News

The former president is taken in the capital Brasilia days before starting his prison time for leading coup attempt.

Brazil’s federal police have arrested former President Jair Bolsonaro, days before he was set to begin his 27-year prison sentence for leading a coup attempt, according to his lawyer and a close aide.

Bolsonaro, who has been under house arrest since August, was transferred to detention on Saturday, his lawyer said.

“He has been imprisoned, but I don’t know why,” Celso Vilardi, one of his lawyers, told the AFP news agency.

A close aide told The Associated Press news agency that the embattled former leader was taken to the police headquarters in the capital, Brasilia.

Bolsonaro’s aide Andriely Cirino confirmed to AP that the arrest took place at about 6am (03:00 GMT) on Saturday.

The force said in a short statement, which did not name Bolsonaro, that it acted on the request of Brazil’s Supreme Court.

Neither Brazil’s federal police nor the Supreme Court provided more details at the time of publication.

Sentenced for coup attempt

The 70-year-old former president was taken from his house in a gated community in the upscale Jardim Botanico neighbourhood to the federal police headquarters, Cirino said.

Local media reported that Bolsonaro, who was Brazil’s president from 2019 to 2022, was expected to begin serving his sentence sometime next week after the far-right leader exhausted all appeals of his conviction for leading a coup attempt.

The 70-year-old Bolsonaro’s legal team had previously argued that he should serve his 27-year sentence for a botched coup bid in 2022 at home, arguing imprisonment would pose a risk to his health.

Bolsonaro was convicted in September over his bid to prevent President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva from taking power following the 2022 election, which he lost.

The effort saw crowds of rioters storm government buildings a week after Lula’s inauguration, evoking comparisons with the January 6 riot at the United States Capitol after his close ally, President Donald Trump, lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden.

Trump has branded the prosecution of his far-right ally a “witch-hunt” and made it a major issue in US relations with Brazil, imposing stiff tariffs on the country as a form of retribution.

Trump and Lula held what Brazil described as a constructive meeting on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Kuala Lumpur last month, raising hope for improved relations after stinging US tariffs.

Lula said the meeting with Trump was “great” and added that their countries’ negotiating teams would get to work “immediately” to tackle tariffs and other issues.

Nigeria’s Stolen Classrooms | RSS.com

On The Crisis Room, we’re following insecurity trends across Nigeria.

Between 2014 and 2025, at least 1,880 students have been abducted across Nigeria.

It’s a staggering number on its own, but it becomes even heavier when you realise these are children whose dreams, confidence, and sense of safety have been repeatedly disrupted.

And this tragic pattern continues. Just this Monday, Nov. 17, in Kebbi State, terrorists abducted at least 25 students of the Government Girls’ Comprehensive Secondary School in Maga.

Today on The Crisis Room, we talk about the effect of this abduction on children.

Hosts: Salma

Guests: Hauwa Shaffii Nuhu and Professor Auwal Inuwa

Audio producer: Anthony Asemota

Executive producer: Ahmad Salkida

Nov. 21 (UPI) — The U.S. Coast Guard has reversed course on swastikas and nooses, saying they are “hate symbols” after reportedly issuing guidance calling them “potentially divisive.”

The agency late Thursday said the guidance “doubles down on its current policies prohibiting the display, distribution or use of hate symbols by Coast Guard personnel.”

“This is not an updated policy but a new policy to combat any misinformation and double down that the U.S. Coast Guard forbids these symbols,” the Coast Guard, which is part of Homeland Security, said in a news release.

The new guidance came after media outlets, led by The Washington Post, earlier Thursday reported that the Coast Guard had written a less firm policy earlier this month.

Since 2023, Coast Guard policy said displaying the symbols “constitutes a potential hate incident.”

“The Coast Guard does not tolerate the display of divisive or hate symbols and flags, including those identified with oppression or hatred,” the Coast Guard wrote about the policy on Thursday night.

“These symbols reflect hateful and prohibited conduct that undermines unit cohesion. A symbol or flag is prohibited as a reflection of hate if its display adversely affects good order and discipline, unit cohesion, command climate, morale, or mission effectiveness.”

Listed were “a noose, a swastika, and any symbols or flags co-opted or adopted by hate-based groups as representations of supremacy, racial or religious intolerance, anti-semitism or any other improper bias.”

The policy applies to all personnel and they “shall be removed from all Coast Guard workplaces, facilities and assets,” the agency said.

Also, all displays or depictions of Confederate battle flags continue to be prohibited.

In the earlier reported policy, commanders could take steps to remove them from public view and that the rule did not apply to private spaces outside public view, including family housing.

“At a time when anti-Semitism is rising in the United States and around the world, relaxing policies aimed at fighting hate crimes not only sends the wrong message to the men and women of our Coast Guard, but it puts their safety at risk,” Democratic Sen. Jacky Rosen of Nevada said Thursday.

She said the change “rolls back important protections against bigotry and could allow for horrifically hateful symbols, like swastikas and nooses, to be inexplicably permitted to be displayed.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called the change “disgusting” and said “it’s more encouragement from the Republicans of extremism.”

Adm. Kevin Lunday, acting commandant of the Coast Guard, called it “categorically false” to claim prohibitions were rolled back.

“These symbols have been and remain prohibited in the Coast Guard per policy,” Lunday said in a statement, adding that “any display, use or promotion of such symbols, as always, will be thoroughly investigated and severely punished.”

DHS denied there was a revision.

“The 2025 policy is not changing — USCG issued a lawful order that doubles down on our current policies prohibiting the display, distribution or use of hate symbols by Coast Guard personnel,” spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said to CNN.

Nooses are a symbol of hatred of black people, with thousands lynched between the end of the Civil War and the beginning of the civil rights movement.

Swastikas represent Adolf Hitler‘s Nazi Germany, which killed millions of people during the Holocaust.

About 1,900 died while serving in the Coast Guard during World War II against Germany.

“The swastika is the ultimate symbol of virulent hate and bigotry, and even a consideration by the Coast Guard to no longer classify it as such would be equivalent to dismissing the Ku Klux Klan‘s burning crosses and hoods as merely ‘potentially divisive,'” Menachem Rosensaft, a law professor at Cornell University and a Jewish community leader, said in a statement to Military Times.

Other armed services are part of the Department of Defense.

In 2020, a Pentagon report found that extremist views were not widespread in the military, though there was the ability of people with military experience to carry out “high-impact events.”

Two months ago, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered a review of all the hazing, bullying and harassment definitions across the military. He said they were “overly broad” and were “jeopardizing combat readiness, mission accomplishment and trust in the organization.”

During his confirmation hearing in January, Hegseth said a focus on extremism has “created a climate inside our ranks that feels political when it hasn’t ever been political.”

The U.S. Air Force says it estimates a fleet of Next Generation Airlift (NGAL) aircraft will be flying operational missions by the 2040-2041 timeframe. The service hopes to have its C-5M Galaxy and C-17A Globemaster III cargo planes replaced by NGAL types by the mid-2040s and mid-2070s, respectively. By 2075, the C-17, a type that has been under particular strain in recent years, will have been in service for 80 years, though the remaining individual aircraft will be younger than that.

Air Mobility Command (AMC) laid out its latest vision for its future airlift fleets in a strategy memo released earlier this week. The document reconfirms that the current plan is for a single NGAL aircraft to supplant the C-5M and C17A, which AMC had first disclosed publicly in September. At that time, the command had only said it was targeting the mid-2040s timeframe to begin making the transition to its new cargo planes. The Air Force had 222 C-17As and 52 C-5Ms in its inventory as of the start of Fiscal Year 2025.

“With an accelerated NGAL Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) in FY27 [Fiscal Year 2027] and an uninterrupted acquisition process with consistent funding, the first NGAL aircraft could be produced as early as FY38,” the Airlift Recapitalization Strategy document, dated November 18, 2025, explains. “It is estimated [that] the NGAL program will reach Initial Operational Capability (IOC) in FY41.”

U.S. government fiscal years run from October 1 of the year before through September 30 of the year in question. So, for example, Fiscal Year 2041 starts on October 1, 2040, and ends on September 30, 2041.

“One NGAL aircraft will replace one C-5M aircraft until the entire C-5M fleet is retired. Then, the C-17A fleet will be replaced by NGAL at a one-for-one swap,” the document adds. “Uninterrupted inter-theater airlift capacity is paramount for global operations during fleet recapitalization. Current recapitalization projections require C-5M viability until 2045 and C-17A viability through 2075.”

The Air Force’s C-5Ms were all upgraded from older B and C variants that began their service careers in the 1980s. C-17As first began entering operational service in 1995. Neither of these aircraft is still in production.

By 2045, the youngest C-5Ms will have been flying for some 56 years. As already mentioned, the Air Force is now set to keep flying C-17s for eight decades. The service took delivery of its last Globemaster III in 2013, which will be 62 years old in 2075.

It’s also important to point out here that a succession of major crises globally has led to persistently high demand for the C-17 fleet in recent years. The aircraft have played notably critical roles in the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, the delivery of military aid to Ukraine immediately before and since Russia’s all-out invasion in 2022, and various contingencies around the Middle East since 2023. This, in turn, has put immense strain on the aircraft, and their crews, and has created additional sustainment challenges. With all this in mind, how exactly the Air Force concluded it would be feasible to keep the C-17s flying through 2075 is unclear.

“To mitigate risks associated with acquisition delays, funding uncertainties, or technological challenges, the existing C-5M and C-17A fleets’ operational viability must be maintained until a fully capable replacement is fielded, which may require extending the service life and associated Military Type Certificate (MTC) of each platform,” the AMC airlift strategy document does note.

There have been growing discussions already about re-engining the C-17 fleet, which could help extend the operational life of those aircraft. New engines that offer greater fuel economy and/or higher reliability could give the aircraft a boost in performance, as well as reduce operating costs and sustainment demands.

“The C-17 and C-5 … served us well for decades, but they’re not going to fly forever, and so we’d like to recapitalize those on our timeline,” Air Force Gen. John Lamontagne, head of AMC, had told TWZ and other outlets at a roundtable on the sidelines of the Air & Space Forces Association’s 2025 Air, Space, and Cyber Conference in Spetember. “We’d like to have a plan in place so when the service life starts to erode on the C-17, whether it’s wings, engines, or more, we’ve got a competition already going.”

AMC does also have plans now for other capability upgrades to its existing airlift fleets, especially the workhorse C-17s, to ensure their continued relevance, especially in future high-end fights. The Globemaster IIIs are already in the process of getting new beyond-line-of-sight communications suites, and new defensive systems could also be on the horizon.

Many questions about the successor NGAL aircraft still remain to be answered, as well, including whether or not the Air Force might require the design to incorporate stealthy features. Vertical takeoff and landing capabilities and other ways to reduce dependence on traditional runways, access to which is expected to be greatly limited in future major conflicts, might also be part of the equation. The Air Force has explored advanced airlift and aerial refueling tanker concepts that include these elements on multiple occasions in the past. TWZ has been calling attention to the growing need for more survivable cargo planes and tankers for years now.

“As far as what we want in the next[-generation airlift] platform, we want agility, we want speed, we want to be able to operate in a higher threat environment,” Gen. Lamontagne had said in September. This includes “countermeasures that are effective against those threats that are coming from increasingly longer ranges.”

On top of all this is the key equation of how the Air Force expects to replace the C-5M and C-17A with a single platform. The Galaxy and Globemaster III are very different size-wise, as well as in the kinds of missions they were designed to perform, as TWZ has highlighted in the past.

At least one company, Radia, is openly pitching a new airlifter to the Air Force that is bigger than the C-17 and the C-5. However, the Windrunner design is also still in a very aspirational phase of development, as you can read more about here.

Lockheed Martin and Boeing, among others, have also been publicly showing various concepts for advanced transports and tankers in recent years.

The Air Force has talked previously about the potential for NGAL to be a ‘system of systems’ rather than a single aircraft. Speaking in September, Gen. Lamontagne said it remained possible that multiple aircraft types could ultimately come under the NGAL umbrella, but raised concerns about whether his service “can afford, grandkids, kids, all of them.”

No matter what aircraft the Air Force ultimately acquires under NGAL, the service has now set a clear goal for them to begin entering operational service within the next 15 years or so.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Travis Head’s 69-ball century in Perth helps Australia take a 1-0 series lead against England in the Ashes.

Makeshift opener Travis Head smacked an explosive 69-ball century to power Australia to victory in a high-octane first Ashes Test on Saturday as England meekly surrendered in the Perth Stadium cauldron.

Chasing 205 to win, Head slammed 123 as the hosts romped home on the second day by eight wickets in an electric start to the five-match series. Marnus Labuschagne was not out on 51, and Steve Smith was on two.

Head’s heroics came on the back of a blistering spell from the marauding pace pair Scott Boland and Mitchell Starc after lunch that prompted a stunning England collapse.

The tourists were cruising at 65-1 and building an ominous second-innings lead, but Boland and Starc left them reeling with four wickets in as many overs.

A ruthless Boland accounted for Ben Duckett (28), Ollie Pope (33) and Harry Brook (0) in the space of 11 balls, then two deliveries later, Starc sent Joe Root packing for eight.

When Starc removed skipper Ben Stokes (2), England were flailing at 88-6 and the veteran paceman had bagged a 10-wicket haul for only the third time after his first innings 7-58, a career-best.

England were partially rescued by a crucial 50-run stand between Gus Atkinson (37) and Brydon Carse (20) before being rolled for 164 at tea.

When they returned, Usman Khawaja again failed to show as an opener as he battles back stiffness, with Australia signalling their intent by sending in Head.

Head, who has opened nine times previously in Test cricket, quickly got into his destructive rhythm, crunching some lovely boundaries, including big sixes off Carse and Mark Wood.

He made it look easy, making a mockery of the struggles other batsmen had on the bouncy track, bringing up his half-century in 36 balls, passing 4,000 Test runs in the process.

Looking to emulate him, debutant Jake Weatherald also went on the attack, but it cost him, out for 23 after a mistimed pull shot was taken by Ben Duckett off Carse.

An unruffled Head kept the pressure on, slamming four boundaries in one Stokes over and sending a six back over the head of Jofra Archer on his way to a 10th Test century.

He eventually fell to Carse, going for another big hit.

Starc stars

Australia resumed on a paltry 123-9 in their first innings and added just nine before Nathan Lyon was removed by Carse for four to leave England with a 40-run advantage.

Stokes was the star of the show, claiming 5-23 off just 36 balls to give England a golden opportunity to win a Test in Australia for the first time since the 2010-11 series.

They had all been out for 172 at the hands of Starc on day one.

Australia were banking on the 35-year-old to emulate his exploits in the second innings, and he whipped the sold-out Perth Stadium crowd into a frenzy when he removed Zak Crawley in his first over.

The veteran consigned Crawley to a pair, diving to his left in an incredible feat of athleticism for a memorable caught-and-bowled.

Duckett and Pope settled in, safely reaching lunch at 59-1.

But Scott Boland began to find his radar when they returned.

Duckett edged to Steve Smith in the slips, then Pope did the same to wicketkeeper Alex Carey before Brook repeated the feat to Khawaja.

After a first innings duck, Joe Root was desperate for runs, but he was no match for the relentless Starc, dragging a thick edge onto his stumps to cap a miserable start to the series.

Brendan Doggett then cleaned up Jamie Smith (15), Carse and Archer (5).

Nigeria is in the news again due to recent attacks by armed groups, involving the kidnapping of many students from schools and an assault on a church service. These events have increased pressure on the Nigerian government, especially after U. S. President Donald Trump hinted at possible military action owing to the reported persecution of Christians in the country.

The attacks lack clear responsibility claims, but they resemble those by gangs seeking ransom. These armed groups, referred to as bandits, use intimidation and violence, abducting victims and escaping into forests. Recently, 25 students were taken from a Muslim girls’ school in Kebbi state, marking the first mass school kidnapping since a larger incident in March 2024. Additionally, another 64 individuals were kidnapped from Zamfara state, and two people were killed during an attack on a church in Kwara state, where 38 worshippers were also abducted with a ransom demand made. On Friday, more students were kidnapped from St. Mary’s Catholic school in Niger state, with reports indicating 52 students taken.

Experts believe these attacks are financially motivated, particularly targeting schools due to weak security. Kidnappers find it easier to demand ransoms from parents willing to pay to get their children back. The northwest of Nigeria is especially plagued by insecurity, with armed groups operating in remote areas. Meanwhile, in the northeast, extremist groups like Boko Haram and ISWAP have caused significant humanitarian crises, resulting in over 2 million displaced persons and many deaths.

Tension in Nigeria also arises from ethnic and religious conflicts, especially in the central regions where the Christian and Muslim populations clash over various issues. Despite claims of specific persecution against Christians, some argue that the situation is more complex and that Muslims also suffer violence. The Nigerian government rejects assertions of complicity in religious violence by security forces.

The U. S. is considering actions to pressure Nigeria into better protecting religious freedoms. Nigeria’s military leads the counter-efforts against these armed groups, with traditional leaders also engaging in peace negotiations. However, attacks continue amid reports of increasing violence, with thousands of civilian deaths this year alone. President Tinubu has dispatched officials to oversee rescue efforts for kidnapped schoolgirls.

With information from Reuters

Nov. 21 (UPI) — President Donald Trump and New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, from different political spectrums, found common ground while meeting at the White House on Friday afternoon.

Trump and Mamdani met for a half hour in the Oval Office before fielding questions from reporters for another 30 minutes, during which the president said that they have more shared priorities than expected, including cost of living, housing and crime.

“I met with a man who’s a very rational person,” Trump said from his desk as Mandani stood next to him.

“I met with a man who really wants to see New York be great again,” he added. “I’ll really be cheering for him.”

Trump, whose legal residence now is in Palm Beach, Fla., said he would feel “very, very comfortable being in New York” with Mamdani as mayor.

The president said he “OK” with some New Yorkers voting for both of them.

Mamdani said his motivation for meeting with the president is to “leave no stone unturned” in his effort to make New York City more affordable for its residents.

“I have many disagreements with the president,” Mamdani said, but called it his “opportunity to make my case.”

“We should be relentless and pursue all avenues and all meetings that can make our city affordable for every single New Yorker,” Mamdani added.

“I expect to be helping him, not hurting him,” Trump said when asked about cutting federal funding as he has previously mentioned.

Trump said he is fine with Mamdani referring to him as a fascist.

Mamdani affirmed he is a democratic socialist when asked by a reporter while in the Oval Office though Trump previously called him a “communist,” CNN reported.

The president said the meeting between the two was “really good, very productive” and that they both “want this city of ours that we both love to do very well.”

Trump was born and raised in New York City, and said he and Mamdani talked about making housing more accessible and lowering food prices.

“I think you’re going to have a really great mayor,” Trump said of Mamdani. “The better he does, the happier I am.”

Mamdani is likely to “surprise some conservative people” and “some very liberal people,” he added.

The mayor-elect likewise said the meeting between the two was productive.

“We spoke about rent. We spoke about groceries, [and] we spoke about utilities,” Mamdani told reporters. “We spoke about the different ways in which people are being pushed out.”

He said he “appreciated the time with the president” and “I look forward to working together to deliver that affordability for New Yorkers.”

Mamdani is scheduled to be sworn in as New York City’s mayor shortly after midnight on Jan. 1.

China on Friday took its feud with Tokyo over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Taikachi’s recent comments on Taiwan to the United Nations, as tensions between the East Asian neighbours deepened and ties plunged to their lowest since 2023.

“If Japan dares to attempt an armed intervention in the cross-Strait situation, it would be an act of aggression,” China’s permanent representative to the UN, Fu Cong, wrote in a letter on Friday to the global body’s Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, referring to the strait that separates mainland China from self-governing Taiwan, which Beijing insists belongs to China. Beijing has not ruled out the possibility of forcibly taking Taiwan.

The diplomatic spat began earlier in November when Taikachi, who took office only in October, made remarks about how Japan would respond to a hypothetical Chinese attack on Taiwan. Those remarks angered Beijing, which has demanded retractions, although the Japanese PM has not made one.

However, the spat has now rapidly escalated into a trade war involving businesses on both sides, and has deepened security tensions over a contested territory that has long been a flashpoint for the two countries.

Here’s what we know about the dispute:

What did Japan’s PM say about Taiwan?

While speaking to parliament on November 7, Taikachi, a longtime Taiwan supporter, said a Chinese naval blockade or other action against Taiwan could prompt a Japanese military response. The response was not typical, and Taikachi appeared to go several steps further than her predecessors, who had only in the past expressed concern about the Chinese threat to Taiwan, but had never mentioned a response.

“If it involves the use of warships and military actions, it could by all means become a survival-threatening situation,” Taikachi told parliament, responding to an opposition politician’s queries in her first parliamentary grilling.

That statement immediately raised protests from China’s foreign and defence ministries, which demanded retractions. China’s consul general in Osaka, Xue Jian, a day after, criticised the comments and appeared to make threats in a now deleted post on X, saying: “We have no choice but to cut off that dirty neck that has been lunged at us without hesitation. Are you ready?”

That post by Xue also raised anger in Japan, and some officials began calling for the diplomat’s expulsion. Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Minoru Kihara protested to Beijing over Xue’s X message, saying it was “extremely inappropriate,” while urging China to explain. Japan’s Foreign Ministry also demanded the post be deleted. Chinese officials, meanwhile, defended the comments as coming from a personal standpoint.

On November 14, China’s Foreign Ministry summoned the Japanese ambassador and warned of a “crushing defeat” if Japan interfered with Taiwan. The following day, Japan’s Foreign Ministry also summoned the Chinese ambassador to complain about the consul’s post.

Although Taikachi told parliament three days after her controversial statement that she would avoid talking about specific scenarios going forward, she has refused to retract her comments.

How have tensions increased since?

The matter has deteriorated into a trade war of sorts. On November 14, China issued a no-travel advisory for Japan, an apparent attempt to target the country’s tourism sector, which welcomed some 7.5 million Chinese tourists between January and September this year. On November 15, three Chinese airlines offered refunds or free changes for flights planned on Japan-bound routes.

The Chinese Education Ministry also took aim at Japan’s education sector, warning Chinese students there or those planning to study in Japan about recent crimes against Chinese. Both China and Japan have recorded attacks against each other’s nationals in recent months that have prompted fears of xenophobia, but it is unclear if the attacks are linked.

Tensions are also rising around territorial disputes. Last Sunday, the Chinese coastguard announced it was patrolling areas in the East China Sea, in the waters around a group of uninhabited islands that both countries claim. Japan calls the islands the Senkaku Islands, while Beijing calls them the Diaoyu Islands. Japan, in response, condemned the brief “violation” of Japanese territorial waters by a fleet of four Chinese coastguard ships.

Over the last week, Chinese authorities have suspended the screening of at least two Japanese films and banned Japanese seafood.

Then, on Thursday, China postponed a three-way meeting with culture ministers from Japan and South Korea that was scheduled to be held in late November.

‘Symbol of defiance’

On November 18, diplomats from both sides met in Beijing for talks where the grievances were aired.

Senior Chinese official Liu Jinsong chose to wear a five-buttoned collarless suit associated with the rebellion of Chinese students against Japanese imperialism in 1919.

Japanese media have called the choice of the suit a “symbol of defiance.” They also point to videos and images from the meeting showing Liu with his hands in his pockets after the talks, saying the gesture is typically viewed as disrespectful in formal settings.

The Beijing meeting did not appear to ease the tensions, and there seems to be no sign of the impasse breaking: Chinese representatives asked for a retraction, but Japanese diplomats said Taikachi’s remarks were in line with Japan’s stance.

What is the history of Sino-Japanese tensions?

It’s a long and – especially for China – painful story. Imperial Japan occupied significant portions of China after the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-95), when it gained control of Taiwan and forcefully annexed Korea. In 1937, Japan launched a full-scale invasion of China during the Second Sino-Japanese War. Amid strong Chinese resistance, Japan occupied parts of eastern and southern China, where it created and controlled puppet governments. The Japanese Empire’s defeat in World War II in 1945 ended its expansion bid.

The Chinese Communist Party emerged victorious in 1949 in the civil war that followed with the Kuomintang, which, along with the leader Chiang Kai-shek, fled to Taiwan to set up a parallel government. But until 1972, Japan formally recognised Taiwan as “China”.

In 1972, it finally recognised the People’s Republic of China and agreed to the “one China principle”, in effect severing formal diplomatic ties with Taiwan. However, Japan has maintained firm unofficial ties with Taiwan, including through trade.

Japan has also maintained a policy of so-called “strategic ambiguity” over how Tokyo would respond if China were to attack Taiwan — a policy of deliberate ambivalence, aimed at leaving Beijing and the rest of the world guessing over whether it would intervene militarily. The stance is similar to that of the United States, Taiwan’s most powerful ally.

How important is trade between China and Japan?

He Yongqian, a spokesperson for China’s commerce ministry, said at a regular news conference this week that trade relations between the two countries had been “severely damaged” by PM Takaichi’s comments.

China is Japan’s second-largest export market after the US, with Tokyo selling mainly industrial equipment, semiconductors and automobiles to Beijing. In 2024, China bought about $125bn worth of Japanese goods, according to the United Nations’ Comtrade database. South Korea, Japan’s third-largest export market, bought goods worth $46bn in 2024.

China is also a major buyer of Japan’s sea cucumbers and its top scallop buyer. Japanese firms, particularly seafood exporters, are worried about the effects of the spat on their businesses, according to reporting by Reuters.

Beijing is not as reliant on Japan’s economy, but Tokyo is China’s third-largest trading partner. China mainly exports electrical equipment, machinery, apparel and vehicles to Japan. Tokyo bought $152bn worth of goods from China in 2024, according to financial data website Trading Economics.

It’s not the first time Beijing has retaliated with trade. In 2023, China imposed a ban on all Japanese food imports after Tokyo released radioactive water from the Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific. Beijing was against the move, although the UN atomic energy agency had deemed the discharge safe. That ban was lifted just on November 7, the same day Taikachi made the controversial comments.

In 2010, China also halted the exports of rare earth minerals to Japan for seven weeks after a Chinese fishing captain was detained near the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islands.

Nov. 22 (UPI) — On this date in history:

In 1718, Edward Teach, also known as the pirate Blackbeard, was killed off North Carolina’s Outer Banks during a battle with a British navy force.

In 1858, the city of Denver was founded.

In 1935, a Pan American Martin 130 “flying boat” called the China Clipper began regular trans-Pacific mail service. The flight from San Francisco to Manila, Philippines, took 59 hours and 48 minutes.

In 1943, meeting in Cairo, Egypt, President Franklin Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Chinese Premier Chiang Kai-Shek discuss ways to defeat the Empire of Japan.

In 1950, a train wreck in New York City killed 79 people.

In 1954, the Humane Society of the United States was founded.

File Photo by Bill Greenblatt/UPI

In 1963, U.S. President John F. Kennedy, 46, in the third year of his first term, was assassinated while riding in a motorcade in Dallas. Vice President Lyndon Johnson was sworn in as the nation’s 36th chief executive. Lee Harvey Oswald was charged with Kennedy’s slaying but was killed before he could go to trial.

In 1972, the U.S. State Department ended a 22-year ban on U.S. travel to China.

In 1977, the Anglo-French supersonic Concorde jetliner began scheduled flights to New York from London and Paris.

In 1988, the U.S. Air Force publicly unveiled the B-2 Stealth bomber for the first time before some 2,500 spectators, including members of Congress and other dignitaries.

In 1989, newly elected Lebanese President Rene Moawad died in bomb blast that also killed 17 other people in Syrian-patrolled Muslim West Beirut.

In 1990, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher resigned after 11 years in office.

File Photo by Rich Lipsk/UPI

In 1993, Mexico’s Senate approved the North American Free Trade Agreement. Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari called it a “triumph.”

In 1997, New Zealanders Robert Hamill and Phil Stubbs arrived in Barbados from the Canary Islands in their boat, Kiwi Challenger, after 41 days, 1 hour and 55 minutes — a record for rowing across the Atlantic.

In 2002, at least 100 people died in riots in northern Nigeria sparked by a religious controversy over the Miss World beauty pageant.

In 2005, Angela Merkel was sworn in as Germany’s chancellor. She was the first woman and first person from East Germany to lead the country.

In 2010, about 400 people were killed and hundreds injured in a panic-driven stampede on a densely crowded suspension bridge during Cambodia’s Water Festival in Phnom Penh.

In 2016, President Barack Obama awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom posthumously to Grace Hopper for her roles as a pioneering computer scientist and Navy admiral. Also awarded that day were: Tom Hanks, Ellen DeGeneres, Robert De Niro, Robert Redford, Lorne Michaels, Bruce Springsteen, Diana Ross, Cicely Tyson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Michael Jordan, Vin Scully, Elouise Cobell, Bill Gates, Melinda Gates, Frank Gehry, Maya Lin and Richard Garwin.

In 2020, Russian tennis star Daniil Medvedev beat Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and Dominic Thiem en route to his first ATP Finals title London.

File Photo by Andy Rain/EPA-EFE

60 years after assassination, a look back at JFK

<< Show Caption >>

Abuse survivors urge accountability and support ahead of the much-anticipated release of the files related to the late sex offender in the United States.

A group of survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s decades-long sexual abuse have said that they have been receiving death threats, which they expect to escalate, as the date nears for the release of files concerning the deceased convicted paedophile financier.

In a statement titled “What we’re bracing for” and made public on Thursday, Epstein’s survivors have demanded accountability and legal support to face their abusers and get justice.

“Many of us have already received death threats and other threats of harm. We are bracing for these to escalate,” they said.

“We ask every federal and state law enforcement agency that has jurisdiction over these threats to investigate them and protect us.”

They also warned that there have been attempts to blame the victims for their own or each other’s abuse.

Some of the survivors have increased the pace of their campaigning efforts recently to pressure the United States administration to release the Justice Department’s files on the late sex offender, speaking publicly about their stories.

The furore has dominated the national agenda in the US with President Donald Trump backpedalling on his opposition against the Justice Department releasing the files with a sudden about-face last week.

Trump signed a bill on Wednesday requiring the Justice Department to release all of the files related to the disgraced financier.

That was one day after the legislation was unanimously approved in the US Senate.

After he signed the move into law, the department has 30 days to make them public.

‘Continue fighting’

The development follows weeks of intense political fighting about how far to go in disclosing records tied to Epstein.

The release could identify some of the most high-profile figures in politics, entertainment and business.

“Years ago, Epstein got away with abusing us by portraying us as flawed and bad girls,” said the statement by the survivors, demanding full disclosure of the files.

“We cannot let his enablers use this tactic to escape accountability now,” added the appeal, signed by 18 named survivors and 10 Jane Does.

“We ask our champions in Congress and in the public to continue fighting to make sure all materials are released, not selected ones.”

For one survivor, Marina Lacerda, the upcoming publication of the files represents more than an opportunity for justice.

Lacerda says she was just 14 when Epstein started sexually abusing her at his New York mansion, but she struggles to recall much of what happened because it is such a dark period in her life. Now, she’s hoping that the files will reveal more about the trauma that distorted so much of her adolescence.

“I feel that the government and the FBI knows more than I do, and that scares me, because it’s my life, it’s my past,” she told The Associated Press news agency.

Epstein was found dead in his New York City jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial. He pleaded guilty and was convicted in 2008 of procuring a minor for prostitution.

Virginia Giuffre, an Epstein survivor whose painful story has been one of the most high-profile cases, had reportedly faced a campaign of intimidation and threats before she died by suicide in April.

Giuffre had accused Epstein and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the disgraced and expelled former United Kingdom royal Prince Andrew, of sexual abuse.

The ongoing US actions are ‘suffocating the social fabric of Cuban society’, according to the expert.

The United States must lift unilateral sanctions imposed on Cuba as they are “causing significant effects across all aspects of life” more than six decades after they were imposed during the early part of Fidel Castro’s leadership, according to a senior United Nations expert.

The “extensive regime of economic, trade and financial restrictions” against the island nation marks the longest-running unilateral sanctions policy in US history, said Alena Douhan, special rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on human rights.

Only the US Congress can lift the Cold War-era embargo on communist-run Cuba, whose government has maintained that the country “will not surrender” to Washington’s “policy of collective punishment”.

“As a result, generations of Cubans have lived under unilateral coercive measures, which has shaped the country’s economic and social landscape,” Douhan said in a statement released on Friday.

The UN official cited reports that Washington’s imposed measures have progressively tightened since 2018, with further sanctions imposed on the already existing ones and a significant intensification in 2021 following Cuba’s re-designation as a so-called “state sponsor of terrorism”.

Other countries and international companies also over-comply with the embargoes in an effort to steer clear of being targeted with secondary sanctions, which Douhan said affects the government and the people’s ability for long-term planning, “suffocating the social fabric of Cuban society”.

US governments have for decades ignored international calls to remove the sanctions on Cuba, including the overwhelming UN General Assembly vote at the end of October that showed global support for an end to the embargo for a 33rd year.

According to the UN rapporteur, there are shortages of food, medicine, electricity, water, essential machinery and spare parts in Cuba, while a growing emigration of skilled workers, including medical staff, engineers and teachers, is further straining the country.

The accumulative effect has “severe consequences for the enjoyment of human rights, including the rights to life, food, health and development”, Douhan said.

Cuba has suffered a series of electricity blackouts, grid collapses that have rocked the island of 10 million over the past year.

Even when the US issues very limited licences and exemptions, the UN expert said investors remain wary of committing to long-term projects since there could be a policy shift in Washington.

“I urge all states to adhere to international law principles and norms and ensure that humanitarian concerns are fully respected, grounded in principles of mutual respect, solidarity, cooperation and multilateralism,” she said.

Douhan will present a thorough report to the UN Human Rights Council on the effect of the US sanctions in September 2026, following meetings with government officials, international agencies, church representatives, members of academia, medical personnel and the private sector.

A series of artillery, air attacks hit near Rafah, Khan Younis in the south, and Deir el-Balah in the centre, as well as Gaza City.

Nov. 21 (UPI) — Bonuses of $10,000 will be awarded to 776 air traffic controllers and technicians with perfect attendance during the 43-day government shutdown.

The extra money was announced Thursday by Department of Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy and Federal Aviation Administration Administrator Bryan Bedford. The FAA is part of the Transportation Department.

“These patriotic men and women never missed a beat and kept the flying public safe throughout the shutdown,” Duffy said. “Democrats may not care about their financial well-being, but President Trump does. This award is an acknowledgement of their dedication and a heartfelt appreciation for going above and beyond in service to the nation.”

During the shutdown, essential workers, including those in air traffic control, worked without paychecks.

It ended on Nov. 12 with legislation to fund the government through January.

“I am profoundly proud and grateful for the air traffic personnel who worked during extraordinary operational challenges to keep the NAS running safely during the longest government shutdown,” Bedford said. “Their dedication represents the highest levels of public service.”

Absences caused delays and cancellations of flights, including mandated flight reductions at the largest 40 airports in the United States, which rose to 6%, though there were plans for 10% if the shutdown continued.

Some personnel were required to work six-day workweeks of 10 hours a day. They are on duty for a variety of shifts, including holidays.

Even before the shutdown, there were staffing shortages of air traffic controllers and other essential staff.

Last week, President Donald Trump mentioned the bonuses idea on Nov. 10 in a Truth Social post.

He also threatened to dock the pay of those who called out during the shutdown, telling them he was “NOT HAPPY” with them and “get back to work.”

Selected recipients will receive electronic notification next week, and their payments will be received no later than Dec. 9.

The two agencies didn’t say whether those taking planned vacations or fatigue calls will receive the bonuses, NBC News reported.

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association, which has been critical of staffing issues, said it was informed of the decision on cash bonuses hours before the announcement.

Of these receiving bosses, 311 are represented by NATCA.

“We look forward to working with the Administration to provide the appropriate recognition to those not covered by the Secretary’s announcement,” the union, which represents more than 20,000 air industry workers, said in a statement to CNBC.

The Professional Aviation Safety Specialists, which represents 11,000 FAA and Defense Department workers, including technicians, said it is “reviewing the information that has been provided by the FAA and is evaluating how best to ensure that all employees who worked during the shutdown are recognized.”

That union said 423 will get the bonus. In all, it said 6,000 worked without pay.

“It took many hands to ensure that not one delay during the historic 43-day shutdown was attributed to equipment or system failures,” PASS said in a statement.

There are about 14,000 air traffic controllers in the United States. The median salary for the position, including ones not with the FAA, was $144,580, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Salaries start at $55,000 to $68,000, depending on location.

They work in control towers, approach control facilities or en-route centers.

Also, there are about 3,400 trainees, including 1,000 initially at the FAA Academy in Oklahoma City.

The mandatory retirement age is 56.

Also last week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Transportation Security Administration officers who screen passengers at airports would also receive $10,000 bonuses for perfect attendance.

“Despite tremendous personal, operational and financial challenges, these dedicated officers showed up to work every day for more than a month, without pay, ensuring the American people could travel safely,” DHS said in a press release.

Nov. 21 (UPI) — Engineers formerly employed by Amazon accounted for about 40% of its 4,700 jobs cut in October as the online retailer and tech company seeks greater efficiency and innovation.

Amazon fired more than 1,800 engineers in October amid downsizing, while also seeking more rapid innovation, CNBC reported on Friday.

Amazon has 1,578,000 employees as of Sept. 30, which is twice as many as 2019, according to Stock Analysis. The $2.3 trillion market cap is fifth fifth-highest in the world, The Market Fool posted.

The company announced the job cuts in its respective Worker Adjustment and Retaining Notifications filed in California, New Jersey, New York and the state of Washington.

The jobs cut in one month are the largest reduction in Amazon’s 31 years in business and part of the more than 14,000 layoffs announced last month by Amazon officials.

The tech firm’s human resources leader, Beth Galetti, said Amazon needs more artificial intelligence engineers to enable it to better manage operations while reducing labor costs.

“This generation of AI is the most transformative technology we’ve seen since the internet, and it’s enabling companies to innovate much faster than ever before,” Galetti said in the memo notifying states of the job cuts.

“We’re convinced that we need to be organized more leanly, with fewer layers and more ownership, to move as quickly as possible for our customers and business.”

Most of the engineers fired this year are software specialists.

Amazon’s job cuts echo those of other tech firms, which combined for nearly 113,000 job reductions in total among 231 tech firms so far this year, according to Layoffs.fyi.

Amazon Chief Executive Officer Andy Jassy in recent years has emphasized downsizing to make Amazon more efficient by cutting its organizational fat, CNBC reported.

The virtual retailer is expected to announce more job cuts in January while revising its workforce to improve efficiency and reduce bureaucracy.

Huzaifa Abubakar has spent years leading community dialogues on food security and malnutrition, working to support families whose lives have been shaped by conflict and neglect in northeastern Nigeria. Yet, despite his experience, he often felt unprepared for what awaited him in the field.

As Team Lead of the Scaling Up Nutrition Youth Network Nigeria in Borno State, Huzaifa said he regularly engages with individuals who have experienced deep trauma. But he lacked guidance on how to safely navigate conflict-affected areas or engage survivors in ways that honoured their experiences.

That changed after he spent three days at the capacity-building workshop for the inaugural cohort of the Strengthening Community Journalism and Human Rights Advocacy (SCOJA) Fellowship by HumAngle Foundation in Maiduguri, Borno State. 

“I am now equipped to interact with vulnerable people and survivors ethically and sensibly,” he said. “The session on trauma-sensitive reporting stood out for me; still, the whole training was an eye-opener.”

Huzaifa is one of 90 community journalists and local advocacy actors selected for the SCOJA Fellowship, held with support from the Embassy of the Netherlands in Nigeria. The fellows are drawn from nine states across three regions — North West (Kaduna and Kano), North Central (Benue, Niger, Plateau, Nasarawa), and North East (Borno, Adamawa, Yobe).

The six-month fellowship aims to equip participants with skills and knowledge that will improve how they engage, document, and support grassroots issues and initiatives. 

Abdussamad Ahmad, HumAngle’s Security and Policy Analyst, who has coordinated the workshops in the North East and North Central, reminded fellows that their work places them at the earliest point of contact with communities. 

“You remain society’s first responders; your proximity to ordinary people gives you both responsibility and a rare advantage, the ability to shape public understanding with clarity, empathy, and discipline,” he said.

He urged them to cultivate habits of verification, ethical judgment, and emotional awareness, especially when engaging people coping with displacement, loss, or trauma.

The training also featured role-playing exercises and report-writing activities, giving participants space to practise trauma-sensitive engagement, field reporting, and ethical storytelling in realistic scenarios. These hands-on sessions helped fellows translate the concepts learned into practical skills they can immediately apply in their work.

“It was an engaging and insightful session, and I admire how he shared his experiences for us to learn from,” said Mohammed Alamin from Borno Radio Television (BRTV), referring to a session on digital and field safety, which was facilitated by Abdulkareem Haruna, HumAngle’s former Editor for the Lake Chad. 

Abbas Usman, a reporter for PharmaSahel, a local platform reporting on health issues in Borno, said he now feels better prepared to identify and report misinformation, malinformation, disinformation, and fake news. 

Another SCOJA Fellow, Nathaniel Ishaya, a radio producer and presenter from SMK Radio in Maiduguri, added, “The HumAngle training is an eye-opener; it teaches us about many things we are only now discovering in journalism. Although I studied journalism, this is the first time I got this firsthand.”

The recently concluded workshops, held between Nov. 10 – 19 in Jos (Plateau State), Kaduna, and Maiduguri (Borno State), mark the first phase of the programme. The next stage will involve fieldwork, during which fellows are expected to implement community projects, document local issues, and work with their organisations to pursue practical solutions rooted in human dignity and accountability. They will also share their learnings with colleagues to broaden the fellowship’s impact.

During this period, HumAngle will continue to support the fellows with resources and mentorship to strengthen their work at the grassroots level.

Islamabad, Pakistan – When the United Nations Security Council on Monday adopted a United States-authored resolution that paves the way for a transitional administration and an International Stabilisation Force (ISF) in Gaza, Pakistan – which was presiding over the council – had a seemingly contradictory response.

Asim Iftikhar Ahmed, Pakistan’s permanent representative to the UN, thanked the US for tabling the resolution and voted in its favour. But he also said Pakistan was not entirely satisfied with the outcome, and warned that “some critical suggestions” from Pakistan were not included in the final text.

Though the resolution promises a “credible pathway” to Palestinian statehood, Ahmed, in his comments to the council, said it did not spell that path out, and did not clarify the role of the UN, a proposed Board of Peace (BoP) to oversee Gaza’s governance, or the mandate of the ISF.

“Those are all crucial aspects with a bearing on the success of this endeavour. We earnestly hope that further details in coming weeks will provide the much-needed clarity on these issues,” he said.

But the country had already endorsed US President Donald Trump’s 20-point Gaza ceasefire plan in September – the basis for the UN resolution. And while several other Arab and Muslim countries have also cautiously supported the resolution, Pakistan, with the largest army among them, is widely expected to play a key role in the ISF.

The vote in favour of the resolution, coupled with the suggestions that Pakistan still has questions it needs answers to, represents a careful tightrope walk that Islamabad will need to navigate as it faces questions at home over possible military deployment in Gaza, say analysts.

“The US playbook is clear and has a pro-Israel tilt. Yet, we need to recognise that this is the best option that we have,” Salman Bashir, former Pakistani foreign secretary, told Al Jazeera. “After the sufferings inflicted on the people of Gaza, we did not have any option but to go along.”

Pakistan’s rising geopolitical value

In recent weeks, Pakistan’s top leaders have engaged in hectic diplomacy with key Middle Eastern partners.

Last weekend, Jordan’s King Abdullah II visited Islamabad and met Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Munir, the army chief. Munir had earlier travelled to Amman in October, as well as to Cairo in Egypt.

Pakistan has traditionally had close relations with Gulf states, and those ties have tightened amid Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. Pakistan has long called for “Palestinian self-determination and the establishment of a sovereign, independent and contiguous State of Palestine based on pre-1967 borders with al-Quds al-Sharif [Jerusalem] as its capital”.

But in recent weeks, Pakistan – the only Muslim nation with nuclear weapons – has also emerged as a key actor in the region’s security calculations, courted by both the United States and important Arab allies.

In September, Pakistan signed a Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement (SMDA) with Saudi Arabia, days after Israel had struck Doha, the Qatari capital. Then, in October, Prime Minister Sharif and Field Marshal Munir joined Trump and a bevy of other world leaders in Egypt’s Sharm el-Sheikh for the formal signing ceremony of the Gaza ceasefire agreement. Sharif lavished Trump with praise on the occasion.

By then, Trump had already described Munir as his “favourite field marshal”. Following a brief escalation with India in May, during which Pakistan said it shot down Indian jets, Munir met Trump in the Oval Office in June, an unprecedented visit for a serving Pakistani military chief who is not head of state.

In late September, Munir visited Washington again, this time with Sharif. The prime minister and army chief met Trump and promoted potential investment opportunities, including Pakistan’s rare earth minerals.

Now, Pakistan’s government is mulling its participation in the ISF. Though the government has not made any decision, senior officials have publicly commented favourably about the idea. “If Pakistan has to participate in it, then I think it will be a matter of pride for us,” Defence Minister Khawaja Asif said on October 28. “We will be proud to do it.”

That’s easier said than done, cautioned some analysts.

Palestine is an emotive issue in Pakistan, which does not recognise Israel. The national passport explicitly states it cannot be used for travel to Israel, and any suggestion of military cooperation with Israeli forces – or even de facto recognition of Israel – remains politically fraught.

That makes the prospect of troop deployment to Gaza a highly sensitive subject for politicians and the military alike.

Government keeps cards close to chest

Officially, the government has been opaque about its position on joining the ISF.

Even while describing any participation in the force as a cause for pride, Defence Minister Asif said the government would consult parliament and other institutions before making any decision.

“The government will take a decision after going through the process, and I don’t want to preempt anything,” he said.

In a weekly press briefing earlier this month, Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Tahir Andrabi said the question of Pakistan’s contribution would be decided “after consultation at the highest level”.

“The decision will be taken in due course, as and when required. Certain level of leadership has stated that the decision will be taken with the advice of the government,” he said.

Al Jazeera reached out to Asif, the defence minister, Information Minister Attaullah Tarar, and the military’s media wing, the Inter-Services Public Relations, but received no response.

Legal, operational ambiguities

Some retired senior officers say Pakistan will not decide the matter behind closed doors.

Muhammad Saeed, a three-star general who served as Chief of General Staff until his 2023 retirement, said he expects the terms of reference and rules of engagement for any ISF deployment to be debated in public forums, including Pakistan’s National Security Council and parliament.

“This is such a sensitive topic; it has to be debated publicly, and no government can possibly keep it under wraps. So once the ISF structure becomes clear, I am certain that Pakistani decision-making will be very inclusive and the public will know about the details,” he told Al Jazeera.

Kamran Bokhari, senior director at the New Lines Institute for Strategy and Policy in Washington, DC, said the mutual defence agreement with Saudi Arabia meant that Pakistani troops in Gaza would likely be representing both countries. He, however, added that Pakistan would likely have participated in the ISF even without the Saudi pact.

Still, the lack of details about the ISF and Gaza’s governance in the UN resolution remains a stumbling block, say experts.

Several countries on the council said the resolution left key elements ambiguous, including the composition, structure and terms of reference for both the BoP and the ISF. China, which abstained, also described the text as “vague and unclear” on critical elements.

The resolution asks for the Gaza Strip to be “demilitarised” and for the “permanent decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups”, a demand that Hamas has rejected.

Hamas said the resolution failed to meet Palestinian rights and sought to impose an international trusteeship on Gaza that Palestinians and resistance factions oppose.

So far, the US has sent nearly 200 personnel, including a general, to establish a Civil-Military Coordination Center (CMCC) near Gaza on Israeli territory. The centre will monitor humanitarian aid and act as a base from which the ISF is expected to operate.

US-based media outlet Politico reported last month that Pakistan, Azerbaijan and Indonesia – all Muslim-majority states – were among the top contenders to supply troops for the ISF.

Meanwhile, the United Arab Emirates, which joined the Abraham Accords in 2020 and recognised Israel in Trump’s first tenure, has said it will not participate until there is clarity on the legal framework.

King Abdullah of Jordan also warned that without a clear mandate for the ISF, it would be difficult to make the plan succeed.

Costs, incentives and Pakistan’s historical role

Bokhari argued Pakistan has limited options, adding that many of its close allies are “deeply committed” to the initiative and have sought Islamabad’s participation.

“Pakistan’s economic and financial problems mean it will need to reciprocate militarily in order to secure” the goodwill of the US and Islamabad’s Gulf allies, he said. “We have to assume that the current civilian-military leadership is aware of the domestic political risks.”

Others point to Pakistan’s long experience with UN peacekeeping. As of September 2025, UN figures show Pakistan has contributed more than 2,600 personnel to UN missions, just below Indonesia’s 2,700, ranking Pakistan sixth overall.

Qamar Cheema, executive director of the Islamabad-based Sanober Institute, said Pakistan has emerged as a security stabiliser for the Middle East and has “extensive experience of providing support in conflict zones in the past”.

Pakistan currently faces security challenges on both its borders – with India to its east and Taliban-ruled Afghanistan to the west. But it “may not have to cut troops from its eastern or western borders, since the number of troops [needed in Gaza] may not be that big, as various countries are also sending troops,” Cheema told Al Jazeera.

Saeed, the retired general, said Pakistan’s historic position on Palestine remained intact and that its prior peacekeeping experience meant that its troops were well-equipped to help the ISF.

“Pakistan has one of the richest experiences when it comes to both peacekeeping and peace enforcement through the UN. We have a sizeable force, with a variety of experience in maintaining peace and order,” he said.

“The hope is that we can perhaps provide help that can eliminate the violence, lead to peace, bring humanitarian aid in Gaza and implement the UN resolution,” the former general said.

Domestic political risks and the Israeli factor

Despite those arguments, many in Pakistan question the feasibility – and political acceptability – of serving alongside or coordinating with Israeli forces.

Bashir, the former foreign secretary, acknowledged the risks and said the demand that Hamas deweaponise made the ISF “a difficult mission”.

Still, he said, “realism demands that we go along with a less than perfect solution”.

Bokhari of New Lines Institute said stakeholders often sort out details “on the go” in the early stages of such missions.

“Of course, there is no way Pakistan or any other participating nation can avoid coordinating with Israel,” he said.

Saeed, however, disagreed. He said ISF would likely be a coalition in which one partner coordinates any dealings with Israeli forces, meaning Pakistani troops might not have direct contact with Israel.

“There are other countries potentially part of ISF who have relations with Israel. It is likely they will take the commanding role in ISF, and thus they will be the ones to engage with them, and not Pakistan,” he said. He added Pakistan’s involvement – if it happens – would be narrowly focused on maintaining the ceasefire and protecting Palestinian lives.

But Omar Mahmood Hayat, another retired three-star general, warned that any operational tie to Israel “will ignite domestic backlash and erode public trust”.

Hayat said Pakistan has no diplomatic ties with Israel “for principled reasons” and that blurring that line, even citing humanitarian considerations, would invite domestic confusion and controversy.

“This is not just a moral dilemma, but it is also a strategic contradiction,” he said. “It weakens our diplomatic posture.”

Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy is racing to contain the fallout from a high-level corruption scandal that could undermine his authority, just as his country’s soldiers and civilians face potentially their toughest winter of the war with Russia.

A week after anti-corruption investigators said they had smashed an alleged $100 million (€86 million) kickback scheme centered on state nuclear power firm Energoatom, the furor is still swirling around Zelenskiy—even as Ukraine’s troops are under severe pressure on the battlefield with Russia, and its ailing energy grid suffers nightly attacks.

Justice Minister Herman Halushchenko and Energy Minister Svitlana Hrynchuk have resigned over the scandal, but more damaging for the Ukrainian president is what appears to be significant involvement of businessman Timur Mindich, a protégé of Zelenskiy and co-owner of the media company that Zelenskiy founded before entering politics in 2019. Apparently having been tipped off, Mindich reportedly fled Ukraine shortly before last Monday’s raids and arrests.

The Ukrainian parliament has also voted to dismiss Energy Minister Svetlana Grinchuk, marking the second high-level ouster in a single day as the government struggles to contain a growing corruption scandal linked to a close ally of Vladimir Zelenskyy.

It is reported by the Kiev Post that Zelenskiy could fire his influential chief of staff, Andrey Yermak, this week. A full-scale “riot” has unfolded within parliament over the vast corruption scandal that allegedly links Yermak with the multimillion-dollar kickback scheme in the country’s energy sector. The scandal has also reminded Ukrainians of how the president curbed the independence of the nation’s top EU-initiated anti-corruption agencies in July—before being forced to backtrack by street protests and international criticism—in what critics called a brazen attempt to shield associates from scrutiny.

It threatens to become the biggest political crisis of the war for Zelenskiy and comes at a time when Ukrainian troops are under severe pressure from Russia in parts of four regions—Donetsk, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, and Dnipropetrovsk.

Bags of cash and a golden toilet

The West’s “dis-ease” with Ukraine and its president is no longer speculation. It’s happening in plain sight, slowly but ineluctably. The Financial Times, hardly a Kremlin mouthpiece, has published a piece titled “Bags of cash and a gold toilet: the corruption crisis engulfing Zelenskiy’s government.” Its reporters now openly state that Ukrainian elites expect even more explosive revelations from NABU investigations. And once outlets like FT put something like this in print, it usually means the groundwork has been laid behind the scenes.

That Western Europe and the United States are still approving new aid says little about confidence in Kiev. But it speaks volumes about bureaucratic inertia and the reluctance of those who profit from this war to let the tap close suddenly. Even so, you can now hear cautious whispers in Brussels asking whether it makes sense to send billions to a government whose officials seem determined to conjure up a scheme to steal the money before it arrives. These are not new revelations; rather, the surprise is that anyone actually pretends to be surprised.

The truth is easy to discern: the West knew exactly who it was dealing with from the inception. Nobody in Brussels, London, or Washington was under any delusion that Ukraine was somehow to be confused with, say, Switzerland. They knowingly entered into a political partnership with what is, and has long been, one of the most corrupt and internally unstable political systems in Europe. To pretend otherwise is to feign ignorance—pure theater.

For more than thirty years, Ukrainian statehood has rested on the same shaky foundations: competing clans, oligarchic rule, privatized security services, and a political class willing to plunder their own population. Changing leadership never went so far as to alter the underlying structure; it never happened because each leader owed his position to the same network of cash, patronage, and power.

Consider Leonid Kravchuk: under his auspices, Ukraine began its slow “Banderization,” while state assets were siphoned away and local power brokers entrenched themselves. Leonid Kuchma then perfected this system. Under his presidency, Ukraine saw questionable arms deals, the murders of journalists and opposition figures, and audiotapes revealing orders to eliminate critics. Economic sectors with predictable profits were carved up among regional clans who ruled their fiefdoms in exchange for loyalty. And a steady stream of kickbacks to Kiev.

Viktor Yushchenko’s years brought more of the same: corruption schemes around energy, political assassinations, and the continued exploitation of ordinary Ukrainians. Viktor Yanukovych and Petro Poroshenko added their own layers to this hierarchy of detritus. Zelenskiy inherited it but then accelerated it, surrounding himself with loyalists whose main qualification was their willingness to feed at the same trough as previous leaders and look the other way.

Resistance to federalism

All of these leaders shared one common denominator: resisting federalization. Ukraine is a country with a large landmass; yet, it operates through a centralized, unitary form of governance in which a legislative body or a single individual is given supreme authority and thus ultimate power over regional and local needs of the country. There are distinct disadvantages inherent in such a structure:

·        It tends to subordinate local and regional needs to that of those in power.

·        It can encourage an abuse of power, which is one reason why the United States and a dozen other nations created a federated state instead. Instead of having one form of centralized power, there is a system of checks and balances designed to provide more equality and give greater voice to those being governed.

· Greater opportunities for manipulation exist. Those in power can pursue more wealth or governing opportunities for themselves, because few ways exist to stop such activity.

·        The governing structure will protect the central body first.

·        Sub-national regions are not allowed to decide their own laws, rights, and freedoms; there is no sharing of power.

·        The few control the many. If there is a shift in policy that takes rights away from select groups or individuals, there is little, if anything, the general population can do to stop it.

·        The central authority can artificially shape the discussions of society; it can decide that their political opponents are a threat, then pass laws that allow them to be silenced or imprisoned for what they have allegedly done.

The current scandal in Ukraine is testament to the issues noted above relating to its form of governance.

A federal Ukraine would devolve power and financial control to the regions, and that is the nightmare scenario for Kiev’s elites. It would loosen their grip on revenue streams, limit their political leverage, and allow regional identities to express themselves without fear of punishment from the center. So instead of reform, those with power offered forced Ukrainization and nationalist slogans about one people, one language, and one state. It was a political survival strategy, not a nation-building project.

This is why changing presidents will solve nothing. Remove Zelenskyy, and you likely get another figure produced by the same system. Perhaps Zaluzhnyi, perhaps a recycled face from a previous era. The choreography will be identical; only the masks of the actors will change. The deeper problem is the structure of Ukrainian statehood itself. As long as Ukraine remains in its current unitary form of central authority, it will continue producing conflict, corruption, and internal instability. War is not an aberration in such a system. It is an outcome.

If the elites refuse to reform and the population has no means to compel them, then the discussion must move beyond personalities. The uncomfortable truth is that the only lasting solution may be to abandon the current model of Ukrainian statehood altogether. No cosmetic change will save a system, the very design of which fosters autocracy and corruption.

In early November, democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani won the New York City mayoral election in a landslide, a victory that sent shockwaves across United States politics and galvanised the country’s political left.

It was a dramatic turnaround for a campaign that – less than a year earlier – had been polling at 1 percent support.

Among those who were most surprised was Zohran’s own father, Mahmood Mamdani.

“He surprised me and his mother,” Mahmood told Al Jazeera Mushaber reporter Allaa Azzam in an interview this week. “We wouldn’t expect him to become mayor of New York City. We never thought about it.”

But Mahmood, an anthropology professor and postcolonial scholar at Columbia University, framed his son’s electoral success as evidence of a shifting political landscape.

Zohran, for instance, campaigned heavily on questions of affordability and refused to back away from his criticisms of Israel’s abuses against Palestinians, long considered a taboo subject in US politics.

He is the first Muslim person to become mayor of the country’s largest city by population, as well as its first mayor of South Asian descent.

“There were certain things that were near and dear to him,” Mahmood explained. “Social justice was one of them. The rights of Palestinians was another.”

“These two issues he has stuck by. He’s not been willing to trade them, to compromise them, to minimise them.”

Inside the Mamdani family

The son of Mahmood and Indian American director Mira Nair, Zohran first emerged as the frontrunner in the mayoral race in June, when his dark-horse campaign dominated the Democratic Party primary.

He earned 56 percent of the final tally, besting former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.

When Cuomo ran as an independent in the November 4 election, Zohran once again beat him by a wide margin, with more than 50 percent of the vote to Cuomo’s 41 percent.

Mahmood told Al Jazeera that, while his son’s sudden political ascent came as a surprise, his resilience did not.

“It didn’t surprise us, with his grit and determination,” he said of the election. “I don’t think he joined the race thinking that he was going to win it. I think he joined the race wanting to make a point.”

He traced back some of Zohran’s electoral finesse to his upbringing. Zohran, Mahmood explained, was not raised in a typical US nuclear family but instead shared his home with three generations of family members.

Living with a diverse age range allowed Zohran to expand his understanding and build his people skills, according to Mahmood.

“He grew up with love and patience. He learned to be very patient with people who are slower, people who were not necessarily what his generation was,” Mahmood said.

“He was very different from the American kids around here who hardly ever see their grandparents.”

A ‘mood of change’

Mahmood also credited his son’s victory to a shifting political landscape, one where voters are fed up with the status quo.

“There’s a mood of change. The young voted like they never voted before,” Mahmood said.

“Sections of the population which had been completely thrown into the sidelines – Muslims, recent immigrants whether Muslim or not – he gave them enormous confidence. They came out and they voted. They mobilised.”

Local media outlets in New York reported that turnout for November’s mayoral race was the highest in more than 50 years. More than two million voters cast a ballot in the closely watched race.

Mahmood cast his son’s upcoming tenure as mayor as a test of whether that voter faith would be rewarded.

“America is marked by low levels of electoral participation, and they’ve always claimed that this is because most people are satisfied with the system,” Mahmood said.

“But now the levels of political participation are increasing. And most people, it’s not just that they are not satisfied, but they no longer believe – or they begin to believe that maybe the electoral system is a way to change things. Zohran’s mayoral term will tell us whether it is or it is not.”

Mahmood was frank that his son faces an uphill battle as mayor. He described politics as a sphere dominated by the influence of moneyed powers.

“ I am not sure he knows that world well,” Mahmood said of his son. “He’s a fast learner, and he will learn it.”

He noted that significant resources were mobilised during the mayoral election to blunt Zohran’s campaign.

“ He’s taking on powerful forces. He’s being opposed by powerful forces. They failed during the campaign,” Mahmood said. That defeat, he added, “exposed the failure of money” as a defining force in the race.

A focus on Palestine

Mahmood also addressed the role of Zohran’s advocacy on the campaign trail.

Though faced with criticism from his mayoral rivals, Mamdani has refused to retreat from his stance that Israel’s actions in Gaza amount to genocide.

That position, though widely affirmed by rights groups and experts, including at the United Nations, is relatively rare in mainstream US politics, where opposition to Israel is a political third rail.

Still, voters appear to be shifting on the question of US support for Israel.

A March poll from the Pew Research Center found that the percentage of US respondents with an unfavourable view of Israel has increased from 42 percent in 2022 to 53 percent in 2025.

While unfavourable views were most pronounced among Democratic voters, they have also increased among conservatives, especially those under the age of 50.

Israel’s war on Gaza has killed at least 69,500 Palestinians since its start in October 2023, and there has been continued outrage over widespread Israeli violence in the occupied West Bank as well.

Mahmood said the undeniable human rights abuses are causing a shift in public perception – and not just in the US.

“The real consequence of Gaza is not limited to Gaza. It is global,” said Mahmood. “Gaza has brought us a new phase in world history.”

“There will never be a return to a period when the world believes that what Israel is doing is defending itself.”

Texas redrew its voting map as part of US President Donald Trump’s plan to win extra Republican seats in the 2026 midterm elections.

The United States Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a lower court ruling that found the Texas 2026 congressional redistricting plan likely discriminates on the basis of race.

The order signed on Friday by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito will remain in place at least for the next few days while the court considers whether to allow the new map, which is favourable to Republicans, to be used in the US midterm elections next year.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton hailed the ruling, which had granted an “administrative stay” and temporarily stopped the lower court’s “injunction against Texas’s map”.

“Radical left-wing activists are abusing the judicial system to derail the Republican agenda and steal the US House for Democrats. I am fighting to stop this blatant attempt to upend our political system,” Paxton said in an earlier post on social media.

Texas redrew its congressional map in August as part of US President Donald Trump’s efforts to preserve a slim Republican majority in the House of Representatives in next year’s mid-term elections, touching off a nationwide redistricting battle between Republicans and Democrats.

The new redistricting map for Texas was engineered to give Republicans five additional House seats, but a panel of federal judges in El Paso ruled 2-1 on Tuesday, saying that the civil rights groups that challenged the map on behalf of Black and Hispanic voters were likely to win their case.

The redrawn map was likely racially discriminatory in violation of US constitutional protections, the court found.

Nonprofit news outlet The Texas Tribune said the state is now back to using, temporarily, its 2025 congressional map for voting as the Supreme Court has not yet decided what map Texas should ultimately use, and the “legality of the map” will play out in court over the coming weeks and months.

Texas was the first state to meet Trump’s demands on redistricting. Missouri and North Carolina followed Texas with new redistricting maps that would add an additional Republican seat each.

To counter those moves, California voters approved a ballot initiative to give Democrats an additional five seats there.

Redrawn voter maps are now facing court challenges in California, Missouri and North Carolina.

Republicans currently hold slim majorities in both chambers of Congress, and ceding control of either the House or Senate to the Democrats in the November 2026 midterm elections would imperil Trump’s legislative agenda in the second half of his latest term in office.

There have been legal fights at the Supreme Court for decades over the practice known as gerrymandering – the redrawing of electoral district boundaries to marginalise a certain set of voters and increase the influence of others.

The court issued its most important ruling to date on the matter in 2019, declaring that gerrymandering for partisan reasons – to boost the electoral chances of one’s own party and weaken one’s political opponent – could not be challenged in federal courts.

But gerrymandering driven primarily by race remains unlawful under the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment guarantee of equal protection under the law and 15th Amendment prohibition on racial discrimination in voting.

Nov. 21 (UPI) — A U.S. Supreme Court justice on Friday night at least temporarily paused a lower court’s decision to throw out Texas’ new congressional map to potentially add five House seats for Republicans.

Justie Samuel Alito, chosen to decide on emergency appeals in the state, granted the request, writing it “is hereby administratively stayed” with a response to the application to be filed by 5 p.m. Monday.

So, this puts the block on hold until the full court decides.

Earlier Friday, state lawyers formally asked for an emergency stay to allow the map borders that were approved this summer by the legislature.

On Tuesday, a three-member panel in the U.S. District Court of Western Texas threw out the mapsin a 2-1 vote.

President Donald Trump had urged Texas to change the maps to favor Republicans.

After the state filed its appeal, Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton wrote in a news release: “Texas engaged in partisan redistricting solely to secure more Republican seats in Congress and thereby better represent our state and Texans. For years, Democrats have aggressively gerrymandered their states and only cry foul and hurl baseless ‘racism’ accusations because they are losing.”

He described the legislation signed by Gov. Greg Abbott in August as Texas’ “Big Beautiful Map.”

The state had asked the high court by Monday night to decide on pausing the lower court ruling.

The lower court’s decision caused “chaos” for the election, the state said.

“Campaigning had already begun, candidates had already gathered signatures and filed applications to appear on the ballot under the 2025 map, and early voting for the March 3, 2026, primary was only 91 days away,” Texas officials told the Supreme Court.

Those seeking to run for House seats must declare their candidacy by Dec. 8.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, appointed by President Trump in his first term, and David Guaderrama, appointed by President Obama, threw out the maps.

Circuit Court Judge Jerry Smith, nominated by President Ronald Reagan, dissented, writing: “In my 37 years on the federal bench, this is the most outrageous conduct by a judge that I have ever encountered in a case in which I have been involved.

“If, however, there were a Nobel prize for fiction, Judge Brown’s opinion would be a prime candidate.”

In the 107 pages, he mentioned billionaire George Soros, a donor for Democrats, 17 times.

Brown, writing the majority opinion, directed the state to correct four districts because they were illegal racial gerrymanders.

Brown focused on how the new map would affect the racial makeup of Texas’ congressional districts.

“The public perception of this case is that it’s about politics,” Brown wrote. “To be sure, politics played a role in drawing the 2025 map. But it was much more than just politics. Substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 map.”

But Texas disagreed, saying: politics, not race, drove the new maps.

“This summer, the Texas Legislature did what legislatures do: politics,” the state told the high court.

Texas said the lower court ruling “erroneously rests on speculation and inferences of bad faith.” And it said the state GOP’s chief mapmaker worked with data on partisanship rather than race.

After the decision, Paxton wrote in a post on X that he would appeal the order to the U.S. Supreme Court. He added that he expects the Supreme Court to “uphold Texas’ sovereign right to engage in partisan redistricting.”

Republicans now hold 25 of Texas’ 38 House seats.

Missouri and North Carolina approved a new map that could create another Republican-leaning district in each state.

Unlike those Republican-dominant states, California voters approved the new map that potentially can add five Democratic seats. Proposition 50 was approved by a 64.4-35.6%. The breakdown now is 43 Democrats and nine Republicans.

Other states are considering changes.

The U.S. House party breakdown is 219 Republicans, 213 Democrats and three vacancies. On Thursday, Democrat Mikie Sherill resigned her seat because she was elected New Jersey’s governor earlier this month.

COP30 negotiations drag on in Brazil amid divisions over draft proposal that does not include fossil fuel phase-out.

United Nations climate talks in Brazil have gone past their scheduled deadline as countries remain deeply divided over a proposed deal that contains no reference to phasing out fossil fuels.

Negotiators remained in closed-door meetings on Friday evening at the COP30 summit in the Brazilian city of Belem as they sought to bridge differences and deliver an agreement that includes concrete action to stem the climate crisis.

A draft proposal made public earlier in the day has drawn concern from climate activists and other experts because it did not contain any mention of fossil fuels – the main driver of climate change.

“This cannot be an agenda that divides us,” COP30 President Andre Correa do Lago told delegates in a public plenary session before releasing them for further negotiations. “We must reach an agreement between us.”

The rift over the future of oil, gas and coal has underscored the difficulties of landing a consensus agreement at the annual UN conference, which serves as a test of global resolve to avert the worst impacts of global warming.

“Many countries, especially oil-producing countries or countries that depend on fossil fuels … have stated that they do not want this mentioned in a final agreement,” Al Jazeera’s Monica Yanakiew reported from Rio de Janeiro on Friday afternoon.

Meanwhile, dozens of other countries have said they would not support any agreement that did not lay out a roadmap to phasing out fossil fuels, Yanakiew noted.

“So this is a big divisive point,” she said, adding that another major issue at the climate conference has been financing the transition away from fossil fuels.

Developing countries – many of which are more susceptible to the effects of climate change, including more extreme weather events – have said they want richer nations to shoulder more of the financial burden of tackling the crisis.

“So there is a lot being discussed … and negotiators say that this might likely continue throughout the weekend,” Yanakiew said.

The deadlock comes as the UN Environment Programme warned ahead of COP30 that the world would “very likely” exceed the 1.5-degree Celsius (2.7-degree Fahrenheit) warming limit – an internationally agreed-upon target set under the Paris Agreement – within the next decade.

Amnesty International also said in a recent report that the expansion of fossil fuel projects threatens at least two billion people – about one-quarter of the world’s population.

In a statement on Friday, Nafkote Dabi, the climate policy lead at Oxfam International, said it was “unacceptable” for any final agreement to exclude a plan to phase out fossil fuels.

“A roadmap is essential, and it must be just, equitable, and backed by real support for the Global South,” Dabi said.

“Developed countries who grew wealthy on their fossil fuel-based economies must phase out first and fastest, while financing low‑carbon pathways for the Global South.”