Explainer

United States Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has faced condemnation from Arab and Muslim countries after suggesting Israel has a biblical right to much of the Middle East.

In an interview with prominent right-wing American commentator Tucker Carlson, Huckabee suggested that Israel has a God-given right to land stretching from the Euphrates River to the Nile, which would encompass Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and parts of Saudi Arabia.

“It would be fine if they took it all,” he said, arguing that the geographical borders of Israel are rooted in the Bible, a belief shared by Christian Zionists.

The US diplomat, a self-professed Christian Zionist and staunch supporter of Israel, later walked back his comments, calling them “somewhat hyperbolic” and adding that Israel is not seeking expansion but has a right to security within its current borders.

But were his comments indeed hyperbolic in the Christian Zionist worldview? Or is that precisely what he and his fellow proponents of the ideology believe?

How did Christian Zionism begin, and what are its tenets?

In 1878, William Blackstone, a student of the prominent American evangelist Dwight Moody and a believer in the biblical restoration of Israel, published a book titled Jesus Is Coming. The best-selling work popularised among Americans a belief held by some Christian leaders: that God had given the land of Israel to the Jewish people.

This conviction, often taken from a Protestant evangelical perspective, draws on the ancient biblical idea that, nearly four millennia ago, God promised the land to the Jews, who would rule it until the return of Jesus to Jerusalem for the rapture. According to this theology, Christians will be saved upon Christ’s return while non-Christians who do not convert will face damnation.

The most commonly quoted Bible verse relating to this covenant is Genesis 12:3, in which God tells Abraham: “I will bless those who bless you and I will curse those who curse you and in you all the families of the earth will be blessed,” according to the Religion Media Centre.

According to ChristianZionism.org, a website run by professors, pastors and leaders of church-related organisations, four themes can be found in Christian Zionist thought: One, the founding of today’s nation-state of Israel in 1948 marked the final human era and signals an end of times. Two, the ongoing conflict in the Middle East is a part of God’s plan with a great and final war preceding the second coming of Christ. Three, God’s covenant with Israel is eternal and unconditional. And four, failing to support Israel’s political dominance today will incur divine judgement.

Writer and historian David Swift said that although many Christians – evangelical or otherwise – supported the creation of Israel before 1948, they cannot be called Christian Zionists in the modern parlance.

“This is because Christian Zionism essentially fuses religious belief with a military, strategic and even economic programme,” Swift told Al Jazeera.

“Specifically, Christian Zionism is not just the belief that the biblical land of Israel is the ordained country of the Jewish people but that it is in America’s strategic, military and economic interest to support the expansion of Israel.”

Fathi Nimer, a policy fellow at Al-Shabaka: The Palestinian Policy Network, described the movement as one that “translates into absolute unquestioning support for the Israeli regime”.

He described hearing a podcast about a Christian Zionist woman visiting Bethlehem who, after seeing the separation wall, Israeli soldiers and the harsh conditions in Palestinian refugee camps, remarked: “I feel bad for them, but scripture is scripture.”

“‘Scripture is scripture’ – that overrides everything,” Nimer told Al Jazeera.

“That’s why it’s such a powerful tool for brainwashing.”

How many American Christian Zionists are there?

According to author and academic Tristan Sturm, the largest population of Christian Zionists is in the US, and it numbers more than 30 million. Most are affiliated with evangelical churches in the southeast and south-central regions, often referred to as the “Bible Belt”.

The biggest organisation is Christians United for Israel, which itself boasts 10 million members, Nimer said.

“They are overwhelmingly conservative Republicans, found mostly in the Bible Belt, but also other places in the United States, and they form one of the most formidable voting blocs in the Republican Party,” he said.

Swift stated that only a few million from this group, however, are “fully signed up to the political, military and religious aspects of Christian Zionism”.

What impact do Christian Zionists have on US policy?

Nimer argued that Christian Zionists are “deeply intertwined” with American politics. “A lot of the major donors to the Republican Party and also the Democratic Party are Christian Zionists,” Nimer said.

According to the analyst, Christian Zionists are a cornerstone of Israeli lobbying groups, ranging from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) to the Anti-Defamation League, “that work to spread the Israeli narrative” in American society.

Meanwhile, a lot of members of the US Congress are “openly” Christian Zionist, Nimer said.

“[Politicians like] Mike Huckabee, … they reached the highest echelons of the state. And they bring these beliefs into their politics, into their policies,” the analyst said.

US foreign policy on Israel is, therefore, heavily influenced and shaped around the underlying biblical premise that the Jewish people are divinely destined to be restored to Palestine, he argued.

“When it comes to Palestine and the region in general, as you see right now with the [potential] war in Iran, they’re saying that the ballistic missile programme is now on the table,” Nimer said.

“It has nothing to do with the nuclear deal, … but the idea is that Israel must be able to maintain its superiority over every country in the region, and that’s a decree by God because if Israel prospers, then that’s another step towards the end of the world.”

Christian Zionist groups have also backed Israel’s illegal settlement project in the occupied West Bank and other measures that they see as reinforcing Israeli Jewish sovereignty.

Furthermore, for two decades, organisations such as HaYovel have been bringing in hundreds of American Christian volunteers to work in Israeli settlement agricultural projects, especially during the genocidal war on Gaza, when Jewish Israelis were called for military duty. Many also strongly endorsed US President Donald Trump’s moving of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in 2017.

Swift, however, said Christian Zionists have played only a minor role in shaping US support for Israel and their influence is waning.

He argued that while Christian Zionism is integrated with a “broader neoconservative foreign policy agenda” also tied to the “US defence industry and broader military-industrial complex”, the group does not have much influence in American politics, and, in fact, it is declining.

Traditionally, US government support for Israel was driven by Cold War considerations and by pressure from the Jewish community within the US and lobbying groups like AIPAC. What played less of a role was support for Israel from evangelical Christians and the smaller community of Christian Zionists, Swift said.

“The US president is finally de facto abandoning the previous theoretical support for a two-state solution – although not for Christian Zionist reasons. When Trump talks of ethnically cleansing Gaza and turning it into a beach resort, he uses the language of real estate, not the Old Testament,” the historian said.

According to the analysts, very representative.

“It is pretty representative: Christian Zionists derive their understanding of the proper borders of Israel from the same place as people like [Israeli National Security Minister] Itamar Ben-Gvir and [Israeli Finance Minister] Bezalel Smotrich: the Old Testament. Therefore, they think Israel should expand to include all of the territory of ‘biblical Israel’,” Swift said, referring to the far-right Israeli cabinet members who have worked to expand and protect Israeli settlements and outposts in the occupied West Bank, which are illegal under international law.

Nimer said Huckabee’s statement is also not something that can be criticised within the Christian Zionist community.

“You’re not allowed to criticise that because it’s like you’re criticising prophecy and you’re criticising God and the return of Jesus,” he said.

Huckabee’s comments, therefore, come as no surprise despite infringing upon the sovereignty of US allies in the Middle East, Nimer said.

On Monday, Smotrich said Israel would eventually occupy the Gaza Strip and establish a Jewish settlement there despite a “ceasefire” that went into effect in October.

“We are giving US President Donald Trump the opportunity to do it in his own way. If he does not succeed in eliminating Hamas, the Israeli army will get international legitimacy and American support to do it,” he said in statements to Israeli radio.

How do Jewish Israelis view Christian Zionists?

Mimi Kirk, the director of the Institute for the Study of Christian Zionism and the associate director of Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, writes that “despite the matter of their supposed end-of-times demise according to this view, Jewish Israeli leaders have embraced the money and influence on US foreign policy that Christian Zionists offer,” especially as its adherents include top officials from the first Trump administration, including former Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Nimer said it’s a rather “cynical relationship”, given that the Christian Zionist worldview, which sees all non-Christians going to hell, is “anti-Semitic to the bone”.

“But they support Israel, so it’s fine,” the policy analyst said.

“They care about what they can get out of them right now as the biggest support base in the West currently.”

Israel is further banking on this support because it is quickly losing its “progressive facade” of a “liberal democracy” with “all these progressive rights”, Nimer added.

“This has completely faded over the last few decades, and especially since the genocide in Gaza, this has become completely unacceptable.”

How do Christians in Palestine view Christian Zionists?

Palestinian Christians have long voiced concern that the Christian Zionist position threatens their existence, further entrenching Israel’s occupation while marginalising their community and undermining the historic churches of the Holy Land.

Just last month, the Patriarchs and Heads of the Churches in Jerusalem said activities by local individuals advancing “damaging ideologies, such as Christian Zionism” “mislead the public, sow confusion, and harm the unity of our flock”.

The Christian leaders warned that these efforts could undermine the Christian presence not only in the Holy Land but across the wider Middle East.

The statement came amid growing concern among Palestinian Christians that Israel’s policies – including land confiscation, settlement expansion and pressure on church property – are accelerating the erosion of one of the world’s oldest Christian communities.

Are there critiques of Christian Zionism among other Christians?

Criticism of Christian Zionists from within Christianity is abundant.

In the US, the Institute for the Study of Christian Zionism was created to critique and combat the movement through liberation theology, seeking justice for Palestinians and a resolution to the ongoing conflict.

Swift pointed out that many of the world’s most Catholic countries, from Ireland to those in South America and Southern Europe, “tend to be quite pro-Palestinian”.

Meanwhile, Palestinian Christian scholars “have written very detailed theological critiques of Christian Zionism”, Nimer said, as have pastors from other parts of the Global South.

A prize awarded by the Nelson Mandela Foundation last year was explicitly aimed at initiatives working against Christian Zionism, and a conference next month in Turkiye is being organised to combat the ideology, Nimer said.

“The world is waking up to how insidious this ideology is and how it creeps into societies and makes it impossible to have any kind of solidarity with Palestinians as long as they believe it,” he said.

More than 7,000 languages are spoken around the world today and at least 3,000 of them, or 40 percent, are endangered.

English is the most widely spoken language, with approximately 1.5 billion speakers in 186 countries. Two out of every 10 English speakers are native, while the remaining 80 percent speak English as their second, third or higher language, according to Ethnologue, a database which catalogues the world’s languages.

Mandarin Chinese is the second most spoken language with almost 1.2 billion speakers. However, when accounting for native speakers, it is the largest language in the world, owing to China’s large population.

Hindi comes in third at 609 million speakers, followed by Spanish (559 million), and Standard Arabic (335 million).

Scripts in the world’s most popular languages

There are 293 known scripts – sets of graphic characters used to write a language – according to The World’s Writing Systems, a reference book about global scripts.

More than 156 scripts are still in use today, while more than 137 historical scripts, including Egyptian Hieroglyphs and Aztec pictograms, are no longer in use.

The Latin script, which is used to write English, French, Spanish, German and more, is used in at least 305 of the world’s 7,139 known living human languages. More than 70 percent of the world’s population use it.

Which are the most endangered languages?

Of the 7,159 languages spoken worldwide, 3,193 (44 percent) are endangered, 3,479 (49 percent) are stable, and 487 (7 percent) are institutional, meaning they are used by governments, schools and the media.

A language becomes endangered when its users begin to pass on a more dominant language to the children in the community. Many are used as second languages.

According to Ethnologue, some 337 languages are said to be dormant while 454 are extinct.

Dormant languages are those that no longer have proficient speakers, but the language still has social uses and the language is part of the identity of an ethnic community. Extinct languages are those that have no speakers and no social uses or groups that claim it as part of their heritage or identity.

According to Ethnologue, 88.1 million people speak an endangered language as their mother tongue. There are:

• 1,431 languages with fewer than 1,000 first-language speakers
• 463 with fewer than 100 speakers
• 110 with fewer than 10 speakers

Just 25 countries are home to some 80 percent of the world’s endangered languages. Oceania has the most endangered languages, followed by Asia, Africa and the Americas.

Some endangered languages include:

Oceania 

In Australia, Yugambeh, an endangered Aboriginal language, is spoken by the Yugambeh people, primarily across the Gold Coast, Scenic Rim and Logan in eastern Australia.

In recent years, a strong community-led revitalisation programme and the use of learning apps have made the language more accessible to younger generations.

Asia 

Japan’s Ainu (Ainu Itak) is a critically endangered language. According to UNESCO, it can’t be linked with certainty to any family of languages. The exact number of Ainu speakers is unknown, however a 2006 survey showed that out of 23,782 Ainu, 304 know the language.

Africa

In Ethiopia, Ongota is a critically endangered language.

It was spoken by a community on the west bank of the Weito River in southwest Ethiopia. There are only about 400 members of the community left, with a handful of elders speaking the language.

Americas

In North and Central America, almost all Indigenous languages are endangered. Louisiana Creole, a French-based creole with African and Indigenous influences, is a seriously endangered language in the United States, with it mostly spoken by elders.

Leco is an endangered Indigenous language spoken in Bolivia and is considered an isolated language – one that has no genetic relationship to other languages. The language is only now spoken by elders with a Leco ethnic population of only about 13,500.

Europe

Cornish (Kernewek), spoken in southwest England, was marked as an extinct language by UNESCO, until it was revived and in 2010 changed to an endangered language. It is spoken as a first language by 563 people according to the 2021 England and Wales census.

The United States administration is intensifying its build-up of a vast array of military assets in the Middle East, as President Donald Trump says Iran has “10 to 15 days at most” to agree a deal over its nuclear programme and stock of ballistic missiles.

As well as the world’s largest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R Ford, which is reportedly joining the Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group in the Arabian Sea, key force multipliers such as E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft have been deployed.

In a letter to the United Nations Security Council, Iran said that while the country does not seek “tension or war and will not initiate a war”, any US aggression will be responded to “decisively and proportionately”.

“The United States would bear full and direct responsibility for any unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences,” it said.

Here is what we know about the recent US deployment of military assets in the Middle East – which has also led to a dispute with the United Kingdom over the use of its joint military base in Diego Garcia.

What air power assets has the US deployed to the Middle East?

According to open-source intelligence analysts and military flight-tracking data, the US appears to have deployed more than 120 aircraft to the region within the past few days – the largest surge in US airpower in the Middle East since the 2003 Iraq war.

The reported deployments include E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft, F-35 stealth strike fighters and F-22 air superiority jets, alongside F-15s and F-16s. Flight-tracking data shows many departing bases in the US and Europe, supported by cargo aircraft and aerial refuelling tankers, a sign of sustained operational planning rather than routine rotations.

F-22s and F-35s previously escorted B-2 stealth bombers during Operation Midnight Hammer, the US military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites Trump ordered in June 2025 during the 12-day conflict between Iran and Israel.

“Watch any movement by B-2s. That would indicate a possible replay of ‘Midnight Hammer’,” Mark Cancian, a retired Marine Corps colonel and senior adviser with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank, told Al Jazeera.

This latest wave was preceded several weeks ago by the arrival of Air Force F-15E Strike Eagles. US Central Command said on social media at the time that the fighter jet “enhances combat readiness and promotes regional security and stability”.

What role could Diego Garcia and the UK play?

Attention has also focused on Diego Garcia, the joint UK-US military base in the Indian Ocean’s Chagos Islands, which is capable of hosting long-range US strategic bombers, including B-2 aircraft.

The remote base has historically served as a launch point for major US air campaigns in the region.

However, Diego Garcia is a British sovereign territory leased to Washington, meaning London must approve its use for offensive operations. According to reports in UK media, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has indicated to Trump that the US cannot use British airbases – including Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford in the UK, which is home to the US’s heavy bomber fleet in Europe – for strikes on Iran, as this would be in breach of international law.

Trump retaliated by withdrawing US support for the UK’s decision to transfer the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, announced last year.

On Wednesday, the US president said Starmer was “making a big mistake” in the agreement to transfer sovereignty of the archipelago.

“DO NOT GIVE AWAY DIEGO GARCIA!” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social, saying the base could be called upon in any future military operation to counter a potential attack from Iran.

What do we know about US warships in the Arabian Sea?

The USS Gerald R Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, is currently being redeployed from the Caribbean to the Middle East.

The carrier and its accompanying strike group are expected to arrive in the region in the coming weeks.

On Wednesday, it briefly transmitted its location off the coast of Morocco, suggesting it is transiting the Atlantic towards the Strait of Gibraltar and will then go into the Mediterranean.

This is the same vessel that previously supported US military operations in Venezuela, including missions conducted under Operation Southern Spear.

The USS Gerald R Ford will join the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group, which recent satellite imagery shows is operating in the Arabian Sea off the coast of Oman, positioning US naval power within striking distance of Iran.

The US Navy also has multiple guided-missile destroyers in the region equipped with advanced air defence and ballistic missile interception systems. These multi-role vessels can carry and launch Tomahawk cruise missiles capable of striking land targets deep inside Iran, alongside their anti-submarine and fleet defence missions.

How is Iran responding?

Iran has publicly warned that it will view any military strike by the US as a serious provocation.

Tehran has also moved ahead with its own planned military activities. It announced and began joint naval exercises with Russia in the Sea of Oman and northern Indian Ocean on Thursday. These are intended to enhance maritime cooperation and signal deterrence amid rising US pressure.

As part of these manoeuvres, Iranian authorities issued a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) for rocket launches over southern Iran on Thursday from 03:30 to 13:30 GMT and temporarily closed parts of the Strait of Hormuz, a strategically vital shipping route, during live-fire drills.

Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also warned that a US strike on Iran would have serious repercussions, underscoring the risk of escalation if hostilities spread.

Satellite images published by the Reuters news agency on Thursday showed that Iran has recently built a concrete shield over a new facility at a sensitive military site and covered it in soil, experts say, advancing work at a location reportedly bombed by Israel in 2024.

Images also show that Iran has buried tunnel entrances at a nuclear site bombed by the US during Israel’s 12-day war with Iran last year, fortified tunnel entrances near another, and has repaired missile bases struck in the conflict.

Analytical reports also suggest that Iran has built a multilayered defence centred on mines, missiles, submarines and drones with the intent of slowing down the US forces.

Some analysts say Iran may seek to avoid an immediate full-scale confrontation, but this may be difficult.

“The Iranians have, over the past six months, quietly taken additional steps to move critical assets further underground,” Vali Nasr, a professor of international affairs and Middle East Studies at Johns Hopkins University, said during a roundtable discussion hosted by the CSIS Middle East Program this week

“They are going to be unpredictable,” he said. “But I think they could go big at the beginning, or they might want to drag the United States into a protracted situation.

“You hit a tanker, or you hit an oil facility, or you hit an American ship, and then it’s up to President Trump to decide whether to escalate further. And it can go beyond that.

“We are in a scenario where this might get out of control very quickly,” Nasr added.

Is the US likely to attack Iran?

According to experts, it is a very real possibility.

“The United States is doing all the things that it would do if it were going to conduct some sort of attack,” Cancian told Al Jazeera. “It has moved aircraft into the area, two aircraft carriers, plus enablers like AWACS.”

Barbara Slavi, distinguished fellow at Stimson Center, agreed with this assessment. “It seems that the Trump administration has decided that it is going to attack Iran again, and I presume in conjunction with the Israelis,” she said.

“What the objectives are, we have yet to see. Can it be contained? Will others be drawn in? These are all really important questions, and we don’t have answers.”

Is this a similar situation to what we saw earlier this year in Venezuela?

A build-up of US military assets in the Caribbean, close to Venezuela, which began in September 2025, led to multiple strikes on Venezuelan boats that the US claimed – without proof – were carrying drugs. It culminated in the dramatic January 3 raid on Caracas by US forces and the abduction of then-President Nicolas Maduro, who now faces trial on guns and drugs charges in New York.

“The build-up [in the Arabian Sea] has similarities, but one key difference is the strategic context,” Cancian said.

“Unlike the Venezuela raid, there hasn’t been a large deployment of Special Operations Forces, and Iran’s geography, far inland and heavily defended, makes a quick ground raid unlikely.

“If there are strikes, I would expect long-range missile attacks against security forces such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Strikes against nuclear facilities are also possible, but missiles like Tomahawk can only damage above-ground facilities,” he added.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is reportedly planning to travel to Israel on February 28 to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a State Department official said.

Last summer, the US carried out air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities even as senior American diplomats were scheduled to meet with their Iranian counterparts in ongoing talks.

Microsoft founder Bill Gates has cancelled his keynote speech at India’s flagship AI summit just hours before he was due to take the stage on Thursday.

Gates, who has faced renewed scrutiny over his past ties to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, withdrew to “ensure the focus remains on the AI Summit’s key priorities”, the Gates Foundation said in a statement.

The five-day India AI Impact Summit 2026 was meant to showcase India’s ambitions in the booming sector, with the country expecting to attract more than $200bn in investment over the next two years.

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi had billed the summit as an opportunity for India to shape the future of AI, drawing high-profile attendees, including French President Emmanuel Macron and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

Instead, it has been dogged by controversy, from Gates’s abrupt exit to an incident in which an Indian university tried to pass off a Chinese-made robotic dog as its own innovation.

So, what exactly went wrong at India’s flagship AI gathering and why has it drawn such intense scrutiny?

Why Gates’s appearance became an issue

Bill Gates was due to deliver a short but high-profile speech highlighting the opportunities and risks posed by artificial intelligence.

However, in recent weeks, several opposition figures and commentators in Indian media weighed in after emails featuring his name were released in the Epstein files in late January, questioning whether his presence was appropriate.

Despite the discussion, all appeared to be proceeding as planned earlier in the week. On Tuesday, the Gates Foundation’s India office posted on X that Gates would attend the summit and “deliver his keynote as scheduled”.

Then, on Thursday, hours before the scheduled speech, it released a statement saying that “After careful consideration, and to ensure the focus remains on the AI Summit’s key priorities, Mr Gates will not be delivering his keynote address.”

It added that Ankur Vora, president of the Gates Foundation’s Africa and India offices, would deliver the speech instead.

What are the alleged links between Epstein and Gates?

Bill Gates was named in documents related to Epstein released in January by the US Department of Justice.

In a draft email included among the documents, Epstein alleged Gates had engaged in extramarital affairs and sought his help in procuring drugs “to deal with consequences of sex with Russian girls”.

It was unclear whether Epstein actually sent the email, and Gates denies any wrongdoing.

The Gates Foundation, in a statement to The New York Times, called the allegations “absolutely absurd and completely false”.

What has India’s government said?

Very little.

Despite criticism and calls from opposition figures to explain the invitation to Gates, the Indian government has not directly addressed the controversy that culminated in Gates’s withdrawal.

While unnamed government sources told local media he would not attend the summit, officials stopped short of explaining why.

Asked about Gates’s participation, Information Technology Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw declined to give a clear answer to reporters, while Modi made no reference to the issue in his public remarks.

Why are the Epstein files a sensitive subject for India?

The controversy surrounding Gates’s planned participation comes close on the heels of a series of disclosures in the Epstein files that have forced the Modi government on the backfoot.

In one email to an unidentified individual he referred to only as “Jabor Y”, Epstein referred to Modi’s historic visit – the first by an Indian prime minister – to Israel in July 2017.

Epstein wrote: “The Indian Prime minister modi took advice. and danced and sang in israel for the benefit of the US president. they had met a few weeks ago.. IT WORKED. !”

Modi’s visit to Israel – and his subsequent embrace of the Benjamin Netanyahu government, with military, intelligence and other ties strengthened over the past decade – had already drawn criticism from the opposition Congress party and others, who have accused him of reversing decades of Indian support for the Palestinian cause. India was the first non-Arab nation to recognise the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1974, and did not establish full diplomatic relations with Israel until 1992.

But the Epstein email turbocharged the opposition criticism of Modi’s Israel policy – with questions now also asked about whether it was influenced by Washington.

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs dismissed the Epstein email in an unusually sharply worded statement.

“Beyond the fact of the prime minister’s official visit to Israel in July 2017, the rest of the allusions in the email are little more than trashy ruminations by a convicted criminal, which deserve to be dismissed with the utmost contempt,” spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said.

But the Epstein cloud continues to hover over India.

The files also show that India’s current oil minister, Hardeep Singh Puri, exchanged dozens of emails with Epstein after he joined Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in 2014.

In many of them, Puti appears to be taking Epstein’s help in getting US investors, such as LinkedIn’s Reid Hoffman, to visit India. In others, he appears to suggest that he had a fairly comfortable personal relationship with Epstein.

“Please let me know when you are back from your exotic island,” Puri wrote in December 2014, for instance, asking to set up a meeting in which Puri could give Epstein some books to “excite an interest in India”.

Puri, in a new conference, has claimed that he only met Epstein “three or four times”, but the Congress party has argued that the emails suggest a much closer relationship.

Gates’s work in India

The Gates Foundation has long been a key partner in India’s public health and development sectors, backing major vaccination drives, disease prevention campaigns and sanitation programmes.

At the same time, he has had vocal critics, including environmental activist Vandana Shiva, who has argued that Gates’s brand of “philanthro-imperialism” uses wealth to control global food systems.

Gates also faced heavy criticism after a 2024 podcast in which he said India was “a kind of laboratory to try things … that then, when you prove them out in India, you can take to other places” when discussing development programmes and the foundation’s work there.

‘Orion’ the robodog and other controversies

Beyond the fallout over Bill Gates’s cancelled keynote, the AI Impact Summit has faced several controversies.

One incident involved a robotic dog named “Orion”, which Galgotias University, based in the New Delhi suburban town of Greater Noida, presented as its own innovation.

Online users quickly identified the machine as a commercially available Chinese-made model, prompting organisers to ask the institution to vacate its stall.

The event also drew criticism on its opening day after facing logistical issues, including long queues and confusion over entry procedures, according to local media.

On Wednesday, large crowds were seen walking for miles after police cordoned off roads for VIP access.

Dhananjay Yadav, the CEO of a company exhibiting high-tech wearables, made headlines after he reported on social media that devices had been stolen from the company’s stand.

The Times of India later reported that two maintenance workers at the event had been arrested for allegedly stealing the wearables.

BY THE NUMBERS

Spending on AI is forecast to skyrocket to $2.5 trillion in 2026, dwarfing even the largest scientific and infrastructure projects.

World leaders and tech executives are convening in New Delhi for the India-AI Impact Summit 2026, focusing on the role of artificial intelligence in governance, job disruption and global collaboration.

However, behind these discussions lies the financial reality. Over the past decade, AI has drawn one of the largest waves of private investment in modern history, totalling trillions of dollars.

According to Gartner, a United States-based business and technology insights company, worldwide spending on AI is forecast to total $2.5 trillion in 2026, a 44 percent increase over 2025.

To understand the magnitude of these investments, Al Jazeera visualises the staggering amounts by comparing them with some of the largest projects ever created by humanity. We also highlight which countries are spending the most on AI and provide insights into expenditures on data centres, models, services, and security.

What does $1bn look like?

To help understand a trillion dollars, it is useful to first visualise what millions and billions of dollars look like by using a stack of US dollar bills.

If you break these amounts down using $100 bills, here is how they stack up:

• $1,000 would form a stack about 1cm (0.393-inch) high.
• $10,000 would form a stack approximately 10cm (3.93-inch) high.
• $1m would fit inside a briefcase.
• $10m would fit inside a very large suitcase.
• $100m would fit on an industrial pallet stacked waist-high.
• $1bn would create a building approximately 5.2 metres (17 feet) high, with a width and a length of about 2 metres (6.6 feet) each.

Another way to think of it is if you spent $1 every second, it would take:

• 11.5 days to spend $1m
• 31 years to spend $1bn
• 31,000 years to spend $1 trillion

In more tangible terms, $1bn is roughly equivalent to:

• The estimated cost of the Grand Egyptian Museum in Giza, one of the largest archaeological museums in the world
• The cost of constructing two to three modern football stadiums, depending on size and design
• Buying 10 luxury private jets (at $100m each)
• Buying 6.3 tonnes of gold (at $5,000 per ounce)
• Buying 1 million high-end iPhones at retail price

$1.6 trillion already spent on AI

Over the past decade, AI-related investments have surged nearly 13-fold.

According to the 2025 AI Index Report by Stanford University, between 2013 and 2024, total global corporate investment in AI reached $1.6 trillion. This substantial expenditure dwarfs even the largest scientific and infrastructure projects of the 20th and 21st centuries.

To put the scale of AI investment into perspective, consider how it compares with some of the most ambitious and expensive projects in modern history. All figures are adjusted to 2024 US dollars:

• The Manhattan Project (1942-46): $36bn
• The International Space Station (1984-2011): $150bn
• The Apollo Program (1960-73): $250bn
• The US Interstate Highway System (1956-92): $620bn

In just over a decade, investment in AI has surpassed the cost of developing the first atomic bomb, landing humans on the moon and the decades-long effort to build the 75,440km (46,876-mile) US interstate highway network.

Unlike these landmark projects, AI funding has not been driven by a single government or wartime urgency. It has flowed through private markets, venture capital, corporate research and development, and global investors, making it one of the largest privately financed technological waves in history.

Global corporate investments in AI cover a vast array of operations, including mergers and acquisitions, minority stakes, private investments, and public offerings. These monumental expenditures highlight the extensive financial commitment to advance AI.

Which countries are spending the most on AI?

The AI investment surge is concentrated in just a few countries, where private capital has fuelled thousands of startups and shaped global innovation hubs.

The US has dominated AI spending, accounting for roughly 62 percent of total private AI funding since 2013. Between 2013 and 2024, US companies spent $471bn on AI. Chinese companies are the second-largest spenders at $119bn, followed by the United Kingdom at $28bn.

These figures exclude government spending, such as the US CHIPS Act or European national AI subsidies.

Global private investment in AI by country, 2013-24:

• US: $471bn, supporting 6,956 newly funded AI companies
• China: $119bn, 1,605 startups
• UK: $28bn, 885 startups
• Canada: $15bn, 481 startups
• Israel: $15bn, 492 startups
• Germany: $13bn, 394 startups
• India: $11bn, 434 startups
• France: $11bn, 468 startups
• South Korea: $9bn, 270 startups
• Singapore: $7bn, 239 startups
• Others: $58bn

AI spending to total $2.5 trillion in 2026

AI spending is forecast to skyrocket to $2.5 trillion in 2026, driven by a massive global build-out of data centres and services, according to Gartner.

The bulk of the spending is expected to go towards:

• AI infrastructure: $1.37 trillion
• AI services: $589bn
• AI software: $452bn
• AI cybersecurity: $51bn
• AI platforms for data science and machine learning: $31bn
• AI models: $26bn
• AI application development platforms: $8.4bn
• AI data: $3bn

By 2027, Gartner is forecasting that AI spending will surpass $3.3 trillion.

Guatemala announced last week that it will begin phasing out its three-decade-old programme, under which Cuban doctors work in its country to fill the gap in the country’s healthcare system.

Communist-ruled Cuba, under heavy United States sanctions, has been earning billions of dollars each year by leasing thousands of members of its “white coat army” to countries around the world, especially in Latin America. Havana has used its medical missions worldwide as a tool for international diplomacy.

So why are some countries withdrawing from the programme that helps the host countries?

Why is Guatemala phasing out Cuban doctors?

Guatemala’s health ministry said in a statement that it would begin a “gradual termination” over this year.

“The phased withdrawal of the Cuban Medical Brigade stems from an analysis of the mission’s completion of its cycles,” the statement, originally in Spanish, said on February 13.

The statement added that the Cuban medical mission was meant to support Guatemala through the 1998 Hurricane Mitch, which devastated parts of Central America, overwhelmed local hospitals and left rural communities with almost no access to medical care.

“The Ministry of Health is developing a phased strategic replacement plan that includes hiring national personnel, strengthening incentives for hard-to-reach positions, strategic redistribution of human resources, and specialized technical support,” the statement said.

The Cuban mission in Guatemala comprises 412 medical workers, including 333 doctors.

The Central American country’s decision comes amid growing pressure from the United States, which wants to stop Cuban doctors from serving abroad.

The move aims to starve Cuba of much-needed revenue as a major share of the incomes earned by doctors goes to government coffers. Cuba has been facing severe power, food and medical shortages amid an oil blockade imposed by the Trump administration since January.

Guatemala is just one country which benefits from Cuban medical missions.

Over the past decades, Cuba has sent medical missions around the world, from Latin America to Africa and beyond. It began sending these missions shortly after the 1959 Cuban revolution brought Fidel Castro to power.

Castro’s communist government reversed many of the pro-business policies of Fulgencio Batista, the dictator backed by the US. The revolution ruptured ties between the two countries, with the US spy agency CIA trying several times unsuccessfully to topple Castro’s government.

Guatemala has moved closer to the US since the election of Bernardo Arevalo as the president in January 2024. He has cooperated with US President Donald Trump’s administration. Last year, Guatemala agreed to ramp up the number of deportation flights it receives from the US. The US has deported thousands of immigrants without following due process to third countries such as Guatemala and El Salvador, which are headed by pro-Trump leaders.

In November 2018, shortly after Brazil elected Jair Bolsonaro as president, Cuba announced its withdrawal from the country’s Cuba “Mais Medicos” (More Doctors) programme. Bolsonaro, who is known as Brazil’s Trump, had criticised the medical mission, deeming it “slave labour”. Bolsonaro is serving a 27-year prison sentence after he was convicted in September 2025 of plotting to stage a coup in order to retain power after his defeat in the 2022 presidential election.

Why is the US targeting Cuba’s global medical missions?

The US has deemed Cuba’s foreign medical missions a form of “forced labour” and human trafficking, without any evidence, and has a goal of restricting the Cuban government’s access to its largest source of foreign income.

US efforts to curb Cuba’s medical missions are not new. Just last year, Washington imposed visa restrictions aimed at discouraging foreign governments from entering into medical cooperation agreements with Cuba.

In February last year, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the US would restrict visas targeting “forced labor linked to the Cuban labor export program”.

“This expanded policy applies to current or former Cuban government officials, and other individuals, including foreign government officials, who are believed to be responsible for, or involved in, the Cuban labor export program, particularly Cuba’s overseas medical missions,” a statement on the US State Department’s website said.

Rubio, who is of Cuban origin, has been a vocal critic of Havana, and has pushed US policies in Latin America, including the military operation to abduct Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on January 3. Under Trump, Washington has pushed its focus on Latin America as part of its Western Hemisphere pivot, which seeks to restore Washington’s preeminence in the region.

Since Maduro’s abduction, the US focus has turned towards Cuba. Senior US officials, particularly Rubio, hinted that Havana could be the next target of Washington’s pressure campaign.

The US, in effect, cut off Venezuelan oil shipments to Cuba as part of a new oil blockade. Havana has faced sweeping US sanctions for decades, and Cuba has since 2000 increasingly relied on Venezuelan oil provided as part of a deal struck with Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chavez.

The blockade has caused a fuel shortage and, in turn, a severe energy crisis in Cuba. President Miguel Diaz-Canel has imposed harsh emergency restrictions as a response.

This has renewed US pressure on countries to phase out Cuban medical missions.

How many Cuban doctors are on missions abroad?

More than 24,000 Cuban doctors are working in 56 countries worldwide. This includes Latin American countries such as Venezuela, Nicaragua and Mexico; Africa, including Angola, Mozambique, Algeria; and the Middle East, including Qatar.

There have been occasional deployments in other countries. For instance, Italy received Cuban doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic to help overwhelmed hospitals in some of its hardest-hit regions.

Cuban doctors are crucial for Caribbean countries. They fill a significant gap in medical care amid a lack of trained medical professionals.

Have countries resisted US pressure in the past?

Caribbean countries hit back in March 2025 against the US threats to restrict visas. “We could not get through the pandemic without the Cuban nurses and the Cuban doctors,” Barbados’s Prime Minister Mia Mottley said in a speech to the parliament.

“Out of the blue now, we have been called human traffickers because we hire technical people who we pay top dollar,” Trinidad and Tobago’s Prime Minister Keith Rowley said back then, adding that he was prepared to lose his US visa.

“If the Cubans are not there, we may not be able to run the service,” Saint Vincent and the Grenadines then-Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves said. “I will prefer to lose my visa than to have 60 poor and working people die.”

In August 2025, the US announced that it was revoking the visas of Brazilian, African and Caribbean officials over their ties to Cuba’s programme that sends doctors abroad.

It named Brazilian Ministry of Health officials, Mozart Julio Tabosa Sales and Alberto Kleiman, who had their visas revoked for working on Brazil’s Mais Medicos, or “More Doctors” programme, which was created in 2013.

Some countries are now finding ways around the pressure from Washington. For instance, this month Guyana announced that it would start paying doctors directly, rather than through the Cuban government.

One week ahead of the fourth anniversary of Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, United States-led peace talks in Geneva ended for the day earlier than scheduled on Wednesday.

The talks, which are being mediated by Steve Witkoff, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, are just the latest of a number of attempts to end the deadliest fighting in Europe since World War II – and none have reached a breakthrough.

During his presidential campaign in 2024, Trump claimed repeatedly that he would broker a ceasefire in Ukraine within “24 hours”. However, he has been unable to fulfil this promise.

Here is a timeline of the mediation efforts to end the Russia-Ukraine war, which has killed more than a million people, as it heads towards its fifth year.

February 28, 2022 – direct talks

The first ceasefire talks between Russia and Ukraine took place just four days after Moscow’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.

The meeting lasted about five hours, and featured high-level officials, but with diametrically opposing goals. Nothing came of their talks.

Then, the two sides held three rounds of direct talks in Belarus, ending on March 7, but, again, nothing was agreed.

March-April 2022 – regional talks in Antalya

On March 10, the foreign ministers of Ukraine and Russia, Dmytro Kuleba and Sergey Lavrov, met for the first time since the war started, on the sidelines of the Antalya Diplomacy Forum in Turkiye.

A second meeting between senior leaders in Istanbul towards the end of the month failed to secure a ceasefire.

Then, the withdrawal of Russian forces in early April from parts of Ukraine revealed evidence of massacres committed against the Ukrainian civilian population in Bucha and Irpin near Kyiv, in northern Ukraine.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said this would make negotiations much more difficult, but that it was necessary to persist with the dialogue. Russian President Vladimir Putin later declared the negotiations were at a “dead end” as a result of Ukraine’s allegations of war crimes.

July 2022 – Black Sea Grain Initiative, Istanbul

In July 2022, the Black Sea Grain Initiative was signed by Ukraine and Russia with Turkiye and the United Nations in Istanbul. It was the most significant diplomatic breakthrough for the first year of the war.

The agreement aimed to prevent a global food crisis by designating a safe maritime humanitarian corridor through the Black Sea for cargoes of millions of tons of grain stuck in Ukrainian ports.

November 2022 – Ukraine’s peace plan

Ukraine’s Zelenskyy presented a 10-point peace proposal at the Group of 20 (G20) summit in Indonesia, within which he called for Russia’s withdrawal from all Ukrainian territory as well as measures to ensure radiation and nuclear safety, food security, and protection for Ukraine’s grain exports.

He also demanded energy security and the release of all Ukrainian prisoners and deportees, including war prisoners and children deported to Russia.

Russia rejected Zelenskyy’s peace proposal, reiterating that it would not give up any territory it had taken by force, which stood at about one-fifth of Ukraine by then.

February 2023 – China’s peace plan

China proposed a 12-point peace plan calling for a ceasefire and the end of “unilateral sanctions” that had been imposed by Western nations on Russia. Beijing urged both sides to resume talks on the basis that “the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be effectively upheld”.

The proposal was criticised by Western allies of Kyiv for not acknowledging “Russia’s violation of Ukrainian sovereignty”.

June 2023 – Africa’s peace plan

In June 2023, a high-level delegation of African leaders, led by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and including the presidents of Senegal and Zambia, visited both Kyiv and St Petersburg to present a 10-point plan focusing on de-escalation and grain exports.

Analysts said it was driven largely by the war’s impact on African food security and fertiliser prices.

But Ukrainian President Zelenskyy rejected the call for “de-escalation”, arguing that a ceasefire without a Russian withdrawal would simply “freeze” the war.

The following month, President Putin pulled Russia out of the Black Sea Grain Initiative.

August 2023 – Jeddah summit

Saudi Arabia hosted representatives from 40 countries to discuss Zelenskyy’s “Peace Formula”, but no final agreement or joint statement was reached.

In a major surprise, Beijing sent its special envoy, Li Hui, to the talks. But Russia was not invited, and the Kremlin said the efforts would fail.

June 2024 – Switzerland peace summit

The June 2024 Summit on Peace in Ukraine, held at Switzerland’s Burgenstock resort, brought together more than 90 nations to discuss a framework for ending the conflict in Ukraine. The summit focused on nuclear safety, food security and prisoner exchanges, though Russia was not invited, and several nations, including India and Saudi Arabia, did not sign the final joint communique.

February 2025 – Trump-Putin call

A month after beginning his second term as US president, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that he held a long phone call with his Russian counterpart, Putin, in a bid to restart direct negotiations aimed at ending the war.

On February 18, delegations from Washington and the Kremlin, including US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, met in Saudi Arabia.

They laid the groundwork for future negotiations, but the talks raised significant concerns in Kyiv and Brussels, as both Ukraine and the European Union had been sidelined from the meeting.

February 2025 – Zelenskyy goes to the White House

Ten days later, on February 28, there came a saturation point at the White House.

In one of the most confrontational moments in modern diplomacy, President Trump and Vice President JD Vance berated President Zelenskyy in a televised meeting in the Oval Office.

Zelenskyy – called out for not wearing a suit and not expressing enough gratitude to the US – found himself cornered.

August 2025 – Witkoff goes to Moscow

Trump envoy Steve Witkoff travelled to Moscow to meet Putin on August 6. It was his third trip to Moscow and came amid renewed Western threats of sanctions on Russian oil exports and US threats of “secondary” trade tariffs.

Trump said afterwards that the meeting was “highly productive” and that “everyone agrees this war must come to a close”. Nothing more concrete came out of this meeting, however.

August 15, 2025 – Alaska summit

Trump dropped his sanctions threat and met Putin in person on August 15, 2025, at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska.

But no deal was reached.

August 18, 2025

Trump hosted Zelenskyy and other European leaders in Washington and said he would ask Putin to agree to a trilateral summit.

But nothing came out of this visit, either.

November 2025 – Geneva talks

In November 2025, the Geneva talks became a flashpoint for Western unity, as the Trump administration’s controversial 28-point plan leaked to the press, reportedly involving a cap on Ukraine’s military and a freeze on NATO membership. It also suggested that Ukraine should cede territory to Russia.

Reportedly authored by US envoy Witkoff along with Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev, the draft sparked accusations that the US was drafting a “capitulation” for Ukraine.

No deal was reached after revisions were made to the draft proposal.

December 2025 – Berlin and Miami talks

On December 14 and 15 last year, President Zelenskyy travelled to Berlin to meet US envoys Witkoff and Kushner, alongside a powerful group of European leaders, including Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz, the United Kingdom’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and France’s President Emmanuel Macron.

Following this, US negotiators optimistically claimed that 90 percent of the issues between the two sides had been resolved.

Then, later in the month, Witkoff and Kushner hosted another session of talks in Miami, Florida in the US. But the issues around sovereignty over Ukraine’s Donbas region and the exact line of demarcation proved impossible to bridge.

And no deal was reached.

January 2026 – Abu Dhabi talks

On January 23, high-level delegations from the US, Ukraine and Russia sat face to face to hold trilateral talks for the first time since the 2022 invasion.

Hosted at the Al Shati Palace in Abu Dhabi, talks were mediated by the United Arab Emirates.

Another round of talks was held on February 4, reaching an agreement on a major prisoner exchange but leaving key political and security issues unresolved.

The delegations agreed to exchange 314 prisoners of war – 157 each – the first such swap in five months.

February 17-18, 2026: Geneva talks

Talks in Geneva are currently under way.

Senior military figures from both Ukraine and Russia have attended the second three-way effort, along with the US, to end the war in Ukraine. These have largely stalled so far due to Russia’s insistence on keeping territory it has seized from Ukraine.

Tarique Rahman, leader of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which swept to a landslide victory in last week’s parliamentary elections, has been sworn in as the country’s first elected prime minister since deadly protests in 2024, which resulted in the ouster of the previous government and its prime minister, Sheikh Hasina.

The political alliance led by Rahman’s party won 212 seats in the Jatiya Sangsad, Bangladesh’s parliament, in Thursday’s elections, leaving its main competitor, the alliance led by Jamaat-e-Islami, with 77.

On Tuesday, Rahman took his oath of office, and newly elected MPs pledged loyalty to their country inside the oath room of the parliament building as they were sworn in by Chief Election Commissioner AMM Nasir Uddin.

Foreign officials, among them Pakistan’s foreign minister and the speaker of India’s Parliament, were also present.

Here is what we know about the people who will be running Bangladesh’s new government:

Who are the new cabinet members?

Twenty-five full ministers in the new cabinet took their oaths during a separate ceremony in Dhaka on Tuesday afternoon. The 25 have been drawn overwhelmingly from the BNP and its close allies.

Among the state (junior) ministers appointed to Rahman’s government are Nurul Haque and Zonayed Saki, first-time parliamentarians, who were prominent voices during the 2024 protests.

While members of the cabinet have been announced, the ministries they will be responsible for have not yet been confirmed. Here’s a look at who some of them are.

Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir

Alamgir, who has served as secretary-general of the BNP since 2016, was elected to his seat in parliament by the constituency of Thakurgaon-1, a district in northwestern Bangladesh.

Alamgir, 78, served as a member of parliament from 2001 to 2006 under the previous BNP government, led by Rahman’s late mother, Khaleda Zia, during which he was also state minister for agriculture and later for civil aviation and tourism.

After the end of that government’s term, a caretaker administration took over until elections in 2008, which Alamgir stood in but did not win. He remained a senior member of the BNP outside parliament.

In October 2023, Alamgir was detained by police the day after mass antigovernment protests swept through Dhaka when Hasina’s Awami League party was in power. The police said he had been detained for questioning in connection with the violence that erupted during those demonstrations.

When the BNP win was announced last week, Alamgir hailed the victory and called the BNP “a party of the people”.

Amir Khasru Mahmud Chowdhury

Chowdhury was elected from the Chattogram-11 constituency, which covers the Bandar and Patenga areas of Chattogram city in southeastern Bangladesh.

From 2001 to 2004, Chowdhury served as minister of commerce under the previous BNP administration. He is a member of the BNP’s standing committee.

Before last week’s vote, Chowdhury said that if elected, the BNP would govern by investing in people, “in health, in education and upskilling” and by supporting “artisans, the weavers” and small industries with credit as well as helping them access international markets, including by helping them with their branding.

Iqbal Hasan Mahmud Tuku

Tuku, 75, has been elected as a member of parliament for the Sirajganj-2 constituency in North Bengal.

Tuku is a member of the BNP Standing Committee, the party’s top policymaking body.

He is a veteran BNP figure who has been elected to parliament multiple times and has held important party roles. From 2001 to 2006, he served as the state minister for power. In 2006, he also briefly served as the state minister for agriculture.

In 2007, during the military-backed interim government, a special anticorruption court in Dhaka sentenced Tuku to nine years in prison in a case filed against him by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). The ACC accused Tuku of concealing information about assets worth 49.6 million takas (roughly $400,000).

The High Court upheld his conviction and jail sentence in 2023 after a lengthy appeal process. However, in September 2025, a year after the overthrow of the Awami League government, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court acquitted Tuku.

Khalilur Rahman

Khalilur Rahman is a technocratic minister, appointed for his expertise rather than as a party politician. He is not a member of parliament.

He served as national security adviser in the interim administration headed by Muhammad Yunus, which took over to oversee a transition after Hasina’s ouster.

He also served as the government’s representative for the Rohingya issue during Yunus’s tenure. The refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar in southern Bangladesh are sheltering more than one million Rohingya refugees, most of whom fled Myanmar in 2017 to escape a military crackdown.

Afroza Khanam Rita

The only woman cabinet minister, Rita is a first-time member of parliament but comes from a political family: Her late father was a four-times MP. Rita is also the chairwoman of the Monno Group of Industries, a conglomerate whose firms produce ceramic ware, textiles and agricultural machinery – primarily for export.

Asaduzzaman

Asaduzzaman, was elected from the Jhenaidah-1 (Shailkupa) constituency, which covers Shailkupa upazila in Jhenaidah district in southwestern Bangladesh.

Dipen Dewan

Dewan, 62, a Chakma Buddhist leader, is expected to be named minister of Chittagong Hill Tracts affairs. Dewan won from the Rangamati constituency.

Chakma Buddhists are an ethnic group of Tibeto-Burman speaking people. They are indigenous to the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh and parts of northeastern India.

Nitai Roy Chowdhury

Chowdhury, a Hindu leader, is widely expected to become the minister of cultural affairs.

Chowdhury, 77, has served as a senior adviser and strategist for the BNP’s top leaders.

How significant are these appointments?

During campaigning, the BNP pledged to meet the people’s demand for an elected government with real legitimacy. Therefore, ministers and cabinet members can expect a significant amount of scrutiny, experts said.

Khandakar Tahmid Rejwan, lecturer in global studies and governance at the Independent University, Bangladesh, told Al Jazeera: “The appointees in their respective fields will also face an invisible yet significant pressure to prove themselves more effective and distinctive than the previous administrations, both the interim government and, of course, the Awami League-led government under Sheikh Hasina.”

He added: “It will be particularly interesting to observe whether, after a youth-led mass uprising, the core of executive power is taken over by the old guard or by new faces that reflect diversity in terms of age, gender, ethnicity and religion.”

While two prominent figures from the 2024 student uprisings have been named as state ministers – Nurul Haque and Zonayed Saki – Rejwan added that leaders of the student-led National Citizen Party, which was founded after the 2024 uprising, had made a “strategic mistake” by allying with Jamaat instead of the BNP.

“They had the option to form an alliance with the BNP, which they later abandoned in favour of Jamaat. Given these political dynamics, it is unlikely that any student leaders will receive cabinet positions.”

Who attended the ceremony to swear in the new cabinet?

Several foreign delegations were in Bangladesh to attend the ceremony.

They included Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu and Bhutanese Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay.

India was represented by Om Birla, the speaker of its lower house in Parliament. Pakistani Federal Minister for Planning Ahsan Iqbal also attended.

Leaders and representatives from Nepal and the United Kingdom, China, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Brunei were among those who were invited to attend.

EXPLAINER

Here is how to wish someone during the holy month of Ramadan in different languages around the world.

Following the sighting of the crescent by the moon-sighting committee on Tuesday, Saudi Arabia has announced that the first day of fasting will be Wednesday, February 18.

There are nearly two billion Muslims globally, accounting for almost one-fourth of the world’s population. Indonesia has the largest Muslim population, approximately 242 million, followed by Pakistan (230 million), India (210 million), Bangladesh (160 million), and Nigeria (120 million).

As the holy month begins, many Muslims have been preparing for a period of fasting, reflection, and community. Those observing the fast start their day with a predawn meal, suhoor, and break their fast at sunset with iftar.

Why is Ramadan holy?

Muslims believe that Ramadan is the month when the first verses of the Quran were revealed to the Prophet Muhammad more than 1,400 years ago.

Fasting is one of the five pillars of Islam, along with the Muslim declaration of faith, daily prayers, charity, and performing the Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca if physically and financially capable.

Ramadan sayings in different languages

The month begins with the sighting of the new moon, often accompanied by an outpouring of greetings to mark the occasion. Many Muslim-majority countries have their own traditional greetings in their native languages.

Among the most common sayings are “Ramadan Mubarak” and “Ramadan Kareem”. These are Arabic sayings that translate to “blessed Ramadan” and “generous Ramadan”, respectively.

Greetings are not limited to the spoken language. They also extend to sign language and Braille. Some countries have their version of sign language, but placing one hand horizontally across the mouth is common among most to represent fasting.

Below is a collection of Ramadan greeting cards that you can download and share.

This week, the Israeli government approved a plan to designate large areas of the occupied West Bank as “state property”, shifting the burden of proof to Palestinians to establish ownership of their land.

The decision, which undermines the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, has prompted regional condemnation, with many describing it as a de facto annexation which is illegal under international law.

In recent years, Israel has intensified its military incursions, expanded illegal settlements, and demolished Palestinian homes, all as part of a series of aggressive actions to steal more Palestinian land.

In total, at least 37,135 Palestinians were displaced across the occupied West Bank in 2025, a record high amid Israeli military incursions and settler attacks, according to figures compiled by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

According to UNRWA, Israeli military incursions have forcibly displaced at least 33,362 Palestinians from three northern refugee camps: Jenin (12,557), Tulkarem(11,862) and Nur Shams (8,943).

In addition to those displaced during Israeli operations, at least 3,773 have been forced from their homes due to Israeli home demolitions, settler violence, and access restrictions.

The West Bank governorates with the largest number of forced displacements include:

• Ramallah and el-Bireh: 870
• Jerusalem: 841
• Hebron: 446
• Nablus: 407
• Bethlehem: 397
• Tubas: 292
• Salfit: 150
• Jericho: 135
• Jenin: 110
• Tulkarem: 65
• Qalqilya: 60

Why most demolitions and attacks are in Area C

As part of the 1993 Oslo Accords, signed by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Israel, the occupied West Bank was divided into three areas – A, B and C.

This led to the formation of the Palestinian Authority (PA) – an administrative body that would govern Palestinian internal security, administration and civilian affairs in areas of self-rule, for a five-year interim period.

Area A initially comprised 3 percent of the West Bank and grew to 18 percent by 1999. In Area A, the PA controls most affairs.

Area B represents about 22 percent of the West Bank. In both areas, while the PA is in charge of education, health and the economy, the Israelis have full control of external security, meaning they retain the right to enter at any time.

Area C represents 60 percent of the West Bank. Under the Oslo Accords, control of this area was supposed to be handed over to the PA. Instead, Israel retains total control over all matters, including security, planning and construction. The transfer of control to the PA never happened.

Although Area C is the least populated part of the West Bank, with about 300,000 Palestinians compared with about 3 million in Areas A and B, the vast majority of home demolitions and settler attacks occur there, due to it being under full Israeli military and administrative control.

The Israeli Civil Administration rarely grants building permits to Palestinians in this area, so nearly all construction is considered illegal and subject to demolition.

Record number of Israeli settler attacks

Since Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza began in October 2023, violence by Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank has steadily risen.

According to data from OCHA, settlers have attacked Palestinians more than 3,700 times in the occupied West Bank over the past 28 months.

The number of settler attacks has risen sharply since 2016, with 852 recorded in 2022, 1,291 in 2023, 1,449 in 2024 and 1,828 in 2025 – an average of five attacks per day, according to data from OCHA.

Every West Bank governorate has faced settler attacks over the past year.

Data from OCHA shows that between January 1, 2025 and December 31, 2025, the Ramallah and el-Bireh governorate recorded the highest number of settler attacks with 523 incidents, followed by Nablus with 349 and Hebron with 309.

Who are Israeli settlers?

Settlers are Israeli citizens living in illegal, Jewish-only communities, known as Israeli settlements, built on Palestinian-owned land that Israel occupied in 1967.

Benjamin Netanyahu – Israel’s longest-serving prime minister – has bolstered settlement expansions since he first came to power in 1996, undermining the 1993 Oslo Accords, which called for the freezing of settlements and a mutually negotiated two-state solution.

Today, roughly 10 percent of Israel’s Jewish population, totalling between 600,000 and 750,000 people, live in about 250 settlements and outposts dispersed throughout the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Many of these settlements are located near Palestinian population centres, often leading to increased tensions and restrictions on movement for Palestinians.

About 1.4 billion people began marking the Lunar New Year on Tuesday amid fireworks as China enters the Year of the Fire Horse, one of 12 animals in the Chinese zodiac.

Known as the Spring Festival in China, the new year, based on the lunar calendar, also brings about the world’s largest annual human migration, called Chunyun, as millions travel across the country for family reunions.

It is also a huge opportunity to boost domestic consumption in the world’s second-largest economy, which has been driven by exports.

Monday night’s gala, one of the largest state-sponsored televised events, was marked by a stunningly synchronised kung fu performance by robots and children.

The Year of the Horse, said to bring optimism and opportunity, is following the Year of the Snake, which represented transformation and strategy.

Here is a quick snapshot of the festival.

What’s Lunar New Year?

It is the most important holiday in China and is celebrated by millions of people in the country and in East and Southeast Asia.

In the days leading up to it, people clean their homes and decorate with red lanterns, couplets, and paper cuttings that represent prosperity and good fortune.

On the eve of the Lunar New Year, families gather for a large reunion dinner, exchanging hongbao, red envelopes of cash as a symbol of blessings and good fortune.

The celebrations usually last about 15 days, ending with the Lantern Festival. Fireworks, dragon and lion dances, temple fairs across big cities and the hinterland are common during this period.

In the Chinese zodiac, each year is associated with one of the 12 zodiac animals, which is believed to influence the year’s character and fortune.

The animal from the Chinese zodiac is then paired with any one of the five elements: metal, wood, water, fire and earth.

This is the Year of the Fire Horse.

This year’s official holiday is nine days, rather than the typical eight, with New Year’s Day falling on Tuesday, February 17.

What’s Year of the Fire Horse?

The Chinese zodiac system is incredibly complex, repeating every 12 years, each represented by an animal in this order: rat, ox, tiger, rabbit, dragon, snake, horse, goat, monkey, rooster, dog and pig.

The year of one’s birth decides their zodiac sign; meaning, the ones born last year were Snakes, this year’s children would be Horses and next year’s would be Goats.

A complex mechanism decides how the year will be paired with one of the five elements.

This year, the element is Bing, or big sun, paired with the Horse. This pairing occurs every 60 years, most recently in 1966.

For those who believe in the Chinese zodiac, the Year of the Fire Horse represents an explosion of energy and independence, with unpredictable realignments.

Why is China hoping the Lunar New Year spending will boost the economy?

The Spring Festival in China is not just cultural but also economically significant, typically driving a spike in consumption across multiple sectors.

People spend heavily on food and festive goods, entertainment, and tourism, with retail and e-commerce platforms registering a surge in sales during the pre-holiday period.

The Chinese government is also expecting a record 9.5 billion passenger trips during the 40-day Spring Festival period, up from nine billion trips last year, as they travel for annual reunions.

The government has also issued consumer vouchers worth more than 360 million yuan ($52m) this month to boost consumption.

China is looking to boost domestic spending in its next five-year economic plan, where households save nearly a third of their income.

Where else is Lunar New Year celebrated?

It is a global phenomenon extending beyond China. In East and Southeast Asia, several countries observe the Lunar New Year under distinct cultural pretexts.

For instance, Vietnam celebrates Tet Nguyen Dan, which emphasises family reunions and specific culinary traditions like banh chung. In South Korea, Seollal, or the Korean New Year, focuses on honouring ancestors and the consumption of tteokguk, a rice cake soup believed to grant people another year of age.

In Southeast Asian countries like Singapore and Malaysia, the holiday is a multicultural event marked by public holidays.

Diaspora communities in cities like San Francisco, London, and Sydney also host some of the largest celebrations in the world, featuring massive parades, dragon boat races and fireworks.

Fun fact about the Year of the Horse

This Lunar New Year found its mascot in a rather unusual place: in the World of Harry Potter, a wildly popular British production. And that too in the franchise’s most popular villain, Draco Malfoy.

In Mandarin, the name Malfoy is written phonetically as “ma er fu”. The opening character, ma, signifies “horse” and the closing character, fu, represents “fortune” or “blessing”.

The Israeli government has approved a plan to begin land registration in the occupied West Bank, meaning it will be able to seize land from Palestinians who cannot prove ownership.

For the first time since Israel’s occupation of the West Bank in 1967, it will register such land as property of the state – also known as settlement of land title – in Area C of the occupied West Bank.

Area C is the part of the West Bank that remains under direct Israeli control. It covers about 60 percent of the West Bank.

According to Israeli media, Israeli Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich, who submitted the proposal to restart land registration with Minister of Justice Yariv Levin and Minister of Defence Israel Katz, said the move was a continuation of “the settlement revolution to control all our lands”.

The Palestinian Authority presidency said the decision amounts to “de facto annexation” of the West Bank. It is the formalisation of the ongoing process of building settlements in the West Bank in violation of international law over the past several decades.

Here’s what we know about how this could be implemented:

What does the land registration process mean?

During Jordanian control of the West Bank from 1949 to 1967, the administration primarily followed the British Mandate of land ownership, under which land was registered as state or private property.

But only about one-third of the land in the West Bank was formally registered under this process. Large numbers of Palestinians living in the region had no documentation or other means of proving they owned their own land. Many of them had also lost documents or they had been destroyed during the 1967 six-day Arab-Israeli war, which resulted in the Israeli occupation of the West Bank.

When Israel took control of the West Bank, it discontinued the process of land registration.

Now, the government has decided to restart the land registration, a move that many Israeli human rights groups and political analysts have condemned.

Xavier Abu Eid, a political analyst based in the West Bank, described the Israeli government’s move as a “de facto annexation of Palestinian territory”.

“What they are doing is the implementation of annexation, packaging it as a mere bureaucratic process,” he told Al Jazeera.

He added that it reaffirms the idea that “there is a colonial power that sets two different sets of legislation depending on ethnic and religious identity, defined also as apartheid.”

Where will land registration be implemented?

In 1993 and 1995, the Oslo Accords were signed between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization. They laid out administrative control of the West Bank and Gaza and divided the occupied West Bank into three areas – Area A, Area B and Area C.

The new Palestinian Authority (PA) was granted full administrative control of 18 percent of the land – Area A – and joint control with Israel over 22 percent – Area B. Area C remained under complete Israeli military control. These areas were meant to be in place for five years, after which full administrative control would be handed to the PA. However, this transfer never took place.

The land registration that will now be restarted will apply to Area C, which is home to more than 300,000 Palestinian people.

According to the Israeli anti-settlement group Peace Now, in Area C, about 58 percent of the land remains unregistered. In a statement on Sunday, the group warned that the Israeli government’s land settlement process will now facilitate full Israeli control of this unregistered land.

How will land registration work?

Israeli authorities have provided few details about how the process will unfold, but essentially, it will likely involve transferring legal ownership of land to the Israeli state and issuing evictions to Palestinian communities, as has been happening in East Jerusalem in recent years, experts told Al Jazeera.

Michal Braier, an architect and the head of research at Bimkom, an Israeli human rights organisation that focuses on land and housing rights, said it is likely Israeli authorities will take the same approach in the West Bank as they have taken in East Jerusalem since 2018. In East Jerusalem, only 1 percent of settled land has been registered to Palestinians from 2018 to 2024, according to Bimkom.

Braier said Israel will begin by selecting the areas of land it wants to register. The government has set a goal of registering about 15 percent of the unregistered land within the next four years, she added.

“Now we can pretty clearly guess that this 15 percent will be lands where they assume that they can prove the state ownership easily or they can easily reject Palestinian ownership claims because a lot of these unregistered lands don’t have clear records and the records go a very, very long time back. So it will be very hard to prove Palestinian ownership,” she told Al Jazeera.

In theory, she said, Palestinians will be able to file land claims as part of the new process, but in practice, it is likely that they will be prevented from successfully doing so.

“Even if they do file claims, the legal bars they need to meet are very difficult to obtain. On top of this, there is the problem of Absentee Property Law, which moves land into the state’s hands and is yet unclear how exactly it will be practised in the occupied West Bank. So Palestinians are highly likely to lose their individual property rights,” she said.

The Absentee Property Law is an Israeli law enacted in 1950 that states that Israel has the right to seize property of “absentees” – people who were expelled, fled or who left the country after November 29, 1947, the day the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution to end the British Mandate and recommend the creation of a Palestinian and a Jewish state. Israel was founded less than six months later.

Braier said land registration “will be used as another mechanism to grab land that they could not grab until now for different reasons and to build more settlements and push out Palestinians from Area C”.

According to a Times of Israel report, an Israeli government resolution linked to the land registration bill has allowed for an initial budget of $79m for the land registration process in Area C from 2026 to 2030. The report added that during this process, Israel, which already has civilian and military control of the area, will establish 35 ministerial positions and set up state agencies to begin the process of registering land.

What does this mean for Palestinian communities?

Peace Now described the Israeli government’s decision to restart land registration in the West Bank as “a mega land grab of Palestinian property”.

“Land registration will result in the transfer of ownership of the vast majority of Area C to the state, leaving Palestinians with no practical ability to realise their ownership rights,” the group said in a statement on Sunday.

Abu Eid said the land registration process the government intends to undertake amounts to a “full-fledged ethnic cleansing policy” and added that it is a moment that will be “remembered as a turning point in Israeli attempts at erasing the Palestinian cause”.

But he noted that the Israeli government’s decision has not arisen in a vacuum as Israel has “allowed for a wave of terror attacks by Israeli settlers and the expansion of colonial settlements all over the West Bank” for years.

“Palestinians in general are not just dispossessed of their land and natural resources but come under attacks that are dealt with utter impunity both by the Israeli regime and by the international community,” he said.

“In al-Auja, for example, near Jericho, from 100 Palestinian families that used to live in the place a few months ago, now there is not a single family left,” he added.

He said it is likely that Israel will expect thousands of displaced people from the West Bank to go to Jordan.

“You should not forget the incitement coming out from members of the Israeli government claiming that Jordan should be turned into Palestine while Palestine should be left for the Zionist project,” Abu Eid said.

How have Palestinian land rights been eroded before this?

The West Bank is home to about 3.3 million Palestinians. It is divided into 11 governorates with Hebron being the most populous at 842,000 residents. Jerusalem follows with 500,000, Nablus with 440,000, Ramallah and el-Bireh with 377,000 and Jenin with 360,000.

Since the Israeli occupation in 1967, the Palestinian people have been subject to  land seizures and illegal settlement expansion.

Today, about 700,000 Israelis live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in settlements and outposts that are Jewish-only communities built on Palestinian land. These range in size from a single dwelling to a collection of high rises. Last year, the Israeli government approved the construction of new settlements in the region, seeking to advance “de facto sovereignty” in the region.

In all, the number of settlements and outposts in the West Bank and East Jerusalem has risen by nearly 50 percent since 2022 – from 141 to 210 now.

Besides eroding Palestinian people’s land rights, Israel has also carried out frequent raids in the West Bank, where Palestinians are also subject to checkpoints, arbitrary arrests, home demolitions and settler attacks.

The Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem estimated that settler attacks against Palestinians have forcibly displaced 44 communities across the West Bank in recent years. These attacks have also resulted in the deaths of Palestinian people. Since Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza began on October 7, 2023, settler attacks have also intensified.

At least 1,054 Palestinians were killed in the West Bank by Israeli soldiers and settlers from October 7, 2023, to February 5 of this year, according to the latest United Nations figures.

Braier said Sunday’s approval of Israel’s land registration in the West Bank will result in a rise in violence in the region.

“Area C is being cleared out by what is usually regarded as settler violence, but this violence is actually state violence, backed by state mechanisms, so this is all working together to expand Israeli control over Area C and expand settlement in Area C,” she said.

Is Israel’s land registration process legal?

In 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel’s “expropriation of land and properties, transfer of populations, and legislation aimed at the incorporation of the occupied section are totally invalid and cannot change that status”.

The ICJ has also ruled that Israel’s long-term occupation of Palestinian territory is illegal and must be terminated “as rapidly as possible”.

Braier said the Israeli government’s latest decision on land registration also contravenes international law.

“International law is clear: As an occupying power, Israel cannot exercise sovereign powers, including final determination of land ownership, in an occupied territory,” she told Al Jazeera.

“This position was reinforced by the International Court of Justice’s 2024 advisory opinion, which found that similar settlement of land title proceedings in East Jerusalem violate the laws of occupation,” she said.

“Furthermore, the decision to authorise Israeli civilian authorities to manage the land registration procedures likewise constitutes a clear indication of the annexation of the area,” she added.

What does this mean for Israel’s peace treaty with Jordan?

On October 26, 1994, Israel and Jordan signed the Wadi Araba Treaty, which formally ended the state of war between the two nations that had existed since the creation of Israel in 1948.

Under the agreement, Israel and Jordan established diplomatic ties, agreed to exchange territory and opened the way for cooperation in trade, tourism, transport links, water resources and environmental protection. Jordan also signed the agreement seeking to ensure a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine would be established.

But the public in Jordan, opposition groups and human rights groups have repeatedly called on the government to sever relations with Israel due to its continuing aggression in Palestine.

In 2014, many Jordanians took to the streets, calling on the government to scrap its peace treaty with Israel after clashes between Israeli police and Palestinians at Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.

In 2024, a similar call was issued by Jordanian activists as Israel conducted its genocidal war in Gaza, which has killed more than 70,000 Palestinians.

On Sunday, Jordan, which shares a 482km (300-mile) border with Israel and the West Bank, condemned Israel’s decision to reinstate land registration in the West Bank. Jordan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs described Israel’s move as a “flagrant violation of international law”.

While Jordan’s peace treaty with Israel still holds, Abu Eid said Sunday’s decision by the Israeli cabinet is a serious and sensitive matter for Jordan, particularly if thousands of people are forcibly displaced from the West Bank.

Furthermore, he said, Israel has been acting against the principles of the Jordan-Israel peace agreement for years.

“If peace agreements are aimed at creating the conditions to enhance cooperation and establish a two-state solution, Israel goes against all of such principles, seeking the expansionist ‘Greater Israel’ agenda,” he said.

“Jordan takes such matters seriously and will certainly seek to have collective action with other regional and international allies,” he added.

New US court documents reveal ties between a key figure behind the Oslo Accords and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, including financial links and visa favours. The revelations have sparked political fallout in Norway and renewed scrutiny of the Palestinian peace process’s legacy. Al Jazeera’s Nour Hegazy explains.

Speaking at the annual Munich Security Conference on Saturday, United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio urged European countries to collaborate with the US to build a “new Western century”, describing US-Europe ties as “civilisational”.

“We are part of one civilisation – Western civilisation,” he said.

His rallying speech comes after more than a year of President Donald Trump’s rhetoric about mass immigration in Europe and his administration’s latest National Security Strategy, which warns of “civilisational erasure” in Europe.

Last year, US Vice President JD Vance also lambasted European “liberal values” in his first address at the security conference.

As European leaders grapple with the rise of far-right political parties, how will they respond to this new demand from the US, and what does it mean for the future of transatlantic relations?

What did Rubio say?

The top US diplomat focused on several key areas he views as imperative for Europe to address, which included ending “liberalist” policies the Trump administration views as responsible for Europe’s “post-war decline”, creating new supply chains to reduce reliance on countries such as China, and ending mass migration, which he said is leading to the erasure of Western “civilisation”.

“The work of this new alliance,” Rubio said, “should not be focused just on military cooperation and reclaiming the industries of the past. It should also be focused on, together, advancing our mutual interests and new frontiers, unshackling our ingenuity, our creativity, and the dynamic spirit to build a new Western century.”

Liberalism and mass migration

Rubio argued that the “euphoria” of the Western victory in the Cold War had led to a “dangerous delusion that we had entered ‘the end of history’”, where every nation would be a liberal democracy and “live in a world without borders, where everyone became a citizen of the world”.

He used this as a plank to lash out against opening “doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people”.

“Mass migration is not, was not, isn’t some fringe concern of little consequence. It was and continues to be a crisis which is transforming and destabilising societies all across the West,” he said.

Taking aim at liberalist policies, he added that, to “appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people”.

New supply chains

Rubio said the US and its allies should bring more industry and jobs back home, not just to build weapons but to lead in new, high‑tech fields.

He added that the West should control key minerals and supply chains, invest in space travel and artificial intelligence, and work together to win markets in the Global South.

In particular, he said, is the need for a “Western supply chain for critical minerals not vulnerable to extortion from other powers”.

Earlier this month, Trump hosted ministers from dozens of countries for a critical minerals conference in Washington. The meeting was the first of a new Critical Minerals Ministerial, a US initiative to build alliances aimed at countering China’s control over critical mineral supply chains around the world.

What does a ‘new Western century’ mean?

While the overarching message of Rubio’s speech was that the US still seeks a partnership with Europe, said Trita Parsi, executive vice president of think tank Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, his remarks revealed, “The US will entirely set the parameters of that partnership and that it will be based on ideas Europe long has abandoned: An embrace of empire and colonisation.”

Rubio’s remarks at the conference suggest that the US under Trump wants Europe to accept “a civilisational divide of the world in which the ‘West’ must restore its dominance over other civilisations”, Parsi told Al Jazeera.

“In essence, Rubio listed the criteria for how Europe can become well-behaved vassals of the United States,” he said.

How did European leaders react to Rubio’s speech?

European leaders appeared to welcome Rubio’s speech at the conference; it was followed by a standing ovation. However, while lauding his call for stronger ties with the US, they notably did not address his comments about migration and liberal values.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told reporters on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference: “We know that in the [Trump] administration, some have a harsher tone on these topics. But the secretary of state was very clear. He said, ‘We want [a] strong Europe in the alliance’, and this is what we are working for intensively in the European Union.”

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot responded to Rubio’s speech: “Referring to [our] common legacy can only be welcomed with applause in Europe.”

“We will deliver a strong and independent Europe,” he said. “Independent, of course, irrespective of the speeches that we hear at the Munich Security Conference, however right they may be.”

Calling Rubio a “true partner”, German Foreign Minister John Wadephul said: “[It was] a very clear message from Secretary Rubio that we have … to stay and stick to our international rules-based order, which is, of course, in [the] first line the United Nations. This is our Board of Peace. We have to make it more effective, as Rubio said this morning.”

Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen said she was “very satisfied with the tone” and the content of Rubio’s speech.

What does this mean for Europe?

European leaders have been facing a dilemma – particularly over migration and defence – for some time, for a number of reasons. The mass migration crisis prompted by unrest in other parts of the world has already caused far-right parties to surge in popularity. Now, the Trump administration has voiced support for many of these parties and is also urging Europe to take stronger action on migration and defence.

Therefore, many European leaders have already started taking action in these areas.

For instance, most European countries are already working on boosting their defences and cracking down on migration.

Last year, the United Kingdom announced plans for a big boost in defence spending in advance of Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s meeting with Trump early last year amid fears the US would withdraw support for Ukraine in its war with Russia. Notably, Rubio skipped a meeting about Ukraine with European leaders at the Munich conference.

Many countries have also tightened controls over immigration. Denmark has led the way in implementing increasingly restrictive policies in its immigration and asylum system, with top leaders aiming for “zero asylum seekers” arriving in the country. Recently, the UK said it was studying the Danish model as well.

Europe is also working to make its energy and technology supply chains more sovereign, reducing dependence on foreign suppliers, particularly in the face of Trump’s trade war, which has seen him impose reciprocal trade tariffs on many countries around the world.

Many European leaders have come under increasing pressure from the rise in popularity of far-right parties calling for greater restrictions on immigration, as well.

In recent years, far-right, anti-immigration sentiment has been increasing in countries like the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and France. In 2023, the far-right Party for Freedom (PVV), led by Geert Wilders, won the election in the Netherlands. France’s National Rally (RN), led by Marine Le Pen, won the snap election in 2024. The same year, Nigel Farage’s right-wing Reform UK party made significant inroads in the general elections and, last year, a YouGov poll placed Reform as the UK’s most popular political party.

Besides this, ideas which were once far-right fringe notions, such as remigration – the notion of forcibly expelling non-white European citizens – are gaining traction among far-right conservatives in Europe. The idea has been promoted by Herbert Kickl, the leader of Austria’s far-right anti-immigration Freedom Party (FPO) and Alice Weidel, the leader of the AfD in Germany.

While some European leaders have geared up to resist the rise of far-right politics – partly by appeasing them with new, more restrictive migration policies – Trump has, however, embraced it.

What does this mean for US-Europe relations?

All this ultimately means that “Europe has a choice to make”, said Trita Parsi, executive vice president at the think tank Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. “It can pursue strategic autonomy and seek to find a balance between the great powers, and within that seek a dignified partnership with America in which it is not subjugated into vassalage.”

“[Or] Europe can continue on its current path in which it subordinates itself slowly but surely fully to Washington’s interests, priorities, impulses, and ideas about civilisational empire,” he told Al Jazeera.

Parsi pointed to the standing ovation at the conference that followed Rubio’s speech, simply for offering to remain partners with Europe.

“Whether they disregarded Rubio’s parameters, did not understand them, or simply found it unimportant because Europe desires to be a junior partner to the United States regardless of the parameters, remains to be seen,” he said.

For their part, European leaders appeared to place the greatest importance on repairing US-Europe relations above all else at the Munich Security Conference.

During his address at the conference on Friday, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz called on the US and Europe to “repair and revive transatlantic trust together”. “Let me begin with the uncomfortable truth: A rift, a deep divide has opened between Europe and the United States,” he said.

“Vice President JD Vance said this a year ago here in Munich. He was right in his description,” Merz said, as he called for a “new transatlantic partnership”.

Thousands of Western nationals joined the Israeli military amid its genocidal war in Gaza, raising questions over international legal accountability for foreign nationals implicated in alleged war crimes against Palestinians.

More than 50,000 soldiers in the Israeli military hold at least one other citizenship, with a majority of them holding US or European passports, information obtained by the Israeli NGO Hatzlacha through Israel’s Freedom of Information Law has revealed.

Since October 7, 2023, Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza has killed at least 72,061 people in military actions that have been dubbed war crimes and crimes against humanity by rights groups.

Rights organisations around the world have been trying to identify and prosecute foreign nationals, many of whom have posted videos of their abuse on social media, for their involvement in war crimes, particularly in Gaza.

So, what does the first such data reveal about the Israeli military? And what could be the legal implications for dual-national soldiers?

Which foreign nationals enlist most in the Israeli military?

At least 12,135 soldiers enlisted in the Israeli military hold United States passports, topping the list by a huge margin. That is in addition to 1,207 soldiers who possess another passport in addition to their US and Israeli ones.

The data – shared with Al Jazeera by Israeli lawyer Elad Man, who serves as the legal counsel for Hatzlacha – shows that 6,127 French nationals serve in the Israeli military.

The Israeli military, which shared such data for the first time, noted that soldiers holding multiple citizenships are counted more than once in the breakdown.

The numbers show service members enlisted in the military as of March 2025, 17 months into Israel’s devastating war in Gaza.

Russia stands at third, with 5,067 nationals serving in the Israeli military, followed by 3,901 Ukrainians and 1,668 Germans.

The data revealed that 1,686 soldiers in the military held dual British-Israeli citizenship, in addition to 383 other soldiers who held another passport in addition to their British and Israeli ones.

South Africa, which brought a case of genocide against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also had 589 of its citizens serving in the Israeli military ranks.

Furthermore, 1,686 soldiers hold Brazilian citizenship, 609  Argentine, 505 Canadian, 112 Colombian, and 181 Mexican, in addition to their Israeli nationality.

Israel’s military comprises an estimated 169,000 active personnel and 465,000 reservists – of whom nearly eight percent hold dual or multiple citizenships.

Can dual nationals be tried for war crimes in Gaza?

Ilias Bantekas, a professor of transnational law at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar, told Al Jazeera that “war crimes incur criminal liability under international law, irrespective of what the law of nationality says”.

Otherwise, Nazi Germans, whose law allowed and obliged them to commit atrocities, would incur no liability, Bantekas added. “Dual nationality is immaterial to criminal liability,” he said.

However, the major issue in prosecuting the accused “is getting [them] on your territory and putting them before a court”, he noted.

Bantekas also added that there is no difference in the question of liability between native soldiers and those of dual nationalities.

Dual nationals, in fact, “may in addition be liable under laws that prevent military service in foreign conflicts or joining armies of other nations”, the professor said.

Prosecuting foreign nationals has been “pretty much the norm”, he noted.

“Think of Nazi Germans tried by Allied war crimes tribunals after World War II, Japanese officers tried by US military courts, and crimes committed during the Bosnian conflict where alleged offenders were tried by various courts in Europe,” Bantekas told Al Jazeera.

Last May, the United Kingdom’s Foreign Office said that allegations of war crimes should be submitted to the Metropolitan Police.

“The UK recognises the right of British dual nationals to serve in the legitimately recognised armed forces of the country of their other nationality,” it said. “Allegations of war crimes should be submitted to the Met Police for investigation.”

Have foreign nationals been tried for Gaza war crimes?

Nationals with dual or multiple citizenships have not yet been arrested for committing war crimes in Gaza. But rights groups, including lawyers, are trying to get them prosecuted.

In the UK last April, the Gaza-based Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) and the UK-based Public Interest Law Centre (PILC) filed a 240-page report to the Metropolitan Police.

Accusations against the 10 British individuals, whose names have not been publicly disclosed, include murder, forcible transfer of people, and attacks on humanitarian personnel, between October 2023 and May 2024.

In September last year, a case was filed in Germany against a 25-year-old soldier, born and raised in Munich, for participating in the killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza, by PCHR, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), Al-Haq, and the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights.

The sniper, with shootings documented near Gaza’s al-Quds and Nasser hospitals between November 2023 and March 2024, was a member of a unit known as “Refaim”, “ghost” in Hebrew.

Legal proceedings against members of the same unit are also under way in France, Italy, South Africa, and Belgium.

The Belgian public prosecutor’s office also opened a judicial investigation last October into a 21-year-old Belgian-Israeli citizen, a member of Refaim.

The mandatory military service law in Israel exempts dual nationals residing abroad, making the enlistment a voluntary act, an important distinction when such crimes are tried in foreign courts. Lawyers have reportedly noted that the voluntary nature of the soldiers’ service makes them more liable for alleged crimes.

What does international law say about soldiers in foreign wars?

South Africa brought its case to the ICJ in December 2023, arguing that Israel’s war in Gaza violates the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

While a final ruling could take years, the ICJ issued provisional measures in January 2024 ordering Israel to take steps to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza and to allow unimpeded access for humanitarian aid. But Israel has continued curb the supply of aid into Gaza in violation of the ICJ interim order.

Under the 1948 Genocide Convention, countries that are party to the treaty have a binding obligation to prevent and punish genocide. Countries can investigate and prosecute individuals who may have committed or been complicit in this crime.

In March last year, the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) announced the “Global 195” campaign to hold Israeli and dual-national individuals accountable for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

The coalition aims to work simultaneously within multiple jurisdictions to apply for private arrest warrants and initiate legal proceedings against those implicated, including the Israeli military members and the entire Israeli military and political command in its scope.

For countries that are parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), there is an additional layer, where the ICC can assert its jurisdiction. Palestine has been a state party since 2015.

The State of Palestine is recognised as a sovereign nation by 157 of the 193 UN member states, representing 81 percent of the international community. Most recently, it has been recognised by France, Belgium, Canada, Australia, and the UK.

A foreign national, whose country considers Palestine a “friendly state”, would also be vulnerable to prosecution for participating in the Israeli military’s war crimes in Gaza.

How is the Hind Rajab Foundation tracking alleged war criminals?

The Hind Rajab Foundation – named to honour a five-year-old Palestinian girl whose killing by Israeli soldiers on January 29, 2024 became emblematic of Israel’s genocide in Gaza – has been amassing troves of data with identifiable information about Israeli soldiers.

The Belgium-based foundation is the force behind an international effort for accountability over war crimes in Gaza – and has since filed several cases, including a landmark challenge targeting 1,000 Israeli soldiers.

The foundation identified numerous individuals with dual citizenship, including 12 from France, 12 from the US, four from Canada, three from the UK, and two from the Netherlands, in the complaint.

The foundation has scoured TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube, where the Israeli soldiers boast about atrocities in Gaza, to collect information on the soldiers. It has been using those pieces of evidence to pursue the trail of the accused for war crimes.

“We are in possession of many more profiles of dual nationals beyond the 1,000 soldiers named in our complaint to the ICC. We will be pursuing legal action against all of them in the national courts of their respective countries,” the foundation had said in October 2024. “Impunity must end, everywhere.”

The Hind Rajab Foundation says it pursues criminal accountability for Israeli war criminals, from those who planned and ordered operations to those who executed them, including foreign nationals who have participated in or financed these crimes.

Its founder, Dyab Abou Jahjah, was also threatened by Israeli Minister of Diaspora Affairs Amichai Chikli, who told him to “watch your pager” in a post on X, an allusion to deadly attacks on Hezbollah members’ communication systems in September 2024. At least 12 people were killed and more than 3,000 people were wounded when thousands of pagers were detonated by Israeli operatives during those attacks.

In January last year, a complaint filed by the Hind Rajab Foundation led to a Brazilian judge ordering an investigation into an Israeli soldier vacationing in the country. The soldier had to flee, prompting the Israeli military to order all troops who participated in combat to conceal their identities.

“Criminal liability under international law cannot be dissolved by time bars. It extends forever, and no statute of limitations is applicable,” said Bantekas of Hamad Bin Khalifa University.

However, prosecuting Israeli military members “is practically difficult for two reasons”, he said, noting the difficulty of obtaining firsthand evidence and the wariness of national prosecutors who may fear political or other repercussions.

“If public opinion and political opinion in Europe shifts far more in favour of Palestine than it is now, then national prosecutions will feel more at ease to initiate prosecutions,” he told Al Jazeera.

EXPLAINER

The dawn-to-dusk fast lasts anywhere from 11.5 to 15.5 hours, depending on where in the world you are.

The Muslim holy month of Ramadan is set to begin on February 18 or 19, depending on the sighting of the crescent moon.

During the month, which lasts 29 or 30 days, Muslims observing the fast will refrain from eating and drinking from dawn to dusk, typically for a period of 12 to 15 hours, depending on their location.

Muslims believe Ramadan is the month when the first verses of the Quran were revealed to the Prophet Muhammad more than 1,400 years ago.

The fast entails abstinence from eating, drinking, smoking and sexual relations during daylight hours to achieve greater “taqwa”, or consciousness of God.

Why does Ramadan start on different dates every year?

Ramadan begins 10 to 12 days earlier each year. This is because the Islamic calendar is based on the lunar Hijri calendar, with months that are 29 or 30 days long.

For nearly 90 percent of the world’s population living in the Northern Hemisphere, the number of fasting hours will be a bit shorter this year and will continue to decrease until 2031, when Ramadan will encompass the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year.

For fasting Muslims living south of the equator, the number of fasting hours will be longer than last year.

Because the lunar year is shorter than the solar year by 11 days, Ramadan will be observed twice in the year 2030 – first beginning on January 5 and then starting on December 26.

Fasting hours around the world

The number of daylight hours varies across the world.

Since it is winter in the Northern Hemisphere, this Ramadan, people living there will have the shortest fasts, lasting about 12 to 13 hours on the first day, with the duration increasing throughout the month.

People in southern countries like Chile, New Zealand, and South Africa will have the longest fasts, lasting about 14 to 15 hours on the first day. However, the number of fasting hours will decrease throughout the month.

Fasting times around the world

The table below shows the number of fasting hours, suhoor and iftar times on the first and last days of Ramadan 2026. Use the arrows or search box to find your city.

Ramadan greetings in different languages

Muslim-majority nations have various greetings in their native languages for Ramadan.

“Ramadan Mubarak” and “Ramadan Kareem” are the most common greetings exchanged in this period, wishing the recipient a blessed or generous month, respectively.

United States Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has claimed that Washington engineered a dollar shortage in Iran to send the rial into freefall and cause protests on the streets.

In December and January, Iran was faced with one of the biggest antigovernment protests the country has seen since the Islamic revolution of 1979, prompted by the severe economic crisis.

Protests over soaring prices in Iran began with shopkeepers in Tehran who shuttered their shops and began demonstrating on December 28, 2025, after the rial plunged to a record low against the US dollar in late December. The protests then spread to other provinces of Iran.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s government responded with force. More than 6,800 protesters, including at least 150 children, are thought to have been killed in a sweeping crackdown by the government on the protest movement.

So, how did Washington create a “dollar shortage” in Iran, ultimately causing the rial to tank? And what effect has that had on the Iranian people?

What is a ‘dollar shortage’?

A “dollar shortage” refers to when a country does not have enough US dollars to pay for things it needs from the rest of the world.

The US dollar is the main currency used in global trade, especially for oil, machinery and loan repayments, which means countries need a steady supply of it.

If exports fall and sanctions block access to the US financial system, dollars can become scarce. As a result, the local currency weakens, prices of imported goods rise, and inflation worsens.

In Iran, a “dollar shortage” was engineered by simultaneously blocking the two main channels of foreign exchange (FX) inflow: Oil exports and international banking access, said Mohammad Reza Farzanegan, an economist at Germany’s Marburg University. The US did this by imposing sanctions on Iranian oil, meaning anyone buying or selling it would be subject to punitive measures.

Given Iran’s dependence on oil for revenue, economic sanctions on its oil can create a severe FX constraint.

“By using secondary sanctions to threaten any global entity trading in dollars with Iran, the US traps Iran’s existing reserves abroad and prevents new dollars from entering the domestic market,” Farzanegan told Al Jazeera.

What has US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said?

Replying to a query about dealing with Iran at a Congressional hearing last week, Treasury Secretary Bessent described the US strategy to send the Iranian currency plunging.

“What we [have done] at Treasury is created a dollar shortage in the country,” Bessent said, adding that the strategy came to a “grand culmination in December, when one of the largest banks in Iran went under … the Iranian currency went into freefall, inflation exploded, and hence, we have seen the Iranian people out on the street.

“We have seen the Iranian leadership wiring money out of the country like crazy,” Bessent added. “So the rats are leaving the ship, and that is a good sign that they know the end may be near.”

Before this, speaking with Fox News at the World Economic Forum last month in Davos, Bessent explained the role US sanctions played in driving the recent nationwide protests.

“President Trump ordered Treasury … to put maximum pressure on Iran, and it’s worked,” he said. “Because in December, their economy collapsed. They are not able to get imports, and this is why the people took to the streets.”

In both instances, Bessent referred to his earlier remarks at the Economic Club of New York, in March last year, when he outlined how the White House would leverage President Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign to collapse Iran’s economy.

In his address there, Bessent said the US “elevated a sanctions campaign against [Iran’s] export infrastructure, targeting all stages of Iran’s oil supply chain”, coupled with “vigorous government engagement and private sector outreach” to “close off Iran’s access to the international financial system”.

What effect did the dollar shortage have in Iran?

In January, the Iranian rial was trading at 1.5 million to the dollar – a sharp decline from about 700,000 a year earlier in January 2025 and about 900,000 in mid-2025. The plummeting currency triggered steep inflation, with food prices an average of 72 percent higher than last year.

In 2018, during his first presidency, Trump withdrew from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a deal between Iran and global powers limiting Tehran’s nuclear programme in return for sanctions relief.

Since re-election last January, President Trump has doubled down on his so-called “maximum pressure” to cripple Iran’s economy and corner Tehran to renegotiate its nuclear and regional policies. Last month, Trump threatened a 25 percent tariff on countries doing business with Iran.

Through the rigorous blocking of Iran from the global financial system by creating a dollar shortage, the US pushed Tehran towards a severe “import compression, [and as a result, Iran] cannot pay for the intermediate goods and machinery required for domestic production”, said Farzanegan, the economist.

The US strategy, he said, “is particularly devastating because it leverages commercial risk management against humanitarian needs”. In short, Washington’s strategy “makes the small Iranian market a commercial liability” for any company, even if they are only dealing with medicine, for instance, Farzanegan added.

A research paper published by Farzanegan and Iranian American economist Nader Habibi last year found that the size of Iran’s middle class would have expanded by an annual average of approximately 17 percentage points, between 2012 and 2019, if it were not for US action.

In 2019, the estimated size of loss in the middle-class share of the population in Iran was 28 percentage points, the research found.

“People lost their purchasing power, and savings were wiped out,” the economist told Al Jazeera. “This is a long-term destruction of the country’s human capital.”

Besides the US action is the existing vulnerability of Iran’s economic structure, with factors like long-term mismanagement, high rates of corruption and over-reliance on oil revenues making it fragile.

While the US sanctions created external shock, a lack of domestic structural reforms left the government with “no fiscal space to cushion the blow”.

What is the US’s endgame here – and will it succeed?

Bessent’s admission that Washington deliberately created a “dollar shortage” signals the US’s shift towards a total economic warfare narrative.

“This is economic statecraft; no shots fired,” Bessent said at the WEF in Davos last month.

“This admission may complicate the US’s diplomatic standing, as it confirms that the humanitarian channels for food and medicine are often rendered useless if the entire banking system is being targeted for collapse,” Farzanegan said.

Bruce Fein, a former US associate deputy attorney general who specialises in constitutional and international law, told Al Jazeera that this type of economic coercion is “as common as the sun rising in the east and setting in the west”, pointing to economic sanctions against Russia, Cuba, North Korea, China and Myanmar.

However, unlike in other cases where the US has applied economic pressure, Farzanegan said Iran’s case is “a unique experiment due to the duration and intensity of the pressure”.

Unlike Russia, which has a more diversified export base and larger reserves, Iran has been facing varied forms of sanctions for decades since the supreme leader took power in 1979.

“Iran has a sophisticated internal mechanism for sanctions circumvention that makes the ‘dollar shortage’ a game of cat-and-mouse rather than a one-time shock,” the economist said.

With a US armada currently stationed in the Arabian Sea, the US and Iran are in talks to defuse tensions. The US wants three key things from Iran: To stop enriching uranium as part of its nuclear programme, to get rid of its ballistic missiles and to stop arming non-state actors in the region.

Ultimately, observers say, the US wants regime change in Iran.

But Fein said his experience shows that economic sanctions alone “seldom, if ever, topple regimes … Regime change comes externally only with the use of military force.

“Iran’s dollar shortage will not oust the mullahs or Revolutionary Guard,” he said, referring to Iran’s current administrative structure.

The impoverishment of Iranians will diminish, Fein told Al Jazeera, “rather than promote the likelihood of a successful revolution because day-to-day survival will be the priority”.

Over the span of five hours on Wednesday, United States lawmakers questioned Attorney General Pam Bondi over the US Justice Department’s (DOJ) handling of documents related to convicted late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Bondi, testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, defended the DOJ’s handling of the release of the Epstein records and said there are “pending investigations” in the case.

Here are key takeaways from Bondi’s congressional hearing.

Why is Pam Bondi being questioned?

Bondi testified before the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, in a hearing entitled “Oversight of the US Department of Justice”, but the Epstein files quickly became a primary focus.

Since the start of his second term, US President Donald Trump and his administration have consistently faced questions about the decision to withhold or redact documents related to Epstein.

That new law, called the Epstein Files Transparency Act, passed into law in November with bipartisan support. It requires the Justice Department to publish all of its documents related to Epstein in an easily searchable format.

Though the law allows for some limited redaction to protect the identities of victims, critics argue that scores of documents have been published with heavy redactions. Some of those blacked-out sections appear to shield the identity of powerful figures involved with Epstein.

During her opening statement on Wednesday, Bondi, a prosecutor from Florida, defended her record of addressing sexual abuse.

“I have spent my entire career fighting for victims, and I will continue to do so,” she said.

Epstein victims were present

With several victims of Epstein seated behind her in the hearing room, Bondi forcefully defended the department’s handling of the files related to the well-connected financier, an issue that has dogged her tenure.

During her opening remarks, Bondi deemed Epstein a “monster” and issued an apology to the victims.

“I am deeply sorry for what any victim, any victim, has been through, especially as a result of that monster,” Bondi said.

At one point during the hearing, Representative Pramila Jayapal, a Democrat from Washington, asked the Epstein victims to raise their hands if they had not had a chance to meet with a member of the Justice Department. All the victims raised their hands.

The victims included Danielle Bensky, who met Epstein in 2004 when she was 17 years old. She has accused Epstein of sexually assaulting her.

“There was such a lack of empathy today. There was such a lack of, honestly, humanity today,” Bensky told an NBC programme after the hearing.

Bondi clashes with Democrats

Congressional Democrats accused the US attorney general on Wednesday of engaging in a “cover-up” of the Jeffrey Epstein files and turning the Department of Justice into an “instrument of revenge” for Trump.

Maryland Democrat Jamie Raskin criticised the slow release of the Epstein files and the redactions made to the documents.

“You’re running a massive Epstein cover-up right out of the Department of Justice,” Raskin said. “You’ve been ordered by subpoena and by Congress to turn over six million documents, photographs and videos in the Epstein files, but you’ve turned over only three million.”

When pressed by Representative Jayapal, Bondi refused to turn and face the Epstein victims in the audience and apologise for what Trump’s Justice Department has “put them through”. She accused the Democrat of “theatrics”.

Texas Democrat Jasmine Crockett stormed out of the hearing after a spat with Bondi. “This is a big cover-up. And this administration is still engaged in it. In fact, this administration is complicit,” Crockett said.

During a heated exchange, Crockett said Bondi would be remembered as one of the worst attorneys general, prioritising loyalty to Trump over the law, before yielding the rest of her time.

Bondi shot back that Crockett had not even tried to question her and accused her of ignoring the fact that Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries had taken money from Epstein after his conviction, a claim Jeffries has denied.

The attorney general also clashed with Ted Lieu, a Democrat from California. Lieu asked whether Trump had attended a party with underage girls, a question Bondi deemed “ridiculous”.

Bondi insisted there was no evidence Trump had committed a crime.

Lieu suggested that her answer amounted to lying under oath, noting that Trump’s name appears repeatedly in the Epstein files. Bondi shot back: “Don’t you ever accuse me of committing a crime.”

Trump’s name appears multiple times in the released Epstein files, but not in connection with the sexual abuse of women. Rather, the records primarily show that he and Epstein were acquainted and had a social relationship.

For instance, Trump was listed as a passenger on Epstein’s private jet at least eight times between 1993 and the mid-1990s.

On February 1, Trump told reporters on board Air Force One about his name being mentioned in the latest tranche of Epstein files: “I was told by some very important people that not only does it absolve me, it’s the opposite of what people were hoping, you know, the radical left.”

Republicans join Democrats in questioning Bondi

Bondi accused Democrats of using the Epstein files to distract from Trump’s successes, even though it was Republicans who initiated the furore over the records and Bondi herself fanned the flames by distributing binders to conservative influencers at the White House last year.

Representative Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, who helped lead the effort to require the files’ release, accused the Justice Department of a “massive failure” to comply with the law as he questioned why billionaire Leslie Wexner’s name was redacted in an FBI document listing potential co-conspirators in the sex trafficking investigation into Epstein.

Bondi said Wexner’s name appeared numerous times in other files the department released and that the DOJ unredacted his name on the document “within 40 minutes” of Massie spotting it.

“Forty minutes of me catching you red-handed,” Massie replied.

On Tuesday, Democratic Representative Ro Khanna revealed the names of six men, including Wexner. The other names made public are Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, the head of Dubai-based logistics company DP World, Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonic Leonov and Nicola Caputo. Al Jazeera could not independently verify their identities or affiliations.

Khanna said he was revealing the men’s names after he reviewed the files with Massie.

‘Trump orders prosecutions like pizza’: Bondi came to the president’s defence

Raskin and other Democratic lawmakers condemned the prosecutions brought by the DOJ against Trump’s political foes, such as former FBI director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

“You’ve turned the people’s Department of Justice into Trump’s instrument of revenge,” he said. “Trump orders up prosecutions like pizza and you deliver every time he tells you to.”

Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s former girlfriend, is the only person behind bars in connection with Epstein. She was convicted in 2021 of sex trafficking underage girls and is serving a 20-year prison sentence.

Trump has not been accused of any wrongdoing regarding Epstein but he fought for months to prevent the release of the files about his one-time friend.

A rebellion among Republicans eventually forced the president to sign off on the law mandating the release of all the records.

The move reflected intense political pressure to address what many Americans, including Trump’s own supporters, have long suspected to be a cover-up to protect rich and powerful men in Epstein’s orbit.

Trump’s repeated denials of any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes have come under scrutiny due to a 2019 FBI interview – contained in the Epstein files – with Palm Beach’s then-police chief Michael Reiter.

Reiter told the FBI that Trump had called him in 2006 – when the sex charges against Epstein became public – to say: “Thank goodness you’re stopping him, everyone has known he’s been doing this.”

United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer has emerged rattled but ultimately unscathed after a day and night of drama during which a key member of his Labour Party called for him to resign over revelations about a former ambassador to the US, Peter Mandelson, in the Jeffrey Epstein files.

Starmer has faced more than a week of mounting pressure since the release of the latest tranche of documents from the US Department of Justice relating to the criminal cases against the late sex offender. They revealed that Mandelson had maintained a close friendship with the disgraced financier even after Epstein had pleaded guilty to solicitation of sex with a minor and was jailed in 2008.

They include documents and emails that suggest Mandelson may have received payments from Epstein and passed sensitive information to him during the 2008-2009 financial crisis.

Since then, Starmer has admitted that he knew of the pair’s friendship when he appointed Mandelson as ambassador but said the peer had lied about the extent of it. The affair has caused outrage in parliament. Two key members of Starmer’s inner circle have resigned and a third is under pressure to go. On Monday, Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar called for the prime minister to do the same.

While Starmer’s position has been shored up for now by a rally of support from his cabinet on Monday night, just how badly has this affair shaken his government?

Why did Anas Sarwar call for Starmer to resign?

Sarwar said at a news conference early on Monday afternoon that he had called Starmer and told him it was time for him to resign. “I spoke to the prime minister earlier today, and I think it’s safe to say he and I disagreed,” Sarwar said.

He said “too many mistakes” had been made in relation to the appointment of Mandelson.

“The distraction needs to end, and the leadership in Downing Street has to change,” Sarwar said as he became the first Labour heavyweight to stand against the prime minister.

While Sarwar said he believed Starmer to be a “decent man”, the fury over the Epstein files had severely damaged the government’s support and wrecked its chances in the upcoming Scottish parliament elections. Opinion polls put Scottish Labour some distance behind the Scottish National Party, followed by the far-right Reform party, led by Nigel Farage.

But cabinet members came out in support of Starmer, ultimately ending the coup that never was. Angela Rayner, former deputy prime minister and a senior member of the Labour Party, was the first to show him support. She said in a post on X that while she did not defend Starmer’s judgement, “the worst possible response [to the scandal] would be to play party politics or factional games.”

“I urge all my colleagues to come together, remember our values and put them into practice as a team,” she wrote on X. “The Prime Minister has my full support in leading us to that end.”

Within hours, nearly every minister had followed suit. Wes Streeting, the health secretary, urged people to “give Keir a chance”. Pat McFadden, the work and pensions secretary, said he hoped the prime minister would stay on, and Douglas Alexander, Scotland secretary, said he “respected” Sarwar’s stance but backed the prime minister.

On Monday night, Starmer addressed more than 400 MPs and peers at a Labour Party meeting. “I have won every fight I’ve ever been in. I fought to change the Labour Party to allow us to win an election again,” he told them.

“But I’ll tell you this, after having fought so hard for the chance to change our country, I’m not prepared to walk away from my mandate and my responsibility to my country or to plunge us into chaos as others have done.”

Who has resigned from Starmer’s team and why?

Two key figures have already resigned, and a third is under pressure to do so, UK media has reported.

Amid growing outrage over the new revelations about Mandelson and Epstein, Starmer’s chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, resigned on Sunday, taking “full responsibility” for advising the prime minister to appoint Mandelson to the ambassadorship, which he took up in 2025, despite the risks.

“The decision to appoint Mandelson was wrong,” McSweeney said. “He has damaged our party. … I advised the prime minister to make that appointment and I take full responsibility for that.”

Mandelson was dismissed from the post in September after serving seven months after the UK daily The Sun obtained other emails between him and Epstein that showed the depth of their friendship.

After the release of the latest tranche of Epstein documents on January 30, Mandelson resigned from the Labour Party and the House of Lords.

Tim Allan, Starmer’s communications chief, resigned on Monday, saying he was leaving to pave the way for a “new No 10 team” to be built as Starmer tries to reset his government.

Allan, who founded the Portland Communications firm specialising in reputation management, had been in the job for only five months, and Starmer is now looking to hire his fifth communications chief since taking office in 2024.

Chris Wormald, the cabinet secretary and senior-most civil servant in Downing Street, is also reportedly under pressure to resign and is said to be currently negotiating his exit from the role, which he has been in for less than a year.

The UK’s Guardian newspaper reported that some people close to Starmer view him as a “disastrous” appointment.

What did the Epstein files reveal about Mandelson?

The latest release of files showed Mandelson maintained his relationship with Epstein after the latter was jailed in 2008.

They also suggested Mandelson received payments from the late financier and may have shared market-sensitive information with him that was of financial interest to Epstein.

Leaks of sensitive information by Mandelson allegedly took place in 2009 while he was serving as the UK’s business secretary.

The UK police have launched a criminal investigation over suspected misconduct in public office linked to Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein.

In one of the emails revealed in the most recent tranche of documents released from the US Justice Department, Mandelson told Epstein to “fight for early release” shortly before he was sentenced in 2008.

“I think the world of you,” Mandelson told Epstein, adding about his prosecution: “I can still barely understand it. It just could not happen in Britain. You have to be incredibly resilient, fight for early release and be philosophical about it as much as you can.”

How damaging has this all been for Starmer?

Starmer has apologised publicly for appointing Mandelson as ambassador to the US despite knowing of his ties – but not the extent of them, he said – to the disgraced financier.

“None of us knew the depth and the darkness of that relationship,” Starmer said on Thursday as he apologised to Epstein’s victims.

“I am sorry – sorry for what was done to you, sorry that so many people with power failed you, sorry for having believed Mandelson’s lies and appointing him.”

But this has not been enough to let him off the hook entirely, experts said.

Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London, said the scandal has been hugely damaging for Starmer. “A more popular PM might have been able to ride it out, but he was already facing a good deal of hostility from voters before it blew up,” Bale told Al Jazeera. “He’s managed so far to hold on to his cabinet, but he’s completely lost the trust of the electorate – and that’s hard to get back.”

Bale said “people are disgusted by” Starmer’s decision to appoint Mandelson “despite knowing that he’d stayed friends with Epstein after he’d been convicted”.

Can Starmer’s leadership still be challenged?

While Starmer has survived Monday night, his position is still weak with low approval ratings, experts said.

Labour is expected to suffer losses in crucial Scottish elections in May. A parliamentary by-election is also due on February 26.

“The immediate danger [to Starmer] is that [Labour] suffers catastrophic losses in a by-election and then a big set of elections in May,” Bale said. “That will reignite calls for Starmer to resign and, if he doesn’t, a challenge from one or more of his colleagues.”

Among the top runners to replace Starmer are Rayner, his former deputy prime minister who resigned from the cabinet last year over a tax scandal.

A website pitching Rayner as leader, angelaforleader.co.uk, went live in January briefly, The Guardian newspaper reported. Rayner has denied any links to the website.

Another politician gearing up to replace Starmer is Wes Streeting, the health secretary.

Streeting, 43, has also been called out for his ties with Mandelson. In a bid to distance himself from the former ambassador, Streeting this week shared private chats he had with Mandelson that questioned the government’s growth plan.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, 45, is another possible successor to Starmer. She has grown popular among several right-aligned leaders of the Labour Party with her moves to tighten border controls and crack down on unauthorised immigration.

What other issues has Labour faced under Starmer?

The Labour Party swept to power in July 2024, ending nearly 14 years of Conservative rule. However, the prime minister has since had a difficult time in Downing Street.

In the 2024 elections, Reform UK, the right-wing, populist, anti-immigration party led by Farage, won just five of the 650 seats in parliament. However, it has gone on to become one of the best polling British parties. In July, a YouGov poll put Reform in the lead, predicting it could win 271 seats if elections were held then.

In his speech on Monday, Starmer called the challenge posed by the rise of the Reform party, which has won over a number of high-profile defectors from the Conservative Party in recent weeks, “a fight for our lives”.

Starmer is also facing domestic pressure to put a stop to undocumented immigration to the UK. More than 32,000 people tried to cross the English Channel from France in small boats last year. These crossings are dangerous and have resulted in many deaths.

The UK and France have laid the blame on each other for the rising numbers. This led to a “one-in-one-out” migrant deal signed between the UK and France last year, under which the UK returns one migrant to France for each accepted refugee. The scheme has had little success, however, with only a handful of migrants returned.

Starmer himself has dropped in popularity by 20 percentage points from July 2024 to January this year, according to YouGov.

“Reform has obviously spooked some in the Labour Party,” Bale said, adding, however, that Reform is eating into the Conservatives’ base more. “And Labour probably needs to worry more about the Greens and the Liberal Democrats at this stage.”

“The break-up of the two-party duopoly that has dominated British politics for a century is no longer simply an aspiration among challenger parties but an ongoing reality,” Bale said.

Interest in gold has skyrocketed in recent weeks, with the price of one ounce hitting an all time high of $5,600 on January 29 before settling back to just under $5,000 on Sunday.

As economic conditions fluctuate and geopolitical tensions rise, more individuals are seeking gold as a secure investment.

In this visual explainer, Al Jazeera breaks down how gold value is determined, the prices of gold coins in different markets, and the countries holding the largest reserves.

How is the value of gold measured?

Understanding the value of a gold item requires knowing its weight in troy ounces alongside its purity in karats.

Weight (in troy ounces)

The weight of gold and other precious metals like silver and platinum is commonly measured in troy ounces (oz t). One troy ounce is equal to 31.1035 grammes.

At $5,000 per troy ounce, 1 gramme of gold is worth about $160, and a standard 400-troy-ounce (12.44kg) gold bar costs $2m.

Troy ounces are different from regular ounces, which weigh 28.35 grammes and are used to measure everyday items including foods.

Purity (in karats)

Karat or carat (abbreviated as “K” or “ct”) measures the purity of a gold item. Pure gold is 24 karats, while lower karats such as 22, 18, and 9 indicate that the gold is mixed with less expensive metals like silver, copper, or zinc.

To determine the purity of gold, jewellers are required to stamp a number onto the item, such as 24K or a numeric value like 999, which indicates it is 99.9 percent pure. For example, 18K gold will typically have a stamp of 750, signifying that it is 75 percent pure.

Some typical values include:

• 24 karat – 99.9% purity – A deep orange colour, is very soft, never tarnishes and is most commonly used for investment coins or bars
• 22 karat  – 91.6% purity – A rich orange colour, moderate durability, resists tarnishing and most often used for luxury jewellery
• 18 karat – 75% purity – A warm yellow colour, high durability, will have some dulling over time and most often used in fine jewellery
• 9 karat – 37.5% purity – A pale yellow colour, has the highest durability, dulls over time, used in affordable jewellery

Other karat amounts such as 14k (58.3% purity) and 10k (41.7% purity) are often sold in different markets around the world.

When you buy jewellery, the price usually depends on the day’s gold spot price, how much it costs to make, and any taxes.

If you know the item’s exact weight in grammes and the gold’s purity in karats, you can calculate the craftsmanship cost on top of that.

You typically cannot negotiate the spot gold price, but you can often haggle over the craftsmanship costs.

The price of gold has quadrupled over the past 10 years

Gold has been valued for thousands of years, serving various functions, from currency to jewellery. The precious metal is widely regarded as a safe haven asset, particularly in times of economic uncertainty or market volatility.

Up until 1971, the United States dollar was physically defined by a specific weight of gold. Under the classical gold standard, for nearly a century, from 1834 until 1933, you could walk into a bank and exchange $20 for an ounce of gold.

In 1933, amid the Great Depression, the price was raised to $35 per ounce to stimulate the economy.

In 1971, under President Richard Nixon, gold was decoupled from the dollar, and its price began to be determined by market forces.

Over the past 10 years, the price of gold has quadrupled from $1,250 in 2016 to around $5,000 today.

How is the price of gold determined in different countries?

Gold is priced globally based on the spot market, where one troy ounce is traded in US dollars on exchanges such as London and New York. Local prices vary as the dollar rate is converted into domestic currencies, and dealers add premiums for minting, distribution and demand.

Taxes and import duties further influence the final cost: India adds 3 percent GST, while the United Kingdom and United Arab Emirates impose none on gold investments.

Different countries produce unique gold bullion coins and bars, each with its own distinct features and cultural significance. Notable examples include the Gold Eagle from the US, the Gold Panda from China, and the Krugerrand from South Africa.

Which countries have the most gold reserves?

The US leads global gold reserves with 8,133 tonnes, nearly equal to the combined total of the next three countries. Germany is in second place with 3,350 tonnes, and Italy comes in third with 2,451 tonnes.

The graphic below shows the top 10 countries with the largest gold reserves.

Leqaa Kordia, a 33-year-old Palestinian woman detained in the United States by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency since March, has been rushed to a hospital after a medical episode, according to media reports.

Kordia is being held in Texas after being detained as part of US President Donald Trump’s crackdown on pro-Palestine protests on college campuses across the country.

Her legal team said she was targeted for her protest against Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza near Columbia University in New York in 2024, but the federal government said she was arrested for allegedly overstaying her student visa.

Since her hospitalisation on Friday, Kordia’s legal team and family said they have not been able to speak with her and do not know her whereabouts.

Here is everything we know about Kordia and why she continues to remain in detention:

Who is Kordia?

Kordia grew up in the occupied West Bank city of Ramallah before coming to the US in 2016. She arrived on a visitor’s visa, staying with her mother, a US citizen, in Paterson, New Jersey, home to one of the largest Arab communities in the country.

She later transitioned from a tourist visa to a student visa, according to her habeas corpus petition.

After her mother applied for Kordia to remain in the US as the relative of a citizen, her green card application was approved in 2021. However, she received incorrect advice from a teacher that led to her student visa expiring in 2022, according to her lawyers.

Before her arrest, Kordia worked as a server at a Middle Eastern restaurant on Palestine Way in New Jersey and helped to care for her autistic half-brother.

Kordia was moved to protest against Israel’s war due to personal loss. Since the start of the war in October 2023, Kordia said, more than 200 of her relatives have been killed.

Israel has killed more than 71,000 Palestinians in Gaza and wounded more than 170,000 in a war that human rights groups, a United Nations commission and a growing number of scholars said amounts to genocide. Since a “ceasefire” began in October, Israel has killed more than 500 Palestinians and continues to impose curbs on the entry of aid into Gaza.

If deported, Kordia would be handed over to the Israeli government.

Why was Kordia arrested?

She was first arrested in April 2024 during a protest outside the gates of Columbia University, but the case was soon dropped.

On March 13, 2025, Kordia showed up at the ICE headquarters in Newark, New Jersey, for what she believed to be routine immigration questions. She was detained there, “thrown into an unmarked van and sent 1,500 miles [more than 2,400km] away”, Kordia wrote in the USA Today newspaper last month.

Kordia was neither a student at Columbia University nor a part of political circles.

“Though I was not a student, I felt compelled to participate. After all, Israel, with the backing of the United States, has laid waste to Gaza, forcibly displacing my family, killing nearly 200 of my relatives,” she wrote in USA Today.

Today, Kordia is the only person who remains in detention from the Columbia campus demonstrations. She has been held at Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas.

A leader of the protests, Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian student with Algerian citizenship and a US green card, and others have been released. Khalil, however, is still in a legal battle to remain in the US with his American wife and child. Last month, an appeals court panel dismissed a lawsuit Khalil filed challenging his detention and deportation order. The judges concluded that the federal court that ordered Khalil’s release last year lacked jurisdiction over the matter.

What are the charges against Kordia?

The US government has called Kordia’s money transfers to relatives in the Middle East evidence of possible ties to “terrorists”.

Kordia’s lawyers have continuously argued for her release, saying she was targeted by federal officials for her participation in pro-Palestinian protests.

The federal government has maintained that the case against Kordia is of overstaying a student visa.

“Her arrest had nothing to do with her radical activities,” the Department of Homeland Security said in April. “Kordia was arrested for immigration violations due to having overstayed her F-1 student visa, which had been terminated on January 26, 2022, for lack of attendance.”

Writing in USA Today last month, Kordia said she does not consider herself either a leader or an activist.

“I am a devout Muslim who is deeply committed to my faith and community. I’m a Palestinian woman who enjoys playing the oud, making pottery and hiking,” Kordia wrote. “Speaking out against what rights groups and experts have called a genocide is my moral duty and – I thought – a constitutionally protected right for all in this country. Except, it seems, when that speech defends Palestinian life.”

An immigration judge has called for Kordia’s release twice. However, it has been repeatedly blocked through a series of procedural and administrative moves.

“[The] Trump administration has exploited rarely used procedural loopholes to keep me confined, a practice now being challenged in federal district courts across the country, with many finding the practice unconstitutional,” Kordia wrote.

How has Kordia lived in ICE detention?

Since Kordia was moved to the ICE detention facility in Alvarado in March, she has been facing a range of issues, from sleeping on a bare mattress on the floor to being denied religious accommodations, including halal meals.

“Inside the ICE facility where I’m being held, conditions are filthy, overcrowded and inhumane,” Kordia wrote in her piece for USA Today. “For months, I slept in a plastic shell, known as a ‘boat,’ surrounded by cockroaches and only a thin blanket. Privacy does not exist here.”

Last year, when Kordia’s cousin Hamzah Abushaban visited her a week after her arrest, he told The Associated Press news agency in an interview that he was taken aback by the dark circles under her eyes and her state of confusion.

“One of the first things she asked me was why she was there,” Abushaban said. “She cried a lot. She looked like death.”

Rights groups and some Democratic Party leaders have called her a “political prisoner”, condemning the way her case has proceeded.

State Representative Salman Bhojani said the conditions at the detention facility were “suffocating”.

Kordia’s dorm, he said, had 60 mattresses crammed into a space designed for 20 women.

“She does not even have clothing that fully covers her body. Community organizations have tried to provide more appropriate clothing and have been turned away,” Bhojani said. “Male staff enter the dorm at any time, leaving her body exposed in violation of her religious obligations.”

Calling for her release, Amnesty International noted that ICE has “repeatedly violated” Kordia’s religious rights. “She has been served almost no halal meals, forcing her to eat food that doesn’t meet her dietary requirements and causing significant weight loss,” the human rights group said in a statement.

“During Ramadan, staff refused to let her save food for when she could break her fast, forcing her either to go hungry or to break her fast early,” Amnesty said. “She has not been provided with clothing suitable for prayer or a clean prayer space.”

Why was Kordia hospitalised?

On Friday, Abushaban said he heard about Kordia’s hospitalisation in the morning from a person formerly detained with his cousin.

Kordia had fallen, hit her head and suffered a seizure in a bathroom at the Prairieland Detention Center, he told The Dallas Morning News newspaper.

In a statement on Saturday, Kordia’s attorneys and family members demanded answers from the Department of Homeland Security and Prairieland Detention Center regarding her health and whereabouts.

“[Kordia] was reportedly hospitalised yesterday morning after fainting and having a seizure at the Prairieland Detention Center,” the statement said, adding: “Neither her legal team nor family have been provided answers about where she has been hospitalised, the specifics of her health status, and whether and how ICE will ensure her health upon discharge from the undisclosed, off-site hospital.”

“We have since learned that she is expected to spend another night there, but we still have not been able to speak with her directly or have any confirmation of what brought her to the hospital in the first place,” the statement said.

The family members told US media that they called all hospitals in the vicinity but could not locate Kordia.

What were the Columbia protests about?

In 2024, pro-Palestinian student encampments at Columbia University helped ignite a global movement against Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

The protest sites, however, were broken up after Columbia University allowed hundreds of New York City police officers on campus, leading to dozens of arrests.

The student protesters demanded an end to Israel’s war in Gaza and the university’s divestment from companies linked to the Israeli military.

Columbia University imposed severe punishments, including expulsion and revocation of academic degrees, on dozens of students who participated in the protests. University President Nemat “Minouche” Shafik, who was criticised for the handling of the student protests, stepped down.

The protests also put Columbia at odds with the Trump administration, whose officials alleged anti-Semitism on campus. Campaigners said the campus crackdown violated US free speech rights.

Trump also cancelled millions of dollars in federal funding for the university, accusing it of failing to protect Jewish students. Later, Columbia settled and agreed to pay $200m to the government over three years. In exchange, the Trump administration agreed to return parts of the $400m in grants it froze or terminated.

A US oil blockade is causing a severe energy crisis in Cuba, as the government has been forced to ration fuel and cut electricity for many hours a day, paralysing life in the communist-ruled island nation of 11 million.

Bus stops are empty, and families are turning to wood and coal for cooking, living through near-constant power outages amid an economic crisis worsened by the Trump administration’s steps in recent weeks.

President Miguel Diaz-Canel has imposed harsh emergency restrictions – from reduced office hours to fuel sales – in the backdrop of looming threats of regime change from the White House.

The Caribbean region has been on edge since the US forces abducted Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro last month and upped the pressure to isolate Havana and strangle its economy. Venezuela, Cuba’s closest ally in the region, provided the country with the much-needed fuel.

So, how dire is the situation in Cuba? What does United States President Donald Trump want from Havana? And how long can Cuba sustain?

What are Cuba’s emergency measures?

Blaming the US for the crisis, Cuba’s Deputy Prime Minister Oscar Perez‑Oliva Fraga appeared on state television on Friday to inform the millions of the emergency steps “to preserve the country’s essential functions and basic services while managing limited fuel resources”.

Now, the Cuban state companies will shift to a four‑day workweek, with transport between provinces dialled down, main tourism facilities closed, shorter schooldays and reduced in‑person attendance requirements at universities.

“Fuel will be used to protect essential services for the population and indispensable economic activities,” said Perez-Oliva. “This is an opportunity and a challenge that we have no doubt we will overcome. We are not going to collapse.”

The government says it will prioritise available fuel for essential services – public health, food production and defence – and push the installation of solar-based renewable energy sector and incentives therein. It will prioritise shifting energy to selected food production regions and accelerate the use of renewable energy sources, while cutting down on culture and sport activities and diverting resources towards the country’s early warning systems.

Why has the US blocked oil to Cuba?

Decades of strict US economic sanctions against Cuba, the largest island nation in the Caribbean, have destroyed its economy and isolated it from international trade. Cuba relied on foreign allies for oil shipments, such as Mexico, Russia, and Venezuela.

However, after the US forces abducted Venezuelan President Maduro, Washington blocked any Venezuelan oil from going to Cuba. Trump now says the Cuban government is ready to fall.

Under Trump, Washington has pivoted to the Western Hemisphere, which it wants to dominate. The military actions in Venezuela, the pledge to take over Greenland and changing the government in Cuba are part of the new policy.

Last month, Trump signed an executive order – labelling Cuba a threat to national security – imposing tariffs on any country that sells or provides oil to the island nation. Further pressure on the Mexican government reportedly led to oil stocks reaching a record low in Cuba.

“It looks like it’s something that’s just not going to be able to survive,” Trump told reporters last month, when questioned about the Cuban economy. “It is a failed nation.”

Havana has rejected accusations that it poses a threat to US security. Last week, the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement calling for dialogue.

“The Cuban people and the American people benefit from constructive engagement, lawful cooperation, and peaceful coexistence. Cuba reaffirms its willingness to maintain a respectful and reciprocal dialogue, oriented toward tangible results, with the United States government, based on mutual interest and international law,” a statement from the ministry said on February 2.

Trump’s goals in Cuba remain unclear; however, US officials have noted on multiple occasions that they would like to see the government change.

Responding to a question during a US Senate hearing on Venezuela, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said, “We would like to see the regime there change. That doesn’t mean that we’re going to make a change, but we would love to see a change.”

Rubio, who is of Cuban descent, is one of the most powerful figures in Trump’s administration.

“The Cuban-American lobby, which Rubio represents, is one of the most powerful foreign policy lobbies in the United States today,” Ed Augustin, an independent journalist in Havana, told Al Jazeera’s The Take.

“In the new Trump administration, [with] an unprecedented number of Cuban Americans, the lobbyists have become the policymakers,” he said, adding that Rubio has built firm control over the lobby.

On January 31, Trump told reporters, “It doesn’t have to be a humanitarian crisis. I think they probably would come to us and want to make a deal. So Cuba would be free again.”

He said Washington would make a deal with Cuba, but offered no clarity on what that means.

History of US-Cuba relations

Since Fidel Castro overthrew the pro-US regime in the Cuban revolution in 1959, the country has been under US embargo. Decades of sanctions have denied Cuba access to global markets, making even supply medicines difficult.

Castro nationalised US-owned properties, mainly the oil sector, and Washington responded with trade restrictions that soon became a full economic embargo that continues to this day, undermining Cuba’s economy.

The US also cut diplomatic ties with Havana, and three years later, a missile crisis almost brought Washington and the erstwhile USSR, an ally of Cuba, to the brink of nuclear war.

In 2014, Washington and Havana restored ties after 50 years. Two years later, US President Barack Obama travelled to Havana to meet Raul Castro.

However, during his first term as president, Trump reversed the historic move in 2017. Since then, the US has reimposed a raft of sanctions against Cuba, especially economic restrictions, leading to one of the worst economic crises in the island nation’s history. Within hours of his inauguration in January 2025, Trump reversed the previous administration’s policy of engagement with Havana.

How long can Cuba sustain?

Until last month, Mexico reportedly remained Cuba’s major oil supplier, sending nearly 44 percent of total oil imports, followed by Venezuela at 33 percent, while nearly 10 percent was sourced from Russia and a smaller amount from Algeria.

According to Kpler, a data company, by January 30, Cuba was left with oil enough to last only 15 to 20 days at current levels of demand.

Cuba currently needs an estimated 100,000 barrels of crude oil per day.

What has the UN said about the Cuban crisis?

United Nations spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters on Wednesday that “the secretary-general is extremely concerned about the humanitarian situation in Cuba, which will worsen, and if not collapse, if its oil needs go unmet”.

Dujarric said, for more than three decades, the UN General Assembly has consistently called for an end to the embargo imposed by the US on Cuba, adding that the UN urges “all parties to pursue dialogue and respect for international law”.

Francisco Pichon, the senior-most UN official in Cuba, described “a combination of emotions” in the country – “a mix of resilience, but also grief, sorrow and indignation, and some concern about the regional developments”.

The UN team in Havana says the vast majority of Cubans are hit by rolling blackouts, with the number of people in vulnerable situations increasing significantly.

“The last two years have been quite tough,” Pichon said, adding that urgent changes are needed to sustain Cuba “in the midst of the severe economic, financial and trade sanctions”.