halts

Russia’s key Black Sea oil port of Tuapse has suspended all fuel exports after Ukrainian drones struck its infrastructure on November 2, igniting a fire and damaging loading facilities. The attack also forced the nearby Rosneft-operated refinery to halt crude processing, according to industry sources and LSEG ship tracking data.

Tuapse is one of Russia’s major export hubs for refined oil products, including naphtha, diesel, and fuel oil. The port plays a crucial role in supplying markets such as China, Malaysia, Singapore, and Turkey. The refinery, capable of processing around 240,000 barrels of oil per day, exports most of its production.

Why It Matters

The suspension underscores Ukraine’s ongoing campaign to weaken Russia’s wartime economy by targeting energy infrastructure deep inside Russian territory. These strikes not only disrupt export revenues but also stretch Russia’s military and logistical resources. For Moscow, losing Tuapse an export-oriented refinery on the Black Sea adds pressure to its already strained oil supply chain amid international sanctions and logistical bottlenecks.

The attack also signals Kyiv’s growing drone capabilities, with long-range operations increasingly aimed at strategic Russian energy sites. As the conflict nears its fourth year, energy infrastructure on both sides has become a critical front in the economic war underpinning the battlefield.

The regional administration in Tuapse confirmed the drone strike and subsequent fire but offered few details. State oil company Rosneft and Russia’s port agency did not respond to Reuters’ requests for comment.

According to data reviewed by LSEG, three tankers were docked during the attack, loading naphtha, diesel, and fuel oil. All vessels were later moved offshore to anchor safely near the port. Before the incident, Tuapse had been expected to increase oil product exports in November.

Ukraine has not directly claimed responsibility for the specific attack but reiterated that its drone strikes aim to erode Russia’s capacity to finance its invasion through energy exports.

What’s Next

Repair timelines for the Tuapse refinery and port infrastructure remain unclear, but the temporary halt is expected to disrupt Russia’s short-term fuel exports and trading flows in the Black Sea region. The strike may prompt Moscow to bolster air defenses along its southern coast and diversify export routes to reduce vulnerability.

Meanwhile, Ukraine is expected to continue leveraging drone warfare to target high-value Russian infrastructure as part of its asymmetric strategy to offset Moscow’s battlefield advantages.

With information from an exclusive Reuters report.

Dutch chipmaker Nexperia has suspended wafer shipments to its Chinese assembly plant in Dongguan, a move that could intensify the semiconductor supply crunch already rattling automakers worldwide.

The suspension, revealed in a company letter dated October 29 and signed by interim CEO Stefan Tilger, followed the Chinese unit’s failure to meet contractual payment terms. It comes amid escalating tensions after the Dutch government seized control of Nexperia from its Chinese owner, Wingtech Technology, in late September, citing national security and governance concerns.

Why It Matters

The halt threatens to disrupt automotive and electronics supply chains at a critical time. Around 70% of Nexperia’s chips produced in the Netherlands are packaged in China, meaning the freeze could ripple through global manufacturing networks.

The dispute also underscores the deepening fractures in global tech supply chains, where national security concerns and trade controls increasingly shape corporate decisions. With the U.S., China, and Europe tightening technology restrictions, Nexperia’s situation reflects the mounting geopolitical tug-of-war over semiconductor control.

Nexperia (Netherlands): Seeking to maintain operations while asserting independence from Chinese influence.

Wingtech Technology (China): The former owner now sidelined after Dutch government intervention.

Dutch Government: Exercising sovereignty over critical tech assets amid Western security coordination.

Chinese Ministry of Commerce: Blocking Nexperia’s chip exports from China in retaliation.

Global Automakers: Companies like Stellantis and Nissan are monitoring potential production halts as chip prices soar.

What’s Next

Nexperia says it is developing alternative supply routes to support its global customers but has not disclosed details. The Dongguan facility remains operational, though limited by the wafer cutoff.

Analysts expect further trade retaliation from Beijing, potentially deepening the rift between European and Chinese semiconductor ecosystems. Automakers warn of possible shortages by mid-November if shipments do not resume.

Implications

This episode highlights how state intervention in technology firms is reshaping global supply chains. The Dutch government’s takeover framed as a national security move signals Europe’s growing alignment with U.S. export controls targeting Chinese tech entities.

In the short term, the halt could spike chip prices and strain automotive production, particularly in Asia and Europe. Long term, it may accelerate a strategic decoupling between Western and Chinese semiconductor manufacturing bases.

Politically, this marks a test of Europe’s resolve to protect critical tech sectors even at the cost of trade friction with Beijing.

With information from an exclusive Reuters report.

Ontario to stop running advertisement featuring voice of US President Ronald Reagan saying that trade tariffs were a bad idea.

The Canadian province of Ontario has said it will pull an anti-tariff advertisement featuring former United States President Ronald Reagan’s voice, which prompted current US leader Donald Trump to scrap all trade talks with Canada.

Trump announced on his Truth Social network on Thursday that he had “terminated” all negotiations with Canada over what he called the “fake” advertising campaign that he said misrepresented fellow Republican President Reagan.

Less than 24 hours later, Ontario’s Premier Doug Ford said he was suspending the advertisement after talking to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney about the spiralling row with Washington.

“In speaking with Prime Minister Carney, Ontario will pause its US advertising campaign effective Monday so that trade talks can resume,” Ford said in a post on X.

Ford added, however, that he had told his team to keep airing the advertisement during two baseball World Series games this weekend, in which Canada’s Toronto Blue Jays will face the Los Angeles Dodgers.

The advertisement used quotes from a radio address on trade that Reagan delivered in 1987, in which he warned against ramifications that he said high tariffs on foreign imports could have on the US economy.

Reagan is heard in the advertisement saying that “high tariffs inevitably lead to retaliation by foreign countries and the triggering of fierce trade wars”, a quote that matches a transcript of his speech on the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library’s website.

Our intention was always to initiate a conversation about the kind of economy that Americans want to build and the impact of tariffs on workers and businesses. We’ve achieved our goal, having reached U.S. audiences at the highest levels. I’ve directed my team to keep putting our…

— Doug Ford (@fordnation) October 24, 2025

The Ronald Reagan Foundation wrote on X on Thursday that the Ontario government had used “selective audio and video” and that it was reviewing its legal options.

An Al Jazeera analysis of the words used in the advertisement found that while it spliced together different parts of the 1987 speech by Reagan, it also appeared sincere to the meaning of Reagan’s message: that tariffs, if wielded as an economic weapon, must be used only sparingly and for a short time, or they can hurt Americans.

President Trump did not immediately react to the Ontario premier’s decision to pull the advertisement.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller told reporters that Trump had made his “extreme displeasure” known and was expected to respond later to news of the advertisement’s impending removal.

A senior US official said that Trump would probably encounter Carney at a dinner on the sidelines of an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in South Korea on Wednesday.

“They will likely see each other,” the official told the AFP news agency.

In his original social media post announcing the launch of the advertising campaign featuring Reagan’s voice, Ontario’s Ford says, “Using every tool we have, we’ll never stop making the case against American tariffs on Canada.”

It’s official: Ontario’s new advertising campaign in the U.S. has launched. 

Using every tool we have, we’ll never stop making the case against American tariffs on Canada. The way to prosperity is by working together.

Watch our new ad. pic.twitter.com/SgIVC1cqMJ

— Doug Ford (@fordnation) October 16, 2025

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge blocked the Trump administration Wednesday from firing thousands of government workers based on the ongoing federal shutdown, granting a request from employee unions in California.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston issued the temporary restraining order after concluding that the unions “will demonstrate ultimately that what’s being done here is both illegal and is in excess of authority and is arbitrary and capricious.”

Illston slammed the Trump administration for failing to provide her with clear information about what cuts are actually occurring, for repeatedly changing its description and estimates of job cuts in filings before the court, and for failing — including during Wednesday’s hearing in San Francisco — to articulate an argument for why such cuts are not in violation of federal law.

“The evidence suggests that the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, and the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, have taken advantage of the lapse in government spending and government functioning to assume that all bets are off, that the laws don’t apply to them anymore,” Illston said — which she said was not the case.

She said the government justified providing inaccurate figures for the number of jobs being eliminated under its “reduction in force” orders by calling it a “fluid situation” — which she did not find convincing.

“What it is is a situation where things are being done before they are being thought through. It’s very much ready, fire, aim on most of these programs,” she said. “And it has a human cost, which is really why we’re here today. It’s a human cost that cannot be tolerated.”

Illston also ran through a string of recent comments made by President Trump and other members of his administration about the firings and their intentionally targeting programs and agencies supported by Democrats, saying, “By all appearances, they’re politically motivated.”

The Trump administration has acknowledged dismissing about 4,000 workers under the orders, while Trump and other officials have signaled that more would come Friday.

Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought said Wednesday on “The Charlie Kirk Show” that the number of jobs cut could “probably end up being north of 10,000,” as the administration wants to be “very aggressive where we can be in shuttering the bureaucracy, not just the funding,” and the shutdown provided that opportunity.

Attorneys for the unions, led by the American Federation of Government Employees, said that the figures were unreliable and that they feared additional reduction in force orders resulting in more layoffs, as promised by administration officials, if the court did not step in and block such actions.

Illston, an appointee of President Clinton, did just that.

She barred the Trump administration and its various agencies “from taking any action to issue any reduction in force notices to federal employees in any program, project or activity” involving union members “during or because of the federal shutdown.”

She also barred the administration from “taking any further action to administer or implement” existing reduction notices involving union members.

Illston demanded that the administration provide within two days a full accounting of all existing or “imminent” reduction in force orders that would be blocked by her order, as well as the specific number of federal jobs affected.

Elizabeth Hedges, an attorney for the Trump administration, had argued during the hearing that the order should not be granted for several procedural reasons — including that the alleged harm to federal employees from loss of employment or benefits was not “irreparable” and could be addressed through other avenues, including civil litigation.

Additionally, she argued that federal employment claims should be adjudicated administratively, not in district court; and that the reduction in force orders included 60-day notice periods, meaning the layoffs were not immediate and therefore the challenge to them was not yet “ripe” legally.

However, Hedges would not discuss the case on its actual merits — which is to say, whether the cuts were actually legal or not, which did not seem to sit well with Illston.

“You don’t have a position on whether it’s OK that they do what they’re doing?” Illston asked.

“I am not prepared to discuss that today, your honor,” Hedges said.

“Well — but it’s happening. This hatchet is falling on the heads of employees all across the nation, and you’re not even prepared to address whether that’s legal, even though that’s what this motion challenges?” Illston said.

“That’s right,” Hedges said — stressing again that there were “threshold” arguments for why the case shouldn’t even be allowed to continue to the merits stage.

Danielle Leonard, an attorney for the unions, suggested the government’s positions were indefensible and directly in conflict with public statements by the administration — including remarks by Trump on Tuesday that more cuts are coming Friday.

“How do we know this? Because OMB and the president relentlessly are telling us, and other members of the administration,” Leonard said.

Leonard said the harm from the administration’s actions is obvious and laid out in the union’s filings — showing how employees have at times been left in the dark as to their employment status because they don’t have access to work communication channels during the shutdown, or how others have been called in to “work without pay to fire their fellow employees” — only to then be fired themselves.

“There are multiple types of harm that are caused exactly right now — emotional trauma. That’s not my word, your honor, that is the word of OMB Director Vought. Let’s cause ‘trauma’ to the federal workforce,” Leonard said. “And that’s exactly what they are doing. Trauma. The emotional distress of being told you are being fired after an already exceptionally difficult year for federal employees.”

Skye Perryman, president and chief executive of Democracy Forward, which is co-counsel for the unions, praised Illston’s decision in a statement after the hearing.

“The statements today by the court make clear that the President’s targeting of federal workers — a move straight out of Project 2025’s playbook — is unlawful,” Perryman said. “Our civil servants do the work of the people, and playing games with their livelihoods is cruel and unlawful and a threat to everyone in our nation.”

Illston asked the two parties to confer on the best date, probably later this month, for a fuller hearing on whether she should issue a more lasting preliminary injunction in the case.

“It would be wonderful to know what the government’s position is on the merits of this case — and my breath is bated until we find that,” Illston said.

After the hearing, during a White House news conference, Trump said his administration was paying federal employees whom “we want paid” while Vought uses the shutdown to dismiss employees perceived as supporting Democratic initiatives.

“Russell Vought is really terminating tremendous numbers of Democrat projects — not only jobs,” Trump said.

A federal judge on Tuesday temporarily halted a Trump administration plan to reduce disaster relief and anti-terrorism funding for states with so-called sanctuary policies for undocumented immigrants.

U.S. District Judge Mary S. McElroy granted the temporary restraining order curtailing the cuts at the request of California, 10 other states and the District of Columbia, which argued in a lawsuit Monday that the policy appeared to have illegally cost them hundreds of millions of dollars.

The states said they were first notified of the cuts over the weekend. McElroy made her decision during an emergency hearing on the states’ motion in Rhode Island District Court on Tuesday afternoon.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta cheered the decision as the state’s latest win in pushing back against what he described as a series of unlawful, funding-related power grabs by the Trump administration.

“Over and over, the courts have stopped the Trump Administration’s illegal efforts to tie unrelated grant funding to state policies,” Bonta said. “It’s a little thing called state sovereignty, but given the President’s propensity to violate the Constitution, it’s unsurprising that he’s unfamiliar with it.”

Neither the White House nor the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the funding and notified the states of the cuts, immediately responded to a request for comment Tuesday.

Sanctuary policies are not uniform and the term is imprecise, but it generally refers to policies that bar states and localities — and their local law enforcement agencies — from participating in federal immigration raids or other enforcement initiatives.

The Trump administration and other Republicans have cast such policies as undermining law and order. Democrats and progressives including in California say instead that states and cities have finite public safety resources and that engaging in immigration enforcement serves only to undermine the trust they and their law enforcement agencies need to maintain with the public in order to prevent and solve crime, including in large immigrant communities.

In their lawsuit Monday, the states said the funding being reduced was part of billions in federal dollars annually distributed to the states to “prepare for, protect against, respond to, and recover from catastrophic disasters,” and which administrations of both political parties distributed “evenhandedly” for decades before Trump.

Authorized by Congress after events such as Sept. 11 and Hurricane Katrina, the funding covers the salaries of first responders, testing of state computer networks for cyberattack vulnerabilities, mutual aid compacts between regional partners and emergency responses after disasters, the states said.

Bonta’s office said California was informed over the weekend by Homeland Security officials that it would be receiving $110 million instead of $165 million, a reduction of its budget by about a third. The states’ lawsuit said other blue states saw even more dramatic cuts, with Illinois seeing a 69% reduction and New York receiving a 79% reduction, while red states saw substantial funding increases.

Bonta on Tuesday said the administration’s reshuffling of funds based on state compliance with the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement priorities was illegal and needed to be halted — and restored to previous levels based on risk assessment — in order to keep everyone in the country safe.

“California uses the grant funding at stake in our lawsuit to protect the safety of our communities from acts of terrorism and other disasters — meaning the stakes are quite literally life and death,” he said. “This is not something to play politics with. I’m grateful to the court for seeing the urgency of this dangerous diversion of homeland security funding.”

Homeland Security officials have previously argued that the agency should be able to withhold funding from states that it believes are not upholding or are actively undermining its core mission of defending the nation from threats, including the threat it sees from illegal immigration.

Other judges have also ruled against the administration conditioning disaster and public safety funding on states and localities complying with federal immigration policies.

Joining California in Monday’s lawsuit were Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia.

Sept. 26 (UPI) — The Trump administration has halted funding to three public school districts — in Chicago, Fairfax, Va., and New York City over their diversity policies.

The Department of Education on Thursday pulled $65 million in magnet school funding from the districts 10 days after issuing them a warning, The New York Times reported.

On Sept. 16, the department sent letters to the district accusing them of violating civil rights law. The Trump administration took issue with all three districts allowing transgender students to play in sports and use the bathroom of their choice.

Federal officials also threatened to withhold funds from Chicago schools over a program specifically designed to help Black students, according to Axios.

Department of Education spokeswoman Julie Hartman said that because the districts were willing to “continue their illegal activity” means move to cut funding “falls squarely on them.”

“These are public schools, funded by hardworking American families, and parents have every right to expect an excellent education — not ideological indoctrination masquerading as ‘inclusive’ policy,” she said.

The Chicago Teachers Union said the district is “standing firm” against the Department of Education’s threats.

Chicago Public Schools “and the Board of Education made clear they will not abandon the Black Student Success Plan or roll back protections for transgender students,” a statement from the union said.

“Instead, the district is demanding due process and defending these policies as both legally required and essential for closing opportunity gaps and protecting vulnerable students.”

New York City Public Schools said it had asked the Trump administration for an extension in response to the Sept. 16 letter.

“Cutting this funding — which invests in specialized curricula, afterschool education and summer learning — harms not only the approximately 8,500 students this program currently benefits, but all of our students from underserved communities,” the district said.

Lilongwe, Malawi – In the rural valleys of Malawi, where homes are built of mud and grass, and electricity is scarce, Tamala Chunda spent his evenings bent over borrowed textbooks, reading by the dim light of a kerosene lamp.

During the day, he helped his parents care for the family’s few goats and tended their half-acre maize field in Emanyaleni village, some 400km (249 miles) from the capital city, Lilongwe. By night, he studied until his eyes stung, convinced that education was the only way to escape the poverty that had trapped his village for generations.

That conviction carried him through his final examinations, where he ranked among the top 10 students in his secondary school.

Then, this May, a letter arrived that seemed to vindicate every late-night hour and every sacrificed childhood game: a full scholarship to the University of Dayton in Ohio, the United States.

“I thought life was about to change for the first time,” Chunda told Al Jazeera. “For my entire family, not just myself.”

News of the award brought celebration to his grass-thatched home, where family and neighbours gathered to mark what felt like a rare triumph. His parents, subsistence farmers battling drought and rising fertiliser costs, marked the occasion by slaughtering their most valuable goat, a rare luxury in a village where many families survive on a single meal a day.

Distant neighbours even walked for miles to offer their congratulations to the boy who had become a beacon of hope for the children around him.

But just months later, that dream unravelled.

The US embassy informed Chunda that before travelling, he would have to post a $15,000 visa bond – more than 20 years of the average income in Malawi, where the gross domestic product (GDP) per person is just $580, and most families live on less than $2 a day, according to the World Bank.

“That scholarship offer was the first time I thought the world outside my village was opening up for me,” he said. “Now it feels as if I’m being informed that no matter how hard I work, doors will remain sealed by money I will never have.”

A sudden barrier

Chunda is one of hundreds of Malawian students and travellers caught in the sweep of a new US visa rule that critics say amounts to a travel ban under another name.

On August 20, 2025, the US State Department introduced a yearlong “pilot programme” requiring many business (B-1) and tourist (B-2) visa applicants from Malawi and neighbouring Zambia to post refundable bonds of $5,000, $10,000 or $15,000 before travelling.

The programme, modelled on a proposal first floated during the Trump administration in 2020, is intended to curb visa overstays. But Homeland Security’s own statistics suggest otherwise.

In 2023, the department reported that Malawian visitors had an overstay rate of approximately 14 percent, which is lower than that of several African nations not subject to the bond requirement, including Angola, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Liberia, Mauritania, Nigeria and Sierra Leone.

“It is the equivalent of asking a farmer who earns less than $500 a year to produce 30 years’ worth of income overnight,” said Charles Kajoloweka, executive director of Youth and Society, a Malawian civil society organisation that focuses on education. “For our students, it is less of a bond and more of an exclusion order.”

A US embassy spokesperson in Lilongwe told local media that the bond programme was intended to discourage overstays, and said it did not directly target student visas.

While student visas, known as F-1s, are technically exempt from the bond requirement in the pilot phase of the programme, in practice the situation is more complicated, observers note.

International students on F-1s are allowed to enter the US up to 30 days before their programme start date. However, for those needing to arrive prior to that – for orientation programmes, housing arrangements, or pre-college courses, for instance – they must apply for a separate B-2 tourist visa.

That means that many scholarship recipients need tourist visas to travel ahead of the academic year. But without funds to secure these visas, the scholarships can slip away.

For students entering the US on tourist visas with the intention of changing their status to F-1 once they are there, this is legally permissible, but it must be approved by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services. The visa bond requirements make this pathway much more complicated for Malawian students.

Even for those who manage to raise the funds, there is no guarantee of success. Posting a bond does not ensure approval, and refunds are only granted if travellers depart on time through one of three designated US airports: Logan in Boston, Kennedy in New York, and Dulles outside Washington.

Kajoloweka added that the policy also places extraordinary discretion in the hands of individual consular officers, who decide which applicants must pay bonds and how much.

Students in limbo

For decades, programmes such as the Fulbright scholarships, the Mandela Washington Fellowship, and EducationUSA have created a steady pipeline of Malawian talent to American universities.

“Malawi depends on its brightest young minds acquiring skills abroad, especially in fields where local universities lack capacity,” said Kajoloweka. “By shutting down access to US institutions, we are shrinking the pool of future doctors, engineers, scientists, and leaders … It is basically a brain drain in reverse.”

The visa bond has strained decades of diplomatic and educational ties between the US and Malawi, a relationship built by programmes dating from the 1960s and reinforced by sustained investment in education and development.

Last month, Malawi’s foreign minister, Nancy Tembo, called the policy a “de facto ban” that discriminates against citizens of one of the world’s poorest nations.

“This move has shattered the plans most Malawians had to travel,” said Abraham Samson, a student who had applied for US scholarships before the bond was announced. “With our economy, not everyone can manage this. For those of us chasing further studies, these dreams are now a mirage.”

Samson has stopped monitoring his email for scholarship responses. He feels there is little point, believing that even if an offer were to arrive, the overall costs of studying in the US would remain far beyond his reach.

Section 214(b) of US immigration law already presumes every visa applicant intends to immigrate unless proven otherwise, forcing students to demonstrate strong ties to their home country.

The bond adds another burden, wherein applicants must now prove both their intention to return and that they have access to wealth beyond the means of most.

Hope on hold

The situation is even more difficult for small business owners.

One businessman has spent two decades creating his small electronics import company in Lilongwe, relying on regular trips to the US to identify cost-effective suppliers.

In the aftermath of the mandate, the $15,000 visa bond has disrupted his plans, forcing him to buy from middlemen at outrageous prices.

“Every delay eats away at my margins,” he explained, speaking under the condition of anonymity to protect future visa prospects. “My six employees rely on me. If I can’t travel, I may have to send them home.”

Civil society groups, such as the one Kajoloweka helms, are mobilising against the policy. The group is documenting “real-life stories of affected students,” lobbying both locally and internationally, and “engaging partners in the United States and Europe to raise the alarm”.

“We refuse to let this issue quietly extinguish the hopes of Malawian youth,” he said. “This bond is a barrier, but barriers can be challenged. Your dreams are valid, your aspirations are legitimate, and your voices matter. The world must not shut you out,” he added, speaking generally to Malawian youth.

Meanwhile, back in his village, Chunda contemplates a future far different from the one he had imagined. His scholarship to the University of Dayton sits unused, a reminder of an opportunity denied.

“I thought life was about to change for the first time,” he lamented. “For my entire family, not just myself. I now have to look elsewhere to realise my dream.”

This article is published in collaboration with Egab.

The reunion special of Love is Blind UK has arrived on Netflix – however, it proved to be an emotional one for co-host Emma Willis with the star forced to pause filming

Love is Blind UK’s Emma Willis burst into tears during the Netflix show’s emotional reunion special and was forced to take a break after the episode took an emotional turn. The second series of the dating competition came to an end this week, with the couples reuniting for a highly-anticipated special.

While the final episode of Love is Blind UK saw three couples say ‘I do’ at their wedding ceremony, the reunion revealed that only Kieran and Megan were still together. Kal and Sarover admitted that they separated back in January after Kal decided that they were no longer compatible.

Meanwhile, Billy and Ashleigh divorced in January due to personal differences. Despite the split, Ashleigh said at the reunion that she still has “faith in love” just not from Billy. It comes after Love Is Blind UK series two reunion biggest spats ‘exposed’ as cast members reunite.

READ MORE: Love Is Blind UK star hits out after marriage ended in three months ‘I was in the darkest place’

READ MORE: Will there be a Love Is Blind UK season 3 as Netflix favourite comes to an end?

“I have faith in love from this experiment and being brave every single day of that experiment,” she said. “And exposing myself in every possible way because I wanted this to work.

“And I wanted to find true love and someone who would make me feel safe every single day. I want someone with a backbone. Someone who loves me for me and all of me 365 days of the year until we pass.

“I want that love story and I deserve that love story and I love myself for that. And love me unconditionally every single day and not give up within three months because I have a role which is very similar to yours, where I travel at times.”

Ashleigh’s speech left Emma in tears, with the presenter saying: “I know, I know this is really hard. But thank you both so much for being here, for being honest and I do hope you both find genuine love until the day you die.”

She added: “Oh, you got me you two did,” while husband and co-host Matt Willis comforted her. “Shall we take another break?” he asked, before Emma decided that it would be best if they paused filming.

During the reunion, Sarover opened up about her break-up from Kal, saying that she “never saw the end coming”. Kal repeatedly said: “I just don’t think I’m compatible in a long-term relationship, and it took me to meet on paper the perfect woman to realize that.”

However, Sarover hit back and criticised him for going through a “legal commitment” she didn’t think he ever should have made if he had doubts about their future.

Join The Mirror’s WhatsApp Community or follow us on Google News , Flipboard , Apple News, TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads – or visit The Mirror homepage.

The Trump administration halted construction on a nearly complete offshore wind project off Rhode Island as the White House continues to attack the battered U.S. offshore wind industry that scientists say is crucial to the urgent fight against climate change.

Danish wind farm developer Orsted says the Revolution Wind project is about 80% complete, with 45 of its 65 turbines already installed.

Despite that progress — and the fact that the project had cleared years of federal and state reviews — the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management issued the order Friday, saying the federal government needs to review the project and “address concerns related to the protection of national security interests of the United States.”

It did not specify what the national security concerns are.

President Trump has made sweeping strides to prioritize fossil fuels and hinder renewable energy projects. He recently called wind and solar power “THE SCAM OF THE CENTURY!” in a social media post and vowed not to approve wind or “farmer destroying Solar” projects. “The days of stupidity are over in the USA!!!” he wrote on his Truth Social site this week.

Scientists across the globe agree that nations need to rapidly embrace renewable energy to stave off the worst effects of climate change, including extreme heat and drought; larger, more intense wildfires; and supercharged hurricanes, typhoons and rainstorms that lead to catastrophic flooding.

Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee criticized the stop-work order and said he and Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont “will pursue every avenue to reverse the decision to halt work on Revolution Wind” in a post on X. Both governors are Democrats.

Construction on Revolution Wind began in 2023, and the project was expected to be fully operational next year. Orsted says it is evaluating the financial impact of stopping construction and is considering legal proceedings.

Revolution Wind is located more than 15 miles south of the Rhode Island coast, 32 miles southeast of the Connecticut coast and 12 miles southwest of Martha’s Vineyard. Rhode Island is already home to one offshore wind farm, the five-turbine Block Island Wind Farm.

Revolution Wind was expected to be Rhode Island and Connecticut’s first commercial-scale offshore wind farm, capable of powering more than 350,000 homes. The densely populated states have minimal space available for land-based energy projects, which is why the offshore wind project is considered crucial for the states to meet their climate goals.

“This arbitrary decision defies all logic and reason — Revolution Wind’s project was already well underway and employed hundreds of skilled tradesmen and women. This is a major setback for a critical project in Connecticut, and I will fight it,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said in a statement.

Wind power is the largest source of renewable energy in the U.S. and provides about 10% of the electricity generated nationwide.

“Today, the U.S. has only one fully operational large-scale offshore wind project producing power. That is not enough to meet America’s rising energy needs. We need more energy of all types, including oil and gas, wind, and new and emerging technologies,” said Erik Milito, president of the National Ocean Industries Assn., which supports offshore oil, gas and wind energy.

Green Oceans, a nonprofit that opposes the offshore wind industry, applauded the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management decision. “We are grateful that the Trump Administration and the federal government are taking meaningful action to preserve the fragile ocean environment off the coasts of Rhode Island and Massachusetts,” the group said in a statement.

This is the second major offshore wind project the White House has halted. Work was stopped on Empire Wind, a New York offshore wind project, but construction was allowed to resume after New York Sen. Chuck Schumer and Gov. Kathy Hochul, both Democrats, intervened.

“This administration has it exactly backwards. It’s trying to prop up clunky, polluting coal plants while doing all it can to halt the fastest growing energy sources of the future — solar and wind power,” Kit Kennedy, managing director for the power division at Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement. “Unfortunately, every American is paying the price for these misguided decisions.”

O’Malley writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Jennifer McDermott in Providence, R.I., and Matthew Daly in Washington contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — A day after conservative activist Laura Loomer, an advisor to President Trump, posted videos on social media of children from Gaza arriving in the U.S. for medical treatment and questioning how they got visas, the State Department said it was halting all visitor visas for people from Gaza pending a review.

The State Department said Saturday the visas would be stopped while it looks into how “a small number of temporary medical-humanitarian visas” were issued in recent days. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday told “Face the Nation” on CBS that the action came after ”outreach from multiple congressional offices asking questions about it.”

Rubio said that there were “just a small number” of the visas issued to children in need of medical aid but that they were accompanied by adults. The congressional offices reached out with evidence that “some of the organizations bragging about and involved in acquiring these visas have strong links to terrorist groups like Hamas,” he asserted, without providing evidence or naming those organizations.

As a result, he said, “we are going to pause this program and reevaluate how those visas are being vetted and what relationship, if any, has there been by these organizations to the process of acquiring those visas.”

Loomer on Friday posted videos on X of children from Gaza arriving this month in San Francisco and Houston for medical treatment with the aid of an organization called Heal Palestine. “Despite the US saying we are not accepting Palestinian ‘refugees’ into the United States under the Trump administration,” these people from Gaza were able to travel to the U.S., she said.

She called it a “national security threat” and asked who signed off on the visas, calling for the person to be fired. She tagged Rubio, Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Trump has downplayed Loomer’s influence on his administration, but several officials swiftly left or were removed shortly after she publicly criticized them.

The State Department on Sunday declined to comment on how many of the visas had been granted and whether the decision to halt visas to people from Gaza had anything to do with Loomer’s posts.

Heal Palestine said in a statement Sunday that it was “distressed” by the State Department decision to stop halt visitor visas from Gaza. The group said it is “an American humanitarian nonprofit organization delivering urgent aid and medical care to children in Palestine.”

A post on the organization’s Facebook page Thursday shows a photo of a boy from the Gaza Strip leaving Egypt and headed to St. Louis for treatment and said he is “our 15th evacuated child arriving in the U.S. in the last two weeks.”

The organization brings “severely injured children” to the U.S. on temporary visas for treatment they can’t get at home, the statement said. After treatment, the children and any family members who accompanied them return to the Middle East, the statement said.

“This is a medical treatment program, not a refugee resettlement program,” it said.

The World Health Organization has repeatedly called for more medical evacuations from Gaza, where Israel’s 22-month war against Hamas has heavily destroyed or damaged much of the territory’s health system.

“More than 14,800 patients still need lifesaving medical care that is not available in Gaza,” WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said Wednesday on social media, and called on more countries to offer support.

A WHO description of the medical evacuation process from Gaza published last year explained that the organization submits lists of patients to Israeli authorities for security clearance. It noted that before the war in Gaza began, 50 to 100 patients were leaving the territory daily for medical treatment, and it called for a higher rate of approvals from Israeli authorities.

The United Nations and partners say medicines and basic healthcare supplies are low in Gaza after Israel cut off all aid to the territory of over 2 million people for more than 10 weeks earlier this year.

“Ceasefire! Peace is the best medicine,” Tedros added Wednesday.

Aug. 7 (UPI) — A federal judge on Thursday blocked further construction on an immigrant detention complex in Florida that has been referred to as “Alligator Alcatraz.”

U.S. District Court Judge Kathleen Mary Williams issued a temporary restraining order after hearing two days of testimony about the potential environmental impacts of the center.

The state of Florida and the Trump administration are permitted to continue housing detainees, but further construction is on hold for 14 days.

Environmental advocates and the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians and the state contend the “Alligator Alcatraz” facility could harm the Everglades ecosystem. The groups contend that construction of the center began without the necessary environmental impact statements.

Multiple species reside in the area’s habitat, including the Florida Panther, and it is considered spiritually sacred to the Miccosukee Tribe.

“We welcome the court’s decision to pause construction on this deeply concerning project,” Miccosukee Chairman Talbert Cypress said in a statement. “The detention facility threatens land that is not only environmentally sensitive but sacred to our people. While this order is temporary, it is an important step in asserting our rights and protecting our homeland. The Miccosukee Tribe will continue to stand for our culture, our sovereignty, and the Everglades.”

Williams’ temporary restraining order prevents filling, paving, lighting and installing additional infrastructure.

The detention center opened in July and is able to house thousand of inmates. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has said “Alligator Alcatraz” could serve as a template for state-run immigration-detention facilities in the United States.

President Donald Trump announced in May that the United States would reopen the original Alcatraz prison in San Francisco Bay, but there have been no independent cost analyses of what that would cost or when, or if, it would happen.

Baharav-Miara at loggerheads with PM Netanyahu over corruption charges, his ‘judicial coup’, and sacking of Shin Bet chief.

The High Court of Israel has issued a temporary order freezing an attempt by the government to dismiss Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, in the latest instance of the far-right coalition closing ranks.

The court’s decision on Monday came immediately after the Israeli cabinet voted unanimously to fire Baharav-Miara, the country’s most senior legal official, who has been leading the prosecution of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his corruption trial.

Justice Minister Yariv Levin announced the cabinet’s decision and addressed a letter to Baharav-Miara saying she “should not try to impose herself on a government that has no trust in her and cannot work with her effectively”.

However, immediately after the decision, opposition party Yesh Atid and activist groups filed urgent petitions to Israel’s High Court seeking to halt the dismissal.

The Movement for Quality Government in Israel, a prominent watchdog group, cited the conflict of interest over Netanyahu’s corruption trial and said the dismissal effectively turned the role of attorney general into a “political appointment”.

In response, the court issued an injunction suspending the decision, clarifying that the government could not strip Baharav-Miara of her authority or name a replacement until further review, with a court hearing set to take place within 30 days.

Immediately after the court ruling, hardline Israeli Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi vowed on X not to obey the court order, declaring it “invalid”.

“A replacement for her must be appointed immediately!” he said. “We obey the law! We say to the High Court – no!”

Escalating tensions

Baharav-Miara has been at loggerheads with the government since it took office, with tensions escalating over the government’s divisive judicial reform package, which was first unveiled in 2023, sparking major street protests.

Back in March, the Israeli cabinet had passed a vote of no confidence against Baharav-Miara. Netanyahu’s office accused the legal official of “inappropriate behaviour”, claiming that her “ongoing substantial differences of opinion” with the government prevented “effective collaboration”.

The attorney general had refuted the claims and said the vote of no confidence was aimed at gaining “limitless power, as part of a wider move to weaken the judicial branch” and to “promote loyalty to the government”.

Days later, the Israeli parliament passed a key component of the plans, which critics have branded as a “judicial coup”, effectively giving politicians more power over the appointments of judges, including Supreme Court justices.

Baharav-Miara had also challenged the legality of Netanyahu’s attempt to fire Ronen Bar, the head of the Shin Bet security agency, which the Supreme Court declared “unlawful”.

Bar, who stepped down from his role when his term ended in June, had been conducting a probe into alleged ties between the prime minister’s close aides and Qatar, a case known in the Israeli press as “Qatargate”.

The former Shin Bet head had also refused to sign off on a security request aimed at relieving Netanyahu from testifying at his ongoing corruption trial in which he faces charges of bribery, fraud and breach of public trust.

Aug. 1 (UPI) — A federal judge has ruled to postpone the Trump administration’s termination of deportation protections for tens of thousands of migrants from Honduras, Nepal and Nicaragua amid litigation.

Judge Trina Thompson of the U.S. District Court in Northern California issued her strongly worded order Thursday, delaying the termination of Temporary Protected Status until at least Nov. 18, when a hearing is scheduled to hear the merits of the case.

The ruling is a win for immigration advocates, who have been fighting Trump’s crackdown on immigration and policies seeking to mass-deport migrants in the country.

“The freedom to live fearlessly, the opportunity of liberty and the American dream. That is all plaintiffs seek. Instead, they are told to atone for their race, leave because of their names and purify their blood. The court disagrees,” Thompson said in her decision.

TPS was established by Congress in 1990 to shield migrants in the United States from being deported to their home countries experiencing problems, such as war, conflict or famine, where they would be put into harm’s way.

Honduras and Nicaragua were both granted TPS designation in January 1999, following the devastation caused by Hurricane Mitch a year prior, with Nepal receiving the designation in 2015.

Some 60,000 people from the three countries are currently protected from being deported to their native nations because of TPS, many of whom have been in the United States for decades.

Trump has attempted to dismantle TPS. In early June, he announced it was ending such protections for those from Nepal, followed by doing the same for those from Honduras and Nicaragua. The designations were to be terminated within 60 days — Aug. 5 for Nepal and Sept. 8 for Honduras and Nicaragua.

The Trump administration cited that conditions in each of the three countries no longer warranted TPS designation.

The move was met with litigation filed by the National TPS Alliance on July 7, arguing the terminations violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to follow the necessary review process rules while stating racial animus was the actual motive behind ending the deportation protections.

The next day, National TPS Alliance filed for postponement of the terminations.

“Today’s court decision is a powerful affirmation of our humanity and our right to live without fear,” Sandhya Lama, a TPS holder from Nepal and plaintiff in the case, said in a statement. “As a TPS holder and mother, this victory means safety, hope and the chance to keep building our lives here.”

In her decision, Thompson, a President Joe Biden appointee, cited comments from Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem about TPS and immigrants as proof of racial animus behind the terminations.

She said Noem had intended to end TPS without first reviewing any country condition reports and that she had expressed bias against the program.

“These statements reflect the secretary’s animus against immigrants and the TPS program even though individuals with TPS hold lawful status — a protected status that we expressly conferred by Congress with the purpose of providing humanitarian relief,” Thompson said, adding that TPS holders have contributed billion to the economy by legally working, paying taxes and contributing to Medicare.

“By stereotyping the TPS program and immigrants as invaders that are criminal, and by highlighting the need for migration management, Secretary Noem’s statements perpetuate the discriminatory belief that certain immigrant populations will replace the white population.”

Thompson also mentioned comments from Trump and other White House officials about migrants that show racial animus.

Trump has also sought to end TPS protections for other nations, including Afghanistan — moves that are also being challenged in court.

July 18 (UPI) — A federal judge overturned the approval by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of a mixed-use project in Chico, Calif., after environmentalists claimed it will destroy the natural habitat of threatened species.

At issue was the Stonegate Development Project, a 314-acre development. It was to include 423 single-family residential lots, 13.4 acres of multi-family residential land uses, 36.6 acres of commercial land uses, 5.4 acres of storm water facilities, 3.5 acres of park and a 137-acre, open-space preserve, the ruling said.

U.S. District Judge Daniel Calabretta gave summary judgment requested by the Center for Biological Diversity and AquAlliance and halted implementation of the project until the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prepares a legally adequate biological opinion that the development wouldn’t jeopardize protected species.

Calabretta, a President Joe Biden appointee, wrote that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a Biological Opinion for the project in early 2020. That opinion “acknowledged there would be harm to some ESA-listed species, but that the project would not jeopardize the continued survival and recovery of the listed fairy shrimp, tadpole shrimp and meadowfoam.” It also did not analyze impacts on the giant garter snake, he added.

“The court finds that federal defendants’ failure to consider potential effects on the ESA-listed giant garter snake was based on a faulty assumption that there have been no sightings of the snake within five miles of the project renders its Biological Opinion arbitrary and capricious,” Calabretta said.

According to the conservation groups, the project also would permanently destroy 9.14 acres of wetlands. But some meadowfoam habitat may be established through mitigation efforts.

The Butte County meadowfoam is found nowhere in the world but Butte County, Calif., the Center for Biological Diversity said. The species has only 21 distinct populations remaining, and the project would destroy one population and further encroach on two others.

According to the fish and wildlife service, the giant garter snake is one of the largest garter snakes, reaching 63.7 inches long. It has been listed as threatened since 1993 and now only exists in three counties in California. Only about 5% of its historical wetland habitat remains.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp are restricted to vernal pools found in California and southern Oregon. They are found in 32 counties across California’s Central Valley, central coast and southern California and in Jackson County in southern Oregon, the service said.

July 8 (UPI) — A federal judge has awarded Planned Parenthood a win over the Trump administration, halting a provision in President Donald Trump‘s massive tax cuts and benefits bill that prevents patients from using Medicaid at its healthcare facilities.

Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts issued her temporary restraining order Monday evening, ordering the Trump administration to take “all steps necessary to ensure that Medicaid funding continues to be disbursed in the customary manner and timeframes to Planned Parenthood Federation and its members.”

The ruling came hours after Planned Parenthood filed its lawsuit against a provision in Trump’s policy bill that puts in place a one-year ban on Medicaid payments to healthcare nonprofits that provide abortion services while receiving more than $800,000 in Medicaid reimbursements in fiscal year 2023.

The nonprofit family medical provider accused the Trump administration of unlawfully targeting it with the so-called defund provision.

It said the provision’s purpose was to specifically “punish” Planned Parenthood for advocating for and providing legal abortion access outside of the Medicaid program and without using federal funds.

The lawsuit added that the provision was made specifically to target Planned Parenthood as those who would be affected by it are “almost entirely” its members.

“And if there were any doubt, President Trump, Speaker [Mike] Johnson and their allies have been promising to ‘defund Planned Parenthood’ for years now,” the lawsuit states. “That is what the Defund Provision does.”

According to the lawsuit, if the provision is allowed to stand, it would threaten the healthcare of more than 1 million Americans who use Medicaid as their insurance at Planned Parenthood centers for care ranging from birth control to cancer screenings.

“The Defund Provision is a naked attempt to leverage the government’s spending power to attack and penalize Planned Parenthood and impermissibly single it out for unfavorable treatment,” the lawsuit states.

“It does so not only because of Planned Parenthood members’ long history of providing legal abortions to patients across the country, but also because of Planned Parenthood’s unique role in advocating for policies to protect and expand access to sexual and reproductive healthcare, including abortion.”

In a statement following the ruling, Planned Parenthood said it was “grateful” for the swift action.

“In states across the country, providers have been forced to turn away patients who use Medicaid to get basic sexual and reproductive healthcare because President Trump and his backers in Congress passed a law to block them from going to Planned Parenthood,” it said on Threads.

“The fight is just beginning, and we look forward to our day in court!”

The Russian occupation governor of Ukraine’s eastern Luhansk region claimed it had been entirely conquered on Tuesday, making it the first of the four eastern Ukrainian regions Russia has annexed that it fully controls.

“Just a couple of days ago, I received a report that the territory of the Luhansk People’s Republic has been 100 percent liberated,” Leonid Pasechnik told Russia’s TV Channel One.

Not everyone agreed.

Russian military reporters said two villages remained free, and pointed out that Luhansk had been declared conquered once before, in 2022, before being partially reclaimed in a Ukrainian counteroffensive in September of that year.

Undoubtedly, though, Russian forces have inched towards reconquering the entire territory in the intervening 33 months, and that constitutes a second milestone within the past month on Ukraine’s eastern front.

Russia’s advance dealt another blow to Ukraine, more than three years after the full-scale invasion began. On the same day as Pasechnik’s announcement, the United States said it would not be sending Kyiv some weapons that had been promised by the administration of Joe Biden, the former US president.

“This decision was made to put America’s interests first following a review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries across the globe,” said the White House.

Russian troops reached the border of the Dnipropetrovsk region over the weekend of June 7-8, marking the first time in the war they had conquered the entire breadth of the Donetsk region at any point, even though about a third of it remains in Kyiv’s hands.

These milestones may be strategically meaningless, as they do not mark a breakthrough or a pace change in the Russian forces’ crawling advance, but they demonstrate that Ukrainian forces are also unable to turn the tide.

The Russian Ministry of Defence claimed its forces had taken the villages of Zaporizhzhia, Perebudova, Shevchenko and Yalta in Donetsk on June 27, proceeding to Chervona Zirka the following day and Novoukrainka on Sunday.

Through such small but constant conquests, Russia has given its offensive in Ukraine an inexorable feeling.

The buffer bluff

“Naturally, the Russian armed forces are now tasked to continue operations to establish a buffer zone. According to experts, it should stretch at least 70 to 120 kilometres (40 to 75 miles) deep inside Ukraine,” Igor Korotchenko, the editor of National Defense magazine, told TASS.

Such statements have come before from Russian officials and pro-Moscow pundits.

Last March, when Russian forces recaptured Kursk, a Russian region Ukraine had counter-invaded, battalion deputy commander Oleg Ivanov told TASS it was now necessary to create a buffer zone “no less than 20km [12 miles] wide, and preferably 30km [19 miles], extending deep into Ukrainian territory,” so that residents of Kursk would be safe from Ukrainian counterattack.

In May, deputy chairman of Russia’s National Security Council Dmitry Medvedev said that “if military aid to the regime of bandits continues”, referring to Kyiv, “the buffer zone could look like this” – and he posted a map on his Telegram channel, showing almost all of Ukraine shaded.

When Russian troops reached the Dnipropetrovsk border last month, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said they had begun new offensive operations in that region “within the framework of the creation of a buffer zone”.

Officially, the Kremlin has annexed only Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia and Kherson, but given that Russian President Vladimir Putin on June 20 revealed he still regarded all of Ukraine as Russian territory, many experts believe these buffer zones are little more than an excuse to continue capturing as much Ukrainian territory as possible.

On June 27, Putin referred to his goals more cryptically, telling journalists at the Eurasian Economic Union summit in Minsk that “we want to conclude the special military operation with the result that we need”.

In May, he called for a buffer zone between Russia and Ukraine on Ukrainian territory, leaving it to his lieutenants to define it. One general thought it should comprise six Ukrainian territories, and legislators in the Russian Duma backed him.

On Sunday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Ukraine was withdrawing from the Ottawa Treaty banning antipersonnel landmines.

The move would allow Ukraine to manufacture, stockpile and use such mines to defend itself.

“Antipersonnel mines … very often have no alternative as a tool for defence,” Zelenskyy said.

Ukraine strikes back

Ukraine continued to score tactical successes of its own inside Russia, using long-range weapons.

On Friday and Saturday, June 27-28, Ukrainian drones struck the Kirovske airfield. The Ukrainian State Security Service (SBU) said it was behind the attack and claimed to have destroyed at least three attack helicopters.

Also last week, Ukraine’s General Staff said an aerial attack had destroyed at least four Sukhoi-34 fighters at Russia’s Marinovka airbase. Russia uses the fighters to drop glide bombs on the Ukrainian front lines.

Intelligence sources reported that Ukraine may have destroyed a Russian intelligence base in the Bryansk region on June 26.

“Russia is investing in its unmanned capabilities. Russia is planning to increase the number of drones used in strikes against our state,” Zelenskyy said on June 30.

The previous day, Russia had conducted the largest unmanned air strike of the war so far, sending 447 drones and 90 missiles into Ukrainian cities.

Ukraine’s air force said it had shot down or electronically suppressed all but one of the drones and 38 missiles.

The increase in scale and intensity of Russian unmanned air attacks this year, and particularly since bilateral talks between the warring sides resumed in May, have led Ukrainian military experts to conclude that Moscow is marking Ukrainian territory it intends to launch a ground war against.

“We are not talking about the front lines. We are talking actually about [rear] areas and even the residential areas of Ukraine, so not so-called red line cities or communities but actually yellow cities and communities, which means slightly farther from the red line zones,” Cambridge University Centre for Geopolitics expert Victoria Vdovychenko told Al Jazeera.

When Zelenskyy spoke on Monday, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul visited Kyiv for the first time.

Zelenskyy said most of the nine billion euros ($11bn) in military aid Germany has promised this year would go towards the “strategic objective” of launching “systematic production of air defence systems”.

He had elaborated on what that meant last week, when he said he was “scaling up Ukraine’s potential, particularly regarding interceptors”, the missiles used to target incoming missiles.

“The scale of our production and the pace of drone development must be fully aligned with the conditions of the war,” he said. Russian attacks have been increasing in scale, and Zelenskyy meant that Ukraine had to keep up in its defensive response.

Regarding drones, he said on Monday, “The priority is drones, interceptor drones and long-range strike drones.”

Missiles for Patriot air defence systems and Hellfire missiles are among items being held back, according to US media.

The United States says it is halting some weapons deliveries to Kyiv that were promised under the Biden administration, as Russia intensifies its attacks on Ukraine.

The Biden-era pledges, which included various munitions to bolster Ukraine’s defences, are now under review as the Pentagon reassesses current inventory levels. The move could signal a shift in priorities under President Donald Trump, who has pressed for a more restrained global military posture.

“This decision was made to put America’s interests first following a review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries across the globe,” said White House spokesperson Anna Kelly in a statement on Tuesday.

The internal assessment by the Pentagon found some stockpiles “too low” to justify immediate transfer to Ukraine, said a US official who spoke on condition of anonymity, according to Politico, which first reported the halt of military aid.

“America’s military has never been more ready and more capable,” said Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell, noting a major tax and defence spending bill in Congress would help modernise systems for long-term deterrence.

Politico and other US media reported that missiles for Patriot air defence systems, precision artillery and Hellfire missiles are among the items being held back.

Russia intensifies assault

The delay comes at a precarious moment for Ukraine, as Russia intensifies its aerial bombardment in one of the heaviest phases of the war. Hopes for a ceasefire – long championed by Trump – have faded further, with talks between Kyiv and Moscow stalled.

Since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, the US has provided more than $66bn in weapons and security assistance to Ukraine.

Throughout the war, Washington has also urged its allies to supply air defence systems, particularly Patriot missile batteries. However, many NATO members remain reluctant to give up the systems, particularly countries in Eastern Europe that are wary of Russia.

Trump, who met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during last week’s NATO summit, acknowledged Ukraine’s request for more Patriots.

“They do want to have the antimissile missiles, OK, as they call them – the Patriots,” Trump said. “We’re going to see if we can make some available. We need them, too. We’re supplying them to Israel, and they’re very effective. Hard to believe how effective.”

Elbridge Colby, undersecretary for policy at the US Department of Defense, said the administration was exploring ways to balance continued support for Ukraine with readiness at home.

“The department is rigorously examining and adapting its approach,” Colby said, “while preserving US forces’ readiness for current defence priorities.”

Cambodia’s PM Hun Manet announced that the decision would take effect from midnight on Sunday.

Cambodia has announced it will stop all fuel imports from its neighbour Thailand as relations have plunged to their lowest ebb in more than a decade after a Cambodian soldier was killed last month in a disputed area of the border.

Prime Minister Hun Manet announced the decision on Sunday, posting on social media that it would take effect from midnight.

Manet said energy companies would be able to “import sufficiently from other sources to meet domestic fuel and gas demands” in the country.

Separately, on Sunday, Cambodia’s Foreign Ministry urged its citizens not to travel to Thailand unnecessarily. Concurrently, Thailand’s consular affairs department warned Thais in Cambodia to avoid “protest areas”.

The ongoing escalation between the two countries began last month after a brief exchange of gunfire in the disputed border area killed a Cambodian soldier.

For more than a century, Cambodia and Thailand have contested sovereignty at various un-demarcated points along their 817km (508-mile) land border, which was first mapped by France when it colonised Cambodia in 1907.

But following the soldier’s death, the two countries have taken several measures to secure their borders, with both announcing closures of border checkpoints and crossings.

Leaked phone call

The border dispute created wider political turmoil after a leaked phone call on Wednesday between Thailand’s Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra and the former Cambodian leader, Hun Sen, who remains a powerful influence in his nation.

During the call, the Thai premier told Hun Sen that she was under domestic pressure and urged him not to listen to “the opposite side”, including a prominent Thai military commander at the border.

Soon after the leak, a major coalition partner, the Bhumjaithai Party, quit the ruling alliance, overshadowing Paetongtarn’s premiership.

But on Sunday, the Thai leader said all coalition partners have pledged support for her government, which she said would seek to maintain political stability to address threats to national security.

Following a meeting with her coalition partners, she said, “The country must move forward. Thailand must unite and push policies to solve problems for the people.”

A rally has, nevertheless, been called for June 28 to demand that Paetongtarn, the daughter of influential former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, resign.

Hosts Tim Lovejoy and Simon Rimmer were forced to reveal that one of their guests, Yungblud, would not be appearing on the Channel 4 show

Sunday Brunch experienced an unexpected shake-up after a guest had to cancel their appearance due to medical advice.

The popular Channel 4 programme was back on the telly on Sunday (June 15), serving up its usual mix of culinary delights, banter and tunes. Presenters Tim Lovejoy and Simon Rimmer were joined by a fresh set of celebs.

During the episode, the duo engaged in conversation with stars such as Josh Groban, Gabriel Howell, Tom Hughes, Yinka Bokinni, and Lesley Joseph, while chart-topping sensation AJ Tracey delivered a musical performance.

However, singer Yungblud was notably absent from the line-up, having been forced to withdraw from the show following his doctor’s orders.

“YUNGBLUD sadly isn’t here,” Tim announced. He elaborated: “He was going to be on last week’s show and he was ill. Then he was going to be on this week’s show and he’s ill again.”, reports the Manchester Evening News.

Simon contributed: “He’s sent us a sick note Tim. A little handwritten sick note.”

Tim then presented Yungblud’s forthcoming album, Idols, which featured a handwritten note on the reverse.

As Simon read out the note, he conveyed: “In summary, he said, ‘Dear Tim and Simon, I regret to inform you that I Yungblud will not be able to appear on your show this Sunday again. Doctors are insisting I spend the week horizontal.'”.

Simon disclosed: “He’s got tonsils,” before resuming with Yungblud’s note: “Enclosed is a £20 note in the hope that you will shamelessly promote my album that comes out this Friday, it’s really good.”

Last week saw Yungblud bow out, with pop and Indie sensation Jerub stepping in at the eleventh hour to fill the void.

Taking a seat for a chat on the couch with the hosts, Jerub admitted it had been a “tight squeeze” managing to pencil in his studio appearance, but he jumped at the chance when approached, eager to “make it work.”

Sunday Brunch airs every Sunday at 10am on Channel 4.