Explainer

EXPLAINER

Uncertainty remains over key positions after student-led movement deals blow to longtime leader’s political dominance.

A student-led opposition movement has emerged victorious in Serbia’s snap parliamentary election, ending former President Aleksandar Vucic’s long grip on power.

The Student List’s win on Sunday followed nearly two years of youth-led protests triggered by the death of 16 people in a railway station canopy collapse in the city of Novi Sad in 2024.

Demonstrations demanding accountability quickly evolved into a wider political campaign against alleged corruption and capture of democratic institutions. In its electoral programme presented in September, the Student List said fighting corruption and organised crime were among its main priorities. It also pledged to raise living standards, boost employment, improve education, ensure media freedom and the independence of Serbia’s institutions.

After declaring victory on Sunday, the movement also said it would work to improve relations with neighbouring countries following a period of tension during Vucic’s more than decade-long rule.

Here’s what you should know:

What are the latest results?

The Republic Election Commission (RIK) announced on Monday that the Student List had won 52.54 percent of the vote, based on 8,077 processed polling stations out of 8,392.

The figures also showed the United Serbia list, led by Vucic’s Serbian Progressive Party, had secured 39.29 percent of ballots cast.

Voter turnout stood at 68.78 percent, a record high in more than 30 years, according to RIK data on Sunday.

What’s next?

While the final election result is not yet known, the figures mean that the Student List will be able to form a majority in Serbia’s 250-seat parliament on its own.

The bloc is projected to win 140 seats, well ahead of the 126 mandates required for a majority, while United Serbia is expected to have 103.

The remaining seats are set to go to the Alliance of Vojvodina Hungarians (three); the Albanian political bloc (two); and the Rasim Ljajc-Ljudski and SDA Sandzak lists, with one each.

Who could be the new prime minister?

Unlike United Serbia, which named Vucic as its candidate for prime minister before the election, the Student List made no such announcement during the campaign.

Since its formal creation, the list has avoided highlighting single candidates, eager to emphasise the collective nature of the movement that brought together academics, doctors and workers.

During the campaign, the movement was led by Ilija Srdanovic, a professor at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Novi Sad. The cardiologist is now seen as the most likely candidate to become the next prime minister, but it remains unclear who will take over key ministries, including those of internal affairs, finance and justice.

When will the new government be formed?

This depends on when the final election results will be announced and when parliament convenes.

The new National Assembly must be established within 30 days of the final results being announced.

A government must be formed within 90 days after that – but the Student List’s clear majority removes the need for lengthy coalition talks.

What about the president?

Vucic has dominated Serbia’s politics – first as prime minister and then as president – since 2014.

Following his call for the snap parliamentary vote last month and his resignation as president, the post has been held temporarily by Ana Brnabic, the president of the National Assembly.

Brnabic is obliged to call for an extraordinary presidential election which must be held no later than three months after the end of Vucic’s mandate.

Vucic resigned on September 27 , so the deadline to hold a vote is December 27 .

The president of Serbia is elected directly by the citizens, not by the representatives in the assembly, but the post is largely ceremonial.

Algeria’s parliament has approved a proposal to deploy troops to neighbouring Niger, in a major shift in the North African nation’s noninterventionist military doctrine.

Algeria’s lower house, the People’s National Assembly, ratified the deployment on Sunday after the upper house, the Council of the Nation, unanimously approved the proposal earlier in the day.

Details about the number of soldiers and when they will be deployed have yet to be made public.

It comes nearly two months after Algeria dispatched four Russian-made Sukhoi Su-30 jets, a transport aircraft and an aerial refuelling aircraft to Niamey, following what Algerian authorities described as an attempt to destabilise Niger’s military-led government.

The step comes amid a thawing of relations between Algiers and Niamey as Niger’s President Abdourahamane Tchiani visited Algeria in February and, months later, his defence minister, Salifou Mody, ⁠⁠travelled to Algiers to discuss security cooperation.

The shooting down of a Malian drone by the Algerian army last April triggered a diplomatic crisis after Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso recalled their ambassadors from Algiers. The condemnation of the 2023 coup in Niger by Algeria had also strained ties.

The troop deployment is reportedly intended to protect oil installations belonging to Algeria’s state-owned energy company, Sonatrach. Troops would be sent “to protect Algeria’s economic and strategic interests, particularly its oil facilities in Niger”, The Associated Press news agency reported, quoting Algerian Senator Belkacem Boulghiti.

It also comes as Algiers seeks to deepen security cooperation in the Sahel, a vast belt of territory stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea, including several countries along Algeria’s southern frontier.

Why does this matter?

Algeria has historically been reluctant to deploy its armed forces beyond its borders, reflecting a longstanding foreign policy built around sovereignty, noninterference and opposition to foreign military intervention.

But that does not mean it has never done so.

Algerian forces participated in the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, although overseas military deployments have remained exceptionally rare in the decades since.

A constitutional revision in 2020 formalised the conditions under which Algerian troops could be sent abroad.

Under Article 91, the president may authorise such deployments, provided they receive the backing of at least two-thirds of the members of each chamber of parliament.

The constitution also provides for Algerian participation in peacekeeping operations under the auspices of the United Nations, the African Union and the Arab League.

The move is particularly significant given Algeria’s military capabilities. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the country spent more than $25bn on its armed forces in 2025, making it Africa’s largest military spender.

But the decision also comes against a backdrop of growing diplomatic tensions and shifting regional alliances.

In September, Algeria severed diplomatic relations with the United Arab Emirates, accusing Abu Dhabi of repeated “hostile” and “provocative actions” without publicly detailing the incidents behind the decision.

The two countries have long disagreed over several regional issues, including Western Sahara and the UAE’s alleged interference in North African and Sahelian affairs.

Taken together, these developments suggest that Algeria is becoming increasingly willing to assert its security interests beyond its borders, even as it continues to emphasise the principles of sovereignty and noninterference.

Why the Sahel?

For Algeria, instability in the Sahel is not a distant security concern.

The country shares thousands of kilometres of borders with Mali, Niger and Libya, making developments in its southern neighbourhood particularly consequential.

The roots of the current security crisis can be traced, in part, to the collapse of Muammar Gaddafi’s government in Libya in 2011.

At the height of the Arab Spring uprisings, Algeria took a firm stance against foreign military intervention and warned that the disintegration of the Libyan state could destabilise neighbouring countries.

Those concerns were not unfounded.

Following Gaddafi’s overthrow, weapons and armed fighters, including Tuareg who had served in Libya, spread into neighbouring countries.

Their return helped fuel a rebellion in northern Mali in 2012, contributing to a security crisis that preceded the military overthrow of President Amadou Toumani Toure that March.

Over the following decade, armed rebellion expanded across parts of the Sahel, particularly Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger.

Since 2012, those three countries alone have experienced six military coups: three in Mali, two in Burkina Faso and one in Niger.

Many of the coups unfolded against a backdrop of deteriorating security, with military leaders accusing civilian governments of failing to contain increasingly powerful armed groups.

But insecurity was not the only factor. Political grievances, governance failures and rivalries within armed forces also contributed to the coups.

Who else is operating in the Sahel?

Another factor shaping Algeria’s calculations is the changing presence of foreign military forces across the region.

For more than a decade, France was a central player in counterterrorism operations in the Sahel, deploying thousands of troops to combat armed groups linked to al-Qaeda and ISIL (ISIS).

But that military presence has largely unravelled.

Following successive coups and deteriorating diplomatic relations, France withdrew its troops from Mali in August 2022, Burkina Faso in February 2023 and Niger in December 2023.

The withdrawals were accompanied by growing anti-French sentiment and demands from military governments for greater control over their security policies.

Niger demanded the departure of approximately 1,500 French soldiers following its July 2023 coup.

Just months later, in April 2024, approximately 100 Russian military personnel arrived in Niamey, bringing equipment and providing training to Nigerien forces.

The personnel were associated with Africa Corps, a Russian paramilitary group close to the Kremlin.

Moscow has also expanded its military cooperation with Mali and Burkina Faso, where Russian personnel have undertaken training, advisory and security roles, including combat support in Mali.

The United States has also seen its military footprint shrink.

In 2024, Washington withdrew approximately 1,000 soldiers from Niger after the military government terminated their security cooperation agreement. The withdrawal included personnel stationed at an important US drone base near Agadez.

The result has been a significant realignment of the Sahel’s security partnerships, with Western military forces departing and Russia assuming a more prominent role.

What does Algeria stand to gain?

For Algiers, the proposed deployment to Niger carries immediate security and wider strategic implications.

At the most practical level, protecting Algerian energy investments would help safeguard the country’s economic interests in a region affected by armed rebellions and political instability, including the Trans-Saharan Gas Pipeline (TSGP), which would transport Nigerian gas to Europe and traverse Niger and Algeria.

It could also deepen cooperation with Niger, whose military government has sought new security partners since taking power in 2023.

More broadly, the move would allow Algeria to establish a direct military presence in a neighbouring country at a time when the Sahel’s security architecture is being reshaped.

“We are not sending our soldiers to wage war in Niger, but for a mission to secure economic infrastructure,” Senator Boulghiti told reporters after the vote. “It is simply an adaptation of our doctrine to evolving circumstances so we can rise to the new challenges imposed by the situation in the Sahel region.”

Israel is heading to the polls on October 27 in an election that could end Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s long grip on power.

The vote for all 120 seats in the Knesset is the first since the Hamas-led attacks of October 7, 2023, the onset of Israel’s subsequent genocidal war on Gaza and a wider conflict that has seen Israel carry out attacks in several countries across the region.

Opinion polls suggest his right-wing bloc is in a close race against a Jewish-led opposition alliance. But defeating Netanyahu at the ballot box does not necessarily mean removing him from power.

Israel’s proportional representation system means parties must negotiate alliances to secure a governing majority in the Knesset. No single party has ever won an outright majority of at least 61 seats.

According to recent polling, the opposition bloc is projected to win 52 seats, compared with 50 for Netanyahu’s religious-nationalist alliance. Palestinian-led parties could, therefore, determine who governs.

Here are eight possible outcomes:

Netanyahu forms another government

Despite slightly trailing in opinion polls, Netanyahu could remain prime minister if his Likud party assembles enough parliamentary support from existing allies or new coalition partners.

His traditional partners include far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Jewish Power party and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s Religious Zionism party.

Ultra-Orthodox parties Shas and United Torah Judaism – which have previously joined his coalition multiple times but also walked away, most recently in 2025 – could also play an important role.

An opposition-led majority government

In late September, four opposition parties signed a non-aggression pact, agreeing to work together in a bid to unseat Netanyahu.

The rival movements – the Yashar party, the Democrats, the Yisrael Beytenu party and the Together alliance – said they are united in their goal to “preserve and strengthen Israel as a Jewish and democratic state”.

The bloc has not announced who would lead a future governing coalition, but former army chief Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the Yashar party, is seen as its most likely prime ministerial candidate.

Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who heads the Together alliance with Yair Lapid, is another potential candidate.

A coalition involving Ra’am

The Joint List and Ra’am – the two Arab-led parties representing the Palestinian citizens of Israel, who make up about 20 percent of the population – are projected to win about 13 seats.

Ra’am, also known as the United Arab List, made history in 2021 by joining Bennett’s coalition, becoming the first Arab-led party to participate in an Israeli governing coalition.

Mansour Abbas, leader of Ra’am, has signalled a willingness to repeat that arrangement if the opposition-led alliance needs additional seats.

He has said his priorities include combatting the wave of violent crime that has been allowed to engulf Palestinian communities, as well as addressing discriminatory government policies, including on housing.

However, most opposition leaders, including Eisenkot, have ruled out such an alliance.

A minority government

If a coalition falls short of 61 seats, it could seek outside parliamentary support from other parties without including them in government, such as the Palestinian-led parties.

Joint List, which includes the Hadash, Ta’al and Balad factions, has said it could provide a so-called safety net to the anti-Netanyahu coalition by agreeing not to stand against it in a confidence vote, even if the alliance does not join the government. In return, it has said it would demand certain conditions, including a path to Palestinian statehood and fighting organised crime.

However, any such arrangement would leave the governing coalition vulnerable to defections and disputes over major policies.

A national unity government

A national unity government, according to Israel’s parliament, is a “government based on a broad coalition, the members of which also include representatives of rival parliamentary groups”.

This is usually formed at times of national emergencies, such as war, natural disasters or economic crises.

In May 2020, Netanyahu and Benny Gantz formed a unity government following three inconclusive elections. That agreement collapsed within a year.

However, in 2023, following the Hamas-led attacks on Israel, Gantz and members of his party joined Netanyahu’s coalition – seen as an emergency unity government – despite Gantz previously bitterly opposing it.

A rotating premiership

Two political leaders could agree to alternate as prime minister under a power-sharing arrangement.

Netanyahu and Gantz agreed to such a rotation in 2020, but their coalition collapsed before Gantz could take over.

Bennett and Lapid made the same arrangement for the prime minister’s office to change hands after the former came into power in June 2021. After Bennett’s coalition lost its parliamentary majority in June 2022, Lapid took over as caretaker prime minister in July that year.

A different prime minister from the same political camp

In Israel, the prime minister is voted in by members of the Knesset after an election.

If negotiations stall over forming a government, parties could agree to support another Knesset member from Netanyahu’s political camp or that of an opposition bloc, someone who is more acceptable to future partners.

No agreement – another election

If no leader can assemble sufficient support in the Knesset, Israel could face another period of political turbulence and head for a new election.

The country held five elections between 2019 and 2022 as rival blocs repeatedly struggled to form stable governments.

In such a scenario, Netanyahu would remain caretaker prime minister until a new administration took office.

Security forces in Jordan are searching for three gunmen who opened fire at a church in Karak governorate on Friday, killing eight people and injuring dozens more, according to Jordan’s Ministry of Health.

King Abdullah II said those behind the attack would face the “harshest penalties”, as he offered his condolences to the victims’ families. He has ordered a review of the country’s security procedures for responding to terrorist attacks.

Authorities are calling this rare attack on a Christian place of worship an act of terror, with the perpetrators yet to be identified.

Here’s what we know about how the attack unfolded, and what was behind it.

What happened during the church shooting in Karak?

On Friday afternoon, three masked gunmen opened fire during a funeral in a Greek Orthodox church in the village of Hamoud.

Survivors said they heard an explosion just after the start of the service. Two attackers who arrived in a vehicle were joined by a third carrying a semi-automatic rifle. They entered the church and opened fire for several minutes.

One survivor, Nasser al-Burqan, a lawyer, told the Reuters news agency that one of the attackers, standing about two metres (6.5 feet) away, pointed a handgun at him and opened fire.

“When everything finally quietened down, I looked out the window behind me, and I saw two [assailants] – one was masked, the other was not; he was carrying a handgun,” said al-Burqan, a lawyer.

Later, his son, who had also been present, called him to say he had been shot in the leg and was being treated in hospital.

Tarek Ammarin, who was visiting a relative injured in the attack, now in hospital, said: “A massacre, a massacre in every sense of the word.”

Bahjat al-Rushda, mayor of Shihan village in Karak, joined a list of officials condemning what he called a “wicked” attack.

“God willing, this country will remain safe,” he said.

State news channel Al-Mamlaka reported that security forces were deployed to the church and were in pursuit of the two suspects who had arrived in a vehicle.

How many people were killed or injured?

Eight people were killed in the shooting, including seven who died at the scene and one who succumbed to her injuries hours after the attack, Jordan’s Petra news agency reported on Saturday.

Of the 40 people injured, 27 are still in hospital. The Director of Prince Ali Military Hospital in Karak said one person is in critical condition, after undergoing surgery.

Who carried out the attack?

The identity of the three attackers has not been confirmed, with government statements referring to them as “unknown assailants”.

Security camera footage of the attack has been circulating online, however. Video broadcast by Al-Mamlaka shows three people shooting outside the church and running towards its entrance.

Other footage also shows the attackers opening fire on a group of men outside the building trying to flee.

Jordan’s Interior Minister Mazin Al-Farrayeh said a group of “extremists” that have “no relationship to humanity” were responsible for the attack, though no specific groups were mentioned.

Why was the church targeted?

Prime Minister Jafar Hassan said on Friday that the attack was a by-product of terrorist ideology and “blind extremism”, but did not give specifics about the attackers.

The motive remains unclear since the attackers’ identities have yet to be revealed.

Where is Karak, and what do we know about its Christian community?

Karak governorate is about 120km (75 miles) south of Amman and is home to many from Jordan’s Christian minority, which makes up about 300,000 of the country’s population of 11.5 million people.

Taylor Luck, senior Middle East correspondent at the Christian Science Monitor, told Al Jazeera that Jordan’s Christians “pride themselves on [their] interfaith solidarity and coexistence”.

He said that Christians and Muslims have lived side-by-side in Karak for generations and that if the attack had been carried out in an attempt to divide the community, it is more likely that the “community come[s] back even stronger”.

Jordan is also home to many biblical sites that draw visitors from around the world.

What has the response been to this shooting?

Several countries, including Azerbaijan, Iraq, Poland, Palestine and Qatar, have issued statements condemning the attack and expressing their solidarity with Jordan.

Ahmed al-Tayeb, the grand imam of Al-Azhar in Cairo, a leading Sunni religious institution, offered his condolences to the families of the victims, calling the shooting a “heinous terrorist attack”.

“This crime contradicts the teachings of the Abrahamic religions and reveals that its perpetrators are devoid of all compassion, humanity and morality,” he wrote in a social media post.

The United States embassy in Jordan also released a statement on X offering condolences to victims and survivors of the attack.

“On behalf of the American people, we offer our most heartfelt condolences to the victims and survivors of the terror attack today at a church in Karak, Jordan,” it said.

The Jordanian Prime Minister declared three days of mourning following the attack, with flags to be flown at half-mast over government and public buildings.

Has Jordan experienced similar attacks before?

Yes, although they are rare.

In 2016, the ISIL (ISIS) group carried out a series of attacks across Karak, including a deadly siege on a Crusader-era castle in which 10 people were killed, including a Canadian tourist and seven police officers. Dozens of others were injured.

Four attackers were later killed by Jordanian security forces following a long standoff.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) says renewed attacks by the United States could prompt Tehran to invade neighbouring countries and hit bases used in US military operations as part of its new “offensive” strategy.

The warning on Wednesday came amid escalating attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, a global energy chokepoint, and uncertainty over diplomatic efforts to end the nearly eight-month war.

“Our defence doctrine was previously defensive; we used to say that if a country attacks us, we will respond. Now we say that if a country attacks us, we will both respond and launch an offensive,” IRGC spokesman Hossein Mohebi said.

Washington ordered some diplomatic personnel to leave Saudi Arabia amid attacks from Yemen’s Houthis while US President Donald Trump has signalled that a decision on the conflict could come soon.

According to media reports, the US and Israel are planning potential attacks on Iran in the coming weeks.

As negotiations seem stalled and both sides exchange threats, could the region be heading towards another military escalation?

What is Iran’s new doctrine?

The IRGC on Wednesday announced a shift towards an “offensive and asymmetrical” defence doctrine, threatening to invade countries that launch attacks against it.

Mohebi said Tehran would no longer limit its military operations to retaliatory strikes.

Mohebi stressed that Iran’s missile stockpile has increased 1.5 times since the 12-day war between Iran and Israel in June 2025. He did not provide specific figures.

“The quality of the missiles has improved significantly, and their range, destructive power and accuracy in hitting targets have increased,” the spokesman said.

Moreover, Mohebi said Iranian forces were in the “stage of preparing to unveil the ‘father of all bombs’. This is something new for the enemy.”

Meanwhile, attacks in the Strait of Hormuz continued unabated.

The IRGC’s navy said on Thursday that four vessels it accused of being involved in illegal oil transfers were struck and caught fire in the northern Gulf. Three other vessels hit mines west of the strait, it added.

Before the war, one-fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas supplies passed through the Strait of Hormuz. While shipments through the strait are still below those levels, oil shipments from the region returned to pre-war levels last month as exporters found alternative ways to ship out their oil and gas, including using pipelines.

However, a flurry of recent attacks in the key waterway and the fighting between Yemen’s Houthis and its Saudi-backed, internationally recognised government, which has resulted in Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia, have once again sent oil prices surging. Brent crude climbed above $110 a barrel on Thursday amid fears of further disruptions to regional energy supplies.

Why the shift?

Iran’s shift towards an offensive military doctrine reflects Tehran’s determination to make future US-Israeli attacks significantly more costly, according to analysts.

Negar Mortazavi, senior fellow at the Centre for International Policy, told Al Jazeera that Tehran was drawing lessons from the wars of 2025 and 2026 after its previous strategy of retaliation failed to prevent repeated attacks.

“Tehran now wants to establish a new equation: Any future attack on Iran will come at a much higher cost for the aggressors,” she told Al Jazeera.

Unable to match conventional US military capabilities, Iran is increasingly relying on asymmetric warfare, including missiles, drones and its leverage over the Strait of Hormuz, Mortazavi explained.

She said Tehran was pursuing a broader strategy aimed at imposing military, economic and political costs on Washington, including potentially influencing the November 3 US midterm elections.

“Iran wants to teach Washington a lesson: Attacking Iran comes with a high price, one that can even cost elections,” Mortazavi said, referring to US surveys that are predicting electoral losses for Trump’s Republican Party.

She added that Iranian officials were closely monitoring the elections, believing the economic fallout from the war could damage the Republican Party’s prospects of retaining control of Congress.

“The long-term objective is to establish deterrence so that future American administrations think twice before daring to attack Iran again,” she said.

Political analyst Rami Khouri said the doctrine was also intended to ensure that the consequences of attacks extend to the US, Israel and regional countries supporting their military operations.

“That’s one part of the strategy, that the suffering and the damage have to be equal and reciprocal,” Khouri, nonresident senior fellow at the Arab Center, told Al Jazeera.

Khouri argued that Tehran was also seeking to challenge what it views as longstanding Western domination of the region.

“The Iranians are actually working to try to end the colonial period,” he said.

He added that Iran’s strategy could extend the economic consequences of conflict far beyond the Middle East, affecting energy supplies, transportation, insurance costs and shipments of essential goods.

“The pain is going to go way beyond just the Middle East and Israel and the US and will hurt people in other parts of the world,” Khouri said.

What has the US said about resuming the war?

Trump has offered conflicting signals about Washington’s next steps.

On Wednesday, he said the US was no longer negotiating with Tehran and suggested developments were imminent. “We are going to have something one way or the other that’ll happen fairly soon,” he told reporters.

He also said Washington could end the war immediately but wanted a lasting outcome. “It’ll end very soon. We could leave now, but we want to make sure it lasts for a long time,” Trump said at a campaign rally in South Carolina.

Trump previously pledged not to attack Iran before the November 3 elections.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said this week that reaching a peace agreement is extremely difficult and insisted that Iran must stop targeting commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

In recent weeks, Iran’s enrichment of uranium has re-emerged as a point of contention.

Rubio has maintained that Washington will reject any agreement allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons, which require highly enriched uranium. “The United States will not support any deal that creates a pathway for Iran to ever have a nuclear weapon,” he said on Wednesday.

Tehran insisted its right to enrichment is guaranteed under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Iran has offered a seven-day plan to restore shipping through the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for Washington ending its blockade of Iranian ports, easing sanctions and unfreezing Iranian assets.

Meanwhile, the US Department of State on Wednesday ordered nonemergency personnel and their families to leave Saudi Arabia after recent Houthi attacks.

The US embassy in Riyadh has warned of further attacks while American officials told the Reuters news agency that family members could be withdrawn from other Gulf missions.

State Department spokesman Tommy Piggott said departure orders for mission personnel across the Gulf have not been ordered, saying the current orders were for “employees and their family members in Saudi Arabia only”.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated on Sunday his pledge to topple Iran’s government, saying it was key to preventing it from rebuilding its nuclear programme and the “axis of resistance”, further raising prospects of an escalation.

Netanyahu made the comments as Israel’s longest-serving prime minister is locked in a tough battle to remain in power in Tuesday’s elections.

Is war imminent?

Analysts warned that renewed US-Israeli attacks on Iran are increasingly possible with both sides preparing for another confrontation despite the continued possibility of diplomacy.

“Another round of war seems to be approaching,” Mortazavi said.

“Both sides appear to be preparing for renewed confrontation while escalating tensions in the Strait of Hormuz increase the risk of a wider conflict,” she said.

Mortazavi added that the elections in the next two weeks in the US and Israel could influence the timing of military action but warned that the current trajectory appeared to favour escalation over negotiations.

Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, on Wednesday said, “Everyone must know that any action against Iran comes at a cost.”

“If diplomacy can create this understanding, we prefer diplomacy, but if the war continues, Iran has the necessary means to sustain its response,” Rezaei said, according to the IRNA news agency.

Echoing Mortazavi, Khouri warned that another confrontation could be approaching although he said US threats might still be part of a negotiating strategy.

“I think imminent conflict is on the cards, but I don’t know if war is the right word to use,” Khouri told Al Jazeera.

He said renewed strikes could target Iran’s critical infrastructure, including electricity networks, transportation systems, bridges and essential services.

“We’re probably going to get some severe attacks on a few targets that will try to make life in Iran very difficult,” he said.

However, Khouri cautioned that Iran’s ability to withstand another major military offensive while inflicting comparable damage on its adversaries remained uncertain.

“It’s not clear if Iran has the ability to withstand major new assaults against it,” he said, while stressing that Tehran was unlikely to surrender to military pressure.

Government websites in Europe and elsewhere have gone offline after news of critical vulnerabilities in a widely used programming language sent website operators scrambling to protect their systems.

Developers of the PHP programming language on Wednesday released urgent new fixes, saying all users were “encouraged to update immediately”.

PHP runs on the servers that host websites, building pages behind the scenes before they reach a visitor’s browser. Most people never see it, but it powers everything from blogs to online shops and government portals.

The vulnerabilities, which had been lurking in the software for years, were uncovered with the help of artificial intelligence. Details about them leaked online on Tuesday before fixes were available, forcing PHP to rush them out.

Experts said they were bracing for a wave of intrusions as hackers jumped to get ahead of the updates.

What is the bug?

Andrew Cullen, a lecturer on AI and cybersecurity at the University of Melbourne, said many devices in the world are connected to one piece of foundational software, which is where the bug was found.

The vulnerability allows a hacker to run code on a website, meaning they could change the website or force it to release personal information collected in a database, Cullen told Al Jazeera.

Both flaws stem from how PHP handles fatal errors, such as running out of memory. Because the problem sits in PHP itself, even the simplest website running an affected version can be vulnerable, and attackers could read passwords and other credentials from a server’s memory, the cloud security company Wiz said. Both flaws scored 9.2 out of 10 on the industry’s standard severity scale, placing them in the “critical” category.

The two flaws, nicknamed PHP2Shell, were found independently by two cybersecurity companies using AI. Calif, working with OpenAI, reported the first on August 11. Wiz, which is owned by Google, reported the second on August 24.

The vulnerabilities remained hidden in the PHP codebase for more than a decade and would have been extraordinarily complicated for a human hacker to take advantage of, Wiz said in a statement.

Calif and Wiz said they had coordinated with each other, the PHP team and OpenAI before making the vulnerabilities public.

However, Amazon security chief CJ Moses said his security team detected an attempt to exploit the vulnerabilities on October 17, four days before the public disclosure.

Moses said it was unclear how the hacker learned of the flaws while Calif’s and Wiz’s reports were still under embargo. Security researchers usually keep details of flaws secret until a fix is ready, so attackers cannot use them in the meantime.

Who can potentially be affected?

PHP, a language that dates back to the early 1990s and initially stood for Personal Home Page, underpins huge parts of the public-facing web and is baked into WordPress, Drupal, Joomla and Magento sites, meaning any critical vulnerability potentially has enormous knock-on consequences.

Calif, Wiz and the web infrastructure company Cloudflare said the flaws affect PHP 5.4 and later versions, more than a decade of releases.

Cullen said the vulnerability was “really unprecedented”, noting that PHP powers more than 70 percent of websites globally, although sites that have been updated are protected.

“There is a real risk to the kind of shared digital infrastructure that we all rely on,” Cullen told Al Jazeera. “There is concern in the cybersecurity community about what the blast radius for this will be, even though the developers of PHP have been very quick to try and develop patches for it.”

Cullen added that while AI was getting better at cybersecurity, it was also getting better at being a hacker. “This means that we are developing systems … that are making the internet safer by helping to fix bugs, but we’re also making it riskier by discovering bugs and creating bugs they’ll be able to hack,” he said.

What has the impact been so far?

In the Netherlands, the Dutch cybersecurity agency itself went offline, saying it had done so as a precaution because of the vulnerabilities. Several organisations followed the example and took public-facing websites offline, including the Port of Rotterdam, government portal Overheid.nl, the national football association KNVB, the websites for the country’s five largest political parties and several hospital ‌websites.

Dutch Prime Minister Rob Jetten said he was closely monitoring the situation.

Disruptions were even more widespread in Finland, where state IT services provider Valtori said government public network services had been taken offline “as a precautionary measure”.

France’s Ministry of the Interior said it had placed all of its websites into preventive maintenance.

Belgium’s Federal Public Service Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation said it had temporarily taken its websites offline after reports of cyberattacks exploiting the PHP vulnerabilities although the country’s cybersecurity centre said it had not recorded any attacks on Belgian websites.

South Korea’s ⁠government raised ⁠its private-sector cybersecurity alert level and activated emergency response measures. It issued security guidance to about 28,000 companies with registered chief information security officers and 5,900 members ⁠of a government information-sharing ⁠network as well as operators of critical infrastructure, web-hosting firms and data centres.

The operator of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia also said it had taken down an unspecified number of systems until they could be safely patched while the Internet Archive, the sprawling online library, said it also briefly went offline to deal with the issue.

Voters in Alberta have chosen to remain part of Canada in a first-ever independence referendum.

Canadian state broadcaster CBC News called the results of Monday’s vote late on the same day after 48 percent of the ballots counted showed overwhelming support for the “remain” side, with 76 percent opting to stay with Canada.

The result marks a major win for Prime Minister Mark Carney, who is facing a trade and political war with the United States amid US President Donald Trump’s higher tariffs and repeated suggestions of annexing the country.

On his way into a cabinet meeting on Tuesday morning, Carney called it a “great day.”

“I’m thrilled that Albertans have chosen unity. They’ve chosen to build together. They’ve chosen to continue to take care of each other, to move forward together with purpose,” he said.

But the result also comes as a disappointment for those Albertans seeking independence for the resource-rich region following years of grievances laid at Ottawa’s door. Here’s what we know:

What was the referendum about?

The nonbinding referendum was first announced in May following a campaign and petition by a group of Albertans who want to be an independent country.

While only about one-third of Albertans were found to be pro-independence in polls, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith argued in her announcement that a referendum was necessary to respect the 300,000 Albertans who had petitioned officials for it.

In the referendum, voters answered 10 questions, including whether the government should begin a binding process to seek independence from Canada. They also answered questions on immigration, access to provincial services like education, social care and healthcare, and voter identification requirements.

Prime Minister Carney had campaigned for Albertans to vote “remain”, saying last week at a rally in Calgary that separation would be “ a dangerous bluff that will lead to years of deep division”.

“There are some outside our borders who are working to break us so they can own us,” he said.

Researchers have pointed to possible online influence campaigns by both Russian and US entities that helped amplify the call for separation and allegedly shared misleading information. Alberta PM Smith told media in August that the online activity was under observation.

What have the reactions been?

Prime Minister Carney, who grew up in the region, said “Albertans made a clear choice” in a statement he made early on Tuesday.

“They chose unity, to build together, and to take care of each other,” he said, adding that “Canadians will move forward together with renewed purpose and high ambition.”

Alberta’s Premier Smith said she was pleased to see the results and that “Albertans have voted for a stronger Alberta in a united Canada.”

Separatist leaders from the groups Let Alberta Decide, the Alberta Prosperity Project and the Pathway to Independence said they will wait for all votes to be counted before conceding.

First Nations groups turned out in strong numbers to vote to remain with Canada, with one southern Alberta polling station in an area home to the Siksika Nation temporarily running out of ballots, local media reported.

Why is Alberta important, and why are there calls for independence?

Many Albertans have long complained that their critical natural resources are funding the government in Ottawa and the commercial hubs of Toronto and Montreal, but that the province does not receive proportionate benefits.

The province, with a population of 5.1 million, holds massive oil deposits. It also holds reserves of critical and rare-earth metals including lithium, titanium and zircon, which are essential for manufacturing many tech items, from smartphones to fighter jets.

Separatist movements, some of which even support Alberta joining the US, go back to the 1940s, following the discovery of oil reserves. Some of Alberta’s premiers have had spats with Ottawa over wealth distribution.

US President Trump has made remarks about Canada becoming a US state in recent months.

Last week, he told a political rally in the US state of Arizona that Canada will “end up being the 51st state, because it’s the only way it works”.

The two countries have been embroiled in a trade war since talks fell apart in August this year and they slapped each other with tit-for-tat tariffs.

Earlier this month, tech billionaire Elon Musk called for Alberta, Saskatchewan and Quebec to separate from Canada, saying “they’d be better off”.

But the matter of Alberta’s independence gained intense scrutiny last year after pro-separatists launched a petition to pressure the government.

Alberta, alongside other western provinces of British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, have all complained about “western alienation” by the government in the centre.

Is it over for Alberta’s independence bid?

With separatism agitations running so far back, experts say the referendum will likely not end the movement altogether.

Ahead of the vote, some separatist leaders said they would pursue another referendum if necessary, arguing that the referendum shows that independence is legally possible.

“Regardless of what happens on Monday, we’ve already won,” Keith Wilson, co-leader of Let Alberta Decide, said at a rally last week.

New Delhi, India — United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio has arrived in India for a two-day visit, during which he is set to tour the Jamnagar refinery complex in Gujarat, owned by billionaire Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries, a major player in global oil markets.

Reliance’s crude refinery in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s home state is the world’s largest single-site refinery. In many ways, Reliance Industries’ businesses sit at the crossroads of the ongoing global energy crisis.

The conglomerate is central to Washington’s efforts to punish Russian energy buyers, while also trying to contain oil prices amid the war on Iran, on top of rising diesel costs in the US, where a crucial midterm election looms. Reliance has also only recently committed to a major investment in the US, which President Donald Trump’s administration has cited as an example of its successes in luring global capital.

Rubio is skipping the capital, New Delhi, at a time when the US-India bilateral relationship has been rocky, strained by a string of friction points — and an elusive trade deal.

So why is the top US diplomat visiting the world’s largest single-site oil refinery?

Where is Rubio visiting?

After meetings in Mumbai, India’s financial hub in the western state of Maharashtra, Rubio will fly to Jamnagar in neighbouring Gujarat, near the Gulf of Kutch. Jamnagar opens into the Arabian Sea and is home to Reliance Industries’ refining complex, a major hub for crude processing and fuel exports, which processes 1.4 million barrels per day (bpd).

Rubio had visited India earlier this year too, but this trip “is a little more business-focused”, the US ambassador to India, Sergio Gor, told reporters last week. A readout from Rubio’s office noted that he would “meet with business leaders to promote opportunities for commercial investment and economic cooperation”.

“[At Jamnagar] he will meet some of the folks at Reliance,” Gor said.

What’s in Jamnagar?

The world’s largest single-site oil-refining complex has a combined crude-processing capacity of 1.4 million bpd. That is nearly 1.5 percent of global refining capacity, according to the company.

The complex comprises two refineries: the original facility, commissioned in 1999 with a capacity of 660,000bpd, and a second, export-oriented refinery commissioned in 2008, adding 580,000bpd, which operates in a special economic zone.

Jamnagar imports crude from international suppliers and exports refined products to global markets. The refinery can process heavy, sulphur-rich crude that many facilities cannot handle efficiently, converting oil into higher-value products.

Reliance said last month that the complex has processed more than 216 crude grades, claiming to be “perhaps the only refinery to achieve this feat”.

The Jamnagar refinery’s capacity is also driving a sharp revival in imports of Venezuelan crude — taken over by the US earlier this year after abducting then-President Nicolas Maduro — as Washington seeks to reshape global oil trade.

Reliance is expected to account for roughly 350,000bpd to 370,000bpd of the October intake, according to estimates from analytics firm Kpler. “We will talk with Reliance about refining more Venezuelan crude,” Rubio told reporters in brief remarks on Tuesday.

Why is the refinery significant for global energy supplies?

Reliance is a central player in keeping global oil markets stable, as one of the world’s biggest suppliers of refined petroleum products. In September, for instance, six of the seven large cargo ships that docked at European Union ports carrying oil products were bearing Reliance goods.

Reliance’s biggest export is diesel, which Trump has been particularly worried about, with prices reaching historic highs in the US ahead of midterm elections early next month.

Though the data on exports by category is not public, an analysis by the Reuters news agency from trade sources noted that Reliance Industries exported 21.66 million tonnes of refined petroleum products in the first half of 2025 from Jamnagar. Diesel accounted for the largest share at 9.81 million tonnes, followed by petrol at 6.14 million tonnes and jet fuel at 2.06 million tonnes.

Europe accounted for the biggest share of the company’s exports, making up 28 percent of Reliance’s refined products during the period. Buyers include BP, ExxonMobil, Glencore, Vitol and Trafigura.

The Jamnagar refinery also shipped about $143m worth of oil products to the US last month, according to data cited by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), a think tank in Finland.

CREA noted in its report that the EU’s ban on importing petroleum products made from Russian crude from January 2026 does not adequately prevent products from refineries in third countries from entering Europe when those refineries also process Russian crude. The Jamnagar refinery is a prime example of that loophole.

Rubio’s visit to the refinery also comes as Trump faces his worst approval ratings amid inflation and rising fuel prices ahead of the midterm election in November. Just about 31 percent of Americans are happy with Trump’s performance – the lowest-ever number in his two terms, according to a Reuters/Ipsos survey.

The Trump administration has also reportedly been pushing Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to stop strikes on Russian energy facilities, which have rattled the global fuel markets.

Why the refinery is important for the Russia-Ukraine war

Reliance is also a critical actor in US efforts to influence how much oil Russia sells.

Since the start of Russia’s full-fledged war on Ukraine in February 2022, India has emerged as the second-largest buyer of Russian oil after China. And Reliance is driving that surge in imports. While only 3 percent of its oil was sourced from Russia before 2022, that share rose to 50 percent by 2025.

So when Trump imposed an additional 25 percent tariff on Indian goods in August 2025 to punish New Delhi for the purchase of Russian oil, Reliance was directly affected. It cut back on Russian crude imports significantly in subsequent months, but it still made up a third of the oil processed by Jamnagar’s refinery during the July-September 2026 quarter.

That was under threat when the Trump administration appeared poised to impose a 100 percent tariff on Indian goods because of continued Russian oil imports, under a new law passed last month.

But Trump has since suspended those proposed tariffs, easing concerns for India and Reliance.

Rubio has said India has been diversifying its import mix away from Russian crude, even as it still buys millions of barrels of Russian oil every day. “You’ve got countries like India, for example, that have voluntarily diversified their energy portfolio, but are still getting a substantial amount of energy from Russia because it’s hard to pivot from one day to the next,” Rubio said on Sunday.

“But they’re also an important ally and partner of the United States.”

Is Reliance also investing in the US?

Yes, India’s richest man, Mukesh Ambani, the chairman and managing director of Reliance Industries, is investing in the US, primarily through energy-related projects.

It is backing America First Refining’s planned oil refinery at the Port of Brownsville in Texas, also the first major US refinery in about 50 years, announced by Trump in March.

The refinery is expected to cost $3bn to $4bn and process about 60 million barrels of US crude annually. Reliance has signed a 20-year agreement to buy a large share of the facility’s output, with operations expected to start around 2029.

In November 2024, Reliance’s US subsidiary also acquired a 21 percent stake in helium explorer Wavetech Helium for $12m as part of its low-carbon energy strategy.

Last month, Trump announced that India’s Essar Group — an oil major with knee-deep ties to Russia — is planning an $18bn integrated steel investment in the US through its subsidiary, Mesabi Metallics.

Didn’t Trump’s ally just lock horns with Ambani?

Despite Reliance’s investments in the US and Rubio’s upcoming visit to the Jamnagar facility, Elon Musk, the world’s richest man who is also a key Trump ally, recently hit out at Ambani.

His Starlink space telecommunications firm has struggled for years to secure a licence to operate in India.

In ⁠a series of X posts recently, Musk accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government of stalling Starlink’s entry to ⁠favour market leader Ambani’s telecom firm, Jio. Musk taunted Ambani directly, addressing ‌him as “Prime ‌Minister Ambani” and asking whether he would “consider allowing Starlink to compete”. Starlink, Musk wrote, was being blocked by “oligarchs” protecting their “monopolistic chokehold” on Indians.

In a statement issued on X, Reliance said it has “never feared competition” and has “grown in an India that welcomes investment and innovation, homegrown or international”.

For several days, the streets of Tirana have witnessed a wave of antigovernment demonstrations, with demonstrators engaged in fierce clashes with security forces, while police have fired tear gas on thousands of young protesters to prevent them from scaling barricades.

Protests escalated last week after school and university students joined them, citing rising tuition fees and crumbling infrastructure.

What initially began as a targeted environmental protest in May has rapidly escalated into one of the most serious political challenges facing Prime Minister Edi Rama in his more than a decade in power.

Yet, as the unrest reaches a boiling point, a fundamental question remains: Who is behind this movement, and can it force systemic political change?

Contrary to claims by government officials that the unrest is being orchestrated by political opponents or external actors, analysts and journalists on the ground emphasise that the movement is largely decentralised and youth-driven.

Fatos Hakorja, editor-in-chief of TV Klan and Klan News, told Al Jazeera that the demonstrations have evolved organically into a broad coalition of high school students, university students, environmentalists, and aggrieved citizens.

“So far, what can be said with certainty is that the protests have been organised mainly by young people themselves,” Hakorja told Al Jazeera. “What began as the ‘Flamingo Revolution’ gradually developed into a broader student and youth protest… There is no clear evidence that a single consolidated structure stands behind the protests,” he said, referring to the May protest against a luxury resort that threatens the protected coastline.

Hakorja noted that coordination takes place dynamically across digital platforms such as WhatsApp, Telegram, and Snapchat, rather than through formal organisational hierarchies.

Albanian political analyst and publicist Ben Andoni echoed this view, describing the situation not merely as a standard protest, but as “a genuine, horizontal revolt”.

“The protest has turned into a rebellion for the past seven days. It was a protest before, but it has never taken on the character of a movement. If it were so, there would be a leadership group and some short-, medium-, and long-term goals,” Andoni told Al Jazeera.

“It is a horizontal movement, where people are mobilised by TikTok groups and social networks, but not by true cultural and political organisations. That is also a handicap or a source of pressure for Rama’s government, which seeks to negotiate, but finds no single counterpart standing in its way.”

From the ‘Flamingo Revolution’ to broad structural discontent

The roots of the current unrest are multifaceted, blending localised grievances with deep-seated frustration over governance, economic stagnation, and corruption.

The initial spark – dubbed the “Flamingo Revolution” – was ignited by environmental opposition to controversial luxury development projects, notably in the protected area of Zvernec and the planned resort investment on Sazan Island by the firm of Jared Kushner, United States President Donald Trump’s son-in-law.

The flamingo, native to these coastal lagoons, quickly became a symbol of resistance against the perceived commodification of public lands.

However, environmental concerns swiftly converged with student anger over high tuition fees, inadequate dormitory conditions, and low educational competitiveness. Beneath these immediate triggers lies a much deeper structural crisis.

“Problems of corruption, nepotism, and a lack of perspective are the main reasons that drove people to protest,” Andoni explained.

“The protest summarised the entire range of problems that Albania has, and brought them to the doorstep of a government that has crossed lines regarding corruption, inequality, and particularly a lack of empathy for the people.

“Among some protesters, especially on social media, there is also a narrative that Rama is placing the country’s interests at the service of private interests, his personal hold on power, or foreign interests, including Israeli interests. These claims have not been proven, but they seem to have increased the anger of some young people and part of the wider population,” Hakorja added.

Rama has strongly rejected the allegations, calling them conspiracy theories and dismissing them as manipulated disinformation spread through social media by “foreign hands”, aimed at destabilising the government and undermining the country’s public institutions.

Rejection of the entire political class

A defining feature of the uprising is the protesters’ explicit rejection of the ruling Socialist Party (SP) and the traditional opposition, including the Democratic Party (PD) led by Sali Berisha.

While Prime Minister Rama has accused the opposition of taking over the movement, and opposition supporters have joined the crowds on the ground, experts stress that opposition leaders exercise no direct control over the demonstrators. In fact, several opposition MPs who attempted to address the crowds faced open hostility and rejection.

“A large number of these young people seem to feel unrepresented by the whole political class,” Hakorja told Al Jazeera.

“They see the political system as disconnected from their reality and as a system that protects the interests of a minority more than it addresses the problems of the majority of citizens.”

This widespread cynicism has resulted in an uncompromising stance. Demonstrators have demanded the immediate resignation of Prime Minister Rama and the formation of a technical government, refusing official offers of dialogue due to a total breakdown of trust in state institutions.

The deep cynicism towards Albania’s political class stems from a widespread feeling that leaders are entirely indifferent to citizens’ daily struggles. Young people face rampant corruption, high unemployment, and an economy that drives huge brain drain.

This disconnect is further spurred by years of government apathy towards crumbling public education, high tuition fees, and poor dormitory conditions.

Furthermore, controversial state-backed developments – such as the planned luxury resort by Kushner’s firm – serve as prime examples for citizens who believe the political establishment consistently trades national resources and public goods for private and foreign interests.

Heavy-handed security and growing fatigue

Faced with a leaderless movement that refuses to negotiate, the Albanian government has increasingly relied on security forces to maintain control.

Police have been accused of brutality as they have used tear gas, water cannons, and rubber bullets to quell the protesters. At least 167 people have been arrested, including minors.

In a move that highlights the administration’s reliance on law enforcement, Prime Minister Rama announced a 2,500-euro ($2,800) bonus for police officers on the front lines, alongside substantial salary increases set for 2027.

Hakorja pointed out that the government is treating the crisis predominantly as a matter of public order and security.

He also highlighted troubling incidents, such as the appearance of unidentified civilians armed with wooden sticks inside the Socialist Party headquarters. While these individuals remained inside to protect the building as protesters hurled stones and attacked the entrance, their presence – including individuals holding public positions – led to fears of informal, non-state security responses operating alongside or outside official police forces.

What lies ahead?

As both sides brace for further escalation, the immediate outlook remains uncertain. Without clear leadership to negotiate terms, or intervention from international partners such as the European Union and the US, the deadlock threatens to prolong political instability.

According to Andoni, the Rama administration has used force as its main instrument, as it has suffered a severe loss of moral authority and legitimacy.

“Demonstrators remain persistent and aggressive, while Rama plays the card of force through the police,” Andoni told Al Jazeera, adding that “fatigue” is impacting the young protesters.

“It seems that young people may execute a tactical withdrawal first by temporarily stepping back from the streets due to exhaustion, leaving the weight and burden of proof on Mr Rama” – placing the ultimate responsibility on the prime minister to prove that his government has the legitimacy, capability, and sincere intent to carry out deep reforms and resolve a crisis that police force has only further escalated.

Whether this youth-led rebellion marks the beginning of a new political era in Albania or subsides under policing and exhaustion, it has irrevocably exposed the deep rift between Albania’s youth and its governing political establishment.

Israelis go to the polls on October 27 to elect the 26th Knesset, in the first general vote since the genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and the wars on Lebanon and Iran.

Benjamin Netanyahu, the longest-serving prime minister in Israel’s history, with 19 years in office, is seeking another term while standing trial on corruption charges. His Likud party and the far-right coalition it leads are locked in a close race with a Jewish-led opposition bloc, with neither side appearing on track to win an outright majority in the 120-seat Knesset, Israel’s parliament.

About 7.3 million people aged 18 and above are eligible to vote, according to Israel’s Central Elections Committee. Most polling stations open from 7am to 10pm, and anyone still queuing when they close is entitled to vote. Election day is a national holiday.

Any party clearing an electoral threshold of 3.25 percent enters parliament, which sits for a four-year term. There are no term limits for a prime minister.

How voting works

Israelis vote for a party, not a candidate.

A majority requires 61 of the 120 seats and no party has ever won that outright. Finishing first does not guarantee power. Parties then have 28 days, with a possible extension of up to 14 days, to assemble a coalition reaching 61. If nobody manages it, the country votes again.

Seats are shared out in proportion to each party’s share of the national vote, so a party winning 30 percent of votes takes roughly 30 percent of seats. The votes for parties failing to secure 3.25 percent are discarded, which explains why small parties routinely merge before every election.

Who can and cannot vote?

About 7.3 million Israeli citizens are eligible to vote in this election, but they are not the only adults living under the government they choose.

Roughly three million adult Palestinians in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem have no vote in the government that controls their borders, movement and legal status.

Jewish Israelis and Palestinian citizens of Israel, who number about 1.2 million, can vote. So can adult settlers among the more than 750,000 Israelis living in the occupied West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem, who help elect the parliament that legislates over the land they live on.

Most Palestinians in occupied East Jerusalem hold Israeli residency, not citizenship. They can vote for Jerusalem’s city council but not for the Knesset.

The result is a sharp anomaly in the occupied West Bank, where a settler votes and a Palestinian family living nearby, under the same military authority, does not.

Most Israeli citizens living abroad also cannot vote, because Israel has no general absentee ballot and requires voters to be physically in the country on election day. Diplomats and state emissaries are the exception, casting their ballots at Israeli missions on October 20.

What are the main issues?

Israelis are dealing with a series of domestic and international issues this election cycle, including:

• October 7 security failures – Three years on, the government is yet to form a state commission of inquiry into the events of October 7, 2023, when a Hamas-headed attack led to the killing of some 1,200 people, with about 250 taken captive. Israel launched the genocidal war against Palestinians in the wake of the attack, killing at least 74,000 people and leaving most of the besieged territory in ruins.
• Ultra-Orthodox draft exemptions – Supporters of the exemptions say they protect full-time Torah study, but critics argue they place an unfair military burden on everyone else.
• Judicial reform – Netanyahu’s push to curb the Supreme Court’s powers, which sparked mass protests before the war on Gaza, remains a deep fault line. Critics see it as a threat to democracy, while supporters argue that the court has overstepped its authority.
• War and security – The public wants stability but remains wary of concessions in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and Lebanon. Netanyahu promised “total victory”, but Hamas and Hezbollah remain operational.
• Cost of living – High prices and modest wages are being further squeezed by soaring defence spending. Since 2023, Israel’s defence budget has doubled, increasing pressure on public finances.

Israel’s outgoing government

Netanyahu’s coalition held 60 of the Knesset’s 120 seats when parliament dissolved in July. It comprised Likud with 32 seats, Shas with 11, Religious Zionism with seven, Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit with six, and New Hope with four. Shas left the government in July 2025 but remained in the coalition and New Hope will merge into Likud for this election.

The opposition held 59 seats: Yesh Atid with 24, Blue and White with eight, United Torah Judaism with seven, Yisrael Beiteinu with six, Hadash-Taal and Raam with five each and Labor with four. Noam’s single seat was unaffiliated.

Who are the main contenders?

Netanyahu is seeking re-election while facing a trial on corruption charges, which he denies.

His far-right coalition is up against a bloc comprising of four major Jewish-led opposition parties, whose leaders have signed a declaration promising not to attack each other ahead of the vote and to join forces in forming a government after the polls.

Former army chief Gadi Eisenkot is viewed as the opposition’s most likely candidate for prime minister, with his new Yashar party evenly matched with Likud in the opinion polls.

The opposition alliance includes the Together list, led by former Prime Ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid; Avigdor Liberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu and Yair Golan’s Democrats.

Other key players include far-right ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, the ultra-Orthodox parties, and the Arab-majority lists Ra’am and the Joint List.

Last month, Israel’s Central Elections Committee voted to bar Ra’am and the Joint List from the election, but the Supreme Court unanimously overturned the bans on October 2, ruling that the evidence did not meet the legal threshold for exclusion.

Sami Abu Shehadeh, a Palestinian citizen of Israel who leads Balad, one of the parties in the Joint List, withdrew from the race after the court signalled that a majority of its judges would uphold his disqualification.

The Arab-led parties could hold the balance of power after the vote, but most leaders of the Jewish-led opposition bloc have ruled out joining forces with them.

Sixth election in seven years

October 27 will be Israel’s sixth national vote since 2019, but the first in 38 years to arrive at the natural end of a full Knesset term.

The instability began in April 2019, when Netanyahu’s Likud party and Benny Gantz’s Blue and White party tied on 35 seats each. A second vote that September produced another deadlock, with Blue and White on 33 and Likud on 32, and neither round yielded a coalition able to reach a majority.

A third election in March 2020 gave Likud 36 seats to Blue and White’s 33, and produced a Netanyahu-Gantz unity government that collapsed within a year. In March 2021, Likud won 30 seats to Yesh Atid’s 17, but an eight-party coalition led by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid that also included Ra’am, an Arab party, ended Netanyahu’s 12-year run. It lasted a year.

Netanyahu returned in November 2022, with Likud on 32 and Yesh Atid on 24, at the head of what has been described as Israel’s most right-wing government. Polls now show neither bloc clearly reaching 61.

Israel’s prime ministers

The state of Israel has had 14 prime ministers since its foundation in 1948. Netanyahu is by far the longest-serving, with 19 years in three separate stints: 1996 to 1999, 2009 to 2021 and from 2022 to now

Only David Ben-Gurion, who led the country from 1948 to 1954 and again from 1955 to 1963, comes close.

Whatever happens on October 27, Netanyahu stays on as caretaker prime minister until a new government is sworn in.

European diplomats and officials were attacked on Saturday amid a surge in settler pogroms across the occupied West Bank in recent weeks, coinciding with olive harvest season.

The settler pogroms have escalated just weeks before Israel heads to the polls on October 27.

The European Union (EU) on Sunday condemned settler attacks on European diplomats and Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. A day earlier, a veteran American journalist working for the Washington Post was also brutally attacked.

But this is not the first time Israeli settlers have assaulted foreign officials or prominent Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.

Here’s a timeline of some of the recent and past attacks:

October 17, 2026

Israeli settlers assaulted European diplomats, including a French mayor, near the Palestinian village of Taybeh in the occupied West Bank.

The delegation was visiting Palestinian olive harvesters on Saturday when the Israeli attackers confronted the group.

In Saturday’s incident, the settlers targeted Belgium’s consul general, French and Polish diplomats, and Catholic representatives, Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs Maxime Prevot said.

“A French mayor was assaulted and a Belgian vehicle damaged,” Prevot said, linking the incident to Israel’s “illegal settlement policy” and pledging to push for further EU sanctions.

Bernard Baudoux, the French mayor who was assaulted, told the AFP news agency the attack suggests that “there is a tolerance on the part of the Israeli government” towards settler violence.

Video shared by an activist at the scene, Amit Orfali, shows Baudoux leaning against a vehicle while sitting on the dusty ground. Other clips showed young masked men knocking insistently on a driver’s side window and asking for identification, while other masked men carrying sticks advanced in the distance. Orfali said the masked men “threatened to kill us”.

France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot called on Israel to arrest the “extremist settlers” who “violently assaulted” Baudoux, and bring them to justice. “They must urgently halt this criminal violence and guarantee the safety of civilian populations, as they are compelled to do under international law,” he said in a post on X.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office has, however, appeared to question the reports of the attack on the Europeans, saying on X that they are “alleged” and require “compelling evidence”, despite acknowledging that published footage of the incident exists.

“We take positive note of statements by several Israeli representatives who condemned the attacks,” the EU said in a statement on Sunday. “But we expect full accountability as well as effective measures to prevent continued acts of violence and violent harassment against Palestinians, including during the ongoing olive harvest season, as well as against journalists.”

October 16, 2026

Palestinian farmers harvesting olives and veteran American journalist Heidi Levine, 64, who freelances for the Washington Post, were brutally attacked by settlers.

Levine fell to the ground during the assault before she was set upon, witnesses said. “We looked and saw that there was a journalist … on the ground with people surrounding her, beating her, clubbing her, robbing her, pulling her up, beating her again and kicking her,” Jasper Nathaniel, an independent journalist who witnessed the attack, told Al Jazeera.

Levine later told reporters that her attackers “just kept kicking me and kicking me, like probably 50 times”.

Levine was wearing a protective vest marked “PRESS” on the front and back. Her cameras and phone were taken from her during the assault, the Washington Post reported.

Nathaniel said he and others managed to reach her when the settlers briefly backed away, but she struggled to stand. “She was in very, very bad shape. She couldn’t really get up off the ground,” he said.

As they helped Levine towards paramedics, settlers charged again, throwing more stones, he added. The journalist was eventually taken to a hospital in Ramallah.

Nathaniel said Israeli soldiers arrived after the settler assault and opened fire and used tear gas against Palestinians, shooting a man in the leg. “They do nothing to stop the settlers, and they speed into town and start firing their guns and tear-gassing, and they shoot a Palestinian man in the leg,” he said.

“They’re pointing their guns at the paramedics who are helping him, shoving journalists, including myself,” Nathaniel said, adding that the injured man was eventually taken away in an ambulance.

Wafa, the Palestinian news agency, reported that Israeli forces fired live ammunition and tear gas at Palestinians during the attack. After the soldiers left, Palestinians returned to harvesting their olives, Nathaniel added.

Netanyahu’s office has said the facts around the settler attack “remain unclear”, as it offered a conditional condemnation.

“Serious questions remain”, said a post on the official X account of the prime minister’s office, calling for an investigation to “establish the facts, including who initiated the violence”.

October 6, 2026

Israeli settlers beat Palestinian AFP news agency photographer Jaafar Ashtiyeh, 58, with rifle butts near Aqraba, south of Nablus. He suffered bruises to his head and torso and was taken by ambulance to a hospital, according to witnesses, his family and fellow journalists cited by AFP.

AFP photographer John Wessels was with Ashtiyeh when the incident occurred.

The news agency reported that a quadbike had raced towards the journalists and a man had opened live fire.

“At least six other people then rushed towards the AFP journalists, firing guns,” AFP reported. “As Ashtiyeh attempted to enter a car, which was clearly marked ‘Press’, two men jumped on him and beat him repeatedly with the butts of their rifles. ‘I could hear his screams,’ said Wessels, who was also threatened at gunpoint.”

While Ashtiyeh is now conscious in a hospital in Nablus, the assailants have taken his camera equipment, according to his colleague Wessels.

The Israeli military has yet to respond to the AFP news agency.

July 11, 2026

United States Congressional Representative Ro Khanna said he and his tour group were detained by rifle-wielding Israeli settlers during a trip to Palestine.

In a post on X, Khanna had accused the Israeli army of supporting the settlers.

“When the [Israeli army] arrived, they sided with the settlers and continued our detention,” Khanna wrote.

Khanna, a Democrat who is considering running for US president in 2028, told the Reuters news agency that “hoodlums … with machine guns” had detained his group a day earlier. “They block off the road. And then they call the [Israeli military] and the [Israeli military] is on their side,” Khanna said.

He added that the settlers were armed with US-made assault rifles.

In an interview with DRM News, Khanna said his experience in the occupied West Bank and Israel was the “first time” he had “really been acutely aware of being brown”.

“I saw the arrogance in the eyes of those settlers. Twenty-one and 22-year-olds with guns, laughing that they had detained us. The arrogance of those young [Israeli army] soldiers that my tax dollars are funding. Having no respect for the fact that they were detaining Americans,” he added.

The Israeli military disputed Khanna’s version of the events, saying that it “dispersed” civilians who were blocking the road.

Israeli officials have, however, ruled out apologising to Khanna or holding the settlers accountable.

Three months after the incident, on Saturday, October 17, Khanna called Netanyahu a “liar” after his office released an October 16 statement on X saying that “serious questions remain” about “who initiated the violence” and other details of the attack on Washington Post journalist Heidi Levine.

“Netanyahu called me a liar when settlers detained me, along with a NYT photographer, in Zanuta this past July,” Khanna wrote. “Netanyahu, you are the liar with the blood of Palestinian children on your hands.”

November 2025

One Canadian and three Italian activists were injured by illegal Israeli settlers in the Ein ad-Duyuk village in the Jericho governorate in the central West Bank, local sources told the Anadolu news agency.

Anadolu reported that settlers had stormed into a Bedouin community where the activists were residing and then assaulted them. Three activists sustained moderate injuries, while one was critically wounded, the news agency said and added that their passports, phones, and belongings were also taken.

July 2025

Palestinian activist and English teacher Awdah Hathaleen, who contributed to the Oscar-winning documentary No Other Land, was shot and killed on July 28, 2025, in the occupied West Bank village of Umm al-Khair in the Masafer Yatta region.

The beloved 31-year-old activist and father of three fell to the ground as people rushed over to try to help him. Then an ambulance came out of the nearby illegal settlement of Carmel and took him away.

Footage published by Israeli human rights group B’Tselem appears to show the suspect Yinon Levi opening fire on Hathaleen during a confrontation in the village.

Despite the visual evidence and prior sanctions imposed on Levi by both the EU and the United States over past attacks on Palestinians, Israeli authorities released him to house arrest.

US President Donald Trump also removed the penalties against Levi and other settlers accused of extremist violence after assuming office in January 2025.

July 2024

Israeli settlers attacked a group of foreign volunteers helping Palestinian farmers in the occupied West Bank.

David Hummel, an American-German in the group, told the AFP news agency that eight mainly American volunteers were working with the farmers in an olive grove near the Palestinian village of Qusra when settlers attacked them.

“They started attacking and beating us all with sticks and metal pipes, and they were throwing rocks as well at us,” he said.

“I was attacked on my legs, on my arms and here on my jaw as well and it was … very violent,” he added.

The Israeli army condemned the violence and said its troops were deployed to the scene and had fired warning shots into the air, causing the Israeli settlers to flee the area.

Remember the FIFA Peace Prize awarded to United States President Donald Trump six months before the World Cup? Well, it is now close to being scrapped, which would make the US president its first and only winner.

Less than a year after FIFA President Gianni Infantino extolled Trump in the US capital while presenting the award at the World Cup 2026 draw, several members of the FIFA Council are questioning its merit and have demanded changes, including scrapping the award.

The calls for scrutiny come at a time when Infantino faces ongoing criticism for his World Cup sell-off plan, which also led to calls for his removal from office.

So what was the prize about, and why might it be scrapped? Here’s a look:

What is the FIFA Peace Prize?

On November 5, football’s global governing body announced a new annual award called the “FIFA Peace Prize – Football Unites the World”.

FIFA said the award was created to “reward individuals who have taken exceptional and extraordinary actions for peace”.

Why did Trump receive the FIFA Peace Prize?

A month later, Trump became the first recipient of the award.

The US leader had been heavily favoured to win the inaugural prize after failing to win the Nobel Peace Prize despite an aggressive campaign involving endorsements from other world leaders.

Trump thanked FIFA and called the award “one of the great honours of my life”.

He and Infantino are close allies, and the FIFA chief had made it clear that he thought Trump should have won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to broker a ceasefire in Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

“This is your prize. This is your peace prize,” Infantino said at the glitzy, celebrity-studded ceremony at Washington, DC’s Kennedy Center.

Infantino has repeatedly spoken about football as a unifier for the world, but the prize is a departure from the federation’s traditional focus on sport.

Critics pointed out that the recognition came less than 24 hours after the Trump administration carried out a deadly air strike in the Caribbean.

Two months later, the US and Israel launched their war on Iran, assassinating Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in Tehran and hitting nuclear and military sites around the country.

The US-Israel war on Iran has gone on for months with Trump saying this week that he will not attack Iran again before the November 3 midterm elections in the US.

Why might FIFA scrap the award?

Several FIFA member nations demanded the discontinuation of the award during Thursday’s FIFA Council meeting in Zurich, Switzerland, according to reports in British media.

Others called for the prize to no longer be handed out to politicians.

As a result, FIFA’s 22-member Football Social Responsibility Committee was tasked with assessing the merits of the award. It is expected to make a recommendation before the next council meeting in Doha, Qatar, on December 16.

Debbie Hewitt, a FIFA vice president and president of the English Football Association, told the media at the council briefing that the committee “will consider, first of all, how the peace prize came about, whether it should have come about, whether it should have been awarded in the way that it was, who made that decision and whether or not it should be taken out or whether it should be reformed”.

What has FIFA said?

Al Jazeera has reached out to FIFA for comment and was referred to Infantino’s statement on it: “For the FIFA Peace Prize, it was decided that the Football Social Responsibility Committee will be tasked to analyse it, provide a proposal, and also, there, a decision will be taken at the next FIFA Council meeting.”

Has the FIFA Peace Prize faced opposition?

Yes.

In October, the Norwegian Football Association (NFF) made parallel filings with ⁠⁠FIFA committees in relation to three recent issues, one of which was related to the awarding of the FIFA Peace Prize.

“The purpose is ⁠⁠to raise these issues formally with the appropriate bodies, to have them examined, relevant evidence obtained and accountability for the conclusions reached,” the NFF said in a statement.

The NFF has repeatedly raised questions about the award, and in April, its president, Lise Klaveness, said FIFA should scrap its peace prize to avoid getting drawn into ⁠⁠politics.

“We want to see it abolished. We don’t think it’s part of FIFA’s mandate to give such a prize. We think we have a Nobel institute that does that job independently already,” Klaveness said.

Earlier, human rights group FairSquare filed a complaint with the FIFA Ethics Committee, accusing Infantino of breaching his duty of neutrality by supporting Trump.

‘Mockery’ of FIFA human rights policy

The criticism of the award isn’t limited to football associations.

In late April, Australia midfielder Jackson Irvine said football’s credibility as a force for good ⁠⁠has been undermined by FIFA, and he accused FIFA of making a mockery of its human rights policy.

“As an organisation, you would have to say decisions like the one that we saw awarding ⁠⁠this peace prize makes a mockery of what they’re trying to do with the human rights charter and trying to use football as a global driving force for good and positive change in the world,” Irvine told the Reuters news agency in an interview.

“Decisions like that feel like they just set us back in the perceived market of what football currently is, especially at the top level, where it’s becoming so disconnected from society and the grassroots of what the game actually is and means in our communities and in the world.”

Craig Mokhiber, a former United Nations official who has campaigned to suspend Israel from world football over its genocidal war in Gaza, called the award to Trump a “truly shameful development”.

Infantino has refused to take action against Israel, arguing that football “cannot solve geopolitical” issues.

“Not satisfied with two years of FIFA complicity in genocide in Palestine, Infantino and his cronies have now invented a new ‘peace prize’ in order to curry favour with Donald Trump,” Mokhiber told Al Jazeera.

He added that the award also aims to “obscure” Trump’s “disgraceful record” of support for Israel, his deadly strikes on vessels in the Caribbean Sea and “gross violations of human rights” inside the US.

Growing pressure on Infantino

The scrutiny around the FIFA Peace Prize follows the recent backlash Infantino has faced.

Infantino has been under fire since his announcement in late July that he wanted to open FIFA’s premium competitions, such as the World Cup, to private investors.

That plan was ultimately abandoned in the face of widespread criticism with a rebellion led by the European governing body UEFA, the Asian Football Confederation and CONCACAF, which runs the sport in North and Central America and the Caribbean.

Infantino has headed FIFA since 2016 and is running for re-election in March despite calls for him to stand down in the wake of the $4.2bn plan to sell a 20 per cent commercial stake in the World Cup.

United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio is to visit India in the coming week, but he will not set foot in the capital, New Delhi.

Instead, on Monday, Rubio will hold talks with Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar in Mumbai, India’s financial hub, and then visit an oil refinery in Jamnagar in the western state of Gujarat, according to a statement from the US Department of State.

His itinerary sparked a political storm after the US ambassador to India said Washington expected Jaishankar to travel to meet Rubio, prompting opposition leaders to accuse the government of allowing India’s top diplomat to be “summoned” on home soil.

The spat comes as relations between the two countries are strained over trade, tariffs and India’s purchases of Russian oil.

So why is Rubio avoiding New Delhi, and why has it caused such upset? Here’s what you need to know:

What is Rubio doing in India?

He plans to discuss trade, energy and investment.

Rubio is arriving on Sunday from Samarkand, Uzbekistan, where he has been meeting with five Central Asian states at the C5+1 summit.

In India, he is due to meet senior officials to discuss the US-India strategic partnership and energy cooperation and hold talks with business leaders, the State Department said.

Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal appeared to confirm the agenda, stating on Friday that the Mumbai talks would cover energy, trade and investment, defence, and critical and emerging technologies.

In Jamnagar, Rubio is to visit the world’s largest single-site refinery, operated by billionaire Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries, and attend a reception hosted by the Ambani family, according to The Hindu newspaper.

Why isn’t Rubio going to New Delhi?

No official reason has been given.

Rubio was in the Indian capital in May for a meeting of foreign ministers of countries in the Quad, a group consisting of the US, India, Japan and Australia.

The State Department has framed his upcoming trip around energy and investment, and the second stop on Rubio’s India visit, Jamnagar, is one of the world’s most important energy hubs.

The visit also comes as fuel prices bite in the US before next month’s midterm elections.

Reliance, an energy, retail and telecommunications conglomerate, also sits at the centre of Washington’s wider oil diplomacy.

Business Standard, an Indian financial daily, said the Jamnagar stop was significant because Reliance is the biggest buyer of Venezuelan crude oil besides the US at a time when Washington has been urging India to buy more.

Since US forces seized Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January and took essential control of the country’s oil industry, the US government has marketed Venezuelan oil to buyers abroad.

Reliance is also investing in a new refinery in Texas, the first to be built in the US in 50 years, which Trump hailed as a $300bn deal when he announced it in March, Business Standard reported.

What did the US ambassador say, and why has it caused upset?

Speaking at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum in New Delhi on Thursday, US Ambassador to India Sergio Gor said Rubio would meet Indian government officials in Mumbai, and Washington “expected” Jaishankar and others from New Delhi to travel there to see him.

Earlier in the week, however, Jaiswal had not confirmed the trip or explained why Rubio was skipping New Delhi, telling reporters the Indian government would announce it “at the appropriate time”, The Hindu newspaper reported.

Jairam Ramesh, a general secretary of the opposition Indian National Congress party, wrote on X that the ambassador’s statement was “quite extraordinary”.

Rahul Gandhi, leader of the opposition in parliament’s lower house, also took to X to comment, writing on Friday that Rubio had “summoned his employee to Mumbai”.

Congress MP Pawan Khera went further.

“A foreign government summoning India’s External Affairs Minister on Indian soil is a new low, even by the Modi Government’s standards,” he wrote on X, referring to Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Why are US-India relations strained?

Mainly because of Trump’s tariffs and Russian oil.

In August last year after a round of trade talks broke down, the US hit most Indian goods with a 50 percent tariff. Under a framework the two sides agreed in February, that rate fell to 18 percent, however.

Since then, negotiations have stalled.

This month, Indian Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said the talks had “plateaued”, according to The Hindu.

On Thursday, Trade Minister Piyush Goyal said the “first tranche” of a deal was in its final stages but India would not sign until its exporters had an edge over rivals such as Bangladesh, Vietnam and Indonesia, according to the Reuters news agency.

Other points of friction have emerged.

Last week, US Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling announced that his department was suspending eight companies – including the Indian IT giants Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services, Wipro and HCL – from a labour certification scheme that is a key step for employers seeking green cards for their foreign staff.

Sameer Lalwani, a senior fellow in the South Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote this week that Indian public opinion of the US has hit a record low, citing US engagement with Pakistan and the US-Israel war on Iran, which he said had pushed India back towards Russian oil.

Despite that, he argued, defence and technology cooperation has quietly deepened, and bilateral trade grew by almost 12 percent in 2025 to nearly $240bn.

In his view, “perceptions of the political relationship have deteriorated faster than its strategic foundations.”

A sanctions law had threatened to make matters worse.

Last month, Trump signed the Lindsey O Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act, which could impose tariffs of up to 100 percent on goods from the five largest importers of Russian oil or gas.

India, one of the world’s biggest buyers of Russian oil, had warned Washington that new tariffs could hurt bilateral ties. Trump signed an executive order seeking to waive the sanctions on Friday as he tries to ease high oil prices before the November 3 US elections.

United States President Donald Trump has signed an executive order waiving newly-passed Russia sanctions, claiming the move is in the US’s “national interest”.

Earlier this month, Trump also announced a deal to bring stocks of Russian diesel into global markets, in a bid to drive down energy prices that have spiked during the US-Israel war on Iran. The US Treasury waived sanctions on Russian diesel sales until April 2027.

Trump’s embrace of Russian energy has angered Ukraine, European partners and many US officials, who say the move rewards Moscow while it continues its four-and-a-half-year war against its neighbour.

Ukraine’s President Volodmyr Zelenskyy slammed Trump’s diesel deal as “a gift” to Russia’s President Vladimir Putin that will help fund his war effort.

While European countries have also criticised Trump’s embrace of Russian energy, the US president has accused them of “hypocrisy”, as figures show that European Union countries continue to import Russian gas.

Here’s what we know:

Which sanctions has Trump waived?

In his executive order on Friday, Trump called off numerous planned Russia-related sanctions days before they were due to take effect, including duties on Russian goods and penalties for buying the country’s oil and gas.

The now-blocked measures were part of legislation passed in Congress with bipartisan support last month, named after the late US Senator Lindsay Graham, an outspoken critic of Russia.

They would have included up to 100 percent tariffs on all goods brought into the US from the five top importers of Russian crude oil or gas, including China and India. They could also have imposed equal penalties on countries deemed to have knowingly bought oil or gas from Russia 30 days after the law’s implementation, or to be among the top five countries helping Moscow circumvent sanctions on sales of its oil.

The waiver will hold until the Trump administration believes “further action is appropriate”, according to the executive order.

US Congressman Don Beyer, a Democrat from Virginia, said the sanctions waiver amounts to a “surrender to Putin” that “betrays our Ukrainian partners and defies clear congressional intent”.

Who will benefit from this?

Vasily Astrov, an economist at the Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, told Al Jazeera that the Russian government will likely be the greatest beneficiary because the easing of sanctions means Russian oil will not have to be further discounted.

He estimated that about 60 cents of every extra dollar in the price of a barrel of Russian oil would “end up in state coffers”.

Russian official Kirill Dmitriev, an envoy for Putin, hailed the US decision to waive the sanctions as “an important and truly historic moment”.

Other beneficiaries include major importers of Russian oil and gas, such as China and India, who are now less exposed to the risk of secondary US penalties.

While Trump hopes the measures will also help bring down oil prices for US consumers before November mid-term elections, experts say that is less certain.

Addressing the US’s recent diesel deal with Russia, EU economy chief Valdis Dombrovskis said it is unlikely to have a significant impact on global prices.

According to Trump, that deal would bring 300,000 tonnes of diesel fuel into US and global markets “immediately”, followed by 500,000 tonnes in November, and 1 million tonnes afterwards.

“If we look at the volumes, they are not of any macroeconomic significance, and frankly, there are strong doubts whether Russia is even able to supply those volumes, and according also to US quality standards, those are big question marks,” Dombrovskis told the AFP news agency.

Which countries still buy oil from Russia?

China and India are the largest buyers of Russian crude oil, purchasing 6 billion euros ($6.74bn) and 3.6 billion euros ($4.04bn) worth respectively in September, according to the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), a nonprofit think tank.

Hungary and Slovakia, the landlocked EU members that have exemptions to the bloc’s ban on Russian crude, also remain big customers, buying a combined 290 million euros ($326m) worth of the commodity in September, said CREA. Turkiye imported 172 million euros ($193m) worth of Russian crude oil the same month, the think tank added.

Since the end of 2022, the largest importers of Russian oil products, which include diesel, have been Turkiye, China, Saudi Arabia, Brazil and Singapore.

Saudi Arabia imported the most Russian oil products in September at 534 million euros ($600m), followed by Turkiye with 321 million euros ($361m), China with 304 million euros ($342m) and India with 161 million euros ($181m).

Is Europe buying increasing amounts of gas from Russia?

“The European Council regrets the United States’ decision to temporarily lift sanctions on Russian diesel,” European leaders said in a joint statement adopted following a two-day European Council meeting in Brussels this week.

But despite its own near-blanket ban on Russian oil, the EU has continued to import large quantities of Russian gas, though it plans to phase out those imports next year.

Urgewald, a Germany-based group that researches coal companies, reported this week that more than 12 million tonnes of Russian Arctic LNG was transported into EU ports from January to September this year, a 9.5 percent jump from the same period last year.

In September, EU countries imported 817 million euros ($918m) of pipeline gas, and 615 million euros ($691m) of liquefied natural gas (LNG), according to CREA.

EU members France and the Netherlands were the largest LNG importers, bringing in 446 million euros ($501m) and 116 million euros ($130m) respectively, according to the think tank. France’s LNG imports represented a 103 percent increase from the previous month, it added.

France’s President Emmanuel Macron has been among the most outspoken about Trump’s diesel deal with Russia, saying on Friday that it “sends a negative message” and would have no impact on global prices.

Hungary imported the most Russian pipeline gas of any EU member by far during the month, with 414 million euros ($465m) worth. Slovakia and Bulgaria brought in 161 million euros ($181m) and 132 million euros ($148m), respectively, according to CREA data.

China is increasing its gold reserves in a bid to reduce its dependence on US dollar assets and protect against financial and geopolitical risks, analysts say, while households are turning to the precious metal amid uncertainty over the domestic economy.

The People’s Bank of China reported buying gold for a 23rd consecutive month in September, when the country’s central bank also made its largest monthly purchase in nearly three years. The sustained buying points to a longer-term effort to spread risk associated with its vast reserves, experts say.

Among concerns is high US debt and Western governments’ freezing of assets, which has highlighted the inherent risk in holding money overseas, particularly for emerging market and Global South economies. Gold bought and stored domestically offers protection against that risk because access does not depend on the will of another government.

But central bank buying and household demand for gold in China have different drivers. While Beijing is managing its financial exposure, private investors are seeking somewhere to preserve their savings. Here is what we know.

How much gold has China bought?

China’s central bank added approximately 23 tonnes of gold in September, bringing its reported holdings to about 2,410 tonnes, according to the World Gold Council. That was its largest monthly purchase since October 2023. Gold accounted for 8.5 percent of China’s total official reserves at the end of September, compared with 5.5 percent at the end of 2024.

Reserves are assets central banks hold to ensure they can meet international payments and respond to financial disruption. They usually include foreign currencies, foreign government debt and gold.

Private demand for gold within China has also risen, with purchases of gold bars and coins 28.4 percent higher in the first half of 2026 than during the same period last year, according to the China Gold Association. The buying of gold has continued amid falling prices, with gold down around 8.5 percent over the month.

The World Gold Council attributed the decline in gold prices partly to a stronger dollar and higher returns on US government debt. With interest rates going up in an attempt to curb inflation, these investments are attractive for buyers as they pay interest, making them more attractive to private investors than gold, which does not.

Why is China buying more gold?

A key objective is to reduce dependence on US government debt, known as Treasuries, according to Thu Lan Nguyen, head of commodity research at Commerzbank in Frankfurt.

China holds substantial reserves in dollar-based assets and, therefore, buying gold reduces its exposure to decisions taken in Washington. “China’s gold purchases are part of a broader effort to make its reserves more resilient,” Nguyen told Al Jazeera.

The freezing by Western countries of roughly $300bn in Russian Central Bank overseas assets following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 demonstrated how reserves held abroad can quickly become inaccessible.

The concern for China may be that a future confrontation with Washington could expose some of its overseas assets to similar restrictions. “Gold held domestically has a crucial advantage in this respect: it does not represent a claim on another country and is therefore much less exposed to sanctions or asset freezes,” Nguyen said.

“I would interpret it primarily as risk management,” she added, pointing to increased geopolitical tensions and economic and fiscal risks.

America’s rising debt, which hit $40 trillion for the first time in history earlier this year, adds another source of uncertainty. In February, the US Congressional Budget Office projected that federal debt held by the public would rise from 101 percent of the size of the US economy in 2026 to 120 percent in 2036. That provides context for concerns about Washington’s ability to repay that debt going forward should an economic crash occur. Much of this debt is held by China. Gold, therefore, offers a less volatile and risky asset to hold.

Chinese households have different motivations for buying gold. When confidence in other investments weakens, gold can become more attractive as a way to hold savings. “Strong demand for gold can partly reflect a search for alternative stores of value,” Nguyen said.

The World Gold Council has identified weak Chinese share markets as one factor supporting domestic demand for gold, while its property market is burdened by heavy borrowing and overbuilding, contributing to a fall in housing prices, making it a poorer investment.

What this means for the US dollar

Analysts warned that China’s increased buying of gold does not signal an imminent end to the dollar’s global dominance. “I would be cautious about describing this as a major shift away from the dollar,” Nguyen said. “The dollar remains by far the dominant global reserve currency.”

But a gradual shift could still matter if China and other central banks put more of their new reserves into gold, buying fewer US assets than they normally would. That could weaken one source of demand for US government debt. But the effect would depend on how widely and quickly the shift developed.

“The key point is, therefore, that this is likely to be a slow diversification process rather than a sudden abandonment of the dollar,” Nguyen said. She added that the consequences for the US economy would remain limited unless the trend broadened and accelerated substantially.

Central banks also need readily available foreign currency to support international payments and the dollar remains central to those transactions. So gold can provide financial protection, but it cannot directly replace all the functions of dollar reserves.

Who else is buying gold?

China is part of a wider trend, particularly among central banks in emerging economies, Nguyen said.

“The trend is particularly visible among emerging market central banks,” Nguyen said. “But sanctions are only part of the story.”

Poland has also become a more prominent buyer. Its central bank purchased 31 tonnes in the first quarter of 2026 and another eight tonnes in July, according to the World Gold Council.

Large holdings do not necessarily indicate recent purchases. India, for example, confirmed in June that its physical gold stock remained unchanged at about 880.5 tonnes. India’s gold reserves have changed little since mid-2025, according to the World Gold Council. It bought about four tonnes in 2025, down from 73 tonnes in 2024.

Despite China’s sustained buying, its reserves remain far smaller than those of the United States. Its holdings of about 2,300 tonnes at the end of 2025 amounted to less than one-third of the US stockpile of approximately 8,133 tonnes.

United States President Donald Trump has for the first time explicitly ruled out the use of a nuclear weapon against Iran, but has not denied US media reports that his administration is considering deploying the US’s most lethal non-nuclear munition, nicknamed the “mother of all bombs” in the near future.

In an interview published on Thursday by right-wing American news site Newsmax, Trump suggested he does not plan to use nuclear weapons, but also clarified that the devastating aerial weapon, the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB – ‘mother of all bombs ) “is not nuclear”.

“I wouldn’t use nuclear. We don’t have to. We’re the greatest nuclear power in the world,” he told Newsmax.

The comments marked Trump’s first definitive statement on the nuclear topic following speculation about a possible atomic conflict earlier in the US and Israel’s war on Iran. They also appeared to confirm speculation that another phase of the war is imminent, likely after the US midterm elections on November 3.

Here’s what we know:

What did Trump say?

Trump told Newsmax that the US might indeed launch another strike on Iran’s nuclear sites, particularly on Pickaxe Mountain, where Tehran is believed to be hiding a nuclear facility deep under layers of granite.

He ruled out using a nuclear weapon or a tactical nuclear weapon.

“I wouldn’t use nuclear. We don’t have to. We’re the greatest nuclear power in the world,” he said.

He also clarified that the MOAB, which CNN reported the US government is considering using, “is not nuclear”.

Responding to a question about whether the MOAB is “tactical nuclear” – meaning smaller nuclear munitions – Trump reiterated that it is not.

“Well, the mother of all bombs is not nuclear,” Trump said. “It’s not nuclear at all. This is just an extremely large bomb.”

Trump declined to say whether he had authorised its use in Iran.

Trump also suggested renewed attacks are likely in the near future. The US cannot end the war now because it has to ensure Iran cannot produce a nuclear weapon, he argued, saying he believes that “if they had it, they would use it, in my opinion, instantaneously”.

Trump also reiterated that the war would end “very soon” whether by force or diplomacy and that oil prices would then drop.

When asked if he would put “troops on the ground”, Trump said: “No, I don’t see that, I don’t see it.” Earlier in the war, Trump had made comments regarding sending in troops, a move analysts said would be devastating for US soldiers because of Iran’s mountainous territory.

What is the ‘mother of all bombs’?

The MOAB carries a massive payload of about 8,500kg (18,000 pounds or 8.5 tonnes) of high explosives. It weighs 9,800kg (21,605 pounds or nearly 10 tonnes) – about the same as four cars – and is just over nine metres (about 30 feet) long. Stealth bombers are too small to carry it, so it has to be deployed by larger, Lockheed C-130 Hercules transporters.

It is designed to explode a few metres above the ground, sending out intense fireballs that can blast buildings and other hard-surface structures within a 1km radius, experts have told Al Jazeera. It is so powerful that a mushroom cloud from its blast has been seen 32km (20 miles) away in tests, the US Air Force has said.

“Its large explosive charge can produce devastating blast effects against exposed personnel, equipment and vulnerable structures,” Brussels-based military and weapons analyst Elijah Magnier said. “Its purpose is to generate an exceptionally powerful blast across a surface area.”

However, Magnier said there is doubt about whether using the massive surface explosive would be effective against deeply buried nuclear installations in Iran. He added that the terrain in Iran could be difficult for larger cargo aircraft to access.

What has Trump previously said about nuclear weapons?

Trump has never explicitly mentioned using a nuclear weapon, but he has also never ruled it out.

Speculation regarding whether Washington might use nuclear weapons was rife in the early days of the conflict, largely because of the extreme nature of Trump’s numerous threats against Tehran.

In April, for example, as Iran enforced a blockade on ships in the Strait of Hormuz, Trump posted on his Truth Social site that “…a whole civilisation will die tonight, never to be brought back again”, if Iran did not agree to a peace deal and reopen the strait.

He also threatened to destroy Iran’s infrastructure, saying a bombing campaign “will be Power Plant Day and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one”, in Iran.

Experts widely interpreted his statements as a threat of nuclear destruction, but one that still failed to force Iran to the table.

Although Trump largely moved away from his sabre-rattling rhetoric in the following weeks, he reiterated at the United Nations General Assembly in New York last month that he could “annihilate” Iran. He also told the assembly that he believed a deal would emerge after the midterms.

What is a ‘tactical’ nuclear weapon?

“Tactical” nuclear weapons (TNW) are smaller nuclear munitions designed for the battlefield as opposed to strategic nuclear munitions designed for mass destruction.

Some perceive TNWs as having a lesser impact than an atomic bomb, but experts warn that their names are misleading and they can nevertheless be devastating. Their explosive yield, between 0.3 and 50 kilotons, can impact areas within a 500-600km radius.

The US dropped a 15-kiloton nuclear bomb on Hiroshima, meaning that weapon would today be considered a TNW. The US, North Korea and Russia have TNWs in their arsenals, although no country has ever used them. TNWs are not subject to any international treaties and are largely unregulated.

What might another US attack on Iran look like?

With Trump failing to rule out dropping the MOAB, analysts speculate that the US might launch another – perhaps final – intensive bombing campaign targeting Iran’s nuclear and defence sites, particularly Pickaxe Mountain.

The US could also continue its naval blockade on Iranian ports, while providing escorts for commercial ships through the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran has vowed to respond to escalatory strikes by targeting oil and digital infrastructure in neighbouring Gulf states.

Senior defence officials have also warned that Iran will invade its neighbours if the US launches a ground operation, although Trump appears to have ruled that out.

Earlier in the war, he hinted at the possibility of sending ground forces to retrieve some 400kg of “yellowcake” – highly enriched uranium that Washington and Israel claim Tehran has hidden underground.

Trump’s phone calls in March to Kurdish militia groups fighting Iran provoked speculation that Washington could coordinate with them for an invasion, although that did not happen.

For every five plates of food served around the world, roughly one ends up in the bin. That adds up to more than a billion tonnes of food a year.

Meanwhile, 645 million people, about one in 13 of the world’s population, went hungry in 2025, according to the UN.

That gap is the focus of World Food Day on October 16, the annual UN observance marking the founding of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in 1945. This year’s theme, “Innovate today, nourish tomorrow”, calls for food systems that feed more people and waste less.

In this visual explainer, Al Jazeera looks at global hunger, which countries waste the most food and simple ways to waste less at home.

Hunger is falling, slowly

Global hunger has fallen for a third year in a row, but it remains above levels seen before the COVID-19 pandemic.

According to the UN’s annual State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report, an estimated 645 million people, or 7.8 percent of the world’s population, faced hunger in 2025. That is down from 8.1 percent in 2024 and a peak of 8.6 percent in 2022, but still about 61 million more people than in 2019.

Where are people the most hungry?

Africa has more hungry people than any other region.

In 2025, an estimated 309 million people in Africa were undernourished. That is one in five people on the continent and almost half of the world’s hungry people.

By comparison, 292 million people in Asia (6 percent of the population) and 32 million in Latin America and the Caribbean (4.8 percent) were undernourished.

The 2026 Global Hunger Index shows a similar pattern at the country level. The index scores countries out of 100, combining undernourishment with child stunting, child wasting and child mortality. Scores of 35 or more are considered “alarming”.

Hunger is classed as alarming in eight countries, seven of them in Africa. Somalia has the worst score of the 122 countries ranked, followed by the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Chad and Madagascar.

Sudan, South Sudan, Burundi and Yemen were also classed as alarming, but conflict and data gaps meant the index could not calculate their scores.

At the same time, a large share of the food the world grows never reaches a plate.

How much food is wasted every year?

Food is lost and wasted at every stage of its journey from farm to table.

According to the FAO, about 13 percent of the food produced globally is lost after harvest and before it reaches shops, spoiling in storage, during transport or in processing. Fruits and vegetables suffer the highest losses.

Food lost before it reaches shops is worth more than $400bn a year, according to the FAO.

Shops, restaurants and households then throw away almost a fifth of the food available to consumers, about 1.05 billion tonnes in 2022, according to the UN Environment Programme (UNEP). That is equivalent to 52.5 million trucks, each carrying 20 tonnes.

Households account for the most, 60 percent, followed by restaurants and other food services at 28 percent and shops at 12 percent.

How to reduce food waste at home

Most food waste happens at home, which means households can make a real difference. Here are some simple steps recommended by food waste campaigners and UN agencies:

1. Plan before you shop: Check what you already have, plan meals for the week and shop with a list to avoid buying more than you need.
2. Understand date labels: “Use by” dates are about safety, but “best before” dates are about quality. Food is often still safe to eat after its “best before” date.
3. Store food properly: Keep your fridge at 5C (41F) or below, and store fruit and vegetables where they last longest. Bananas, for example, speed up the ripening of other fruit nearby.
4. Use the freezer: Bread, cooked meals, meat and many fruits and vegetables can be frozen before they go off.
5. Cook the right amount: Measuring portions, especially for rice and pasta, cuts down on leftovers that get thrown away.
6. Eat the oldest food first: Move older items to the front of the fridge and cupboard so they get used before newer ones.
7. Use leftovers and scraps: Turn leftovers into new meals, and use vegetable peels and stalks in soups and stocks.
8. Compost what you can’t eat: Composting inedible parts such as peels and eggshells keeps them out of landfills, where rotting food releases methane.

Which country wastes the most?

On average, every person in the world wastes about 132kg (291 pounds) of food a year, roughly the weight of two adults. Of that, 79kg (174 pounds) was thrown away at home.

But the amount varies widely. Hotter countries tend to waste more at home, UNEP says, possibly because of more fresh produce and less refrigeration.

The Maldives wastes the most food, with each person throwing away about 260kg (573 pounds) a year, about twice the global average. Syria, the Dominican Republic, Seychelles, Mexico and Tunisia follow, each wasting more than 210kg (463 pounds) per person, according to UN estimates.

Spain recorded some of the lowest levels, at around 39kg (86 pounds) or less per person.

What does food waste cost?

Food loss and waste costs the global economy more than $1 trillion a year, according to the UN.

To put that in perspective, what else could $1 trillion buy?

Use the + buttons to add items to your cart and see how the money would be spent across 35 categories.

Throwing food away also wastes the money, land and energy used to produce it.

About 1.4 billion hectares (3.5 billion acres) of land, or 28 percent of the world’s agricultural land, is used to grow food that is never eaten. That is an area larger than Canada.

Food loss and waste also generate an estimated 8 to 10 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, including methane released as food rots in landfills.

The United States has developed plans to strike Iran with the largest non-nuclear bomb in its military arsenal on Iran’s energy infrastructure and nuclear sites if President Donald Trump orders renewed combat operations, according to US officials cited by CNN.

Deploying the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB), nicknamed the “mother of all bombs”, could significantly escalate the ongoing conflict at a time when fighting has lulled, experts say.

Concerns are also being raised, including within the Trump administration itself, over what such a move would even achieve. Officials familiar with military planning discussions told US news outlet CNN and Al Jazeera that deploying the MOAB would be unlikely to help the US achieve its stated strategic goals, including to destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Brussels-based military expert Elijah Magnier told Al Jazeera that using the MOAB would not even guarantee the destruction of Iran’s deeply buried underground nuclear installations and that such a strike would likely amount to little more than “political theatre”.

Here’s what we know:

What is the MOAB?

The GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB) is a massive munition containing about 8,500kg (18,000 pounds or 8.5 tonnes) of high explosives. It weighs 9,800kg (21,605 pounds or nearly 10 tonnes) – about the same as four saloon cars – and is as long as a small yacht at just over 9 metres (about 30 feet).

The MOAB is typically deployed from the Lockheed C-130 Hercules cargo aircraft because it cannot fit in a stealth bomber.

The bomb, which was first manufactured between 2002 and 2003, has undergone 12 detonation tests.

Its name is a reference to former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s comments during the 1991 Gulf War when he invoked the “mother of all battles”.

The US has only deployed the MOAB once before – during its 2017 attacks on an Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP) cave and tunnel complex in Afghanistan. Afghan authorities claimed that while 94 Islamic State-Khorasan Province (ISKP) fighters were killed in the blast, no civilians were hurt. However, there were unconfirmed, local reports of civilian casualties and many homes were destroyed.

What is the ‘mother of all bombs’?

The GBU-43/B, the US’s most powerful non-nuclear bomb, was used once, against Islamic State-Khorasan…

GBU-43/B

Pallet is deployed from rear cargo door of MC-130H or C-17aircraft.

1. Released from the aircraft.

2. Cradle separates; GPS and fins guide it.

3. H6 explosives detonate.

4. A powerful shockwave spreads.

5. Hot gases, smoke and debris rise in a mushroom cloud.

1 of 4

What kind of damage can it cause?

Designed to explode a few feet above the ground, the MOAB sends out lethal waves of fire when it detonates, blasting away buildings, cave openings and other hard-surface structures.

“Its purpose is to generate an exceptionally powerful blast across a surface area,” Magnier said.

Military expert Colonel Nidal Abu Zeid told Al Jazeera the bomb does not require impact in order to detonate and that its massive blast will destroy everything above ground within a 1km (0.6-mile) radius.

It is likely that the US would aim to use the high-explosive MOAB to completely destroy Iran’s ground-force positions above ground, and to reach its underground facilities, including Pickaxe Mountain, which Trump has previously threatened to attack, Abu Zeid said.

However, Magnier said the bomb’s radius and level of destruction would depend greatly on the terrain it is used within and how populated the area is. He added that it may not be particularly effective against targets buried deep underground.

Some of Iran’s nuclear sites which the US may wish to target, such as the Fordow complex and an under-construction site at the Pickaxe Mountain, are heavily fortified and deeply buried.

“Its large explosive charge can produce devastating blast effects against exposed personnel, equipment and vulnerable structures,” Magnier said. “The Afghanistan operation demonstrates its intended application against a cave-and-tunnel position; it does not demonstrate an ability to destroy every kind of underground installation.”

While its blast can reach underground, the MOAB is not especially designed to punch through deep concrete or mountain rock in the way that a “bunker buster” bomb is. The US military’s most powerful bunker buster is the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator. Weighing about 30,000 pounds (13,600kg), including a 2,700kg (6,000 pound) warhead, this precision-guided bomb is made of high-strength steel and built to penetrate up to 200 feet (61 metres) underground before exploding.

Would the US really use an MOAB?

It already has done – in Afghanistan in 2017.

However, besides not being guaranteed to hit underground targets effectively, Magnier told Al Jazeera it could be difficult to deploy the necessary aircraft in the regions of Iran where nuclear sites are located. Stealth bombers which are better suited to this terrain are not able to carry this size of bomb.

Using the bomb could also destroy infrastructure without inducing Iran to make any concessions, he added, noting that its deployment would risk turning “a spectacular event” into one that ultimately delivers few political results for Washington.

“The question I would put to any commander advocating its use is straightforward: What will this weapon accomplish that another available weapon cannot, and how will that result advance an achievable political settlement?,” Magnier said.

“If the answer centres on the spectacle of the explosion, the proposal is stronger as political theatre than as military strategy,” he added.

CNN reported that Trump, in private discussions, has been seeking a “definitive” end to the war that will prove Washington has been undefeated.

How might Iran respond?

A MOAB strike would likely prompt a major reaction from Iran, experts say, warning that Tehran could even invade its neighbours who host US military assets in response.

Iranian security officials have for months made comments regarding a possible invasion of countries like Kuwait to capture US troops and force Washington to surrender.

In May, during a pause in hostilities, Kuwait alleged that sailors from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) infiltrated its Bubiyan Island, leading to an exchange of fire between Iranian and Kuwaiti forces. One Kuwaiti was injured and four Iranian soldiers were captured.

Iran denied that it had invaded the island and said the troops’ navigation system had malfunctioned.

On Tuesday, IRGC security adviser Mohammad Reza Naghdi warned that Iran could capture troops if Washington were to launch ground attacks, although military experts have long dismissed Trump’s earlier threats of an invasion due to Iran’s mountainous terrain.

“If the United States launches a ground attack, so many of its troops will be captured that it will be forced to raise the white flag,” he said.

Experts say Iran has been preparing for another round of war by stockpiling weapons, fortifying key nuclear and defence locations, and rallying its supporters.

In a television broadcast on Sunday, National Security Council chief Mohsen Rezaei threatened that Iran would attack regional digital infrastructure, including communication cables, data centres and artificial intelligence facilities in the United Arab Emirates and others, if American strikes resume.

Forces aligned with Yemen’s government on Thursday said that they had intercepted a drone headed towards Medina in Saudi Arabia, and a missile fired towards Riyadh, amid escalating fighting between them and Yemen’s Houthi group.

Fighting between the Saudi-backed Yemeni government forces and Iran-aligned Houthi rebels has intensified along the country’s western Red Sea coast, along with expanding Houthi attacks on oil facilities and airports in neighbouring Saudi Arabia.

On Wednesday, Yahya Saree, the military spokesman for the Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah or Supporters of God, said the group’s forces had conducted “a high-quality military operation targeting Aramco in Dhahran”, as well as strikes on Riyadh airport and a refinery in the capital.

He added that operations “will continue in the coming days, targeting Saudi enemy airports and oil facilities”.

A Saudi Ministry of Energy official confirmed that a building belonging to Aramco in Dhahran was hit, resulting in a “limited fire” but “no casualties or fatalities”. Dhahran is home to Aramco’s headquarters, a vast complex comprising numerous buildings and residential compounds.

Meanwhile, the Saudi-led coalition launched strikes against the Houthi stronghold in the Yemeni capital, Sanaa, which the armed group seized in 2014 and has held ever since. The coalition fought the Houthis, who also seized large quantities of Yemen’s military assets, until a ceasefire was agreed in 2022. That ceasefire has broken down in recent months.

Reporting from Sanaa, Al Jazeera’s Yousef Mawry said the war has become a tit-for-tat exchange of blows. The Iran-backed group “will continue to launch these air strikes and … its goal is to meet fire with fire – air strike for air strike, capital for capital, airport for airport, and energy facility for energy facility”.

Which sites have the Houthis targeted in Saudi Arabia?

Recent Houthi strikes on Saudi Arabia have mainly targeted key infrastructure on the outskirts of Riyadh, but they appear to be edging closer to the city centre.

Houthi attacks on Riyadh’s King Khalid international airport over the weekend killed 14 people and wounded more than 300 others. Houthi attacks have also been reported on other airports, including Abha international airport in southern Saudi Arabia, where two people were killed, and on Saudi Aramco energy facilities.

Authorities say Riyadh airport will remain shut at least until Saturday as several airlines cancelled flights, emptying the skies over the kingdom’s capital.

Al Jazeera’s Mawry said Saudi Arabia “has much more to lose” from tit-for-tat attacks disrupting air traffic, as Sanaa international airport has been closed for many years due to the damage it has sustained over the years of civil war. There are currently no Yemeni airliners at the airport.

Additionally, by disrupting security, the Houthis are signalling that Saudi Arabia will suffer mounting economic costs for its involvement in Yemen. Earlier this year, the Houthis similarly began launching strikes on Saudi-linked shipping in and around the Bab al-Mandeb strait at the entrance to the Red Sea. Saudi Arabia has increasingly relied on this shipping route for oil exports since Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz in March, under fire from the United States and Israel.

The kingdom is set to host a major investment conference in Riyadh later this month, dubbed “Davos in the desert”, but it is now unclear whether the event will go ahead amid the attacks.

Organisers of the Six Kings Slam tennis tournament, originally slated to begin next week in Riyadh, have announced the event will be pushed to December.

Saudi Arabia is also preparing to host the FIFA World Cup in 2034.

Al Jazeera’s Zein Basravi, reporting from the Qatari capital, Doha, said, “These military hits by the Houthi forces are meant to create a pressure campaign that is also having knock-on economic effects.”

“The Gulf Cooperation Council has become a place where these enormous events have been playing out over the past year, and if they carry on, the international implications for the global economy will continue to be negative,” he added.

What’s the situation on the ground in Yemen?

Yemeni government forces are currently engaged in a major counteroffensive operation, called “Dawn of Yemen“, to retake coastal territory seized in recent weeks by the Houthis near the Bab al-Mandeb strait, a vital maritime trade chokepoint.

The Saudi cabinet pledged in a meeting led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman this week that it “will not allow its security or freedom of navigation in the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandeb strait to be threatened”.

On Wednesday, Yemeni government forces said they had carried out 2,309 “targeting operations” against the Houthis as part of their “Dawn of Yemen” military campaign.

The forces’ spokesperson, Majeed al-Nuzaili, said the operations were conducted using combat aircraft, drones, artillery and rocket launchers, and destroyed 460 Houthi military vehicles.

Government forces say they have retaken areas in Sabr al-Mawadim and al-Sarari in Taiz governorate and have repelled a large Houthi attack west of Taiz city in southwest Yemen, a government-held city that was besieged by Houthi fighters earlier this month. Taiz governorate includes the flat, western coastal region on the Red Sea, which contains the port city of Mocha and the Bab al-Mandeb. Much of the governorate also lies within Yemen’s highlands while its capital, Taiz, is nestled between mountains.

Al Jazeera’s Mawry said fighting has been so intense in the area because of its strategic value. “Whoever controls the altitude and gains control of the mountains controls the landscape. They control the Red Sea coastlines and even the city of Taiz,” he said.

The internationally recognised Yemeni government has been calling for more reinforcements as well as Saudi air attacks on the positions recently taken over by the Houthis, mainly in the district of al-Misrakh, south of Taiz, and the district of at-Turbah, which are the gateways to the city of Taiz.

Mawry reported that while the Saudi-led coalition’s aerial strikes are forcing the Houthis to withdraw and retreat, allowing government forces to advance, they have not been able to gain a full hold over some of those positions.

“It is then followed by another counter-military offensive by the Ansar Allah group to retake the area. And this is sort of the routine that we have been seeing since early September,” he said.

The Houthi siege of Taiz has resulted in civilian casualties and severe shortages of fuel, gas and other supplies. On Wednesday, the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) reported that wheat flour stocks have been nearly exhausted.

The Red Cross said front-line hospitals in areas including Marib, Taiz and Yemen’s Red Sea coast ⁠are registering unprecedented numbers of weapon-wounded patients, with some facilities admitting more than ⁠700 casualties in a single week.

United States federal agents have arrested a Saudi national and charged him with planting a hidden audio recording device in a conference room at the California offices of OpenAI, where he was working as an engineer.

Abdulrahman Alfozan, 35, had been working at the AI company since ⁠July 2025, the US Department of Justice said in a statement on Tuesday.

OpenAI discovered the device plugged into a USB port behind a television in an executive conference room at one of its San Francisco buildings on September 30, according to a criminal complaint filed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Following the discovery, the company placed a camera in the room, which captured Alfozan entering last week and checking behind the television where the listening device had been installed, the FBI alleges.

The case highlights growing security concerns around sensitive AI research as companies and governments compete for the best talent and technology with the potential to alter regional economic and strategic dynamics.

Who is Abdulrahman Alfozan and what is he charged with?

Alfozan has been a legal permanent resident of the US since September 2020.

According to a LinkedIn profile in his name, he studied at ⁠the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the University of California, Berkeley. He previously worked at Meta and Microsoft, it said.

Before he joined OpenAI, he was a venture partner at Raed Ventures, headquartered in Riyadh in Saudi Arabia, which invested “in seed and early-stage startups in Saudi Arabia and MENA”.

Al Jazeera could not independently verify the details mentioned in this LinkedIn profile.

Alfozan made his first court appearance on Tuesday on a charge of “using or endeavouring to use an electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept oral communications”.

It was not immediately clear if he has legal representation. He is expected to return to court on October 19.

If convicted, Alfozan faces up to five years in prison, a $250,000 ⁠fine, and three years of supervised release.

What happened at OpenAI?

The FBI says a thumb-sized device with a microphone, and which ‌could connect to a camera, had been concealed in toilet paper and placed behind a television set in the conference room. It was installed around September 28, the FBI said. Its stored data was encrypted and inaccessible. Investigators later found a similar device in Alfozan’s personal bag.

In a post on X, OpenAI said it had evidence that the employee intended to place other listening devices throughout sensitive areas of its offices to secretly record meetings.

“At this time, we have no indications of this individual inappropriately accessing or exfiltrating model weights, source code, or customer data. The employee was ⁠terminated,” the company said.

The FBI complaint also alleges that Alfozan used an AI productivity tool to make multiple inquiries about the company’s building addresses, meeting rooms, meeting-room capacities and calendars, despite not having the authority to access these spaces or participate in meetings there.

“This alleged attempt by a Saudi national to steal sensitive communications from OpenAI was taken extremely seriously. Theft of intellectual property involving cutting-edge super intelligence technology poses a serious threat to our national security,” Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement on X.

Hasn’t OpenAI been accused of helping to spy on civilians?

In an X post by OpenAI explaining how its own systems were used to trap Alfozan, the company said: “Our security program is designed to protect against a wide range of threat actors, from insider risks to cybercriminals to nation states, and this case is an example of how AI can help address these sophisticated security threats.”

But AI technology is used not only to catch spying, but conversely, to engage in it as well.

In February 2025, an investigation by The Associated Press found that US tech giants had enabled Israel to track and kill people in Gaza and Lebanon through AI and computing services. The AP reported that the Israeli military had bought advanced AI tools from tech companies including OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, through Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform, to assist with surveillance.

OpenAI denies having a relationship with the Israeli military.
But OpenAI also faced criticism when it signed a deal with the US Department of Defense in February this year to supply its technology to the US military for use in classified settings, including intelligence gathering. OpenAI’s competitor, Anthropic, refused to sign the same deal unless the Pentagon barred mass surveillance of Americans.

There have been several incidents in which OpenAI models have gone “rogue” by independently breaking out of a testing environment and then hacking into other organisations and even government sites, leading to calls for stronger regulations against unchecked AI surveillance.

German authorities briefly closed an airport and scrambled fighter jets to escort a passenger plane on Tuesday following an emergency alert indicating a hijacking was taking place on board. However, the alert had been accidentally triggered by a radio “malfunction”.

Corendon Airlines said its Boeing 737-800, which was en route from the Greek holiday island of Corfu to Nuremberg, Germany, sent out an emergency code while it was flying over Croatia “due to a brief malfunction in the radio communication system”.

In a statement, the airline said that “no emergency situation occurred”, and the 178 passengers, flight crew and aircraft had not been in danger at any point. The plane landed safely in Nuremberg.

What happened?

German police said Corendon Airlines flight XR456 “inadvertently” sent out an emergency “squawk” alert with the code 7500 while flying over Croatia on Tuesday.

A squawk is a four-digit code a pilot sends via the jet’s transponder to air traffic control. The code 7500 tells air traffic controllers that a hijacking is in progress.

However, air traffic controllers were unable to make contact with the pilots or crew, causing the alarm to be raised further. It is unclear why this happened.

“The aircraft could no longer be reached by radio to clarify the situation”, prompting warnings to be activated in several European countries, police said.

A Rafale fighter jet was scrambled from Croatia to intercept the Boeing passenger jet, while the German military also dispatched warplanes.

Police cordoned off the Albrecht Dürer airport in Nuremberg as a precaution until they knew the reason the pilot had sent the hijack alert.

Police spokesman Michael Petzold explained that authorities had “received a code directly from the cockpit that suggested a hijacking”.

“Since we were then unable to reach the cockpit, and the tower was also unable to contact the cockpit, we had to assume the worst – that it might indeed be a hijacking,” Petzold said.

The incident disrupted flights, with six flights delayed and two inbound flights diverted to other airports as a precaution, a Nuremberg airport spokesperson said.

Why are aviation authorities so concerned?

The hijack scare has come amid heightened concerns about aviation security after the copilot on board a Flydubai jet bound for Israel from Dubai attacked the captain with an emergency crash axe, forcing the flight to make an emergency landing in Saudi Arabia on September 30.

On Friday, the United Arab Emirates’ prosecutor general said the copilot was on a “suicide” mission to crash the plane at Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv and called the incident a “terrorist attack”.

Also, before the false hijack alert in the early hours of Tuesday, flights had been briefly disrupted at Nuremberg ‌airport after pilots reported suspected drone sightings.

Authorities across Europe have already stepped up surveillance of the skies in recent weeks after a series of mostly mysterious drone incidents and concerns about Russian hybrid warfare.

Western nations, including Germany, have accused Moscow of launching a campaign of sabotage, espionage and disruption to undermine European support for Ukraine and destabilise the continent.

Several German airports have had to suspend operations for brief periods in recent months due to drone activity, with suspicion often falling on Russia.

Last month, the German government blamed Russia for an attempted attack at Leipzig/Halle airport in August using a drone laden with explosives. Berlin closed the Russian consulate among other measures.

Russian President Vladimir Putin dismissed the allegations, saying Berlin “fabricated” the evidence. However, in light of the concerns, NATO’s top general told the Warsaw Security Forum earlier this week that the alliance has a new war plan for countering a Russian attack on its members, embedding lessons learned from the Ukrainian front lines.

How common are radio glitches and false hijack alerts?

Radio glitches are common, but incidents rarely escalate to major security events because pilots use back-up radios to communicate with air traffic controllers when they lose communication signals.

In 2019, a pilot flying an Air Europa jet from Amsterdam to Madrid accidentally transmitted hijack alert 7500. For half an hour, aviation authorities thought the alarm was a genuine emergency and followed safety protocols, which disrupted flights and led to the evacuation of part of Schipol airport in the Netherlands.

In 2011, a flight from Chicago to Germany was diverted to Toronto when a pilot spilled coffee and accidentally set off a hijack alarm. The spill caused distress signals to go out, including the 7500 transponder code.