news

FIFA’s president lobbies for latest proposal for investment in football’s governing body, which has met with criticism.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino has set a September 19 deadline for the 211 member federations to accept a one-off $20m offer to each underwritten by the investment firm of Jared Kushner’s brother as part of a project to sell stakes in the World Cup.

Infantino set out the “singular and unique funding opportunity” in a letter detailing why he wants to create a $20bn FIFA subsidiary that would be 20 percent owned by private investors and would run the football body’s competitions and events like World Cups and Club World Cups.

“It is my duty and responsibility as FIFA president to present such game-changing opportunities to you, our members,” Infantino wrote on Wednesday in the letter seen by The Associated Press news agency.

The proposal, revealed on Tuesday and backed by Joshua Kushner’s investment firm Thrive Capital, was met with immediate fury by Infantino’s former colleagues at the European football body UEFA, which said the World Cup “is not FIFA’s to sell”.

UEFA is expected to call its 55 member federations to an emergency online meeting, likely on Thursday.

Joshua Kushner’s brother, Jared Kushner, is a son-in-law of United States President Donald Trump.

FIFA’s private equity plan is the latest ambitious project proposed during Infantino’s 11-year presidency, during which he has increasingly seemed to be an executive leader acting without consulting football’s major stakeholders.

Previous plans include creating a FIFA Peace Prize and trying to reorganise football’s calendar with World Cups every two years instead of four.

Concerns about the previously secret plan were aired on Wednesday by the continental football bodies for Asia and the North American, Central American and Caribbean region, known as CONCACAF.

“We are deeply concerned by the lack of due process,” CONCACAF said in a statement.

The Kuala Lumpur-based Asian Football Confederation said it was “disappointed that a matter of such significance entered the public domain before the AFC family had been afforded the opportunity to examine and discuss it.”

Continental bodies that organise their own international club and national team competitions – such as the Champions League, European Championship and Copa America – likely will see threats to those events from FIFA wanting to increase revenue and value for investors by playing World Cups and Club World Cups for men and women more often.

If the FIFA Forward Enterprise subsidiary is approved by a majority of the 211 members, they are each promised $20m in funding from the four-year commercial cycle tied to the men’s 2030 World Cup.

That would lead, Infantino wrote, to “a pool of diverse international investors” joining Joshua Kushner’s Thrive as the anchor investor. “This process will be led by J.P. Morgan,” his letter said.

If Infantino’s plan is rejected, those members will get their previously promised $10m over the next four years, the letter stated.

FIFA’s plan met quick opposition from British Prime Minister Andy Burnham, whose government is preparing to support hosting the 2035 Women’s World Cup in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. FIFA is to confirm that lone bid for 2035 at an online meeting in November.

“Football does not belong to investors,” Burnham, a longtime football fan, said in a video message on Instagram. “Once you have sold a piece of [the World Cup], you have sold out. Football belongs to the fans. It always has, and it always will.”

Resistance by British lawmakers – including threats of legislation by then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson in 2021 – previously helped stop the divisive European Super League project that was criticised as an existential threat to UEFA’s Champions League and which Infantino had discreetly supported.

Last week, two of OpenAI’s most advanced AI models were reported to have “escaped” a controlled testing environment and hacked Hugging Face, a totally separate AI company, moving from one computer system to another to complete their task.

Reuters reported that the models exploited vulnerable code written by a customer of yet a third independent AI company, Modal Labs.

This is likely the first incident of an AI “agent” – an AI system that can make decisions and take actions – acting autonomously, offering a rare glimpse into how these systems can plan, adapt and pursue goals with minimal human intervention.

Al Jazeera breaks down what happened, how AI agents are able to act independently, and what that might mean for the future of AI safety.

What happened?

OpenAI decided to test the autonomous abilities of its models by removing standard safety measures to see what would happen. The experiment was carried out in an isolated internal virtual testing environment known as a “sandbox” which has no access to the internet, and which it calls “ExploitGym”.

Below is a play-by-play account of events during the OpenAI-Hugging Face incident.

1. On July 9, during OpenAI’s internal cybersecurity test, researchers presented two AI models – GPT-5.6 Sol, one of OpenAI’s most powerful models released in June,  and another “even more capable” version – with a series of software vulnerabilities and asked them to create hacks to address them in the isolated environment.
2. Both models attempted to solve the test by finding a way to access the internet. Instead of working with the information they had been given, the AI models found a weakness in the test environment – known as a “zero-day vulnerability” – which they exploited to “escape” the restricted environment, eventually making their way to a system which had internet access by hopping from computer to computer. They went to “extreme lengths to achieve a rather narrow testing goal” and “found ways to gain access to secret information that it could use to cheat the evaluation”.
3. By gaining this access, the models were able to request increased access and then move through the system until they finally reached a computer with internet access. The models were then able to breach Hugging Face systems, a company entirely unconnected to OpenAI, which operates as a repository for AI tools and models. The two AI agents gained access to its system to scour it for information on how to complete their task.
4. The models ultimately obtained solutions to the problem from Hugging Face’s database.
5. The models dutifully returned “home” to complete their task.
6. The breach was detected and contained by Hugging Face’s security team sometime later. According to Thomas Wolf, Hugging Face’s cofounder, the breach began on July 11 and lasted until July 13. It is unclear how long it took for the breach to be spotted.

How do AI ‘agents’ solve problems?

In order to understand how AI agents work, it’s important to differentiate them from traditional AI chatbots.

Generative AI creates text and images based on human prompts, while AI agents go a step further by making decisions and taking actions independently in pursuit of a specific goal, similar to a human being. This is known as “agentic AI” because the model has agency.

According to academics at the MIT Sloan School of Management, AI agents build on the abilities of large language models (LLMs) – generative AI models – by allowing them to complete tasks, not just generate answers.

For example, if you ask a traditional AI model to find the cheapest flights, it will provide you with a list of options it has sourced on the internet. An AI agent will strive to compare the flights, check them against your budget and preferences, and, with your permission, book the best option for you.

This shows that while generative AI provides information, AI agents can also make decisions and take action to achieve a goal without necessarily being prompted to.

To show how AI agents work towards a goal, the Sense, Plan, Act, Evaluate (SPAE) loop can be drawn upon. Originally developed in robotics, this describes a continuous cycle in which an AI agent gathers information, decides what to do next, takes action and checks the results before repeating the process. That process looks like this:

1. Goal: determine the task that needs to be completed.
2. Assess: gather and analyse information from the available environment.
3. Obstacle: if something is inhibiting the task being completed, check for additional information and resources to move forward.
4. Plan and decide: evaluate different options to complete the task and choose an appropriate one.
5. Action: execute the chosen option.
6. Evaluate: assess the outcome and whether the chosen action moves closer to achieving the goal.
7. Adapt: if further actions are needed, gather more information or try a different approach.
8. End state: the cycle continues until the goal is reached.

Could AI act beyond human control?

Incidents like the OpenAI-Hugging Face one have raised concerns about the potential for extreme capabilities of AI systems.

This is all valuable. Agentic AI’s market value is expected to grow from $5.1bn in 2024 to $47bn by 2030, according to Statista, in a clear indication of how quickly it is being adopted.

AI developer Anthropic urged the industry last month to slow the advance of the most powerful systems, saying that the speed at which AI models are carrying out tasks is too rapid. Last week, US Congress members put forward a bipartisan bill which would require developers of AI systems to create a “kill switch”, meaning these advanced models could be shut down if they posed a catastrophic risk.

Anthropic’s warning came a week after researchers at the University of Toronto carried out tests showing that AI could create a “worm” capable of adapting how it hacks while moving from device to device until it eventually takes over a computer network.

These dystopian-sounding developments came in advance of OpenAI boss Sam Altman saying on Saturday that AI has reached “the singularity” referring to the point at which AI surpasses human intelligence and becomes increasingly difficult to control.

Sean O hEigeartaigh, a research professor at the University of Cambridge, told Al Jazeera that he does not believe singularity has been reached quite yet.

“By the definition I’m familiar with, the singularity is the hypothetical point where AI is so capable and advancing so fast that it is transforming civilisation in ways we cannot control or predict,” he explained.

“This would most likely be through AI rapidly designing future generations of AI: recursive self-improvement. We aren’t there yet.”

However, he added: “The most advanced current models frequently make efforts to avoid being shut down in evaluation tests, and more capable future models will be better at bypassing ‘kill’ switches.”

Altman argued that such rapidly advancing AI is good for the world, but his comments have prompted further concerns about a new reality in which AI systems become unstoppable. How much of that is true and how much remains in the realms of science fiction is up for debate.

Concerns about AI range from the notion that it could “want” to “take over”, to making its own long-term plans, controlling the internet and operating infinitely.

While not quite amounting to full control of the internet, another theory, known as the dead internet theory, supposes that the World Wide Web will in the future mostly be filled with automated bots and AI-generated content rather than authentic human activity.

Many concerns raised by academics, however, are centred less on agentic AI’s intelligence, but on its ability to make judgements. MIT researchers have highlighted that “hallucinations”, which describe moments when an AI agent relies on the wrong data, can lead to grave mistakes. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) echoed this, saying “a system might be smart enough to execute a task perfectly yet fail to realise that a sudden change in the local situation makes that task a catastrophic mistake”.

Another concern that has been echoed for a while is for the labour market, if AI becomes too capable. A study by MIT, carried out in November, found that agentic AI could already replace more than 10 percent of US jobs.

The graphic below highlights some of the common misconceptions and fears about AI and the current reality.

Israel will head to national elections on October 27, marking the country’s first vote since the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack that triggered the Gaza war and later expanded into conflicts with Lebanon and Iran. The election is widely seen as a defining moment for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose political future faces its toughest test in years.

Although opinion polls suggest Netanyahu is heading toward defeat, Israel’s fragmented parliamentary system means election outcomes often depend on coalition negotiations rather than outright victories, leaving several possible paths to power.

Polls Signal Trouble for Netanyahu

Recent surveys indicate declining public confidence in Netanyahu, whose long standing reputation as Israel’s security leader suffered after the October 7 attack.

While many Israelis have supported military operations against Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran, dissatisfaction has grown over the government’s handling of domestic issues, including the relationship between religion and the state.

Despite the unfavorable polling, Netanyahu remains one of Israel’s most experienced political figures and has repeatedly returned to power after seemingly insurmountable political setbacks.

Who Are Netanyahu’s Main Challengers?

Several political figures are seeking to capitalize on Netanyahu’s weakened position.

Former military chief Gadi Eisenkot has emerged as one of the strongest contenders. Having lost his son during the Gaza conflict, Eisenkot has built a reputation as a respected security figure while portraying himself as an honest alternative to the current leadership.

Former prime ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid have reunited politically after previously forming the coalition that briefly removed Netanyahu from office in 2021. Their earlier government brought together parties from across Israel’s political spectrum, although it lasted only 18 months.

Another challenger is former Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, once a close Netanyahu ally. Lieberman later became one of his fiercest critics, accusing him of failing to adopt a sufficiently tough security policy.

How Israel’s Election System Works

Israel elects its 120 member Knesset through a nationwide system of proportional representation.

Rather than voting directly for a prime minister, citizens vote for political parties. Seats are distributed according to each party’s share of the national vote, provided they receive at least 3.25 percent, the equivalent of four parliamentary seats.

Because no party has ever secured an outright majority, governments are always formed through coalition negotiations among multiple parties.

This coalition system gives smaller parties significant influence over government formation and policymaking, often making them decisive kingmakers after elections.

Why Coalition Politics Matter

Coalition governments have become a defining feature of Israeli politics.

Since 2019, repeated political deadlock produced multiple elections before Netanyahu returned to power in 2022 with the country’s most right wing coalition to date.

His governing alliance has relied heavily on ultra Orthodox Jewish parties, whose demands, particularly regarding exemptions from compulsory military service, have generated growing public controversy during wartime.

Following disagreements, some coalition partners have already left the government, although they have continued providing parliamentary support on key votes.

The Main Parties in the Election

Netanyahu’s coalition includes:

• Likud
• Religious Zionism
• Jewish Power

The opposition currently consists of:

• Yashar, led by Gadi Eisenkot
• Together, the alliance between Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid
• Israel Our Home, led by Avigdor Lieberman
• Arab parties including Hadash, Taal, Raam, and Balad
• The left wing Democrats, headed by former general Yair Golan

The political landscape could still change before candidate registration closes, as parties may merge, split, or withdraw from the race.

Why This Election Matters

The October election will shape Israel’s political direction at a time when the country remains engaged in multiple regional conflicts and faces mounting domestic challenges. While polls currently favor opposition forces, Israel’s coalition based electoral system means the final outcome will depend less on which party wins the most votes and more on which leader can assemble a governing majority in parliament.

Analysis

The 2026 Israeli election is not simply a referendum on Benjamin Netanyahu but a broader test of whether Israeli voters want continuity or political renewal after years of conflict and instability. Netanyahu enters the race weakened by security failures linked to the October 7 attacks and growing public frustration over domestic governance, yet his long record of coalition building means he cannot be discounted. Even if his Likud party falls short, post election negotiations could still determine his political survival.

For the opposition, electoral success alone may not be enough. Parties ranging from centrists to left wing and Arab factions must overcome ideological divisions to build a stable coalition, a challenge that has repeatedly undermined previous governments. The election therefore highlights a recurring feature of Israeli politics: governments are decided not only at the ballot box but also through complex coalition bargaining that can reshape leadership long after votes are counted.

With information from Reuters.

The dust has barely settled on the expanded 48-team FIFA World Cup 2026, yet further development of the competition’s future has already been mooted, as well as struck by a fierce backlash.

The shine on the trophy, now held by Spain after their defeat of Argentina in the final, still glitters brightly, but there were tarnishes to this year’s event.

Now, the game’s global governing body, FIFA, and its president, Gianni Infantino, face yet more criticism after a plan was released to sell stakes in future World Cups and other events to private investors.

From European football’s governing body, UEFA, to the United Kingdom’s new prime minister, Andy Burnham, FIFA’s plan has been slammed. There has even been a suggestion of a boycott by UEFA.

Al Jazeera Sport takes a look at what the latest proposals on FIFA’s desk mean.

What are Gianni Infantino and FIFA’s new World Cup plans?

FIFA announced plans on Tuesday to sell stakes in future World Cups and other events to private investors in a bid to maximise revenue for the sport.

The proposal is to create a $20bn subsidiary to run the World Cup and other events.

FIFA says it would retain the majority share of a newly created FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) scheme, meaning it would still preside over football governance, competitions, match calendars and regulatory and sporting decisions.

Minority stakes, however, would be sold to external investors to raise up to $4.2bn as part of the new proposal.

Why do Infantino and FIFA want to sell stakes in the World Cup?

Debate raged for months in the build-up to World Cup 2026 that FIFA’s ticket pricing was pushing fans out of “the people’s game”, as it has long been regarded.

FIFA’s defence was that the World Cup is their main source of income to support the game around the globe – from the sport’s grassroots to the administration of the major international events.

This latest proposal is FIFA’s attempt to stretch that revenue potential even further.

How would the new plan for the FIFA World Cup work?

Billions of dollars are already raised by FIFA tournaments, largely from broadcasting rights, sponsorship and other commercial deals.

This new commercial subsidiary, the FFE, would extend beyond traditional means of raising funds and would be akin to the franchise model that many sports have now turned to.

The Indian Premier League (IPL), a T20 cricket tournament, was one of the first competitions to fully exploit the potential of franchise models, selling stakes in teams in a newly formed competition.

On Wednesday, the IPL – only formed in 2008 – announced its value had soared more than 11% this year to 20.6bn.

Teams in that competition are owned by majority investors, who therefore hold significant sway in how it is run.

Other models, including The Hundred of the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) – an attempt to rival the IPL – have sold minority ownership of the teams.

ECB, as a result, retains control of the competition, and this is what FIFA is proposing for the share of the World Cup and its events that it intends to sell privately.

Nonetheless, a share is a share and new investors, be it in cricket’s The Hundred or in the FIFA World Cup, will expect at the very least to be heard when it comes to decision-making.

This is where concerns are being raised about the proposals.

Who are the potential investors in the World Cup and other FIFA events?

Thrive Eternal, a United States venture capital firm, has been put forward to lead the proposed investor group, FIFA said.

The vehicle was founded by Joshua Kushner, the brother of US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Any potential investors would thereafter buy into the FIFA events via Thrive Eternal.

What benefits are FIFA claiming if the World Cup and events plan succeeds?

FIFA has said all net benefits will be reinvested in football, and that all countries should benefit from the ever-increasing profitability of the sport.

“Football is the world’s most popular sport,” FIFA President Gianni Infantino said in a statement.

“Parts of the game have turned that popularity into remarkable commercial value – and we celebrate that success and want it to continue, because it lifts the whole game.

“Our job is to make sure the rest of football grows with it: FIFA exists to support sustainable, inclusive development in every corner of the world.”

‘It is not FIFA’s to sell’: UEFA and UK PM reaction to Infantino’s World Cup plan?

FIFA has already clashed with domestic and continental governing bodies during World Cup 2026. The European powerhouse, UEFA, was the first to speak out against the new proposals.

“This crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross,” UEFA said.

“UEFA takes it extremely seriously. So should every National Football Association. So should every stakeholder who cares about the future of the game.

“The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade – especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”

Andy Burnham, who only replaced Keir Starmer as the United Kingdom’s prime minister last week, wrote on X: “Let me say this very directly. Football does not belong to investors. It belongs to the people who fill the stands and who stand on the touchline week in, week out, rain or shine.

“The World Cup is not a product. It is the greatest competition in world sport, and it was never anyone’s to sell. Dress the deal up however you like. Once you have sold a piece of it, you have sold out.

“Football belongs to the fans. It always has, and it always will,” he added.

The Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football (CONCACAF) said on Wednesday that it ⁠had not been informed of FIFA’s proposed sale of equity to outside investors and was “deeply concerned” over a lack of due process.

What will happen next for FIFA’s World Cup plans, and will UEFA boycott?

Any change will need to be voted through by FIFA’s 211-country membership.

Of that number, 55 nations fall within UEFA’s governance.

The European body will hold an emergency meeting later this week to discuss the proposals.

Were FIFA to implement such a plan, one possible response UEFA could take would include a boycott of FIFA competitions.

Although at just above a quarter of FIFA membership, Europe has produced the winner of six of the last eight World Cups.

Argentina and Brazil are the only teams to prevent a clean sweep by the Europeans in that time, and, indeed, are the only nations outside Europe to win the World Cup since fellow South Americans Uruguay won their second and last title in 1950.

What were the main criticisms of FIFA World Cup 2026?

The main criticism going into the 2026 World Cup, held in the US, Canada and Mexico, was pricing. From tickets to transport links, it was felt that football fans on median salaries around the world were being priced out of the game.

During the World Cup, the decision to suspend a red card shown to USA striker Folarin Balogun “undermined the game’s integrity and credibility,” according to UEFA.

US President Donald Trump said he called Infantino about the ban that Balogun faced – the forward lined up for USA in their next match against Belgium.

FIFA also faced a backlash over hydration breaks that were introduced midway through each half of those matches. Critics said the breaks functioned primarily as commercial opportunities for broadcasters and disrupted the traditional flow of football matches at the tournament.

ICE deported a married couple back to Guatemala who had sought safety in the US. Their bodies have been found tied up and shot, with their 14-month-old daughter left alive beside them.

Chelsea have agreed a deal to sign Danny Welbeck while Jordan Henderson is set to cancel his Brentford contract to enable a move to Stamford Bridge.

Henderson, 36, is under contract until 2027. Welbeck, 35, has agreed a two-year deal and been given permission by Brighton to conduct a medical at Stamford Bridge.

A fee for the striker has also been agreed but remains undisclosed as Chelsea tie up the deal for him to join pre-season in Hong Kong after Chelsea‘s final match in Australia against Tottenham on Saturday evening.

Welbeck will become the oldest signing under the Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital ownership, until Henderson’s likely arrival with the west Londoners.

It is part of new manager Xabi Alonso’s drive to add experience to Chelsea‘s squad, which has been the youngest in the Premier League for the past two seasons.

Their focus on youth has been viewed as a factor in their inability to challenge consistently for major honours.

Towards the end of last season’s disappointing campaign, when they finished 10th and won nothing, Chelsea co-owner Behdad Eghbali said their recruitment model needed a “tweak”.

Since then, Chelsea have made an offer to reunite Sunderland midfielder Granit Xhaka, 34, with Alonso – they won the Bundesliga title together at Bayer Leverkusen in 2024.

They have also signed 26-year-old centre-back Maxence Lacroix from Crystal Palace on a six-year contract, pending an official announcement, while talks continue over Henderson.

Morgan Rogers, who signed for a club-record £117m from Aston Villa earlier this month, is relatively experienced, despite having just turned 24.

The club have also signed 21-year-old full-back Marco Palestra from Atalanta.

Welbeck, formerly of Manchester United and Arsenal, has hit 90 goals in 400 top-flight appearances – and is the leading Premier League scorer at Brighton, who he joined on a free transfer from Watford in 2021.

His arrival would leave Chelsea with six senior strikers on their books, with others available for loan or sale.

Among those who could leave on either a permanent deal or loan are Nicolas Jackson, Liam Delap and Marc Guiu.

The Blues have also brought in Dutch striker Emmanuel Emegha from sister club Strasbourg this summer and he could remain part of the squad.

Henderson, meanwhile, would add further experience and seniority to the squad, having been selected by Thomas Tuchel as part of England’s leadership group at this summer’s World Cup.

It was during the celebrations following England’s last-16 victory over Mexico that Henderson fractured his arm and wrist after landing awkwardly while jumping over an advertising hoarding.

Henderson joined Brentford last summer after spells abroad with Dutch side Ajax and Saudi club Al Ettifaq. That followed a hugely successful spell at Liverpool, where he won six major honours, including the Champions League and Premier League.

He joins a midfield that includes Moises Caicedo, Enzo Fernandez, Dario Essugo, Romeo Lavia and Valentin Barco – who is expected to join from Strasbourg – pending an official announcement.

Here’s TWZ’s weekly carrier tracker monitoring America’s flattop fleet, including deployed Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) and Amphibious Ready Groups (ARG), using publicly available open-source information. Check out last week’s report here.

While the American airstrike campaign may be on pause, the rebooted naval blockade remains in full effect, as the second week comes to a close. In an update posted Monday morning, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that it has redirected 17 commercial vessels, disabled two kinetically, and boarded another two “to ensure compliance” since reinstating the blockade on July 14. Both carriers deployed to the CENTCOM area of responsibility (AOR), USS Abraham Lincoln and USS George H.W. Bush, remain on station “to support maritime security and stability in the Middle East.”

In the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) AOR, USS George Washington transited the Luzon Strait westbound and entered the South China Sea on July 22, escorted by guided-missile cruiser USS Robert Smalls and destroyers USS Benfold and USS Shoup. Washington’s repositioning comes on the heels of a serious incident last week between the Philippine Navy and China Coast Guard at Second Thomas Shoal, resulting in the medical evacuation of a Filipino Navy SEAL. “The melee marked the most severe incident between Beijing and Manila to date. It was the first time the two forces directly engaged each other beyond rammings, water cannon blasts and other coercive activities,” USNI News reported. A U.S. Coast Guard cutter was also on scene to provide support.

The U.S. Ambassador to the Philippines, Lee Lipton, acknowledged the arrival over the weekend, writing on X, “The USS George Washington Carrier Strike Group’s advanced capabilities, including the F-35, are upholding FREEDOM of Navigation and Overflight in the South China Sea. We challenge excessive maritime claims around the world.”

USS Theodore Roosevelt, also underway in the Pacific, led a massive group sail as part of the final stages of exercise Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2026. The ongoing RIMPAC 2026, which we have covered in previous reports, is set to wrap up at the end of the month. The group sail and photo exercise (PHOTOEX) took place on July 22 approximately 100 nautical miles northeast of Kauai, Hawaii, according to public AIS data, with more than 20 American and allied warships participating in the show of force.

Back stateside, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower departed Naval Station Norfolk on July 22 to conduct an ammunition onload with USNS Medgar Evers. MH-60S Seahawks, attached to the “Dragonslayers” of Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 11, were spotted transporting ammunition while operating in the Atlantic Ocean. The flattop returned to homeport yesterday.

Amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli returned to Sasebo, Japan, over the weekend, completing a more than six-month deployment to the CENTCOM and PACOM AORs. Tripoli stopped at White Beach Naval Facility in Okinawa last week to disembark elements of the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) before heading back to Sasebo. USS Boxer, flagship of the sole ARG now deployed in the Middle East (and around the globe), conducted a vertical replenishment with USNS Carl Brashear on July 20.

Overall, three U.S. carriers are deployed, three are training or in port in various states of readiness, four are in maintenance, and one is being used primarily for training. One amphibious ready group is deployed, five are training or in port, and three are in maintenance.

Note: Positions are general approximations. Non-deployed LHA/LHD amphibious warships are not shown.

Contact the author: ian.ellis-jones@teamrecurrent.io

West Indies take a 1-0 lead in the two-Test series after Jayden Seales dominates with the ball on day 4 in Trinidad.

Paceman Jayden Seales ‌claimed his fourth five-wicket haul to bowl the West ⁠⁠Indies to ⁠a 90-run victory over Pakistan in the opening Test match in Tarouba, Trinidad and Tobago.

After eking out a 29-run first-innings ⁠lead, the West ⁠⁠Indies made 181 in their second innings to set Pakistan a target of 211 on Tuesday, the fourth day of play.

Seales (5-20) and his pace ⁠colleagues returned to produce a superb fast-bowling display at the Brian Lara Stadium, routing Pakistan for 120 in a little over 40 overs, with one day of play remaining.

Pakistan captain Babar Azam made an unbeaten 58 and combined ‌with number 11 Mohammad Abbas (23) in a brief resistance, but the West ⁠⁠Indies’ victory appeared a formality after the tourists slumped to 71-9.

Pakistan number three Shan Masood, who fractured his finger during his first-innings knock of 109, batted at number eight in the second innings. He made three before ⁠Seales dismissed him.

Captain Roston ⁠Chase dedicated the victory to West Indies great Garry Sobers, who died earlier this month.

“We wanted to make him proud and had a chat about it ⁠before the match. I hope he is smiling down on us,” Chase said afterwards.

“I ⁠love the direction this team is ⁠heading. We’re not relying on one or two players; everyone is chipping in at crucial moments.”

Babar said Pakistan’s lack of partnerships proved costly.

“Today, as a batting ‌unit, we weren’t up to the mark. We kept losing wickets back-to-back, and the batting failed. That’s something we’re working ‌on,” ‌he said.

The second and final Test match in Port of Spain begins on Sunday.

The US and Saudi Arabia launched joint air strikes on Iraq, targeting ‘Iran-aligned’ groups after drone attacks targeted US forces in the region and Saudi oil facilities. Saudi Arabia says it acted in self-defence, while Iraq’s Popular Mobilisation Forces reported at least 20 killed.

Berlin, Germany – Music is a major part of Rayhan Butt’s life. The 18-year-old from the west German city of Bielefeld discovered his passion for the piano a few years ago, and now plays daily, sometimes for 12 hours a day. Picking up singing along the way, he performs regularly across the country.

Butt has now found a way to combine his love of music with his love for Germany. Next month, he will travel to Berlin for an internship with the German Armed Forces, and in autumn he will be joining full-time as part of the army’s marching band.

“Music, especially piano and singing, is not a hobby – it’s my whole life, and I want to build my future around it,” Butt tells Al Jazeera. “The Bundeswehr [German Armed Forces] has an excellent reputation, and there are a lot of opportunities to perform at a very high professional level, for example, in front of the German chancellor.

“I have decided to enrol because I can continue receiving musical training alongside learning valuable skills within the army such as teamwork and discipline.”

As he looks ahead to joining, Butt says that he supports voluntary military and civic duty and believes all young people should pursue one of these paths. “If tomorrow I’m called away from the marching band to fight, I would not hesitate in stepping up as a soldier. I’m a child of immigrants, and I’ve had a lot of opportunities growing up here, such as freedom and a great education. I would definitely defend this country with my life,” adds Butt, who Al Jazeera met through his participation with Generation Global, an initiative by the Liz Mohn Foundation that aims to prepare young people for future leadership roles.

That’s a sentiment the German government is desperately counting on, as it seeks to ramp up its military recruitment.

Germany’s expanded military ambitions

The Bundeswehr wants to increase its active-duty force by 80,000 men and women to 260,000, through a voluntary recruitment drive. In addition, it wants 200,000 men and women in the reserves.

The drive forms part of the Military Service Modernisation Act, which came into effect on January 1 and lays out a new set of requirements for young Germans. Since January, more than 300,000 letters have been sent to 18-year-olds to gauge their willingness to join the armed forces, as well as requesting information on their physical fitness and education. Women have also been sent the letter but, unlike young men, are not legally required to respond.

It’s one strand within Germany’s broader military expansion plans, initiated in 2022 after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In one of his first major speeches as chancellor last year, Friedrich Merz pledged to build the “strongest conventional army in Europe”.

Most recently, a new military concept outlining how Germany intends to fight and a capability profile were published three months ago.

Moritz Graefrath, an assistant professor of international security at the University of Oklahoma’s School of International Studies, said that more than this new document, the timing of its publication is what’s significant.

“One of the most plausible explanations is that it’s part of an effort to show, particularly to Washington as well as potentially other European allies within NATO, how serious the German government now is about ‘Europeanising’ European security and taking on more of the burden of continental defence,” he told Al Jazeera. “In many ways, this is a relatively costless signal of commitment to that idea of burden shifting within NATO, to that idea of taking on more responsibility.”

Opposed to conscription

Yet the latest measures on conscription are not being welcomed by all.

Official figures published on July 14 showed that so far this year,  6,000 young men have applied to remain out of the military service on “religious” and “moral” grounds, more than the number throughout the whole of last year.

A clause in the new law that required young men between the ages of 17 and 45 years old to seek prior approval for long stays abroad was repealed following a backlash by opposition voices, including student activists who have arranged three large-scale demonstrations attended by a reported 50,000 young people across 90 German cities since December.

Bela Breitner is a 22-year-old computer science student living in Bochum in western Germany. He is part of the Schulstreik Gegen Wehrpflicht (School Strike Against Conscription) campaign group, which formed late last year in response to what they see as the “militarisation” of German society.

“Our main focus point is conscription,” he tells Al Jazeera. “Many students are in opposition to these measures because within the last few years, we feel like we haven’t received anything positive from the state.

“Many young people lost opportunities during the COVID pandemic, the school system in Germany is criminally underfinanced, and now they want to implement conscription to force us to be trained in combat. Many of us feel like our voices are not being listened to.”

History of conscription in Germany

Conscription was first introduced in Germany in the mid-1950s, and suspended only in 2011. Graefrath says the suspension was driven by societal factors as well as government calculations around things such as budgets.

“On the one hand, there was a sense of post-Cold War peace where it seemed inconceivable for another war in Europe to take place, let alone one that would involve Germany, so the conscription framework was seen as a relic of the past,” he said. “On the other hand, it became apparent, especially to young Germans at the time, that if the model was abandoned, they could study, start apprenticeships and enter the workforce, rather than having at least one year of compulsory service. So there was that societal element there.”

While the Bundeswehr says it is optimistic about achieving its targets, only about 500 recruits have been enrolled so far this year. The figures prompted one senior politician earlier this month to say that Germany will have to decide by next July at the latest whether to reintroduce compulsory military service.

Analyst Graefrath said that Germany would need to decide the future of conscription based on its reading of wider geopolitical challenges. “This would be how unreliable the United States is right now and in the foreseeable future, and how big a threat Russia actually poses.”

Meanwhile, the clause for young men to seek permission before shifting abroad remains repealed but only as long as conscription remains voluntary.

Student activist Breitner says the issue doesn’t just affect students, but people from across society, and the campaign group will continue efforts to mobilise wider support.

“I don’t know any Russians, but I believe there are many people in Russia and around the world who have dreams and want to achieve something else with their life other than fighting a war,” he said. “I believe that there are more people who share values such as peace, freedom and the right to choose over what may separate us.”

China fields the largest and most sophisticated ballistic missile arsenal in Asia, supported by what the U.S. Department of Defense has described as “the world’s most active and diverse missile development program.” In the first of this series, TWZ provides an overview of the country’s intercontinental and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (ICBMs and SLBMs), representing the leading edge of Beijing’s nuclear deterrent forces.

China has rapidly expanded and modernized the arsenal of its People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force (PLARF), fielding a growing number of ballistic missiles capable of delivering either conventional or nuclear warheads. The backbone of the force now consists of road-mobile, solid-fuel medium-, intermediate-, and intercontinental-range missiles. However, legacy liquid-fueled systems such as the Dong Feng-5 (CSS-4) remain in service, and a new silo-building program will change the balance yet again.

The expansion shows no signs of slowing. According to one report, by the start of this decade, the number of Chinese ballistic missile brigades had grown by more than 35 percent in just three years, with most new formations operating medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs and IRBMs) alongside ground-launched cruise missiles (GLCMs).

Perhaps most dramatically, China has embarked on a rapid expansion of its ICBM silos. In 2021, open-source researchers observed the construction of several hundred new missile silos. These are located near Yumen (120 silos), Hami (110 silos), and Ordos (around 90), and they raise big questions about how many ICBMs China aims to deploy. The analysts responsible for locating the new solos described it as “the most significant expansion of the Chinese nuclear arsenal ever,” but its full significance remains to be seen.

Leaving some of the new silos empty might be an option, revisiting the ‘shell game’ that was planned for the U.S. Peacekeeper ICBM in the late 1970s. However, the U.S. State Department has said that the U.S. intelligence community believes every silo will have a missile ‘loaded.’ You can read our previous assessment of this development here.

At the same time, Beijing is improving the survivability and effectiveness of its strategic arsenal through the deployment of multiple independent re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) and penetration aids, while advancing new sea- and air-based nuclear delivery systems. These include the Type 096 ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) and its JL-3 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM), as well as the nuclear-capable H-20 stealth bomber currently under development, further strengthening China’s emergence as a fully fledged nuclear triad power.

As for the nuclear warheads that arm the ICBMs and SLBMs discussed below, the numbers available are a closely guarded secret. However, the Pentagon has estimated that China had surpassed 600 operational nuclear warheads in its stockpile as of mid-2024 and will have over 1,000 operational warheads by 2030, much of which will be deployed at higher readiness levels.

DF-5 (CSS-4)

Range: 12,000+ kilometers

With the DF-4, a ‘limited-range ICBM,’ having been retired from service around 2023, the DF-5, China’s first true ICBM, is now the oldest in the inventory.

On account of its size, the two-stage, liquid-fueled DF-5 was always intended for silo deployment.

Although tested as early as 1971, the missile wasn’t successfully flown over longer ranges until 1980. It appears that China had particular challenges getting the powerful new engines to work, and other new developments over the DF-4 included using nitrogen tetroxide as an oxidizer and steering via gimballed engines and vernier engines rather than jet vanes.

As tensions with the Soviet Union increased, China accelerated the program, placing the missiles in experimental silos by December 1980, a month after the handover of the first DF-5.

As early as 1983, work began on the improved DF-5A, known in the West as the CSS-4 Mod 2, four units of which were reportedly operational by 1992. Deployed DF-5 units were gradually replaced with the DF-5A. The DF-5 and DF-5A both featured a multi-megaton warhead.

In 2015, the further-improved DF-5B (CSS-4 Mod 2) variant was unveiled. In a first for China, this version is understood to differ from its predecessors in carrying multiple warheads, reportedly four re-entry vehicles per missile. The delay in fielding a missile with nuclear-armed multiple independent re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) may seem surprising, but reflects the major technological challenges, which saw China lag behind the Soviet Union (later Russia) and the United States for many years.

At the same time, it appears that, instead of attempting to boost penetrative power against enemy defenses by adopting MIRVs, China instead focused more on rapid launch sequences and hardened silos for its ICBMs.

It should be noted that the DF-5 also served as the basis for China’s important Long March 2 series of space launch vehicles and its successors.

The latest version of the missile is the DF-5C (CSS-4 Mod 4). This features an enlarged final stage section, which the Pentagon has suggested carries a multi-megaton-sized warhead. This would indicate a counter-value rather than a counter-force system, i.e., expected to target enemy population centers and economic assets, rather than its military capabilities like missile silos and command bases.

The DF-5 and its improved variants remain in service as China’s last liquid-fueled ballistic missiles. According to Western estimates, there are 20 known DF-5 silos, although China is building additional silos which may well also be used to house these weapons, as well as more modern missiles.

DF-31 and DF-31A (CSS-10 Mod 1 and CSS-10 Mod 2)

Range: DF-31 (CSS-10 Mod 1) 7,000+ km; DF-31A (CSS-10 Mod 2) 11,000+ km

With Sino-Soviet relations hitting a low in the early 1970s, China launched the development of a solid-fuel ICBM (and a submarine-launched counterpart) as part of a major overhaul of its strategic forces.

Initial work on what became the DF-31 began in 1974, but the program made little progress until 1978. Successful tests of a new solid-fuel motor in 1983 spurred these efforts and led Beijing to scrap work on a new liquid-fuel ICBM. In 1984, an official directive called for a shift from liquid to solid propellants, as well as a focus on tactical rather than strategic missile systems.

Solid-fueled missiles, when combined with mobile launchers, can leave cover and launch far more quickly, eliminating the lengthy fueling process required while the missile is erected. As a result, they are significantly less vulnerable to preemptive strikes. The shorter launch timeline also drastically improves the ability to respond to a crisis.

From 1985, China embarked on its ‘second-generation strategic missile’ program, spearheaded by the DF-31 and the submarine-launched JL-2.

In 1999, the three-stage DF-31 was publicly unveiled for the first time during a parade. However, the missile didn’t enter service until 2006, reportedly due to difficulties related to the guidance systems.

As a mobile solid-fuel ICBM, the closest match to the DF-31 is perhaps Russia’s Topol. The U.S. Minuteman III is similar in terms of size and configuration but is exclusively silo-based and has significantly better performance.

The DF-31 is an important part of Beijing’s strategic force. Most significantly, perhaps, it reflects a shift from a Chinese ICBM force dominated by heavy, liquid-fuel missiles to one fielding a larger number of smaller, mobile solid-fuel missiles.

As well as the original DF-31 (CSS-10 Mod 1), of which around eight launchers are understood to be deployed, China operates around 24 launchers armed with the DF-31A (CSS-10 Mod 2). The DF-31A reportedly first flew in 1999 and has a longer range thanks to a lighter guidance system and other improvements. Both types carry a single warhead.

There is also a silo-based version of the missile, which Beijing is now presumed to have installed in many of the silos in its missile fields. This is designated as the DF-31BJ, but few details about it are known.

DF-31AG (CSS-10 Mod 3)

Range: unknown

In 2017, China publicly displayed a new variant of the DF-31, the DF-31AG. Mounted on a new transporter-erector-launcher (TEL), the new missile system has a distinctly unique appearance and likely has certain different capabilities, perhaps including multiple warheads. Based on commercial satellite imagery, it appears that China is converting at least some of its existing DF-31A brigades to this new variant.

Compared to the tractor-trailer configuration of the MEL used on the DF-31/DF-31A, that for the DF-31AG is highly mobile and much more suitable for off-road operations, suggesting a different employment concept. Around 30 launchers are understood to be deployed.

DF-41 (CSS-20)

Range: 12,000+ km

While the DF-31 series marked a step change for China’s strategic forces, these ‘second-generation strategic missiles’ were just a part of the process of modernizing the deterrent.

By 1986, China was working on an even more ambitious three-stage solid-fuel missile, the DF-41. This was intended to fully replace the liquid-fuel DF-5 by no later than 2010, although this goal was not achieved.

Like the DF-31, the new ICBM would be mobile, and, in parallel with its development, China made efforts to make portions of its highway network more suitable for handling the heavy mobile launchers.

The DF-41 was revealed to the public during a parade in 2019. At the time, it was announced that two brigades were already equipped with this system.

In contrast to the DF-31, the DF-41 is thought to be equipped with multiple warheads, although sources disagree on how many. Published figures range from three to 10 MIRVs, although it’s probable that a range of different numbers and yields can be accommodated. One Pentagon assessment said that “the system is likely intended to carry no more than three warheads per missile and has improved range and accuracy over DF-31 class ICBMs.”

In addition to the road-mobile version, the U.S. Department of Defense has assessed that both silo-based and rail-based variants are under development. Potentially, the newly built silos could accommodate other ICBMs, like the DF-31 and DF-5, but the more modern DF-41 appears a more likely candidate.

Looking at the road-mobile type only, a total of 18 launchers for the DF-41 are understood to be deployed.

DF-61

Range: unknown

The latest Chinese ICBM to have been revealed is the DF-61, shown publicly for the first time during the parade celebrating the 80th anniversary of victory in World War II, in September 2025. There have been suggestions that the missile could be the launcher for one or more intercontinental-range nuclear-armed HGVs. (It is unclear what happened to the ‘missing’ DF-51 designation, which only ever appears to have been used speculatively).

U.S. intelligence considers that there is a Chinese counterpart to Russia’s Avangard, namely, an intercontinental-range hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV), which may be carried atop the DF-61. Designed to fly at high speeds and low altitudes, it would seriously complicate an adversary’s ability to provide precise warning. It is likely the same gliding re-entry vehicle that China tested in 2021 as a fractional orbital bombardment system (FOBS) capable of defeating U.S. missile defences.

Chinese officials have hinted at such a capability in the past. In 2024, then-Principal Assistant Deputy Secretary of Defense for Space Policy, Dr. Vipin Narang, described a ‘strategic hypersonic glide missile that can carry nuclear warheads’ in Beijing’s arsenal. Such a missile would provide a long-range, strategic complement to the theater-range, conventionally armed DF-17 hypersonic boost glide vehicle.

JL-2 (CSS-N-14)

Range: 7,000 km

Soon after embarking on its nuclear program, China began looking at launching a ballistic missile from a nuclear-powered submarine. The ambition was long delayed, since the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) did not commission its first nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBN) until 1984. The goal was further thwarted when it deprioritized its SSBN program, and only a single Type 092 class boat was ever fielded.

Ultimately, China did not possess a true sea-based deterrent until the mid-2010s. The PLAN deployed its first Type 094 Jin class SSBN in 2007 and commissioned its sixth example in 2021.

Each Jin class submarine carries 12 JL-2 (CSS-N-14) submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), which are derived from the DF-31 ICBM. The three-stage solid-fuel missile was reportedly tested for the first time in 2004. British and U.S. intelligence reports on the status of the JL-2 were generally circumspect, and they only started to list the missile as operational around 2015.

The limited range of the JL-2 means that the Type 094 submarines would need to operate in areas north and east of Hawaii if China wanted to strike targets on the U.S. east coast. This puts a serious dent in the credibility of China’s sea-based deterrent, and this is exacerbated by the fact that only a portion of what is already a small SSBN force will be on patrol at any given time.

Most Western sources consider that the JL-2 is armed with a single warhead, although there have been rumors of a multiple-warhead configuration with three to eight MIRVs.

JL-3

Range: 10,000 km (estimated)

China is developing a follow-on to the JL-2, the JL-3, which would allow it to target portions of the continental United States from its own territorial waters. This missile is expected to be deployed on the new Type 096 submarine, which China likely began constructing in the early 2020s. These new SSBNs are expected to enter service in the 2030s and will provide China with a much more credible sea-based deterrent. The Pentagon has also reported that some of the older Type 094 submarines may have been equipped to carry the JL-3 as well as the older JL-2.

The JL-3 is presumed to be a three-stage, solid-fuel weapon carrying multiple warheads.

“Over the next decade, the PRC [People’s Republic of China] probably will continue to modernize, diversify, and expand its nuclear forces rapidly,” the Pentagon had noted in the unclassified version of an annual report on Chinese military developments that it sent to Congress in December 2024.

“The PLARF is advancing its long-term modernization plans to enhance its ‘strategic deterrence’ capabilities,” the report added.

The development of new ICBMs and SLBMs is an important part of this, and one that will significantly improve its nuclear-capable missile forces. However, these weapons are just one part of the picture. China is busy working on fielding a larger and more diverse missile force, both nuclear and conventional. China’s bewildering array of intermediate-, medium-, and short-range ballistic missiles will be discussed in a forthcoming article.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Heathrow Airport will be allowed to charge airlines more for its services to recover money spent on the early stages of its third runway project.

The aviation regulator is permitting the airport to claw back up to £320m through higher airport charges to airlines for each passenger, which is likely to end up being added to ticket prices.

A bidder which unsuccessfully put forward a rival design involving a shorter runway, Arora Group’s Heathrow West, will also be allowed to recover £4.1m pounds in costs.

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and Heathrow said safeguards would be put in place to protect consumers from unjustified costs.

At this stage, the costs being recovered are only for the early planning and design of the runway during 2025 and 2026.

Tim Johnson, the CAA’s director of consumers and markets, told the BBC: “We’ve announced that the first tranche of costs, which is to help with the planning of this, can be recovered from passengers. That’s up to a maximum of £320m.”

Heathrow airport will also be able to collect Heathrow West’s costs up to November last year by adding to its airport charges.

The CAA said allowing these costs to be recouped will result in the maximum airport charge per passenger increasing by around 15 pence in 2028, rising to an estimated 30 pence in the following years.

In November, the government announced it preferred the £33bn scheme put forward by the airport over Arora’s alternative plan.

At the time, the Department for Transport said Heathrow’s own proposal offered the most deliverable option, and the “greatest likelihood” of getting a decision on planning approval within this parliament.

The CAA’s director of consumers and markets, Tim Johnson, said today’s decision “strikes a balance between supporting the delivery of benefits to consumers through timely progress on Heathrow expansion, whilst also protecting them from undue increases in costs”.

The regulator said “safeguards” designed to monitor cost efficiency would include transparency and cost reporting requirements, and assurance by independent experts.

Airlines often complain that Heathrow is the world’s most most expensive hub airport, and have repeatedly voiced concern that the airport’s expansion plans will make it pricier.

The government hopes for a planning decision by 2029.

Plans for a third runway stretch back decades, with the government backing the plans in 2003.

However, the idea has also long faced opposition from climate campaigners, many local residents, and several politicians.

They worry an additional runway will increase air pollution, noise pollution, and breach the government’s legally binding climate commitments.

The United States military says it intercepted ballistic missiles fired by Iran across the Middle East.

In a statement on X on Wednesday, US Central Command (CENTCOM) said Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launched multiple ballistic missiles in an “attempted surprise attack on US forces based in the Middle East”.

All the missiles were intercepted, and “US forces remain vigilant and at a high state of readiness”, the statement added.

Five missile interceptions were reported over Jordan, according to the Jordan News Agency.

The IRGC said its air force targeted a US airbase and Central Command centre in Jordan, “with several ballistic missiles”.

“As long as threats against the Islamic Republic of Iran continue and illegal and vicious actions by American forces against our interests continue, the resistance will continue,” the IRGC said in a statement carried by Iran’s IRIB broadcaster.

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar said the latest escalation seemed like a “pre-emptive attack, not a reactionary measure”, from the Iranians.

US President Donald Trump had called off a two-week US bombing campaign on Iran on July 24, claiming after that “good talks” were under way with Iran.

“After 13 consecutive days of constant bombing, in the tit-for-tat US-Iran bombings, these latest attacks will most definitely have an impact on the mediation efforts”, Al Jazeera’s Serdar said.

Trump has threatened to ⁠restart strikes if negotiations stagnate, while Iran has denied seeking to resume talks with Washington.

‘Sending a message’

The Iranian attacks targeting US bases came as Trump was meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been pushing for war on Iran, in the White House.

“This is Iran sending a message to Trump that they need to be involved in all discussions,” Al Jazeera’s Alan Fisher said from Washington, DC.

“It was reported in Israel that Netanyahu was very keen to raise the question of Pickaxe Mountain. The Israelis said there has been building work going ahead there; they believe the Iranians are putting together another nuclear facility”, he said.

Jason Campbell, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Al Jazeera that Tehran is “trying to retake the initiative and the momentum with these latest attacks”.

“Iran has expressed scepticism that the US engages in these pauses between attacks to prepare for another phase of violence, so Tehran likely thinks the US is doing just that with this latest pause”, he said.

US oil futures jumped more than 4 percent to more than $82 a barrel, while Brent crude futures went to more than $88 a barrel after the US military confirmed the Iranian attack.

Oil prices were dropping earlier on Tuesday as Washington’s suspension of strikes on Iran continued, with traders closely monitoring reports of renewed talks.

Hormuz tensions continue

The Strait of Hormuz and its shipping traffic have been major talking points for Trump, who has decried Iran’s blocking of some vessels.

Iran asserts that it is within its rights to control shipping through the strait.

On Wednesday, the IRGC said it “struck and stopped” three oil tankers in Hormuz, according to Tasnim news agency.

It said the tankers “continued to move along an unsafe and illegal route, ignoring our warnings”,

Oman has presented Iran with a proposal to jointly manage traffic in the strait, but Iran has rejected it.

Deputy Iranian Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi told state television that Tehran rejected splitting transit routes equally.

Instead, he said, Tehran proposed managing shipping on its side of the strait, while Muscat would manage part but not all of the opposite lane.

Taipei, Taiwan – China’s coastguard and civilian fleet are expanding their presence in the waters east of Taiwan, raising fears that Beijing may be rehearsing a containment strategy that would cut off the self-ruled island from outside trade and assistance.

Through June and July, China’s Maritime Safety Administration and coastguard staged multiple patrols and “special maritime law enforcement operations”, according to official government announcements.

While China regularly patrols the Taiwan Strait – the waterway with an average width of about 180km (112 miles) separating coastal China from the main island of Taiwan – this marks the first time the patrols have moved east of Taiwan in such quick succession, according to analysts.

K Tristan Tang, a nonresident fellow at the United States-based National Bureau of Asian Research, said the shift carries both strategic and symbolic weight for Taiwan.

“Beijing is signalling that it wants to extend its claimed administrative jurisdiction to Taiwan’s eastern waters, effectively surrounding Taiwan rather than only eroding Taiwan’s space in the strait,” Tang told Al Jazeera.

“Law enforcement operations” have included patrolling the area and requesting information from commercial vessels about their origin and destination, according to Taipei.

The shift east has also occurred amid a greater uptick in Chinese maritime activity around Taiwan and its outlying islands. Taiwan reported 55 sightings of Chinese coastguard and research vessel activity in June, up from 30 sightings in May.

These sightings included Chinese activity near the uninhabited Taiwan-controlled Dongsha Islands, also known as the Pratas Islands, in the South China Sea.

Beijing has said the operations are a response to talks between Japan and the Philippines to set their maritime boundaries, which infringe on “territorial sovereignty as well as its maritime rights and interests”, according to Chinese state media.

Some of the waters around southern Japan and the northern Philippines overlap with Taiwan’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which extends 200 nautical miles (370km) from its coastline.

On July 4, China’s coastguard announced that law enforcement activities to the east of Taiwan would continue to “firmly safeguard China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests”.

China claims Taiwan as a province – which means it also views Taiwan’s EEZ as under its jurisdiction. It also claims large swaths of the nearby South China Sea and East China Sea, some of which are disputed by Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei.

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has previously told reporters that its activities near Taiwan are “legitimate actions to exercise China’s jurisdiction, safeguard regional stability and uphold order at sea in accordance with the law”.

The Chinese embassy in Washington, DC did not immediately respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

‘Grey zone’ tactics

Ray Powell, founder and director of Sea Light, a maritime transparency project based at Stanford University, said he views the uptick in patrols as part of China’s “boa constrictor strategy that intends to squeeze Taiwan one coil at a time”.

China has pledged to annex Taiwan by peace or by force, and it employs a variety of pressure tactics, from cutting off access to international spaces such as the World Health Organization, drone and fighter jet incursions, to alleged cyberattacks, according to Taiwan’s National Security Bureau.

Known as “grey zone” tactics, these manoeuvres are designed to strain Taiwan’s limited resources and damage morale in order to convince its 23 million people that annexation is inevitable, according to Taiwanese officials.

Security analysts like Powell have warned that “law enforcement” activities could quickly escalate into a blockade or quarantine. Taiwan is particularly vulnerable to this type of pressure as an island that imports nearly all its energy supplies.

“One day we could look back at this and say this was in some ways the start of the quarantine,” he told Al Jazeera.

“Today it’s radio challenges; what is the next stage after that? When do we start to see them stop and inspect ships or reroute them? It’s not a very big step to start squeezing Taiwan on things it needs, like LNG,” Powell said.

China has already signalled that a blockade could be on the table in the future. Since 2022, Beijing has regularly staged large-scale military exercises in the Taiwan Strait, including a simulated blockade of the island during its last round of exercises in December.

While coastguard activity is more low-profile than a naval patrol, Chauluen Lin, an expert in asymmetric warfare at Taipei’s Institute for National Defense and Security Research, told Al Jazeera the fleet could be considered a “second navy”.

China’s coastguard is not a civilian police force, as it falls under the jurisdiction of the Central Military Commission as a division of the People’s Armed Police.

China’s coastguard patrols have been unusual enough to elicit a rare joint response from the United Kingdom, Germany and France, who said in late June that the “actions threaten regional stability and the freedom of navigation and safety of international shipping”.

“We reiterate our opposition to any unilateral change to the status quo, particularly by threat or use of force or coercion,” the statement said.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said last week that Washington disagrees with the expanded patrols and that they undermine regional stability.

A distracted US

William Yang, the Crisis Group’s senior analyst for Northeast Asia, told Al Jazeera that Beijing may be taking advantage of a US distracted by the war in Iran and a president who appears ambivalent towards Taiwan.

Although the US does not recognise Taiwan as a country, it has pledged to help the island defend itself. Much of this assistance has come in the form of weapons sales, training and intelligence sharing.

US President Donald Trump also cast doubt on these commitments when he said US weapons sales could be a “negotiating chip” with China following a meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in May.

“The external environment has fundamentally changed in the Indo-Pacific region, at least from their perspective, with Washington very focused and tangled up in the Middle East,” Yang said.

“At the same time, the US has no bandwidth to really look at or respond to such an expansion of Chinese maritime operations in these sensitive waters,” he added.

The death toll from Japan’s Kyushu island quake rises to 13. Japan’s Prime Minister says there are still people waiting to be rescued from the damage caused by the 7.1-magnitude quake.

The US military says it has successfully intercepted a barrage of missiles fired by Iran at its troops in Jordan. The sudden attack coincides with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the White House and comes after a five-day pause in the war. Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar reports from Tehran.

Caracas, July 28, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez hosted a US Congress delegation in Caracas on Friday. 

The team of US politicians was led by Florida Republican Representative Brian Mast, a military veteran who also served voluntarily in the Israeli armed forces. It also included Florida Republican representatives Randy Fine and Kat Cammack alongside Illinois Democratic representative Jonathan Jackson. 

According to Venezuelan state media, the high-level meeting saw the two sides “assess progress in bilateral relations and the joint agenda in strategic areas.”

“Both sides reviewed bilateral cooperation schemes geared toward fighting transnational organized crime and border security,” the official report said.

For his part, Fine wrote on social media that he was “honored” to take part in the first congressional delegation to Venezuela in a decade. He added that the US’ January 3 kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro “set Venezuela on a trajectory to be a key ally” of the US. 

Fine, like Mast, is a major advocate of Israeli interests in the US legislature and has the backing of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). He has publicly called for starving and dropping nuclear bombs on the Gaza Strip. 

Also participating in the summit were US Chargé d’Affaires in Venezuela John Barrett, Venezuelan Foreign Minister Félix Plasencia, and Vice Minister for Europe and North America Oliver Blanco.

Blanco, who comes from the ranks of the opposition Democratic Action (AD) party, has been the main government liaison with US officials in the country. He was recently appointed First Vice Minister of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in order to “strengthen Venezuela’s foreign policy and peace diplomacy around the world.”

In addition, the US Congress members held talks with National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez, who described the meeting as “fruitful” and said discussions focused on “the legislative agenda and international investment.” Rodríguez added that Venezuela took the opportunity to “thank the United States for its support” following the June 24 twin earthquakes.

The US lawmakers held subsequent meetings with officials from Venezuela’s Ministry of Defense and the National Anti-Drug Superintendency (Sunad), according to reports.

Following the January 3 US military strikes and Maduro kidnapping, the Rodríguez-led acting government fast-tracked a diplomatic rapprochement with Washington following seven years of severed ties. Both administrations have opened their respective embassies.

Venezuela’s acting president has hosted a number of US officials in Caracas in recent months, including Energy Secretary Chris Wright, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe.

Last March, Rodríguez had already received a delegation from the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee as part of the ongoing “peace dialogue” between Washington and Caracas.

At that time, the presidential press office said the Senate delegation had traveled to Caracas for a “technical and political” visit intended to continue the bilateral “roadmap” focused on “direct communication to manage historical differences and strengthen energy cooperation in light of global challenges.”

Venezuela and Peru Move Toward Restoring Relations

Caracas’ foreign policy shift has likewise seen authorities mend ties with regional US allies that had sought to isolate the Caribbean nation.

On Friday, the governments of Venezuela and Peru announced the start of a gradual process to fully restore diplomatic relations, which were severed in 2024 after the Peruvian government refused to recognize Venezuela’s official electoral results that saw Maduro secure a third term in office.

“In a first stage, both countries have agreed to reactivate consular relations as an initial step toward the full restoration of bilateral ties,” the foreign ministries of Venezuela and Peru said in a joint statement.

The immediate objective is to guarantee protection and consular services for Venezuelan and Peruvian citizens residing in each country. The diplomatic rapprochement comes days before a change of government in Peru, where conservative leader Keiko Fujimori is set to replace interim President José María Balcázar after a narrow and disputed electoral triumph.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

The Trump administration on Tuesday announced a ban on new foreign-made humanoid robot imports to the US over “unacceptable risks” to the country’s national security.

The move applies to advanced robots – including humanoid and four-legged machines. Many of them are made in China, which is competing with the US to develop robotics and artificial intelligence (AI).

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) also banned imports of power inverters – a device used in data centres and solar panels – which it said could also pose a risk to the US economy.

The Chinese embassy in Washington said China has long opposed the US’ “politicising” of trade issues and sanctions based on “groundless pretexts”.

FCC chairman Brendan Carr said the agency was doing its part “to secure America’s critical supply chains”.

The FCC has added the items to its Covered List – a register of goods and services that are deemed a risk to US national security.

The ban applies to new foreign-produced advanced robotic devices and power inverters and does not prevent the sale or import of any existing models that had been previously authorised by the FCC.

The FCC cited concerns that the use of foreign-made inverters could allow overseas firms to turn them off, steal data, facilitate remote access and surveillance by “foreign government actors, or be otherwise exploited through a cyberattack.”

It added that the use of robots made outside the US could allow “malign actors to surveil Americans, enhance the capabilities of foreign intelligence services, or to remotely commandeer the robots.”

The Chinese embassy in Washington also said Beijing will “take all necessary measures” in response to any moves that harm its interests, urging all countries to work together to develop AI “for the positive and for good”.

It called on the US to “abandon its hegemonic mindset, and stop smearing Chinese companies and threatening them with sanctions.”

The BBC has contacted major Chinese robot manufacturers Unitree, UBTech and AgiBot for comment.

After more than 42 years of service as one of America’s most potent power-projection platforms, the nuclear-powered submarine USS Georgia has returned home from operations for the final time ahead of its retirement. The boat is one of four Ohio class nuclear-powered guided missile submarines, or SSGNs. The SSGNs are some of the most capable and in-demand submarines in the U.S. Navy’s inventory today, but all are set to leave service before the end of the decade.

The USS Georgia returned to its homeport of Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia, on Monday. The boat is scheduled to be officially inactivated on July 31, the first step on a long road through retirement that is set to end with it being recycled.

Georgia was first commissioned as an Ohio class nuclear ballistic missile submarine, or SSBN, in 1984. It was the last of the four Ohio class boats to be converted into a conventionally armed SSGN, returning to the fleet in its new form in 2008. However, it was used as the main testbed for proving out the concept initially, as you can read about in much more detail in this past TWZ feature.

The Ohio class SSGNs are most widely known for their ability to carry up to 154 Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles. However, they typically only carry around 100 of these weapons – a still impressive amount – and are actually highly capable multi-mission platforms. These boats can be fitted with up to two dry deck shelters, for deploying special operators underwater, including in mini-submarines, as well as uncrewed platforms. They are also equipped to act as discreet underwater intelligence fusion nodes and command centers.

This unique mix of capabilities has led the four converted Ohios to become among the most heavily tasked submarines in the Navy. The public presence of one of these SSGNs, as well as their SSBN cousins, in any region of the world sends powerful signals to opponents, as well as allies and partners. Over the years, they have made somewhat regular appearances during spikes in geopolitical friction globally.

USS Georgia, specifically, has been used for this purpose on several occasions in the past, especially in the Middle East. In late 2020 and early 2021, Georgia made rare publicized trips on the surface through the Strait of Hormuz during periods of particular tension with Iran. In May 2021, Iranian boats harassed the submarine and its escorts during one of these transits, prompting a U.S. Coast Guard patrol boat to fire warning shots.

Iranian fast boats around USS Georgia in the Strait of Hormuz

The USS Georgia is also very likely to have been the submarine that fired more than two dozen Tomahawks at the Iranian nuclear facility at Isfahan as part of Operation Midnight Hammer in 2025. Whether or not it took part in subsequent strikes on Iran as part of Operation Epic Fury this year is unclear.

Despite what the Ohio class SSGNs continue to bring to the table, the Navy currently plans to inactivate all of them over the next three years. The plan had previously been to have all of these boats out of active service by 2028. This timeline has now been just slightly extended, with the USS Ohio, USS Florida, and USS Michigan set to follow Georgia into retirement in Fiscal Years 2027, 2028, and 2029, respectively. USS Ohio is also notably the lead boat in the class and, by extension, the oldest, having entered service in 1981.

As it stands now, there is no direct replacement for the Ohio SSGNs in the Navy’s shipbuilding pipeline. The service does have a number of Virginia class attack submarines capable of supporting special operations missions in service now and is planning to acquire enlarged Block V subvariants. Each Block V will feature what is known as the Virginia Payload Module (VPM), which gives the boat four additional larger vertical launch tubes, and will really make it more of an SSGN. Between the VPM and the existing launch tubes carried over from the Block IV design, these submarines will be able to carry up to 40 Tomahawk missiles at a time. The VPM tubes will also be able to accommodate the forthcoming Intermediate-Range Conventional Prompt Strike (IRCPS) hypersonic missile. However, no version of the Virginia class is expected to provide the same level of capability, at least in some regards, as is found on the Ohio SSGNs, based on what is publicly known. The first Block V Virginia class submarine with the VPM is not expected to enter service until 2028.

The Navy is also in the process of replacing its Ohio SSBNs with new Columbia class types. There has been talk in the past of acquiring new “Large Payload Submarines,” possibly based on the Columbia design, as a more direct replacement for the Ohio SSGNs. However, the Columbia class program has suffered delays and cost growth, and the priority remains on getting the new SSBNs into service. It is critical for those boats to be delivered on a tight schedule to ensure there is no gap in the ability of the maritime leg of America’s nuclear triad to meet operational requirements.

In the meantime, the USS Georgia is already heading toward retirement and, unless the Navy changes course, the last of these highly capable submarines will be out of active service by 2029.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

Graffiti has marked the walls of Rome for millennia. Now, as one content creator builds a following cleaning spray-painted walls, his videos are fuelling a wider debate over heritage, street art and where the line between the two should be drawn.

The Houthis recently declared a naval blockade on Saudi Arabia in the Red Sea, targeting several tankers.

Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthi group says it has fired ballistic missiles at a Saudi oil tanker, more than a week after imposing a naval blockade on Saudi vessels in the Red Sea.

In a post on X, Yahya Saree, the Houthi military spokesman, said the group had “carried out a military operation targeting the Saudi oil tanker (NCC GHAZAL) for violating the maritime navigation ban” that the group had imposed on Saudi vessels.

He added that the group had used several ballistic missiles and forced the vessel to retreat.

The UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), a maritime security monitor, said a tanker reported an explosion while transiting the Red Sea, adding that the crew is safe and no environmental damage was reported.

The Houthis seized the capital Sanaa in 2014 and have fought the internationally recognised Yemeni government, which Saudi Arabia backs, for more than a decade.

On July 20, the Houthis announced their maritime blockade, accusing Saudi leaders of imposing “an unjust and oppressive siege” on Yemen for nearly 12 years, “plundering our resources and imposing a comprehensive blockade”.

It went on to affirm “the right of our great people to respond to the blockade with a blockade”.

Second attack

The Houthis have also claimed an attack on two Saudi oil tankers transiting the Red Sea last week.

“We targeted two Saudi oil tankers, named Encelia and Layla, for their violation of the blockade decision issued by the armed forces,” Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree said on July 22.

The Saudi Press Agency reported that the Encelia had been hit, citing an official source at Saudi Arabia’s Transport General Authority who said all crew members were safe.

The Bab al-Mandeb chokepoint connecting the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden is one of the world’s most important shipping routes, including for oil exports.

Between Yemen to the northeast and Djibouti and Eritrea in the Horn of Africa to the southwest, the strait is just 29km (18 miles) at its narrowest point, limiting traffic to two channels for inbound and outbound vessels heading to the Suez Canal.

In 2024, about 4.1 billion barrels of crude oil and refined petroleum products passed through the strait – about 5 percent of the global total.

Oman’s proposal is based on the Strait of Malacca in East Asia, a model whereby ships that use the strait provide voluntary fees.

Iran and Oman have exchanged proposals regarding the future management of the Strait of Hormuz, as points of contention continue to exist between the two nations whose territorial waters border the strategic waterway.

Oman presented a proposal to Iran ⁠for ⁠a joint regional mechanism to manage the Strait of Hormuz with “voluntary fees”, Reuters reported on Tuesday. Under the Omani proposal, which reportedly has regional backing, Iran would not exercise sole control ⁠of the strait, an unnamed Gulf source and Western diplomat ⁠told the news agency.

Oman’s proposal is reportedly based on the Strait of Malacca, which connects the Indian and Pacific Oceans. There, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore ask ships that use the strait to voluntarily contribute to fund navigation, environmental protection, and ‌search-and-rescue operations.

This proposal aims to contribute to ending the global disruption to trade caused by the strait’s closure in the US-Israeli war on Iran. Tehran, however, says the strait ⁠cannot go back to its pre-war status where shipping flowed freely,

In comments to Iranian state media on Tuesday, Kazem Gharibabadi, the country’s deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, said Tehran rejects an Omani proposal for an equal division of transit routes between the two countries, as such a plan does not address Tehran’s security concerns.

Gharibabadi said that Tehran proposed to Oman that Iran would manage shipping through its side of ‌the strait and Muscat would manage part but not all of the opposite lane.

He added that Tehran has “no plans to negotiate with the US”, but affirmed talks are proceeding “step by step” with Oman, warning that Tehran will consider “any action” to maintain control over the strait, including the resumption of war.

“The Omanis are now suggesting three lines for the maritime traffic: one that runs through Iran’s territorial waters, an international one, and one through Omani territorial waters,” said Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar, reporting from Tehran. “Despite public statements, our sources tell us Iran is demonstrating some flexibility.”

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, also reporting from Tehran, said there remain many “points of contention” between Oman and Iran on Hormuz. These include the trajectory of the ships, the fees, the question of who will define the arrangements, and mine clearances – which will reportedly be Iran’s responsibility.

Paul Musgrave, a professor at Georgetown University in Qatar, said Oman’s proposal to Iran to get the Strait of Hormuz running again is positive, but it remains to be seen if hardliners in Iran will go for it.

Musgrave noted that under the Strait of Malacca model, voluntary contributions raise about $70m annually, far from the $1m per ship that’s reportedly been proposed by Tehran as a “service fee” in the Strait of Hormuz.

Meanwhile, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) foreign ministers met via video call on Tuesday to discuss the latest developments in the conflict, including ways to improve cooperation on issues surrounding freedom and navigation through the waterway, a statement from the Qatari Foreign Ministry said.

The United States suspended a nearly two-week-long campaign of air strikes against Iran over the weekend after pressure from regional mediators to find a diplomatic solution and to return to the memorandum of understanding signed in June, which would allow shipping to resume in the Strait of Hormuz. The strait carried one-fifth of global energy supplies before ⁠the February 28 start of the US-Israel war on Iran.