News Analysis

It was another bold statement from United States President Donald Trump: An edict in his usual inflated style, claiming that the US had almost sealed Iran off from the rest of the world.

“Very little gets into, or out of, Iran!” the US president posted on his Truth Social account on Sunday, a day after the US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced its latest plan to choke Tehran’s military supply networks.

On Sunday, CENTCOM announced Task Force Iron Gate – a unit targeting land routes and the Caspian Sea, which will aim to prevent Iran from using ground routes to transport advanced weapons and other materials.

Trump’s message on Truth Social claimed that the task force was “in full force and effect” in Iran – and that between this and the US naval blockade of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, the US had virtually cut off what enters and exits the country.

But analysts say a small intelligence-focused unit cannot seal Iran’s borders or stop its extensive procurement networks without regional cooperation.

They did warn, however, that attempts to disrupt these networks could draw neighbouring countries into the conflict and undermine ongoing diplomatic efforts in the US-Israel war on Iran.

“I see Task Force Iron Gate as a desperate attempt to extend the American naval blockade into Iran’s continental supply networks without deploying American troops along its borders,” Andreas Krieg, an associate professor of defence studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera.

An ‘intelligence fusion cell’

Task Force Iron Gate aims to find out where “weapons systems are coming in, how they could potentially be cut off” and how “Iran is transporting its energy”, Michael Mulroy, a former US deputy assistant defence secretary for the Middle East, has told Al Jazeera.

Based in Tampa, Florida, the unit will coordinate with other US government agencies “on preventing the movement of advanced weapons systems, dual-use technologies, sanctioned materials and illegal revenue streams across Iran’s land borders and the Caspian Sea”, CENTCOM has said.

Analysts said the task force could coordinate sanctions enforcement, pressure foreign suppliers, and work with partner countries to disrupt smuggling.

According to Matthew Savill, director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute, the US mission would rely on a combination of satellite imagery, drones, intercepted communications, financial intelligence and intelligence-sharing.

“Then, frankly, I would expect some use of force – strikes or discreet ground operations – to confiscate components, whether done by US forces or the Israelis,” the analyst told Al Jazeera.

“They would want to pass some intelligence on and bring legal and economic pressure to bear outside the Middle East if they think dual-use components are coming from the West … but if the target is supplies from Russia and China, that will be tougher.”

While CENTCOM’s announcement did not explicitly identify Iran’s weapons trade with Russia, analysts say the unit could be seen as an attempt to disrupt supply networks that include Russian connections.

US media have reported that Russia has sent drone components and explosives to Iran via the Caspian Sea. There are also claims that Russian technology could be helping Iran develop advanced supersonic cruise missiles.

Krieg agreed the task force would combine methods, but stated that it would operate largely as an “intelligence fusion cell”.

“Twenty people cannot police thousands of kilometres of frontiers,” he said.

“The objective is not necessarily to stop every shipment, but to make Iranian military procurement progressively more expensive, slower and riskier,” he added.

The obstacle the US mission will face, however, is political rather than technological, he argued. Iran’s neighbours will be largely unwilling to cooperate.

“Iraq offers Washington some leverage, but Iranian-aligned networks remain deeply embedded in its economy and security institutions,” he explained.

Azerbaijan could cooperate discreetly, while Turkmenistan would be “extremely reluctant” to jeopardise its neutrality or relationships with Russia and China, said the professor.

Pakistan is particularly unlikely to participate openly because it is currently mediating between Washington and Tehran, he added. Turkiye also has little interest in turning its border with Iran into another confrontation, said Krieg.

“Without these countries’ cooperation, Washington can disrupt individual networks but cannot effectively seal Iran’s borders,” he said.

Rami Khouri, a public policy fellow at the American University of Beirut and a non-resident senior fellow at the Arab Center Washington DC, has previously told Al Jazeera that Iran’s history as a trading nation for thousands of years makes the US mission near impossible.

“There’s an enormous web of contacts that Iran has had for thousands of years with traders and partners and allies all over the region, especially in Asia – it’s virtually impossible for the US to seal off every one,” he said.

“There are people all over the region who have links with Iran, some very close, some just commercial,” he said.

Mission creep or mission impossible?

Krieg expressed concern about the potential for mission creep — that the task force’s action could widen the war to new arenas.

“Intelligence gathering can quickly become pressure for seizures, border closures or military strikes against suspected logistical infrastructure,” he said.

“This would extend America’s economic war into the sovereign territory of neighbouring states.”

Iran’s response in turn would likely be asymmetrical, “intensifying maritime coercion in Hormuz and potentially using the Houthis to increase pressure around Bab al-Mandeb and Saudi Arabia”, Krieg added.

Joe Kent, a former top US counterterrorism official, has also argued that the new task force is an attempt by CENTCOM to subvert ongoing diplomatic efforts.

“This is CENTCOM inviting Iran to escalate while the vice president is attempting to negotiate with the Iranians,” Kent, who resigned in March in protest against the US’s war on Iran, said on X following the US military’s announcement.

“This is, as CENTCOM calls it, ‘policy by CONOP’, when the military finds a way to subvert the White House without blatantly disobeying the President, by taking actions that will ensure a war escalates or perpetuates.”

The Wall Street Journal, meanwhile, has reported that CENTCOM chief Brad Cooper is among the many officials, alongside Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, pressing Trump to renew attacks on Iran.

Some analysts, however, argue that without US access to the Caspian Sea, troops on the ground, or cooperation from neighbouring states, the task force will have limited practical impact.

Mahjoob Zweiri, a professor of contemporary history and politics at Qatar University, has told Al Jazeera that the new initiative may just be symbolic because of the lack of US military presence on the Caspian Sea.

“America has no access to the sea, unless some of the neighbouring countries like Azerbaijan or Armenia or others collaborate [with them] … And they’re not collaborating on this because they don’t want to upset Russia,” said Zweiri. “It will require … troops on the ground, and this is unlikely to happen.”

Tehran, Iran – The Iranian government has reported more strikes by the United States but insists this pressure will not impact its demands to end the war.

Ahmad Nafisi, deputy governor for Hormozgan, where the overnight US strikes hit, confirmed on Monday morning that the southern island of Qeshm was targeted but no residential and commercial areas or vital infrastructure were damaged.

The US did not directly acknowledge the air strikes, but Secretary of State Marco Rubio reiterated Washington’s characterisation of similar recent strikes on Qeshm as “defensive”. Previous attacks, the latest of which was acknowledged by President Donald Trump on Friday, have targeted Iranian air defences and radar installations.

Mediators are trying to prevent large-scale US attacks on Iran, which Trump has repeatedly threatened, with talks continuing. But Washington appears unwilling to accept Iran’s seven demands to end the war, which include the lifting of the US blockade on Iran’s southern ports and lifting sanctions on Tehran.

Seven demands

Esmail Baghaei, the spokesman of Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on Monday rejected Rubio’s remarks that some of these seven demands were “ridiculous and really not realistic”.

“Iran’s plan is still the most logical plan on the table. I think it can lead to security returning to the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf, and create the grounds for a process,” Baghaei said during a news conference in Tehran.

The terms mostly amount to a return to the Islamabad memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed in June between Iran and the US. But Tehran now has additional stipulations regarding the future of the Strait of Hormuz.

Baghaei said the US announcement of a reward of up to $20m for information on Iran’s nuclear programme is a ploy by the Trump administration to “convey the sense that the Iranian nuclear issue is still a threat”, after the Republican Party’s heavy defeats in midterm elections.

Tehran says it will not part with its highly enriched uranium, which is believed to be buried under the rubble of facilities bombed by the US and Israel last year. But it is open to downblending the material, which would be needed to build a nuclear bomb.

International inspectors have no access to Iranian nuclear sites, except for the Bushehr nuclear power plant, where the Foreign Ministry said there was a recent visit.

Iran has accused the International Atomic Energy Agency and its director, Rafael Grossi, of stepping out of their technical mandate and creating the grounds for attacks on nuclear facilities during last year’s 12-day war and the current war.

There have been signs of a positive breakthrough in mediation efforts, with reports that Trump and Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani will meet in the White House on Monday.

But Andreas Krieg, an associate professor at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera that Washington’s biggest objection to the ongoing mediated talks is that Iran is essentially demanding the rewards of an agreement before providing the concessions to justify one.

“Reopening Hormuz within two days sounds accommodating, but it changes the timetable rather than the substance of the bargain,” he told Al Jazeera about the Iranian proposal.

Both the US and Iran’s Arab neighbours would not accept long-term Iranian-approved shipping corridors in the Strait of Hormuz.

Rubio and other officials are also against Iran’s demand for an end to hostilities across the region, as it would restrict Israel’s military freedom of action.

“Iran is going beyond a ceasefire, trying to translate its wartime leverage into a new regional security arrangement on its own terms,” Krieg said.

Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz said Sunday that the country’s military mission in Iran remained unfinished, and threatened Lebanon’s Hezbollah with further territorial losses if it joined an Iranian attack.

Tankers and navigation systems targeted

Iranian authorities continue to warn ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz to refrain from taking “unauthorised” routes or face potential attacks.

Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) spokesman Hossein Mohebbi rejected the claim by the US that all naval mines have been cleared from the Strait of Hormuz.

“Nobody dares enter the Strait of Hormuz to remove the mines,” he said on Sunday.

Iranian state television reported on Monday that 11 tankers have been attacked over the past 10 days, with four unable to continue transit.

IRGC-affiliated media cited an unnamed IRGC Navy source as claiming on Monday that maritime navigation systems were targeted in the southern areas of the waterway overnight, preventing tankers from transiting as part of the US-coordinated oil shuttle system.

Trump played down the prospects of a return to all-out war with Iran on Sunday, but added that the US military had marked civilian infrastructure like 38 bridges as targets if the war restarts at scale.

Krieg said he expects Tehran to continue its strategy of “controlled escalation” rather than immediate all-out retaliation against the US strikes.

“The new American effort to disrupt Iran’s overland trade will reinforce this strategy. Tehran will increasingly seek to make the Gulf states bear the economic consequences of Washington’s decisions, hoping they will pressure Trump towards compromise,” Krieg said.

“Washington may believe it is conducting a limited campaign of coercion, while Tehran increasingly sees an unrestricted economic war against its survival. At some point, Iran may decide that the costs of continued restraint exceed the risks of escalation.”

Disagreements between the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) over the formation of a new government have led to the threat of two rival administrations emerging in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq, analysts say.

The dispute between the two dominant political forces in the semiautonomous Kurdistan Regional Government, which traditionally has operated under a power-sharing agreement, escalated after a parliamentary session was held last week in Erbil without the PUK’s participation.

PUK leader Bafel Talabani responded by withdrawing his party from the government, and a threat is growing that a rival administration could be formed in the party’s Sulaimaniyah base.

Independent Kurdish politician Yasin Aziz said the latest developments have deepened the historical divisions between the KDP and PUK.

“I believe the spectre of two administrations in Kurdistan is now very close, and the outlines of such a scenario are becoming clear. … The events have been painful and rapid. The differences between the two parties were significant and have now led to a breakdown in relations,” Aziz told Al Jazeera.

“There had been hopes that the two sides would reach an agreement, but activating parliament without the PUK deepened the divisions between the KDP and PUK.”

The KDP, which is led by Massoud Barzani, is the biggest party in the region, and its strongholds are in Erbil and Dohuk.

Two powers

Since the first Gulf War in 1990 and 1991 and the establishment of a US-led “no-fly zone” in northern Iraq, Iraq’s Kurds have largely governed themselves, separate from the national government in Baghdad.

The Iraqi Constitution enacted after the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq recognised the northern Kurdish region as a federal entity with its own legislative, executive and judicial powers.

There is a historical precedent for the possible separation of powers in this region between two rival authorities. When a conflict erupted between elements of the KDP and PUK in the 1990s, the two parties formed separate local governments in Erbil and Sulaimaniyah, respectively.

While there have been no recent violent flare-ups between the two parties, political distrust remains deep.

During the sixth parliamentary elections in the region on October 20, 2024, the KDP won 39 seats and the PUK 23. This left a 16-seat gap between the two parties.

But the KDP’s ability to form a new government was still dependent on reaching an agreement with the PUK and other parties, such as the New Generation Movement, which secured 15 seats in the last election.

The PUK has so far refused to collaborate, so after a two-year wait, the KDP reactivated the regional parliament on Wednesday without its rivals.

Divisions but no conflict

Although the rivalry between the two parties is longstanding, Aziz argued that the current crisis is more serious and deeply rooted than previous political disputes.

“Given the political stubbornness of both parties, I do not expect an agreement or understanding to be reached soon,” he said. “Both sides must make concessions to each other. The party willing to make greater concessions will demonstrate greater concern for the Kurdistan region.”

Aziz was clear in laying blame for the deepening divide.

“The responsibility for deepening this conflict lies with the leaderships of Kurdistan’s two main parties,” he said. “Their failure to recognise the risks posed by continuing these disputes is one of the reasons we have reached this point.”

Subhi Mandalawi, a member of the KDP, blamed the current impasse on the refusal of the PUK to form a new government with the KDP.

“Following the Kurdistan parliamentary elections, the PUK delayed the formation of the new government. They were counting on the KDP being unable to secure the legal quorum needed to convene a parliamentary session,” Mandalawi told Al Jazeera. “But we held a parliamentary session without the PUK in 2018 as well, and they subsequently joined the government and parliament.”

Mandalawi insisted that the door remains open for the PUK and other political parties but warned that prolonged divisions would lead to deeper problems for the Kurdish region.

“Continuing to obstruct legislative institutions two years after the elections is unacceptable and harms the Kurdistan region domestically, regionally and internationally,” he said.

“Threatening to divide the Kurdistan region is a hasty, ill-considered and unrealistic decision. No party leader can take such a step, and the PUK would be the biggest loser if it went ahead with it.”

Despite the differences, there is little risk of a return to conflict between the two parties. “We are brothers, and there can be no fighting among us,” Mandalawi said.

Separation threats

Mahmood Khoshnaw, a senior PUK official, said the KDP’s decision to convene parliament without his party has worsened political tensions in the region.

“Activating parliament without the PUK represents a departure from the principle of partnership and from political realities, and there will be consequences. If a prime minister is appointed in Erbil, we will take the same step in Sulaimaniyah. Whatever the KDP does, we will do the same in Sulaimaniyah,” Khoshnaw warned.

“The situation in the Kurdistan region is heading towards chaos unless the crisis is addressed rationally and realistically. Activating parliament without reaching an understanding with the PUK has had a negative impact on relations between the two parties.”

Despite this, there are questions about whether Sulaimaniyah could legally separate from the Kurdish regional government.

Ramadan Albadran, an independent political analyst and constitutional affairs expert, said the dispute is not a constitutional issue about the KDP’s convening of parliament but a deep political crisis with the potential to create security repercussions for the region.

The Iraqi constitution also provides no mechanism for dividing the region into zones of influence between the KDP and PUK.

“If the PUK moves to separate Sulaimaniyah from the Kurdistan region, that would not be a legal or constitutional act,” Albadran said.

“If it takes place without a mandate from the elected Kurdistan Regional Government, it would be closer to an act of rebellion since there is no legal provision permitting withdrawal from or the dismantling of a region in this manner.”

Ahmed Abed (a pseudonym due to ongoing threats of arrest) still feels like a prisoner despite being released from an Israeli jail to the occupied West Bank nearly two years ago.

Despite being technically “free”, Abed, 43, is still often rearrested by Israeli forces or summoned by intelligence for interrogation.

Hundreds of other Palestinians in the occupied West Bank face similar ordeals after being released from Israeli prisons. Their homes are sometimes raided twice a week; they can be detained, assaulted and interrogated on the spot before being released.

Every day, organisations dedicated to prisoners’ affairs document the arrests of dozens of Palestinians across the West Bank as part of large-scale operations that frequently target former detainees. Most of those detained are released after hours of interrogation, in what appears to be a campaign of intimidation by Israel against former Palestinian prisoners.

Frequent detentions

Abed was released as part of a prisoner exchange deal between Hamas and Israel in January 2025, having served 22 years of a life sentence. Since his release, he has faced persistent harassment by the Israeli military.

Just days after Abed’s release, he was summoned by Israeli intelligence for questioning. They informed him that they were unhappy with the political decision to carry out the exchange deal and warned they would rearrest him if he made the “slightest mistake”.

Since his release, he has been arrested six times and summoned for interrogation five times. Each time, his home has been raided and his family terrorised by Israeli soldiers. His father was once arrested simply because Abed happened to be outside his house at night.

“Whenever there are reports of Israeli military activity in the city, my family goes into a state of high alert; no one sleeps all night,” he told Al Jazeera. “Some neighbours even leave their homes, fearing they might be raided as part of the collective intimidation campaign imposed because of me.”

When Abed is arrested, he is often forced to walk for several kilometres handcuffed and blindfolded, accompanied by soldiers. He is then placed in a detention centre under dire conditions, deprived of food and water, subjected to beatings and verbal abuse, and then the threats begin.

“Every time, they threaten to send me back to prison to the point where I feel as though two-thirds of my body are still in captivity, with only one-third outside,” he said. “The threats vary, but the underlying message is always the same: I am not permitted to do anything ordinary or live a normal life like everyone else.”

Abed avoids family gatherings, fearing his presence may bring them harm, and so limits his interactions to his immediate family. An Israeli officer warned him that if he were to go to the mosque to pray, he would be arrested.

“The Israeli officer told me, ‘We have zero patience for you. Any behaviour we deem inappropriate, or any movement we find suspicious, we will rearrest you immediately,’” Abed added.

Although he managed to earn both a bachelor’s degree and a doctorate during his time in prison, he has been unable to secure a job. When employers learn about his repeated arrests, they refuse to hire him. Instead, he has to rely on day-labour work to cover his basic costs.

Loss of livelihood

A former prisoner from Qalqilya says he is arrested on average twice a week during the frequent Israeli military sweeps of the city, where former detainees are targeted. He was recently warned during one interrogation that if he ever set foot on a football pitch, he would be arrested. This puts his job as a referee in jeopardy.

Abdullah, another former prisoner from the city who also requested not to use his real name, told Al Jazeera that he has been arrested so many times since his release in 2000 that he has lost count. But he says he has spent a total of 17 years in custody since his “release”.

He was recently held under “administrative detention”, lasting from November 2023 to February 2025, during which he was subject to physical and psychological torture. By the time he was released, he had lost 60kg (132 pounds).

Abdullah, who supports a family of seven, is repeatedly arrested and released after a few hours, but only after his children have been terrorised and his home ransacked.

His employer grew frustrated with his repeated detentions and found a replacement for him.

“After losing my job, I began working on a piece of land I inherited from my father. However, due to arrests and threats, I can never find the right time to tend to it,” he said. “I often fall behind in irrigating, applying pesticides, or tilling the soil, all of which have taken a toll on my seasonal yields, leaving me with more losses than profits.”

‘Normalising fear’

Since the outbreak of the war on the Gaza Strip in October 2023, the occupied West Bank has witnessed a wave of Israeli arrest campaigns and pogroms. Israeli troops now make regular incursions into towns, refugee camps, and homes, as well as arrests at military checkpoints to detain former prisoners.

Palestinian prisoner advocacy organisations have documented approximately 26,000 arrests in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, between October 2023, when the genocidal war on Gaza began, and early October 2026. This figure includes more than 800 women and nearly 2,000 minors. The total encompasses individuals who were subsequently released, not just those who remain in custody.

Amani Sarahneh, a spokesperson for the Palestinian Prisoner’s Society, told Al Jazeera that Israeli operations in the West Bank have evolved into a continuous, round-the-clock wave of detentions. On average, between 10 and 15 Palestinians are arrested and remain in Israeli custody every day.

These arrests not only take place at night, as they did before, but also during daylight hours, at military checkpoints, and through field interrogations.

“The persistence of these campaigns has led to a ‘normalisation of fear’ among the citizens, which has significantly impacted social relations, particularly in villages where residents live in a state of constant anxiety, fearing that occupation forces might storm their towns or public spaces and arrest groups of people at any moment,” she told Al Jazeera.

These arrests are frequently accompanied by physical assaults and abuse, with detainees held for long hours while handcuffed and blindfolded. The victims’ family homes are frequently ransacked and possessions taken away during the Israeli raids.

“These policies also include using family members of those targeted, such as wives and sisters, as hostages to exert pressure,” Sarahneh said.

“The impact of these campaigns has extended beyond the detainees and their families, deepening a sense of fear and apprehension among the general public, who now worry that the arrests could reach a much wider segment of the population,” Sarahneh said.

Tel Aviv-Jaffa, Israel – On election day, Lama Yassin, 31, drove to polling stations in her hometown of Arrabeh, where Palestinian citizens of Israel make up an overwhelming majority, inspired by what she was witnessing.

“You would see families coming to the polls together, grandparents and grandchildren,” she said. “It was the first time in a really long time that I felt there is hope – hope of a change.”

The overwhelming Arab turnout in the October 27 Israeli election won the Arab parties a record 19 seats in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament.

Thabet Abu Rass, an expert on Jewish-Arab relations in Israel, had predicted the Arab parties would be impossible for Gadi Eisenkot’s opposition bloc to ignore: Their seats push it past the 61-seat threshold for a ruling coalition.

Instead, Yassin and others saw Israeli channels invite “Jews to talk about Arabs and Arab voter turnout”, she recalled, with almost no Arab guests.

“The whole conversation was about how dangerous these Arab voters are.” The “most disgusting term” she saw online, however, was the repeated refrain of “election terrorism” on Channel 14, the hard-right, pro-Netanyahu station.

Within a day of the vote, Likud and figures like Itamar Ben-Gvir accused the Arab parties of stealing the election through “bribery, threats, violence, forgeries”. The accusations have continued even after the Central Elections Committee and the Israeli police said they found no sign of organised tampering.

Distraught, Yassin posted an Instagram video that went viral among Palestinians, capturing the doublespeak of Israelis they so often hear:

“Eating hummus with us? ‘Brothers and friends’.

Seeking political power? ‘Terror supporters’.

Helping someone in distress? ‘Brothers and friends’.

Voting in large numbers? ‘Terror at the ballot box’.”

“When it suits you, we are brothers and friends. When it suits you, we are a symbol of coexistence. When it suits you, you go around the world boasting about our integration into Israeli society.

“But the moment we demand to have influence, to shape policy, and to take part in decision-making – suddenly, our very presence becomes a threat.”

When voting becomes ‘a danger to the state’

More than a week after the election, Jaffa’s Ajami neighbourhood offers both the history leading up to – and the fraught circumstances of – this moment that Abu Rass calls Israel’s “political crossroads”.

Faded Arabic signs on abandoned buildings hint at the Palestinian community that thrived in Ajami before 1948. On Ajami’s streets, posters of children killed during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza hang metres away from campaign posters for Ra’am and the Joint List.

From the back office of his cluttered hardware shop, Omar Siksik, once a Tel Aviv-Jaffa city councilman who now co-chairs Kulna Yaffa, a grassroots, Arab-Jewish civic initiative in the city, weighs this moment of unprecedented representation – met by renewed delegitimisation efforts – against Ajami’s own history. It is a struggle, he says, for basic existence.

Before 1948, Jaffa had about 100,000 Palestinians. After the Nakba, fewer than 4,000 remained – with those left fenced inside Ajami under military rule. “We called it the Ajami ghetto,” explained Siksik. Born there in 1957, he grew up sharing a toilet and kitchen with newly arrived Jewish immigrants who took the homes of expelled Palestinian neighbours.

Over time, the fence surrounding Ajami was torn down, martial law ended, and the Palestinians who remained there were granted Israeli citizenship. But later, when Siksik became the head of the Rabita Association, a nonprofit for the Palestinian residents of Jaffa, he remembered “sleeping under the bulldozers” that were razing the houses of Palestinians in the area, a practice that Rabita had fought in court.

For Siksik and others, election day is the only occasion that’s different for Palestinian citizens of Israel. “This is a democratic election,” he said. “It’s the only thing where we’re equal with the Jews. The only thing.

“When we came and expressed our dissatisfaction with this government, the Arab vote became a danger to the state,” said Siksik. “It’s not normal.”

Many Palestinian citizens of Israel believe they’ve been allowed to remain out of necessity, not equality. “The bus drivers are Arabs, the doctors in the hospitals are Arabs, the construction workers are Arabs,” Siksik notes.

But even those “essential worker” roles are being stripped away. After October 7, Israel revoked tens of thousands of work permits for Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank to enter Israel, and the essential jobs they filled are being replaced by short-term labourers brought from abroad. Yassin notes fabricated stories over the summer on Israeli social media that Arab doctors were poisoning Jewish patients at Rambam Hospital in Haifa.

“If they could give up on anything Arab, they would,” says Yassin. “It’s not because they like us [that they let us remain]… It’s not because they want to; it’s because they have to.”

Facing ‘the whole Israeli system’

Yassin herself went through that struggle for acceptance in Israeli society. After growing up in Arrabeh, she learned Hebrew so well at Ben-Gurion University that “no one knew I was an Arab any more.” She took a job at a regional council near Jerusalem, in an entirely Jewish workplace, to prove she was “fully Israeli”.

“I did not speak Arabic in public. I even voted for [left-wing Zionist party] Meretz and favoured them over Arab parties,” said Yassin. “I wanted to be ‘the good Israeli’.”

But she could never escape that sense of otherness. At the council, colleagues asked if they could call Yassin – whose first name, Lama, means “why” in Hebrew – “Yasmine” instead, because she reminded them of Jasmine from the movie Aladdin. She was Yasmine for a year and a half. “It was another demand of giving up on another part of my identity – one that defines me literally.”

And then, the Sunday after the October 7 attacks, her colleagues would not say hello back to her.

She came to realise that “shared society cannot be built over inequality.”

After becoming director of public policy at the Abraham Initiatives, which advances the rights of Palestinian citizens in Israel, Yassin testified at Knesset committee meetings regarding unchecked crime and violence affecting their communities. She describes being dismissed or silenced outright, despite prior approval to speak. “If you say one more word,” she recalled the National Security committee chairman saying, “I will ask you to leave.”

Yassin sees that derision of a Palestinian political voice carrying over into the rhetoric – and investigations – surrounding the post-election talks. In Jaffa, that wider climate was felt on November 3, when, about midnight, about 15 security officers, a few of them masked, raided the Jaffa home of Abed Abou Shehadeh, a journalist and activist, arresting him in front of his two children. Accused of having “contacts with a foreign agent”, a court has ordered him held until November 8.

The ‘loyalty test’

In the south, meanwhile, police arrested seven Bedouin men on suspicion of planning to pay people to vote for Ra’am, which calls them party activists and denies the allegations. Arab political leader Ayman Odeh now faces investigations as well by the Shin Bet intelligence service, which is run by the Netanyahu-aligned David Zini, over allegations that he received money from foreign sources to influence voter turnout. Odeh denies the allegations, calling them “political persecution”.

“We are now facing the whole Israeli system,” says Abu Rass. “I think we are facing the deep state also.”

Before the election, Abu Rass had predicted to Al Jazeera that 15 to 17 seats would have Israeli party leaders knocking on the Arab parties’ doors. But despite the Arab parties exceeding even those high expectations, that success has not yet borne such fruit.

With 67 members of the Knesset, including those from the Arab parties, recommending Eisenkot to the president to form a government, the anti-Netanyahu bloc has signalled agreement to remove Knesset speaker Amir Ohana and halt the judicial overhaul legislation. The Arab parties also plan to back a state inquiry into the October 7 security failures. But Abu Rass does not mistake this for a lasting partnership.

“[Eisenkot is] counting on us only for the coming months,” he says, “to help him stabilise his government, to pass this stage of removing the government and Netanyahu.”

And while Eisenkot campaigned on two pillars – removing Netanyahu, and mandating military service for ultra-Orthodox Haredim who largely do not serve – even Avigdor Liberman, long a fierce opponent of Haredi draft-dodging, now signals he would work with the Haredi parties to form an anti-Netanyahu government without the Arabs, who have repeatedly offered to support Eisenkot from outside the coalition to unseat Netanyahu.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog, tasked with choosing a leader to try to form a government, this week condemned “the coarseness and racist expressions that we have heard recently”. But according to Israeli media, during meetings with party leaders, he asked Ra’am leader Mansour Abbas whether he considers Hamas a terrorist organisation. “You cannot constantly put us to this test,” said Abbas, who has repeatedly condemned the October 7 attacks, according to Israeli media.

Yassin has felt and seen these loyalty tests play out before in Israel. “Even if the two million Arabs who live here … say ‘we condemn Hamas,’ the day after, we will have another loyalty test,” she says. “It’s never-ending, and whoever wants to deny our rights in this country does not really need a reason to.”

A Jewish-only coalition, she says, would mean “we went a few stairs down in the whole democracy approach, the so-called democracy in Israel.”

‘We don’t have the privilege of giving up’

Most people in working-class Ajami have swiftly come down from their election-night highs. “I am not optimistic,” said Nadia, a middle-aged woman sitting behind the counter of a clothing store. “If we raise our voice in the streets, we are arrested. If we raise our voice in the ballot, we are dismissed.”

Siksik fears: “I see catastrophic things coming here.”

But Nadia noted she would vote again if it means keeping Ben-Gvir and Smotrich out of government.

As Yassin puts it: “We don’t have the privilege of giving up. If we don’t do this work, no one will.”

After the sense of power the 19 seats gave people, she says, “it’s going to be hard to give it away.”

Sitting in a liberal Tel Aviv cafe, Yassin overheard a conversation at the adjacent table turn to Gaza and “how they killed the children” – apparently in reaction to what she had been saying.

As the opposition bloc appears to be pursuing every avenue to avoid including Arab parties in any position of power, she finds herself looking at even “liberal” Israelis differently.

“I was looking at every one of them and wondering if they would support an Arab or Arab parties being part of the coalition,” she said.

“Because if they don’t want my representatives, it also means that they don’t want me.”

As the United States midterm election results landed late on Tuesday night, United States President Donald Trump took a phone call from the news outlet Politico.

A wave for the Democratic Party had sunk Trump’s Republican Party. For the first time in his two stints as president, Trump’s Republican Party no longer controlled either chamber of Congress.

But in the phone interview, Trump put on a brave face — and offered an olive branch: He said that he would be willing to work with Democrats.

“They’ve already called, and they want to work with me. I have the right to veto everything, but I don’t want to be just sitting there for two years just vetoing everything,” he said.

While a handful of seats remain to be counted, the Democrats have won comfortable majorities in both the House of Representatives, where they have secured at least 253 seats out of 435, and in the Senate, where they have won at least 54 out of 100.

Trump has since posted a picture on his Truth Social account using the Make America Great Again red baseball hat to read “VETO”. Despite the Democrats’ success, as president, Trump holds broad executive authority, with Article 1, Section 7 of the US Constitution stipulating that the president has the power to reject legislation passed by Congress through a veto.

Congress can override the veto, but would need to have a two-thirds majority, something that the Democrats do not have in either chamber.

But Trump’s comments to Politico underscore an alternate possibility — the president may pick and choose when to veto, and when to work with Democrats.

Bipartisan negotiations

As it stands, Trump has three options: veto legislation, enforce executive orders or make deals.

Since Trump was inaugurated in January 2025, he has passed 292 executive orders: 67 this year and 225 last year, according to the Federal Register.

But now, according to Andrew Proctor, a lecturer in US politics at University College London, Trump has even less leverage than before with Congress.

“I think the biggest thing is we’re probably going to see a decent amount of gridlock. The Democrats are going to try to pass policies, but he’s got the power to veto them, and Democrats don’t have enough seats in either chamber to overcome any vetoes that he has,” Proctor said.

“So that raises questions about, will he try to work with the Democrats at all on passing legislation? I think recent history says that’s unlikely.”

Still, some Democrats have said that they would work with the president to advance programmes central to their campaign promises.

Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed, the first Muslim elected to the US Senate, has already said he could work with Trump  — even though the US president had used racist and Islamophobic rhetoric to target El-Sayed during the campaign.

El-Sayed told MSNOW on Thursday that if Trump was interested in “getting money out of politics, putting money in pockets and passing Medicare for All, that’s what I ran to do, and I’m looking forward to working with anyone who is willing to do that”.

“He is the president of the United States,” he said. “I’m going to be one United States senator, and if he’s interested in working on issues that I want to work on – getting more people healthcare, ending the Medicare cuts, ending the stupid war, stopping these stupid tariffs with Canada – then let’s talk about doing that and go and deliver for the public.”

Progressive Senator Bernie Sanders has also said, in recent interviews, that he would not rule out Trump signing onto a Medicare for All bill if Democrats pass it in both chambers of Congress. He described Trump as a “politician” who was not “too ideological”.

Proctor argued that Trump could indeed make a deal with the Democrats based on how good it could make him look, but that getting Medicare for All passed in the next two years appeared unlikely.

“I do think that a place where common ground could emerge on healthcare is rolling back, specifically the sort of subsidies that were cut” under Trump’s earlier legislation, he said. “So that would make healthcare more affordable for millions of Americans.”

Proctor pointed out that some Republicans in 2025 had said they were willing to negotiate with Democrats on healthcare reforms.

“That didn’t end up happening, but I could imagine that might be a place for healthcare-specific policy where we could see something emerge,” he said. “I don’t think that a broader healthcare debate on passing Medicare for All, though, is really in the cards.”

Veto or filibuster

Though Trump has said he would be willing to use veto, he has historically not been among the most avid proponents of the practice.

He has so far used the veto twice in this term, and used it 10 times during his first term. Joe Biden used it 12 times in his single term, while Barack Obama used the veto a dozen times over two terms.

Overall, the presidential use of the veto has declined with time: Bill Clinton vetoed legislation 37 times between 1993 and 2001. His predecessor, George HW Bush, used it 44 times in his single term — almost once a month. Ronald Reagan used it 78 times over his two terms.

But Proctor said that Republicans also have a different tool to try and block legislation. That is the filibuster, a tactic that delays a vote on a specific piece of legislation by using an extended debate, which would impact the Democrats’ ability to get something passed.

“This is what they did to [former President Barack] Obama,” Proctor told Al Jazeera. “Senate Republicans will probably try to do the same thing, and it also means that we don’t even get to the point of Trump having the power to veto because the legislation never reaches him in the first place.”

Impeachment

Since the Democrats swept the midterms on Tuesday, calls for investigations against the administration have already emerged.

In his first term, Trump was impeached twice — first for the abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, and the second time for “inciting” the US Capitol riots.

On Tuesday night, US Representative Robert Garcia, who is set to become chairman of the House Oversight Committee, wrote on X: “LAWYER UP.” Senator Ron Wyden, who is expected to lead the Senate Finance Committee, wrote in a post on X: “Subpoenas.”

However, the Trump administration has already denied any wrongdoing.

“If Democrats choose to pursue sham investigations and radical left policies, they are choosing to work against the American people,” said White House spokesperson Lauren Bis on Wednesday.

Reports also suggest that impeachment proceedings against Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth might be imminent, over the Iran war that Trump and other Republicans have blamed for the party’s losses.

DEVELOPING STORYDEVELOPING STORY,

Paraguayan President Santiago Pena resigned on Thursday after calls for his removal swelled following the collapse of digital lender ueno that left millions of customers unable ‌to access their accounts.

“I do so with the stability of our country, social peace and the need to preserve our democratic institutions in mind,” he said in a video recorded address on Thursday.

Pena, an ally of US President Donald Trump, is stepping down after the ⁠opposition called an extraordinary session to begin the process of filing an impeachment motion in Congress, and as protesters demanded his resignation.

Earlier on Thursday Pena lost backing from members of his own conservative party. Vice President Pedro Alliana is set to take office as his replacement.

Lawmakers had accused Pena of conflicts of interest, misuse of pension funds and institutional cover-ups linked to the collapse of ueno, which had grown ‌quickly ⁠from a niche fintech player into a mid-tier bank administering close to $850 million in public funds.

“He is accused of negligence at the very least and complicity in covering up the fact that the bank was insolvent,” said Al Jazeera’s Latin America editor Lucia Newman.

“The congress right now is tying to impeach the president and the vice president, this session is underway,” she added. “As a I speak, there are people outside urging congress not to accept the resignation of the president because they say that they want him tried and impeached.”

Paraguay’s central bank intervened in ueno after determining ⁠that it had breached minimum solvency requirements, setting off a crisis that has left the company’s roughly 3 million customers, in a ⁠country of 6.5 million people, unable to access accounts.

“My greatest wish is that the return of those funds be guaranteed, that the deposit guarantee fund fulfill its purpose, and that ⁠public funds – as well as the resources that belong to all Paraguayans – be protected,” Pena added in his address.

Ueno has made no public statement on the issue.

Hours after results confirmed that the Republican Party had lost control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives in the United States Congress in the midterm elections this week, senior Republicans were hand-wringing over what had gone so badly wrong and whether a major course correction would now be required.

As once-Republican strongholds like Texas fell to the enemy, US Vice President JD Vance took to X to declare that the “real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone”.

“The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night. If you’d like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that’s at least honest,” Vance said.

Former Trump voters had switched sides, he said, over the Iran war and the US ties to Israel.

The elephant in the room was no more.

“I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, ‘I told you so’: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview,” he wrote.

A poisoned chalice

Just days after the US and Israel launched strikes across Iran on February 28, Tehran effectively closed the critical Strait of Hormuz, which once transited roughly 25 percent of the world’s seaborne oil trade, triggering a massive spike in oil prices and a major global energy crisis. The price of Brent crude – the global benchmark – hit $120 in March and April and has hovered around $115 in recent weeks.

On Thursday morning, oil prices dropped to $93.82 a barrel on expectations that Republican Party losses would reduce the likelihood of US President Donald Trump renewing strikes on Iran following weeks of speculation.

But as consumers in the US struggle with sky-high petrol and diesel prices – not to mention the soaring cost of food, which has also been impacted by Trump’s trade tariffs – the midterms have forced a leadership rethink as the Trump brand appears increasingly toxic.

While no Republicans have declared their intention to run for the 2028 presidential election, some in the party are believed to be eyeing it now.

Andrew Payne, from the Chatham House think tank, told Al Jazeera that any Republican wanting to take on the 2028 election will now need to “distance themselves from the more unpopular aspects of Trump’s record”. That means the Iran war, the greatest poisoned chalice of them all.

“That, I think, is why Vance came out so clearly in blaming the war. It is evident to those who have been watching closely that he has always been the voice of scepticism behind the scenes, and he now needs to make that difference of opinion clear to the average voter. But doing so will be really hard while Trump is still in office and, presumably, wants to play an active role as kingmaker,” Payne said.

Unpopular, but not as unpopular as Trump

The most obvious pick and frontrunner for the Republican 2028 nomination is currently Vance, who is known to have ambitions to take over from Trump.

Regarded as an anti-US interventionist, Vance, while publicly supporting Trump’s Iran war, has also been privately urging him and others to end the conflict, according to the US news outlet Axios.

Last week, Vance sent a letter to the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Mohsen Rezaei, proposing a meeting between US and Iranian officials soon in a bid to prevent further escalation. By contrast, this week Trump said the war would only come to an end “when I want it to”.

This move, coupled with his post on X on Wednesday night, is increasingly being seen as Vance putting as much distance as he can between himself and the war.

Throwing off the Trump touch may be trickier than he thinks, however, according to one Vance ally close to the White House who spoke to Politico on Wednesday. While it is “possible for him [Vance] to modestly differentiate himself” from Trump, the source said, there is no way to completely delink himself.

“He’s still Trump’s vice president. This is still a Trump administration war. They’re still both unpopular. He’s not as unpopular as Trump but he’s unpopular,” the anonymous source said.

According to Tuesday polling from The New York Times on who is ahead in a theoretical Republican presidential primary, Vance is at 40 percent. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio follows at 21 percent, alongside Donald Trump Jr, also at 21 percent.

Rubio has yet to comment on the Republican wipeout. Still, like Vance, he is allied with Trump’s administration, which may make a presidential bid challenging.

Any potential candidate now faces a choice between two routes, Payne said. One is to “re-energise the [Make America Great Again or MAGA] movement, which I expect will be difficult, because Trump did it through sheer force of personality that is hard to replicate”.

“The second route is to keep as much of the base on board as possible while appealing to the traditional conservative groups who have drifted from the party over the past decade, thereby expanding the coalition. If he runs, I would think Marco Rubio has a better shot at doing that,” Payne said.

‘Blue tsunami’

There are other potential candidates to consider.

A former frontrunner for the 2016 presidential election, which saw Trump secure his first administration, Ted Cruz is now Texas’s only statewide Republican lawmaker.

In a post on X after the results, Cruz wrote: “2026 was not simply a blue wave; it was a blue tsunami. It was an a** kicking”.

“Food is too high, gas is too high, diesel is too high, insurance is too high, life is too high. Tariffs have made everything too expensive, and the Iran war has dragged on too long. It should have been brief, decisive, and over,” Cruz wrote.

“Understandably, people were pissed off, and elected Republicans didn’t do enough to address their very real pain. So, what do we do now? We need to listen and respond. We need to champion economic policies that make a real difference in working people’s lives, and we need to deal with the consequences.”

In September, the Wall Street Journal reported that Cruz was testing the waters for the 2028 nomination. But as one of the early cheerleaders for the Iran war, Cruz will struggle to disassociate himself from it, other than to criticise the manner of its execution.

As the blame game continues, the Republican Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, described the results of the midterms as “close to an extinction-level event” for the party.

“If the Republican Party doesn’t have Texas as an anchor, then we are not going to be viable nationally going forward,” he said.

“We’re in a very volatile political era, things shift quickly, and the leaders just got to recognise that.”

DeSantis’s time as governor ends in January after two terms, but speculation has grown about whether he also wants to throw his hat into the ring for the US presidential nomination as the playing field remains wide open.

Democrats rode a blue wave to victory in the United States midterm elections, winning control of both chambers of Congress. Now comes the question of whether they can deliver on their promises.

The party campaigned on bringing down the cost of living, ending the war on Iran and holding President Donald Trump accountable, as well as pushing back against his immigration crackdown.

But Democrats won’t take control of Congress until January. Even then, there’s only so much they’ll be able to do without Republican cooperation.

Most bills need 60 votes to get past a filibuster in the Senate, and even if Democrats manage that, Trump can still veto their legislation. He has already threatened to do just that, telling a podcast on Monday, “I’ll veto everything.”

But the Democrats now also have other tools at their disposal, including power over Senate confirmations and control over committees that can launch investigations.

So what can Democrats realistically accomplish over the next two years, and where might they struggle to make good on their promises?

Can Democrats bring down the cost of living?

Affordability was one of the biggest issues for voters heading into Tuesday’s midterm elections, and Democrats seized on that, promising to bring down the costs of energy, housing, healthcare and groceries.

Dean Baker, an economist and cofounder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a US-based think tank, said one of the most effective things Democrats can do to bring down costs is push for an end to the war on Iran.

Since February, the conflict has driven up energy prices, as Iran has restricted commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for the oil and gas trade.

Baker argued that Democrats could use congressional investigations and oversight to pressure the Trump administration to end the war, potentially helping to give consumers relief.

Foreign policy is an area where some Republicans could find common cause with Democrats, said Baker.

Another area, he added, might be healthcare, an issue that similarly hits voters in the pocketbook.

The expiration of enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies in 2025 has left many Americans facing higher insurance premiums.

With their new congressional majorities, Democrats could push to restore those subsidies and reverse cuts to Medicaid, the government healthcare programme for low-income Americans.

A possible path to accomplishing that goal would be to include those measures in government spending bills that Congress needs to pass, according to Baker. That would also make them harder for Trump to reject.

“Republicans living in a post-Trump world, I don’t think they want to be on the side of preventing people from getting healthcare or basically paying more for healthcare,” Baker said. “They can make the politics such that he doesn’t want to veto it.”

Trump’s tariff campaign is another factor driving up consumer costs. But Baker warned that they could be tougher to reverse, without substantial support from Republicans to override a Trump veto. Even if they do manage that, prices could take a while to actually drop.

“Prices are like rockets and feathers. They shoot up like rockets; they come down like feathers,” said Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, a progressive economic think tank.

Jacquez, however, pointed to another path Democrats could take that wouldn’t need Trump’s approval.

With majorities in Congress, Democrats could wield congressional committees to investigate companies that have been raising the prices of everything from groceries to electricity bills.

“There’s a lot of precedent for getting some real material outcomes just through having the gavels and being able to subpoena CEOs and haul people in front of Congress,” Jacquez told Al Jazeera.

While there’s no guarantee these investigations would bring down prices, they could put pressure on companies to explain or adjust their decisions.

Could a Democratic Congress hold Trump accountable?

Laura Blessing, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Government Affairs Institute, expects Democrats to make extensive use of their new investigative powers.

“In terms of time spent and newspaper ink spilled, this is where you’re going to see the most action from Dems, by a mile,” she told Al Jazeera in an email.

Congressional investigations do not require White House approval. But they could make life harder for Trump by scrutinising his actions both within and outside of government.

Many Democrats have signalled they plan to investigate the source of the Trump family’s wealth as part of January’s incoming Congress.

Trump’s personal wealth has soared by about $2.2bn since the start of his term, according to financial disclosure forms released earlier this year.

His family’s business empire has likewise expanded over the last two years into everything from cryptocurrency and drones to artificial intelligence and prediction markets — industries his government has favoured in its policies.

Democratic senators have already been laying the groundwork for potential investigations, sending letters to companies and government departments demanding that they preserve records.

Among the issues they could examine are whether donors to Trump’s White House ballroom received favourable treatment from the government, and whether the Justice Department targeted his political opponents.

There is no guarantee, however, that everyone will cooperate.

Trump administration officials could challenge subpoenas in court, delaying investigations. But while Blessing doesn’t expect “Trump’s nuclear family to show up to a subpoena”, she said Democrats could still question government employees and others connected to Trump’s inner circle.

Even if they uncover wrongdoing, however, there is no guarantee of legal consequences, since it’s Trump’s own Justice Department that would have to decide whether to take up the cases.

Impeachment is another possibility. Lawmakers have already introduced articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for multiple reasons, including allegations that he waged war against Iran without seeking congressional approval first.

Republican Representative Thomas Massie has said he will try to force a House vote on Hegseth’s impeachment when the outgoing Congress returns to session next week.

Trump, who was impeached twice during his first term, however, dismissed the prospect of facing a third impeachment himself, telling reporters on Wednesday that he was “not even a little bit” worried.

“I think it would destroy the Democratic Party if they did that, because it would be impeachment for no reason,” he said.

Trump also defended Hegseth, saying he was doing “a very good job”.

Even if the House of Representatives votes to impeach a government official, the case must still be weighed in a Senate trial.

Removing an elected official would require a two-thirds vote in the Senate, meaning many Republicans would need to get on board to oust a figure like Trump or Hegseth. No president in US history has ever been removed from office as a result of an impeachment proceeding.

Could Democrats end the war on Iran?

With less than two months until the 120th Congress is sworn in, experts anticipate Trump will use his final weeks with the outgoing Republican majorities to push through any remaining legislative priorities.

It also leaves Trump a critical window in which to escalate the war on Iran, according to Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a foreign policy think tank.

“He has shown a pattern in which, in the face of humiliation and defeat, he becomes more reckless,” Parsi told Al Jazeera.

Democrats could pursue a binding resolution to wind down the war. After all, the US Constitution assigns Congress the sole authority to declare war, and laws like the War Powers Act of 1973 give lawmakers a path to ending unauthorised conflicts past the 60-day mark.

But there is no guarantee that those efforts would work, given the possibility of Trump vetoing their proposed measures.

Experts, however, say there is another way that Democrats could rein in Trump’s war powers. One of their most powerful tools will be control over government spending.

The Trump administration can continue using money already allocated for military operations, but Democrats could try to block additional funding for the war.

“It creates a limitation for how long he can pursue the war,” Parsi said. “If he needs more funding for it, we’re not talking about small sums that he can just reallocate from other places easily.”

With control of congressional committees, Democrats could also investigate the administration’s conduct during the war, including whether its military operations complied with US law.

“Rigorous oversight would not restrict military operations by itself but could raise the political costs of the war beyond what the president or other key officials are willing to endure,” said David Janovsky, a policy analyst at the Project on Government Oversight.

How much political will Democrats have to end the conflict, however, is an open question.

Blessing, the government affairs fellow, noted that the party has historically been reluctant to withhold military funding out of fear of being accused of undermining US troops.

But Parsi warned that failing to act would be politically unsustainable — and could be seen by the party’s base as a tacit endorsement of US military involvement in the Middle East.

“It will no longer be just Trump’s war,” Parsi said. “They will also co-own it, because they will be complicit, because they have the ability to stop it.”

Could Democrats rein in Trump’s immigration crackdown?

Another target for the incoming Democrat-led Congress could be Trump’s hardline immigration crackdown.

His pledge to oversee the largest mass deportation in US history has sparked widespread public backlash. A public opinion poll earlier this year found that 65 percent of Americans believe Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has “gone too far” in its efforts.

With control of both chambers of Congress, Democrats could launch investigations into ICE and other agencies involved in the crackdown.

Their probes could seek information about conditions inside detention centres, allegations of abuse and how taxpayer dollars are being used for immigration enforcement, said Heidi Altman, the vice president of policy at the National Immigration Law Center.

Altman argues Congress could also claw back the roughly $240bn already given to the Trump administration for immigration enforcement over the past two years.

That amount of money, she explained, has allowed ICE to operate with few constraints, without having to prioritise which communities to go into or who to detain.

“The only way to force a slowdown and actual sort of decision-making and prioritisation and enforcement is to dramatically curtail their budget by taking back the funding from the last session,” she said.

Doing so would require passing legislation that Trump could eventually veto. But Altman argued that Democrats should push ahead anyway.

“The worst possible thing we could do is throw up our hands and say we have limited power,” she said.

“Pass the bills, see what happens, put them on the president’s desk, and dare him to look at the American people and say he’s not signing something that they overwhelmingly demanded.”

Polls to start closing in waves across the country, with the earliest closures at 23:00 GMT in Indiana and Kentucky.

In a small house in Omdurman, Hassan Saber Jumaa, a senior administrator at the Zamzam displacement camp in Sudan, sat on a simple wooden chair. He scrolled through his phone, looking for any photograph he might have of Zamzam, which is near el-Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, and once sheltered hundreds of thousands.

He found nothing. Jumaa explained that his old phone was looted during last year’s attack by Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces on the camp. Pointing to the bare walls around him, Jumaa said that all he has left are his memories of the camp, and the people who once called it home.

Zamzam, established in 2004, was home to generations of people displaced by western Sudan’s Darfur war, which began in 2003 and continued for nearly two decades. Alongside Abu Shouk camp and al-Salam camp, Zamzam formed part of one of Darfur’s largest concentrations of displaced people.

Jumaa recalled a bustling community, with its market open every day, and children walking to school.

Zamzam memories

Zamzam continued as a refuge for civilians until Sudan’s current war, which began in 2023. The RSF, fighting the Sudanese Armed Forces and its allies, captured the camp in April 2025, after months of attacks. Famine had been confirmed in the camp in August 2024.

Mukhtar Musa, a survivor of the assault, watched the community he knew descend into starvation and violence. He said restrictions on the movement of goods had exhausted food supplies, leaving some residents with little choice but to eat animal feed and peanut shells.

Umm Kulthum Ali Saleh described the months before the final attack as the hardest of her life. The RSF siege on Zamzam stopped goods from entering. She searched for food every morning, and recalled seeing women cooking grass and mixing mud with flour to bake bread.

Saleh believes the blockade was not merely a military measure, but a deliberate way to weaken the camp’s residents in advance of the final offensive, and Zamzam’s fall.

Brutal military offensive

On April 11, the RSF launched a three-day assault using cars, camels, and horses, burning straw homes and health facilities.

A United Nations Human Rights Office report documented at least 1,013 civilians killed, including 319 who were summarily executed in homes, markets, schools, clinics, and mosques. The report documented other abuses, including rape, gang rape, sexual slavery, and other forms of sexual violence, particularly targeting the Zaghawa community.

Musa was a witness to some of those mass killings, and said he saw RSF fighters kill civilians while chanting religious slogans. He described seeing bodies scattered around the main market and near schools, and said fighters continued pursuing civilians along roads leading out of the camp.

Saleh also recalled seeing bodies littering the roads, with only chickens, donkeys, and sheep wandering among the abandoned buildings.

The attack forced tens of thousands to flee Zamzam, with many remaining in the el-Fasher area, and others fleeing south to Tawila and Dar al-Salam.

The violence continued to engulf el-Fasher and its surrounding displacement camps over the following months.

With Zamzam under its control, the RSF launched an attack on el-Fasher in August 2025, and soon captured the Abu Shouk camp.

The UN Human Rights Office said at least 40 displaced people were killed inside Abu Shouk, while 19 others were injured. The International Organization for Migration reported that at least 500 residents fled the camp that day.

The RSF captured el-Fasher itself on October 26, 2025. More than 6,000 people are believed to have been killed in the attack, in el-Fasher as well as on escape routes out of the city. The UN found that RSF fighters targeted civilians, including members of non-Arab communities, and committed acts amounting to war crimes.

The RSF has previously denied targeting civilians in Zamzam and el-Fasher, while acknowledging that some fighters committed abuses.

The survivors of Zamzam, al-Shouk, and el-Fasher focus on bearing witness to the tragedy they faced.

Jumaa said the destruction of Zamzam marked not the end of the violence, but the beginning of another wave of displacement.

For him, the camp survives in the memories of those who once lived there – even as they are now displaced elsewhere.

Musa, meanwhile, said he cannot forget the first days of the siege, and the bodies he saw on the streets.

“Whoever survives must tell the story of what happened,” Musa said.

Tehran, Iran – Iran’s military is warning that if all-out war breaks out again with the United States and Israel, it will be longer and more costly than their rivals expect.

Iran’s armed forces could deploy new weapons and tactics against the US, Israel and other countries, which would be the third major conflict between the countries since June last year.

There have been increasing signs that the US and Israel’s war on Iran, which began on February 28, could restart after the US midterm elections. President Donald Trump said on Sunday that the war with Iran will end “very soon one way or the other” and Tehran should agree a deal or “the hammer” will come down.

Hossein Kanani Moghaddam, a former senior IRGC commander, told Al Jazeera that despite extensive blows to the Iranian armed forces during US and Israeli strikes earlier this year, they are now in better operational shape compared with previous conflicts.

“In terms of offence, our target database has significantly expanded, the range, accuracy and warheads of our missiles have improved and our drone capabilities have increased,” he said.

New enemy assets were being identified and operations in additional geographical areas were being planned, he added. Arkaminia said that previously undisclosed capabilities and targets would be revealed – and used – if Iran is attacked again.

Commanders from Iran’s General Staff of Armed Forces, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the Islamic Republic of Iran Army are reported to have recently met Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei to discuss what steps will be taken if attacked again. The response will be immediate and could go beyond the West Asia region, they said.

The IRGC was “100 percent ready” to confront another attack, spokesman Hossein Mohebbi said on Sunday evening, describing “maximum deterrence” as a goal Iran would reach in the near future.

Army spokesman Mohammad Akraminia said the commanders would rely on “asymmetric warfare” tactics that would compensate for the superiority of US military equipment.

He added that “some weaponry was renovated and new equipment was added along with new tactics” during the brief ceasefire period that came after the June memorandum of understanding between Iran and the US.

Last month, state television showed an underground drone production line. The authorities also showcased an upgraded version of the Arash attack drone and claimed that its warhead had doubled to 100kg with improved guidance.

According to a Reuters investigation published last week, numerous military agencies linked with Iran’s defence establishment have evaded sanctions and funnelled billions into military imports to replenish the IRGC. The imports between January 2025 and June this year from China, Russia and Germany to fuel missile and drone production included rocket propellants, explosives, detonators, titanium and heavy-duty trucks that could be used as launchers.

Many Iranian missile defence systems, radars and other equipment were hit during the war. But Kanani Moghaddam said remaining and newly developed systems were becoming more accurate, pointing to the targeting of a US-built F-35 and other warplanes and drones as successes that can be replicated and expanded upon.

“At sea, we have shown that we can easily target supertankers,” he said regarding transit through the Strait of Hormuz that is deemed “unauthorised” by Iranian authorities. He said Iranian attacks on US Navy vessels in September prompted them to stop venturing into the critical waterway since. But the US has continued its naval blockade on southern Iranian ports, while Iran’s civilian population and infrastructure remain largely exposed if the war resumes.

Tehran and other cities across the country lack shelters or early warning systems to protect civilians. Authorities have not reported any progress regarding the promised shelters and gaps in public warning arrangements.

Iran’s electricity grid, as well as oil and gas facilities, petrochemical and steel manufacturers and roads and railways could also be attacked again, making life even more difficult amid the economic crisis.

‘Intelligence weakness’

During both wars, many senior political and military figures of the Islamic Republic were killed by US and Israeli strikes.

The new supreme leader has not been seen or heard from since replacing his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in early March, ostensibly for security reasons.

This has led to tighter domestic security controls, and prompted some voices from within the establishment to raise concerns and demand accountability for intelligence failures and protection of leadership.

“We have been hit and hit hard,” state-linked analyst Hamzeh Rahim Safavi said during a televised debate on Saturday. “The main cause is intelligence weakness, but no one talks about it or is held accountable”.

The analyst is the son of Yahya Rahim Safavi, a former commander-in-chief of the IRGC who currently serves as a senior military adviser to the supreme leader. The analyst said calls by hardliners to acquire a nuclear bomb would not repair intelligence and security weaknesses.

But Esmaeil Kowsari, a former IRGC division commander now a parliamentary national-security commission member, told local media last week that even though the supreme leader and others were assassinated, “the enemies did not reach their main goals”. He said the goals were to overthrow the Islamic Republic and fragment Iran.

“On the eve of their elections, the Americans are trying to pretend that they have achieved victory by causing a ruckus and launching psychological operations, but that is not the truth,” Kowsari said.

Al-Jawf has become a new focal point in the conflict between forces aligned with Yemen’s internationally recognised government and the Houthis, highlighting the strategic importance of the northern governorate.

A major counteroffensive has been launched by the Yemeni government army and forces loyal to it to capture the strategic heights east of the provincial capital, al-Hazm, from the Houthis.

The operations are part of Operation Dawn of Yemen, launched by the government last month to reverse Houthi territorial gains and restore state control in the country.

Al-Hazm has become a central part of this operation, with the city a potential launchpad for government forces against the Houthis. They have controlled the capital Sanaa and most of northern Yemen since the war broke out in September 2014.

Strategic defence lines

During the 12 years of war in Yemen, control over al-Hazm has shifted several times, with the Houthis seizing the city in March 2020.

The governorate remains highly coveted due to its expansive border with Saudi Arabia and its direct geographic links to five pivotal governorates: Hadramout, Saada, Sanaa, Amran and oil-rich Marib and close to the capital, Sanaa.

Al-Jawf also acts as a vital defensive shield for Marib, controlled by government forces, preventing the Houthis from advancing into the eastern regions. It is also a gateway to major Houthi strongholds in northern Yemen.

Field Commander Colonel Rabie Al-Qurashi said government forces have been able to win complete control over the strategic Huwaishan mountain range, east of al-Hazm city. He said it is the first line of defence for the Houthis in the eastern axis and control over the rugged region would give government forces the ability to disrupt rebel supply routes.

“Government forces succeeded in breaking that defensive format with partial control over the Al-Alam front road,” Al-Qurashi said. “The government advance represents a beginning to tighten the noose on the Houthis in the upper al-Labanat camp,” which is regarded as a vital eastern gateway to Sanaa.

Ali Al-Dahab, a military and strategic affairs researcher, said there are immense tactical benefits from holding this elevated terrain.

“The recent advances of government forces in Al-Jawf are a military transformation that serves the course of future operations for their arrival to al-Hazm city,” Al-Dahab told Al Jazeera.

“The government forces’ recovery of a number of heights there provides a military and psychological morale advantage and confuses the Houthis’ decisions, in addition to granting government forces monitoring, movement, and observation of Houthi supply lines and securing their own lines.”

Military spokesman Majed Abdullah Al-Nuzaili said on X that recent military operations against Houthi positions in al-Jawf were “inflicting losses on the militia’s capabilities”.

Desert battleground dynamics

The government dominates the vast eastern desert district of Khabb wa ash Sha’af, representing 82 percent of the governorate’s total area. The Houthis control the provincial capital, al-Hazm, and 10 other districts.

Security and political affairs researcher Brigadier General Ahmed Al-Awadhi stressed the importance of “continuous but not rapid” government advances in the area.

“The advances of government forces in Al-Jawf cannot be ignored or their importance underestimated,” Al-Awadhi told Al Jazeera.

“Control over heights or mountain ranges in the desert Al-Jawf governorate represents points of military strength regardless of their proximity to or distance from the governorate capital.”

The government forces advances in al-Jawf highlight a historical vulnerability for the Houthis, having suffered repeated defeats in battles in desert and open areas, he added.

The developments coincide with the Presidential Council’s appointment of Major General Amin Ali Al-Akimi as governor and military commander of al-Jawf.

“[His] reappointment… comes within the context of restructuring the theatre of operations and unifying the front,” Ibrahim Jalal, a Yemen-focused analyst told Al Jazeera.

“Hailing from Dhu Hussein, a branch of the Daham Bakil tribe, Al-Akimi possesses tribal and military influence that could help mobilise tribes, overcome divisions and bolster momentum on the ground. However, translating this influence into sustainable gains remains contingent upon unifying command and control, coordinating operations across all battlefronts, securing military and logistical support and strengthening anti-corruption efforts to improve the efficient management of military resources.”

The Houthis say they have thwarted advances by government forces in al-Jawf and Marib.

Escalating nationwide hostilities

Fighting has continued in other parts of Yemen as Houthi-affiliated media reported air strikes on an oil company facility in the Bajil district of Hodeidah, which coincide with fierce fighting further south.

Government forces repelled Houthi attacks in al-Aqroudh and on the Tur al-Baha front in Lahij governorate. Intense fighting continues in Taiz governorate.

The siege of Taiz City continues to strain medical infrastructure, with deliveries of food and fuel severely restricted. Civilians remain at risk from sniper fire from surrounding hillsides, authorities have warned.

Governor Nabil Shamsan said that hospitals are working at only 20 percent capacity, with 120 health centres entirely shut due to the siege.

“We urge the international community to secure at least one safe route between Taiz and Aden to enable citizen movement and the smooth entry of services, essential materials and goods,” Shamsan appealed to Al Jazeera.

More than 300,000 people have fled their homes in western Yemen due to the escalating fighting, leaving civilians highly vulnerable.

All 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 35 of the Senate’s 100 seats are being contested on Tuesday.

Iranian officials have been speaking with Qatari mediators about a two-day plan to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, according to Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, in the latest effort to find a diplomatic path out of the US-Israel war on Iran that has caused a serious global energy crisis.

But even amid signs of diplomatic progress, officials from both sides say they are ready for renewed military escalation.

President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly suggested the United States could attack Iran after the November 3 midterm elections, said the latest negotiations were “going fine”, but added that the US still had several Iranian targets to “take care of”.

Meanwhile, Araghchi has also said Iran’s military was more prepared than ever for renewed war, while the country’s security chief, Mohsen Rezaei, threatened Iran would use “new weaponry” in response to any future attack.

Here’s what we know about the latest diplomatic efforts and the sharp rhetoric from both sides, and what it could mean for what lies ahead:

What is the status of talks?

Araghchi said on Saturday that an Iranian delegation, including one of his aides, travelled to Doha to meet Qatari mediators. Earlier, Qatari officials also travelled to Tehran for consultations.

The latest discussions in Doha centred on a plan that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a global energy chokepoint, within two days and restart peace talks with the US, provided Washington meets a set of demands from Tehran, Araghchi told Al Jazeera.

Those demands include the lifting of recently imposed US sanctions, the reinstatement of oil waivers granted in June, a reduction in the US military presence in the region, recognition of new shipping routes in the Strait of Hormuz designated by Iran and Oman, and an end to the conflict on all fronts, including Israel’s attacks on Lebanon, said Araghchi.

Qatari and Pakistani mediators were “continuing consultations regarding our conditions”, said the top Iranian diplomat.

Pakistan has been mediating between the US and Iran, with its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, visiting Tehran several times as part of the diplomatic efforts to end the war. Doha and Islamabad played key roles in the signing of the June memorandum of understanding (MoU) that collapsed in August.

Iran’s Rezaei said the US had “indicated its readiness” to accept its conditions, although Washington has not confirmed this.

On the US side, Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed Qatar-led talks were ongoing, but said he was not aware of a timeframe for them.

“There are multiple talks. Talks have actually never stopped,” said Rubio. “If there is a diplomatic solution, we would be open to it.”

Why has Iran noted a change in the US’s ‘tone’?

The renewed diplomatic activity comes after US Vice President JD Vance sent a letter earlier this week to Rezaei, reportedly seeking to gauge the prospects of restarting negotiations and averting another round of military escalation.

Rezaei confirmed on Saturday that he had read the letter, whose tone he said had “completely changed” compared with earlier correspondence from Trump.

Araghchi also said he had studied Vance’s letter, which he described positively.

“The American side’s attempt to open the door to dialogue and understanding more broadly is a positive step,” Araghchi told Al Jazeera.

However, he warned, “If Washington’s goal in sending this letter is to stir up discord, it would be yet another mistake to add to its previous ones.”

What has Iran said about prospects for peace and war?

Iranian officials have said they are open to new peace talks if the US meets their conditions, but also ready to act more aggressively in any new military confrontation.

“I know that our armed forces are more prepared for war than any time before, and we are ready for any scenario,” Araghchi told Al Jazeera.

In the event of any new military threat from the US or Israel, Iran’s response would be “immediate” and “without geographical limitations”, according to a statement by Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei.

Khamenei ordered commanders to update Iran’s target list to include “all types of tangible and intangible assets belonging to the American-Zionist enemy”.

Rezaei told Al Jazeera that Iran would use “new weaponry” in its response to any future attacks. He also said Iran’s government was weighing a change to its “nuclear doctrine”, which currently includes a ban on nuclear weapons.

Iran’s nuclear programme has been a major point of contention in the conflict with the US, and Trump has repeatedly said Iran must never be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon. Tehran insists its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes.

What is the latest from Trump?

The US president has sent mixed signals about the status of peace talks. On Saturday, he said negotiations were “going fine” but added that they were “not very reliable”.

He also said the US military still needed to “take care of” several Iranian sites, singling out a suspected underground nuclear complex known as Pickaxe Mountain.

Trump added that the US could achieve its military objectives “very quickly” and was not in a hurry.

Previously, he threatened to renew attacks that would “finish off” Iran, while the US has reportedly warned its Gulf allies to prepare for a short, high-intensity round of conflict after the midterm elections.

Rubio said Trump had not yet decided on whether to carry out new strikes, but warned the US “can achieve military objectives if we seek to”.

How could Israel play into the calculation?

Israel, which joined the US in initiating the war against Iran in February, is preparing for another round of potential conflict right after the US midterm elections, according to a senior Israeli official cited by Israel’s Ynet News site.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said Israel has a “historic, one-time opportunity … to remove the Iranian threat once and for all”. While Netanyahu’s coalition lost its parliamentary majority in recent legislative elections, the 77-year-old leader remains in office as caretaker until a new government is formed.

Andreas Krieg, an associate professor of security studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera that Netanyahu’s threats complicate Iran’s calculus because Tehran fears “even a nuclear agreement with Washington may not end the threat of another Israeli attack”.

Brigadier-General Yadollah Javani, the deputy for political affairs of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, said Iranian forces are operating on the assumption that the US or Israel could strike at any moment.

What explains the parallel diplomatic efforts and war rhetoric?

Hamidreza Azizi, a senior Iran analyst with the Crisis Group, said Tehran is pursuing diplomacy while also “attempting to redefine” the military implications of another potential conflict.

“For now, diplomacy and military preparations are proceeding simultaneously,” he wrote in a post on X. “The emerging Iranian position seems to be that an agreement remains possible, but another war would be fought under different rules and on a much wider battlefield.”

He added, “Whether Washington takes these warnings as credible deterrence or further escalatory threats could significantly influence what happens next.”

Krieg said the November 3 elections give Iran an incentive to delay concessions to deny Trump a diplomatic victory. But that calculus could change afterwards when he has fewer domestic political restraints on military action.

“We could therefore reach a situation where Iran becomes more willing to compromise precisely when Washington becomes more willing to strike,” said Krieg.

Dozens of officers, some accompanied by police dogs, moved into Rossio Square in Lisbon early on Sunday.

Police have used shields and batons to disperse housing protesters who stormed a tent camp in Portugal’s capital, Lisbon, a week after similar operations drew criticism from protesters and rights groups.

Dozens of officers, some accompanied by police dogs, moved into Rossio Square at about 4:30am (04:30 GMT) on Sunday, a day after thousands marched demanding the government withdraw a rental bill they say would deepen the country’s housing crisis.

Protesters had erected more than 50 tents following Saturday’s march through Lisbon. Police commander Iuri Rodrigues issued three warnings to remove the tents, saying they had been erected illegally and that anyone resisting their removal could face disobedience charges.

Hundreds of demonstrators shielding the camp were dispersed, while police also dismantled a smaller encampment in Porto’s Dom Joao I square.

Earlier, lawmaker Pedro Delgado Alves said Rossio Square was peaceful and that nothing justified “a police intervention involving force, physical violence or baton charges, the kind of scenes we witnessed last week”.

The intervention followed operations in the same squares the previous Sunday, when police arrested 25 people in Lisbon and six in Porto. Housing campaign group Casa para Viver said 60 people were injured across those operations, which police described as “proportionate”.

Rising housing costs

The protests reflect growing anger over housing costs across Europe, including demonstrations in Spain and opposition to government economic policies in France, Germany and Albania.

Portugal faces one of Europe’s severest housing affordability crises, with young people among the hardest hit. House prices have more than doubled since 2017, while rents on new leases have almost doubled.

The Bank of Portugal estimates a nationwide shortage of 300,000 homes, equivalent to Lisbon’s entire housing stock.

Demonstrators want the minority centre-right government to scrap legislation that would make evictions easier and remove rent caps on new leases, saying it would worsen affordability and leave tenants more exposed.

Port Sudan, Sudan – Awad Haroun, 45, a visual artist and theatre director, fled his home in Al-Halfaya, Khartoum North, after war destroyed a life he had worked hard to build in the capital.

He moved to Port Sudan with his wife and son, leaving behind his home, artistic workspace and the tools he needed to work, shortly after fighting erupted between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and Rapid Support Forces (RSF) paramilitary in April 2023.

When he fled, he carried little: Two shirts, two pairs of trousers, two books and a few torn drawing papers, expecting to return soon. Instead, he has been forced to rebuild his life far from home.

He lost not only his home but also the tools and materials he relied on to work and make a living.

In Port Sudan, he looked to use his skills in sculpture, design and decoration for some money. He has since participated in theatrical performances at Wasel Festival, organised by Ahalina Cultural Group in partnership with UNESCO, and led traditional arts workshops with cultural groups.

Awad founded Ahalina cultural group in 2013 with a group of young people, using theatre, visual arts, music and puppetry to engage with young people and promote peace and social cohesion.

Drawing, storytelling, music and play have also given children opportunities to express themselves and connect with others.

“Losing my tools does not mean I have lost my skills, and losing my workspace does not mean I have lost my ability to create,” Awad told Al Jazeera.

Awad and other displaced artists found shelter at an old school in Port Sudan, where they helped clean and prepare the building for families forced from their homes.

“Now, concerns about the possibility of eviction have left us uncertain about where we will go next,” he said.

While art cannot replace a lost home or end the war, Awad believes it can preserve memories, bring communities together and offer children space to play and express themselves.

“From the ashes, we will rise” is the motto of Ahalina cultural group. This is more than a slogan for Awad; it is a reminder to keep creating, despite everything the war has taken from him.

The war has taken a heavy toll on Sudan’s cultural life, damaging heritage sites and disrupting the livelihoods of artists across the country.

In June 2026, UNESCO estimated that Sudan’s cultural sector faced a $30m funding gap. But behind this figure are deeply personal losses: Artists killed by the war or forced to leave behind studios, galleries, artworks and the tools they need to create.

In April 2024, UNESCO reported that the Artists and Writers Union in Port Sudan had provided shelter to more than 112 displaced artists and other cultural professionals.

The challenges remain significant, but cultural initiatives have continued. In April 2026, UNESCO said its initiatives in Port Sudan had benefitted more than 350 artists, women, girls and internally displaced cultural professionals, supporting efforts to sustain Sudan’s cultural life amid the conflict.

Asim Abdelaziz, 31, a musician and filmmaker, left El Obeid, the capital of North Kordofan state, amid escalating fighting and repeated drone attacks. He arrived in Port Sudan in November 2023, hoping to find safety and work.

Separated from his family, who are scattered between Omdurman and El Obeid, Asim lives alone in a shelter for displaced artists. The war has uprooted his life and disrupted his career, but he continues to use music to preserve Sudan’s cultural heritage and bring communities together.

In Port Sudan, he has worked with the local Artists and Writers Union, UNESCO and community organisations.  He has also collaborated with the Ministry of Culture and Information and other artists on music programmes to address social issues, including hate speech and racism.

Asim said the war has spurred hate speech and deepened divisions between Sudan’s different communities. He believes art can counter these differences by promoting diversity, mutual acceptance and peaceful coexistence.

“I have seen firsthand how hate speech affects people’s lives,” Asim told Al Jazeera. “Through music, I try to remind Sudanese people that we are all brothers and sisters, and that war does not represent who we are.”

Mokhalaya, a project he founded to document and archive traditional music and rhythms from across the country a year ago, is one avenue for this.

“I hope to take the project to international festivals, introducing audiences abroad to [showcase] Sudan’s rich musical traditions and cultural diversity,” he said.

Preserving heritage is not just about safeguarding the past, but also about keeping Sudan’s cultural identity alive during a war that has displaced communities and disrupted lives, he said.

Abdelqader Hashem, secretary of the Red Sea State Writers and Artists Union, told Al Jazeera the union has supported artists and their families who fled fighting in other parts of Sudan since the war began on April 15, 2023.

“We worked to establish a shelter for displaced artists in a school in Port Sudan and sought support from local and international organisations to provide for their basic needs,” he said.

Beyond providing shelter, the union has helped displaced artists take part in the city’s cultural activities, contributing to community awareness programmes that address important societal issues such as the dangers of drug use, a growing concern in Sudan.

“We have also implemented projects in partnership with UNESCO to train children in displacement camps in handicrafts, including concrete crafts,” Hashem said.

“Most of the displaced artists have since returned to their homes in Khartoum following the Sudanese army’s recapture of the capital.”

Gaza City— Mohammed Hamad, 14, was on his way home from school in Deir el-Balah on October 17 when an Israeli strike targeted the road he was travelling along.

He had finished classes at the makeshift school and was walking home through the al-Baraka neighbourhood with his 10-year-old brother, Abdullah. Mohammed was killed in the strike along with another man. Abdullah survived.

Mohammed was Riyad Hamad’s third child, an eighth-grade student among the top pupils in his class. His loss is difficult for the 44-year-old father to comprehend.

“He was not just my son, he was my friend,” Hamad told Al Jazeera from his family tent in Deir el-Balah. “He was doing so well. May God have mercy on him.”

The family has struggled to come to terms with the death of a boy whose schoolwork and achievements had been a source of pride.

“Mohammed used to ask me: ‘How am I with you?’ I swear, I never asked him for anything more,” he said.

The loss has also left a deep mark on Abdullah, who now fears losing his father, too.

“He has become very afraid of going to school. They used to go together every day and come back together. Now he cannot come to terms with having to go on his own,” Hamad said.

“We are living in fear. When I go out into the streets, I swear I am afraid. Even when I am walking or sitting in a car, my heart is filled with fear … Why should our children have to live with this constant fear and anxiety, even until the last moment?

“Enough is enough. The child is supposed to bury his father, not the father bury his child. They have turned the order of things upside down.”

The gradual return of children to school – even in makeshift classrooms and tents – had offered families in Gaza some hope of restoring a sense of normality after years of disruptions.

But Israeli air raids and sniper fire have continued, despite a ceasefire being established last October for Gaza. Since then, Israel has killed at least 1,574 Palestinians and injured 5,687 in Gaza, according to the enclave’s Ministry of Health.

The academic year resumed in Gaza on September 19, after nearly three years of disruptions caused by Israel’s war – and with it came more Israeli strikes.

Ten children aged from six to 16 and a teacher were killed between October 18 and 24. In a statement last Sunday, the Ministry of Education said that two girls were wounded during morning assembly at Muradiya School in Jabalia on October 21. Five students were also injured, some critically, in an attack on the Islamic University campus in Gaza City on Sunday.

The ministry called for urgent international action to protect students, schools and universities in Gaza.

The risks are particularly high for schools located near the so-called “Yellow Line”, a point that divided Gaza’s territory between Israeli and Palestinian control as part of the October 2025 “ceasefire” agreement. The line has moved westward to give Israel control of more than 65 percent of Gaza, according to the United Nations, up from the 53 percent agreed upon a year ago

At least 66 Palestinian children have been killed close to the Yellow Line, and pupils and teachers travelling near this zone remain in mortal danger from Israeli snipers and bombs.

On October 21, Suad Abd Rabbo, a fourth-grade student, went to school carrying her bag and books. Not long afterwards, her older sister rushed home shouting that Suad had been shot.

“I ran out barefoot,” Suad’s mother, Aliaa Abd Rabbo, recalled. “When I saw her, I was confused. I didn’t know what to do. She was bleeding, crying and screaming.”

The bullet struck Suad above the knee and lodged in a sensitive area close to her nerves and tendons. She was rushed to hospital, where doctors warned that trying to remove it could cause paralysis. They operated on Suad but were still unable to extract the bullet, which remains in her leg.

Abd Rabbo remembers when Suad came round from the anaesthesia after surgery and started reciting a passage she had been preparing for a school dictation exercise.

“‘O symbol of generosity and resilience … When I feel tired, I sit under an olive tree in the yard of our home, and feel rested after the exhaustion,” her mother recalled her saying.

Suad has since been discharged from hospital and has returned to her tent, where she remains unable to walk or move around. She needs surgery abroad to fully recover, but with Israel tightly controlling exit and entry from Gaza, her prospects of proper treatment are remote.

“Suad is now deeply frustrated. She cries and asks: ‘Why did this happen to me? Why was I targeted? What did I do?’” Abd Rabbo said.

Israeli tanks, military vehicles and cranes regularly open fire close to their tent in northern Gaza, particularly after sunset. Families often have to lie flat on the ground for hours to avoid the stray bullets that ricochet through the camp.

“My heart hurts when I send the girls to school. I told my husband I regret coming back from the south,” Abd Rabbo said about their return home to Jabalia after fleeing to Deir el-Balah during the war.

Another girl was also injured on the same day as Suad as students at Muradiya School were preparing for assembly at about 10:30am, Naim Aloush, the school’s principal, said.

“The girls had formed two lines … one suddenly screamed and fell to the ground … another girl standing nearby was struck by a bullet in her side,” she told Al Jazeera.

Teachers rushed to the girls and found that Suad had been shot while the second pupil, Amina Khader, a fifth-grade student, sustained a minor injury to her abdomen.

Aloush said the shooting sent fear through the school, with parents rushing to collect their children.

Pupils who had witnessed the incident were left terrified, and the school saw a marked increase in absenteeism in the days that followed.

The principal sees this incident as part of wider dangers facing the school in the al-Ghubari area, west of Jabalia al-Balad, consisting of 20 educational tents and serving about 1,000 pupils in the surrounding community, close to the Yellow Line.

Aloush said stray bullets or projectiles – from Israeli artillery, quadcopter drones and snipers – still regularly hit the school.

“Education is under fire, and our whole lives are under fire. At any moment, there can be gunfire. It is not light … it comes down like rain,” she told Al Jazeera.

“Every day, I come to school with my hand over my heart, afraid that one of my pupils or a member of the teaching staff might be hit.”

Amina, the other child injured along with Suad, has been left deeply traumatised by the incident, her father, Khaled Khader, said.

Khader said he rushed to the school after hearing that Amina had been injured and carried his daughter to a nearby clinic.

“There was terror, absolute terror. My daughter was in shock. She broke down, started screaming and collapsed,” Khader told Al Jazeera.

“Thank God she is safe … but the psychological impact of what happened will take years to overcome.”

Amina has since been afraid to return to school. Her family tried taking her back once, but she left early, unable to bear the sound of the gunfire.

“She is now afraid of the school itself. She keeps dreaming about her classmate lying there with blood running from her,” Khader said.

He said the incident had also left him afraid for the rest of his children and his wife, with Israeli air raids, random gunfire and shelling continuing to affect streets near the school.

“We are confused about what to do. Do we keep our children away from school and deprive them of their education, or do we send them out, knowing that they could be targeted at any moment?” Khader said. “A student needs stability to be able to learn. But we have no stability, and there are no alternatives.”

Fabricated political polling has forced its way into the spotlight during the midterm election period in the United States.

Revelations that a small number of fraudulent firms have released fictitious results – some of which were picked up by news outlets and polling trackers – have raised concerns about how easily false information can acquire credibility.

Those datasets can be used to cast doubt on the electoral process. And when bad actors are unmasked, their existence can be leveraged to undermine voter confidence in election information overall.

The latest example occurred earlier this month, when Wedgewood Polls released a statement on social media admitting its statistics about a bevy of battleground states – like Texas, Ohio, Michigan, Kansas and Maine – were fake.

Wedgewood described its work as “an experimental project” designed to highlight the “vulnerabilities, lack of oversight and overall low barrier to entry” in the US polling industry.

“Having previously worked in the polling and research sector, we watched as the public’s trust in polling eroded alongside a rise in unverified, low-quality methodology,” the firm said in a statement posted to its social media account, which has now been deleted.

It justified its false data as a test to see how easy it would be for fabricated polling to gain traction among voters and the media.

“The short answer: Far too easy,” Wedgewood said.

But Wedgewood’s admission came after its surveys had already circulated through the political information ecosystem, reaching prominent media outlets like The New York Times.

The incident was the second such scandal in the 2026 election cycle, following the exposure of another operation, Median Strategies, which acknowledged in August it had also faked results as a “short-term social experiment”.

In an increasingly polarised US political environment, the incidents have roiled a polling industry – and a public – struggling to adapt to an ever-changing information landscape.

How fake polls gained credibility

Wedgewood, which launched in June, published surveys covering competitive races across several states. Its results attracted attention from political campaigns, commentators and organisations that compile polling data.

The New York Times said its polling tracker had listed 15 Wedgewood surveys between June and October. The newspaper subsequently removed them.

In the wake of the scandal, it explained that the firm had answered questions about its personnel, methodology and funding before its results were included.

While the Times said Wedgewood’s surveys were not incorporated into the newspaper’s own presidential approval or national congressional polling averages, the case revealed a vulnerability in the process by which polling information becomes established as credible.

Polling aggregators help journalists and voters make sense of a crowded field of surveys by collecting results from multiple research organisations. Their value depends partly on their ability to distinguish reliable research from poorly conducted or fraudulent work.

Wedgewood’s success in passing some of those checks suggests that transparency on paper is not necessarily proof that research has been conducted as claimed.

According to FiftyPlusOne, a polling and forecasting website that investigated the firm, inconsistencies in the raw data and the technical identifiers associated with survey responses helped raise suspicions about its authenticity.

The investigation prompted Wedgewood to acknowledge that most of its results were fabricated.

Though Wedgewood has denied trying to mislead the public, some pollsters are not convinced, suggesting the group could was up to something more nefarious.

“We were investigating Wedgewood for faking their data,” said data journalist G Elliott Morris, who was involved in FiftyPlusOne’s probe. “They are trying to cover up for their fraud with the ‘we were doing a social experiment’ excuse.”

How fake polling has impacted elections

The consequences of fake polling extend far beyond the polling industry.

Mallory McMorrow, who ran unsuccessfully in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, has argued that a Wedgewood survey showing her support in the single digits damaged her campaign.

McMorrow said the poll left her volunteers demoralised, and journalists repeatedly contacted her to ask whether she should abandon the race.

Donations, she added, also evaporated, with Democratic supporters looking to other campaigns to invest.

In a social media post, McMorrow described the poll from Wedgewood – and another from the firm Mitchell Research and Communications – as a “one-two punch” that “killed her campaign”. She suspended her Senate bid in July.

“By that point, we took a risk and we spend our money. We put our ads up. They were working. But the damage was done. And I was drowned out by outside spending and the narrative that we had completely collapsed,” she wrote.

Experts say McMorrow’s account illustrates a broader problem: Even when a poll does not accurately measure public opinion, its findings can still influence the decisions of people who believe it does.

Why it matters

The Wedgewood controversy demonstrates how fraudulent data can become ammunition in an already polarised political environment.

Researchers at the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public tracked how discussion of Wedgewood’s admission spread across social media.

Initially, much of the conversation was concentrated among polling experts and people who followed election data. But the story subsequently gained traction among influential political commentators and partisan accounts.

Some posts focused on the fact that prominent outlets and polling aggregators had listed Wedgewood’s results. Others used the revelation to question polling more broadly, particularly surveys suggesting that Democrats were competitive in closely contested races.

The researchers found the controversy became intertwined with claims that polling was systematically misleading voters or understating support for particular political parties.

“Within 24 hours, the right-wing media ecosystem had succeeded in drawing attention to the story and setting some of the most salient frames: that poll numbers around the midterms, especially poll numbers favoring Democrats, cannot be trusted,” the Center for an Informed Public wrote in its analysis.

President Donald Trump, who has regularly made false claims about US election integrity, seized on the revelations to criticise the Times for including Wedgewood’s surveys in its polling tracker.

“The New York Times got caught,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. “Everything about The Failing New York Times is ‘ARTIFICIAL’.”

He also suggested the Wedgewood case would help his $15bn defamation suit against the Times.

“Our powerful Lawsuit against them is getting stronger and stronger everyday,” he added.

What can be done?

No laws exist in the US that criminalise fake polls outright.

Some advocacy groups and law scholars have argued that the publication of fake polls constitute commodities and wire fraud, warranting federal prosecution.

“Deterring this sort of fraud before it can happen – and raising awareness of it – is vital,” Tyler Yeargain wrote for the Missouri Law Review in 2020.

He argued that enforcement of election-related laws against fake pollsters has “not been fully utilized”.

“Prosecution would serve a strong federal interest,” he wrote. “The interest at stake is weightier than concerns over how fake polls can shade the accuracy of an academic endeavor in prediction markets. It is instead to deter other wrongdoers, the sort who would weaponize fake polls to manipulate elections.”

Brendan Carr, the head of the Federal Communication Commission (FCC), which regulates broadcasts in the US, said there has been “a significant surge” in fake polls during the 2026 midterms, urging networks not to amplify them. Otherwise, Carr said, they could lose their licence to operate.

“Broadcasters are prohibited by the terms of their federal licenses from engaging in News Distortion or promoting Broadcast Hoaxes,” Carr wrote on social media. “It is important that broadcasters comply with their public interest obligations.”

But the FCC’s sole Democratic commissioner, Anna Gomez, disagreed with Carr’s assessment.

“Pollsters who intentionally mislead the public should answer for it, but broadcasters who report publicly available polling data should never be punished when a poll is wrong,” she wrote on X. “FCC rules on news distortion or hoaxes do not apply to a station that reports this data in good faith.”

Without a clear legal remedy against fake polls, experts argue the onus is placed on media outlets and voters themselves to evaluate the quality of the election data they see.

Mark Baldassare, the survey director of the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), said there are ways to quickly spot which surveys are real – and which are not.

“Look for transparency,” Baldassare told PPIC’s Stephanie Barton in an interview. “A credible survey will list its mission, the purpose of its polling, and its sponsors or funders.”

“A poll guided by partisan groups or campaigns that is publicly released may have a message to relay to the public.”

Ethiopia has received 12 Russian Su-35 fighter jets and will acquire four S-400 air defence batteries, in a deal experts say strengthens Moscow’s foothold in the Horn of Africa while bolstering Addis Ababa’s military amid conflict at home and tensions with neighbouring Eritrea.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed announced the deal in Moscow during the two-day Russia-Africa Summit.

“I value the friendly relations between Russia and Ethiopia,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a statement. “Russia and Ethiopia stand together in international affairs.”

Experts say the agreement builds on decades of military cooperation, offering Moscow arms revenue and diplomatic influence while allowing Ethiopia to strengthen its armed forces amid its ongoing conflict in Tigray.

Here is what we know:

What weapons is Ethiopia acquiring?

Abiy said Ethiopia had taken delivery of its first 12 Su-35s under an earlier agreement with Russia, with four S-400 batteries to follow, but did not say when the air defence systems would arrive.

The aircraft would expand an air force already equipped with Russian fighter jets. The S-400 systems would complement this existing fleet by helping the military defend itself against aerial threats, experts say.

“They would be best used against conventional air threats,” Benedict Manzin, a lead analyst on the Middle East and Africa at risk consultancy Sibylline, told Al Jazeera. “In a war with Eritrea, they could be used against Eritrea’s limited air force and drones.”

However, air defences do not provide protection against every kind of attack.

“As we have seen in Ukraine, conventional air defence systems can be overwhelmed by small, cheap drones,” he said.

Why does Russia want closer ties with Ethiopia?

The relationship predates the current competition for influence in Africa.

“Russia has been engaged in Ethiopia for decades, part of the legacy of the Cold War,” Manzin said.

The Soviet Union backed Ethiopia’s former communist government. Today’s cooperation builds on those foundations, with the two countries having signed military agreements intended to improve the Ethiopian armed forces’ capabilities through technology, knowledge and training, according to the Ethiopian News Agency.

Commercial interests also matter.

“Russia is also in the business of making money through arms sales,” Manzin said. “This is one of Russia’s primary exports to Africa.”

Weapons sales provide revenue while sustaining relationships with governments that require training, maintenance and replacement equipment. But the partnership extends beyond defence.

Abiy said his talks with Putin covered nuclear energy, health and trade, alongside bilateral and multilateral cooperation, while in a statement, Putin said bilateral trade exceeded $1.3bn in January-September, more than twice the figure for all of 2025.

He identified energy, agriculture, industry and education among potential areas for further cooperation.

Ethiopia’s size also makes it attractive to competing powers, with experts saying that because it is Africa’s second-most populous country, it offers a substantial market.

“Everyone engages a bit, and Ethiopia tries to maximise its gains,” Manzin said.

Does this mean Ethiopia is turning away from the West?

Manzin suggested Ethiopia is widening its options rather than committing exclusively to Moscow.

“African states are aware that they are a focus of geopolitical competition,” he said.

That competition gives governments room to seek weapons, investment and diplomatic backing from different partners. Ethiopia’s relationship with Russia coexists with a significant Chinese presence and continuing Western investment in the country.

“China has a huge presence in Ethiopia, and Russian arms have always been a huge factor,” Manzin said. Moscow is seeking to turn those established connections into broader influence as Western sanctions over its war in Ukraine constrain its international relationships.

Russia supplied 15 percent of African imports of major weapons in 2021–2025, behind the United States at 19 percent and China at 17 percent, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

Could the weapons be used in Tigray?

In his statement, Abiy thanked Putin for ensuring the aircraft were delivered a year ahead of schedule and said the equipment would strengthen Ethiopia’s ability to “preemptively deter aggression”.

The delivery comes amid renewed fighting in Tigray, a separate rebellion in Amhara and concerns about a possible conflict with Eritrea.

“Ethiopia is buying a lot of aircraft,” Manzin said. “The timing comes as Ethiopia is going through conflict in Tigray, with speculation about war with Eritrea.”

He cautioned against assuming the latest battlefield developments directly prompted purchases negotiated earlier.

“Aircraft are helpful regardless, as they are using aircraft and the air force heavily during any suppression,” he said.

What’s the conflict about?

Fighting between Ethiopia’s federal army and Tigrayan forces intensified in late September, in effect unravelling the November 2022 Pretoria peace agreement that ended a devastating two-year war.

Each side has blamed the other for renewed violence. Tensions grew following the formation of a seven-group alliance seeking to overthrow Abiy’s government and establish a transitional administration.

Government troops and allied forces entered Mekelle, Tigray’s capital, earlier in October after Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) fighters withdrew.

Addis Ababa subsequently installed a six-month caretaker administration, but rebel commanders have promised to continue fighting.

The United States midterm elections appear stacked against the ruling Republicans, with polls suggesting the Democrats average an eight-point lead in the House of Representatives and the Senate. But if Democrats take one or both houses, could they affect upcoming elections in Europe?

Not fundamentally, analysts and observers have told Al Jazeera, but besides a welcome improvement in transatlantic relations, they point to two potentially adverse effects.

First, a Democratic Congress might produce complacency among Europeans regarding their own far-right movements.

Second, it might spur US President Donald Trump to raise pressure on Ukraine to make a deal it doesn’t want to make with Russia.

“If the Democrats win the House, let alone both houses, it will be read as, ‘you see democracies bounce back,’” said Catherine Fieschi, a nonresident scholar at Carnegie Europe, specialising in European far-right politics. It would introduce “the idea that these things don’t mean the advent of a fascist regime”, she said.

From her vantage point in Paris, Fieschi said she imagines a Democratic win leading to “a whole discussion about whether we should fear a Marine Le Pen election as much as some people say we should, or whether, in fact, it’s swings and roundabouts and, at some point, if people are really bad and really incompetent, then elections right the way,” she said.

French right-wing politician Marine Le Pen is currently leading the field in polling for presidential elections scheduled for April 18, with surveys indicating she has about 34 percent of the popular vote.

There is a precedent for the complacency Fieschi alludes to. In June 2025, the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), a think tank, polled Europeans following Trump’s first six months in office. Clear majorities in Western Europe said the US political system was broken. In Eastern Europe, majorities said it was working well – though they were weighted towards right-wing voters.

Greek Migration Minister Thanos Plevris warned against giving too much credit to the US for what Europeans think and do, however.

He said he believes European public opinion hardened against asylum and economic migration independently, but the US marked the shift by expressing it more violently, with military deportation flights and armed Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents sweeping American cities.

“I think there was a European about-turn on migration. We saw this in Germany, which had a welcoming attitude [to refugees] for many years, and they went to a more controlled policy. All northern European governments saw societies change,” he told Al Jazeera.

“But the US provided a change in tone, from induction and integration and benefaction to deterrence, border protection, increased returns and consequences if asylum is denied. I do think that pivot played a role in Europe,” Plevris added.

The fallout for Ukraine

Should French voters decide that the only way out is through electing Le Pen – “like some kind of strong medicine that would wake us up to what we might lose”, as Fieschi put it – they would have to contend with three controversial propositions – cutting French financial contributions to the European Union’s federal budget to pay for earlier retirement, cutting military aid to Ukraine and possibly leaving the single currency, the euro, in favour of a devalued franc.

Any one of those policy moves would be a major setback for the European project, which has coalesced around trade, money and now security. A cut in assistance to Ukraine would remove 3.5 percent of its foreign military aid, according to the Kiel Institute’s Ukraine Support Tracker, which other allies would have to make up.

At the same time, “we could end up in a situation where Trump is basically clinching deals with Putin as fast as he can,” said Fieschi, referring to the US-Russian strategy to coerce Ukraine into a peace agreement that involves sacrificing its eastern Donbas region – something Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said would be a strategic error leading to renewed war, and which a majority of Ukrainians are against.

Trump has already leveraged US early warning on incoming ballistics and Starlink satellite navigation against Ukraine. He has twice echoed Russian calls for Zelenskyy to be replaced.

Compounding this renewed pressure from a beleaguered White House, Russia could intensify its “all-domain war”, which many European governments believe it is already waging against them, said Victoria Vdovychenko, a Ukraine expert at Cambridge University’s Centre for Geopolitics.

“Cognitive warfare never stopped on the European continent, and Russians are already using existing vulnerabilities to the utmost,” she told Al Jazeera. “I hope that the European partners will be staying very strong.”

What Europeans think

Trump’s abandonment of the world order the US and Europe established after World War II, his disregard for democracy and human rights, and his betrayal of Ukraine have already transformed European public opinion, observers say.

Only 31 percent of Europeans see the US as Europe’s “most trustworthy ally”, down from 51 percent in 2024, when Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, was in office, according to a poll for the German think tank Bertelsmann Stiftung.

Seventy-three percent of Europeans across all age groups say Europe should “go its own way” rather than continue a close cooperation with the US, up from 63 percent in 2024, and that figure includes a clear majority among those on the centre-right and right.

In this year’s Spring Eurobarometer, a regular pulse-taking conducted by the European Commission, 68 percent of respondents wanted the EU’s role in protecting Europeans from global crises and security risks to increase, while 39 percent wanted it to be a top priority.

In a June poll for the European Council on Foreign Relations, the description of the US as an “ally” fell from 22 percent in November 2024 to 11 percent across all territories polled in Eastern and Western Europe.

In a June poll for the Pew Research Center, a Washington-based think tank, 76 percent of people polled in 36 countries, of which nine were EU members, expressed no confidence in Trump, and 57 percent expressed unfavourable views of the US.

It would appear that such shifts against the US and especially Republicans, formed over two Trump terms, would be difficult to reverse in a single congressional election, especially with a Russian war ongoing in Europe.