growing

One afternoon late August in a quiet Irish seaside town, a supermarket worker decided he could no longer separate his job from what he was seeing on his phone.

Images from Gaza, with neighbourhoods flattened and families buried, had followed him to the checkout counter.

At the time, Israel’s genocidal onslaught had killed more than 60,000 Palestinians.

His first act of protest was to quietly warn customers that some of the fruit and vegetables were sourced from Israel. Later, as people in Gaza starved, he refused to scan or sell Israeli-grown produce.

He could not, he said, “have that on my conscience”.

Within weeks, Tesco supermarket suspended him.

He requested anonymity following advice from his trade union.

In Newcastle, County Down, a town better known for its summer tourists than political protest, customers protested outside the store.

The local dispute became a test case: Can individual employees turn their moral outrage into workplace action?

Facing mounting backlash, Tesco reinstated him in January, moving him to a role where he no longer has to handle Israeli goods.

“I would encourage them to do it,” he said about other workers. “They have the backing of the unions and there’s a precedent set. They didn’t sack me; they shouldn’t be able to sack anyone else.

“And then, if we get enough people to do it, they can’t sell Israeli goods.”

“A genocide is still going on, they are slowly killing and starving people – we still need to be out, doing what we can.”

From shop floors to state policy

Across Europe, there is labour-led pressure to cease trade with Israel.

Unions in Ireland, the UK and Norway have passed motions stating that workers should not be compelled to handle Israeli goods.

Retail cooperatives, including Co-op UK and Italy’s Coop Alleanza 3.0, have removed some Israeli products in protest against the war in Gaza.

The campaigns raise questions about whether worker-led refusals can lead to state-level boycotts.

Activists say the strategy is rooted in history.

In 1984, workers at the Dunnes Stores retail chain in Ireland refused to handle goods from apartheid South Africa. The action lasted nearly three years and contributed to Ireland becoming the first country in Western Europe to ban trade with South Africa.

“The same can be done against the apartheid, genocidal state of Israel today,” said Damian Quinn, 33, of BDS Belfast.

The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement is a Palestinian-led campaign launched in 2005 that calls for economic and cultural boycotts of Israel until it complies with international law, including ending its occupation of Palestine.

“Where the state has failed in its obligation to prevent and punish the crime of genocide, citizens and workers across the world must refuse Israel and apply pressure on their governments to introduce legislation,” said Quinn.

That pressure, he said, takes the form of boycotting “complicit Israeli sporting, academic and cultural institutions”, as well as Israeli and international companies “engaged in violations of Palestinian human rights”.

The movement also seeks to “apply pressure on banks, local councils, universities, churches, pension funds and governments to do the same through divestment and sanctions”, he added.

Supporters argue that such pressure is beginning to shape state policy across Europe.

Spain and Slovenia have moved to restrict trade with Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank following sustained public protests and mounting political pressure. In August 2025, Slovenia’s government banned imports of goods produced in Israeli-occupied territories, becoming one of the first European states to adopt such a measure.

Spain followed suit later that year, with a decree banning the import of products from illegal Israeli settlements. The measure was formally enforced at the start of 2026.

Both countries’ centre-left governments have been outspoken critics of Israel’s conduct during the war, helping create the political conditions for legislative action.

In the Netherlands, a wave of pro-Palestinian campus protests and public demonstrations in 2025 shifted political discourse. Student demands for academic and trade disengagement became part of broader calls for national policy change.

Later that year, members of the Dutch parliament urged the government to ban imports from illegal Israeli settlements.

Meanwhile, Ireland is attempting to advance its Occupied Territories Bill, first introduced in 2018, which would prohibit trade in goods and services from illegal settlements in occupied Palestinian territory, including the West Bank.

Progress, however, has stalled despite unanimous backing in the lower house of Ireland’s parliament, the Dail.

Paul Murphy, an Irish pro-Palestine member of parliament who, in June, attempted to cross into Gaza, told Al Jazeera the delay amounts to “indirect pressure from Israel routed through the US”. He accused the government of “kicking the can down the road” as it seeks further legal advice.

Pro-Israel organisations are working to oppose initiatives that aim to pressure Israel economically.

B’nai B’rith International, a US-based group that says it strengthens “global Jewish life”, combats anti-Semitism and stands “unequivocally with the State of Israel”, decries the BDS movement. In July 2025, it submitted an 18-page memorandum to Irish lawmakers, warning the bill could pose risks for US companies operating in Ireland.

The memorandum argued that, if enacted, the bill could create conflicts with US federal anti-boycott laws, which prohibit US companies from participating in certain foreign-led boycotts – particularly those targeting Israel.

B’nai B’rith International also “vehemently condemns” the United Kingdom’s recognition of Palestinian statehood and has donated 200 softshell jackets to Israeli military personnel.

Critics say interventions of this kind go beyond advocacy and reflect coordinated efforts to influence European policymaking on Israel and Palestine from abroad.

While lobby groups publicly press their case, leaked documents, based on material from whistleblower site Distributed Denial of Secrets, suggest the Israeli state has also been directly involved in countering BDS campaigns across Europe.

A covert programme, jointly funded by the Israeli Ministries of Justice and of Strategic Affairs, reportedly hired law firms for 130,000 euros ($154,200) on assignments aimed at monitoring boycott-related movements.

Former Sinn Fein MEP Martina Anderson, who supports the BDS movement, previously accused Israeli advocacy organisations of attempting to silence critics of Israel through legal and political pressure.

According to the leaked documents cited by The Ditch, an Irish outlet, Israel hired a law firm to “investigate the steps open to Israel against Martina Anderson”.

She told Al Jazeera she stood by her criticism.

“As the chair of the Palestinian delegation in the European Parliament, I did my work diligently, as people who know me would expect me to do.

“I am proud to have been a thorn in the side of the Israeli state and its extensive lobbying machine, which works relentlessly to undermine Palestinian voices and to justify a brutal and oppressive rogue state.”

Pushback across Europe

In 2019, Germany’s parliament, the Bundestag, adopted a non-binding resolution condemning the BDS movement as anti-Semitic, calling for the withdrawal of public funding from groups that support it.

Observers say the vote has since been used to conflate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.

The European Leadership Network (ELNET), a prominent pro-Israel advocacy organisation active across the continent, welcomed the move and said its German branch had urged further legislative steps.

Meanwhile, in the UK, ELNET has funded trips to Israel for Labour politicians and their staff.

Bridget Phillipson, now secretary of state for education, declared a 3,000-pound ($4,087) visit funded by ELNET for a member of her team.

A coworker of Wes Streeting named Anna Wilson also accepted a trip funded by ELNET. Streeting himself has visited Israel on a mission organised by the Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) group.

ELNET’s UK branch is directed by Joan Ryan, an ex-Labour MP and former LFI chair.

During the passage of a bill designed to prevent public bodies from pursuing their own boycotts, divestment or sanctions policies – the Labour Party imposed a three-line whip instructing MPs to vote against it. Phillipson and Streeting abstained.

The Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill was widely seen as an attempt to block local councils and public institutions from adopting BDS-style measures.

A vocal supporter of the legislation was Luke Akehurst, then director of the pro-Israel advocacy group, We Believe in Israel. In a statement carried by ELNET, he said it was “absurd” that local councils could “undermine the excellent relationship between the UK and Israel” through boycotts or divestment.

“We need the law changed to close this loophole,” he said, arguing that BDS initiatives by local authorities risked “importing the conflict into communities in the UK”.

The legislation was ultimately shelved when a general election was called in 2024. It formed part of broader legislative efforts in parts of Europe to limit BDS-linked boycotts.

Akehurst has since been elected as Labour MP for North Durham, having previously served on the party’s National Executive Committee.

If there were any doubt about this being the year of the freshman in high school basketball, all you needed to do was look at who was on the court Saturday in a sold-out rivalry game between Village Christian and visiting Heritage Christian.

“There were five freshmen out there,” Heritage Christian freshman guard Ty Lazenby said.

Make no mistake about how much young talent Heritage Christian has after a 74-71 victory that ended the Crusaders’ 11-game winning streak.

The Warriors (20-6, 6-2) start two freshmen and three sophomores. In high school sports, you never know who’s staying and going each year, but Heritage Christian is feeling good about its group.

“They had to reenroll by yesterday,” coach Paul Tait said.

Said Lazenby: “We’re figuring it out. In two years we’re going to be very good.”

On Saturday, Eli Simmons had 18 points and 13 rebounds, and fellow sophomore Houston Rolle scored 16 points. Lazenby had 15 points. Another freshman, Nalu Clark, the brother of Virginia NCAA champion guard Kihei Clark, had seven points and seven assists.

It was left to sophomore Tyler Jackson to put the finishing touch on the win, banking in a free throw with 11.9 seconds left for a three-point cushion that forced Village Christian’s outstanding freshman, Will Conroy Jr., to shoot a three to tie. It didn’t go.

Conroy finished with 28 points. The Crusaders got into trouble when they failed to get the ball to Conroy earlier, resulting in a turnover and forcing them to foul Jackson.

Village Christian still can win the Olympic League title outright with a win over Maranatha next week. Heritage Christian is rooting for Maranatha to produce a three-way tie for first.

Crespi 57, Harvard-Westlake 52: The Celts advanced to a Tuesday night Mission League tournament semifinal at Sherman Oaks Notre Dame by eliminating Harvard-Westlake, which lost for the third time in its last four games. Isaiah Barnes scored 19 points.

Loyola 60, St. Francis 57: Quincy Watson and Deuce Newt each scored 13 points to help the Cubs keep their playoff hopes alive. They advance to play top-seeded Sierra Canyon on Tuesday in a Mission League tournament semifinal.

Girls’ basketball

Ventura 46, Mater Dei 42: Kai Staniland and Emma Anter each scored 13 points in Ventura’s upset of the Monarchs.

Sierra Canyon 73, Oak Park 46: Jerzy Robinson scored 29 points in a matchup of Open Division teams.

After the recent shootings of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal agents in Minneapolis, some police chiefs have joined the mounting criticism of the Trump administration’s immigration blitz.

One voice missing from the fray: LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell.

This week, the chief reiterated that the department has a close working relationship with federal law enforcement, and said he would not order his officers to enforce a new state law — currently being challenged as unconstitutional — that prohibits the use of face coverings by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal agents.

Top police brass nationwide rarely criticize their federal partners, relying on collaboration to investigate gangs, extremist groups and other major criminals — while also counting on millions in funding from Washington each year.

McDonnell and the LAPD have found themselves in an especially tough position, longtime department observers say. The city has been roiled by immigration raids and protests, and local leaders, including Mayor Karen Bass, have blasted the White House. But with the World Cup and Olympics coming soon — events that will require coordination with the feds — the chief has been choosing his words carefully.

Over the past year, McDonnell has fallen back on the message that the LAPD has a long-standing policy of not getting involved in civil immigration enforcement. Unlike his counterparts in Minneapolis, Portland and Philadelphia, he has largely avoided public comment on the tactics used by federal agents, saving his strongest criticism for protesters accused of vandalism or violence.

In a radio interview last spring, the chief said that “it’s critical that in a city as big, a city that’s as big a target for terrorism as Los Angeles, that we have a very close working relationship with federal, state and local partners.” He boasted that the LAPD had “best relationship in the nation in that regard.”

McDonnell stood beside FBI Director Kash Patel on an airport tarmac last week to announce the capture of a Canadian former Olympic snowboarder accused of trafficking tons of cocaine through Los Angeles. Then, at a news conference Thursday in which city officials touted historically low homicide totals, McDonnell said LAPD officials were as “disturbed” as everyone else by events in other parts of the country, alluding to Pretti’s shooting without mentioning him by name. He said the department would continue to work closely with federal agencies on non-immigration matters.

Explaining his stance on not enforcing the mask ban, McDonnell said he wouldn’t risk asking his officers to approach “another armed agency creating conflict for something that” amounted to a misdemeanor offense.

“It’s not a good policy decision and it wasn’t well thought out in my opinion,” he said.

Elsewhere, law enforcement leaders, civil rights advocates and other legal experts have decried how ICE agents and other federal officers have been flouting best practices when making street arrests, conducting crowd control and maintaining public safety amid mass protests.

After a shooting by agents of two people being sought for arrest in Portland, Ore., in mid-January, the city’s chief of police gave a tearful news conference saying he had sought to understand Latino residents “through your voices, your concern, your fear, your anger.”

Philadelphia Sheriff Rochelle Bilal set off a social media firestorm after she referred to ICE agents as “made-up, fake, wannabe law enforcement.”

In Minneapolis, where the Trump administration has deployed 3,000 federal agents, police Chief Brian O’Hara reportedly warned his officers in private that they would lose their jobs if they failed to intervene when federal agents use force. And in a news conference this week, New Orleans’ police superintendent questioned ICE’s arrest of one of the agency’s recruits.

The second-guessing has also spread to smaller cities like Helena, Mont., whose city’s police chief pulled his officers out of a regional drug task force over its decision to collaborate with U.S. Border Patrol agents.

Over the weekend, the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, the nation’s largest and most influential police chief group, called on the White House to convene local, state and federal law enforcement partners for “policy-level discussions aimed at identifying a constructive path forward.”

McDonnell’s backers argue that the role of chief is apolitical, though many of his predecessors became national voices that shaped public safety policy. Speaking out, the chief’s supporters say, risks inviting backlash from the White House and could also affect the long pipeline of federal money the department relies on, for instance, to help fund de-escalation training for officers.

Assemblyman Mark González (D-Los Angeles) was among those who opposed McDonnell over his willingness to work with ICE while serving as Los Angeles County sheriff, but said he now considers him a “great partner” who has supported recent anti-crime legislation.

So he said was disappointed by McDonnell’s unwillingness to call out racial profiling and excessive force by federal agents in Minneapolis and elsewhere.

“We have to trust in a chief who is able to say ICE engaging and detaining 5-year-old kids and detaining flower vendors is not what this system was set up to do,” said González, the Assembly’s majority whip. “It would help when you’d have law enforcement back up a community that they serve.”

Inside the LAPD, top officials have supported McDonnell’s balancing act, suggesting that promises by officials in other cities to detain ICE agents rang hollow.

“Have you seen them arrest any? No,” said Deputy Chief Alan Hamilton.

LAPD officers serve on nearly three dozen task forces with federal officials, where they share information and resources to track down criminals, said Hamilton, the department’s chief of detectives. Cooperating with federal partners is essential to tasks including combating “human trafficking on Figueroa” and dismantling international theft rings, he said. As part of these investigations, both sides pool intelligence — arrangements that some privacy rights groups warn are now being exploited in the government’s immigration crackdown.

Hamilton said that “there’s nothing occurring right now that’s going to affect our relationship with the federal government across the board.”

Art Acevedo, a former chief in Houston and Miami, said that for any big-city chief, taking an official position on an issue as divisive as immigration can be complicated.

Being seen as coming out against President Trump comes with “some political risks,” he said.

But chiefs in immigrant-rich cities like Houston and L.A. must weigh that against the potentially irreparable damage to community trust from failing to condemn the recent raids, he said.

“When you don’t speak out, the old adage that silence is deafening is absolutely true. You end up losing the public and you end up putting your own people at risk,” he said. “The truth is that when you are police chief you have a bully pulpit, and what you say or fail to say is important.”

Those with experience on the federal side of the issue said it cuts both ways.

John Sandweg, the former director of ICE under President Obama, said that federal authorities need local cops and the public to feed them info and support operations, but the immigration agency’s “zero tolerance” approach was putting such cooperation “in jeopardy.”

“Ideally, in a perfect world, ICE is able to work within immigrant communities to identify the really bad actors,” he said. “But when you have this zero tolerance, when the quantity of arrests matters far more than the quality of arrests, you eliminate any ability to have that cooperation.”

Times staff writers Brittny Mejia, Ruben Vives and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

Airports use technology for passenger flow, baggage tracking and predictive maintenance to enhance efficiency and experience.

As global air passenger traffic is forecast to hit 10.2 billion in 2026, a 3.9 percent year-on-year increase, investments have been pouring in to improve airport infrastructure and operational efficiency and use artificial intelligence to achieve it.

Working with data released by Airport Council International, airports are relying on the increasing use of AI to embrace the rise in demand.

AI is now being embedded in airports’ workflows to reshape everything from passenger flow management to airside maintenance, cybersecurity, lost luggage and enhancing on-site and virtual customer experiences, according to analysts and experts at the Airport AI Exchange event this month during discussions of the technology’s existing use and its potential.  

The use of AI-powered analytics to anticipate congestion at security, immigration and boarding points is also helping to prevent delays. Resources are being allocated to shift from reactive crowd management to predictive operations.

AI-powered baggage optimisation tools and biometric processing – which would allow passengers to walk through immigration without the need to present a physical passport – are also gaining traction as airports seek to improve passenger experience while maintaining operational efficiency.

“AI started changing very rapidly in 2017 and initiated this entire AI race and enabled us to really use AI, the neural network that we talked about and heard about since the 1940s,” Amad Malik, chief AI officer at Airport AI Exchange, said.

“Since then, the progressions have been very, very steep. If you look at the curve from the first day to now, AI is able to do so much more. In only the last two years, the ability has grown exponentially.”

What are airports using AI for?

In addition to quicker immigration controls, analysts said AI is aiding automated check-ins and boardings, baggage handling and tracking, and predictive maintenance. It is also enhancing passenger experience, providing security screening, and offering personalised services and assistance, they said.

AI-powered analytics can enable airports to tailor services and experiences to individual passenger preferences, fostering a more personalised and efficient journey from check-in to boarding, according to Mahmood AlSeddiqi, former vice president of IT for the Bahrain Airport Company.

While insights shared at the Airport AI Exchange suggested AI has advanced at an exponential pace over the past few years, some argue that aviation’s adoption of the technology has remained comparatively limited.

“AI has progressed exponentially over the past few years, but compared to that curve, aviation’s use of AI is still negligible,” said Malik, adding that that gap is partly explained by the sector’s reliance on legacy systems and its inherently cautious operating model.

Much of the technology still underpinning aviation operations dates back decades and innovation is often slowed by the industry’s safety-critical nature, he said.

“When you’re dealing with people’s lives, safety and regulation outweigh speed of innovation,” Malik noted.

As the Canadian military assesses how it would best deal with a potential invasion from Russia, Ottawa is pushing ahead with plans to significantly bolster its armored forces. On the wish-list are more than 250 armored fighting vehicles (AFVs), as well as an upgrade for the Canadian Armed Forces’ existing Leopard 2 main battle tanks (MBTs).

These plans were outlined by representatives of the Canadian Armed Forces speaking at Defense IQ’s International Armored Vehicles conference in England last week, their comments later published by Shephard’s Defense Insight. Events of this kind are typically conducted under Chatham House rules, meaning that information can be freely shared with the public, but the identity of the speakers cannot be disclosed.

Canada already had a plan in place to introduce new AFVs, although the timeline for this has been brought forward. At one point, the new vehicles were expected to be inducted in 2035, but, in a reflection of the new urgency for defense modernization, they are now required to be fielded between 2029 and 2031.

This also appears to be the first time that the number of new AFVs has been officially pitched at 250.

The AFVs are required for the Canadian Army’s armored cavalry forces, specifically the two new medium cavalry (MEDCAV) battalions that are planned to be fielded by the future Maneuver Division.

The vehicles will require both a high level of tactical mobility as well as STANAG Level 6 blast protection, officials say. Level 6 constitutes protection against, for example, 30mm automatic cannonfire, or the detonation of a 15mm artillery shell at 10 meters (33 feet).

According to Shephard, the AFVs are also needed in a highly modular configuration, allowing the fleet to be equipped with cannons and/or mortars for direct fire, as well as for launching loitering munitions. Other versions will be configured as munitions carriers or for command and control (C2) operations.

In the past, three vehicles had been identified as meeting the AFV requirement: the Anglo-Swedish BAE Systems CV90, the South Korean Hanwha Redback, and the German Rheinmetall Lynx. Potentially, many other types could also be considered.

It’s not clear to what degree the new AFVs might be expected to have special modifications for the region in which they will chiefly operate. It is notable that Russia is well-trained for fighting in northern latitudes and is introducing a variety of weapons systems that are optimized for this kind of environment. In contrast, meanwhile, the U.S. Army is only slowly returning to more robust preparations for warfare in Arctic conditions.

Currently, the Canadian Army’s tracked AFV fleet is dominated by variants of the Tracked Light Armored Vehicle (TLAV), which is a derivative of the Cold War-era M113. The service also operates more modern wheeled AFVs, including the Bison (a Canadian version of the LAV II used by the U.S. Marine Corps), the improved LAV 6.0, and the Coyote (a version of the Bison configured for battlefield reconnaissance).

A tracked AFV will ensure the MEDCAV battalions have the requisite off-road mobility and ability to negotiate challenging obstacles, especially vital in the Canadian North. Tracked vehicles are also better able to keep pace with tanks.

As for the Canadian Army’s MBT fleet, this is also slated for an upgrade.

Under the Heavy Direct Fire Modernization (HDFM) project, Ottawa wants to bring its current fleet of German-made Leopard 2A6 MBTs to a new standard, known as Leopard 2A6M, by 2033.

Overall, the country now has a force of 103 Leopard 2A4, 2A4M, and 2A6M vehicles, which are being supported under a contract awarded in 2024. The last of these vehicles is expected to be withdrawn from operational service in 2035. Meanwhile, the oldest Leopard 2A4 versions are only used for training. Canada also donated eight Leopard 2s to Ukraine in 2023.

HDFM replaces most of the remaining analog systems in the Leopard 2A6M fleet and modernizes existing systems, including the optics and fire-control system. The result brings the 2A6M in line with the more advanced Leopard 2A4M fleet.

Canadian Army – Leopard 2A4M CAN Main Battle Tanks Live Firing + On The Move [720p]

The HDFM upgrade is only a stopgap, however, before Canada selects a new MBT. At the International Armored Vehicles conference, officials confirmed that Canada plans to “identify and begin procurement” of a new MBT by 2030. It’s also envisaged that, before the last of the Leopard 2s are retired, these older tanks and the new MBT will serve together within additional armored battalions and companies. The Canadian Forces want these units to be operational by 2037.

“The force design may require additional armored or armored cavalry battalions, but it is just too early at this point to say how many,” one source stated at the conference, as reported by Shephard.

This is part of a wider rethinking of the military, with the aim of having a warfighting concept for 2040.

“We recognize that the army we have is not the army we need, and we are taking the necessary funded steps to bridge that gap,” the source continued. “We are changing our structure, we are modernizing our fleet, we are growing our armored capability. We are no longer just talking about the future; we are actively building it.”

Against this force-structure planning and decisions over new fighting vehicles, Canada is increasingly looking at the kinds of land warfare scenarios it might face in the future.

Earlier this month, TWZ spoke to the operational commander for the Canadian North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) about how the Royal Canadian Air Force is looking to counter the growing threats China and Russia pose to the High North.

Simply put, the vast swaths of the Arctic are increasingly of both strategic and economic interest for all the major global powers, and this has been underscored by the growing intensity of Russian and Chinese military and civilian maritime activity in the region.

These same potential threats are also driving a reconfiguration of the Canadian Army.

Remarkably, however, the Canadian Armed Forces are reportedly also now looking at how they would respond to a hypothetical U.S. military invasion of Canada. Officials have stressed that they don’t think it is likely that U.S. President Donald Trump would order an invasion of Canada, and that the war-gamed scenarios were entirely conceptual in nature.

Interestingly, these concepts reportedly involve the Canadian Armed Forces adopting asymmetric tactics, “similar to those employed against Russia and later U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan,” according to two senior Canadian government officials, who spoke to The Globe and Mail on condition of anonymity.

The same newspaper suggests that this war-gaming is the first time in a century that the Canadian Armed Forces have looked at a hypothetical American assault on the country, which is not only a founding member of NATO but also, under NORAD, a close partner with the U.S. military in continental air defense. Canada is expected to be part of the Trump administration’s forthcoming Golden Dome missile defense system.

Undoubtedly, however, relations between Canada and the United States have cooled dramatically in recent years.

While officials in the Trump administration have hammered home their goal of U.S. regional dominance as an overarching geostrategic objective, the president himself has made threats to annex Canada. Last year, Trump said that the border between the two countries was no more than an “artificially drawn line” and one that might be redrawn using force and persuasion.

Last week, Trump posted an altered image on his social media account that placed the American flag over Canada, Greenland, and Venezuela.

“We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and Denmark is not going to be able to do it,” Trump told reporters earlier this month.

The ongoing Greenland issue, which has led to considerable consternation in Europe, has also now drawn in Canada.

Reports emerged last week that Canada was considering sending a small contingent of troops to Greenland. Here they would conduct maneuvers alongside eight European countries, part of a military exercise that is seen as a show of solidarity for Denmark, of which the self-ruling island is a territory.

Last week, Trump posted on Truth Social that Canada was opposed to having the Golden Dome over Greenland “even though The Golden Dome would protect Canada. Instead, they voted in favor of doing business with China, who will ‘eat them up’ within the first year!”

Clearly, no one within the Canadian Armed Forces expects to be taking up arms — whether using AFVs or guerrilla tactics — against a U.S. invasion.

However, it is very telling how such a ‘what if?’ is apparently now being considered at a theoretical level. This kind of thinking, as well as the renewed impetus to acquire new and modernized armored fighting vehicles and tanks, underscores just how shifting strategic priorities across the High North are being felt by all of the countries within the region, with Canada no exception.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

As federal immigration tactics face mounting legal and political scrutiny after a U.S. Border Patrol agent fatally shot a Minneapolis man over the weekend, Donald Trump announced Monday he was dispatching his border czar Tom Homan to Minnesota.

Until now, Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino has overseen the federal government’s immigration crackdown in Minnesota. But as the Trump administration’s Department of Homeland Security faces widespread criticism for its aggressive tactics since it launched Operation Metro Surge in December, Trump signaled Monday that he could be shifting strategy as he deploys Homan to the region.

“He has not been involved in that area, but knows and likes many of the people there,” Trump said of Homan on TruthSocial. “Tom is tough but fair, and will report directly to me.”

Trump’s deployment of Homan comes as a federal judge hears arguments Monday on whether to temporarily halt the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement in Minnesota. Meanwhile, Democratic senators plan to oppose a funding bill for DHS, raising the possibility of a partial government shutdown, and a small but growing number of Republicans have joined Democratic calls for a thorough investigation into the killing of Alex Pretti

The Department of Homeland Security said Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse, approached federal officers on the street Saturday morning with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun and “violently resisted” when officers tried to disarm him. But cellphone videos recorded by eye witnesses contradict that account.

According to videos taken on the scene, Pretti was holding a phone, not a handgun, when he stepped in front of a federal agent who was targeting a woman with pepper spray. Federal agents pulled him to the ground and shot him.

Pretti is the second U.S. citizen in Minneapolis to be killed by immigration officers this month. On Jan. 7, Renee Good, a 37-year-old mother, was shot in the head by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer.

Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem raised criticism this weekend when she said that her agency would lead the investigation into Pretti’s killing.

After federal officials denied Minnesota state investigators access to the shooting scene in South Minneapolis, local and state officials in Minnesota accused DHS of mishandling evidence. Late Saturday, the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension asked a federal court to block Homeland Security and Justice Department officials from destroying or concealing evidence.

It is not immediately clear how Bovino’s role could change as Homan arrives in Minneapolis.

Noem, who has backed Bovino’s aggressive tactics, said Monday it was “good news” that Homan was going to Minneapolis.

“I have worked closely with Tom over the last year and he has been a major asset to our team,” Noem wrote on X. Homan’s “experience and insight,” she said, would “help us to remove even more public safety threats and violent criminal illegal aliens” off Minneapolis streets.

But some Democrats in Minnesota oppose sending Homan to Minnesota. Minneapolis City Council member Soren Stevenson said the move would only aggravate tension.

“They are losing the battle in people’s minds,” Stevenson told CNN, noting that people could see video evidence contradict federal accounts of border patrol agents’ actions.

“They’re losing this narrative battle, and so he’s sending in his top guard,” Stevenson added. “And really, it’s escalating, because we just want to be left alone. The chaos in our community is coming from ICE. It’s coming from this invasion that we’re under … and it’s got to stop.”

In a short interview with The Wall Street Journal Sunday, Trump criticized Pretti for carrying a gun during protest activity.

“I don’t like any shooting. I don’t like it,” Trump said. “But I don’t like it when somebody goes into a protest and he’s got a very powerful, fully loaded gun with two magazines loaded up with bullets also. That doesn’t play good either.”

The President declined to comment on whether the agent who shot Pretti had done the right thing. “We’re looking,” Trump said when pressed. “We’re reviewing everything and will come out with a determination.”

Democratic officials, including Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, have called on federal immigration officers to leave Minneapolis. On Sunday, Trump suggested they could withdraw, but he did not give a timeline.

“At some point we will leave,” the president said. “They’ve done a phenomenal job.”