when they applied for a driver’s license

But that law was amended last year by the state’s Republican-controlled legislature in an attempt to crack down on unproven claims, pushed in part by US President Donald Trump, that noncitizens were voting in the state’s election. US law prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections.

The ruling marks a victory for voting rights advocates like Red Wine & Blue, which sued Ohio’s secretary of state, Frank LaRose, over claims that the law disenfranchised eligible voters and violated the NVRA.

One of the group’s lawyers, Ben Stafford, praised the ruling, calling it “a win for Ohio voters.”

“With the registration deadline just weeks away, eligible Ohioans will now have the opportunity to register to vote at the BMV without having to produce unnecessary paperwork that is not required by federal law,” Stafford, an attorney at Elias Law Group, said in a statement.

LaRose said his office disagrees with the decision and will appeal.

Mass kidnappings highlight Nigeria’s security crisis in the north as elections approach.

Kidnappers have released a video of what appears to be a large group of people being held captive by armed men in a forested area in Nigeria.

The video emerged on Sunday, two days after gunmen abducted as many as 600 worshippers during Friday prayers at a mosque in Dekera village in Nigeria’s north-central Niger state.

The incident comes as Nigeria prepares for presidential elections in January, with security likely to be high on the agenda due to a wave of mass kidnappings for ransom across the north of the country.

Dekera village residents have reported that gunmen took people away in simultaneous raids on several communities.

In the video, posted on Facebook and WhatsApp and circulating widely, children can be heard crying. A gunman speaking in the Hausa language speaks directly to families of the captives, telling them to identify relatives.

“These are all your people,” the gunman ⁠says.

News agencies reported that they could not verify the exact date or location where the video was filmed. However, no older version of the video has been found posted online before Sunday.

Residents, including Abdulmutallib Muqaddas Dindi, were able to confirm the identities of some ⁠of the hostages.

“We have identified our elders, relatives, and some of us have seen their wives and children in the video,” he said.

Police and state authorities have not responded to requests for comment.

Amnesty International has urged Nigerian authorities to secure the release of the worshippers, warning of the growing threat posed by mass abductions in northern Nigeria.

State Commissioner for Information and Orientation Obed Nana told the Anadolu news agency that an operation is under way to “assess the situation, track the attackers, and facilitate the rescue of the abducted worshippers”.

Mass abductions for ransom have become common in parts of northwestern and north-central Nigeria, with armed gangs frequently raiding villages, schools and highways and holding abductees until the gangs are paid large sums of money.

Increasingly, the gunmen are targeting communities further south, beyond ‌hot spots in the north.

As he prepares for the election, President Bola Tinubu has faced growing criticism over lax security.