Global

US Japan Currency Intervention Signals Shift Away From G7 Coordination

Last week’s joint intervention by the United States and Japan to support the Japanese yen has raised fresh questions about the future of international currency coordination, as the operation proceeded without broader participation from other Group of Seven (G7) economies.

Although the intervention temporarily strengthened the yen, analysts argue that the absence of coordinated action from Europe and other major economies reflects a broader decline in multilateral economic cooperation and a growing preference for bilateral deals under the Trump administration.

The intervention was jointly carried out by Washington and Tokyo after the yen weakened to multi decade lows against the U.S. dollar. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Japanese Finance Minister Satsuki Katayama later confirmed the operation and defended its objectives.

The yen has largely maintained its gains since the intervention, although investors remain uncertain whether further support will follow or whether the Bank of Japan will reinforce the move through additional interest rate increases.

Treasury Market Concerns Shaped Washington’s Decision

One key factor behind U.S. involvement appears to have been concerns over the U.S. Treasury market.

Japan remains the largest foreign holder of U.S. government bonds. A large unilateral intervention by Tokyo would likely have required selling significant amounts of U.S. Treasuries to obtain dollars for prolonged currency operations, potentially disrupting already volatile bond markets.

By participating directly, the United States reportedly helped provide dollar liquidity while selling euros rather than dollars, reducing pressure on Treasury markets and limiting broader financial instability.

G7’s Absence Raises Questions

Despite the shared interest among G7 economies in preventing excessive currency volatility, other members of the group did not participate.

Historically, major currency interventions have often involved coordinated action across the G7. Following Japan’s 2011 earthquake and tsunami, G7 nations jointly intervened to weaken an excessively strong yen. Earlier coordinated efforts also included interventions supporting the euro in 2000 and global liquidity operations after the September 11 attacks.

In contrast, the latest operation remained strictly bilateral, even though the United States reportedly sold euros during the intervention without direct European participation.

The European Central Bank declined to comment publicly, while the International Monetary Fund has also remained largely silent.

Shift From Multilateralism to Bilateral Deals

The intervention reflects a broader shift in U.S. foreign economic policy under President Donald Trump, whose administration has increasingly favored bilateral negotiations over multilateral coordination.

Rather than pursuing comprehensive international agreements similar to the Plaza Accord or Louvre Accord, Washington has increasingly relied on country specific arrangements.

Japan has also deepened bilateral economic cooperation with the United States, including major investment commitments linked to previous tariff negotiations, reinforcing this new framework.

Regional Currency Pressures

U.S. officials also pointed to wider regional concerns.

Treasury Secretary Bessent argued that continued yen weakness risked placing downward pressure on other Asian currencies, particularly South Korea’s won, as exporters sought to remain competitive with Japanese manufacturers.

China’s yuan remains another major regional factor, although Beijing falls outside the G7 framework. Broader discussions involving China are expected only at future G20 meetings.

Historical Role of the G7

For decades, the G7 served as the primary forum for coordinated responses to major currency instability.

From stabilizing the euro during its early years to responding collectively after major financial crises, coordinated interventions carried significant market credibility because they demonstrated unified political and monetary commitment.

The latest U.S. Japan intervention marks a departure from that tradition, suggesting that future currency management may increasingly rely on bilateral arrangements rather than collective action.

Analysis

The U.S. Japan intervention highlights more than an attempt to stabilize the yen. It reflects a structural shift in global economic governance. The declining role of coordinated G7 action suggests that multilateral mechanisms are gradually giving way to transactional bilateral partnerships, particularly under the Trump administration.

While bilateral interventions may offer quicker and more flexible responses, they lack the collective market impact that historically made G7 operations highly effective. The absence of Europe and other major economies also raises questions about the future cohesion of the G7 as a forum for managing global financial stability.

For investors, this evolving landscape increases uncertainty. Without unified international coordination, currency markets may become more volatile as governments pursue national interests independently rather than through collective action. Whether future administrations restore broader multilateral cooperation or continue this bilateral approach will shape the next phase of global foreign exchange policy.

With information from Reuters.

After just six days in theaters, Sony Pictures’ “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” has now raked in more than $1 billion in global box office revenue.

The movie is the second-fastest film ever to reach the 10-figure milestone, bested only by Walt Disney Co. and Marvel Studios’ 2019 hit “Avengers: Endgame.”

“Brand New Day” has now earned $407 million in the U.S. and Canada, with an additional $645.8 million in international box office receipts for a global total of $1.05 billion, according to studio estimates. Its $360 million domestic opening last weekend now ranks as the highest ever.

The movie was produced by Sony-owned Columbia Pictures, as well as Marvel Studios and Pascal Pictures. The film’s production budget was about $225 million.

The filmmakers, as well as box office analysts, have credited the movie’s emotional storyline and focus on the web slinger’s internal conflict for connecting with audiences and giving a fresh take on a familiar franchise and genre. It also doesn’t hurt that its stars, Tom Holland and Zendaya, are two of the most popular actors in the business, both of whom are also fresh off appearances in Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey.”

Together, “Brand New Day” and Universal Pictures’ “The Odyssey” powered last weekend’s three-day domestic box office total to a new best with $436.5 million, according to data from Rentrak. The summer so far stands at $3.6 billion, up 16.7% compared to last year’s middling season and running just 0.7% behind the pre-pandemic summer of 2019, according to Rentrak.

The so far has given analysts hope that the domestic box office could finally reach $10 billion by the end of the year for the first time since the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Spider-Man: Brand New Day” swung into the top spot at the box office and scored one of the highest-grossing opening weekends with an estimated haul of $355 million in the U.S. and Canada, far surpassing studio and analyst expectations.

The Sony Pictures film also brought in $572 million internationally for a worldwide total of $927 million, according to studio estimates.

The movie’s haul now ranks as the second-biggest domestic and global opening ever, surpassed only by Walt Disney Co. and Marvel Studios’ “Avengers: Endgame” in 2019.

The film, which stars Tom Holland and Zendaya, is produced by Sony-owned Columbia Pictures, Marvel Studios and Pascal Pictures. Its production budget was about $225 million.

Marvel Studios President and “Spider-Man” producer Kevin Feige called the debut “truly phenomenal.”

“We are grateful to audiences everywhere for coming out and experiencing our film the way it was meant to be seen,” he said in a statement Sunday. “This debut reflects the enduring power of Marvel’s characters, and the connection they continue to have with fans around the world — and, as audiences saw, it sets up exciting things to come.”

Anticipation for the movie was building for months, as robust pre-sales indicated high interest in Spidey’s return to the big screen.

The previous film in the franchise, 2021’s “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” had one of the biggest domestic debuts on record with $260 million.

But it came during the depths of a COVID-19 surge and against very little competition at the box office. That film also reunited all three Spider-Men — Holland, Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield — in one time-bending, multiverse storyline, a move “Spider-Man” producer Amy Pascal described as 20 years in the making.

This time around, “Spider-Man” was up against the juggernaut holdover Universal Pictures’ Christopher Nolan film, “The Odyssey,” which came in second at the domestic box office with $51 million on its way to a global total of $911.4 million.

The strong performance of “The Odyssey,” as well as the billion-dollar-grossing “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” and “Michael” earlier this year, helped push Universal over the $4-billion global box office mark this weekend, the first studio to do so this year.

Walt Disney Co. and Pixar’s “Toy Story 5” came in third with $6.3 million to add to its worldwide total of more than $1.06 billion. Universal and Illumination’s “Minions & Monsters” ($5.8 million) and Disney’s live-action “Moana” ($5.3 million) rounded out the top five this weekend, according to data from Rentrak.

“‘Spider-Man: Brand New Day’ is fundamentally a movie about friendship, about the balm of connection in all our lives,” Sony Pictures Motion Picture Group Chairman Tom Rothman said in a statement Sunday. He added that this theme resonates with “audiences of all ages and all around the world.”

Saltburn’s amateur cricketer at centre of cheating allegations that grabbed global headlines is suspended by club.

An English ‌amateur cricketer at the centre of allegations ⁠of finger-clicking ⁠trickery has been suspended and will not play “for the foreseeable future”, his club has said.

The fielder, dubbed “Clicky Ponting” on social media in a punning nod to former Australia captain ⁠Ricky Ponting, allegedly tricked umpires by clicking his fingers to make the sound of a ball nicking the bat as deliveries were missed and caught by ‌the wicketkeeper.

The video footage went viral on social media and made international headlines.

Saltburn Cricket Club, run by volunteers, said on Wednesday in a statement it was treating the allegations “with the utmost seriousness”.

“The player at the centre of the complaint has been suspended ⁠and will not play again ⁠for the club this season or in the foreseeable future, pending the outcome of this investigation.”

It said initial discussions between club ⁠officials and the North Yorkshire and South Durham league had already taken ⁠place.

The league said on Tuesday ⁠it had received a formal complaint “regarding alleged incidents in a Division Two game on Saturday 25th July 2026”.

Saltburn said it had ‌been a distressing and stressful experience for all concerned and asked for “personal boundaries” to be respected.

The club ‌are ‌top of the Division Two table with 10 wins from 15 matches.

Historically, cricketers – even at the highest level of the game – have been accused of trying to trick umpires with noises, including chomping on a biscuit, to fool umpires into believing the ball hit the bat.

Cricket cheating allegations have even extended to dirt being applied to the ball, for which former England captain Michael Atherton was once fined, and the use of bottle tops to scuff the ball.

Both were attempts to create extra swing for the quick bowlers.

July 28 (Asia Today) — China’s successful stock market debut of its largest DRAM manufacturer has fueled expectations that the company could challenge the three global leaders in memory chips, though Chinese media acknowledged that a significant technological gap remains.

ChangXin Memory Technologies, commonly known as CXMT, became the most valuable company in China’s domestic A-share market after its shares surged 465.82% during their first day of trading on Shanghai’s technology-focused STAR Market on Monday.

The shares closed at 49 yuan ($7.24), compared with an initial public offering price of 8.66 yuan ($1.28).

The closing price gave CXMT a market capitalization of about 3.28 trillion yuan ($484.5 billion), surpassing the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, previously the country’s most valuable domestically listed company.

The shares lost some momentum Tuesday, closing at 47 yuan ($6.94). CXMT’s market value declined to about 3.14 trillion yuan ($463.8 billion), but it remained the largest company in the A-share market.

The listing followed Asia’s largest initial public offering of 2026. CXMT raised about $8.6 billion, nearly twice the amount initially sought, reflecting strong investor demand for Chinese semiconductor companies.

State media celebrates semiconductor advance

Chinese state-affiliated media described the listing as a milestone in Beijing’s drive for technological self-sufficiency.

The Global Times said the market response demonstrated growing investor confidence in China’s semiconductor industry as the country accelerates efforts to reduce its dependence on foreign technology.

The Chinese-language Global Times described memory chips as the “rice of the digital age” and said CXMT had broken the longstanding foreign dominance of large-scale DRAM production.

It said the company had built its design and manufacturing capabilities from virtually nothing over approximately a decade.

CXMT was founded in 2016 and produces DRAM chips used in smartphones, personal computers, tablets and servers. It is widely regarded as the world’s fourth-largest DRAM manufacturer after Samsung Electronics, SK hynix and Micron Technology.

China’s state media said the funds raised through the listing would be used to upgrade memory wafer production lines, expand DRAM research and development and pursue next-generation memory technologies.

Chinese analysts expressed hope that the investment could eventually weaken the dominance of Samsung Electronics, SK hynix and Micron in the global DRAM market.

CXMT’s progress has already heightened investor concern over increasing Chinese competition. Its market debut contributed to declines in several global semiconductor stocks, including shares of South Korean memory manufacturers.

Technology gap remains

Despite the celebratory tone, Chinese media cautioned that CXMT continues to trail South Korean and U.S. memory manufacturers in advanced production processes.

The company is estimated to remain two to three years behind leading foreign manufacturers in some advanced technologies and faces restrictions on access to sophisticated overseas chipmaking equipment.

CXMT’s roughly 8% share of the global DRAM market also remains well below the combined position of Samsung Electronics, SK hynix and Micron.

The memory chip industry is highly cyclical, meaning the current surge in prices and demand associated with artificial intelligence may not continue indefinitely.

Rapid capacity expansion by CXMT and other manufacturers could also increase supplies and place downward pressure on global memory prices.

Chinese state media urged investors and the semiconductor industry not to allow the listing’s success to create excessive confidence.

The debut nevertheless represents a major symbolic and financial achievement for Beijing’s semiconductor strategy. CXMT now has access to substantial capital that could accelerate research, manufacturing expansion and efforts to compete in higher-end memory products.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260728010010446

Major central banks are confronting an increasingly difficult inflation landscape as multiple price pressures converge, raising questions over whether policymakers can continue treating inflation shocks as temporary.

The U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bank of Japan and the Bank of England all meet this week against a backdrop of elevated inflation driven by rising energy costs, geopolitical tensions, supply chain disruptions, fiscal stimulus, labor market tightness and climate related risks.

While central banks have traditionally argued that isolated price shocks eventually fade without requiring aggressive monetary tightening, economists warn that today’s inflation environment is no longer defined by a single disruption but by several overlapping forces reinforcing one another.

Inflation remains well above target

The Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation measure, the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Price Index, is expected to remain significantly above the central bank’s 2 percent target.

Economists expect headline PCE inflation to stand at 3.7 percent and core inflation, which excludes food and energy, at 3.3 percent.

Inflation has remained above the Fed’s target for more than five consecutive years, complicating expectations that price growth will naturally return to normal levels.

Energy prices return as a major concern

Renewed military tensions in the Middle East have pushed crude oil prices sharply higher, adding fresh uncertainty to the global inflation outlook.

Brent crude briefly climbed above $100 per barrel before easing, while volatility in oil markets has increased as conflict around the Gulf and Red Sea threatens global energy supplies.

Higher crude prices have translated into rising fuel costs, with average U.S. gasoline prices now more than 30 percent above levels recorded a year earlier.

For central banks, energy inflation remains particularly difficult because monetary policy cannot directly resolve geopolitical conflicts or supply disruptions.

Food inflation adds further pressure

Food prices are emerging as another source of concern.

Annual U.S. food inflation already stands near 3 percent, while forecasts suggest stronger El Niño weather conditions could reduce agricultural production and lift global food prices over the coming months.

Some projections indicate food inflation could approach 5 percent next year, adding further upward pressure to overall consumer prices worldwide.

Unlike financial market volatility, rising food and fuel costs directly affect households and often shape public perceptions of inflation more than broader economic indicators.

Core inflation refuses to ease

Although policymakers often focus on core inflation because it removes volatile food and energy prices, underlying price pressures remain stubbornly elevated.

Persistent wage growth, continued strength in consumer spending and resilient labor markets have prevented meaningful progress toward the Fed’s inflation target.

Economists also warn that prolonged increases in food and energy prices eventually feed into broader consumer prices, making it increasingly difficult to separate temporary inflation from structural trends.

Tariffs and artificial intelligence create new price risks

Additional inflationary risks are emerging from trade policy and technological investment.

President Donald Trump’s renewed tariffs on imported goods could increase costs across multiple industries, while continued demand for artificial intelligence infrastructure has intensified shortages in advanced semiconductor markets.

Higher chip prices are expected to affect consumer electronics and industrial production, creating another potential source of inflation in manufactured goods.

Meanwhile, expansionary fiscal policies and strong financial conditions continue to support consumer demand, limiting the slowdown in prices that central banks have been seeking.

Strong labor markets complicate policy

Employment conditions remain exceptionally resilient across advanced economies.

In the United States, unemployment has remained near historically low levels, while wage growth above 3 percent continues to support household spending.

Although robust labor markets are generally viewed as positive for economic growth, they also contribute to persistent service sector inflation by increasing business labor costs.

This has made it harder for central banks to achieve price stability without risking slower economic growth.

Analysis: Inflation risks are becoming structural

The challenge facing central banks is no longer whether one inflation shock will fade but whether multiple overlapping shocks are creating a new inflation environment.

Energy markets remain vulnerable to geopolitical conflict. Climate related disruptions continue to threaten food production. Trade barriers are increasing production costs, while the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence is reshaping industrial demand and supply chains. At the same time, strong labor markets and expansionary fiscal policies continue to support consumer spending.

Individually, policymakers can argue that each of these factors is temporary or outside the influence of interest rates. Collectively, however, they reinforce one another and increase the likelihood that inflation remains above target for longer than anticipated.

For the Federal Reserve and other major central banks, the risk is no longer simply misjudging one temporary shock. The greater challenge is determining whether today’s inflation reflects a lasting structural shift in the global economy. If these pressures persist simultaneously, policymakers may be forced to maintain higher interest rates for longer, even at the cost of slower growth, making the path back to price stability significantly more difficult than markets currently expect.

With information from Reuters.

The world claims to regard education as a universal right. Its financial system tells a different story.

⁠New figures released by UNESCO show that 113 countries with a total population of 6.1 billion now spend more on servicing debt than educating their people. In low-income countries, debt payments are nearly four times education expenditure. In 18 of the most heavily indebted countries, governments spend at least five times more on debt than on education.

These are not merely signs of strained public finances. They reveal a stark political hierarchy.

Creditors possess enforceable claims on government revenues. Children possess declarations, development goals and promises. When the two collide, creditors are paid first.

The consequences are visible in overcrowded classrooms, deteriorating school buildings, teacher shortages, unaffordable school fees and children leaving education prematurely. Yet these outcomes are generally described as funding gaps or failures of domestic governance, as though governments had freely decided to neglect their schools.

In reality, many governments are operating inside an international financial order that sharply restricts what they can choose.

The ⁠World Bank reports that developing countries transferred $741bn more to external creditors in principal and interest between 2022 and 2024 than they received in new financing. This was the largest net debt outflow in at least 50 years. In 2024 alone, low and middle-income countries paid a record $415bn in interest.

In other words, the financial flows are frequently moving in the opposite direction from the one suggested by the language of development assistance.

Poorer countries are commonly portrayed as beneficiaries of Western generosity. But vast amounts of public wealth are travelling from debtor countries to bondholders, commercial banks, multilateral institutions and wealthier creditor governments.

Money that could hire teachers, provide school meals or build classrooms is instead leaving the country.

This is particularly perverse because education is not simply another item of government consumption. It is an investment in a society’s future capacities. Cutting it may make debt payments easier today, but it will weaken productivity, public revenues and social resilience tomorrow.

Debt contracts are treated as binding obligations whose breach can trigger credit downgrades, capital flight, lawsuits and exclusion from financial markets. The right to education, by contrast, carries no comparable machinery of enforcement.

No ratings agency downgrades creditors when a country cannot afford enough teachers. No financial penalty is imposed on bondholders when debt service forces children out of school. Markets do not panic when classrooms collapse.

The system disciplines governments for failing creditors, not for failing children.

UNESCO has proposed expanding debt-for-education swaps. Under these arrangements, a creditor cancels or restructures part of a country’s debt in exchange for government investment in agreed educational programmes.

Such initiatives can produce tangible gains. A 2023 agreement with France helped Ivory Coast finance more than 30 schools in underserved areas. A German agreement with Egypt supported school feeding and basic services, while an earlier Spain-Peru programme funded education projects across vulnerable regions.

These programmes are worthwhile. But they are not a solution to the larger debt crisis.

Debt swaps typically cover only a small fraction of what countries owe. They are negotiated selectively, depend on creditor consent and may add new layers of external monitoring to domestic spending. Most importantly, they leave untouched the principle that creditors are entitled to repayment unless they voluntarily concede otherwise.

The question becomes how to persuade creditors to permit a little more education, rather than why the claims of creditors should take priority in the first place.

That question is especially urgent because education aid is also falling. UNESCO projects that international assistance for education could decline by as much as 30 percent between 2023 and 2027.

Debtor countries are therefore being squeezed from both sides: aid is retreating while debt payments continue.

The familiar recommendation that developing countries should mobilise more domestic resources is inadequate. Progressive taxation and reduced corruption matter. But additional revenues will not transform education systems if they are immediately diverted towards debts contracted at high interest rates, or made more expensive by currency depreciation.

Nor can the problem be solved by demanding ever more austerity. Education budgets consist largely of recurring expenditure, especially teachers’ salaries. When governments are instructed to freeze public-sector wage bills, they cannot solve teacher shortages or expand access, however often international institutions proclaim education a priority.

A more serious response would begin with large-scale debt cancellation for countries in distress, automatic suspension of payments during economic and climate emergencies, far cheaper concessional financing and a fair multilateral mechanism for restructuring sovereign debt.

At present, debt negotiations are fragmented among private creditors, bilateral lenders and international institutions. Debtor governments must bargain with powerful financial actors while trying to avoid being punished for seeking relief.

A binding United Nations framework for sovereign debt could establish shared rules, require both borrowers and lenders to act responsibly and prevent holdout creditors from obstructing restructuring. It could also make social rights central to assessments of what a country can genuinely afford to repay.

The world needs to move towards the idea that debt repayment cannot come at any human cost. A debt is not sustainable when paying it requires dismantling the institutions on which a society’s future depends.

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

Global hunger declined for the third consecutive year in 2025, offering a rare piece of positive news for food security after years of setbacks caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, conflict and economic instability. Yet the United Nations warns that the gains remain fragile, with climate change, geopolitical tensions and disruptions to global trade threatening to reverse recent progress.

According to the latest State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report, jointly produced by five U.N. agencies, approximately 645 million people or 7.8% of the global population experienced hunger last year. That marks an improvement from 8.1% in 2024 and 8.6% in 2022, continuing a gradual downward trend.

While the figures suggest the world is moving in the right direction, U.N. experts caution that achieving the goal of ending hunger by 2030 remains far from guaranteed.

Hunger Declines Across Every Continent

For the first time in several years, every continent recorded improvements in hunger levels, including Africa, where progress has historically been the slowest.

Asia accounted for much of the global improvement, led by significant gains in India, while Latin America and the Caribbean continued building on earlier successes. Several African nations—including Ethiopia, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Senegal—also reported improvements after years of deteriorating food security.

Despite these advances, Africa remains the world’s most food-insecure region. Around 309 million people, or roughly one in every five Africans, continue to suffer from chronic undernourishment.

U.N. officials described the continent’s improvement as encouraging but modest, emphasizing that much more investment will be needed to sustain progress.

India Emerges as a Key Driver

India played a central role in reducing global hunger statistics.

Home to nearly one-fifth of the world’s population, the country has lowered hunger levels to below 10%, driven by expanded welfare programs, increased agricultural productivity and improvements in food distribution.

The country’s progress demonstrates how targeted government policies combined with economic growth can substantially improve food security even in densely populated developing economies.

Elsewhere, the Dominican Republic also achieved sufficient progress to be removed from the global hunger map.

Climate and Geopolitical Risks Persist

Despite encouraging trends, the U.N. warns that several emerging risks could quickly undermine global food security.

One of the most immediate concerns is the disruption to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, where escalating tensions in the Middle East have increased transportation costs and driven up prices for fuel and fertilizers—critical inputs for agricultural production worldwide.

Higher energy costs inevitably translate into more expensive food production and distribution, placing additional pressure on consumers already facing elevated food prices.

Meanwhile, forecasters are monitoring the possible emergence of a strong El Niño weather pattern, which could reduce crop yields across many vulnerable regions through droughts, floods and extreme temperatures.

Together, geopolitical instability and climate shocks threaten both food availability and affordability.

Hunger Is Falling, But Healthy Diets Remain Unaffordable

The report also highlights an important distinction between reducing hunger and improving nutrition.

Although fewer people are experiencing chronic hunger, 2.69 billion people still cannot afford a healthy diet.

The U.N. estimates that a nutritious daily diet costs an average of $4.28 per person when adjusted for purchasing power—well beyond the reach of many households in low-income countries.

The affordability gap is especially severe in Africa, where 66.1% of the population cannot afford healthy food, more than double the levels recorded across much of Asia and Latin America.

Poor transport infrastructure, inadequate cold-storage facilities and fragmented regional trade continue to make nutritious foods such as fruits, vegetables, dairy and meat significantly more expensive across the continent.

Nutrition Challenges Extend Beyond Hunger

The report also warns that improving calorie intake alone is not enough.

Child malnutrition remains widespread in many developing countries, while anemia among women continues to worsen. At the same time, adult obesity is increasing globally, illustrating the growing “double burden” of malnutrition in which undernutrition and unhealthy diets coexist.

This reflects broader structural problems within global food systems, where inexpensive calories are often more accessible than balanced nutrition.

What’s Next?

U.N. experts remain cautiously optimistic that global hunger can continue declining through 2030, provided governments maintain investments in agriculture, strengthen international trade and improve resilience against climate shocks.

However, the outlook depends heavily on geopolitical stability. Continued conflict in the Middle East, disruptions to major shipping routes, worsening climate events or prolonged trade barriers could rapidly increase food prices and slow or reverse recent gains.

Analysis: Progress Is Real, But Food Security Remains Fragile

The latest U.N. report demonstrates that coordinated public policies, agricultural investment and social protection programs can reduce hunger on a global scale. India’s progress, alongside improvements across Latin America and parts of Africa, shows that meaningful change is possible even amid economic uncertainty.

Yet the report also highlights a growing challenge: food security is increasingly shaped by forces beyond agriculture itself. Climate change, global shipping disruptions, energy prices and geopolitical conflicts now influence what people eat as much as farming does. While hunger is declining, access to affordable, nutritious food remains out of reach for billions. Sustaining progress will therefore require not only producing more food, but building more resilient supply chains, improving regional trade and adapting agricultural systems to an increasingly volatile global environment.

With information from Reuters.

South Korea’s proposed cooperation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is aimed at enhancing their own respective contributions to global peace and stability, Seoul’s foreign ministry said Tuesday, in its first response to recent concerns by Russia over what it described as growing military cooperation between Seoul and NATO.

“Cooperation between South Korea and NATO is aimed at strengthening each side’s capabilities across various sectors, including defense industry, new technologies and cybersecurity, so as to reinforce each side’s role and contribution to international peace and stability,” the ministry told Yonhap News Agency in a written statement.

“In addition, our government continues to hold necessary communication with the Russian side to stably manage South Korea-Russia relations and protect our people and companies,” it added.

Russia’s foreign ministry has expressed displeasure over Seoul’s deepening military cooperation with NATO, according to Russia’s Tass news agency.

“The Russian side expressed serious concern over Seoul’s growing drift toward NATO, as demonstrated, among other things, by the Republic of Korea’s practical steps to deepen military and military-technical cooperation with NATO, the consequences of which pose a threat to Russia’s security,” the ministry said in a statement Thursday.

Moscow further argued that Seoul’s growing cooperation with NATO made it a “de facto participant in NATO’s qualitative and quantitative rearmament process, as the alliance has openly declared its preparations for war with Russia.”

The Russian statement came after South Korean President Lee Jae Myung attended the NATO summit in Ankara earlier this month as one of the alliance’s four Asia-Pacific partners, marking his first appearance at NATO’s annual top-level gathering.

At a NATO summit defense industry forum, Lee proposed elevating South Korea-NATO defense cooperation to a “Korea-NATO Defense Industry Partnership 2.0″ to expand cooperation beyond weapons system transactions to joint research, production and operation in the defense sector.

“Our government is pushing for cooperation with various countries and international organizations, including NATO, under its principle of pursuing practical diplomacy centered on national interests,” the foreign ministry said.

Still, it added, “The country will continue to closely work with the international community while closely monitoring the related developments, as the prolonged Russia-Ukraine war and the military cooperation between North Korea and Russia are issues that have a negative effect on international peace and security on the Korean Peninsula and the region.”

Pyongyang and Moscow have repeatedly and publicly reaffirmed their commitment to strengthening their bilateral cooperation since signing a comprehensive strategic partnership treaty two years ago.

North Korea has also sent around 15,000 combat troops and conventional weapons to Russia to support Moscow’s war against Ukraine, Seoul’s spy agency has said.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

KISUMU, Kenya — As U.S. antiabortion groups’ campaign to restrict abortion access at home and abroad has gained strength since President Trump returned to office, his administration is delivering new global momentum to the movement by exporting its view of “family values” to nations overseas.

At the annual March for Life demonstration in January in Washington, Vice President JD Vance announced sweeping new restrictions on U.S. funding for nongovernmental organizations, foreign governments and U.N. agencies that promote access to abortion, gender-affirming care and diversity initiatives overseas. “We’re going to start blocking every international NGO that performs or promotes abortion abroad from receiving a dollar of U.S. money,” he told the crowd.

That effort has been particularly active in Africa, where doctors and advocates now describe an environment of rising harassment, arbitrary detentions and deadly backstreet abortions, with often deadly results for women across the continent.

The expanded restrictions build on the antiabortion advocacy work carried out by conservative U.S. nonprofits abroad — especially in Africa, where healthcare is highly dependent on foreign aid. The region has the world’s highest estimated proportion of unsafe abortions and highest maternal mortality rates — including the highest number of maternal deaths per 100,000 abortions.

The new rules represent a radical expansion of earlier U.S. policy that cut assistance to overseas groups providing abortion-related services. Experts say at least $30 billion in U.S. aid could be affected, reshaping health policies worldwide.

“We’re seeing opportunity here to have a consistently pro-life ethic,” Nicole Hunt of Colorado-based Focus on the Family, a conservative Christian evangelical group, told the Associated Press. “We’ve been influencing health policies for a long time with our foreign aid. This is just a new direction.”

In the crosshairs is an international convention signed by African countries two decades ago declaring safe abortion a human right. Known as the Maputo Protocol, it obliges signatory nations to legalize abortion in cases of rape, incest, fetal malformation or risk to a woman’s health.

But implementation has been spotty, forcing women to seek illicit procedures. Every year, sub-Saharan Africa records over 6 million unsafe abortions, according to the African Institute for Development Policy.

Emboldened by Trump’s policies, U.S. antiabortion groups now aim to overturn even this limited access to safe abortion.

In Nairobi, Nardos Hagos of the International Planned Parenthood Federation said she is deeply worried for the future.

“We’ve now moved into a new era where we are the ones who are in opposition because the most powerful and influential supporters of reproductive health — the U.S. and a lot of Europe — are now more aligned with anti-rights groups,” she said.

“We’re gonna see more women dying from unsafe abortions.”

Africa is the focus

It’s difficult to track the full scope of the funding U.S. antiabortion charitable groups send to Africa.

Publicly available information from nonprofit tax filings of 17 such groups show money sent to Africa jumped 50% between 2019 and 2022, to over $16 million, according to an analysis by the Institute for Journalism and Social Change, a research group.

And the funding kept growing: The organizations spent almost $9.4 million in Africa during 2023 and 2024, previously unreported data analyzed by the institute show.

That’s “just the tip of the iceberg,” said the institute’s Claire Provost.

“What we’re seeing here is just a fraction of what the real investment on the continent is,” Provost said, noting that unlike other tax-exempt charitable organizations, U.S.-based churches and some religious groups are not required to complete annual financial disclosures detailing revenue, contributions and expenses.

It’s not possible to see “even limited information” about how much money the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, among others, funnel to Africa, she said.

Widely known as the Mormon church, the Salt Lake City-based church is ”increasingly active on the continent, including opposing sexual and reproductive rights issues,” Provost said. With over 1 million followers in Africa, it has held “Strengthening Families” conferences across Africa over the last eight years.

Sean E.R. Donnelly, the church’s communications manager for Africa, said in an AP interview that about a quarter of the $1.5 billion the church spent overseas last year was in Africa, for development projects “with the goal of helping people, especially families,” including in healthcare, education and emergency relief.

Asked about women’s reproductive rights and abortion, he said the church was “not really active” in those areas, but noted the issues may be discussed by its African partners during church-sponsored conferences.

“We have the deputy prime minister, we have the ministries of gender, we have all the ministers who are relevant to family, and we’re helping them … as they craft policy and strategy to make sure that we protect the family,” Donnelly said of the conferences.

Asked about the church’s position on abortion, he sent a statement outlining that it generally opposes elective abortion in most cases but allows exceptions for rape, incest or danger to a woman’s health in counseling its members. He said via email that the church conducts no activities related to abortion and reproductive rights.

Last year’s church-sponsored conference took place in Sierra Leone at a time when the country was close to decriminalizing abortion. But pressure from local religious lobbies stalled the process, local rights groups said.

Activists and rights groups have raised the alarm over the influence of local religious groups, whose strategies mirror those of some conservative U.S. Christian groups. In response to AP’s questions about the conference and any pressures around abortion and other reproductive rights issues, Donnelly said, “This is not how the church operates in Africa or globally.”

He also referred AP to the church’s Caring Report, which outlines its humanitarian work globally and does not mention the conference.

It’s tricky to determine how the U.S. money is spent once it reaches Africa because of loose requirements on disclosing financial data in African countries.

Focus on the Family spent $370,000 in Africa between 2019 and 2023, according to the Institute for Journalism and Social Change, which says that probably does not fully capture the scope of the group’s influence or work. Focus on the Family’s Hunt said its mission is “to change hearts and minds on abortion” globally, but she declined to provide details of activities in Africa.

Harassment of reproductive rights groups

Hannah Ruguru vowed to help women get abortions safely after losing her sister to a backstreet procedure. But her work at a reproductive health clinic in Kisumu in rural western Kenya has proved increasingly hazardous.

She’s been screamed at by protesters and encountered so much abuse on Facebook that she deleted her account, she said.

“Sometimes you can get scared,” Ruguru said. But “at the end of the day, I’m helping women.”

Marie Stopes International, which runs the clinic where Ruguru works, said in a 2024 report that staff in several African countries described online and legal attacks from U.S.-based groups and U.S.-funded local organizations. In Congo, it said, health workers have been detained for days for providing legally permissible services before being released without charge.

“The extent of the opposition has made abortion providers fearful of coming into work,” the report said.

In Ethiopia, the group said, the head of the local office of U.S.-based Family Watch International has “targeted and trolled members of our senior leadership team on social media,” and released YouTube videos promoting antiabortion misinformation.

In Kenya, the names and addresses of staff at reproductive rights organizations have been published online, accusing them of murder.

The owner of a private abortion clinic in Nairobi said staff members have been harassed by police and detained. Officials demand bribes, threatening charges if they don’t pay up, the owner said, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of repercussions.

Musoba Kitui, regional director of Ipas Africa Alliance, which promotes reproductive rights and access to safe abortion care, said the changes in U.S. foreign aid policy combined with “this advancing American interest in ideology in Africa is really concerning.”

“We think the consequences are going to be dire,” Kitui said, especially for women and marginalized communities such as LGBTQ+ people.

‘It’s a culture war’

Last year, antiabortion Christian groups from the U.S., Europe and Africa and high-ranking Kenyan officials gathered in Nairobi for a conference on “Promoting and Protecting Family Values in Challenging Times.” Poland-based antiabortion group Ordo Iuris handed out a guide in four languages, including Swahili, with tips on lobbying international organizations, including the United Nations, European Union and African Union.

Travis Weber, vice president of the Family Research Council, a Washington-based evangelical group active in antiabortion advocacy, said he traveled to Nairobi to “defend the family as God designed it.”

Charles Kanjama, vice chairman of African Christian Professionals Forum, the conference organizer, said that, previously, international aid often supported reproductive rights — but times have changed.

“We are hoping that … we can start attracting money from people who think like us,” said Kanjama, among Africa’s most prominent antiabortion figures. “It’s a culture war, really.”

Indeed, the antiabortion agenda is gaining momentum. In June, representatives of 20 African countries finalized a draft charter at a conference in Ghana that calls for rejecting sexual and reproductive health rights. It will be voted on by the African Union next year. Family Watch International’s co-founder, Sharon Slater, was among those fundraising for the charter’s passage at the European Parliament in Brussels this year.

Legal gray area

In Kenya, one of Africa’s richest countries, seven women die every day on average from complications of unsafe abortions, according to the African Population and Health Research Center.

The 2010 Kenyan Constitution permits abortion when a woman’s health or life is threatened. Subsequent court decisions have also allowed abortions in cases of rape, incest or serious threat to a woman’s mental health.

But there’s a major legal gray area. Kenya’s penal code, which dates to the colonial era, continues to criminalize abortion providers and women seeking the procedure, who can face up to 14 years in prison.

Most public hospitals don’t perform abortions, leaving women the option of pricey private clinic procedures or risky illicit methods, healthcare officials said.

In May, an appeals court in Kenya overturned a ruling that affirmed access to abortion as a fundamental right — a case led by Kanjama, who said the decision “restored constitutional balance.”

The Kenyan Health Ministry, Justice Ministry and the government spokesperson’s office did not reply to repeated AP requests for comment, including detailed questions sent via email.

The U.S. State Department, in response to an AP request for comment on the Trump administration’s new rules governing American aid overseas, said: “The American people expect their tax dollars to support programs that save lives … and reflect American values, not fund abortion-related activities, left-wing social agendas, or wasteful overseas bureaucracies.”

“U.S. assistance continues to support a wide range of maternal and child health services as part of the America First Global Health Strategy,” it said in a statement.

The toll of unsafe abortions

In Kenya, doctors are obligated to treat women suffering from post-abortion complications, often from underground procedures, including bleeding, infections and the loss of their wombs — and it’s those cases that often end up in public hospitals.

“By the time the women come, we are often dealing with a life-threatening situation,” said Dominic Omollo, the reproductive health coordinator in Bondo, western Kenya.

Even as the stated aim of U.S., international and Africa-based antiabortion groups is to protect life, activists and healthcare providers say that, in reality, the result is more unsafe abortions and more women dying.

In Karabok, a village in rural Kenya, two trees were planted at the site where Mary Olouch is buried, just feet from where the 25-year-old bled to death after an illicit abortion.

“She did not open up to anyone,” said Loice Ochieng, a community health volunteer in charge of family planning in the village.

Olouch already had a young child when she realized she was pregnant. She didn’t tell her husband. When he came home one evening, he found her bleeding and rushed her to the hospital, but it was too late.

Olouch did not qualify for an abortion in a public hospital and couldn’t afford a private clinic on her meager income selling fish. Abortion carries enormous stigma in rural communities, and husbands often don’t allow women to use contraceptives, Ochieng said.

After Olouch’s death, women started to talk more openly about abortion in Karabok, where, for many, even uttering the word had been taboo, Ochieng said.

Now, she said, if women “have a problem, they come to me, they ask. Because they have seen that this thing can cause death.”

Pronczuk and Beaty write for the Associated Press and reported from Kisumu and New York, respectively. AP writers Evelyne Musambi in Nairobi and Caitlin Kelly in Freetown, Sierra Leone, contributed to this report.

It was a very warm homecoming at the box office this weekend for Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey,” as the star-studded epic grossed $124.5 million in the U.S. and Canada, a welcome and massive jolt for theaters after a series of slower weeks.

The Universal Pictures film’s haul outperformed studio expectations of a $117 million domestic opening and set a record for the highest-grossing opening weekend for a live-action or R-rated film so far this year.

“The Odyssey” now ranks as the third-highest domestic debut of 2026, trailing only Disney and Pixar’s “Toy Story 5” ($159.7 million) and Universal, Illumination and Nintendo’s “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” ($131.7 million).

The film, which stars Matt Damon as Odysseus, brought in a total of $264.1 million worldwide, according to studio estimates. That marks the biggest global opening ever for a Nolan film.

“The Odyssey” was produced by Nolan and his wife and producing partner Emma Thomas for their company, Syncopy, and had a production budget of about $200 million to $250 million.

“It delivers on every sort of promise,” said Jim Orr, Universal’s president of domestic distribution. “It is totally immersive. It is great emotional storytelling. It is something that truly has to be experienced on the big screen.”

The nearly three-hour epic is the first feature to be shot entirely on Imax cameras, a feat that required extensive cooperation between Nolan and the Canadian entertainment tech company, which operates out of Playa Vista.

Nolan first told Imax Chief Executive Rich Gelfond in early 2024 that he was considering making an entire film with Imax cameras and laid out what he’d need for that to happen, including a quieter and lighter camera, a way to make film reloads easier and getting enough trained projectionists.

“It took a fair amount of time and investment” to figure out those challenges, Gelfond said. But by August 2024, the Imax team put together a series of tests to show cinematographer Hoyte van Hoytema. Two months later, Nolan saw the tests and was impressed.

“As filmmakers and studios integrate Imax, we become an increasingly important part of the ecosystem,” Gelfond said. “When a film is released in Imax or shot in Imax, I think it’s a signal to audiences that it’s somewhat special, and the filmmaker is really leaning in in a unique way.”

Anticipation for the film has been building for at least a year, when the first Imax 70mm tickets went on sale. Pre-sales for “The Odyssey” shattered the previous Imax record by nearly double, the company said.

Enhanced formats made up 53% of the domestic weekend’s total, with both film and digital Imax revenue comprising 23.8%. Imax 70mm comprised about 4% of that total, with Imax digital making up the rest. Non-Imax 70mm film screening revenue totaled 3%, while 35mm showings made up 0.3%.

Adding to the film’s mystique is Nolan’s reliance on old-school Hollywood practical effects, such as his use of puppetry, animatronics and robotics in scenes with the Cyclops, as well as a real Viking boat that the actors learned to sail.

The massive reception for the film is a relief for theater owners, who weathered their own rough waters in the last few weeks, as Walt Disney Co.’s live-action “Moana” underperformed in its opening at the box office and Universal and Illumination’s “Minions & Monsters” had a softer debut.

“Moana” came in second at the box office this weekend with a domestic haul of $19 million. “Minions & Monsters” ($14.8 million), “Toy Story 5” ($14.8 million) and Warner Bros. Pictures’ “Evil Dead Burn” ($5 million) rounded out the top five, according to data from Rentrak.

Abidjan, Ivory Coast – For decades, many of Ivory Coast’s biggest consumer markets were built around international companies with established brands, global supply chains and deep financial resources.

But a number of Ivorian businesses are now finding room to grow.

From petroleum distribution and digital banking to cosmetics manufacturing, these companies are entering sectors where foreign firms have long been dominant, building customer bases at home and looking beyond Ivory Coast’s borders.

Their rise does not signal the retreat of multinational companies, which remain major players across the economy. Instead, the experiences of Petro Ivoire, Djamo and Kaira Holding show how some domestic firms are competing by moving quickly, understanding their markets and investing in production.

Fuel challenge

When Petro Ivoire entered Ivory Coast’s petroleum sector in 1994, international oil companies controlled much of the market.

Today, the company says it is the country’s largest locally owned fuel distributor and ranks third overall behind TotalEnergies and Shell.

Sebastien Kadio-Morokro, Petro Ivoire’s chief executive, said the company’s founders believed a domestic business could compete by combining knowledge of the market with international standards.

“In the 1990s, the market was managed exclusively by multinationals,” Kadio-Morokro told Al Jazeera. “My late father’s idea was that, given the local expertise we had acquired in this industry, it was important to offer something authentic to the local market while strictly adhering to international standards.”

The company says it now holds about 15 percent of Ivory Coast’s fuel market. Kadio-Morokro said being locally owned allows the company to make decisions faster than larger international rivals.

“When a strategic decision needs to be made, we can convene our board immediately and move forward,” he said. “We don’t have to navigate a long chain of decision-making through headquarters overseas.”

That approach helped Petro Ivoire move into the butane gas market in 2007, a sector the company says it now leads. It is also investing in electric-vehicle charging infrastructure as Ivory Coast prepares for changes in transport and energy use.

For Kadio-Morokro, the company’s experience reflects a broader challenge facing African businesses: building confidence that companies created on the continent can compete at scale.

“Africans must trust their countries, themselves and their continent,” he said. “There is no reason why we cannot succeed at home.”

Digital banking

In West Africa’s financial sector, another company is challenging traditional ways of accessing banking services.

Djamo launched in Ivory Coast in 2020, offering accounts, savings and investment products through a mobile application. The company says it now serves more than two million customers and 10,000 small and medium-sized enterprises.

For cofounder Hassan Bourgi, one of the biggest obstacles was convincing investors that francophone West Africa could produce a technology company capable of scaling.

“The biggest hurdle we encountered was that our region was completely off the radar for global venture capital investors,” Bourgi told Al Jazeera. “Historically, tech investment flowed almost exclusively into four main hubs: Nigeria, Kenya, South Africa and Egypt.”

Djamo sought to challenge that perception by showing investors that companies from francophone markets could grow beyond their borders.

“We showed investors that it was possible to build a large company here,” Bourgi said. “We highlighted the stability of our economy and the CFA franc, which created a strong environment for us to build and expand.”

The company focused heavily on younger consumers, designing a platform around the habits of a generation already familiar with digital services.

“Generation Z was the cornerstone upon which we built our product,” Bourgi said. “We wanted to provide an experience that matched what people encountered every day on international platforms.”

Scaling up

The growth of companies such as Petro Ivoire and Djamo comes as Ivory Coast seeks to strengthen its domestic private sector and help businesses move beyond the national market.

The International Finance Corporation (IFC) and Ivory Coast’s employers’ association, CGECI, have launched programmes aimed at helping promising companies improve access to finance, strengthen management and prepare for regional expansion.

For many entrepreneurs, the challenge is not only building a successful business at home but creating companies large enough to compete across borders.

Few stories capture that journey more clearly than Kaira Holding.

From cot to cosmetics

In 2009, Fode Kaira Yatabare launched his cosmetics company from a two-room apartment in Abidjan.

The apartment served as both home and office. Each night, he slept on a folding military cot that had to be packed away each morning to make space for work.

Today, Kaira Holding exports beauty and personal care products to 32 countries across Africa, Europe and the Middle East.

“I belong to a new generation of African entrepreneurs who passionately believe in local manufacturing and value addition,” Yatabare told Al Jazeera.

“When we started, capital constraints were immense. We launched from a tiny two-room flat. We only managed to scrape together four million CFA francs [about $7,000] to start producing soap.”

The company has since invested in its own packaging, printing and manufacturing processes, reducing its dependence on imported inputs.

“Many people fail to realise that manufacturing costs in Africa can actually be lower than in China if you fully integrate your value chain,” Yatabare said. “This vertical integration has made us more competitive.”

Kaira Holding is now expanding its research capacity and preparing to enter new markets, including China.

The experiences of Petro Ivoire, Djamo and Kaira Holding do not represent the end of multinational influence in Ivory Coast. But they show how some African businesses are building an advantage by staying close to consumers, making decisions quickly and investing in their own capacity.

For Yatabare, that ambition reflects a changing mindset among entrepreneurs on the continent.

“Africa has changed,” he told Al Jazeera. “We are moving forward guided by a singular ambition: from Côte d’Ivoire to the world.”

United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio is hosting more than 65 countries for a conference focused on political violence from the far left, a designation that a number of critics say is being used to target legitimate opposition.

The “Ministerial on the Resurgence of Political Terrorism”, taking place on Thursday, brings together government representatives from around the world to coordinate on what the US Department of State calls a “renewed threat”  that has “remained a blind spot in the international community’s counterterrorism focus”.

Critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, told the Reuters news agency that “the far-left terrorism designations could be used to target lawful protest activity and political opponents rather than genuine security threats.”

Here’s what’s driving the summit and who’s attending:

What is this summit about?

The Trump administration’s 2026 counterterrorism strategy identifies three primary threats: “Islamist terrorism”, “narco-terrorism”, and “violent left-wing extremists, including Anarchists and Anti-Fascists”.

The strategy states that the third category of left-wing “extremists” has been traditionally ignored, and notes that Charlie Kirk’s assassination in September 2025 was executed “by a radical who espoused extreme transgender ideologies”.

The counterterrorism strategy omits right-wing extremism and white supremacist groups, despite growing instances of violence that some of these outfits have been accused of – including several of those who attacked the Capitol on January 6, 2020, in an attempt to overturn the US presidential election that Donald Trump lost.

Thomas Renard, director of The Hague-based International Centre for Counter-Terrorism, said the summit reflects a fundamental shift in how the US sees the threat.

“What we are seeing now in the United States is that counterterrorism has been completely politicised, instrumentalised,” he told Al Jazeera. “For instance, the threat from far-right terrorism, which was for decades considered as the primary domestic threat, has now completely disappeared from the US counterterrorism strategy.”

Who has been invited?

Invites went to more than 70 countries as the State Department wrote on social media that countries had shown “overwhelming interest”. It is reported that Israel’s Foreign Minister Gideon Saar will be present alongside representatives from multiple countries. The stated aim is to “expand coordination, enhance information sharing, and strengthen international law enforcement mechanisms”.

The summit follows a series of smaller meetings held earlier this year, including one in The Hague with law enforcement officials.

Renard says many European nations are expressing their unease with this ministerial meeting by sending relatively junior ministers.

“They are not particularly convinced that this is a topic that justifies this type of gathering, but at the same time, they don’t want to antagonise the United States either. And therefore, this is the compromise they found,” he said.

In November, 2025, the US designated four European groups as terrorist organisations: The German Antifa Ost, the Italian Informal Anarchist Federation/International Revolutionary Front (FAI/FRI), the Greek Armed Proletarian Justice and the Greek Revolutionary Class Self-Defense.

What is “far-left terrorism”?

The term is usually used by governments to describe movements accused of violence and driven by left-wing ideologies, including Marxism, socialism, or anarchism. Such movements usually describe themselves as anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist.

Latin America saw several left-wing armed movements during the Cold War, a number of which carried out sustained campaigns of political violence, such as Colombia’s Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMNL) in El Salvador and the Tupamaros in Uruguay. Throughout the 20th century, Washington repeatedly backed hardline right-wing regimes that opposed left-wing movements across Latin America.

India has been dealing with the Naxalite rebellion, a far-left Maoist movement that started in the 1960s and claims to fight for the rural population. The group is seen as one of India’s most serious internal security threats. At its peak, about the year 2000, thousands of people were killed due to the conflict with the Naxalite rebellion.

During the 1970s and 1980s, Marxist groups like the Red Army Faction in West Germany were behind several assassinations, abductions and bombings that they argued were aimed at weakening the capitalist state.

By contrast, the Antifa movement, which the Trump administration has consistently tried to portray as a major violent threat, is a loose, decentralised collection of socialist-leaning individuals opposed to far-right extremism, white supremacy and authoritarianism. Several individuals described by prosecutors as Antifa members have been indicted on accusations of violence in US courts, especially in states like Texas that are ruled by Trump’s Republican Party, since he returned to power. In June, eight such individuals were sentenced to several years in prison: Benjamin Hanil Song, convicted of the attempted murder of a law enforcement officer, was sentenced to 100 years in prison.

Far-right political violence and terrorism in the US

But the same Trump administration has pardoned all those charged with violence during the January 6, 2023 insurrection, including individuals accused of beating police officers.

This week’s summit also specifically focuses on far-left political violence but does not include the threat from far-right ideology and terrorism, similar to the counterterrorism strategy.

This, even though the Oklahoma bombing, which killed 168 people and wounded nearly 700 in the deadliest act of domestic terrorism in the US, was carried out by the right-wing hardliner Timothy McVeigh.

The Cato Institute, a US think tank in Washington, DC, stated in February that of politically motivated terrorism on US soil between 1975 and 2025, excluding the Oklahoma bombing and 9/11, “right-wing terrorists account for 45 percent of people murdered, Islamists are responsible for 32 percent, left-wing terrorists are responsible for 16 percent.”

Renard says the summit creates the very problem it claims to solve: “The United States, with this summit and with its strategy, is creating, actually, a blind spot about far-right terrorist threats, as that threat is strongly anchored and rooted in the United States.”

South Korea will further boost its airborne electronic warfare capabilities, buying another two platforms based on the Bombardier Global 6500 bizjet. These will eventually complement the four Global 6500-based airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft that Seoul has already ordered, and which you can read about here.

Canada’s Bombardier Defense announced today that its Global 6500 had been selected for a second South Korean special mission aircraft program. The aircraft have been acquired by Korean Air, which will modify them for the electronic warfare role. Specifically, these will be standoff jammer (SOJ) aircraft, intended to disrupt enemy electromagnetic signals from a safe distance.

“The Global 6500 aircraft is in demand around the world because of its performance and versatility, and we’re extremely proud that it was chosen for two very advanced, yet different defense missions in South Korea,” said Michael Anckner, vice-president of worldwide sales at Bombardier Defense. “This aircraft is trusted because of its proven military track record, yet it remains highly adaptable as defense needs evolve.”

The Global 6000 series is already a popular choice for military special missions adaptations. Outside of South Korea, prominent examples include the Saab GlobalEye AEW&C aircraft, as well as the German Luftwaffe’s PEGASUS signals intelligence (SIGINT) aircraft. Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force opted for a Global 6000-based solution for its E-11A Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) program, and the U.S. Army ordered a Global 6500-based solution for its ME-11B High Accuracy Detection and Exploitation System (HADES), which will be the service’s next-generation intelligence-gathering aircraft. 

All these applications are aided by the Global’s relatively high-altitude flight profile, which provides a significant standoff capability, increasing line of sight for the sensors, and helping keep the jet and its onboard operators further away from enemy air defense systems. In general, bizjet platforms are also becoming increasingly cost-effective, helped by steady improvements in jet engine technology.

Both Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) and Korean Air had presented offerings for the SOJ to the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), which serves as the central administrative agency of the South Korean Ministry of National Defense.

DAPA had approved the plan for the development of the so-called Block I Electronic Warfare System Development Project in April 2025, with around $1.2 billion earmarked for the program by 2034.

As of September last year, KAI was teamed with Hanwha Systems and was pitching a design based on the Global 6500 airframe. Meanwhile, Korean Air was partnered with LIG Nex1 and, according to some reports, was proposing a platform based on the Gulfstream G550. Other reports suggested that both teams favored the Bombardier bizjet, which provides commonality with the new South Korean AEW&C aircraft.

KAI had argued that it was the best fit for the requirement based on its previous involvement in the Peace Eye program, which provided South Korea with a version of the E-7A Wedgetail AEW&C aircraft, as well as the forthcoming Baekdu II intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) platform. KAI is also an established airframer, building the T-50/TA-50/FA-50 series as well as the KF-21 fighter and various helicopters.

Meanwhile, Korean Air is involved in heavy aircraft maintenance, military aircraft upgrades, and the development of drones, while LIG Nex1 developed advanced electronic warfare systems for the KF-21, as well as for warships, submarines, and reconnaissance aircraft.

From relatively early on, there had been indications that the Korean Air bid was favored. Reports in the South Korean media said that the proposal “scored higher” in the bid evaluation process by DAPA, which had been “evaluating each company’s electronic warfare equipment technology and airframe integration capability, among other factors.” 

In the past, DAPA had said that the Republic of Korea Air Force (ROKAF) required four aircraft capable of “paralyzing enemy air-defense networks and wireless command and communication systems in times of crisis.” While Bombardier has said it is providing two Global 6500s for the program, it remains possible that more might be added. We have approached the company for clarification.

South Korea becomes the latest nation to invest in an SOJ platform, reflecting the growing interest in these capabilities, especially as higher-end and longer-range air defense systems proliferate.

The U.S. Air Force has introduced the EA-37B Compass Call as a standoff electronic attack platform, while earlier this year we looked in detail at Turkey’s HAVA SOJ, based on the Global 6000 airframe and intended to undertake a similar kind of mission.

Typically, SOJ platforms are intended to support air operations by suppressing enemy air defense radars, disrupting command-and-control networks, and interfering with communications through long-range deception and noise jamming, all while remaining outside hostile airspace. By degrading an adversary’s sensing and coordination capabilities, they enable friendly aircraft to penetrate defended airspace through safer access corridors. In modern warfare, the effective use of SOJ platforms has become a critical capability, serving as a force multiplier and delivering significant asymmetric operational advantages.

In addition to jamming systems, the SOJ aircraft generally also have a surveillance capability, with passive electronic support measures (ESM) equipment, while some might include an onboard radar or other sensors. ESM, which is a passive system, can geolocate threats and communications nodes, and that data can be shared in real time with tactical aircraft and missile units to prosecute strikes.

In its rendering of the aircraft, Korean Air presented a platform with prominent fairings alongside the fuselage sides as well as a canoe-type fairing below the fuselage. The fuselage fairings likely contain conformal antennas, which may well be associated with active electronically scanned array (AESA) technology.

AESAs can be used to send out highly focused beams of electromagnetic energy to jam hostile radars and other radio-frequency sensors and emitters in the air, on land, and at sea. This is a capability we have talked about before in relation to the U.S. Air Force’s EA-37B. Potentially, these same AESA antennas could be used to trigger cyber attacks, a capability you can read more about here.

According to South Korean outlet Chosun, the aircraft should have a jamming range of “at least 200 kilometers [124 miles] to cover the entire Korean peninsula.” Additionally, “high-performance transmit-and-receive antenna technology is required to secure enemy electronic signals while disrupting the enemy by emitting powerful radio waves.”

While designed to work from outside hostile airspace, there have been increasing questions about the ability of specialized aircraft like these to survive against more capable air defenses, with the threat of long-range anti-air missile systems only set to grow. However, this kind of platform makes unique sense for South Korea, which has a very specific threat to counter: North Korean air defenses are becoming more capable, and hardened borders mean the geographic area that the new SOJ is expected to cover is clearly established. Criticism of aircraft survivability and range is less of an issue in this case.

At the same time, although South Korea has long relied heavily on the United States for defense, Seoul has increasingly emphasized greater strategic autonomy. This includes developing sovereign electronic warfare and AEW&C capabilities, reducing its reliance on U.S. military assets and American-provided equipment for these critical missions.

As well as the new SOJ and AEW&C platforms, the ROKAF is also set to receive four Baekdu II ISR aircraft. KAI is developing these in partnership with LIG Nex1 under a $675-million contract, with the mission equipment to be installed on the Dassault Falcon 2000LXS bizjet airframe.

The contract is due to be completed by the end of 2026, and the new ISR jets will replace the four Hawker 800XP Peace Pioneer signals intelligence (SIGINT) aircraft that first entered service with the ROKAF in 2001. These are known locally as the RC-800B Baekdu and are operated alongside a similar number of RC-800G Geumgang imagery intelligence (IMINT) aircraft provided under the Peace Krypton program.

Photos show the RC-800B Baekdu SIGINT aircraft:

A photo shows the RC-800G Geumgang IMINT aircraft:

Meanwhile, the ROKAF also operates two modified Dassault Falcon 2000S bizjets in a SIGINT role. These RC-2000s were also procured under the Baekdu project between 2011 and 2018 and incorporate a greater proportion of Korean-built electronics than the RC-800Bs. These aircraft are also specially equipped to detect North Korean missile launches.

A photo shows the RC-2000 SIGINT aircraft:

Then there is the AEW&C fleet, currently comprising four Boeing E-737s, and set to be bolstered by four new aircraft based on the Global 6500 airframe, valued at roughly $2.2 billion. As we have discussed in the past, these will be outfitted by L3Harris and will include the EL/W-2085 AESA radar from Israel’s Elta. This series of radars is already used in AEW&C aircraft operated by Israel, Italy, and Singapore. The new radar planes are due to be introduced by 2032.

Returning to the new SOJ aircraft, the fact that North Korea possesses dense, layered air defenses concentrated near the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) makes an electronic attack platform like this a key enabler for military operations. This is only becoming more important as North Korean defenses continue to mature.

Beyond enhancing operational effectiveness, the SOJ program strengthens South Korea’s defense industrial base, which is fast becoming a true global player.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com