News

Announcing the move, staff at the outlet said ‘authoritarian regimes are already celebrating’ its potential demise.

Radio Free Asia (RFA) will shut down its news operations on Friday, citing the government-funded news outlet’s dire financial situation caused by funding cuts under President Donald Trump’s administration and the ongoing US government shutdown.

Bay Fang, RFA’s president and CEO, said in a statement that “uncertainty about our budgetary future” means that the outlet has been “forced to suspend all remaining news content production”.

“In an effort to conserve limited resources on hand and preserve the possibility of restarting operations should consistent funding become available, RFA is taking further steps to responsibly shrink its already reduced footprint,” she said on Wednesday.

Fang added that RFA would begin closing its overseas bureaus and would formally lay off and pay severance to furloughed staff. She said many staff members have been on unpaid leave since March, “when the US Agency for Global Media [USAGM] unlawfully terminated RFA’s Congressionally appropriated grant”.

On March 14, Trump signed an executive order effectively eliminating USAGM, an independent US government agency created in the mid-1990s to broadcast news and information to regions with poor press freedom records.

Alongside RFA, USAGM also hosts sister publications Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE) and Voice of America (VOA).

Following March’s executive order, RFA was forced to put three-quarters of its US-based employees on unpaid leave and terminate most of its overseas contractors.

Another round of mass layoffs followed in May, along with the termination of several RFA language services, including Tibetan, Burmese and Uighur.

Mass layoffs also took place at VOA in March when Trump signed another executive order placing nearly all 1,400 staff at the outlet – which he described as a “total left-wing disaster” – on paid leave. It has operated on a limited basis since then.

Trump has said operations like RFA, RFE/Radio Liberty and VOA are a waste of government resources and accused them of being biased against his administration.

Since its founding in 1996, RFA has reported on Asia’s most repressive regimes, providing English- and local-language online and broadcast services to citizens of authoritarian governments across the region.

Its flagship projects include its Uighur service – the world’s only independent Uyghur-language outlet, covering the repressed ethnic group in western China – as well as its North Korea service, which reports on events inside the hermit state.

An announcement penned by RFA executive editor Rosa Hwang, published on the outlet’s website on Wednesday, said, “Make no mistake, authoritarian regimes are already celebrating RFA’s potential demise.”

“Independent journalism is at the core of RFA. For the first time since RFA’s inception almost 30 years ago, that voice is at risk,” Hwang said.

“We still believe in the urgency of that mission – and in the resilience of our extraordinary journalists. Once our funding returns, so will we,” she added.

RFE/Radio Liberty, which went through its own round of furloughs earlier this year, said this week that it received its last round of federal funding in September and its news services are continuing for now.

“We plan to continue reaching our audiences for the foreseeable future,” it said.

It’s not immediately clear why RFA and RFE/Radio Liberty – which share the same governing and funding structure, but are based in the US and Europe, respectively – are taking different approaches.

The United States Department of Justice has reportedly placed two federal prosecutors, Samuel White and Carlos Valdivia, on administrative leave after they referred to the participants in the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, as “a mob of rioters”.

Documents the two prosecutors had filed in advance of a Thursday sentencing hearing were also amended to remove references to the January 6 attack.

The new filings were made on Wednesday, the same day that the prosecutors received their notices and were locked out of their government devices.

Both were members of the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, according to sources who spoke to Reuters and The Associated Press, on condition of anonymity.

The punishment they faced was the latest instance of the administration of President Donald Trump taking action against federal prosecutors who participated in cases the Republican leader perceives as unfavourable.

Trump has long defended the participants in the January 6 attack, going so far as to pardon more than 1,500 rioters who had pending criminal charges or convictions during the first day of his second term.

Another 14 rioters had their sentences commuted. In a presidential statement, Trump called the prosecutions a “grave national injustice”.

The attack on the Capitol was prompted by Trump’s false claims that his defeat in the 2020 presidential election had been “rigged”. Spurred by the misinformation, thousands of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol on the day that lawmakers inside were certifying the Electoral College votes.

More than 100 police officers were hurt, and multiple deaths were attributed to the attack, including a protester who was shot while trying to enter the Speaker’s Lobby and a police officer who collapsed and suffered multiple strokes, potentially due to the stress of being assaulted.

Some officers were beaten with flag poles, fire extinguishers and hockey sticks.

The Justice Department has yet to comment on Wednesday’s suspensions of the two prosecutors.

The lawyers were previously scheduled to appear on Thursday in federal court for the sentencing of Taylor Taranto, a Navy veteran who was among those pardoned by Trump for participating in the January 6 attack.

During that clash, he was observed attempting to breach the Speaker’s Chamber, a restricted area. Taranto had been charged with four misdemeanours for those actions before Trump pardoned his charges.

In May, Taranto was convicted on unrelated charges, including illegally carrying two firearms, the unlawful possession of ammunition, and spreading false information and hoaxes.

Taranto had been arrested on June 29, 2023, near an address in Washington, DC, supposedly linked to former President Barack Obama, one of Trump’s political rivals.

Trump had posted the address on social media, and Taranto proceeded to drive to the area, livestreaming his progress, in an attempt to seek out “tunnels” to enter the residence.

Upon exiting his vehicle and entering a restricted area, he was confronted by Secret Service agents. He allegedly told them, “Gotta get the shot, stop at nothing to get the shot.”

There were reportedly more than 500 rounds of ammunition in his van.

A day earlier, Taranto had also recorded a “hoax” video claiming that a car bomb was headed to the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Taranto’s defence lawyers have described him as a “journalist” and “comedian”. But prosecutors have sought a sentence of more than two years in prison for Taranto.

That sentencing recommendation was kept in the revised documents submitted on Wednesday.

At Thursday’s hearing, US District Judge Carl Nichols praised the suspended prosecutors, White and Valdivia, saying they did a “commendable and excellent job” and displayed the “highest standards of professionalism” in the case.

Nichols ultimately sentenced Taranto to 21 months in prison. Since Taranto has already been in custody for 22 months, he will not serve any additional time.

Career prosecutors are assigned to criminal cases regardless of the presidential administration in power.

But the Trump White House has repeatedly sought to sideline, if not fire, those who prosecuted cases that run contrary to the Republican president’s interests.

In January, for instance, nearly two dozen employees of the US Attorney’s Office in Washington, DC, were fired, many with links to the January 6 prosecutions carried out under former President Joe Biden.

And in June, another three prosecutors involved in the January 6 cases were reportedly fired.

The Trump administration will limit the number of refugees admitted to the US to 7,500 over the next year, and give priority to white South Africans.

The move, announced in a notice published on Thursday, marks a dramatic cut from the previous limit of 125,000 set by former President Joe Biden and will bring the cap to a record low.

No reason was given for the cut, but the notice said it was “justified by humanitarian concerns or is otherwise in the national interest”.

In January, Trump signed an executive order suspending the US Refugee Admissions Programme, or USRAP, which he said would allow US authorities to prioritise national security and public safety.

The previous lowest refugee admissions cap was set by the first Trump administration in 2020, when it allocated 15,000 spots for fiscal year 2021.

The notice posted to the website of the Federal Register said the 7,500 admissions would “primarily” be allocated to Afrikaner South Africans and “other victims of illegal or unjust discrimination in their respective homelands”.

In February, the US president announced the suspension of critical aid to South Africa and offered to allow members of the Afrikaner community – who are mostly white descendants of early Dutch and French settlers – to settle in the US as refugees.

South Africa’s ambassador to Washington, Ebrahim Rasool, was later expelled after accusing Trump of “mobilising a supremacism” and trying to “project white victimhood as a dog whistle”.

In the Oval Office in May, Trump confronted South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa and claimed white farmers in his nation were being killed and “persecuted”.

The White House also played a video which they said showed burial sites for murdered white farmers. It later emerged that the videos were scenes from a 2020 protest in which the crosses represented farmers killed over multiple years.

The tense meeting came just days after the US granted asylum to 60 Afrikaners.

The South African government has vehemently denied that Afrikaners and other White South Africans are being persecuted.

On his first day in office on 20 January, Trump said the US would suspend USRAP to reflect the US’s lack of “ability to absorb large numbers of migrants, and in particular, refugees, into its communities in a manner that does not compromise the availability of resources for Americans” and “protects their safety and security”.

The US policy of accepting white South Africans has already prompted accusations of unfair treatment from refugee advocacy groups.

Some have argued the US is now effectively shut to other persecuted groups or people facing potential harm in their home country, and even former allies that helped US forces in Afghanistan or the Middle East.

“This decision doesn’t just lower the refugee admissions ceiling,” Global Refuge CEO and president Krish O’Mara Vignarajah said on Thursday. “It lowers our moral standing.”

“At a time of crisis in countries ranging from Afghanistan to Venezuela to Sudan and beyond, concentrating the vast majority of admissions on one group undermines the programme’s purpose as well as its credibility,” she added.

Refugees International also slammed the move, saying it “makes a mockery of refugee protection and of American values”.

“Let us be frank: whatever hardships some Afrikaners may face, this population has no plausible claim on refugee status – they are not fleeing systematic persecution,” Refugees International said in its statement.

The South African government has yet to respond to the latest announcement.

During the Oval Office meeting, President Ramaphosa said only that he hoped that Trump officials would listen to South Africans about the issue, and later said he believed there is “doubt and disbelief about all this in [Trump’s] head”.

Earlier this year, Ramaphosa signed a controversial law allowing the government to seize privately-owned land without compensation in some circumstances.

While the country does not release race-based crime figured, figures published earlier this year showed that 7,000 people were murdered in South African between October and December 2024.

Of these, 12 were killed in farm attacks and only one of the 12 was a farmer. Five others were farm dwellers and four were employees, who are likely to have been black.

Oct. 30 (UPI) — Hurricane Melissa, now a Category 2 storm, was heading toward Bermuda on Thursday evening after battering the Caribbean over the past few days, forecasters said.

Forecasters said Melissa was forecast to pass Bermuda, where a hurricane warning is in effect, on Thursday night.

The eye of Melissa was about 260 miles west-southwest of Bermuda, the National Hurricane Center said in its 8 p.m. EDT update.

It had maximum sustained winds of 105 mph, and was making its way northeast toward Bermuda at 21 mph. Earlier in its lifecycle, the storm was largely stationary, moving at about 2 mph as it made its way toward a Jamaican landfall Tuesday.

Forecasts indicate the storm would pick up more speed as it moves away from the Bahamas. It was forecast to pass to the northwest of Bermuda on Thursday night and should become a strong extratropical cyclone near the southeastern tip of Newfoundland on Friday.

The outer bands of Melissa could pour an additional 1 to 2 inches of rain over Bermuda through Thursday night, while a brief period of heavy rain was considered possible for the southern Avalon Peninsula of Newfoundland on Friday night.

Melissa made landfall in Jamaica on Tuesday at about 1 p.m. as a powerful Category 5 storm, with estimated maximum sustained winds of 185 mph. It was the strongest direct hit on Jamaica since records have been kept in the Atlantic basin. It was also the first storm to make landfall in the Caribbean this season.

The storm lost some strength as it traveled over Jamaica’s western mountains, but maintained major hurricane status as it headed for Cuba. It remained a hurricane when it reached the Bahamas.

Melissa is the 13th named storm and fifth hurricane of the season. The other Category 5 storms in the Atlantic this season have been Erin and Humberto.

In September 2019, Hurricane Dorian had maximum sustained winds of 185 mph and devastated the Bahamian islands, including the Abaco Islands and Grand Bahama, as a Category 5 storm.

The all-time highest sustained wind speed recorded in the Atlantic was Hurricane Allen at 190 mph in August 1980 over the Yucatan Peninsula before weakening to a Category 3 when it struck South Texas.

The most destructive Category 5 storm in the United States was Hurricane Andrew in August 1992, causing $27.3 billion in damage. Hurricane Michael, also a Category 5 storm, struck the less populated Florida Panhandle in October 2018.

Hurricane Gilbert struck Jamaica in 1988 as a Category 3 storm.

President Donald Trump has come out in support of a future fleet of South Korean nuclear-powered submarines. He says he has signed off on the plan and has claimed that at least some of the boats will be built in the United States. Authorities in South Korea have been open about their nuclear-powered submarine ambitions for years, but have faced pushback, including from the United States, particularly over nuclear proliferation concerns.

Trump has made two posts on his Truth Social social media network discussing South Korean nuclear-powered submarine plans in the past day or so. The U.S. President held a summit with his South Korean counterpart, Lee Jae Myung, yesterday, which was centered heavily on trade negotiations. Trump’s visit to South Korea was part of a larger tour of Asia.

“Our Military Alliance is stronger than ever before and, based on that, I have given them approval to build a Nuclear Powered Submarine, rather than the old fashioned, and far less nimble diesel powered submarines that they have now,” Trump wrote in one post on Truth Social.

“South Korea will be building its Nuclear Powered Submarine in the Philadelphia Shipyards, right here in the good ol’ U.S.A.,” he wrote in a second post. “Shipbuilding in our Country will soon be making a BIG COMEBACK. Stay tuned!!!”

The South Korean Navy already has a substantial fleet of diesel-electric submarines, which currently consists of 12 Jang Bogo class, nine Sohn Won-yil class, and three Dosan Ahn Chang-ho class types. The Jang Bogo and Sohn Won-yil class submarines are German-designed Type 209s and Type 214s, respectively. The Dosan Ahn Chang-ho class, also known as the KS-III Batch I, is a domestically developed design. Just this month, South Korea launched the first of a planned subclass of three KS-III Batch IIs, the country’s largest and most advanced submarine to date, which you can read more about here.

In general, compared to even advanced diesel-electric types like the KS-III Batch II, the key benefit that nuclear-powered submarines offer is functionally unlimited range.

The Trump administration has yet to elaborate on exactly what the current South Korean nuclear-powered submarine plan might entail and the roles that the United States may play.

The shipyard in Philadelphia that Trump mentioned is most likely the Hanwha Philly Shipyard. That yard had been Philadelphia Shipyard Inc. until elements of the South Korean conglomerate Hanwha acquired it last year. That yard has never produced a submarine of any kind or any type of nuclear-powered vessel.

“Asked about Trump’s submarine announcement, Hanwha Ocean, which owns the shipyard with another Hanwha affiliate, said it was ready to cooperate with both countries and provide support with advanced technology, but did not mention specifics,” according to Reuters.

General Dynamics Electric Boat in Groton, Connecticut, and Newport News Shipbuilding, a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) in Newport News, Virginia, are two current producers of nuclear-powered submarines in the United States.

South Korea’s “Defense Minister Ahn Gyu-back told lawmakers that plans called for South Korea to build its own submarines and modular reactors, and receive a supply of enriched uranium fuel from the United States,” Reuters also reported. “Seok Jong-gun, the minister for the defense acquisition program administration told the same hearing that South Korea had been developing small nuclear reactors for some time and would be able to build one for a submarine in less than the decade usually needed to develop such nuclear-powered vessels.”

“We believe if we use the technologies we have been preparing for the future…we’ll be able to achieve this within a short period of time,” Seok added, per Reuters‘ story.

The South Korean government is known to have conducted at least one detailed design study relating to a miniature nuclear reactor for use on a future submarine, called the 326 Initiative, in the 2003 timeframe. The country also has an established nuclear power industry that develops reactors for non-military purposes, but which could be leveraged for such work.

A key question, in general, when it comes to nuclear-powered submarine designs, is the level of enrichment of the fuel inside their reactors. U.S. Navy nuclear-powered submarines notably have reactors with fuel enriched to the same level as material for nuclear weapons. This is not a requisite, however. The reactors inside current French nuclear-powered submarines use low-enriched uranium. There are reports that Chinese nuclear-powered submarines may also use reactors with LEU fuel.

Still, it is worth noting here that, at least currently, the only countries with operational nuclear-powered submarines are also nuclear weapon states. At the same time, that is already set to change with the Australian Navy’s expected acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines through the trilateral Australia-United Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) defense cooperation agreement.

Since 2015, South Korea has also faced the unique hurdle of a bilateral agreement that bars it from enriching uranium and reprocessing spent fuel without U.S. government approval. Trump appears to have now given that approval. Defense Minister Ahn’s comments, per Reuters, indicate the hurdle has been further cleared by a plan to source the nuclear material directly from the United States.

A South Korean nuclear submarine program could still create proliferation concerns for the country, which is presently a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). As TWZ previously wrote when the possibility of South Korea acquiring nuclear-powered submarines came up in 2018:

The need to build enrichment or other nuclear facilities, or otherwise acquire the highly enriched fissile material, could also draw international criticism that South Korea is abiding by the letter, but not the spirit of the NPT, effectively developing a nuclear weapons program in all but name. These issues are at the core of why South Korea conducted the 326 Initiative in secret and why it abandoned it after it became public, attracting the attention of both the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

South Korean officials have talked in the past about the possibility of changing geopolitical circumstances on the Peninsula, and elsewhere, leading it to start its own nuclear weapons program. North Korea is, of course, a nuclear weapons state, and it may now be pursuing its own nuclear-powered submarines with assistance from Russia.

The South Korean Navy would also have to develop suitable infrastructure to sustain a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines, as well as train personnel in the operational and maintenance of naval reactors. There could be cost and related industrial base concerns, especially depending on how deeply involved the United States needs to be in any such plan. Questions have already been raised about whether the U.S. nuclear-powered submarine industry can support Australia’s needs and U.S. Navy requirements. The U.S. naval shipbuilding industry, as a whole, has faced serious challenges in recent years and continues to despite government-backed efforts to bolster its capabilities and capacity.

There are still larger questions about South Korea’s practical need for a nuclear-powered submarine capability. South Korean President Lee has said that his country fielding nuclear-powered submarines could help reduce operational demands for its American allies. Especially combined with conventionally-armed submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM), it could also give the South Korean Navy more of a true second-strike capability to help deter North Korea.

However, North Korea has limited anti-submarine warfare capabilities, while South Korean diesel-electric submarine designs are only getting more and more advanced. The range and other benefits that nuclear propulsion offers for naval vessels generally point to broader, blue water ambitions. This is certainly the case for Australia, which is situated far from the areas it expects its future nuclear-powered boats to operate.

As such, South Korea’s work to acquire a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines, especially if they are capable of carrying out longer-range strikes on targets at sea and/or ashore, could have broader ramifications. The KSS-III Batch I submarines can already fire conventionally-armed SLBMs (SLBM), a capability that is being expanded upon in the Batch II types.

The Chinese government “hopes that South Korea and the United States will earnestly fulfill their nuclear non-proliferation obligations and do things to promote regional peace and stability, and not the other way around,” Guo Jiakun, a spokesperson for the country’s foreign ministry, said in response to the nuclear-powered submarine news, according to Reuters.

China already has a very large submarine force that includes diesel-electric and nuclear-powered types, and which it continues to expand in both size and capability.

Much still remains to be learned about how, and when, South Korea may expect to finally begin operating nuclear-powered submarines. Regardless, the country’s ambitions in this regard have now gotten a major boost in support from President Trump.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Oct. 30 (UPI) — Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has said that there is not sufficient evidence to claim that Tylenol causes autism a month after the White House discouraged pregnant women and young children from using the pain reliever.

Kennedy said that while evidence does not support the claim that Tylenol causes autism, he said it should still be used cautiously.

“The causative association … between Tylenol given in pregnancy and the perinatal period is not sufficient to say it definitely causes autism,” Kennedy told reporters. “But it is very suggestive.” Kennedy cited animal, blood clotting and observational studies as the reason for his concerns over Tylenol.

“There should be a cautious approach to it,” he continued.

Earlier this week, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxon sued Kenvue, the maker of Tylenol, over health concerns. Acetaminophen, the active analgesic in Tylenol, has been widely marketed and sold for decades as an effective pain reliever and fever reducer.

Trump administration officials denied that Kennedy’s statement was a softening of his stance on Tylenol, and claimed it is consistent with his previous statements.

Kennedy said an August study found “interventions” that could be causing autism. A month later, he and President Donald Trump, neither of whom have any formal medical training, warned pregnant women against taking acetaminophen without citing any scientific evidence.

In April, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that in 2022, 1 in 13 children was diagnosed with autism by age 8, up from 1 in 36 in 2020, and a five fold increase since 2000.

The New Reactor Economy

In the twenty-first century, nuclear energy has re-emerged not only as a source of electricity but also as an instrument of geopolitical endurance. Among all global reactor exporters, Russia’s Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corporationremains exceptionally resilient. Despite sanctions and fractured supply chains, Rosatom today is involved in the construction of thirty to forty reactor units worldwide, including in Egypt’s El-Dabaa, Bangladesh’s Rooppur, and Turkey’s Akkuyu.

Yet beneath the story of uranium and concrete lies a subtler revolution: the rise of digital-twin technology. A digital twin is a virtual, data-driven replica of a reactor that mirrors every process in real time using sensors, analytics, and artificial intelligence (AI). It enables engineers to simulate performance, anticipate faults, and fine-tune safety systems remotely.

In doing so, Rosatom is no longer merely exporting atomic hardware; it is exporting data architectures and predictive-analytics ecosystems that tether partner nations to Russian digital infrastructures for decades. The company has consolidated these capabilities under its Unified Digital Platform, linking design, construction, and operation through cloud-based modelling and AI-driven monitoring (Rosatom Newsletter, 2025).

This digitalization marks a turning point in nuclear diplomacy: power now flows through algorithms and data, not only through megawatts and materials.

From Hardware Exports to Data Dependencies

Since 2020, Rosatom’s subsidiaries, notably Atomenergomash and Rusatom Service, have begun integrating digital lifecycle systems across their international reactor portfolio. The company’s engineering arm, ASE, has developed what it calls Multi-D IMS, a digital configuration-management platform that creates detailed virtual models of nuclear facilities during design and construction. These models enable real-time collaboration, fault prediction, and workflow optimization across sites, forming the foundation of Rosatom’s emerging digital-twin ecosystem.

Rosatom’s own communications describe these tools as part of a broader Unified Digital Platform, which connects design, manufacturing, and operation through cloud-based modelling and AI-driven analytics. While official statements do not identify specific plants using these systems, Rosatom notes that its “digital infrastructure and twin technologies” are being offered to international partners within its reactor export programs.

This architecture creates a durable maintenance corridor between Moscow and client operators.  Even after physical construction ends, the flow of digital data and software updates ensures that Russian engineers remain integral to plant performance.  In practice, the information layer itself becomes a channel of long-term engagement and influence.

Comparable Western vendors, EDF, Westinghouse, and GE Hitachi, are also pursuing digital-twin technologies. Yet Rosatom’s approach is uniquely state-integrated, aligning with Russia’s national strategy of digital sovereignty and self-sufficient AI infrastructure. The result is a hybrid of engineering innovation and strategic design: a system that embeds Russian digital standards within the nuclear industries of its partners.

For many developing economies, the offer is pragmatic: a single vendor providing financing, turnkey construction, and continuous digital assistance.  But this convenience introduces a subtler dependence, one not of uranium supply or credit, but of algorithmic reliance and data governance.

Kudankulam: India’s Quiet Test Bed

Nowhere is this shift more visible than in southern India. The Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP), jointly operated by India’s Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) and Rosatom, is the first operational complex of VVER-1000 reactors in the Global South.

Originally a hardware partnership signed in 1988, Kudankulam is evolving into a digital interface. In 2020, Rosatom’s fuel subsidiary TVEL supplied India with next-generation TVS-2M fuel assemblies, extending reactor cycles from twelve to eighteen months, a shift managed through digital modelling and predictive maintenance.

Rosatom’s 2024 annual report outlines plans to connect Kudankulam’s operational analytics to its Unified Digital Nuclear Industry Platform, integrating India into the same digital ecosystem that supports Turkey’s and Egypt’s projects.

For India, this offers substantial advantages, higher capacity factors, enhanced safety diagnostics, and exposure to emerging global standards in nuclear AI. Yet it also entwines India’s civilian nuclear operations with Russian data protocols and remote diagnostic tools. Kudankulam thus becomes not only a reactor but also a node in Rosatom’s global digital web, where megawatts are managed by code as much as by turbines.

This duality defines the future of strategic cooperation: efficiency through integration, balanced against data-driven interdependence.

Algorithmic Sovereignty and Strategic Autonomy

Digital integration introduces a new vocabulary of power. Terms once reserved for information technology, data sovereignty, algorithmic control, and cybersecurity now shape energy diplomacy. For countries like India, which prize autonomy, these are practical concerns.

In 2019, a cyber incident at Kudankulam briefly demonstrated how vulnerable nuclear infrastructure can be when administrative networks intersect with global data flows. Although operational systems were unaffected, the episode exposed the need for stronger digital-governance frameworks in critical energy sectors.

Another question concerns ownership of reactor data. Predictive-maintenance algorithms rely on vast datasets, coolant temperatures, pressure levels, and sensor diagnostics gathered continuously during operation. If these datasets are processed on Rosatom’s proprietary cloud, who controls their reuse or replication? India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act (2023) mandates localization for sensitive data, yet nuclear information exists in a legal grey zone, governed more by bilateral contracts than explicit national legislation.

For Russia, digitalization ensures resilience under sanctions. Cloud-based engineering assistance allows specialists in Moscow to monitor reactors abroad even when travel or logistics are constrained. For partners, it delivers cost-efficient expertise, yet it also embeds an asymmetry; operational sovereignty becomes mediated by foreign algorithms.

Rosatom’s approach reflects Moscow’s broader strategy of technological statecraft, using digital ecosystems to sustain global reach despite economic isolation. The outcome is a new form of dependence: not energy insecurity but informational dependency.

Atoms → Algorithms: The Next Frontier of Energy Diplomacy

Rosatom’s digital transformation parallels wider trends in global technology politics. China’s Digital Silk Road, the U.S.-EU “trusted-tech” frameworks, and Russia’s own push for a “Digital Atom Belt” all reveal how infrastructure and information are converging.

India occupies a delicate middle ground. Collaboration with Rosatom at Kudankulam grants access to advanced analytics, but New Delhi also explores partnerships with Western firms on small modular reactors and new fuel cycles. Balancing these engagements will require clear rules on digital interoperability, data governance, and cyber assurance.

India already has the institutions to do so. The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) verifies reactor-control software domestically, while CERT-IN supervises cyber-critical infrastructure. Extending such oversight to digital-twin and predictive-maintenance platforms can preserve sovereignty while encouraging innovation.

For Russia, meanwhile, digital twins are both export products and diplomatic instruments. By embedding AI-based support systems in every reactor project, Rosatom ensures long-term relevance. Even if hardware exports slow, its role as a digital-lifecycle provider guarantees enduring engagement. In that sense, Rosatom’s most influential reactor export may no longer be physical; it is virtual.

Conclusion: The Politics of Invisible Power

The shift from atoms to algorithms defines the next frontier of nuclear diplomacy. During the Cold War, power was measured in reactors built or megawatts produced. Today, it is determined by who controls the data that sustains those reactors.

For partner nations, digital twins promise transparency, efficiency, and safety. For exporting powers, they offer a quiet form of leverage that persists beyond physical construction. As India pursues self-reliance through Make in India and Atmanirbhar Bharat, it must treat data infrastructure with the same strategic weight as fuel supply chains.

The aim should not be isolation from partners like Russia but reciprocal digital governance, shared access protocols, transparent algorithmic audits, and domestic data custody. Rosatom’s digital twin diplomacy exemplifies a future where technological cooperation and strategic caution must coexist.

The next great non-proliferation challenge may not concern uranium enrichment but data enrichment: who holds it, who protects it, and who decides how it is used?

Pakistan has accused Afghanistan of harbouring the Pakistan Taliban, a charge Kabul denies.

Pakistan and Afghanistan have agreed to extend a ceasefire for at least another week during talks in Turkiye, the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs said.

The sides plan to meet again at a higher-level gathering in Istanbul on November 6 to finalise how the ceasefire will be implemented, the ministry said in a statement released on behalf of Pakistan, Afghanistan and mediators Turkiye and Qatar.

“All parties have agreed to put in place a monitoring and verification mechanism that will ensure maintenance of peace and imposing penalty on the violating party,” the statement read.

The two neighbours engaged in a weeklong border conflict earlier this month following explosions in Afghanistan, which the Afghan government blamed on Pakistan.

In the subsequent cross-border strikes, Pakistan’s military claimed it killed more than 200 Afghan fighters, while Afghanistan says it killed 58 Pakistani soldiers.

It was the most serious fighting between the two countries since the Taliban regained control of Kabul in 2021.

After the skirmishes, mediation by Qatar and Turkiye led to a ceasefire signed by the defence ministers of Pakistan and Afghanistan on October 19 in Doha.

The two nations — which share a 2,600-kilometre (1,600-mile) frontier — began a second round of talks in Istanbul on Saturday, which broke down Wednesday when both parties failed to reach a consensus on Islamabad’s central demand that Kabul crack down on Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, an armed group often called the Pakistan Taliban or TTP, which has been long accused by Pakistan of carrying out deadly attacks inside its territory.

The Afghan government has consistently denied that it provides safe haven for the group.

Talks resumed on Thursday, leading to the agreement to maintain the ceasefire until a new round of talks on November 6.

Afghan government spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid issued a statement confirming the conclusion of the talks and saying both sides had agreed to continue discussions in future meetings. Pakistan did not immediately comment.

While a ceasefire remains in place, the border between the two countries has been closed for more than two weeks, leading to mounting losses for traders in the region.

In Kandahar on the Afghan side, Nazir Ahmed, a cloth trader, told the newswire AFP both countries “will bear losses.”

“Our nation is tired and their nation is also tired,” the 35-year-old said Wednesday.

Abdul Jabbar, a vehicle spare parts trader in the Pakistani border town of Chaman, said “trade suffers greatly”.

“Both countries face losses — both are Islamic nations,” he told AFP.

Advocates say new rules let Education Department to politically punish groups working on immigration, transgender care.

The United States Department of Education has finalised new rules that could bar nonprofits deemed to have undertaken work with a “substantial illegal purpose” from a special student loan forgiveness programme.

Those rules, finalised on Thursday, appear to single out certain organisations that do work in areas that President Donald Trump politically opposes, including immigration advocacy and transgender rights.

Under the new rules, set to take effect in July 2026, the education secretary has the power to exclude groups if they engage in activities like the “chemical castration” of children, using a politically charged term for gender-affirming healthcare, including puberty-delaying medication.

It also allows the education secretary to bar groups accused of supporting undocumented immigration or “terrorist” organisations.

The Trump administration has said its decisions “will not be made based on the political views or policy preferences of the organization”.

But advocates fear the move is the administration’s latest effort to target left-leaning and liberal organisations.

Trump has already threatened to crack down on several liberal nonprofits, which the White House has broadly accused of being part of “domestic terror networks”.

Thursday’s rules concern the Public Service Loan Forgiveness programme, created by an act of Congress in 2007.

In an effort to direct more graduates into public service jobs, the programme promises to cancel federal student loans for government employees and many nonprofit workers after they have made 10 years of payments.

Workers in the public sector, including teachers, medical professionals, firefighters, social service professionals and lawyers, are among those who can benefit.

In a statement, the Trump administration defended the updated rules, calling them a necessary bulwark to protect taxpayer funds.

The programme “was meant to support Americans who dedicate their careers to public service – not to subsidize organizations that violate the law, whether by harboring illegal immigrants or performing prohibited medical procedures that attempt to transition children away from their biological sex”, said Education Undersecretary Nicholas Kent.

Critics, however, have denounced the administration for using false claims of “terrorism” or criminal behaviour to silence opposing views and restrict civil liberties.

Michael Lukens, executive director of the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, said the new rules weaponised loan forgiveness.

Lukens explained that many of the lawyers, social workers and paralegals who work at his organisation handle cases to stop deportations and other immigration litigation.

They count on public service loan forgiveness to take jobs that pay significantly less than the private sector, he said.

“All of a sudden, that’s going away,” Lukens told The Associated Press news agency. “The younger generation, I hope, will be able to wait this out for the next couple of years to see if it gets better, but if it doesn’t, we’re going to see a lot of people leave the field to go and work in a for-profit space.”

Organisations have raised concerns over the education secretary’s broad power to determine if a group should be barred. Short of a legal finding, the secretary can decide based on a “preponderance of the evidence” whether an employer is in violation.

The National Council of Nonprofits was among the associations criticising the change.

It said the rules would allow future administrations from any political party to change eligibility rules “based on their own priorities or ideology”.

Oct. 30 (UPI) — England’s Prince Andrew has been stripped of his official title and will leave his royal residence amid fallout from his relationship with the late convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein.

Andrew, the son of the late Queen Elizabeth II, is alleged to have attended gatherings hosted by Epstein.

Buckingham Palace announced Thursday that King Charles III will initiate the process of removing Andrew’s “style, titles and honors.”

“Prince Andew will now be known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor,” a statement from the palace said.

“His lease on Royal Lodge has provided him with legal protection to continue in his residence. Formal notice has now been served to surrender the lease and he will move to alternative private accommodation.”

Andrew stopped using his Duke of York title and announced in a statement released by the palace that “the continued accusations about me may distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.”

It is the first time that a member of the royal family has been stripped of their title in more than a century, according to the House of Commons.

Andrew will move from the royal residence on the grounds of Windsor Castle to a property on Sandringham, which is the private estate of the King in Norfolk, England, according to ABC News.

Andrew has consistently denied accusations against him regarding his association with Epstein and attacked the credibility of Virginia Giuffre, author of a book centered on Epstein called, “Nobody’s Girl.”

Giuffre died of an apparent suicide in April.

In Feb, 2022, Andrew settled a sexual assault lawsuit filed by Giuffre while not admitting any wrongdoing. Epstein and Giuffre settled a lawsuit for $500,000 in 2009.

Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s former accomplice, was convicted in 2021 on child sex trafficking and other charges connected to her involvement with Epstein.

Maxwell has consistently denied all wrongdoing and is the only Epstein associate who has been charged in connection with his crimes.

After more than 20 years under construction, the Grand Egyptian Museum will finally open this weekend, promising more than 50,000 artifacts showing what life was like in ancient Egypt.

Reports of massacres by Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Darfur – after the army was pushed out of the region.

Tens of thousands of civilians are now feared trapped in el-Fasher.

The conflict in Sudan has caused one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises.

So, what can be done to stop the bloodshed?

Presenter: Nick Clark

Guests:

Hamid Khalafallah – Researcher and Policy Analyst

Bakry Eljack – Professor of Public Policy at Long Island University Brooklyn

Justin Lynch – Managing Director, Conflict Insights Group

The rare move comes after mounting pressure to act over Andrew’s relationship with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

King Charles III has stripped his brother Prince Andrew of his remaining titles and evicted him from his royal residence after weeks of pressure to act over his relationship with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Buckingham Palace said on Thursday the king “initiated a formal process to remove the Style, Titles and Honours of Prince Andrew”.

After the king’s rare move, Andrew will be known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and not as a prince, and he will move from his Royal Lodge residence into “private accommodation”.

It is almost unprecedented for a British prince or princess to be stripped of that title. It last happened in 1919, when Prince Ernest Augustus, who was a UK royal and also a prince of Hanover, had his British title removed for siding with Germany during World War I.

Demand had been growing on the palace to remove the prince from Royal Lodge after he surrendered his use of the title duke of York earlier this month over new revelations about his friendship with Epstein and renewed sexual abuse allegations by one of Epstein’s victims, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, whose posthumous memoir hit bookstores last week.

But the king went even further to punish him for serious lapses of judgement by removing the title of prince that he had held since birth as a child of a monarch, the late Queen Elizabeth II.

“These censures are deemed necessary, notwithstanding the fact that he continues to deny the allegations against him,” the palace said. “Their Majesties wish to make clear that their thoughts and utmost sympathies have been, and will remain with, the victims and survivors of any and all forms of abuse.”

Giuffre’s brother declared victory for his sister, who died in April at the age of 41.

“Today, an ordinary American girl from an ordinary American family, brought down a British prince with her truth and extraordinary courage,” her brother Skye Roberts said in a statement.

Andrew faced a new round of public opprobrium after emails emerged earlier this month showing he had remained in contact with Epstein longer than he previously admitted.

That news was followed by the publication of, Nobody’s Girl, by Giuffre, who alleged she had sex with Andrew when she was 17. The book detailed three alleged sexual encounters with Andrew, who she said acted as if he believed “having sex with me was his birthright”.

Andrew, 65, has long denied Giuffre’s claims, but stepped down from royal duties after a disastrous November 2019 BBC interview in which he attempted to rebut her allegations.

Andrew paid millions in an out-of-court settlement in 2022 after Giuffre filed a civil suit against him in New York. While he did not admit wrongdoing, he acknowledged Giuffre’s suffering as a victim of sex trafficking.

The move by the king means Andrew will no longer be a prince or be known as “his royal highness”, “duke of York”, “earl of Inverness” or “baron Killyleagh” – all titles he held until now. Also gone are honours that include Order of the Garter and status as knight grand cross of the Royal Victorian Order.

Andrew is expected to move to a property on the king’s Sandringham estate near the northeast coast and receive private financial support from his brother.

“No one is safe in el-Fasher.” The UN Security Council condemned escalating violence in Sudan’s Darfur region amid reports of atrocities by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces. The ambassadors to Sudan and the United Arab Emirates had a heated exchange, with Sudan accusing the UAE of supporting the RSF.

Oct. 30 (UPI) — Los Angeles has toppled Chicago as America’s Rattiest City, according to exterminating company Orkin, which publishes a Top-50 list.

“With year-round warm weather, a booming culinary scene and dense neighborhoods that offer ample access to food and shelter, the City of Angels checks every box for rodent survival,” a company press release said.

“From bustling commercial corridors to hidden alleyways, Los Angeles’ signature blend of glam and grit creates a perfect storm for rodent activity.”

Chicago has held the top spot since Orkin created the annual list in 2015

The shift is most likely due to weather patterns, urban infrastructure and human behavior, the press release said.

“Rats and mice are more than a nuisance — they’re opportunists,” Ian Williams, Orkin entomologist, said in a statement. “If there’s food, warmth and a way in, they’ll find it. And once inside, their constant chewing and rapid reproduction can quickly turn a small issue into a large, expensive one.”

Rodents are known carriers of illnesses to humans, including Leptospirosis, Salmonellosis, Lymphocytic Choreomeningitis, plague and typhus.

Orkin measures the number of calls to Orkin to eliminate rats to make the rankings.

The top 25 Rattiest Cities, according to Orkin are, in order, Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Hartford, Conn., Washington, D.C., Detroit, Philadelphia, Minneapolis, Denver, Cleveland, Baltimore and Boston.

Also, Indianapolis, Dallas, Milwaukee, Seattle, Atlanta, Sacramento, Pittsburgh, Columbus, Tampa, Fla., Houston, San Diego and Grand Rapids, Mich.

The streets have grown restless since Cameroon announced the results of its Oct. 12 presidential election, which returned 92-year-old Paul Biya as the country’s leader for an eighth consecutive term since 1982.

From Douala to Garoua and the capital, Yaounde, protesters have clashed with police, denouncing what they call a “stolen” and “manipulated” election, revealing the deep anger and mistrust that have defined the country’s politics for decades. 

Biya, who won the election with 53.66 per cent of the vote as declared by the Constitutional Council, is Africa’s oldest and one of the world’s longest-serving leaders. This latest election extends his 43-year rule for another seven years. 

Biya’s main challenger, Issa Tchiroma Bakary, a former ally turned critic, rejected the results, claiming victory based on his campaign’s own tallies. He accused the government of “manipulating the will of the people” and called for nationwide demonstrations. His appeal quickly spread through social media and opposition networks, sparking street protests that soon turned violent.

Other opposition parties and civil society groups have also raised concerns about the credibility of the election. They point to unusually high voter turnouts in some districts, inconsistencies in vote tabulation, and the speed at which results were certified. 

But the anger on the streets is about more than the election. For many, the problem is about a system they say is built to protect incumbency and silence opposition.

Cameroon has been grappling with multiple crises that have weakened its social and political fabric. For nearly a decade, the country has battled separatist insurgencies in the English-speaking North West and South West regions, jihadist attacks in the Far North and the border with Nigeria, and worsening economic hardship in its cities. The election, analysts warned before the vote, could act as a trigger to more instability in the country. Those fears have now materialised. 

The violent ongoing protests have claimed the lives of at least four people, and hundreds have been arrested. Observers suggest the figure may be higher. 

The UN Human Rights Office has since called on security forces to “refrain from the use of lethal force” and urged protesters to demonstrate peacefully. It also reminded authorities of their obligation to respect international human rights law and called for restraint from all political actors.

“We urge the authorities to ensure prompt, impartial and effective investigations into all cases of election-related violence, including the use of unnecessary or disproportionate force, and to bring those responsible to justice,” the UN statement read. 

Douala, the country’s economic capital and largest city, has been the epicentre of the post-election unrest. Eyewitnesses report scenes of gunfire, barricades, and hurried funerals in the city.

In the north, Garoua has also seen violence after reported attacks near Tchiroma’s residence. Smaller towns have joined in, with reports of arrests and clashes spreading across the country. Observers warn that the tension risks taking on ethnic and regional dimensions — a dangerous trend in an already divided nation.

Ethnic divisions have long shaped Cameroon’s politics, and the 2025 election has further exposed these fractures. President Biya’s support remains anchored in his Beti/Bulu base from the Centre and South, while many Bamiléké and Anglophone communities continue to feel excluded from power. The candidacy of Issa Tchiroma, a northern Fulani politician, introduced another layer to the political landscape but did little to ease existing mistrust. Although some of his support came from northern and western groups united mainly by opposition to Biya, the campaign and its aftermath remained charged with ethnic undertones.

As these divisions deepened, tensions between the authorities and the opposition escalated sharply. The government has accused Tchiroma and his supporters of inciting violence and promised to hold them accountable through legal action. Officials say the state is acting to preserve order, but critics argue that the heavy-handed response risks deepening public resentment. Security operations, arrests, and reported internet restrictions have further strained the situation. Access to several areas has been cut off, making it difficult for journalists and humanitarian workers to verify reports of casualties or destruction. However, Tchiroma promised to continue his push until “final victory”. 

As the unrest spreads, attention has also turned to the country’s conflict-prone Anglophone regions. Separatist movements are watching closely, with many viewing the chaos as proof of the central government’s weakness and are using the moment to push their demands for independence. Local leaders warn that any harsh crackdown by the state could inflame tensions in areas where peace is already fragile. 

“Had Biya and his entourage exercised more care in the months before the vote and understood the depth of the government’s unpopularity, this standoff might have been averted,” wrote the International Crisis Group.

Beyond the immediate crisis, the unrest underscores a deeper issue — the fragility of Cameroon’s democratic institutions. Elections are meant to provide legitimacy and a peaceful means of political competition. Instead, they have become flashpoints for unrest. For many young people who have grown up knowing only one president, the sense of disillusionment runs deep. Unemployment remains high, corruption is endemic, and the promise of reform feels distant.

International reactions have been predictable but cautious. Western governments and regional bodies have called for dialogue and restraint. While congratulating Biya on his re-election, the Chairperson of the African Union Commission, Mahmoud Ali Youssouf, stated that he “is gravely concerned about the reported violence, repression and arrests of protesters and political actors in connection with the election results.”

Youssouf urged “the Cameroonian authorities to accord topmost priority to inclusive national dialogue and consultation with all political stakeholders in order to reach consensus in the spirit of national unity, peace and collective security.”

Whether those appeals will be heeded remains uncertain. What happens next depends on how the government and opposition respond in the coming weeks. Analysts warn that Cameroon stands at a crossroads. A violent crackdown could trigger a wider crisis, while genuine dialogue might begin to ease the tension. 

The first step, according to the International Crisis Group, should be an independent review of the election results and the violence that followed — a process that includes civil society, opposition representatives, and credible international observers.

Equally critical is the release of protesters detained for exercising their right to peaceful assembly. Restoring communication channels, lifting internet restrictions, and creating safe conditions for independent reporting would also help reduce misinformation and rebuild trust.

But the challenges go far beyond the current unrest. Cameroon’s long-term stability depends on addressing structural grievances, from political exclusion and corruption to the Anglophone crisis that has displaced hundreds of thousands. The government’s reliance on military solutions in the separatist regions has failed to end the conflict, while economic inequality and youth unemployment continue to feed discontent nationwide.

Without deep reform, each election risks becoming another trigger for instability. Political analysts argue that the ruling party must open the political space, allow real competition, and engage communities long excluded from decision-making. “Cameroon’s democracy has been reduced to a ritual,” one Cameroonian journalist told HumAngle. “People vote, results are announced, and nothing changes.”

For now, calm remains fragile. Markets have slowed, schools have closed in some regions, and the streets are lined with soldiers. In several cities, families are mourning relatives caught in the violence. Others fear more crackdowns as protests continue.

The coming days will test whether President Biya’s government can navigate the crisis without pushing the country into deeper turmoil — or whether the unrest will harden into yet another chapter of Cameroon’s long struggle between power and the people.

If the country fails to learn from this moment, the cycle of repression and resistance will only deepen. And for millions of Cameroonians weary of conflict, the dream of a peaceful transition of power will remain just an illusion. 

The Palestinian group Hamas has handed over two bodies it said were of deceased Israeli captives, a day after the fragile Gaza ceasefire was shattered by a series of deadly Israeli strikes across the besieged enclave.

The office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Thursday that the two bodies had been received by Israeli forces via the Red Cross in Gaza and would be transported into Israel for identification.

Under the US-brokered accord to halt Israel’s two-year war on Gaza, Hamas released 20 living captives in exchange for Israel releasing nearly 2,000 Palestinian political prisoners. Israeli forces have also completed a partial withdrawal from urban centres in Gaza.

But since the ceasefire took effect on October 10, Israeli attacks have killed dozens of Palestinians across the enclave. From Tuesday into Wednesday, the Health Ministry in Gaza said Israeli attacks killed 104 people, including 46 children and 20 women.

As part of the agreement, Hamas committed to returning the remains of all 28 captives, in exchange for the bodies of Palestinians killed in the war. By Thursday, it had handed over 15 sets of remains, saying it continues to press for proper equipment and support to comb through vast mounds of rubble and debris — where thousands of Palestinians killed in Israeli bombardments are still buried.

Israel claims Hamas has been too slow to hand over the remaining bodies of Israeli captives still in Gaza.

Reporting from az-Zuwayda in central Gaza, Al Jazeera’s Tareq Abu Azzoum said Hamas is still facing “logistical and operational challenges regarding the retrieval of the bodies, specifically in areas that have been impacted by the Israeli bombardment”.

“Hamas has been calling for the entry of heavy bulldozers and machines in order to facilitate the process of recovering bodies. But on the ground, Israel is still accusing Hamas of deliberately procrastinating the release of the bodies,” Abu Azzoum said.

The dispute over the recovery and handover of bodies has been one of the difficulties complicating US President Donald Trump’s plan to end the war for good.

Numerous major obstacles still lie ahead, including the future administration of Gaza and the demand for Hamas to disarm.

‘Essential role of NGOs’

Earlier, witnesses said Israeli planes carried out 10 air strikes in areas east of Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip, and tanks shelled areas east of Gaza City in the north before dawn.

The Israeli military said it carried out “precise” strikes against “terrorist infrastructure that posed a threat to the troops” in the areas of Gaza where its forces are still present.

Meanwhile, a UN official said more than 24,000 tonnes of UN aid have reached Gaza since the start of a ceasefire, while calling for NGOs to be allowed to assist in its distribution.

While aid volumes are significantly up compared with the period before the ceasefire, humanitarians still face funding shortfalls, the UN says, as well as issues coordinating with Israeli authorities, which are continuing to seal vital border crossings.

The World Food Programme’s Middle East Regional Director Samer Abdel Jaber said in 20 days of scale-up following the ceasefire, they “have collected about 20,000 metric tons of food inside Gaza”.

“The implementation of the 20-point [ceasefire] plan remains to be the central point and the central condition for us to be able to deliver humanitarian assistance in a holistic manner,” Alakbarov said.

He called on Israel to allow more NGOs to participate in the delivery of aid in Gaza, which Israel has banned.

“The persisting issue of registration of NGOs remains to be a bottleneck issue. We continue to emphasise the essential role of NGOs and national NGOs, which they play in humanitarian operations in Gaza, and we have escalated this now,” he said.

Israel’s assault has displaced most of Gaza’s more than two million people, many of them several times. The majority haven’t yet returned to their ravaged neighbourhoods, fearing they could soon be displaced once again or killed by Israeli forces.

Sources told Al Jazeera that the Israeli army carried out home demolitions east of the Tuffah and Shujayea neighbourhoods in eastern Gaza City on Thursday.

Israel has been demolishing homes since the start of its renewed ground incursion in the area earlier this month, part of what residents describe as a systematic campaign to clear large swaths of residential blocks.

Entire streets have been levelled, with bulldozers flattening homes and infrastructure as Israeli forces push deeper into Gaza City’s eastern districts.

Minutes before he met with Chinese Premier Xi Jinping in Busan, South Korea on Wednesday, U.S. President Donald Trump issued a statement on social media saying he “instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis. That process will begin immediately.” The reason, Trump explained, was because of “other countries [SIC] testing programs.”

Other countries, he said, “seem to all be nuclear testing” but when it comes to the U.S., “We have more nuclear weapons than anybody. We don’t do testing. I see them testing and I say, well, if they’re going to test, I guess we have to test.”

Asked where the tests would occur, the president said, “It’ll be announced. We have test sites.”

At this point, it’s unclear if the president is talking about testing out nuclear weapons delivery systems, something that happens on a regular basis, or actual warheads via a detonation, which the U.S. hasn’t done in more than three decades. The fact that this has not been officially clarified is highly problematic. We reached out to the White House for more details, and they referred us back to Trump’s social media post. We also reached out to several experts for their insights, which you can read more about later in this story.

Testing that results in setting off a chain reaction, known as “critical testing,” last took place nearly a decade ago by North Korea on Sept. 3, 2017. The last U.S. critical nuclear weapons test took place on Sept. 23, 1992, according to the Arms Control Association (ACA). While Russian President Vladimir Putin recently announced the testing of a nuclear-powered cruise missile and a nuclear-powered, nuclear-tipped torpedo, which could have spurred Trump’s tweet if he really meant testing delivery systems, Moscow last conducted a critical nuclear device test on Oct. 24, 1990, according to the ACA. Meanwhile, China’s last test was on July 29, 1996.

In the interim, however, several nations, including the U.S., have conducted what is known as sub-critical testing, which does not result in setting off a chain reaction. It’s possible that expanding those efforts could be at least part of what Trump is referring to, as well. 

Clearly, restarting live nuclear weapons testing would be a massive departure for the U.S. and a very costly one at that. It would likely prompt other nuclear powers to return to live testing, as well. That is if this is what Trump was truly referring to. Assuming that’s the case, we contacted some of the smartest people we know who work on these issues for a living to give us an understanding of what such a revival would actually entail and how long it would take. Their answers have been lightly edited for clarity.

Our participating experts are:

Hans
Kristensen — Director, Nuclear Information Project, Federation of American Scientists. Writes the bi-monthly Nuclear Notebook and the world nuclear forces overview in the SIPRI Yearbook.

Jon B. Wolfsthal, Director of Global Risk, American Federation of Scientists.

Daryl G. Kimball has been Executive Director of the Arms Control Association (ACA) and publisher and contributor for the organization’s monthly journal, Arms Control Today, since September 2001.

Q: Can you tell me the process by which this could happen? What is the chain of command, and who has to be involved?

Hans Kristensen

A: The process for this would require the White House to direct the Department of Energy (DOE) to order the nuclear laboratories to start preparing for a nuclear test. And since the United States doesn’t currently have a nuclear weapons test explosion program, Congress would have to appropriate the money first. 

Jon B. Wolfsthal

A: Not sure what “this” is at this point. To conduct operational flight tests of US delivery systems, those are already underway for existing systems and systems in development. For nuclear testing, the US would need to fund the conduct of a nuclear explosive test. It would be conducted by the US Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration.

Daryl G. Kimball

A: The President has the legal authority to do this, but he needs authorization and appropriations for this purpose by Congress, and Congress can block or modify what he can do or under what conditions, etc. It’s the National Nuclear Security Administration, which is a semi-autonomous agency within the Department of Energy that is responsible for maintaining the existing warheads in the U.S. arsenal. They’ve been doing this since the mid-90s, since the U.S. halted nuclear testing in September 1992 through a very well-funded, sophisticated stockpile stewardship program, which uses non-nuclear, or I should say, non-testing methods, to maintain the seven warhead types in US arsenal.

Q: What specifically would be tested?

Hans Kristensen

A: It is hard to understand what Trump is referring to. It might have been triggered by Russia’s two new missile tests over the last week. But the United States already tests its nuclear weapons in similar ways by conducting test launches and laboratory experiments. If by testing he means nuclear explosive testing, that would be reckless, probably not possible for 18 months, would cost money that Congress would have to approve, and it would most certainly [result in] Russian and Chinese, and likely also India and Pakistan nuclear tests. Unlike the United States, all these countries would have much to gain by restarting nuclear testing. Besides, although there have been occasional rumors that Russia and China may have conducted very small-yield tests, I’m not aware of any reports that they have conducted significant nuclear test explosions.

Jon B. Wolfsthal

A: Again, it depends. This is not well explained by the President at this point.

Daryl G. Kimball

A: Well, this is a great question that the president’s people need to answer. Nuclear testing has historically been used to proof-test new warhead designs. Does the device explode? Does it detonate to the desired explosive yield? Does it have the characteristics that you want? That is the main reason why the United States conducted most of its 1,030 nuclear tests. What exactly they will be trying to figure out from a technical standpoint, I do not know, and frankly, there is no reason why the United States needs nuclear test explosions to maintain existing warheads in our arsenal.

So, looking at Trump’s statements, it’s pretty clear that whatever kind of nuclear testing he’s thinking about, it’s for political purposes. It is a juvenile kind of tit-for-tat reaction to what he perceives other countries are doing. And I would note that he claims that this is from an overnight quote on Air Force One, one you know, all other countries seem to be doing this. Well, those of us who follow these issues extremely carefully do not see any other country conducting nuclear explosive tests. So the president and his scientific advisors need to explain what he’s talking about. I would say that he appears to be confused and misinformed about this issue.

Q: How long would it take from the time of this social media posting until the tests take place?

Hans Kristensen

A: It would be expensive because the timeline for doing a simple explosion is six to 10 months, a fully instrumented test in 24 to 36 months, and a test to develop a new nuclear warhead is about 60 months.

Jon B. Wolfsthal

A: It would require anywhere from a few months to conduct a rapid explosive test and 18 months to conduct a fully instrumented test that would yield scientific results.

Daryl G. Kimball

A: I think it would take many months. I would put it at around 36 months to be able to conduct a nuclear explosive test underground that is contained. There are generally two kinds of tests. One is a demonstration test that simply says, ‘We have nuclear weapons and they explode.’ Then there is a test that is designed to derive some data about the weapon’s design to help understand how it’s working. A scientific test requires much more preparation and time than a simple demonstration test. In theory, the United States could fire a Minuteman III missile from the ground. Within an hour, it could detonate a nuclear device high in the atmosphere, and we would see that one of our nuclear warheads works. But that’s not what I think Donald Trump was talking about.

Q: Where could these tests take place?

Hans Kristensen

A: It can practically only be done in Nevada.

Jon B. Wolfsthal

A: The most likely spot is the Nevada National Security Site, which is the former US nuclear weapons test site about 45 minutes north of Las Vegas. No other location is currently capable or legally structured for the conduct of nuclear explosive tests.

Daryl G. Kimball

A: The Nevada National Security Site, which is nearly the size of Rhode Island, is where the United States conducted the majority of its nuclear test explosions, including 100 in the atmosphere, beginning in 1951. That is the site where, if there’s a military scientific need to resume testing, that’s where the United States has been planning for.

With so many questions about Trump’s nuclear testing statements still outstanding, we are waiting for further clarification from the White House. We will update this story with any pertinent details provided.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Oct. 30 (UPI) — President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has signed a new law that increases penalties and expands enforcement tools to combat organized crime in Brazil amid growing concern over violence in states such as Rio de Janeiro.

The measure, published Thursday in the Diário Oficial, imposes harsher penalties on those who obstruct investigations or collaborate with criminal organizations and provides greater protection for judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officers involved in such operations.

The legislation, which amends the Penal Code and the 2013 Law on Criminal Organizations, sets prison terms of up to 12 years for anyone who interferes with judicial proceedings or intimidates authorities. It also requires those convicted of these crimes to serve their sentences in federal maximum-security prisons.

The Brazilian government says the law strengthens the state’s ability to confront factions such as Comando Vermelho and Primeiro Comando da Capital, which are responsible for much of the country’s urban violence.

“We will not allow organized crime to continue oppressing communities and defying the Brazilian state,” Lula said during the signing ceremony at the Planalto Palace, according to Correio Braziliense.

The law’s enactment comes two days after a large-scale operation in the state of Rio de Janeiro targeting the Comando Vermelho faction, which reignited debate over urban violence and the use of force in the favelas.

Early Tuesday morning, security forces entered the Penha and Alemão favela complexes with armored vehicles, helicopters and drones. Criminal gangs responded by blocking streets, setting vehicles on fire to use as barricades and dropping explosives from drones.

The confrontation left 113 people arrested, 71 rifles seized and 121 dead, according to updated figures from Rio de Janeiro’s Public Defender’s Office. Among the dead were four police officers and dozens of suspected criminals.

The incident sparked concern within Brazil’s federal government and several states, where officials warned about the growing power of criminal organizations and the need for a coordinated response to contain their expansion.

Rio de Janeiro Gov. Cláudio Castro ordered increased patrols across the state amid fears of reprisals.

In a post on X, Castro said the Combat Operations Regiment — an elite unit that specializes in operations against organized crime, particularly in favelas and high-risk areas — had intensified police patrols along the Linha Amarela, one of Rio’s main urban highways connecting northern and western districts with the airport and other strategic areas.

The situation in Brazil also raised alarms in Argentina.

Argentina’s Security Minister Patricia Bullrich announced a “maximum alert” along the tri-border area shared with Brazil and Paraguay. She said migration controls would be tightened and surveillance increased to prevent members of the Comando Vermelho from crossing into the country.

“I will impose a maximum alert at the borders to ensure there is no crossing or passage by those who are evidently moving because of the conflict centered in Rio,” Bullrich told reporters at the presidential palace, according to Perfil.