news

United States President Donald Trump has said a nuclear agreement currently being negotiated with Iran will be “far better” than the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which he withdrew from in 2018 during his first term in office.

The original 2015 accord took roughly two years of negotiations to reach and involved hundreds of specialists across technical and legal fields, including multiple US experts. Under it, Iran agreed to restrict the enrichment of uranium and to subject itself to inspections in exchange for the relaxation of sanctions.

But Trump took the US out of that pact, calling it the “worst deal ever”. Before the initial US-Israeli strikes on Iran at the end of February, the US had made new demands – including additional restrictions on Tehran’s nuclear programme, the restriction of its ballistic missiles programme and an end to its support for regional armed groups, primarily in Lebanon, Yemen and Iraq.

Trump’s latest remarks come amid growing uncertainty about whether a second round of talks will proceed in the Pakistani capital Islamabad, as a two-week ceasefire between the US-Israel and Iran approaches the end in just a day.

So, what was the JCPOA, and how did it compare to Trump’s new demands?

What was the JCPOA?

On July 14, 2015, Iran reached an agreement with the European Union and six major powers – China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the US, and Germany – under which these states would roll back international economic sanctions and allow Iran greater participation in the global economy.

In return, Tehran committed to limiting activities that could be used to produce a nuclear weapon.

These included reducing its stockpile of enriched uranium by about 98 percent, to less than 300kg (660lb), and capping uranium enrichment at 3.67 percent – far below weapons-grade of 90 percent, but high enough for civilian purposes such as power generation.

Before the JCPOA, Iran operated roughly 20,000 uranium-enriching centrifuges. Under the deal, that number was cut to a maximum of 6,104, and only older-generation machines confined to two facilities, which were subject to international monitoring.

Centrifuges are machines which spin to increase the concentration of the uranium-235 isotope – enrichment – in uranium, a key step towards potential bomb-making.

The deal also redesigned Iran’s Arak heavy water reactor to prevent plutonium production and introduced one of the most intrusive inspection regimes ever implemented by the global nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

In exchange, Iran received relief from international sanctions which had severely damaged its economy. Billions of dollars in frozen assets were released, and restrictions on oil exports and banking were eased.

The deal came to halt when Trump formally withdrew Washington from the nuclear deal in 2018, a move widely criticised domestically and by foreign allies, and despite the IAEA saying Iran had complied with the agreement up to that point.

“The Iranian regime supports terrorism and exports violence, bloodshed and chaos across the Middle East. That is why we must put an end to Iran’s continued aggression and nuclear ambitions. They have not lived up to the spirit of their agreement,” he said in October 2017.

He reimposed crippling economic sanctions on Tehran as part of his “maximum pressure” tactic. These targeted Iran’s oil exports, as well as its shipping sector, banking system and other key industries.

The goal was to force Iran back to the negotiating table to agree to a new deal, which also included a discussion about Tehran’s missile capabilities, further curbs on enrichment and more scrutiny of its nuclear programme.

What has happened to Iran’s nuclear programme since the JCPOA?

During the JCPOA period, Iran’s nuclear programme was tightly constrained and heavily monitored. The IAEA repeatedly verified that Iran was complying with the deal’s terms, including one year after Trump announced the US’s withdrawal from the agreement.

Starting in mid-2019, however, Iran began incrementally breaching the deal’s limits, exceeding caps on uranium stockpiles and enrichment levels.

In November 2024, Iran said it would activate “new and advanced” centrifuges. The IAEA confirmed that Tehran had informed the nuclear watchdog that it planned to install more than 6,000 new centrifuges to enrich uranium.

In December 2024, the IAEA said Iran was rapidly enriching uranium to 60 percent purity, moving closer to the 90 percent threshold needed for weapons-grade material. Most recently, in 2025, the IAEA estimated that Iran had 440kg (970lb) of 60-percent enriched uranium.

What are Trump’s latest demands for Iran’s nuclear programme?

The US and its ally, Israel, are pushing Iran to agree to zero uranium enrichment and have accused Iran of working towards building a nuclear weapon, while providing no evidence for their claims.

They also want Iran’s estimated 440kg stock of 60pc enriched uranium to be removed from Iran. While that is below weapons-grade, it is the point at which it becomes much faster to achieve the 90 percent enrichment needed for atomic weapons production.

Iran has insisted its enrichment effort is for civilian purposes only. It is a signatory to the 1970 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

In March 2025, Tulsi Gabbard, the US director of national intelligence, testified to Congress that the US “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon”.

On Sunday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, in a strongly worded statement, said Trump had no right to ⁠⁠”deprive” Iran of its nuclear ⁠⁠rights.

What else is Trump asking for?

Restrictions on ballistic missiles

Before the US-Israel war on Iran began, Tehran had always insisted negotiations should be exclusively focused on Iran’s nuclear programme.

US and Israeli demands, however, extended beyond that. Just before the war began, Washington and Israel demanded severe restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile programme.

Analysts say this demand was at least partly triggered by the fact that several Iranian missiles had breached Israel’s much-vaunted “Iron Dome” defence system during the 12-day war between the two countries in June last year. While Israel suffered only a handful of casualties, it is understood to have been alarmed.

For his part, Trump has repeatedly warned, without evidence, about the dangers of Iran’s long-range missiles, claiming Iran is producing them “in very high numbers” and they could “overwhelm the Iron Dome”.

Iran has said its right to maintain missile capabilities is non-negotiable. The JCPOA did not put any limits on the development of ballistic missiles.

However, a United Nations resolution made when adopting the nuclear agreement in July 2015 did stipulate that Iran could not “undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons”.

Ending support for proxy groups

The US and Israel have also demanded that Iran stop supporting its non-state allies across the Middle East, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and a number of groups in Iraq. Together, these groups are referred to as Iran’s “axis of resistance”.

In May last year, Trump said Tehran “must stop sponsoring terror, halt its bloody proxy wars, and permanently and verifiably cease pursuit of nuclear weapons”, during a GCC meeting in Riyadh.

Three days before the war on Iran began in February, during his State of the Union address to Congress, Trump accused Iran and “its murderous proxies” of spreading “nothing but terrorism and death and hate”.

Iran has refused to enter a dialogue about limiting its support for these armed groups.

Can Trump really get a new deal that is ‘much better’ than the JCPOA?

According to Andreas Kreig, associate professor of Security Studies at King’s College, London, Trump is more likely to secure a new deal that closely resembles the JCPOA, with “some form of restrictions on enrichment, possibly with a sunset clause, and international supervision”.

“Iran might get access to frozen assets and lifted sanctions much quicker than under the JCPOA, as it will not agree to a long drawn-out, gradual lifting of sanctions,” Krieg pointed out.

However, he warned that the political landscape in Tehran has hardened. “Iran now is a far more hardline and less pragmatic player that will play hardball at every junction. Trump cannot count on any goodwill in Tehran,” he said.

“The IRGC is now firmly in charge… with likely new powerful and tested levers such as the Strait of Hormuz,” he said, referring to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which operates as a parallel elite military force to the army and has a great deal of political and economic power in Iran. It is a constitutionally recognised part of the Iranian military and answers directly to the supreme leader.

Overall, Krieg stressed, the US-Israel war on Iran “leaves the world worse off than had Trump stuck to the JCPOA”, even if a new compromise is eventually reached.

Moreover, since the revocation of the JCPOA, the US and Israel have waged two wars on Iran, including the current one. The 12-day war in June last year included attacks on Iran’s nuclear sites and killed more than 1,000 people.

Attacks on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure have continued since the latest war began on February 28, including on the Natanz enrichment facility, Isfahan nuclear complex, Arak heavy water reactor, and the Bushehr nuclear power plant.

Nevertheless, King’s College’s Krieg said there is still room for a negotiated outcome if Tehran and Washington scale back their demands.

“Both sides can compromise on enrichment thresholds, and on temporary moratoriums on enrichments. But Iran will not surrender its sovereignty to enrich altogether, and the Trump administration will have to meet them halfway,” he said.

“While the Iranians will commit on paper not to develop a nuclear weapon, they will want to keep R&D [research and development] in this space alive.”

Economic incentives will be central, he added. “Equally, Iran would want to get immediate access to capital and liquidity. Here, the Trump administration is already willing to compromise.”

The Jamieson Greer has told Mexican industry leaders that tariffs imposed by Donald Trump will remain in place, even as negotiations to revise the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement intensify ahead of a July review deadline.

The remarks, delivered during meetings in Mexico City, signal a major shift from decades of tariff free trade under USMCA and its predecessor NAFTA.

End of Zero Tariff Era

According to multiple sources, Greer made it clear that the United States does not intend to return to a zero tariff framework.

This marks a fundamental change in North American trade policy, where free trade in autos and parts had been the norm for over 30 years. The introduction of tariffs, including a 25 percent duty on automotive imports, has disrupted deeply integrated supply chains across the region.

Impact on Key Industries

The implications for Mexico are significant:

• More than half of Mexico’s auto and steel exports go to the United States
• Vehicle exports have already declined, with job losses in the auto sector
• Steel and aluminum industries face steep duties, some as high as 50 percent

These pressures have weakened Mexico’s competitive position, especially as the United States has negotiated lower tariffs with other partners.

Shifting Trade Rules

U.S. negotiators are also pushing for stricter rules of origin.

Proposals include requiring 100 percent North American sourcing for key components such as engines and electronics, up from current thresholds of around 75 percent. This would force manufacturers to further regionalize supply chains, potentially increasing costs but aligning with Washington’s goal of boosting domestic production.

Mexico’s Position

The Mexican government, led by Claudia Sheinbaum, is seeking relief from tariffs as part of the USMCA review. Officials aim to secure at least partial reductions, particularly in the auto and steel sectors, before finalizing broader trade revisions.

However, the latest signals from Washington suggest that while some easing may be possible, a full rollback is unlikely.

Why It Matters

This development underscores a broader shift in global trade policy away from pure free trade toward managed trade and economic security.

For Mexico, the stakes are high due to its deep economic integration with the United States. Persistent tariffs could reshape manufacturing patterns, investment decisions, and employment across North America.

What’s Next

Formal negotiations are set to begin in late May, with both sides aiming to resolve key disputes before the July deadline.

Key areas of focus will include:

• Tariff levels on autos and metals
• Rules of origin requirements
• Broader economic security cooperation

The outcome will determine the future structure of North American trade.

Analysis

The U.S. position reflects a strategic recalibration rather than a temporary policy shift. By normalizing tariffs, Washington is prioritizing domestic industry and supply chain control over traditional free trade principles.

For Mexico, this creates a structural challenge. Its export driven model, built on open access to the U.S. market, now faces persistent barriers. While some adjustments may preserve competitiveness, the era of frictionless trade appears to be over.

Ultimately, the negotiations will test whether North America can adapt to a new trade paradigm or whether tensions will deepen within one of the world’s most integrated economic regions.

With information from Reuters.

In a letter to EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, the three governments say Israel is violating ‘human rights’.

Spain, Slovenia and Ireland have urged the European Union to debate suspending its association agreement with Israel, saying the bloc can no longer remain “on the sidelines” as conditions worsen in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and Lebanon.

Speaking before a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg on Tuesday, Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares said the three countries had formally requested that the issue be placed on the agenda.

“Spain, along with Slovenia and Ireland, has requested that the suspension of the Association Agreement between the European Union and Israel be discussed and debated today,” Albares said.

“I expect every European country to uphold what the International Court of Justice and the UN say on human rights and the defence of international law. Anything different would be a defeat for the European Union,” he added.

In a joint letter sent last week to EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, the three governments said Israel had taken a series of measures that “contravene human rights and violate international law and international humanitarian law”, adding that it breached the 1995 agreement that outlines political, economic and trade relations between the EU and Israel.

They said repeated appeals to Israel to reverse course had been ignored. The ministers pointed to a proposed Israeli law that would impose the death penalty by hanging on Palestinians convicted in military courts, describing it as “a grave violation of fundamental human rights” and a further step in the “systematic persecution, oppression, violence and discrimination” faced by Palestinians.

They also cited the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, saying conditions there were “unbearable”, with continuing violations of the ceasefire agreement and insufficient aid entering the territory.

The letter warned that violence in the occupied West Bank was also intensifying, with settlers acting “with absolute impunity” alongside ongoing Israeli military operations, causing civilian deaths.

“The European Union can no longer remain on the sidelines,” the ministers wrote, calling for “bold and immediate action” and saying all options should remain on the table.

The three countries argued Israel was in breach of Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which ties relations to respect for human rights. An earlier EU review had already found Israel was failing to meet those obligations, they said, adding that the situation had deteriorated further since then.

During a donor conference in Brussels, Kallas said the estimated cost of rebuilding Gaza had risen to $71bn.

Ireland and Spain first pushed for a review of the agreement in 2024, but the effort failed to win enough backing from member states supportive of Israel. A later Dutch-led initiative succeeded in triggering an EU assessment, which concluded Israel had “likely” breached its obligations under the pact.

Possible trade measures, including suspending parts of the relationship, were later discussed but not implemented after Israel pledged to significantly increase humanitarian aid entering Gaza.

Occupied Territories Bill

Ireland is also seeking to revive its Occupied Territories Bill, first introduced in 2018, which would ban trade in goods and services from illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, including the West Bank. Progress has stalled despite unanimous backing in the lower house of parliament, the Dail.

Meanwhile, Spain and Slovenia have moved to curb trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank following sustained public protests and growing political pressure. In August last year, Slovenia banned imports of goods produced in Israeli-occupied territories, becoming one of the first European states to take such a step.

Spain followed later that year with a decree banning imports from illegal Israeli settlements, with the measure coming into force at the start of 2026.

All three countries formally recognised the State of Palestine in May 2024, in what was widely seen as a coordinated diplomatic move aimed at increasing pressure for a two-state solution.

Sina* is a 28-year-old video editing assistant who fought hard to build a life in Tehran. After completing mandatory military service, he refused to return to his hometown of Neyshabur in eastern Iran, knowing opportunities for a young man with a background in film editing and independent student theatre were bleak there. Through a college friend, he found his footing at a video content creation studio in the capital, climbing from camera assistant to assistant video editor within six months, before losing his job as a result of the US-Israel war on Iran. As told to Arya Farahand. 

It has been a few days since the guns fell silent, and the sliver of hope I felt when the ceasefire was announced is already fading. Out of all the resumes I sent in desperation, only one company called me for an interview. The salary they offered would not cover the bare minimum to survive. My family keeps calling from Neyshabur, repeating the same line: “Come back, there’s work for you here.” What they intend as a lifeline feels like salt in the wound.

I had stopped taking money from my father, my salary grew, and I was buying gifts for my two sisters. I was, for the first time in my life, truly independent. Now, I am sitting in my grandmother’s empty apartment in Tehran, staring at a phone with almost no internet, waiting for a job offer that’s not coming.

This is what the war has done to me. Not a scratch on my body, but everything else – gone.

Croissants on the roof

The morning the war started, we were in a briefing meeting, drinking tea. A colleague had brought fresh croissants. Then we heard the roar of a fighter jet, a whistle, and seconds later, an explosion.

Our initial instinct wasn’t terror, but naive curiosity. Against every survival guide we had read from the previous war, we piled into the elevator and went up to the roof, mugs still in hand. Pillars of smoke were rising across the city. Then, another explosion hit, deafeningly close. We sprinted for the stairs.

Our manager sent us home. The city had seized up. My driver called to say he couldn’t get through the gridlock, so we started walking – 40 minutes under the glaring sun, past stranded people and stalled cars. At one point, a middle-aged driver lost his nerve, swerving into the bus lane against traffic. A bus appeared head-on and deadlocked the lane. Trapped, he looked ready to explode. I didn’t stick around. I just kept walking.

I went to my grandmother’s house. Hard of hearing, she hadn’t heard a single blast and was simply overjoyed to see me. I drank tea, sat in front of the television, tried to process what was happening, then ate lunch and slept.

The city hollowing out

When I woke up, I reached for my phone, only to be reminded that the internet was dead. I am someone who fills every spare moment with online gaming or Instagram. Without either, the boredom was stifling. I couldn’t smoke in front of my grandmother, and the forced abstinence only added to my agitation.

In the days that followed, the city hollowed out. Whenever I stepped into the alley – using a quick errand as a pretext to sneak a cigarette – I saw fewer and fewer people. In our building, only five of the 12 units remained occupied. I could tell by the empty spaces in the parking garage.

When my cigarette supply ran out, the corner shop didn’t have my brand and the supermarket was charging double. With no certainty that my March salary would be paid, I settled for a cheaper, unknown brand. It was like inhaling truck exhaust.

The days blurred: the unemployment anxiety, the stifling boredom, the desperate secret cigarettes. I tried buying VPNs twice. The first worked for a single day. The second – the seller blocked me the moment I transferred the money.

The closest I have come to death

The true nightmare came on the night of March 5. A mild explosion jolted me awake around 4m. I walked to the kitchen for water. Then a blast ripped through the air – a sound seared into my brain for life. I froze. My grandmother stumbled out of her bedroom in terror. I pulled her into the kitchen.

Then came the barrage. More than 10 consecutive explosions, each less than 10 seconds apart. My grandmother sat on the floor beside me, arms wrapped tightly around my leg, head buried. It was the closest I have ever felt to death.

When it finally stopped, the windows held. My grandmother, shaken, recalled how during the Iran-Iraq war, sirens had warned them in time to reach shelters. What she found most painful about this war was the absolute lack of warning – no sirens, no shelters. Just sitting, waiting for the next blast. With tired legs, she climbed back into bed. I did not sleep until morning.

Ten voices in my head

Through all of it, I kept telling myself, “Hold on”. Our manager had hoped this war, like the previous conflict, would end in under two weeks. Whenever my parents called, begging me to return to Neyshabur, I said no.

On March 17, we had our final online meeting. The studio’s debts were mounting, invoices unpaid, and our manager saw no end in sight – for the war or the internet blackout. For the new Iranian year, starting on March 21, only 200 resources staff would remain. The rest of us were laid off, without pay.

As the call ended, it felt like 10 different voices were screaming in my head. I couldn’t rely on my grandmother’s meagre pension. My father was already supporting a family of four. The calculation was merciless: move back to Neyshabur and work at my uncle’s supermarket. Instead of planning how to improve my life, I was plotting survival.

I packed up and left. It was a gruelling 10-hour bus ride through eerily quiet roads. What haunted me most were the final moments in Tehran. The city felt hollow, silent, swallowed by a darkness I had never seen before.

The void

From Neyshabur, I called my manager, hoping against hope. He laid out the brutal math. During the previous war and the December protests, waiting out the shutdowns had been viable. But a relentless year of economic bleeding, capped by this blackout, had driven revenue to zero. Even if the internet were restored tomorrow and we worked nonstop for months, it wouldn’t be enough. The studio hadn’t paused. It had collapsed.

I updated my resume, bought a return bus ticket, and went back to my grandmother’s apartment. There was nothing to go back to. I just needed to feel like I was doing something.

When the ceasefire was announced, I felt a sliver of hope. It lasted about a day.

My life used to be a blur of motion: the studio, independent theatres, cafes with friends, early mornings and late nights. Now, my entire existence has shrunk to four walls. The war has ended, at least for now. The internet remains largely throttled, the economy is in ruins, and the job market that existed before February 28 has not returned with the ceasefire.

Outside, people are beginning to move through the streets again. For them, perhaps, something is resuming. For me, there is nothing to resume.

I don’t know how much longer I can hold out.

*Name changed for security reasons

Voters in Virginia head to the polls on Tuesday to decide on a measure that could redraw the state’s congressional map and potentially shift the balance of power in Washington.

Major political figures, including former President Barack Obama and House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson, have weighed in on the high-stakes vote, with nearly $100m spent on campaigning around it.

Part of a broader redistricting battle that began in Texas and spread nationwide, the vote may be the Democrats’ last chance this year to gain seats by changing district maps. The vote comes about six months before the 2026 midterm elections.

Here is what we know:

What is Virginia voting on?

Virginia currently sends 11 members to the House. At the moment, six of them are Democrats, and five are Republicans, reflecting the state’s balance.

Democrats now want to redraw the map to favour them in a way that could help them win up to 10 of the 11 seats. Under the proposal, most districts would be safely Democratic or lean towards the party, with only one strongly Republican.

A breakdown would be:

• Eight districts would be safely Democratic
• Two would be competitive but lean Democratic
• Only one would be safely Republican

If approved, this could give the Democrats several extra seats in Congress, helping them win back or strengthen control of the House in Washington, where majorities are often decided by just a few seats.

That would be a big political shift for the state, which was once closely contested but has become more Democratic-leaning in recent years.

How would the vote work?

Voters in Virginia can cast their ballots either early or on Election Day.

Polling stations will be open across the state on Tuesday:

• Polls open at 10:00 GMT
• Polls close at 23:00 GMT

Votes will be counted after polls close, with early results expected later that evening and fuller results overnight or the next day.

What are voters being asked to decide?

The proposed constitutional amendment is the only statewide contest on the ballot.

It reads:

“Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia’s standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?”

A “yes” vote would support allowing the General Assembly to redraw congressional districts before the midterms.

A “no” vote would leave current boundaries unchanged until the next round of regularly scheduled redistricting after the 2030 census.

What do the latest polls suggest?

The result is expected to be close.

A recent poll by State Navigate, a nonpartisan research group, suggests a small lead for supporters, with about 53 percent in favour and 47 percent against.

Why do district lines matter so much?

District lines decide how voters are grouped, which can shape who wins elections.

Moving the lines can make a district more favourable to a Democratic or Republican win, by adding or removing neighbourhoods and communities that lean one way or the other.

It can turn a close race into a safe seat, or the other way around. It affects which communities are kept together and who represents them.

This process, often called gerrymandering, allows parties to draw maps that benefit them.

In a closely divided state like Virginia, even small changes to the map can shift several seats and influence who holds power in Congress.

A 2023 study by Harvard University researchers found that gerrymandering often creates “safe” seats for politicians, meaning their races are less competitive.

In turn, those politicians become less responsive to the needs of their constituents, who become discouraged about voting as a result.

When could new maps take effect?

If approved, the new map could be used as early as the next election cycle, including the upcoming midterms, depending on legal approval.

However, the plan could face legal challenges. Critics have questioned the ballot wording and the process used by lawmakers.

The Virginia Supreme Court has allowed the vote to go ahead while reviewing those concerns.

If it later finds that rules were broken, the results could be overturned, and the current maps would remain.

Why this vote could shape power in Washington?

A handful of seats could decide control of the US House.

Republicans currently hold a narrow 218–213 majority, but Democrats are seen as competitive heading into the midterms.

Political leaders have underscored the stakes.

Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic Party’s leader in the House, has pointed to Virginia as a crucial battleground, while Mike Johnson has said the result will be closely watched across the country.

What it means to control the US House

The party with the majority (more seats) in Congress can:

• Set the agenda, deciding which bills are brought up for debate
• Control committees, including investigations and hearings
• Pass legislation more easily (if they stay united)
• Block bills from the minority party.

The majority party also chooses the speaker of the House, who has major influence over what reaches the floor.

Where else has this happened?

Virginia’s redistricting vote is part of a larger political battle playing out in the US. Republicans in Texas, encouraged by Donald Trump, have redrawn district maps to strengthen their advantage, prompting similar efforts in other states.

In rare cases, voters have been asked to decide directly, including in California last year and now in Virginia.

In California, voters backed the changes despite concerns about fairness. Now it’s Virginia’s turn to decide.

What Democrats are saying, and why?

Democrats argue the plan is a response to Republican actions in other states, not just a power grab.

Leaders like Obama had long opposed gerrymandering in principle, but have now backed the Virginia move, even releasing a video asking voters to go out and vote for the constitutional amendment.

Barcelona’s Yamal bags Young Sportsperson of the Year accolade a year after winning the Breakthrough award in 2025.

Tennis ruled the red carpet in Madrid as Aryna Sabalenka and Carlos Alcaraz were crowned Sportswoman and Sportsman of the Year at the Laureus Awards.

The pair were honoured on Monday after glittering 2025 campaigns that saw them finish atop the women’s and men’s tennis rankings, respectively.

Spaniard Alcaraz, 22, reclaimed the year-end world number one spot after capturing two Grand Slam titles at the French Open and US Open, underlining his supremacy across surfaces.

Belarusian Sabalenka, 27, meanwhile, stood alongside him in the winners’ circle in New York and also reached the final in Australia and France, capping a season of relentless consistency.

With her triumph, Sabalenka joins a roll call of Laureus Sportswoman of the Year recipients from her sport, including Serena Williams, Jennifer Capriati, Justine Henin and Naomi Osaka.

Barcelona and Spain athlete Lamine Yamal, 18, won the Young Sportsperson of the Year award. It is the second award for the young Barca forward after being voted Breakthrough Sportsperson of the Year in 2025, making him the youngest athlete to have won two Laureus awards.

German football great Toni Kroos won the world sporting inspiration award, and retired gymnast Nadia Comaneci got the lifetime achievement prize.

The world action sportsperson award went to American snowboarder Chloe Kim.

Brazilian Gabriel Araujo was the world sportsperson of the year with a disability.

In a first for the awards, the ceremony was hosted by two athletes – both former Laureus winners – Novak Djokovic and Eileen Gu. Last year’s top honours went to gymnast Simone Biles and pole-vaulter Mondo Duplantis.

McIlroy takes comeback prize

Elsewhere, Rory McIlroy claimed the World Comeback of the Year Award after ending an 11-year wait to complete the career Grand Slam with a playoff victory at the 2025 Masters, a title he defended in 2026.

Formula One’s Lando Norris was named World Breakthrough of the Year, while Paris St Germain took World Team of the Year after a trophy haul in 2025 that included the French league and Cup, plus their first Champions League crown.

The Laureus World Sports Awards nominees are selected by the global media, while the winners are determined by the 69 members of the Laureus World Sports Academy.

The awards have been presented annually since 2000.

Laureus winners 2026:

• World Sportsman of the Year Award: Carlos Alcaraz
• World Sportswoman of the Year Award: Aryna Sabalenka
• World Team of the Year Award: Paris Saint-Germain
• World Breakthrough of the Year Award: Lando Norris
• World Comeback of the Year Award: Rory McIlroy
• World Sportsperson of the Year with a Disability Award: Gabriel Araujo
• World Action Sportsperson of the Year Award: Chloe Kim
• World Young Sportsperson of the Year Award: Lamine Yamal
• Laureus Sporting Inspiration Award: Toni Kroos
• Lifetime Achievement Award: Nadia Comaneci
• Laureus Sport for Good Award: Futbol Mas

The US tech giant Palantir Technologies has posted what it terms a summary of Palantir CEO Alex Karp and head of corporate affairs Nicholas Zamiska’s book, The Technological Republic, on social media.

Many of the positions articulated in the book go far beyond what would normally be expected of a tech company: calling for the introduction of national service, the “moral” duty of technology companies to participate in defence, the necessity for hard power if what it calls free and democratic powers are to prevail, and an embrace of religion in public life.

The publication of what appears to be a 22-point manifesto comes at a critical time for Palantir, which faces global criticism for its support of US President Donald Trump’s controversial immigration crackdown and its backing of the Israeli military’s actions in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

Many have expressed alarm at the book’s emphasis on cultural hierarchies and what it calls “regressive” cultures.

Eliot Higgins, the founder of the online investigations platform Bellingcat, sarcastically pointed out how “completely normal” it was for a tech company to post what he said was a manifesto attacking democratic norms. “It’s also worth being clear about who’s doing the arguing,” Higgins added. “Palantir sells operational software to defence, intelligence, immigration & police agencies. These 22 points aren’t philosophy floating in space, they’re the public ideology of a company whose revenue depends on the politics it’s advocating.”

So, what is Palantir, why is it so controversial, and why has it posted the “manifesto” now?

What does the book say?

As well as referring to the hard power needed to replace the “soaring rhetoric” previously used to defend “free and democratic societies”, the book rails against what it calls the “psychologization of modern politics”, which appears to criticise anyone the authors feel has become too emotionally invested in their political representatives and identity.

The call for people to care less about politics appears to critics as a way of deflecting from Palantir’s own controversial political positions and its openness to working with government policies that clamp down on liberty. Worryingly for some is also the book’s emphasis on what it calls the technology sector’s “obligation to participate in the defence of the nation”, and on the supposed inevitability of developing AI weapons.

Among other points, the writers appear to defend billionaires, such as Elon Musk, whose achievements, they say, are not met with “curiosity or genuine interest” but are instead dismissed by those who “snicker” at the South African-born businessman. Musk was heavily criticised for his role as the head of DOGE, or the US Department for Government Efficiency, which scrapped several government agencies without much regard for the roles those agencies played, or the legal and political process necessary to shut such agencies down.

Palantir’s post concludes by criticising “the shallow temptation of a vacant and hollow pluralism”. It argues that an unthinking commitment to inclusivity and pluralism “glosses over the fact that certain cultures and indeed subcultures… have produced wonders. Others have proven middling, and worse, regressive and harmful”.

How have people reacted?

Not well.

Mark Coeckelbergh, a Belgian philosopher of technology who teaches at the University of Vienna, described Palantir’s messaging as an “example of technofascism”, while Greek economist and former Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis said Palantir had effectively signalled a willingness “to add to nuclear Armageddon the AI-driven threat to humanity’s existence”.

Posting on social media, Arnaud Bertrand, the entrepreneur and geopolitical commentator, claimed that Palantir had revealed a dangerous “ideological agenda”.

“They’re effectively saying ‘our tools aren’t meant to serve your foreign policy. They’re meant to enforce ours’,” he wrote.

What is Palantir?

Palantir Technologies is widely regarded as one of the world’s most influential data analytics firms, securing major contracts with governments, militaries and global corporations.

Founded in 2003 by Alex Karp and Peter Thiel, with support from In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s venture capital arm, it built its early business on post-9/11 intelligence work and has since expanded internationally, with contracts across Europe, the Middle East, and beyond.

While retaining his shares in Palantir, Thiel is understood to no longer play an active role in its day-to-day operations. Karp has positioned himself as the public face of the company.

Under Karp’s leadership, Palantir has drawn heavily on the expertise of former members of Israel’s cyber-intelligence unit, 8200. After the company announced a “strategic partnership” with Israel in January 2024, its involvement in Gaza and the occupied West Bank expanded considerably. Using a mix of intercepted communications, satellite material and other digital data sources, Palantir began integrating these inputs to help produce targeting databases – effectively, “kill lists” – for the Israeli military.

It has also cultivated close ties with US security agencies, particularly during the Trump administration, of which Thiel has been an enthusiastic backer, and has also worked with Israel in its occupation of the West Bank and genocide in Gaza.

According to its critics, including the rights group Amnesty International, “Palantir has a track record of flagrantly disregarding international law and standards, both in the violations of the human rights of migrants in the United States, to which it risks contributing to, and its ongoing supply of artificial intelligence (AI) products and services to the Israeli military and intelligence services that are linked to Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza.”

What exactly has Palantir been accused of in Israel and the US?

Palantir Technologies has faced criticism across the world for its enabling of government surveillance and military systems in the US and Israel.

In the US, it has been accused of supporting immigration enforcement and policing tools that aggregate vast personal datasets, including medical information, enabling profiling and raising due process and privacy concerns. In Israel, critics allege that its AI and data platforms have been used in military operations in Gaza, potentially contributing to the targeting decisions that have underpinned Israel’s genocide there.

Responding to questions from Al Jazeera earlier this year, a spokesperson for Palantir said, “As a company, Palantir does support Israel. We’ve chosen to support them because of the appalling events of October 7th. And more broadly, we’ve chosen to support them because we believe in supporting the West and its allies – and Israel is an important ally of the West.” The spokesman was referring to the Hamas-led October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, after which Israel launched its genocidal war on Gaza.

Why post the ‘manifesto’ now?

Palantir’s politics and alarm over its influence are growing and gaining traction across much of the West.

As well as concern among US Democrats, politicians in Germany, Ireland, and in the European Parliament have criticised the tech giant, whose products, according to one German lawmaker and cyber security expert, have fallen short of security standards across the bloc.

In the UK, the row over the National Health Service’s adoption of Palantir technology has led to some of the fiercest criticism yet. MPs calling for the UK to take advantage of an early break in the tech giant’s 330 million-pound ($446.4m) contract with the health service labelled Palantir “dreadful” and “shameful” in a debate last week, after which even the government conceded that it was “no fan” of the US company’s politics.

Louis Mosley, the head of Palantir Technologies UK, defended the company by arguing that it had no interest in patient data and existed only as a tool to better manage health service resources.

This is a very similar situation to the one that surrounded Red Bull’s former head of strategy, Will Courtenay, who is now McLaren’s sporting director.

It emerged at the 2024 Singapore Grand Prix that Courtenay had signed to join McLaren when his contract ended, and Red Bull emphasised that he would not be allowed to leave before 2026.

They did not specify exactly when in 2026, and BBC Sport has been told that negotiations were held that led to him starting work at McLaren on 1 January this year.

Despite that, for the entirety of last year, Courtenay stayed in his previous role, even though Red Bull were fighting McLaren for the drivers’ championship.

For now, the same thing will happen with Lambiase – he will continue in his role as Red Bull’s head of racing and race engineer to Verstappen for the foreseeable future.

However, just because Red Bull’s statement announcing his departure said he would not be joining McLaren until 2028 does not necessarily mean that will be the case.

McLaren’s statement said Lambiase would join “no later than 2028”. That means they will be hoping to come to an agreement with Red Bull that shortens that timeframe.

It’s worth pointing out, meanwhile, that McLaren have emphasised that Lambiase is joining to provide support for team principal Andrea Stella, not ultimately replace him.

Stella has until now been fulfilling the role to which Lambiase has been appointed, that of chief racing officer, in addition to that of team principal.

Stella said last week: “Zak (Brown, the chief executive officer of McLaren Racing) and I have built a flat team structure, in which it is essential to ensure all leaders are properly empowered, but at the same time, we must guarantee there is always the necessary level of long-term support.

“It goes without saying that, with this approach, the dual role I currently hold could not be sustainable in the long run.”

McLaren have indirectly – but very clearly – rejected what are said to be inaccurate reports that Stella is on his way to Ferrari.

Stella said in a statement issued by McLaren on Friday: “Some of the recent rumours, including those regarding astronomical salaries and mythical pre-contracts, have made me smile.

“It almost seems as though the ‘silly season’, which usually begins before summer, has arrived early!

“I’m quite used to this sort of thing by now and I take with a smile. It almost looks as if some envious pastry chef has tried to spoil the preparation of a good dessert at the McLaren patisserie. However, we do know very well how to distinguish the good ingredients from the poisoned biscuits.”

Morbi, India – For seven years, Pradeep Kumar would walk into the ceramics factory in western India at 9am, load raw materials – clay, quartz and sand – into the kiln, and spend the day around the heat and dust of the furnaces.

He handled the clay at different stages, sometimes feeding it into machines, sometimes moving semi-processed pieces towards firing. The work was repetitive and demanding, with no protective gear, such as gloves and masks, against the high temperatures.

“It would be very challenging in the summers since the heat would be at its peak,” he told Al Jazeera.

But on March 15, he lost his job – not because of anything he or the company behind his factory had done, but because the United States and Israel attacked Iran, triggering another war in the Middle East and a global fuel crisis.

Barely two weeks after the war began, the ceramics company where he worked shut down due to a shortage of propane and natural gas. The company, in Morbi in Gujarat state – like all of its peers in the ceramics industry – depends on these critical ingredients.

Morbi is the centre of India’s ceramics industry that employs more than 400,000 people. More than half of these workers, like Kumar, are migrants from poorer Indian states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

Five days after Kumar lost his job, the 29-year-old took his wife and their three children back to their home in Uttar Pradesh’s Hardoi district.

“I am here until every other migrant worker who came back home with us goes back,” he told Al Jazeera.

“We don’t want to suffer like dogs, like we did during the COVID-19 pandemic,” he added, referring to the 2020 and 2021 exodus of migrant workers from India’s more industrialised western states to the poorer east, with millions of starving families, including children, walking on foot for days and sometimes weeks to reach their homes amid a coronavirus lockdown.

About 450 of 600 companies shut

With more than 600 companies, Morbi produces about 80 percent of India’s ceramics in the form of tiles, toilets, bathtubs and wash basins. But at least 450 of those companies have been forced to shut down as a standoff on the Strait of Hormuz, a lifeline for India’s gas imports, continues.

Meanwhile, the war continues, with the US on Sunday capturing an Iranian cargo vessel, even as Washington says it is willing to hold another round of talks with Tehran in Pakistan to reach a deal. Tehran has refused to commit to peace talks after its ship was seized.

The developments came as a fragile ceasefire agreed by Iran and the US after a month of fighting expires on Wednesday. But a re-escalation in hostilities has seen Iran shutting down Hormuz for traffic, disrupting global fuel supplies and raising oil prices.

“All manufacturing units in Morbi rely on propane and natural gas to fire kilns at high temperatures. While propane is supplied by private companies, natural gas is provided by the state to those with connections. Around 60 percent of manufacturers use propane because it is comparatively cheaper,” Siddharth Bopaliya, a 27-year-old third-generation manufacturer and trader in Morbi, told Al Jazeera.

Manoj Arvadiya, president of the Morbi Ceramic Manufacturers Association, said they had shut down the units till April 15, hoping that the Middle East crisis would be resolved by then.

“But even today, only around 100 units have opened, and most have still not begun the manufacturing process. For at least another 15 days, it is likely to remain the same,” he told Al Jazeera.

Arvadiya said the closure has impacted 200,000 workers, with more than a quarter of them forced to go back to their homes in other states.

India’s ceramic industry is valued at $6bn.

“About 25 percent of Morbi’s ceramics are exported to countries in the Middle East, Africa and Europe, with a net worth of $1.5bn. But exports are now delayed and, in some cases, completely halted, especially to Middle Eastern countries, due to the production slowdown over the past month,” Arvadiya told Al Jazeera.

Factories that rely on propane remain shut in Morbi. Though natural gas is mostly available, many units have not made the switch yet, as new connections are being priced at 93 rupees a kilo, while existing users receive it at about 70 rupees.

Khushiram Sapariya, a manufacturer of washbasins who relies on propane, said he will wait this month before deciding on reopening his factory.

“Because then I have to call hundreds of staff who have gone to their homes, and I want to be sure before taking their responsibility,” he said.

Returned home with ‘Morbi disease’

Among the workers who left Morbi last month is 27-year-old Ankur Singh.

“The shutdown of my company did not send me back alone, but with a Morbi disease – silicosis. I would often have fever and cough but kept ignoring it, until I came back to my hometown near Patna in Bihar and found after a check-up that it was silicosis,” he told Al Jazeera.

Silicosis is an incurable lung disease caused by inhalation of silica dust found in rock, sand, quartz and other building materials. One of the oldest occupational diseases in the world, it kills thousands of people every year.

Gujarat-based labour rights activist Chirag Chavda says the disease is “widespread in Morbi because workers are routinely exposed to fine silica dust generated during ceramic production”.

“Even those not directly involved in moulding or kiln work often inhale the particles due to poor ventilation and prolonged exposure across factory spaces,” he told Al Jazeera.

Chavda said most ceramic companies do not follow the government regulations regarding the safety of workers.

Harish Zala, 40, had worked in different ceramic companies in Morbi for two decades before he got silicosis two years ago. He said he received no help from his employer, who allegedly abused and threatened his father when he visited the company after the diagnosis.

“Every year, at least one labourer dies of silicosis in each company, while several get detected for silicosis,” Zala told Al Jazeera. “Some like me get lucky and survive, but have no choice but to quit the job immediately.”

Zala said many companies do not provide the workers with written proof of employment, such as appointment letters, salary slips, or identity cards. “This is done so that if a worker later demands labour rights or legal entitlements, they have no concrete evidence to prove that they were employed by the company.”

Chirag added that such workers are also denied social security under various Indian laws regarding salaries or pension funds, since doing so would establish proof of employment.

“As a result, even after working for years, workers are deprived of their labour rights due to a lack of evidence. This leaves employers with little to no legal accountability,” he said.

In Morbi, there are also migrants like Sushma Devi, 56, who did not go back to her home in West Bengal because the tile company her son works at has promised to continue giving them shelter and food as it waits for manufacturing to resume.

“I am here with a few more people because we did not want to spend money on travelling. Here, at least our ration is sorted,” she said as she walked with a bundle of dry twigs, wood and discarded plywood for the cooking.

“We step out to collect these every day to be able to cook our two-time meal,” said Devi. “I hope the kilns and manufacturing resume soon, but I also hope they don’t stop giving us rice and potatoes even if the kilns don’t start running anytime soon.”

Devi’s husband, Debendar, and their son Ankit live in a one-room set given to them by their company. The family has access to a common toilet for 10 families on one floor.

Kumar, meanwhile, is running out of his meagre savings and fears he could fall into a debt trap.

“Initially, we ate from whatever we had saved. But the house needed repair and we had to borrow 20,000 rupees ($214) from a relative, which we have no idea when or how we will repay,” he said, looking at the reworked roof of his brick house in Hardoi.

Dozens of US veterans and family members of military personnel have been arrested while staging a protest in the US Capitol building in opposition to the war on Iran.

Japan could soon sell weapons overseas, including fighter jets, in major shift from pacifist policies introduced after World War II.

The cabinet of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has lifted a ban on exporting lethal weapons, including fighter jets, in a major shift to Japan’s pacifist post-World War II constitution.

In a post on X announcing the changes on Tuesday, Takaichi did not specify which weapons Japan would now sell overseas. However, Japanese newspapers said the changes would encompass fighter jets, missiles and warships, which Japan has recently agreed to build for Australia.

“With this amendment, transfers of all defence equipment will in principle become possible,” Takaichi said, adding that “recipients will be limited to countries that commit to use in accordance with the UN Charter”.

“In an increasingly severe security environment, no single country can now protect its own peace and security alone.”

At least 17 countries will be eligible to buy weapons manufactured in Japan under the changes, Japan’s Chunichi newspaper reported, adding that this list may be expanded if more countries enter into bilateral agreements with Japan.

Previous rules, introduced in 1967 and enacted in 1976, had limited Japanese military exports to non-lethal arms, such as those used for surveillance and mine sweeping, Japan’s Asahi newspaper reported.

Asahi also reported that Japan will still restrict exporting weapons to countries where fighting is currently taking place, but exemptions are allowed under “special circumstances” where Japan’s national security needs are taken into account.

Countries interested in buying Japanese-made weapons include Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines and Indonesia, which recently signed a major defence pact with the United States, Chunichi reported, citing Japan’s Ministry of Defence.

Tokyo’s change in policy comes soon after Japan and Australia signed a $7bn deal that will see Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries build the first three of 11 warships for the Australian navy.

Takaichi sends offering to controversial war shrine

The changes announced by Takaichi on Tuesday come amid reports that the Japanese prime minister had sent a ritual offering to the notorious Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo on the occasion of its spring festival.

Built in the 1800s to honour Japan’s war dead, the shrine includes the names of more than 1,000 convicted Japanese war criminals from World War II, including 14 who were found guilty of “Class A” crimes.

Visits by Japanese officials to the shrine have long been considered insensitive to the people of China, South Korea, and other countries that Japanese soldiers brutalised during the war.

After the defeat of Axis countries, including the bombing of Japan’s Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II, Japan introduced a new constitution renouncing participation in war.

However, Takaichi, considered a China “hawk” and sometimes referred to as Japan’s “Iron Lady”, is among a number of recent Japanese leaders to have pushed back against the country’s pacifist stance.

Mérida, April 20, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Venezuelan government launched a “Great National Pilgrimage” to oppose economic sanctions on Sunday, April 19, coinciding with the 216th anniversary of the country’s declaration of independence.

The nationwide mobilization seeks to channel popular opposition to the US-led economic blockade into a sustained, nationwide movement. 

The pilgrimage was inaugurated in three Venezuelan regions, with a calendar of marches, assemblies, and cultural activities covering the remaining 21 states before a closing event in Caracas on April 30. 

In western Zulia state, Acting President Delcy Rodríguez led a rally through the streets of Maracaibo. Addressing a crowd, Rodríguez linked the historical struggle for independence to the modern-day resistance against Washington’s unilateral coercive measures.

“It is a date that marks the first cry for independence from a united people, and so, beginning with that historic date, I feel compelled to embark on this pilgrimage,” she declared to the crowd.

Venezuelan leaders have sought to highlight the impact of unilateral coercive measures on living standards and public services to push for their withdrawal.

“We want Venezuela to be free of sanctions, so that it can grow without restrictions,” Rodríguez affirmed at the Zulia rally. “I am speaking to the people of the United States, Europe, and the governments of those countries. Please stop levying sanctions against the Venezuelan people.”

In Puerto Ayacucho, Amazonas, National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez led a parallel mobilization on Sunday. He emphasized that the pilgrimage is not merely a political event but a “spiritual and national defense” of the country’s right to self-determination. The campaign’s launch in border states highlighted the disruptions to public services that are generally more acute away from the capital and surrounding areas.

The government’s initiative was also backed by sectors of the moderate opposition. Timoteo Zambrano, deputy from the Democratic Alliance, vowed that his political faction would participate in the pilgrimage.

“[Pilgrimage] is a deeply religious term that unites the world’s religions. We are witnessing a new moment to fight together against sanctions and the blockade,” he said in a press conference in Caracas on Saturday.

For his part, Acción Democrática Secretary-General Bernabé Gutiérrez claimed that Caracas must ask the Trump administration to release proceeds from oil exports “so they reach the state coffers and allow for the solution of our problems.” 

Since January, the White House has imposed control over Venezuelan crude sales, with Venezuela-owed royalties, taxes, and dividends mandated to be deposited in US Treasury-run accounts before being returned to Caracas at US officials’ discretion.

The “Great National Pilgrimage” takes place against a backdrop of nearly a decade of economic pressure from Washington. The first Trump administration launched a “maximum pressure” campaign in 2017 with the goal of triggering regime change.

US Treasury sanctions targeted multiple economic sectors, from mining to banking, and particularly targeted the oil industry, causing an estimated US $25 billion in yearly revenue losses. The blockade also effectively gridlocked Venezuela from international credit markets and saw Venezuelan foreign assets frozen and seized. 

Since the January 3 US military attacks and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro, Caracas and Washington have fast-tracked a diplomatic rapprochement. Acting President Rodríguez has struck a conciliatory tone toward the US, recently thanking Trump and US officials for their efforts in reestablishing “cooperation.”

The US Treasury Department has maintained wide-reaching sanctions in place but issued a series of general licenses in the hydrocarbon, mining, and banking sectors, allowing Western entities to deal with Venezuelan counterparts under restricted conditions.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

A Cuban Foreign Ministry official said the exchange with Washington was ‘respectful and professional’ and devoid of threats.

The Cuban government has confirmed that it held recent talks in Havana with officials from the United States, as tensions remain high between the two countries over Washington’s energy blockade of the Caribbean country.

Alejandro Garcia del Toro, deputy director general in charge of US affairs at the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said on Monday that the US delegation included assistant secretaries of state, and the Cuban delegation included representatives at the level of deputy foreign minister.

Garcia de Toro said that the US delegation did not issue any threats or deadlines as had been reported by some US media outlets.

“The entire exchange was conducted with respect and professionalism,” he said.

In comments reported by Cuba’s Communist Party newspaper Granma, Garcia del Toro emphasised that ending the three-month-old US oil blockade was “a top priority” for the Cuban government in the talks, and accused Washington of “blackmail” for threatening countries that export oil to Cuba with tariffs.

“This act of economic coercion is an unjustified punishment for the entire Cuban population,” he said.

“It is also a form of global blackmail against sovereign states, which have every right to export fuel to Cuba, in accordance with the principles of free trade,” he added.

US news outlet Axios reported on Friday that officials from US President Donald Trump’s administration held multiple meetings in Havana on April 10, including with Raul Guillermo Rodriguez Castro, grandson of former President Raul Castro. The meetings marked the first time that American diplomats had flown into Cuba since 2016 in a new diplomatic push.

According to reports, US officials laid out several conditions for negotiations with Cuba to continue, including the release of prominent political prisoners, an end to political repression, and liberalising the island’s ailing economy.

The Reuters news agency said that US proposals for Cuba also include allowing Elon Musk’s Starlink internet terminals into the country and providing compensation for Americans and US corporations for assets confiscated by Cuba after the 1959 revolution. Washington is also concerned about the influence of foreign powers on the island, a US official told the news agency.

Trump has hinted at military intervention in Cuba and warned of tariffs on any country that sells or supplies oil to Cuba. The fuel blockade has aggravated Cuba’s economic and energy crisis, leading to warnings of a humanitarian disaster.

Cubans have also braced for a possible attack following Trump’s repeated warnings that the country will be “next” after his war on Iran and the US military’s abduction of Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro in January.

Last week, Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel said that his country was prepared to fight if the US carried through on its threats.

The leaders of Mexico, Spain and Brazil on Saturday voiced concern over the “dramatic situation” in Cuba and urged “sincere and respectful dialogue”.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Monday there was no evident justification for the US to attack Cuba.

“The ability to defend oneself does not mean the right to intervene militarily in other states when their political systems do not match what others might have in mind,” he said.

Chavez-DeRemer is the third high-profile female official to leave the Trump administration after recent departures of Kristi Noem and Pam Bondi.

US Secretary of Labour Lori Chavez-DeRemer will be leaving her post in the administration of President Donald Trump, the White House has said.

Chavez-DeRemer is the third woman to leave the Trump administration since March, when the president fired Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in the wake of federal immigration raids in Minnesota that led to the deaths of two protesters. Trump also ousted Attorney General Pam Bondi earlier this month.

Chavez-DeRemer has done a “phenomenal job” protecting American workers and is set to “take a position in the private sector”, White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung said in a post on X late on Monday, announcing the labour secretary’s departure.

“Keith Sonderling will take on the role of Acting Secretary of Labor,” Cheung added, referring to the current deputy labour secretary.

While Cheung did not give a reason for Chavez-DeRemer’s departure, the New York Post reported in January that she was under investigation for “pursuing an ‘inappropriate’ relationship with a subordinate” and drinking in her office during the work day.

Al Jazeera was unable to independently verify the allegations.

From the beginning of her tenure, Chavez-DeRemer had some notable differences with other members of Trump’s inner circle.

She had voiced support for the pro-union Protecting the Right to Organize Act (PRO Act), earning support for her nomination from some Democrats.

Her appointment was also seen as favoured by Sean O’Brien, the president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, who notably spoke in support of Trump’s re-election campaign at the Republican National Convention in July 2024.

However, as the labour secretary, Chavez-DeRemer’s positions have more closely aligned with the Trump administration’s overall anti-regulatory policies, according to US media outlets. During her tenure as secretary, the Labor Department stalled on responding to calls for limits on silica exposure from Appalachian coal miners suffering from the occupational black lung disease.

Chavez-DeRemer is not the first top official to leave the Labor Department during Trump’s second term.

In August 2025, Trump fired the director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Erika McEntarfer, who was appointed by previous President Joe Biden, after a report showed that hiring had slowed in July and was worse in May and June than had previously been reported.

Chavez-DeRemer had supported the president’s move at the time.

“I support the President’s decision to replace Biden’s Commissioner and ensure the American People can trust the important and influential data coming from BLS,” Chavez-DeRemer said in a post on X following McEntarfer’s removal.

Daniel Benaim, the former US Deputy Assistant Secretary for Arabian Peninsula Affairs, says the US missed the early off-ramps to declare victory over Iran, and now finds itself behind where it began on all its objectives.

First all-women cohort of winners hails from Colombia, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, South Korea, the UK and the US.

This year’s prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize has been awarded to six grassroots environmental activists from around the world for their efforts to fight climate change and save biodiversity.

For the first time since the prize was created in 1989 by philanthropists Richard and Rhoda Goldman, all recipients of the award are women: Iroro Tanshi, from Nigeria; Borim Kim, from South Korea; Sarah Finch, from the United Kingdom; Theonila Roka Matbob, from Papua New Guinea; Alannah Acaq Hurley, from the United States; and Yuvelis Morales Blanco, from Colombia.

Sometimes described as the “Green Nobel”, the Goldman Prize recipients are chosen from each of the world’s six primary regions. They each receive $200,000 in prize money.

“While we continue to fight uphill to protect the environment and implement lifesaving climate policies – in the US and globally – it is clear that true leaders can be found all around us,” said John Goldman, vice president of the Goldman Environmental Foundation.

“The 2026 Prize winners are proof positive that courage, hard work, and hope go a long way toward creating meaningful progress.”

Morales Blanco, the winner for the region of South and Central America, fought some of the world’s biggest oil companies to successfully stop the introduction of commercial fracking into Colombia.

The 24-year-old grew up in a family of fishermen along the banks of the Magdalena River in the Afro-Colombian community of Puerto Wilches. “We had nothing but the river – she was like a mother who took care of me,” she said.

She began organising protests after a major oil spill in 2018, which forced the relocation of dozens of local families and killed thousands of animals. Her activism, which made her a target for intimidation and forced her to temporarily relocate, helped halt projects and elevate fracking as an issue in Colombia’s 2022 election.

Two of the other five recipients of this year’s prize have also focused their efforts on fighting fossil fuels, which are causing both global climate change and more localised pollution around the world.

Borim, the winner for Asia who started the Youth 4 Climate Action organisation, won a ruling from South Korea’s Constitutional Court that the government’s climate policy violated the constitutional rights of future generations, the first successful youth-led climate litigation in the continent.

Finch, Europe’s winner, told The Times newspaper she will use her prize money to keep fighting fossil fuels.

Together with the Weald Action Group, she fought oil drilling in southeastern England for more than a decade, securing the “Finch ruling” from the Supreme Court in June 2024, stating that authorities must consider fossil fuels’ impacts on the global climate before granting permission to extract them.

Two other recipients have fought against the destructive environmental impact of mining projects.

Papua New Guinea’s Roka Matbob, winner for Islands and Island Nations, led a successful campaign that saw the world’s second-largest mining company, Rio Tinto, agree to address environmental and social devastation caused by its Panguna copper mine, 35 years after it was closed following an uprising.

And the award recipient for North America, Acaq Hurley, from the Yup’ik nation in the US, successfully fought alongside 15 tribal nations to stop a mega- copper and gold mining project that threatened ecosystems in Alaska’s Bristol Bay region, including the largest wild salmon runs in the world.

Meanwhile, Nigeria’s Tanshi, Africa’s winner, rediscovered the endangered short-tailed roundleaf bat and has been working to save its refuge, the Afi Mountain Wildlife Sanctuary, from human-induced wildfires.

The U.S. Navy has disclosed the test of an AeroVironment LOCUST laser counter-drone system, which has been in the news recently, aboard the Nimitz class aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush. As far as TWZ is aware, this looks to be the first time a laser weapon has been fitted to a carrier. Earlier this year, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle, the Navy’s top officer, said his goal was for directed energy weapons to eventually be the go-to choice for the crews of American warships when facing close-in threats.

The Navy has shared three pictures of the LOCUST system onboard USS George H.W. Bush, seen at the top of this story and below. They were all taken on October 5, 2025, but released today. This coincides with the start of the Navy League’s annual Sea-Air-Space exposition, at which TWZ is in attendance.

The captions to each of the images include the following: “During the live-fire event, [the] LOCUST LWS [laser weapon system] effectively detected, tracked, engaged, and neutralized multiple unmanned aerial vehicles marking a milestone toward fielding operational directed energy capabilities.”

TWZ has reached out to the Navy for more information.

“The successful demonstration of its palletized LOCUST Laser Weapon System (LWS) aboard the USS George H.W. Bush (CVN-77) in October 2025″ was conducted “in collaboration with the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Army Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office (RCCTO),” according to a press release from AeroVironment.

“During the live-fire event, the Palletized High Energy Laser (P-HEL) system tracked, engaged, and neutralized multiple target drones – marking a major milestone toward fielding operational directed energy capabilities across all domains and platforms,” the release adds. “This achievement validates that the LOCUST LWS is truly platform-agnostic, seamlessly transitioning from fixed-site and land-based mobile platforms, such as the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) and Infantry Squad Vehicle (ISV), to the dynamic and demanding environment of a maneuvering aircraft carrier.”

The central element of LOCUST is a laser directed energy weapon in a turret, which also includes built-in electro-optical and infrared video cameras for target acquisition and tracking. Tertiary sensors, including small-form-factor high-frequency radars and passive radio frequency signal detection systems, can also be used to cue the laser. The JLTV and ISV-based configurations mentioned in AeroVironment’s release both feature small radars.

LOCUST’s power rating is generally understood to be in the 20-kilowatt range at present. When it comes to laser directed energy weapons, this is at the lower end of the power spectrum, fully in line with a system intended to defeat smaller drones. LOCUST has also been demonstrated with a 26-kilowatt power rating, but how much more it could be scaled within the existing form factor is unclear.

As of December 2025, the U.S. Army was known to have taken delivery of palletized LOCUST systems, as well as ones mounted on JLTVs and ISVs. The Army has at least deployed the palletized versions overseas operationally in the past. One of the service’s LOCUST systems was also at the center of a widely criticized and controversial shutdown of airspace around El Paso, Texas, in February of this year, as you can read more about here. The system had been on loan to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at the time. Earlier this month, the Pentagon signed an agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regarding the continued use of anti-drone laser systems along the southern border with Mexico.

The U.S. Marine Corps has also moved to acquire JLTV-based LOCUST systems in the past. In addition to appearing to be the first instance of a laser-directed energy weapon going aboard a carrier, last year’s test aboard USS George H.W. Bush also looks to be the first known instance of the Navy even evaluating LOCUST for use on ships or in any other context.

Navy interest in using LOCUST to defend ships, especially very high-value ones like aircraft carriers, is not surprising. For years now, the service has been very active in pursuing shipboard laser and microwave directed energy weapons with a particular eye toward providing additional layers of counter-drone defense.

Experience gained in recent years from operations in and around the Red Sea, as well as against Iran, has only underscored the critical importance of bolstering the ability of U.S. warships to protect themselves against uncrewed aerial threats. The Navy has also been adding counter-drone systems that use physical interceptors as their effectors to a growing number of ships to help address this reality.

In general, lasers like LOCUST offer the promise of functionally unlimited magazine depth, which could be exceptionally valuable in the counter-drone role when faced with large volumes of incoming threats. The dangers that uncrewed aerial systems pose are only set to increase as artificial intelligence and machine learning-driven capabilities, including automated targeting and fully networked swarming, continue to improve while the barrier to entry steadily drops.

Palletized and containerized systems like the P-HEL version of LOCUST can also be employed with more flexibility on a wide variety of ships, as long as sufficient deck space and available power. The test aboard USS George H.W. Bush involved simply lashing the system to the flight deck. This also means the systems can be installed and/or removed more readily depending on mission requirements. The Navy also has a demand for counter-drone capability on land to protect key facilities and assets abroad and at home, where LOCUST would also be relevant.

LOCUST Laser Weapon System

At the same time, especially when it comes to employing lasers on ships, there are also potential pitfalls. As TWZ has previously written:

“A single laser can only engage one target at once. As the beam gets further away from the source, its power also drops, just as a result of it having to propagate through the atmosphere. This can be further compounded by the weather and other environmental factors like smoke and dust. More power is then needed to produce suitable effects at appreciable distances. Adaptive optics are used to help overcome atmospheric distortion to a degree. Altogether, laser directed energy weapons generally remain relatively short-range systems.”

“In addition, laser directed energy weapons, especially sensitive optics, present inherent reliability challenges for use in real-world military operations. Shipboard use adds rough sea states and saltwater exposure to the equation. There is also the matter of needing to keep everything properly cooled, which creates additional power generation and other demands.”

Over the years, the Navy has faced continued and significant hurdles in attempting to field operational laser weapon systems more broadly across its fleets. U.S. military officials have often sought to temper expectations, while also being open about their frustrations with the lack of greater progress, in recent years.

Still, the Navy, in particular, has persisted in its pursuit of these capabilities, given the benefits mentioned earlier. Lasers are set to be a particularly important component of the full arsenal aboard the future Trump class “battleships.”

“My thesis research at [the] Naval Post Graduate School was on directed energy and nuclear weapons,” Adm. Caudle told TWZ and other outlets at a roundtable back in January. “This is my goal, if it’s in line of sight of a ship, that the first solution that we’re using is directed energy.”

In particular, “point defense needs to shift to directed energy,” the admiral added, emphasizing that “it has an infinite magazine.”

“What that does for me is it improves my loadout optimization, so that my loadout, my payload volume is optimized for offensive weapons,” Caudle added at the time. Furthermore, “as you increase power, the actual ability to actually engage and keep power on target, and the effectiveness of a laser just goes up.”

Laser directed energy weapons with higher power ratings could potentially defend ships against other threats, including certain types of incoming missiles.

Whether or not the Navy decides to acquire and field LOCUST operationally on its ships, the service’s general demand for more counter-drone capabilities across the board does not look set to decrease any time soon.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

A photo of an Israeli soldier smashing a statue of Jesus Christ in Lebanon has sparked outrage in the United States, adding to the anger Israel is facing, including from parts of US President Donald Trump’s base.

Although the incident is only one among a broad range of atrocities that Israel is accused of committing in the region in recent years, it garnered condemnations across the world and prompted a response from Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In the US, where support for Israel was once unchallenged – especially in right-wing circles that purport to espouse Christian values – the desecration of the Christian religious symbol added fuel to the criticism that the Israeli government is facing from some Republicans.

“You would never know it by consuming American corporate media, but this kind of incident is not rare,” said right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson, a former Trump ally.

“The Israeli government has permitted its soldiers to behave like barbarians for decades, all while sucking up generous funding from the United States. The only difference between now and the past is that social media has exposed Israel’s behavior for the world to see,” Carlson wrote in his newsletter on Monday.

‘Horrific’

Former Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene – who fell out with Trump over his hawkish foreign policy – highlighted that Israel receives billions of dollars in US military aid annually.

“‘Our greatest ally’ that takes billions of our tax dollars and weapons every year,” she wrote in a comment on X in response to the photo showing an Israeli soldier taking a sledgehammer to the head of the statue of Jesus.

Matt Gaetz, another former Republican congressman and Trump ally, said, “Horrific”.

For his part, independent journalist Glenn Greenwald mocked how Christian Zionists may defend Israel over smashing the statue.

“Christian Zionists: This Israeli soldier was absolutely justified in smashing the head of the Jesus Christ statue because Hezbollah and Hamas were hiding inside. We owe him our gratitude,” Greenwald wrote on X.

The anger echoed growing scepticism of the close alliance with Israel in Trump’s “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) constituency.

Trump is already facing pressure over joining Israel in starting a war against Iran, which sent oil prices soaring. Earlier on Monday, the US president addressed and denied claims that Netanyahu dragged the US into the conflict.

Support for Israel in the US is at a historic low, recent public opinion polls show.

While Israel still enjoys near-unanimous Republican support in Congress, that consensus is starting to fray, with dissent being expressed by the likes of Carlson, in part due to prolonged wars in the Middle East and attacks on Christians.

Israel says it will investigate

The desecration of the statue, which took place near the town of Debl in south Lebanon, according to local reports, prompted an unusually swift response from the highest level of the Israeli government.

“I condemn the act in the strongest terms. Military authorities are conducting a criminal probe of the matter and will take appropriately harsh disciplinary action against the offender,” Netanyahu said in a statement on Sunday.

Israel rarely holds its soldiers accountable for well-documented abuses in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and Lebanon, including sexual violence.

Netanyahu, who has been evading an arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court (ICC) over war crimes charges in Gaza since 2024, went on to argue that Israel treats Christians better than any other country in the region.

“While Christians are being slaughtered in Syria and Lebanon by Muslims, the Christian population in Israel thrives unlike elsewhere in the Middle East,” the Israeli prime minister claimed.

“Israel is the only country in the region that the Christian population and standard of living is growing.”

Lebanon has the largest per capita Christian population in the Middle East, and its president is a Maronite Catholic.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar joined Netanyahu in denouncing the desecration of the statue, saying that it is “entirely contrary” to Israeli values.

But while Israel’s supporters tried to portray smashing the statue as an isolated mistake by one soldier, the incident reflects a pattern of Israeli attacks against houses of worship, including churches.

In 2024, Israeli troops filmed a mock wedding between two soldiers at a church in Deir Mimas in Lebanon and vandalised the building.

An Israeli tank demolished a statue of Saint George in the southern Lebanese village of Yaroun last year, as well.

Israel has bombed Palestinian churches several times in Gaza since the start of its genocidal war in the enclave, including an attack that killed at least 18 people in 2023.

Israel destroyed more than 1,000 mosques and three churches in Gaza during the war, according to local officials.

Catholic leaders respond

The Assembly of Catholic Ordinaries of the Holy Land denounced the attack on the statue on Monday.

“This act constitutes a grave affront to the Christian faith and adds to other reported incidents of desecration of Christian symbols by [Israeli] soldiers in southern Lebanon,” it said in a statement.

“It further reveals a disturbing failure in moral and human formation, wherein even the most elementary reverence for the sacred and for the dignity of others has been gravely compromised.”

The incident came as Israeli soldiers pushed to completely destroy homes and civilian infrastructure in dozens of Lebanese villages in order to prevent residents from returning to them.

“The outrage shouldn’t be about a destroyed statue of Jesus – abhorrent as that is,” Palestinian pastor Munther Isaac wrote in a social media post on Monday.

“The real outrage is the targeting of civilians, the assault on human dignity, the devastation in Gaza and Lebanon. War is evil. We need Accountability.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called on Trump and Congress to intervene and end Israeli violations after the destruction of the statue.

“For years, our government has ignored and enabled persistent Israeli attacks on churches and Christians in Lebanon, Gaza, and elsewhere,” CAIR said.

“Our message to American public officials is simple: If you continue sending more weapons and provide political cover for Israel’s rogue actions, you own what you see in this picture.”

Singer faces first-degree murder and additional charges that could lead to life without parole or the death penalty.

Singer D4vd has been charged in the United States with murder in the death of Celeste Rivas Hernandez, a 14-year-old girl who was last seen alive nearly a year ago.

The 21-year-old musician, whose legal name is David Burke, ⁠faces first-degree murder and additional charges, including lewd acts with a minor and mutilation of a body. D4vd pleaded not guilty on Monday.

The prosecutor said Rivas Hernandez’s dismembered and decomposed body was discovered in September inside an apparently abandoned Tesla linked to the singer.

Authorities said the case includes special circumstances – lying in wait, committing crime for financial gain and the alleged killing of the witness in an investigation – making Burke eligible for life without parole or the death penalty.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said prosecutors would decide later whether to seek the ‌death penalty.

Burke was arrested at a home in Hollywood on Thursday and was being held without bail.

The witness he is alleged to have killed is Rivas Hernandez, who could have given testimony about the sex crime allegations.

Rivas Hernandez had disappeared in 2024, when she was 13. That was her age when, according to an allegation in a criminal complaint, the singer engaged in continuous sexual abuse of her for at least a year from September 2023 to September 2024.

Hochman said authorities believed the girl went to D4vd’s Hollywood Hills home on April 23, 2025, and “was never heard from again”.

Burke’s lawyers said on Monday that the evidence would show he is innocent.

“The actual evidence in this case will show that David Burke did not murder Celeste Rivas Hernandez and he was not the cause of her death,” they said. “We will vigorously defend David’s innocence.”

Court documents outline secret probe

The singer had been under investigation by a Los Angeles County grand jury looking into the death.

The probe was officially secret, but its existence, and his designation as its target, was revealed in February when his mother, father and brother objected in a Texas court to subpoenas demanding they testify.

The 2023 Tesla Model Y was registered in the singer’s name at their address, according to court filings. Authorities did not publicly acknowledge him as a suspect until his arrest.

Police investigators searching the Tesla in a tow yard found a cadaver bag “covered with insects and a strong odor of decay”, court documents said.

Detectives partially unzipped a bag and found a head and torso.

Investigators from the Los Angeles County Medical Examiner’s Office removed the bag and “discovered the arms and legs had been severed from the body”, according to court documents.

A second black bag was found under the first, and dismembered body parts were inside it. No cause of death has been publicly revealed, and police got a judge to block the release of details of the autopsy.

The court order was expected to be lifted after the charges.

Rising to fame

D4vd gained popularity among Gen Z for his blend of indie rock, R&B and lo-fi pop. He went viral on TikTok in 2022 with the hit Romantic Homicide, which peaked at number 4 on Billboard’s Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart.

He then signed with Darkroom and Interscope Records, and released his debut EP, Petals to Thorns and a follow-up, The Lost Petals, in 2023.

When the body was discovered, the singer continued his North American tour, but when reports of his possible involvement spread widely, he cancelled the final two shows and a European tour that was to follow.

As the clock ticks down on a shaky ceasefire that could end Wednesday, Pakistan is attempting to host last-ditch negotiations to stave-off a new round of fighting between the U.S. and Iran. Meanwhile, the Strait of Hormuz remains closed after being shut down again by Iran this weekend as negotiations for a peace deal took a nose-dive. The closure occurred around the same time Iran reportedly fired on several ships in the Strait on Saturday. A U.S. attack on and seizure of a cargo ship that was supposedly running the blockade in the Gulf of Oman on Sunday has also resulted in Iran making new threats of retaliation. All this represents a dramatic deterioration in U.S.-Iran relations compared to just a few days ago.

Pakistan has cordoned off parts of Islamabad in anticipation of the pending talks. However, it remains unclear if Iran will send a delegation to meet the U.S. negotiating party of Vice President JD Vance, envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law. The meeting is tentatively set for Tuesday.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday insisted the talks are still on despite Iranian suggestions otherwise.

“We’re supposed to have the talks,” Trump told The New York Post Monday morning in a brief interview, brushing aside doubts about whether negotiations would fall apart. “So I would assume at this point nobody’s playing games.”

Trump’s comment to the New York Post came after Iranians claimed they would not take part in any new talks.

“So far, we have no plans to participate in the next round of negotiations,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei told reporters on Monday. “The behavior of the United States does not indicate seriousness in pursuing a diplomatic process.”

Baghaei added that no decision has been made on how or when negotiations would resume. The Foreign Ministry spokesman also pushed back on Trump’s claims that Iran agreed to give up its highly enriched uranium (HEU).

“It is strictly off the agenda,” Baghaei proclaimed “Iran’s definitive stance is to keep all of its nuclear achievements on its own soil.”

A senior Iranian source told Reuters the continuation of the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports was undermining the prospect of peace talks, and that Tehran’s “defensive capabilities,” including ​its missile program, were not open to negotiation.

However, a Pakistani security source told the news outlet that Pakistan’s key mediator, Field Marshal Asim Munir, informed Trump that the ⁠blockade was an obstacle to talks, and that Trump had replied that he would consider the advice.

One big reason for confusion about Iran’s attendance at the Islamabad talks could be a growing schism between the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and more moderate elements of Iran’s current leadership. 

“There’s a power struggle underway in Iran—and even within the delegation that went to Islamabad for the first round of talks, which offered a sense of the country’s internal tensions,” according to The Economist. 

“Their arguments were so ferocious that Pakistani mediators are reported to have spent as much time refereeing among the Iranians as engaging the Americans.”

One visible sign of this power struggle may have come Saturday, when several ships were reportedly struck by the IRGC in the Strait of Hormuz. The IRGC could have been acting independently, however we don’t know for sure. Thawed relations with the U.S. run counter to the IRGC’s core mission and beliefs, but also could spell degradation in their power within Iran. The idea that the IRGC could end up taking control over Iran, at least to a degree, is a possible outcome TWZ highlighted before the war broke out.

Iran claims its reluctance to negotiate stems in large measure from U.S. Central Command’s interdiction of the Iranian-owned cargo ship M/V Touska on Sunday for what it says was a violation of the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports. CENTCOM said the Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer USS Spruance intercepted the vessel on Sunday as it transited the north Arabian Sea at 17 knots enroute to Bandar Abbas, Iran.

“After Touska’s crew failed to comply with repeated warnings over a six-hour period, Spruance directed the vessel to evacuate its engine room,” CENTCOM stated. “Spruance disabled Touska’s propulsion by firing several rounds from the destroyer’s 5-inch MK 45 Gun into Touska’s engine room. U.S. Marines from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit later boarded the non-compliant vessel, which remains in U.S. custody.”

The ship had recently visited China, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Early Monday morning, CENTCOM released a video of Marines fast-roping aboard the Touska. The video shows an MH-60R Seahawk helicopter taking off from the Spruance. It cuts to a scene of Marines repelling from a Seahawk onto the deck of the ship.

CENTCOM on Monday had no update on how long the ship would be held, what cargo was discovered on board or the fate of the crew.

The command previously released video of the Spruance firing three rounds on the cargo ship from its Mk-45 gun. The projectiles have a range of up to 20 nautical miles and can be fired at a rate of between 16 and 20 rounds per minute.

While the Navy used the Mk-45 to take down Houthi drones in 2024, it’s unclear when a 5-inch gun was last used against another vessel. We have reached out to the Navy for more details.

The U.S. Marine Corps says it is making good progress toward fielding Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) type drones, starting with a landing gear-equipped version of Kratos’ XQ-58 Valkyrie. The service sees those aircraft, and potentially other CCAs, paired with its F-35s as a “bridge” to an entire family of next-generation air combat capabilities, which could include a sixth-generation crewed fighter.

Marine officials discussed the service’s CCA plans and broader future aviation vision during a panel discussion at the Navy League’s Sea Air Space 2026 exhibition, at which TWZ is in attendance. The Corps’ CCA efforts currently fall under a program called Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTAF) Uncrewed Expeditionary Tactical Aircraft (MUX TACAIR). The MAGTAF is the primary organizing concept around which the service deploys air and ground forces.

“So, with the MUX TACAIR effort, I think we’re meeting our testing goals. I would say that it’s on track,” Marine Col. Dan Weber, the Unmanned Aerial Systems Branch Head in the office of the Deputy Commandant for Aviation, said. “From a funding and demand power perspective, I think we’ve got great support. We’ve got good partners. We’ve got good relationships right now to keep that program on track, and I expect that we’re going to meet all of our milestones and goals.”

“From the F-35 side, the vision ultimately is we want the F-35 to be a quarterback with CCAs as attritable mass, as enablers to ensure the MAGTAF can project power, the sensing, the lethality, [and] all of the intangibles that kind of go along with that,” Marine Col. Thomas Bolen, the Tactical Aviation (TACAIR) Branch Head, another one of the panelists, also said. “How we integrate with CCAs is going to be extremely important, and that will bridge us down the road to kind of the sixth-generation family of systems.”

One of the “main things in our portfolio that will be enduring and developing over the next couple years” is “man-unmanned teaming,” Marine Col. Richard Rusnok, head of the Cunningham Group, who was also on the panel, added. “We’re laying the foundation for that with our first foray into Collaborative Combat Aircraft, the MQ-58.”

The Cunningham Group, which also falls under the office of the Deputy Commandant for Aviation, is charged with plotting out the overarching future vision for Marine Corps aviation.

MQ-58 refers to Marine-specific variants of Kratos’ Valkyrie now in development. Last year, the Corps announced that it was transitioning what had originally been experimental work with a small fleet of XQ-58s into a full program of record to acquire an operational platform. Kratos has since partnered with Northrop Grumman to deliver these uncrewed aircraft.

Marine Valkyries will have built-in landing gear, unlike the original version of the drone, but will still be capable of making rocket-assisted takeoffs from static launchers. This means the uncrewed aircraft will retain a valuable degree of runway independence, but that there will also be tradeoffs, as TWZ has previously explored here.

In January, Kratos told TWZ it was hoping to see the first flight of a landing gearing-equipped Valkyrie in early 2026, but there has been no official announcement yet of that milestone being reached. The Marine Corps’ unclassified 2026 Aviation Plan presents the MQ-58 as a capability arriving in the 2026 to 2030 timeframe.

The Marines have also said previously that they expect the MQ-58 to be just the first in a planned series of CCA “increments,” which might entail the future acquisition of completely different types of drones. The service has said in the past that MUX TACAIR, broadly speaking, “will enhance Marine Corps Aviation’s lethality and ability to support the Stand-in Force (SiF) by delivering air-to-ground, reconnaissance, and Electronic Warfare (EW) capabilities.”

The Corps has also already chosen to use General Atomics’ YFQ-42A Dark Merlin at least as a surrogate to test new autonomy technologies and other mission systems under the umbrella of the MUX TACAIR program. The YFQ-42A is also one of two drones under development as part of Increment 1 of the U.S. Air Force’s CCA program. Dark Merlins have been flying since August 2025, but General Atomics announced an indefinite pause in flight activities earlier this month after one of the drones suffered an accident on takeoff.

Speaking on the panel today, Col. Thomas Bolen did not elaborate on what the Marine Corps’ “sixth-generation family of systems” might consist of. However, Marine Lt. Gen. William Swan, the Deputy Commandant for Aviation, said his service was beginning to explore what it might want in a future sixth-generation crewed combat jet during a press roundtable last week, as first reported by Breaking Defense.

“Last year’s Av[iation] Plan didn’t have six-gen on there, and I made the team put it on, because we need to think about that,” Swan said at that time. “We’re not there yet. We’re fast following with the Air Force, right? They got the F-47. The Navy’s looking at F/A-XX, and they’re just starting on that. So we are going to watch.”

“We want to be an all Block 4 F-35 fleet, and that’s probably going to take another 10 years. So we’re probably five to 10 years away from ultimately making that decision. And we’ll see what they have, see what the threat looks like,” Swan continued. “I think right now, if you had to say, ‘hey, what is it going to look like?’, I think it’ll look a lot more like what the Navy’s doing, because we still fly off the carriers, we’re part of the Department of the Navy.”

“I don’t know that we’re going to get high-end, and that’s really not a Marine Corps mission; it’s the Air Force,” he added. “So I think if I had to – if you said, make a decision right now, it would be yes, some amount to augment the fifth-gen [F-35] force, and it would probably look something like the F/A-XX, or whatever the Navy ends up being [sic; acquiring].”

Lt. Gen. Swan, who served as the moderator for today’s panel at Sea Air Space, as well as Col. Bolen, again stressed the importance of the Block 4 upgrades for the F-35, including for future teaming with CCAs. The Block 4 effort has been mired in delays and cost growth, even after a revision in the fielding strategy last year to focus first on a truncated portion of the planned capability improvements. The full package for all three Joint Strike Fighter variants is eventually expected to include a new AN/APQ-85 radar and electronic warfare suite, replacements for the AN/AAQ-37 Distributed Aperture System (DAS) and Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS), and a host of other improvements. A particular point of concern now is that new production F-35s might soon start being delivered without any radars at all, as a result of issues tied to the development of the APG-85.

As the Marine’s top aviation officer noted last week, it could be 10 years before his service at least sees all of its F-35s fully upgraded to the Block 4 standard. That, in turn, could have serious impacts on the service’s broader plans to acquire and field new crewed and uncrewed aircraft.

Marine Corps interest in whatever the Navy chooses for F/A-XX could be an important factor for the future of that program, as well. In response to a question from TWZ at a roundtable on the sidelines of Sea Air Space this morning, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle said he is now hoping to see the selection of the winning design in the F/A-XX competition by August. The program has been in bureaucratic purgatory since the Pentagon moved to effectively shelve it indefinitely last year, with Congress subsequently intervening to keep it funded. How the Navy’s next-generation carrier-based fighter plans will proceed now still very much remains to be seen.

If nothing else, the vision the Marines have put forward today clearly frames Block 4 F-35s ‘quarterbacking’ fleets of CCAs as a key stepping stone to the service’s next-generation aviation capabilities.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com