limited

Months after the United Nations Security Council backed a comprehensive framework to end Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, Israel’s security cabinet has approved a highly constrained pilot project to allow foreign security forces into a narrow pocket of the devastated territory.

Israeli media reported on Sunday that the so-called International Stabilization Force (ISF), part of United States President Donald Trump’s 20-point “peace plan”, will include 200 members from countries such as Morocco and Uganda deploying to a designated “test” zone in the southern city of Rafah.

While international officials have welcomed the move, analysts describe the limited deployment as a calculated diplomatic gesture with little practical effect that comes as the US-backed peace process has largely stalled and as Israel’s deadly attacks continue.

Instead of a genuine transition towards peace, they argue, the move is a political manoeuvre designed to deflect US pressure ahead of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington this week, while simultaneously entrenching the geographic fragmentation of the Gaza Strip.

“Netanyahu is going to Washington to say ‘no’ to the broader demands of withdrawal” from the Strip, says Wissam Afifa, a Gaza-based political analyst. “Instead, he is offering this alternative: ‘Take this small appetiser, take this minor achievement, and play within this highly restricted space.’”

Scaled-back forces and ‘rubber batons’

The Israeli daily Haaretz reported that the original plan anticipated the deployment of 500 Moroccan troops to a refugee camp in the city. The drastic reduction to just 200 troops may indicate that Israel’s political-security cabinet has decided to divide the deployment into even smaller, heavily controlled stages.

The force will operate in full coordination with the Israeli military. According to the Israeli news outlet Ynet, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir was the sole cabinet member to vote against the measure, arguing that the Palestinian group Hamas had failed to fulfill its commitment to disarm and insisting that “the solution in Gaza is to encourage migration”.

Israeli media also reported that the government maintains that the Israeli military will retain control of the “Yellow Line” – a unilaterally imposed boundary that effectively places up to 70 percent of the Gaza Strip under tight Israeli control – and that no withdrawal will take place until Hamas has fully disarmed.

The original framework endorsed by UNSC Resolution 2803 called for the deployment of an international force alongside a transitional Palestinian administration.

Earlier this month, Hamas announced it would dissolve its government in Gaza and hand over power to a new, Palestinian technocratic governing authority called the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG).

Analysts said Hamas’s move was likely designed to apply pressure on Israel and demonstrate the group’s commitment to handing over governance and allowing the rebuilding of the territory.

The pilot programme also envisions the NCAG’s entry to oversee civil affairs in Gaza. Yet, according to Haaretz, the Palestinian police accompanying them will be stripped of firearms, permitted to carry only “rubber batons and tasers”.

Meanwhile, preparations on the ground appear to be moving forward to accommodate this new security architecture. Israeli Army Radio recently broadcast a video showing a military base under construction in the southern “Gaza envelope” near the Karem Abu Salem (Kerem Shalom) crossing.

The station reported that the sprawling facility is being built specifically to host the incoming multinational forces before their deployment.

Despite the severe Israeli restrictions, Nickolay Mladenov, the high representative for the Board of Peace, welcomed the Israeli cabinet’s decision, praising it as a “critical part of the agreed framework for stabilizing Gaza, supporting demilitarization, and enabling the transition to effective Palestinian transitional administration”.

A ‘sweetener’ for Washington

To understand the timing and motivation behind the decision, experts pointed to the diplomatic deadlock surrounding the US-brokered peace initiative. Trump’s plan envisioned a phased approach, bridged by the handover of Gaza to a technocratic committee. However, this framework has been stalled by Israel’s refusal to link a ceasefire to the broader political situation and its rejection of a phased withdrawal.

Afifa said the “failure” of the US administration’s flagship initiative had left it “embarrassed” as the project that was repeatedly highlighted by Trump “as a great achievement, resulted in zero”.

With Netanyahu heading to Washington, the Israeli prime minister desperately needed a deliverable, said Afifa. The cabinet’s decision, passed hastily via a telephone vote during a Knesset recess to avoid internal coalition fractures, provides exactly that, he added.

Mamoun Abu Amer, an expert on Israeli affairs, echoed this assessment. He viewed the rushed cabinet vote as an attempt to preempt US pressure and present an image of compliance to Trump, while fundamentally altering the agreement’s core terms to suit Israel’s long-term security strategy.

Abu Amer also said that Israel has effectively turned Resolution 2803 upside down through selective and highly conditional implementation.

“This is an inverted process,” said Abu Amer. The original text implied that the NCAG would enter Gaza, the ISF would deploy and the Israeli military would withdraw to new lines to allow for stabilisation. Instead, Israel is demanding unilateral disarmament first, while keeping the technocratic committee besieged within an Israeli security envelope.

Abu Amer also suggested the requirement for the Palestinian police force to only carry rubber batons and tasers reflects a premeditated Israeli strategy to strip the Palestinian administration of genuine law enforcement capabilities, reducing them to subcontractors managing municipal decay in a thoroughly devastated environment under a strict military occupation.

The NCAG itself appeared to reject this Israeli paradigm. In a recent statement, the committee declared it would only assume responsibility for Gaza after UNSC approval of the force’s deployment and, crucially, a full Israeli military withdrawal.

‘False witnesses’

The spatial realities of the Israeli plan reveal a strategy of deep fragmentation and long-term control, experts said, pointing to the cabinet’s decision to explicitly restrict the ISF and the technocrats to operating strictly outside the “Yellow Line”.

Afifa warned that transforming a small pocket of Rafah into an “experimental bubble” subverts the idea of Gaza as a single, contiguous territorial entity.

“This raises a massive question about the fate of two million people,” he said. “If this entire project is reduced to a few thousand individuals selected under Israeli criteria, it means a tacit agreement from the international community to leave two million Gazans hostage to a catastrophic humanitarian crisis while Israel claims to be implementing a peace plan.”

This also carries significant diplomatic risks for the participating nations. Israeli media reported the cabinet’s decision stipulated that ISF contributors must be nations that have peace agreements with Israel and do not pursue legal actions against it in international forums.

“It is not wise for an Arab country like Morocco to be a party to helping Netanyahu implement his political agenda,” said Abu Amer, urging participating nations to reject the altered Israeli formula and insist on a comprehensive withdrawal.

Failing to do so, he cautioned, would reduce foreign troops to mere security buffers, acting as “false witnesses” to the continuation of the occupation and the destruction of the Palestinian society.

Tehran, Iran – Iran is facing more energy constraints as its summer season begins, with the widespread use of air conditioning and other needs during hotter months contributing to an imbalance between supply and consumption.

For decades, successive Iranian governments have kept utility bills well below supply costs for households and offices through a mix of implicit oil-and-gas subsidies, administered tariffs, state-controlled pricing, and sometimes direct financial support.

The negative impacts of the war with Israel and the United States on the economy mean the government has fewer tools at its disposal to deal with an energy crisis this summer.

Despite having the world’s third-largest proven crude oil reserves, Iran will have to import fuel again as demand outpaces refinery output.

President Masoud Pezeshkian has repeatedly urged households and offices to take practical steps to limit energy consumption. Last week, he removed his jacket during a government meeting to demonstrate how Iranians can avoid turning down their air conditioning thermostats in their offices.

Even though energy costs for households are much lower than in other parts of the world, corruption, mismanagement, sanctions, chronic inflation and currency devaluation have eroded the benefits Iranians usually feel from subsidised energy prices.

In November 2019, the government announced a tiered gasoline price scheme that would see huge increases for some consumers. This sparked nationwide protests, and since then, the government has been wary about similar price hikes.

While inflation has galloped on, continued subsidies have kept fuel artificially low.

The administration’s attempts to tackle the subsidies burden due to a mounting budget crunch have resulted in only limited increases in petrol through a complex three-tiered pricing system.

This is applied via a government-issued fuel card, giving most users of Iranian-made vehicles access to 60 litres (15.85 US gallons) per month of subsidised petrol at 15,000 rials (0.8 cents) and another 100 litres (26.42 gallons) at 1.6 cents.

Iranians going over this amount then must use an “emergency card” issued at petrol stations, permitting them to an additional 30 litres (7.9 gallons) of fuel a day at 50,000 rials (about 2.9 cents) per litre.

After a new cap was imposed during the war to limit fuel consumption, each card allows only 30 litres of fuel a day. Petrol stations are issued their own “emergency card” for uses beyond this limit.

Due to supply constraints, staff at petrol stations have now reportedly been instructed to limit the use of these cards to 10 to 15 litres (up to 4 gallons) or asked not to issue any new cards at all to customers.

The Iranian government is running similar schemes for natural gas, electricity and urban water, with fears of social unrest making them averse to any sudden price hikes.

There appears to be little the government can do to bridge the divide between lower energy production and growing demand for subsidised fuel, illustrated by the perpetual queues at petrol stations since the start of the war.

“Reforming and increasing the price of energy is currently not feasible and logical due to the current economic conditions and social concerns,” Esmail Saghab Esfahani, a vice president of the state-linked Organization for Energy Optimization and Strategic Management, said earlier this week.

There have been some changes to pricing structures, but this is impacting small businesses that are already struggling with the dire economic conditions in Iran.

One 35-year-old owner of a welding workshop near Tehran, who asked to remain anonymous, told Al Jazeera that a surge in his monthly energy bill from 40 million rials ($23) per month in the previous Persian calendar year to three times that today.

“I went to the electricity company, and they only kept saying the tariffs have gone up,” he said.

“I had a similar message from a friend who is paying much more now for roughly the same usage as before, so it looks like we’re to pay for the cost of war.”

Authorities say that any complaints about escalating bills will be reviewed. They also have a system where normal household energy consumption is kept artificially low, but excessive users can be billed as much as 45 times the normal prices.

Despite having the second-largest proven natural gas reserves in the world, Iran still suffers from perpetual supply shortages during its winter and summer, when consumption is at its highest.

The situation has worsened during the war, with strikes on Iranian energy facilities seeing Iran’s gasoline production capacity drop marginally from 115 million litres (30.37 million gallons) per day to 110 million litres (29.06 million gallons). Meanwhile, consumption has jumped from 10 million litres (2.64 million litres) in 2025 to 140 million litres this year (36.98 million litres).

US President Donald Trump’s threats of more strikes on power plants have heightened fears of further blackouts and gas shortages this summer, meaning the energy crisis is likely to continue in the coming months.

China’s decision to send a largely academic delegation instead of senior defence leadership to the Shangri La Dialogue in Singapore has been described by Australia as a missed opportunity for strategic engagement at a time of rising regional tensions.

Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles said the Asia Pacific region needs greater strategic reassurance from Beijing, particularly given China’s ongoing military expansion and its growing influence across the Indo Pacific.

The Shangri La Dialogue is the region’s most prominent defence and security forum, bringing together senior ministers, military leaders, and policymakers from across the world to discuss security challenges and regional stability.

For the second consecutive year, China’s Defence Minister Dong Jun did not attend the meeting, with Beijing instead sending a delegation made up mainly of academics and military experts.

Why It Matters

The absence of senior Chinese defence officials comes at a sensitive moment for regional security dynamics.

Australia and its allies have repeatedly raised concerns about China’s rapid military buildup, which is widely regarded as the largest conventional expansion since the Second World War. Regional governments argue that this military growth has not been matched by sufficient transparency or reassurance about China’s long term intentions.

The lack of direct high level engagement at forums such as the Shangri La Dialogue limits opportunities to reduce misunderstandings, build trust, and manage rising tensions through dialogue.

For countries in the Indo Pacific, especially smaller states, the absence of senior Chinese representation can increase uncertainty about regional security and long term strategic balance.

Key Stakeholders

China

China’s approach reflects a more controlled engagement strategy in defence diplomacy, relying on lower profile participation while continuing to expand military capabilities and regional influence.

Australia

Australia views sustained dialogue as essential for regional stability, while simultaneously strengthening its alliance with the United States and deepening defence cooperation across the Indo Pacific.

United States

The United States remains a central security partner in the region and continues to position itself as a counterbalance to China’s military rise through alliances and defence agreements.

Regional Partners

Countries such as Japan, the Philippines, Malaysia, and others attending the forum are closely watching China’s engagement level as they navigate their own security concerns in a shifting regional order.

Future Outlook

If China continues limiting senior level participation in regional defence forums, diplomatic channels for managing tensions in the Indo Pacific may become more constrained. This could increase reliance on bilateral alliances and military deterrence rather than multilateral dialogue.

At the same time, ongoing military expansion by China will likely keep regional security concerns elevated, particularly among Southeast Asian and Pacific nations.

However, if future editions of the Shangri La Dialogue see higher level Chinese participation, it could open pathways for improved communication and reduced strategic mistrust.

For now, the gap between China’s military rise and its diplomatic engagement remains a key concern for regional powers seeking stability in an increasingly competitive Indo Pacific environment.

With information from Reuters.

Pricing for 2026 World Cup has been under heavy scrutiny, including in New York where city mayor cuts limited tickets.

Some lucky New York City residents will soon get a chance to snag cheap seats to this summer’s high-priced World Cup.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced on Thursday that 1,000 tickets costing $50 will be made available to city residents of the city of more than 8 million for the world’s most watched sporting event.

“To put that into perspective, that is five lattes in New York City,” Mamdani quipped from a bar in Harlem’s Little Senegal neighbourhood, alongside US men’s national team star Timothy Weah.

The tickets will be available for seven of the eight games played at the 82,000-seat MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, across the river from Manhattan. The lone exception is the high demand July 19 final, where some seats are costing nearly $33,000.

The tickets will also include free round-trip bus transportation to the stadium and will be distributed via a lottery starting May 25.

With persistent concerns about the sky-high costs for tickets to the games, Mamdani said the city ensure the ones they distribute go to New York City residents and are not resold on the secondary market.

He said the tickets will be non-transferable, with a “variety of ways” used by city officials to verify residency. They will only be handed out directly to fans as they board buses on game day.

“We are making sure that working people will not be priced out of the game that they helped to create,” Mamdani said.

The Democrat, who took office in January, said the effort underscores how his administration is not simply focused on making everyday things like housing and groceries more affordable.

“It extends to making it possible for every New Yorker to take part in the things that make us human,” he said.

During his campaign, Mamdani called on FIFA, football’s global governing body, to make it cheaper for New Yorkers to go to games by setting aside 15% of tickets at discounted prices. He had launched a petition calling on FIFA to reverse its plan to set ticket prices based on demand.

The $50 tickets don’t come directly from FIFA, but from those allotted to New York and New Jersey’s joint host committee for the games, according to the mayor’s office.

Previously, FIFA had made some $60 tickets available for every game at the tournament in North America following backlash over exorbitant prices.

Those reduced price tickets, though, went to the national federations of the teams playing, with the federations deciding how to distribute them to loyal fans who have attended previous games at home and away.

Besides the final, the home stadium for both the NFL’s New York Giants and New York Jets is set to host five group World Cup matches and two knockout stage games. Group stage matches for former winners Brazil, France, Germany and England, along with other nations, begin on June 13.

While the United States backs away from threats to resume bombing Iran if it does not agree to a peace deal, Israel’s political establishment is reportedly itching for war.

Shimon Riklin, an anchor for the right-wing Israeli Channel 14, blurted out apparently confidential plans about a renewed attack on Tehran, which included the location of what he claimed was a uranium storage facility that could be targeted.

Members of the Israeli parliament roundly criticised Riklin’s supposed revelations, leading the anchor to say his comments were purely hypothetical.

Still, despite broad agreement that Israel is eager to restart hostilities, it is unlikely to be able to do so without US permission. That does not look like it will be quick in coming. Reports of a call overnight between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump over Washington’s push for a truce irrespective of Israeli concerns left the Israeli leader reportedly with his “hair on fire”.

This week, Israeli media reported that Netanyahu chaired the second meeting of his security cabinet to discuss renewing the conflict with Iran. Despite billions of dollars in Israeli and US ordnance thrown at Iran, the government in Tehran remains in place.

Iran’s deterrence strategy of striking regional states and the subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz has dented the US’s appetite for renewing a costly and perhaps unremitting war against Tehran.

Iranophobia

For Netanyahu, the April 8 ceasefire – agreed with little Israeli involvement – has proven politically costly and, analysts say, unnerved a public conditioned to view Iran as an existential threat.

Opposition leader Yair Lapid and former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett have used the ceasefire as political currency in their attacks on Netanyahu. Lapid described the truce as one of the greatest “political disasters in all of our history”, a view that appears to be in line with that of the Israeli public.

A poll conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute in early May showed that a majority of Israelis believed a premature end to the war ran counter to their country’s security interests, while a similar percentage thought that a resumption of the conflict is likely.

To a public and political class accustomed to viewing Iran as their number one nemesis, it is unclear what solution they want in dealing with Tehran, Haggai Ram of Ben-Gurion University told Al Jazeera.

“Both politicians and public have been inculcated into seeing Iran as their ultimate foe,” said Ram, whose book Iranophobia chronicles Israel’s longstanding fixation on Iran.

Israeli people have been effectively trained for most of their lives to see war as inevitable, Ram said, a situation evident in their approach to bomb shelters when Iranian missiles fell, with Israelis whom Ram met at the time seemingly unfazed by the experience.

“It was perfectly normal to them that they should effectively stop their lives if it prevented Iran from completing its nuclear programme, or, from their perspective, if it helped ‘free the people’,” he said.

The only question for many Israelis, Ram said, is how Netanyahu – regarded in some quarters as a “magician” – would bring Iran to its knees.

Political necromancy

Many in Israel have grown accustomed to seeing Netanyahu defy the laws of political gravity. In 2022, he won an election despite being hounded by multiple corruption charges. He has managed to distance himself from the security failures of the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, and achieved credit – even if he officially denies it – for allegedly manipulating Trump into joining the war on Iran.

The October 2023 attacks and the US-brokered truce with Iran, which Israel had no role in, will be the foremost political concerns on Netanyahu’s mind, Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli ambassador and consul general in New York, told Al Jazeera. He noted that these could serve as an incentive for resuming military operations.

“My guess is there are three interlocking reasons why Netanyahu is looking to restart the war,” Pinkas said. “Firstly, there’s the distance he wants to put between him and October 7 – he needs a big strategic victory and he’s not going to get that in Gaza or Lebanon, so this is it.

“Secondly, the war wasn’t finished. Every taxi driver or second-rate political commentator will tell you: Israel achieved nothing with its war on Iran.

“Thirdly, and you only need to look at the polls to see it, he needs a victory with Iran to take with him into the [election] later this year.”

Iran’s seizure of the Strait of Hormuz, which has thrown global markets into turmoil, as well as Tehran’s strikes on its neighbours, appear to be consequences that Netanyahu never considered when starting the conflict. Israel’s failures in the war on Iran are expected to be key debates in the general election, slated for August.

Geopolitical shizzle

A few weeks after the April 8 ceasefire, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz boasted that once the US gave the green light, Israel was ready to bomb them “back to the Stone Ages”, highlighting the government’s eagerness to restart the conflict.

“There are those in Israel who would like to cut their losses and walk away,” former Israeli government adviser Daniel Levy told Al Jazeera.

“And then there are those, like Netanyahu, and much of the Israeli political mainstream, who want to double down and use all that US hardware [assembled off the coast of Iran] in an attempt to seriously degrade Iran.”

Ultimately, despite the broad political support for a renewed war with Israel, there are still limits to what Netanyahu can do. “This stops when the US says it stops,” Levy said.

Or, as Trump said of Netanyahu after their overnight call on Tuesday, he’ll “do whatever I want him to do”.

It’s a tight three-way race at the top, with a second helping of “Beef,” which won eight Emmys for its first serving, barely ahead of Richard Gadd’s “Baby Reindeer” follow-up, and a suburban noir with abundant heart from Steven Conrad, the maker of “Patriot.”

Glenn Whipp says, “ ‘DTF St. Louis’ is the standout limited series, a murder mystery in form that’s really about suburban loneliness, particularly the isolation that can cripple middle-aged men.”

While Lorraine Ali calls “Half Man” “the series to watch in this race,” not all of her Buzzy buddies are as enthusiastic: “I fear that ‘Half Man,’ Richard Gadd’s aggressively unpleasant follow-up to ‘Baby Reindeer,’ will get a knee-jerk nomination here,” says Kristen Baldwin, “but that vote would be better spent on PBS’ superb adaptation of ‘The Count of Monte Cristo’ or Riz Ahmed’s ‘Bait.’ ”

Tracy Brown says, “Recent trends suggest this race might come down to voters’ appetites for bleak British miniseries” such as “Half Man,” but “ ‘Adolescence’ co-creator Jack Thorne’s ‘Lord of the Flies’ adaptation was a bit more in my lane so I’ll give it the edge.”

The twice-cooked “Beef” isn’t to all the panelists’ tastes, either. Matt Roush says it “left me cold but probably has a better chance than the streamer’s terrific historical drama ‘Death by Lightning.’ ”

More predictions: Limited / TV movie actor | Limited / TV movie actress

1.“Beef”
2. “Half Man”
3. “DTF St. Louis”
4. “Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette”
5. “All Her Fault”
6. “The Beast in Me”
7. “Bait”
8. “Lord of the Flies””

Los Angeles Times

Lorraine Ali

1. “Half Man”
2. “Bait”
3. “DTF St. Louis”
4. “All Her Fault”
5. “The Beast in Me”

“ ‘Half Man’ is the series to watch in this race, but what should you watch on your screen at home? ‘Bait,’ which follows a struggling British Pakistani actor (Riz Ahmed) as he auditions to become the next James Bond. Is the world ready for a brown Bond? Not really. Hilarity ensues.”

Freelance Critic

Kristen Baldwin

1. “Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette”
2. “Beef”
3. “The Beast in Me”
4. “DTF St. Louis”
5. “All Her Fault”

“I fear that ‘Half Man,’ Richard Gadd’s aggressively unpleasant follow–up to ‘Baby Reindeer,’ will get a knee-jerk nomination here, but that vote would be better spent on PBS’ superb adaptation of ‘The Count of Monte Cristo’ or Riz Ahmed’s ‘Bait,’ a surreal blend of showbiz satire and immigrant-family comedy.”

Los Angeles Times

Tracy Brown

1. “Beef”
2. “DTF St. Louis”
3. “All Her Fault”
4. “Lord of the Flies”
5. “The Beast in Me”

“Recent trends suggest this race might come down to voters’ appetites for bleak British miniseries. I wouldn’t be surprised if ‘Baby Reindeer’ creator Richard Gadd’s ‘Half Man’ is among the nominees, but ‘Adolescence’ co-creator Jack Thorne’s ‘Lord of the Flies’ adaptation was a bit more in my lane so I’ll give it the edge.”

Blavity

Trey Mangum

1. “Half Man”
2. “Beef”
3. “Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette”
4. “All Her Fault”
5. “DTF St. Louis”

“ ‘Love Story’ was the talk of the town when it first premiered, but the last few episodes seemed to have landed softly with the majority of people. I think later entries ‘Beef’ and ‘Half Man’ are immediately dominating conversations, and at the right time.”

TV Insider

Matt Roush

1. “Half Man”
2. “Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette”
3. “Beef”
4. “DTF St. Louis”
5. “All Her Fault”

“Not the strongest field this year, though Richard Gadd’s ‘Half Man’ and Ryan Murphy’s ‘Love Story’ seem unstoppable. The offbeat ‘DTF St. Louis’ might be a spoiler. Season 2 of Netflix’s ‘Beef’ left me cold but probably has a better chance than the streamer’s terrific historical drama ‘Death by Lightning.’ ”

Los Angeles Times

Glenn Whipp

1. “DTF St. Louis”
2. “Beef”
3. “Half Man”
4. “Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette”
5. “All Her Fault”

“ ‘DTF St. Louis’ is the standout limited series, a murder mystery in form that’s really about suburban loneliness, particularly the isolation that can cripple middle-aged men. The cast — Jason Bateman, David Harbour, Linda Cardellini, Richard Jenkins and Joy Sunday — is superb. Emmy noms for all!”