news

BREAKINGBREAKING,

Smoke seen rising near airport in Aden as Houthis say they attacked a military camp with a ballistic missile.

A powerful explosion has been heard in the city of Aden in southern Yemen, an Al Jazeera journalist and police official said.

A police official said on Wednesday that smoke was rising near the airport in Aden, which is controlled by the internationally recognised Yemeni government.

Reporting from Yemen’s Taiz, Al Jazeera’s Maha Ali said “the Houthi group targeted Aden airport with a ballistic missile”.

Houthi spokesman Yahya Saree said the group targeted the Saudi-led coalition’s “military operation room at the Badr Camp in Aden with a ballistic missile”.

He said that “the strike was precise and direct”.

More to come…

New photos provide an interesting first public look inside the payload bay of Australia’s Ghost Shark extra-large autonomous underwater vehicle (XL-AUV), and a glimpse of the highly modular concept at the heart of the Royal Australian Navy’s emerging undersea warfare capability. Australian authorities had said in the past that they plan to use Ghost Sharks to conduct “persistent intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and strike” missions, but without any real elaboration.

The photographs were taken during a recent visit to the Anduril Australia factory in Sydney, New South Wales, by Pat Conroy, Australia’s Minister for Defense Industry. They emerged as the Australian government announced new details of payload development for Ghost Shark, the Speartooth large uncrewed underwater vehicle (LUUV), and the BlueBottle uncrewed surface vessel (USV), on October 19. While the announcement described the payloads in very broad terms, the photos plus additional details from the Anduril event reveal a more concrete picture of the missions Ghost Shark is being designed to perform.

The three previously undisclosed payload options include deploying up to 12 sea mines in a mission, leaving supply caches on the seabed, and launching Anduril’s ALTIUS aerial drones for reconnaissance or strike missions.

“Ghost Shark now has teeth, and will have the ability to inflict damage on any potential adversary,” Conroy said.

The payload bay image is significant in its own right. Ghost Shark’s modular design is intended to accommodate different mission-specific systems, allowing the Royal Australian Navy to configure the same underlying platform for different operational requirements. Ghost Shark was designed to be extremely modular, flexible, and readily reconfigurable. As part of this, the overall payload portion can be readily configured in different ways using different-sized modular hull sections. Since the nose and the tail are different pieces, with an expandable section in the middle, there is plenty of scope for different payloads as well.

Seeing the internal bay for the first time provides a more tangible look at that approach than earlier photographs of the submarine’s exterior.

Inside the bay of one of the Ghost Sharks on display, there appear to be cylindrical spacers, formed in segments, rather than operational stores. These spacers, and other areas inside the bay, look as if they are fabricated from plywood or similar. Overall, this means it is not entirely clear if they represent the kind of ballast that would be loaded to take the place of actual payloads during trials, or whether they are part of a mockup.

Of the three payload options, the ability to deploy ALTIUS aerial drones is particularly noteworthy. An underwater vehicle capable of releasing aerial systems could extend a naval force’s intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) reach beyond the submarine’s own sensors. Depending on the drone variant and mission configuration, it could also provide a means of delivering effects at a distance without putting personnel directly in harm’s way. Other roles could include stimulating enemy air defense networks, perhaps even responding to pop-up air defence threats as they appear and attacking them. The ability to put miniaturized satcom terminals, as well as AI, on small drones also greatly opens up the possibilities for UUV-launched aerial drones.

Which ALTIUS variants the Ghost Shark will be able to deploy has not been publicly disclosed. The models displayed at the Altus factory are all derivatives of the ALTIUS-600 family. Notable versions include the ALTIUS-600 for ISR, as well as the ALTIUS-600M, which is designed for strike missions. As you can read here, the basic drone has an overall weight of between 20 and 27 pounds, depending on its payload, which typically weighs between three and seven pounds. The ALTIUS-600 has a maximum range of around 275 miles and can remain airborne for at least four hours, according to its developer. Unarmed variants of the ALTIUS-600 are designed to be recoverable and reusable, although it is unclear how practical that would be after launch from a UUV.

ALTIUS-600M Loitering Munition

There is another missing part of the payload puzzle, namely the kinds of capsules that would contain the ALTIUS UAVs for launch from the sub.

The Rheinmetall Asteria 533mm-diameter mine pictured alongside the Ghost Shark is not installed in the vehicle’s payload bay. Its appearance nevertheless provides an intriguing visual counterpart to the newly disclosed mine-delivery capability. According to the manufacturer, the Asteria can be deployed from surface vessels, aircraft, and submarines (normally via torpedo tubes). It can be remotely controlled via an acoustic link and is optimized for the defense of harbors, straits, ports, and other critical areas.

The seabed supply-cache concept points to a different operational role. Ghost Shark could position equipment and supplies underwater for later retrieval, potentially supporting forces operating in areas where conventional resupply is difficult or risky.

The notional supply cache payloads — which are under development by the Defense Science and Technology Group (DSTG) — don’t appear to be on display here. Alex Luck, a naval analyst who closely tracks submarine developments, told TWZ that the cache payloads would likely take the form of capsules, similar in shape to the Asteria mine, but containing whatever supplies need to be moved. It is not immediately clear who would use those caches. One option could be special operations forces, but if the payloads could later rise to the surface, they could be accessed by other forces, too.

It should also be noted that the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps, in particular, are envisioning future fleets of UUVs and USVs that can carry out kinetic attacks and employ electronic warfare and other non-kinetic effects, as well as emplace mines, providing a direct parallel with the planned mission set for Ghost Shark.

Some of the new payload capabilities are due to be featured in Exercise Maritime Big Play Pacific in San Diego, an AUKUS Pillar II activity focused on advanced maritime capabilities and interoperability. The Australian government says the development effort involves the Royal Australian Navy, Defense Science and Technology Group, the Advanced Strategic Capabilities Accelerator and defense industry.

As we have discussed in the past, Maritime Big Play has links to the U.S. military’s Technology Readiness Experimentation (T-REX) effort and NATO’s Robotic Experimentation and Prototyping Augmented by Maritime Unmanned Systems (REPMUS) exercise series, according to the Pentagon. The U.S. Navy has also been conducting a growing number of large-scale uncrewed-focused maritime exercises and demonstration events in recent years.

Under AUKUS Pillar II, Australia is collaborating with the United Kingdom and the United States on Ghost Shark and its associated capabilities. While Pillar I centers on providing Australia with nuclear-powered submarines, Pillar II focuses on the joint development of advanced defence technologies, including artificial intelligence and autonomous systems.

Exactly how the Ghost Shark will be deployed during the Maritime Big Play Pacific exercise is unclear, but, speaking about the concept of operations, Conroy described examples of it being deployed from a shipping container or launched from the back of a small vessel using a crane. In the past, we have also seen the Ghost Shark loaded in a standard shipping container and transported in a Royal Australian Air Force C-17A Globemaster III airlifter.

Overall, U.S. military wargames have highlighted how uncrewed systems could shape a high-end conflict across the Pacific, particularly a fight over Taiwan. One set of Taiwan conflict simulations found that large swarms of relatively low-cost, networked drones could be decisive in helping locate and attack an invading force, while other wargaming by the Center for a New American Security has highlighted the severe challenges of defending the island against a Chinese assault. Maritime drones could also play a major role: the U.S. Navy has explored submarine-launched aerial drones that act as “flying periscopes,” extending sensor coverage and providing targeting data beyond a submarine’s own reach, while uncrewed underwater vehicles could conduct mine-laying and other asymmetric missions around key maritime chokepoints. The rapid growth and technological advances made by the Chinese submarine fleet also underscore the critical importance of anti-submarine capabilities, in which uncrewed systems can play a major role. Together, these developments underscore the potential value of autonomous systems for the Royal Australian Navy as it prepares to operate across the vast distances of the Indo-Pacific.

Australia’s 2026 National Defence Strategy and Integrated Investment Program allocate up to A$5.8 billion (approximately $4.05 billion) over the decade to autonomous and uncrewed undersea warfare capabilities, including A$1.7 billion (approximately $1.19 billion) for a new fleet of Australian-designed and built Ghost Shark vehicles.

The newly released imagery and payload details offer the clearest picture yet of how Australia intends to expand Ghost Shark beyond a conventional underwater surveillance role. The next key milestones should provide more details of how the payloads will be integrated into the vehicle, and how they might be deployed in practice.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Katie Boulter moved into the quarter-finals of the Japan Open after she beat Viktorija Golubic in less than an hour.

The British number two defeated her Swiss opponent 6-2 6-1 in Osaka and will face either Croatia’s Antonia Ruzic or American Kayla Day in the next round.

Boulter saved a break point in the opening game but dominated from 2-2 in the first set, winning nine games in a row before Golubic took the penultimate game of the match.

The 30-year-old lost the British number one spot to Sonny Kartal on Monday, but is set to retake the position following her run this week.

Boulter, who is seeded eighth in the competition, said she was pleased with how she handled “difficult conditions”, with a strong wind affecting play.

“I think one of the biggest things for me is staying patient in the wind,” she said.

“Sometimes I can get a little frustrated, and I’m very pleased that I didn’t allow that to affect me today and I think I ended up playing some really good tennis in the second set. I’m really pleased with the performance.”

This autumn, the Supreme Court will consider a question with potentially far-reaching consequences for civil rights in the United States: Who gets to enforce them? On November 30, the justices will hear a case over whether employees of federally funded universities can sue under Title IX over alleged workplace sex discrimination. The Trump administration has urged the court to rule that they cannot, arguing that Congress never gave university employees a private right to bring such claims.

The dispute is the latest front in a broader legal push to restrict the ability of individuals and advocacy groups to take rights violations to court themselves. In June, the Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to a federal appeals court ruling that barred Arkansas United, an immigrant advocacy organisation, from suing to enforce protections for voters who need assistance at the polls. Across a growing number of cases, Republican-led states and the Trump administration are advancing the same basic principle: Unless Congress has clearly authorised private citizens to sue, enforcement should largely be left to the government.

That may sound like an arcane legal argument, but its implications are anything but. If individuals and civil rights groups cannot go to court when laws protecting them are violated, the power to decide which rights are actually enforced increasingly rests with the very government that may be violating, ignoring or choosing not to enforce them.

A private right of action allows individuals, or groups acting on their behalf, to file lawsuits to enforce rights protected by law. These lawsuits can seek compliance with the law or compensation for past violations. Private rights of action are not automatic under US federal and state law. Congress and state legislatures sometimes explicitly authorise private lawsuits. Where they have not, courts have had to determine whether a law implicitly allows individuals or groups to sue, or whether enforcement rests solely with government authorities.

In practice, private litigation has been an essential part of enforcing rights throughout much of US history. As University of Virginia School of Law Professor George Rutherglen writes in a 2015 law review article (PDF):

“The long history of civil rights, dating back to Reconstruction, makes them quintessentially private rights, whose exercise and enforcement should depend primarily on the initiative of the individuals who bear those rights. Public enforcement no doubt remains necessary, and it has an equally long and distinguished pedigree in civil rights law, but it cannot entirely displace individual control over individual rights.”

Proponents of private rights of action, such as AARP, consider them an effective tool for vulnerable individuals and groups to protect their rights when government agencies are unwilling or unable to act. Critics, such as the US Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform, however, argue that private lawsuits can encourage frivolous litigation.

These critics, often from the political right, have attempted to restrict private litigation through legal arguments against private causes of action. An example is the 2001 Alexander v Sandoval decision, in which a Supreme Court majority led by Justice Antonin Scalia ruled that Title VI did not provide a private right of action to enforce regulations prohibiting policies or practices with a disparate impact on protected groups – discrimination that can occur without clear evidence of intent.

The legal push against private rights of action has intensified in recent years. Republican-led states have increasingly challenged the doctrine of implied private rights of action, arguing that courts should reject private suits to enforce various types of rights. The Trump administration has also adopted this stance. When the court decided a 2021 voting rights case, Justice Neil Gorsuch submitted a one-paragraph concurrence, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, questioning whether “the Voting Rights Act of 1965 furnishes an implied cause of action,” despite that issue not being raised in the case itself.

The conservative push to restrict private rights of action has extended to a variety of areas. In June, the Supreme Court ruled against Falun Gong practitioners who accused Cisco Systems of helping the Chinese government develop surveillance technology used to facilitate their persecution, concluding that they could not pursue those aiding-and-abetting claims under the federal laws they had invoked.

One of the most consequential implications of restricting private rights of action is the threat to voting rights. In the Arkansas United case, the Eighth Circuit ruled that the immigrant advocacy organisation did not have the right to sue on behalf of non-native English speakers over the right to have language assistance in the voting booth. The ruling concerned Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. But it extended a much broader argument already adopted by the Eighth Circuit: that private individuals and advocacy organisations cannot sue to enforce key provisions of the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court’s refusal in June to hear Arkansas United left that ruling in place.

This argument has also been pushed by Republican-led governments in two redistricting and vote-dilution cases: Board of Election Commissioners v NAACP in Mississippi and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v Howe in North Dakota. In May, the Supreme Court vacated judgments in both cases and sent them back for reconsideration in light of its ruling in Louisiana v Callais, without resolving the private-enforcement question. That decision sharply raised the bar for some racial vote-dilution claims, endangering the voting power of Black, Hispanic and Native American communities across the US. At the same time, conservative-controlled governments are attempting to deny members and advocates for these communities the right to even bring some of these cases before the courts, arguing that only the Department of Justice can initiate action over such voting rights violations.

The broader danger is that, as private rights of action are curtailed, enforcement of federal law increasingly depends on decisions made by the executive branch.

The Trump administration is now pursuing a different means of restricting private enforcement. The Clean Air Act explicitly gives private citizens the right to bring certain lawsuits, yet the Justice Department has sought to intervene and dismiss a case brought against xAI over allegations that gas turbines at its power facility in Southaven, Mississippi, are violating federal environmental law and polluting surrounding communities. The facility powers xAI’s Colossus 2 data centre in nearby Memphis. In September, the Justice Department appealed to the Fifth Circuit and sought to halt the case. The department has argued that allowing the suit to proceed would threaten national security and the US pursuit of global leadership in AI. Here, the issue is not whether Congress created a private right to sue – it did – but whether the executive branch can nevertheless step in to stop such a case when it conflicts with its priorities.

Relying solely on the Justice Department to pursue such cases at the federal level is a particularly dubious proposition under the current administration. The department has also been weaponised to target political foes of President Trump. Its Civil Rights Division has been steered away from defending the rights of racial and ethnic minorities and refocused on cases brought by white plaintiffs alleging so-called “reverse discrimination”.

The Justice Department’s current politicisation may be reversed under a future administration. But even then, the erosion of private rights of action would leave the enforcement of civil and political rights increasingly dependent on a federal agency with limited resources and subject to political direction. For example, as Democracy Docket noted in 2024, of the 216 active voting rights and redistricting cases it was tracking at the time, only five were cases brought by the Justice Department. As Professor Rutherglen noted in his article, to rely primarily on government actors to enforce rights “is to transform the nature of those rights: from private to public, from individuals to groups, from legal control by plaintiffs to political control by administrators.”

Private rights of action are now being eroded, case by case. Politicians, civil liberties advocates and organisations must challenge this trend before more avenues for enforcement are closed off. Otherwise, protections won over decades may become increasingly dependent on the willingness of government authorities to uphold them, leaving those whose rights are violated with fewer ways to seek redress.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Bitupan Deka was out shopping for a “gamusa” (traditional scarf) with his mother in India’s northeastern state of Meghalaya when he noticed something unusual.

“Every shop selling the scarf had the same handful of patterns repeated over and over,” he told Al Jazeera over the telephone from Shillong, the capital of Meghalaya.

“When I asked around, I found that weavers in Sualkuchi [district in neighbouring Assam state] are paid a one-time fee of roughly 2,000 rupees [$21] for each design they develop, instead of royalties. Cutting down the number of designs they produce was a cost-saving practice followed by the manufacturers.”

This discovery prompted Deka, an assistant professor of computer technology at Shillong’s MIT University, to create a system that can produce infinite new designs for such fabrics.

“My work isn’t meant to replace the traditional designers. I hope, instead, that it will become a tool in their hands to create new and modern motifs more easily, so the consumers can have variety,” Deka said.

Once the patent, which is being applied for under the research and development department of his university, comes through, Deka plans to monetise the system by making it a commercial designing service that the textile industry can avail.

In India’s varied textile traditions, patterns and motifs carry the memory of a place and the mythology of its people – sometimes even the history of migrations.

The designs are imagined by weavers from things that exist around them, and then painted with locally available colours, mostly using carved clay and wooden frames. These weavers do not simply reproduce a pattern; they inherit it. Their hands hesitate where their grandmother’s did, and they know why a particular flower must face left.

A computer has no such inheritance or hesitation. It learns by analysing pictures and repeating them in endless variations. And yet, as Deka’s system shows, the computer can now draw and weave the same flower.

The Rekh Sanganeri Dataset is a similar system developed for hand-block printed Sanganeri textiles from the western Indian state of Rajasthan. It includes high-resolution images of printed patterns, annotated down to ink bleed and slight misalignment – the imperfections that are the hallmark of the handmade work.

Its developer, Reddy Sai Nivas C, says it should be used as a resource for research and art, not as a substitute for artisans.

But the disclaimer is the paradox: Tools built to preserve a craft are making its visual language easier to digitally reproduce without involving the craftsperson.

Dinesh Chhipa comes from one of the oldest Chhipa families, an artisan and merchant caste renowned for dyeing and block printing. He is a Bagru designer – a block printing technique from Bagru town in the western state of Rajasthan – and a textile businessman.

“Traditional craft is slow to produce. Even if someone offered us a fortune, we wouldn’t be able to produce these pieces in mass numbers, so I don’t fault those using digital technology and AI to fill the gap,” he told Al Jazeera.

“But don’t borrow craft and regional names like Bagru and Jaipuri [named after the capital city of Rajasthan]. These designs and motifs were born out of a culture and necessities of the communities they come from.”

Who owns culture when it turns into plain data?

India has been digitising its textile memory for years – from the Botanical Survey of India’s historical collections to the Bharatiya Vastra Shilpa Kosh, a national portal built by the state-run National Institute of Fashion Technology and the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC).

Without documentation, the fragile traditions and knowledge could disappear. But digitisation also allows the same archive to be used by an AI system seeking to reproduce these crafts at scale.

At the India AI Impact Summit in New Delhi in February this year, Indian software company Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) showcased Bridgital Loom, an AI system that converts textile designs into loom-ready instructions. LED lights on the loom guide a weaver through the thread sequences of intricate Banarasi and Kanchipuram patterns – named after the cities where these iconic arts grew.

TCS says the technology helps weavers execute complex designs faster and with fewer errors, and is meant to be a bridge between the artisans and technology. A pilot project that uses the loom is already under way at Kanchipuram, a town in southern Tamil Nadu state.

In an interview with the online platform Digit at the New Delhi summit, the head of AI strategy at Bridgital Loom, Muthulakshmi Nellaiappan, pointed out that a new weaver takes more than 15 years to master the art.

“With the technologies we have in hand … the younger weaver who has just entered the skill can become a master much sooner,” she said.

Technology flattens the master-apprentice hierarchy of traditional knowledge systems. The weaver no longer has to conceptualise or remember patterns, colours and codes; he blindly follows the machine’s instructions, handing creativity and memory to AI.

Nellaiappan said that since a large percentage of India’s looms are non-electronic, TCS has ensured its system works with handlooms as well and that it was essential for scaling up the technology.

But digital looms also raise another question: Who owns culture when it turns into plain data?

For generations, India’s textile knowledge sat outside intellectual property systems. It lived in community memory, passed from master to apprentice with no certificate of ownership. Kanchipuram, Mekhela-Sador, Sanganeri and Banarasi are names for places that these textiles helped shape, not merely emerged from.

Now, this knowledge is entering generative models that owe nothing to these traditions.

For designers and manufacturers, the possibilities are seductive: Motifs combined at will, colours changed with a command, and thousands of designs generated instantly. The machine offers abundance.

The artisan, on the other hand, has always lived with scarcity: Of money, bargaining power, or recognition.

Ananthalakshmi Vadivel, a third-generation weaver and owner of Vadivel Silk Looms in Kanchipuram, says their venture is already competing in the market with cheaper Kanchipuram sarees produced on electronic looms.

“Perhaps, with AI, these sellers can create trending designs faster and cheaper to attract mass consumers. But these imitations can never replace the original,” she told Al Jazeera.

“There will always be a market for authentic Kanchipuram and handcrafted textiles, no matter how much technology makes the imitation cheaper. True Kanchipuram weave, colour, and designs can only be created by hand, and discerning buyers know this.”

Then again, the question is no longer whether AI can recreate a textile. It sure can. The question is: Who gets paid when it does?

Legal gaps

In December 2025, the federal government’s Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade floated a statutory “blanket licence” – a system where AI developers could train models on lawfully obtained copyrighted material without seeking permission from each rights holder. Once commercialised, those systems would owe royalties to copyright owners at rates set by the government.

But intellectual property (IP) laws assume a traceable work with a traceable author. A motif, on the other hand, is communal property, its technique passed down through generations with no single originator.

In such cases, who is entitled to royalty and copyright? The artisan who first created the design? The photographer who documented it? The researcher who assembled the dataset? The developer who built the tool? India’s laws offer no clear answers. The artisan whose name never appeared on a label may once again be missing from the paperwork.

Meanwhile, the government is planning a dedicated AI-handloom research department under the Centre of Excellence for Handloom Technology at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) in the capital, New Delhi. Inaugurated in August, the $1.4m facility aims to modernise India’s handloom sector by combining traditional weaving heritage with contemporary technology.

The government also plans to register thousands of weavers and fit their handlooms with sensors that convert weave patterns into digital data, and issue QR-coded tags to trace provenance. Maharashtra’s Vingatha system does something similar at the state level by authenticating handloom sarees such as Paithani and Karvat Kathi.

The idea is simple: If a saree can tell you where it came from, the person who made it becomes harder to erase.

While these measures cannot stop AI-enabled design and mass production, they may give artisans more visibility and turn each piece into an archive.

In art galleries, the traditional textiles are increasingly shedding the label of craft for the more lucrative category of contemporary art.

Gurjeet Singh, an artist from Chandigarh city, recently hosted a textile-based solo show in New York. His work transforms discarded fabrics, buttons and embroidered scraps into sculptures that explore queer identity and social prejudices surrounding gender and sexuality.

Sayan Chanda, an Indian artist based in London, works with cut and rewoven vintage Bengali quilts to question fixed notions of cultural belonging. Gurugram-based artist Sumakshi Singh uses delicate embroidery and suspended thread structures to reconstruct the architectural fragments of vanished homes, gardens and personal histories. There are many more.

In New Delhi, 20 such artisans and craft-led collectives featured last month at an art show celebrating the traditional textile crafts.

“Our aim is to present these traditional crafts as living practices that continue to evolve through contemporary artisans, rather than as heritage to be archived. Kanmai Payun, one of the artists featured in the show, for example, is the last practitioner of Fulor Saneki, a flower pattern used by Assamese weavers. We encouraged her to teach her 17-year-old son so the craft outlives her,” Aparupa Ray Ganguly, the curator of the show, told Al Jazeera.

But as textiles gain value in art galleries, their makers do not necessarily gain automatic control over their work.

In April, another art exhibition in New Delhi, titled No ‘One’ Maker, saw artisans missing from the show’s preview, exposing how traditional textiles are aestheticised, but the people who carry that knowledge remain unrecognised.

“You cannot separate the names from the community. Call your mass-produced work digital prints and leave the traditional names to the original artisans,” says Chhipa, the artisan and merchant from Rajasthan.

Addressing the issue of US intelligence sharing after Tuesday’s talks, Zelensky said he was “thankful that intelligence works now”.

“Speaking about early warning, which is very important for our people, our children, adults, civilians because we can hear when ballistic[s] is coming – so we are thankful to American side, now it works, it’s great,” the Ukrainian president said.

He said he also hoped for a good result on SpaceX’s Starlink satellite access as well, after Ukraine’s military had reported in recent days speed restrictions on the US platform used by Kyiv to carry out drone strikes against Russia.

Before the Oslo talks, Zelensky said he had had a “constructive discussion” with Rubio about the need for US early warnings, missile interceptors and Starlink.

Last week, a bipartisan group of US senators called for an urgent investigation into speed restrictions to the Starlink network in Ukraine.

And Zelensky also restated that Ukraine was “ready for negotiations” to end the war.

“Of course, we are not losing this war, but we are losing people because Russia attacks,” he said.

The Ukrainian leader added that “strong” security guarantees for Ukraine were also discussed in Oslo, as well as energy ceasefire proposals.

Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, who also took part in the talks, stressed that Europe “needs to be at the table” during any discussions about how to end the Russia-Ukraine war.

Unconfirmed reports earlier on Tuesday said the transfer of more US-made Patriot interceptor missiles – the only effective weapon in shooting down Russian ballistic missiles – had not yet been approved.

Rubio, who is currently on a visit to India, admitted to reporters that it may be true that Patriot interceptors had not yet arrived in Ukraine – but he stressed that nothing had been denied to Kyiv intentionally.

European leaders meanwhile have expressed concern about recent US statements from the US towards Russia.

On Monday, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz spoke of “mixed pictures and messages” on the war, adding that he was trying to convince the American government “in total that this is something we have to resolve jointly”.

“It’s really a big effort for our budgets, it’s really a big thing for the European Union, but we are doing that and we are trying to keep on doing that until this terrible war ends,” the German leader told Bloomberg TV.

Asked during an interview on Monday whether or not he saw Ukraine as a US ally, US Vice-President JD Vance said Kyiv was “certainly a partner in some ways, but we have some divergent interests from time to time, like for example… I think they should stop bombing Russian energy”.

“We don’t have a formal alliance as far as I know with Ukraine. They’re not in Nato, I don’t think they should be in Nato… we’re gonna work together on some things, but also we’re going to be opposite on some things too,” he said.

Both candidates for the Brazilian presidency have called for the disqualification of their rivals over allegations of social media interference, ramping up political drama ahead of the close-fought October 25 runoff election.

Brazil’s right-wing presidential candidate Flavio Bolsonaro has requested the annulment of the candidacy of his rival, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, over what he called unlawful propaganda.

Lawyers for Bolsonaro filed a request with the Superior Electoral Court on Tuesday, alleging Lula’s “abuse of power” in the mass dissemination of government postings during the campaign period via WhatsApp.

Bolsonaro’s camp claimed the Brazilian government sent mass messages to millions of Brazilians via the messaging service, promoting social programmes, benefits and government initiatives in the midst of the presidential race, Brazilian media reported.

The request to the electoral court seeks to declare Lula and Social Communications Minister Sidonio Palmeira ineligible to hold public office for a period of eight years.

‘Algorithmic manipulation’

In the other camp, Lula’s campaign said on Tuesday that it would request the disqualification of Bolsonaro on Wednesday over alleged election interference by WhatsApp parent company, the tech giant Meta.

Lula’s petition, which has yet to be officially filed, alleges “algorithmic manipulation” by Meta aimed at harming Lula’s chances of winning, a campaign source told AFP.

The electoral court had given Meta 24 hours on Monday to prove it was complying with an order to treat both campaigns equally, threatening a daily fine of around $200,000 if it didn’t.

The order came after Lula’s campaign alleged that Meta, which owns Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram, was suppressing his online content to boost Bolsonaro.

“We have completed the implementation of the measures to comply with the Superior Electoral Court’s decision,” the company said on Tuesday.

Lula and Bolsonaro are locked in a heated presidential race after the right-wing candidate, son of former president Jair Bolsonaro, won the initial round of voting earlier this month with 47 percent of the vote to the incumbent’s 45 percent.

Polls show a very close race ahead of Sunday’s runoff round.

Italy has approved the deployment of troops and tougher legal penalties in a bid to quell cost-of-living protests in the north of the country that occasionally turned violent over the weekend.

The Italian cabinet on Tuesday approved sending 500 troops to Milan, a new legal offence covering violent participation in a demonstration, tougher penalties for rioters and financial liability for parents whose children take part in vandalism and looting.

Italy’s Ministry of Defence said the military will help reinforce security at key sites, step up surveillance of sensitive locations and enhance monitoring.

Unrest swept northern Italian cities at the weekend, including the financial capital Milan, where groups of mainly young people looted shops, smashed windows and clashed with the police. The demonstrations were driven by anger over soaring fuel and energy prices, high rents, low wages and the state of public services.

Public safety

As part of the new legal measures, which take effect immediately, anyone who takes part in a group of at least five people and endangers public safety during protests faces up to five years in prison and a maximum fine of €20,000 ($22,460).

Penalties increase if faces are concealed or people are injured.

Authorities can order prompt compensation for any damage inflicted and, in the case of minors, hold their parents liable.

Police will be allowed to detain youths aged between 14 and 17, even if they have not committed a crime, provided there is evidence they pose a danger, extending powers that previously applied only to adults.

But the cabinet did not approve giving soldiers policing powers, as expected, after opposition from President Sergio Mattarella, Italian media reported.

“Destroying and stealing is not protest, it is crime, and the state’s response must be firm,” Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said in a social media post after the cabinet meeting.

Echoing protests

The disturbances in northern Italy echoed riots in neighbouring France, where hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets on Saturday in some of the country’s most violent turmoil in years.

Meloni’s government is also facing mounting pressure from a separate wave of protests in southern Italy, where truck drivers angered by soaring diesel prices and the rising cost of living have staged roadblocks that are disrupting supply chains.

Protesters in both the north and the south say rising prices are pushing families into poverty, a concern for Meloni ahead of the 2027 national elections.

The Guardian says Andy Burnham will face a “climate revolt” by approving drilling at the Jackdaw gas field., external The paper says that, while it will be a “major boost” for Britain’s oil and gas industry, critics will argue it undermines Labour’s green credentials. According to the Financial Times, ministers are expected to say that the project will help increase energy supplies this winte, externalr. The i Paper reports that it will be able to power around a million UK homes., external

The Times reports that the home secretary is facing pressure from her cabinet colleagues to water down plans, external which would make it harder for foreign workers to claim permanent residence in the UK. But an ally of Shabana Mahmood tells the paper that Burnham is “on her side” and is “holding the line”. “Mahmood’s fight to save her migrant crackdown” is the headline.

The Daily Telegraph says a review of anti-Semitism in schools in England is expected to prompt some to ban teachers from wearing pro-Palestinian badges. , externalAccording to the Guardian, the report by Sir David Bell finds that three in five Jewish students have been affected, external by anti-Semitism.

The decision to deploy RAF jets to defend Saudi Arabia is described by the Times as an “expansion of the UK’s role in the conflict in Yemen”, external. A defence source tells the paper that “if Houthi drones or missiles come over the border” then British jets will “take them out”. The Telegraph’s verdict is: “Better late than never”.

The Daily Mirror leads with the Covid inquiry’s findings that government failures during the pandemic allowed the virus to “spread like wildfire” in care homes., external In its leader column, the paper says care home residents were “shamefully abandoned by those entrusted with protecting them”.

Prince Harry’s call for reconciliation with his father and brother is the focus of the Sun’s front page, external. It says the Duke of Sussex is hoping to “fix his bitter family feud”. But the Daily Mail accuses him of “reopening old wounds” in what it describes as a “new Sussex psychodrama”, external. Its headline reads: “Oh, do put a sock in it, Harry!”.

Faecal bacteria are contaminating water in wells and sinkholes in Mexico’s Yucatan state, which are a vital source of drinking water, according to a report by Greenpeace, a global environmental organisation.

The report, published on Tuesday, said nearby pig farms and municipal wastewater were likely sources of the pollution in the southeastern coastal state.

“A range of chemical and microbiological indicators reveal a complex mosaic of severe, localised organic pollution,” it said.

Greenpeace called for an immediate moratorium on new industrial livestock operations and farm expansions in the peninsular state, which was once home to the ancient Maya civilisation.

With no above-ground rivers, groundwater is the Yucatan’s only freshwater source, and the area’s porous limestone bedrock lets pollutants quickly seep into the aquifer.

Laboratory results

The global environmental watchdog group commissioned an independent laboratory to test water at 17 sites near the state capital, Merida, in August.

The sites included household and farm wells, community water points and cenotes, the natural sinkholes that dot the Yucatan Peninsula, which is one of Mexico’s most popular tourist destinations.

According to the report, every sample showed some degree of contamination likely linked to faecal waste, and several sites appeared heavily polluted. Total coliform bacteria reached the test’s upper limit in 16 of 17 samples, and faecal coliforms did so in 13.

However, the tests cannot show whether the waste came from people or animals, and leaking septic tanks and municipal sewage may also contribute to contamination.

Greenpeace said, however, that separate testing using Pig2Bac, a pig-specific DNA marker method, detected pig faecal matter in samples analysed at laboratories at Johns Hopkins University in the US and Mexico’s National Autonomous University (UNAM).

Greenpeace said the results raise “critical accountability questions” about nearby pig farms.

Maya communities joined Greenpeace in demanding action from environmental authorities over the contamination.

Industrial pig farms

A UN report published in July found that there are more than 500 industrial pig farms across Yucatan state with more than 50,000 animals, many located near the lands and territories of Indigenous Peoples.

Marcos Orellana, a former UN special rapporteur who authored the report, said waste and chemicals from industrial farms “find their way very quickly” into the water communities use for bathing, cooking and drinking. He said most farms lack required permits and that regional government initiatives “remain insufficient”.

“The contamination of the waters that have sustained Mayan culture for millennia is predominantly coming from the industrial operations of the growth of animals,” Orellana said.

But Antonio Zumarraga, vice president of the Yucatan Citizen Scientific Water Observatory, defended the local pork industry, saying the sector has invested in water treatment and supports conservation programmes. He blamed local authorities for their inaction.

“It’s an issue that, as long as it doesn’t carry political weight for the government, they won’t do anything about it,” Zumarraga said.

The Yucatan state government was not available for comment, while Mexico’s national water commission, CONAGUA, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Merida’s Association of Pig Farmers also did not respond to a Reuters request for comment.

Police have arrested 55 people after protesters camp in Lisbon and Porto.

Thousands of protesters have returned to two central squares in Portugal for demonstrations against an intensifying housing crisis, hours after police cleared their camps in the capital, Lisbon, and the city of Porto, arresting 55 people.

Activists have demanded the centre-right government withdraw a bill that makes evictions easier and ends rent caps on new leases, which passed a first parliamentary reading.

The demonstrators in Lisbon sought to rebuild their sit-in camp at Rossio Square on Tuesday, while those in Porto were returning to the northern city’s Dom Joao I Square.

Organisers said more than 1,000 people had gathered at each square. Activists have occupied Lisbon’s Rossio Square since Saturday, pitching around 200 tents, and Porto’s Dom Joao I Square for around 10 days.

‘Enough is enough’

Debora Miranda, 41, a communications consultant, told Reuters she joined the Rossio Square protest to represent generations struggling with soaring costs. “If people don’t feel at home, in every sense of the word, they can’t move forward with their lives…enough is enough.”

The camps mirrored housing protests in neighbouring Spain, and coincided with unrest over rising living costs in countries such as France, Belgium and Italy.

Shortly before 6am, after warning protesters that the camps were illegal, police launched coordinated operations in both cities. Demonstrators in Porto followed orders and dismantled their own tents. Officers cleared Lisbon’s Rossio Square in what Carla Valadao, a spokesperson for the camp, described as “very aggressive”.

Public Security Police superintendent Sergio Soares told reporters that the eviction had been “calm, proportionate and appropriate, with no police charge”.

The 55 detainees were later released pending a court appearance in Lisbon on Wednesday.

One of Europe’s worst housing crises

Portugal is grappling with one of Europe’s worst housing affordability crises as purchase prices have more than doubled since 2017 and rents for new leases have nearly doubled.

Jorge Paixao, 19, a history student, called it “a societal crisis”, saying his generation needed “the ability to live with dignity, start families and rejuvenate Portugal”.

The squeeze is most acute in the major cities, where there has also been opposition to excessive tourism and an influx of so-called digital nomads, people who travel while working remotely.

UN experts have called on the Indian government to stop the use of “excessive force” in the wake of the crackdown on opposition and student protests in India.

In a statement on Tuesday, the two dozen independent experts pressed for an impartial investigation into Indian authorities’ conduct, saying that demonstrators had sustained injuries and some reported being subjected to ill-treatment.

“Protesters have sustained injuries, with some reporting being subjected to ill-treatment. The experts expressed particular concern about reports of sexual violence and other forms of gender-based abuse in the protests and related detentions,” according to the statement.

UN experts are appointed by the UN Human Rights Council to monitor and document specific human rights crises but are independent of the organisation itself.

India’s Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), along with other opposition parties and student organisations, has led protests this month demanding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation, after 130 million names were removed from voter lists.

The protesting groups said the removal disproportionately affected poor and homeless people as well as ethnic minorities including Muslims, who are unlikely to vote for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The BJP and India’s Election Commission deny the accusations. The Election Commission said it was removing duplicate, deceased, shifted and otherwise ineligible voters and that anyone excluded in error can pursue appeals.

‘Deployed force’

“Despite the non-violent nature of the assemblies, law enforcement agencies have reportedly deployed force against unarmed students including by means of police so-called lathi charges, and have prevented thousands from joining the protests,” the UN experts said.

Lathi charges are coordinated movements by a policing force using sticks to disperse crowds.

“We call on the authorities to immediately cease the use of excessive force, rescind blanket assembly bans, and refrain from the misuse of digital surveillance, including through biometrics, and internet disruptions,” they added.

India has repeatedly dismissed such criticism and cast it as interference in the country’s internal affairs, including when the UN human rights office earlier this month expressed concerns over mass detentions in relation to the latest protests.

Musanze, Rwanda – Jean Claude Hategekimana feared that returning to Rwanda could cost him his life. After years with the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), he decided to leave the armed group and return home. At Rwanda’s Mutobo Demobilisation and Reintegration Centre, he began preparing for civilian life.

Born in 1996 in Rutsiro District, in western Rwanda, Hategekimana moved to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) with his parents and grew up in an area controlled by the FDLR. He joined the group in 2018, underwent military training and eventually reached the rank of captain.

“I arrived at the Mutobo Centre after fighting to defend Goma. Following our defeat, I fled to Masisi. After realising that I was fighting for nothing, I decided to return to Rwanda. I came back on February 24,” he told Al Jazeera.

Hategekimana said FDLR members had been taught that anyone who returned to Rwanda would be killed.

“Upon arriving in Rwanda, I realised that the FDLR had been lying to us. For me, returning home felt like embarking on a suicide mission,” he said.

His experience illustrates the challenge of reintegrating former fighters whose beliefs and fears have been shaped by years in an armed group.

Rebuilding civilian life

Francis Musoni, secretary-general of the Rwanda Demobilisation and Reintegration Commission, said the Mutobo centre, located in Musanze in Rwanda’s Northern Province, was established in 2001 to receive members of the FDLR and other Rwandan armed groups returning from the DRC.

The FDLR emerged in the aftermath of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsis. After the genocide, members of the former Rwandan armed forces and militia groups fled to what was then Zaire, now the DRC. The Rwandan government accuses the FDLR of carrying out attacks against Rwanda and contributing to cross-border insecurity.

At Mutobo, the rehabilitation programme includes medical care, psychosocial support, civic education and assistance with reconnecting with families. Returnees can also contact relatives and friends through a telephone service, Musoni said.

“We help them to build confidence among themselves, build trust, and empower them to go back into the community and contribute to the development of the country together with their families,” he said.

The centre also allows visitors and media representatives to meet returnees. Musoni said those undergoing rehabilitation can visit their communities for short periods to help rebuild their confidence in returning home.

“They can travel to their communities [during rehabilitation]. They are given written permission for a week or two, and we even facilitate transport,” he said.

Different journeys home

For the former commanders interviewed by Al Jazeera at Mutobo, the decision to leave the FDLR was shaped by family ties, disillusionment and concerns about personal safety.

Major-General Anastase Munyaneza served in the former Rwandan armed forces in Kigali’s Kicukiro District during the 1994 genocide. He said he left Rwanda after the genocide and later joined the FDLR, eventually commanding its South Kivu sector.

Although he had come to accept the group’s beliefs, Munyaneza remained in contact with his family in Rwanda. News of their lives made him question his own circumstances.

“I was the only one who had fled to the DRC. I regularly received news about them. I knew they were still alive, attending school, working for the government and improving their lives. I began asking myself what I was doing in the forest,” he said.

He added that seeing other members return safely encouraged him to consider going home.

Munyaneza said he contacted personnel from the United Nations Organisation Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), who transported him from South Kivu to Bukavu and then to the Congolese-Rwandan border. He subsequently proceeded to Mutobo.

Lieutenant-Colonel Idrissa Bizimana, who was responsible for ideology, propaganda and recruitment within the FDLR, said his decision to return followed a change in his convictions.

“I no longer believed in the ideology I had been promoting. After receiving verified information about what was happening in Rwanda, I decided to return home,” he said.

Bizimana said he had been in contact with a MONUSCO general who had offered to help him return. Using a satellite phone equipped with GPS, he sent his location and the date. A helicopter was then dispatched to retrieve him, he said.

Lieutenant-Colonel Emilien Mpakaniye, who joined the FDLR in 1998 and was responsible for economic affairs at its headquarters, said he began questioning the organisation after becoming disillusioned with what he described as its lies.

Colonel Augustin Nshimiyimana, a former FDLR intelligence commander, returned to Rwanda in 2022 and underwent rehabilitation at Mutobo. He said he decided to leave after another commander accused him of working with Rwanda following a disagreement over a mission in Bujumbura.

Nshimiyimana said the accusation made him fear for his life.

“When they accuse you of working with Rwanda, it means they consider you a Tutsi, and the next step is to kill you,” he said.

Preparing for a new life

At Mutobo, former fighters receive education and practical support to prepare for life after discharge.

Febronie Mukankiko, a teacher at the centre, said teaching people who grew up in the forest required a different approach.

“Our students are different from ordinary students. They are adults who grew up in the forest, so teaching them requires special skills. We undergo additional training to ensure that we can teach them effectively,” she said.

She added that completing their studies could be a significant achievement for those with limited access to formal education.

“When they graduate and receive their certificates, they are very happy,” she said.

Musoni said the average stay at the centre was five months, after which returnees completed a formal discharge process. He said assistance could include financial support, vocational training, formal education and help establishing income-generating activities. The commission also follows up with former residents to assess how they are adjusting to life in their communities.

For those who have spent years away from Rwanda, leaving Mutobo marks the start of another transition: finding work, reconnecting with family and adjusting to civilian society.

For Mpakaniye, disillusionment came partly from the contrast between the lives of senior commanders’ families and those of ordinary fighters.

“First, their family members live in Rwanda and in Europe, while ours are in the forest,” he said.

The U.S. military has successfully demonstrated a new lower-cost receiver that could form part of a future over-the-horizon (OTH) radar. The testing also raises the question of whether the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) research site in Alaska, which the U.S. Air Force transferred away more than a decade ago, could be repurposed for operational use in this role. A new radar of this kind would help the United States plug critical gaps in surveillance coverage over the ever-more strategic Arctic region. Canada is notably already pursuing a multi-billion-dollar OTH radar project in cooperation with Australia for this exact purpose.

The U.S. military put out a press release yesterday regarding the testing of the newly developed receiver array, which occurred between September 7 and September 11. This was the culmination of a series of “Arctic air domain awareness” experiments conducted cooperatively by U.S. and Canadian authorities over the past three years.

The final round of experimentation last month “examined whether an existing high-frequency transmitter [HAARP], paired with a newly developed, low-cost [16-element high-frequency] receiver array, could detect aircraft beyond the coverage of current long-range radar sites,” according to the release. “The effort focused on improving awareness across a region where vast distances, harsh weather and limited infrastructure present challenges for air surveillance.”

“Researchers used the University of Alaska Fairbanks’ High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program [HAARP] facility and a receiver array in Cold Bay developed by MITRE to collect data on participating aircraft over the Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea,” the release added. “MITRE also supported the effort throughout the three-year experiment series and designed and executed the field experiment in partnership with government, scientific, and operational participants.”

The remote HAARP site was built in the 1990s as part of a joint U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy effort. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was also involved. The central component of the 33-acre facility is an array of 180 crossed-dipole antennas, which can transmit up to 3.6 megawatts of radio frequency energy, according to the Air Force.

The primary purpose of HAARP was to provide U.S. government and independent researchers with a state-of-the-art facility to explore ionospheric phenomena. On the U.S. military side, work was focused on improving long-range surveillance and communications capabilities, including ways to communicate with submerged submarines. Over the years, HAARP has also been the subject of several entirely unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.

In 2014, the U.S. Air Force announced that it would shutter the HAARP site and dismantle it. However, the following year, the decision was instead made to transfer it to the University of Alaska Fairbanks, which has continued to operate it as a civilian research facility.

“During an experimental air domain awareness initiative, HAARP served as a high-power illuminator, transmitting signals toward the ionosphere to support the detection of airborne targets over Alaska’s maritime approaches,” according to the captions of several pictures that accompanied the release yesterday. “The experiment evaluated bistatic over-the-horizon detection methods to explore potential improvements in long-range surveillance and air domain awareness across Alaska’s maritime approaches.”

The most common types of OTH radars are so-called ‘skywave’ or ‘backscatter’ designs. They usually consist of two large and geographically separated arrays of antennas. The ‘illuminator’ array pumps out signals that are bounced off the ionosphere, the ionized layer of Earth’s upper atmosphere, at a specific angle so that they return to the ‘receiver’ array. Objects of interest (in the air and/or on the surface depending on the specific configuration) are detected in the process. As TWZ has previously written:

“Commonly, radars are limited by line of sight due to the curvature of the Earth in relation to the altitude they are operating at. OTHRs overcome this critical limitation, but with some major drawbacks.”

…

“While they offer much lower fidelity than many of their line-of-sight counterparts in most cases, they make up for it in huge range, hundreds of miles to thousands of miles (1,500 miles is common, for instance, for powerful military sky wave/backscatter OTHR systems) and a large coverage area. The sky wave type of OTHRs achieve this by bouncing their radio waves off the ionosphere to a coverage area where they hit targets and return the same way to the receiving station. The angle at which the radio waves hit the ionosphere dictates the range, and that angle is limited to a specific envelope or the waves won’t properly bounce back toward Earth. As such, placing the radar in the right place in relation to the targeted surveillance area or areas, to begin with, is key.”

In the testing last month, Air Force E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) radar planes, HC-130J Combat King II rescue aircraft, and KC-135 aerial refueling tankers “served as cooperative targets, providing known positions against which researchers could compare the experimental data,” according to the official release. “The team successfully completed testing, meeting or exceeding its test execution objectives. Initial results show the system was successfully able to achieve full skywave (beyond line of sight) detections of aircraft and correlation to truth flights. Thorough data analysis is ongoing.”

The release also says that the tests “explored how existing infrastructure and emerging technology could complement current surveillance capabilities.” This raises the possibility that the HAARP site, specifically, might be utilized as part of a new OTH radar. Whether or not this is actually under consideration is still unclear, and TWZ has reached out for more information.

Regardless, OTH radars have been experiencing something of a renaissance in recent years in the United States and elsewhere globally. Separate reports just in the past day or so have highlighted what appears to be significant progress on at least one part of a long-planned OTH radar in Russia’s Kaliningrad enclave.

Outside of Alaska, the U.S. military has been working to establish a Tactical Mobile Over-the-Horizon Radar (TACMOR) site in the South Pacific archipelago nation of Palau. The originally stated goal had been to finish work on this facility in 2026, but the project has faced legal challenges.

As already mentioned, OTH radars have also been part of U.S. plans to improve surveillance coverage in the Arctic. Like the recent testing in Alaska, there has been significant cooperation with Canada in this regard over the years, including through the U.S.-Canadian North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD).

Today, NORAD relies heavily on a network of ground-based radars called the North Warning System (NWS) to provide aerial surveillance coverage in the High North. The radars that make up the NWS are also all pointed northward, and none of them provide the kind of wide-area long-range coverage that an OTH design would offer.

The NWS reflects a long-standing focus on monitoring for aerial threats heading across the North Pole toward North America, especially possible nuclear strikes from Russia (and the Soviet Union before it). However, new avenues for geostrategic competition in the Arctic with Russia, as well as China, over natural resources, from oil and natural gas to fish and other sealife, as well as trade routes have emerged in recent years amid receding ice and other impacts of global climate change. This, in turn, has only prompted growing demand for surveillance coverage.

“We need a layered sensing grid, from [the] seafloor to the space layer. And we have no choice. It has to be layered and deep, a defense in depth, from a sensing point of view,” Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) Maj. Gen. Chris McKenna, head of 1 Canadian Air Division and the Canadian NORAD Region, also said during a panel discussion at the Air & Space Forces Association’s (AFA) annual Warfare Symposium in 2025, at which TWZ was in attendance. “And I will say I suffer from an insufficiency of ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] in the Arctic on a daily basis. And I am fighting for information.”

McKenna was responding at the time to a direct question about gaps in so-called “domain awareness” in and around the Arctic and how to address them.

“I think there’s an importance here of not just air domain, but also space domain, and having a sufficiency of ISR in the Arctic to actually build you the [domain awareness] picture,” he added. “I haven’t really touched on over-the-horizon radar, but I certainly can get into it. I think that’s a really important capability given the austerity of the Arctic and the need for it to cue other things.”

For its part, Canada is now building its own new Arctic Over The Horizon Radar (A-OTHR), at an estimated cost of more than $4 billion. In an announcement last year that caught many off guard, the Canadian government announced that it would be leveraging technology originally developed for Australia’s Jindalee Operational Radar Network (JORN) to support this development. It is also important to note here that relations between Canadian authorities and the Trump administration have been and continue to be heavily strained over a variety of issues, which has prompted broad concerns about future defense and security cooperation.

Back in the United States, OTH radar plans are also now tied in with the broader Golden Dome air and missile defense initiative. Golden Dome is seeking to establish new layers of defense around the U.S. homeland against a wide array of threat types, and puts major emphasis on new space-based sensor and interceptor capabilities. Expanded defensive architectures within the Earth’s atmosphere are also part of this plan.

“Adversaries are developing and building advanced nuclear and conventional delivery capabilities,” U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Joseph Jarrard, Vice Commander of the U.S. element of NORAD and Deputy Commander of U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM), warned at the annual Space & Missile Defense (SMD) Symposium in August. This includes “cruise, hypersonic, and ballistic missiles, as well as fractional orbital bombardment systems, or FOBS, to threaten not only Alaska and Hawaii, but the entire continent of the United States.”

Chinese hypersonic and other developments, in particular, enable new modes of attack that “can approach North America from the south, rather than the traditional northerly vector for which our legacy early warning radars were designed,” Jarrard continued. “The Chinese have also been building a conventionally-armed ICBM [intercontinental ballistic missile] equipped with hypersonic glide vehicles that can range [sic] targets throughout Alaska, providing Chinese leaders strike options against our homeland below the nuclear threshold.”

“Russia’s advanced missiles, like the nuclear-armed Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle, are designed to circumvent the ground-based radars used by NORAD and NORTHCOM to detect and characterize an inbound threat, and challenge the ability to provide threat warning and attack assessment,” he added.

New OTH radars positioned in Alaska and elsewhere in the Pacific will not be able to address all of these threat developments alone. At the same time, the recent testing leveraging the HAARP site is another step toward meeting demands for sorely needed expanded long-range radar coverage in the Arctic.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

One of the KC-10A Extender aerial refueling tankers the U.S. Air Force retired some two years ago has left the boneyard at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona. This aircraft is one of a set of KC-10As sold to private aerial refueling contractor Omega Air. At least one other potential operator, a still mysterious end user somewhere in North Africa, could also be in line to pick up several ex-Air Force Extenders.

Maxim Loshak, who goes by the handle @az_aviator on X and Instagram, caught the KC-10A leaving Davis-Monthan earlier today. The aircraft currently carries U.S. civil registration number N82247, and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) records confirm that Omega Air is the new owner. Online flight tracking data also shows the aircraft subsequently flew to San Antonio International Airport, which is Omega’s main base of operations.

The KC-10A in question previously carried the Air Force registration number 86-0034 and had been in the boneyard since May 12, 2023, per the service’s records. The Air Force acquired a total of 60 Extender tankers between 1979 and 1987, and lost one in an accident in 1987. The very last of the remaining 59 KC-10As was retired in September 2024. The Extender was derived from the three-engine DC-10 airliner and was designed to refuel aircraft using either the boom or the probe-and-drogue method.

As seen in the picture at the top of this story, N82247 notably lacks the KC-10A’s trademark boom under the rear fuselage. This is actually not entirely unexpected. The Air Force had put 10 Extenders up for auction last year in a non-flyable state. Each of the planes was missing a single engine, taken from under one of their wings, for reasons that are still not entirely clear. These particular aircraft were also among the first KC-10As to be retired, and their booms had been stripped to be used as spares for other examples that had remained in service until the type’s final retirement in 2024.

In addition to sourcing the requisite engines, “in order to make them flyable, the winning bidder will need to work with Boeing to obtain a fly-away kit to seal up the area where the boom systems was,” an Air Force spokesperson told us last year while the 10 KC-10As were still up for auction.

Omega Air could fit new booms to this KC-10A, as well as other ex-USAF Extenders it is in the process of acquiring. The company could also leave some of them configured as probe-and-drogue-only tankers. Omega already flies two ex-Dutch KDC-10 tankers, which are broadly similar to the KC-10, as well as another DC-10 converted into a probe-and-drogue-only tanker. The company has several Boeing 707-based tankers, as well.

There is a possibility that some of the KC-10As that Omega is acquiring could be operated in non-tanker roles. Carrying cargo was also a major role for Extender while in Air Force service. Still, this seems unlikely given that aerial refueling is Omega’s primary business. Some of the ex-Air Force Extenders might also be used as sources of spare parts. TWZ has reached out for more information about Omega’s overall plans for its new acquisitions.

Regardless, even in a boomless configuration, ex-USAF KC-10As will be a significant addition to Omega Air’s fleet. Demand for private aerial refueling services, in general, has been ramping up in the United States and elsewhere globally in recent years.

For the U.S. military, private contractors offer a valuable way to reduce demand for and strain on organic tanker fleets to meet non-combat-related aerial refueling needs. This, in turn, helps free up government-owned tankers for combat missions and other higher-priority taskings. Those tankers may also simply not need to fly as much with private companies helping to shift the burden. The ability of the Air Force’s existing tanker fleets, in particular, to meet even peacetime demands has been a growing point of concern for years now. This has been further exacerbated by persistent technical and other issues with replacement KC-46 tankers.

With all this in mind, the Air Force’s decision to retire the KC-10A fleet entirely was and still is controversial. Though the Extenders were certainly aging, they were also highly flexible tankers able to carry greater loads of fuel than the KC-46s that supplanted them.

Omega Air clearly still sees value in the KC-10A. As mentioned, at least one other operator in North Africa is at least interested in potentially acquiring Extenders. Others may yet emerge.

If nothing else, after just over two years, an ex-USAF KC-10A has returned to the skies for a second career in the private sector.

Special thanks again to Maxim Loshak for sharing his picture of N82247 with us.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Gambian authorities have announced that funds from the sale of the country’s former president’s mansion in the United States would be used to pay reparations to victims of his rule.

The Gambia Reparations Commission confirmed Tuesday that it received just more than $2.5m from the sale of a property in the wealthy Washington, DC suburb of Potomac, Maryland, belonging to ex-President Yahya Jammeh.

The commission, which was set up to compensate victims of abuses committed during Jammeh’s 22-year rule ending in 2017, said in a statement that “the funds were deposited directly into the Reparations Fund account at the Central Bank of The Gambia and shall only be utilized for the payment of reparations”.

“The Commission is committed to ensuring that the funds are managed responsibly, transparently and accountably, with due regard to the rights and needs of victims and survivors,” it added.

Jammeh currently lives in Equatorial Guinea, after he was forced out under pressure from The Gambia’s West African neighbours following his 2016 election loss to current President Adama Barrow.

He is accused of presiding over the murder of political opponents, disappearances, rape and torture.

A commission of inquiry estimated that between 240 and 250 victims were killed by Jammeh’s forces in the former British colony of two million people.

Proceeds from corruption

President Barrow said in a statement that his government would heed any recommendations by official auditors on how the funds would be allocated to victims.

The US Justice Department filed a civil forfeiture complaint in 2020 alleging that the property was bought with proceeds of corruption. A court ordered its forfeiture in 2022.

The property, it asserted, was purchased through a trust set up by Jammeh’s wife.

The US Justice Department had announced in September that it would return the funds from the mansion sale to The Gambia.

Elon Musk has said he likes the idea of a merger of Tesla and SpaceX, two of his most notable companies, and it is under active consideration.

“Do I think it would be a good idea? Yes,” Musk said during a call with financial analysts over the quarterly business results of SpaceX on Tuesday.

While Musk noted the certainty of such a merger should not be assumed, and it would need shareholders’ support, he said special committees within both companies have been formed to examine the move.

“The special committees have not reached agreement on terms of any transaction and there’s no guarantee that they will,” Musk added. “But I do think there is a lot of merit to merging and a lot to be gained.”

With Tesla valued roughly $1.5 trillion and SpaceX valued at $2 trillion, a combination of the two companies would mark one of the largest mergers in history.

Shares of SpaceX rose 8% in after hours trading.

The company, which builds space rockets and Starlink internet satellites, is now expanding into offering cloud compute capacity for other tech companies, like Anthropic and Google.

That line of business has become the most profitable part of SpaceX, bringing in $7.5bn according to the latest quarterly results. Starlink also tallied revenue of $5.2bn.

SpaceX as a whole, however, is not profitable and has lost $1.1bn so far this year.

Shares of Tesla, which reports its own quarterly results on Wednesday, rose 2% after being down slightly for weeks.

Over the last year, Musk has taken to bringing more of his various companies under fewer banners. Before it went public earlier this year, SpaceX acquired xAI and X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, both of which Musk owned.

The recent launch of Terafab, a combined effort to manufacture computer chips between Tesla and SpaceX, was another signal that Musk sees his companies as potentially more effective when working together.

Musk said on Tuesday a full merger between the two companies would make sense for the work each is doing around chips, artificial intelligence, software and more.

Amid escalating tensions with Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy, United States President Donald Trump has increased pressure on the Eastern European country to make a deal that would end the war with Russia.

Speaking at the White House on Tuesday, Trump doubled down on his efforts to blame the Ukrainian president for holding up peace efforts that would bring the years-long conflict to a close.

“Zelenskyy has to want to settle this war, and if he doesn’t, I think it’s going to be a very bad thing,” Trump said as he talked about Russia having an “unlimited” supply of people to send in the fight.

Moments later, the US president referenced a contentious Oval Office meeting he held with Zelenskyy in February 2025, shortly after returning to power.

Zelenskyy, Trump said, could have made a “better deal” then. “He’s going to have to want to make a deal, because I don’t think his people are going to stand for it any longer,” Trump told reporters.

On Tuesday, the Ukrainian president met US special envoy Steve Witkoff and European leaders in Oslo, Norway, to discuss ending Russia’s war.

In a post on social media after the meeting concluded, Zelenskyy said, without providing specifics, that his country has “some clear ideas on how to get to peace”.

“We are united with our European partners in this effort, and we want the Americans to take these ideas to the Russians,” Zelenskyy wrote. “One of the important ideas is to move to a potential trilateral meeting of the leaders to address the issues that only the leaders can do.”

The Ukrainian leader added that Witkoff would head to Russia on Wednesday, where peace discussions are expected to continue.

“Let’s see what Putin has to say,” Zelenskyy said.

When asked whether Russian President Vladimir Putin should meet Zelenskyy, Trump said there was “tremendous” hatred between the two leaders.

“It’s hard for them to be in the same room,” Trump said. “I don’t care how it’s done.”

Starlink controversy

Trump’s remarks come as the White House continues to squeeze Ukraine in order to force the country to cut a deal with Russia.

Last week, Ukrainian officials reported slowdowns with Starshield, the military-grade version of the Starlink satellite system, run by the aerospace company SpaceX.

Ukraine relies on the technology for communications and intelligence to prevent Russian attacks.

It is unclear who ordered restrictions that limit Ukraine’s access to Starshield. SpaceX CEO and Trump ally Elon Musk pointed a finger at the White House.

“Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS,” he wrote on October 14.

The news agency Reuters also reported that the order came from inside the White House, citing two US officials and a Western official.

But a report in The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday claimed US officials had blamed Musk himself for the slowdown, saying the SpaceX CEO ordered it last week. Trump and US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth have both denied that the government directed the restrictions, with Hegseth pushing responsibility towards SpaceX.

Building ties with Putin

Trump, meanwhile, has sought to ease the historically tense relations between Russia and the US.

In August 2025, Trump invited Putin to Alaska, the Russian leader’s first visit to US soil in a decade.

More recently, Trump has expressed openness this month to meeting with Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping, as part of a trilateral discussion on denuclearisation.

Trump also announced this month that he struck a deal to obtain diesel from Russia, marking a stunning reversal of years of US pressure on Moscow’s economy.

The US president also waived new economic restrictions that would have been imposed under the Lindsey Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act, a bipartisan law he signed one month earlier, in honour of a late senator.

It would have imposed sanctions on Russian officials, banks and tankers, as well as tariffs on countries that purchase Russian oil.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended the decision on Tuesday, saying the law allowed the waiver through a provision embedded in the legislation.

“The president chose to use a national security waiver to not immediately implement those [sanctions and restrictions], because he recognises that these things have to be looked at in their totality,” Rubio said in an interview with India’s News18.

Rubio argued that Trump was engaged in a “balancing act” in deciding the extent of US-imposed economic restrictions and how they could impact the rest of the world.

“When you do that pressure, sometimes it spills over and has a negative impact on other countries,” Rubio said.

Ukraine continues to struggle with throttling of the speeds at which weapons using the vital satellite communications services provided by the SpaceX Starlink system can operate, one weapons manufacturer tells us it is rethinking whether to rely on it in the future. As we have previously reported, heavy use of Starlink on both sides of the conflict in Ukraine, including as a means of guiding one-way attackers in the air and at sea, has underscored potential risks of exclusive reliance on Elon Musk’s orbital communications networks in critical tactical tasks.

At issue are complaints by Ukrainian officials that “in various sectors of the front, the equipment ceases to function at speeds of 130–161 kilometers per hour.”

A limit on how fast Starlink terminals on vehicles can travel before the feed is cut off in certain areas impacts a slew of weapons and campaigns, especially strikes on Russian logistics behind enemy lines and in the sea of Asov, as well as the control of defensive interceptor drones critical for taking down Russian long-range one-way attack drones, like the notorious Shahed-136.

The following video shows one such Shahed interception.

The limiting of Starlink/Starshield occurred amid deteriorating relations between the Trump administration and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The latest chill between Washington and Kyiv was sparked by the American leader’s claims that Ukraine’s attacks on Russia’s energy infrastructure have reduced the supply of diesel fuel to the U.S. and other nations more than the conflict in the Middle East. Trump was upset Ukraine kept hitting these targets despite his demanding they stop.

Exacerbating this issue, Trump on Oct. 9 announced via his Truth Social platform that he had made a deal to purchase diesel from Russia, pivoting away from a years-old Western policy that placed massive economic pressure on Moscow.

Who gave the order to limit the speeds at which Ukrainian weapons using the Starlink/Starshield system operate is unclear.

“The order to limit a satellite system used by Ukraine ​for battlefield communications and drone operations came from inside the White House,” Reuters reported last week, citing two U.S. officials and a Western official briefed on the matter. “The officials said ‌leaders at the Defense Department received a message that the SpaceX Starshield service for the Ukrainian military needed to be slowed.”

“No such request was ever made by the president,” a U.S. official told us on Monday.

“There has been no change to Department of War policy regarding intelligence sharing or any capabilities we are enabling Europeans to provide to Ukraine,” a senior Pentagon official responded to our questions about whether the Pentagon imposed the limits and, if so, why.

When we pushed for a more specific response to the Starlink/Starshield concerns, the Pentagon declined comment. However, Tuesday afternoon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the Pentagon did not order any changes and that Ukraine violated Starlink’s terms of services.

We reached out to SpaceX as well, but the company did not immediately respond. Last week, SpaceX’s founder and CEO, Elon Musk, said that “any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately” Trump. Musk had previously refused Ukrainian requests to use Starlink against targets inside Russia.

The prohibition against using Starlink inside Russia has drastically limited Ukraine’s ability to strike dynamic targets like mobile ballistic missile launchers and hunt for drone launch sites. However, Ukraine has not had to rely on Starlink in its campaign against oil infrastructure or other fixed targets deep inside Russia which upset Trump in the first place.

Tuesday morning, Zelensky spoke with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and again brought up Starlink/Starshield in addition to other major concerns.

“…the situation with Starlink/Starshield… needs to be restored,” Zelensky urged.

I spoke with Marco Rubio @SecRubio, and it was a substantive conversation – focused on the issues that matter. I am grateful for his readiness to help and his clear position. First, ballistic missile interceptors, which are needed to protect lives. Second, early warning of…

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) October 20, 2026

Rubio denied that any assistance was being withheld from Ukraine. Noting that Starlink “is a private company,” the secretary told reporters that Trump is “frustrated…because he doesn’t like to be blamed for things that aren’t true, including accusations that somehow he had ordered intelligence sharing to be cut off. And that’s not true; he’s said that repeatedly.”

SECRETARY RUBIO: There’s nothing being deliberately denied to Ukraine. It’s simply a balance between our obligations to other partners, and frankly, our own standards and requirements for our own facilities as well. pic.twitter.com/x9NWbIufBa

— Department of State (@StateDept) October 20, 2026

This most recent flap isn’t the first time SpaceX and Musk have faced particularly significant criticism over limiting some Ukrainian use of the network. Actions SpaceX took earlier this year to block unregistered Starlink terminals also had major consequences for Russian forces, which were sent scrambling to find alternatives to fill the massive resulting communications gap.

Given the tenuous nature of Ukraine’s ability to use Starlink/Starshield, the Wild Hornets company is reevaluating whether to use the SpaceX system in future endeavors even though, so far, it has experienced few problems with it. Wild Hornets is a major Ukrainian combat drone maker. Among other weapons, it makes the Sting interceptors, designed to defend against Russian Shahed kamikaze drones.

The Starlink/Starshield issue isn’t affecting current operations, Wild Hornets spokesman Mike Orliuk told us Tuesday morning. “Our own communications system provides the basic connection to our interceptors,” he said. “Plus, our technology for remote control of the interceptors can use various sources of internet connectivity. True, the military often uses Starlink for this, but in our case, the terminal doesn’t need to be moved at high speeds (it simply provides a connection between the command center and the ground station to which the interceptor is connected—it’s somewhat similar to cell towers).”

Відео 100 збиттів шахедів перехоплювачем #STING #wildhornets #дикішершні #fpv

Concerns about the reduction in speeds at which Starlink terminals can operate has Wild Hornets thinking about ditching a future project, Orliuk told us.

“But we understand that there are other types of interceptors,” added Orliuk. “For example, some drones carry a terminal on board and need to fly at high speed with it. In such cases, Starlink’s limitations make their operation impossible. From this point of view, it also makes us rethink some of the projects we’re currently working on. For example, launching interceptors from aerial platforms.”

“We’re keeping an eye on the situation,” Orliuk continued. “For our current operations (connections with ground stations), we can use any source of stable internet connectivity. Therefore, various solutions are possible in different locations. However, for these needs, everything is operating normally with Starlink at the moment. As for our plans with new projects, we don’t have a clear decision yet, but we will be testing alternatives.”

Orliuk declined to provide further details about what “alternatives” could look like.

There are a number of ways the lack of Starlink for extended-range drone operations could be mitigated to a degree, but the persistent, reliable, high-bandwidth and compact capability SpaceX provides has no direct alternative at this time. The use of drones that work as line-of-sight relays, which can be daisy chained together electronically with other airborne relays, with a connection spanning dozens or even hundreds of miles to a ground entry point is possible. You can read about this concept here. The use of swarms of balloons to create an active network over a battlespace and using starlink on those slower moving platforms to relay line-of-sight connections to multiple drones below is another possibility. You can read more about this concept here. But we must stress again, nothing can fully replace Starlink/Starshield and its seamless beyond line-of-sight communications architecture at this time.

“I believe, in any case, depending on a single solution is very risky,” Orliuk proffered. “Especially if you don’t have full control over it. Especially when it comes to something as critical on the battlefield as communications. That’s exactly why our ecosystem is built around our own communications technology and basically is open to various solutions when it comes to internet connectivity.”

The No. 1 interceptor: STING by Wild Hornets has destroyed over 15,000 Shaheds and Gerberas in one year 🔥

Confirmed data shows that STING has topped the interceptor rankings for 12 consecutive months. In September this year, Ukraine’s Defense Forces downed around 1,600 Shaheds,… pic.twitter.com/4v1aeOxPiy

— Wild Hornets (@wilendhornets) October 13, 2026

As far as military units are concerned, the commander of the Georgian Legion told us that his forces have been affected by issues with Starlink/Starshield even though the main concerns have been about the speeds at which weapons can travel and still have connectivity. The Georgian Legion is fighting in the heavily contested Kramatorsk region of eastern Ukraine.

“We use Starlink a lot because, in this war, reliable communication is essential,” Mamuka Mamulashvili told us. “It helps us stay connected when everything around us is changing. Of course, we’ve learned not to rely on just one system. There are alternatives, like mobile internet, fiber-optic connections, radio and other satellite systems such as OneWeb. But honestly, none of them can fully replace Starlink in Ukraine right now.”

“The problems were not limited to the speed restriction of approximately 160 km/h,” the Georgian Legion commander pointed out. “Starlink connectivity itself was also intermittent, repeatedly switching on and off. This caused communication disruptions across various drone systems, not just those operating at speeds exceeding 160 km/h. As a result, the impact was broader than the restriction on high-speed interceptor drones. Intermittent connectivity created problems for drone control and communications across multiple systems, affecting their reliability and the ability to carry out missions as intended.”

“We had serious communication problems,” Mamulashvili explained. “At one point, our drone operators were struggling to maintain a reliable connection with the drone systems, which disrupted coordination and made it difficult to carry out missions as planned. When you lose the connection between the operator and the drone, you can lose control of the situation in seconds. We managed to adapt, but it definitely affected our work.”

“We have to adapt and find solutions, as we always do,” the commander said. “This war teaches you one thing every day. You can’t depend on a single technology or expect someone else to solve all your problems. You have to be ready for anything and keep moving forward.”

Russian sources, meanwhile, are gloating over the speed limits placed on weapons using Starlink/Starshield, particularly how it is affecting Ukraine’s mid-range drone attacks that have crippled Russian logistics. As we explained in a previous report, Ukrainian units have relied on the SpaceX system to help extend the range of their drones to reach as far as 150 miles into Russian-occupied territory. The SpaceX system is not used to hit targets inside Russia proper.

The following video shows some of these mid-range attacks.

Russian rail logistics are now also the target of Midstrike drones, with lines to Crimea being particularly affected. pic.twitter.com/K1BFd0QVov

— Sergio 🇺🇦 🇪🇺 (@SergioCentaurus) June 5, 2026

“Disabling or slowing down Starlink has significantly reduced the enemy’s ability to launch medium-range drone strikes along the ‘Novorossiya’ highway,” influential Russian milblogger Vladimir Romanov reported. The highway, also known as the R-280, is a key link between cities in occupied southern Ukraine and the occupied Crimean peninsula. The road has been a frequent target of Ukraine’s mid-range strike campaign.

“The success of these strikes depends on the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ access to American satellite communication,” Romanov noted. “For the past six months, the Ukrainian Armed Forces have been attacking civilian transport – trucks, cars, and buses – exclusively through the use of ‘Starshield.’ This means that, for the past six months, American military satellite infrastructure has been used to carry out terrorist acts against Russian civilians, and so on. In other words, the United States is still directly involved in the war with Russia!”

America’s gifts to Russia never end, with Russian military bloggers now confirming that Washington’s operation to cut Ukraine’s Starlink has halted Ukraine’s ability to strike Russian logistics routes in Ukraine.

An operation likely written in the Kremlin, executed by… pic.twitter.com/iXcIAu5Rr3

— SPRAVDI — Stratcom Centre (@StratcomCentre) October 20, 2026

As for how widespread worries among Ukrainian weapons manufacturers are, Orliuk suggested that Wild Hornets is not alone. He said he has spoken with other companies relying much more heavily on Starlink/Starshield who have expressed concerns. He pointed to growing interest in the European Eutelsat satellite constellation as an example of companies seeking options, but noted that “of course, creating something like Starlink won’t be easy.”

We’ve reached out to the Ukrainian Brave1 defense technology incubator and the National Association of Ukrainian Defense Industries (NAUDI) for additional insights into how this issue is affecting Ukraine’s defense manufacturing base.

It will be interesting to see if other Ukrainian weapons companies also consider scrapping plans to rely on Starlink in the future and what architectures will emerge at least as a backstop to it.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

The lawsuit argues Trump bypassed Congress and misused a century-old law to impose sweeping tariffs on Canadian imports.

A US food importer is suing US President Donald Trump over his 50 percent tariffs on Canadian goods, arguing he lacks the legal authority to impose sweeping tariffs without congressional approval.

Gellert Global Group, a New Jersey-based company that imports Canadian cheese, filed the lawsuit on Tuesday in the US Court of International Trade in New York.

The company says the tariffs are driving up its costs and disrupting its relationships with suppliers on both sides of the border. Between September 16 and October 11, Gellert had paid more than $520,000 in duties, according to the complaint.

“Gellert Global Group has spent generations building trusted relationships with suppliers, customers and partners across the food industry,” said Thomas Gellert, the company’s co-chief executive officer, in a press release. “These tariffs disrupt those relationships overnight and create costs and uncertainty that ripple through the entire supply chain.”

The lawsuit challenges Trump’s decision to use a Depression-era law to impose tariffs on a wide range of Canadian products, including dairy products, furniture, clothing and wine.

Trump first imposed the 50 percent tariffs over the summer, accusing Canada of discriminating against American-made cars, alcohol and dairy products. He expanded the measures in September, adding more products in response to Canadian retaliatory tariffs.

The lawsuit argues that the law doesn’t apply to the Canadian policies the Trump administration says are discriminatory, since two of them “arose in response to the president’s own tariffs, while the third involves Canadian dairy policy governed by the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA)”.

It also questions why Canadian cheese is being taxed over disputes involving alcohol and cars.

“No president should have the power to pull a dormant statute off the shelf and use it to impose sweeping tariffs or import bans without the limits Congress required,” said Sara Albrecht, chairman and CEO of the Liberty Justice Center, a nonprofit legal organisation that filed the suit on Gellert’s behalf.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment, according to the Reuters news agency.

At the centre of the case is Section 338 of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, which allows the president to impose tariffs of up to 50 percent on imports from countries found to discriminate against American businesses.

The provision had never been used until Trump invoked it this year.

The lawsuit argues that newer laws passed by Congress since then, such as Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, require investigations, public comment and other safeguards that Gellert says the Trump administration has bypassed, and that these override Section 338.

“The administration cannot skip those protections by reaching for a 1930 statute that no president had ever used to impose a tariff,” said Jeffrey Schwab, the Liberty Justice Center’s senior counsel and director of litigation.

In addition, the lawsuit says that even if Trump is allowed to use the older law, he hasn’t met its requirements, including waiting 30 days before tariffs can be collected on new products added to the list.

The administration only waited seven days to start collecting tariffs on cheese in September, according to the lawsuit.

Gellert is asking the court to declare the tariffs illegal, stop them from being collected, and order refunds with interest for importers who have been impacted.

The lawsuit marks the fourth major legal challenge to Trump’s tariffs.

In February, the US Supreme Court struck down most of the tariffs he imposed in 2025, and a trade court later ruled against a temporary 10 percent global tariff. A separate challenge to tariffs imposed over alleged forced labour in international trade is still pending.