news

California is considering Proposition 40, which would impose a one-time 5% tax on its billionaires. This initiative is seen as a way to generate funds for healthcare, education, and food assistance, given that California is home to around 250 billionaires worth over $2 trillion. However, political analysts suggest that the proposition’s chances of passing are uncertain, especially with rising debates around income inequality and the implications for the state’s economy.

Opinion polls indicate a divide in support for the tax. A UC Berkeley poll from August showed 48% of likely voters in favor while 41% opposed, and a September poll showed support at 52%. However, historically, California ballot measures need strong initial support to succeed, and undecided voters often lean towards rejecting measures. Critics of the proposition argue it might drive billionaires out of the state, lowering potential tax revenue in the future.

Notable figures, including billionaires like Sergey Brin, are actively campaigning against Proposition 40, with Brin sharing his personal experiences to express concerns about socialism and its effects. Additionally, Governor Gavin Newsom opposes the measure and is advocating for a federal wealth tax instead.

California’s history with ballot initiatives reveals a complex relationship with taxation. While the state has a history of direct democracy, it has only approved about a third of citizen initiatives in the past. A recent attempt to raise taxes on high earners, Proposition 30 in 2022, was rejected, reflecting that even in a predominantly Democratic state, voters may not support aggressive tax increases on the wealthy.

The uniqueness of this initiative lies in its retroactive tax structure, which could limit billionaires’ ability to avoid the tax by relocating. However, supporters like economist Emmanuel Saez argue that the tax will not significantly deter wealthy individuals or tech startups, stressing California’s attractive qualities, such as its universities and infrastructure, which he believes outweigh potential tax burdens.

Overall, Proposition 40 encapsulates the ongoing conversation about wealth inequality in America and the contentious debate surrounding the taxation of the ultra-rich, making it a critical issue for California voters in the upcoming election on November 3.

With information from Reuters

Qatar’s Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani has called on states to respect sovereignty as a condition for security in the Middle East, warning against “cycles of escalation” after “an earthquake” caused by the US-Israeli war on Iran.

The region needs a “framework in which sovereignty is respected” and no state can pose a “threat to another”, Sheikh Mohammed said on Sunday at the opening of the Qatar Economic Forum’s UN General Assembly-adjacent event in New York City.

Sheikh Mohammed – who is also Qatar’s foreign minister – described the economic fallout from the US-Israel war on Iran as “an earthquake” with “its shock waves” reaching far beyond the borders of the Middle East, “challenging assumptions about security and stability”.

“During the crisis, almost every conversation began with security and de-escalation, then turn[ed] to energy supplies, shipping routes, and with our investments, plans will continue. These were different expressions of the same question. When so much is being disrupted, what can still be relied upon?”

He said that Qatar has weathered the test to the “foundations” of the country’s economy and security, but acknowledged that the ongoing conflict in the region is having an impact.

“Permanent security cannot be built through arrangements that leave any state permanently exposed to insecurity,” Sheikh Mohammed said. “We must address the sources of tensions and build confidence.”

Reporting from New York, Al Jazeera’s Kristen Saloomey said that message “no doubt will be repeated” when Gulf leaders meet US President Donald Trump on Tuesday during the UN General Assembly.

Qatar’s $38bn domestic investments

The PM also outlined a domestic shift in Qatar’s investment strategy by pledging more than $38bn in spending on Qatari infrastructure over the next five years.

“That’s meant to attract private investors and send a message of Qatar’s resilience,” Saloomey said, while the PM is nonetheless acknowledging that the ongoing conflict is “having an impact on the region”.

The UNGA starts on Monday and ends on Friday.

The situation in the Middle East and its global ramifications are expected to be high on the agenda during speeches and diplomacy.

Also on Sunday, Qatar’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Majed Al-Ansari, told US media in New York that the mediation efforts by his government are ongoing to restart talks between Tehran and Washington to end the US-Israel war on Iran.

Scott Bessent and He Lifeng meet in New York for US-China talks ahead of the Trump-Xi meeting later this week.

Top economic officials from China and the United States have begun talks in New York City aimed at clearing the way for possible agreements on trade, artificial intelligence and critical minerals ahead of a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping later this week.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng began talks at JPMorgan Chase’s Manhattan headquarters on Sunday morning, with US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer also taking part.

The talks come four days before Trump is due to host Xi at the White House, with both sides looking to ease tensions between the world’s two largest economies.

“I’m looking forward to having focused, fulsome and constructive talks today that will set the stage for our leaders’ meeting,” Bessent told reporters as he arrived.

At the top of the agenda is a fragile US-China trade truce due to expire on November 10.

The agreement, reached in Busan, South Korea, last November, capped US tariffs on Chinese goods at about 20 percent after a tit-for-tat trade fight briefly pushed tariffs into the triple digits.

Washington is also pressuring Beijing over its supply of rare-earth magnets and other critical minerals, crucial to industries ranging from cars to advanced semiconductors.

China promised to restore the flow of critical minerals under last year’s truce, but a senior US official said on Friday that Beijing’s performance had “not been up to par”.

AI enters the talks

Artificial intelligence (AI) is also expected to feature prominently, adding a relatively new issue to negotiations long dominated by trade.

Bessent has said the countries could discuss AI “guardrails” aimed at addressing shared risks, including preventing powerful models from falling into the hands of malign non-state actors.

The talks are expected to cover both open- and closed-weight AI models. Chinese open-weight models have increasingly attracted US companies, in part because they can be cheaper than closed systems developed by US firms such as OpenAI and Anthropic.

“The United States remains the leader in AI,” Bessent said. “And we are open to discussions on avoiding shared risks and avoiding bifurcation of our two systems.”

Another potential point of friction is Iran. China remains one of Tehran’s most important economic partners and buys much of its oil, making Beijing an important target of Washington’s efforts to increase economic pressure on Iran as the US-Israel war on Iran enters its seventh month.

Expectations remain low

Despite the packed agenda, analysts are not expecting a sweeping breakthrough.

“I think there will be some show of deliverables because of the fact that it’s a presidential summit coming, but I don’t feel like we’re on the verge of some sort of breakthrough,” Anna Ashton, a China trade analyst and founder of Ashton Intelligence, told Reuters.

“I think status quo is probably both sides’ general best expectation.”

Former US Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell similarly said the immediate goal may simply be keeping tensions contained.

“One of the only things we can hope for in the short term is a truce, and that this will likely continue through the remainder of this year,” Campbell said.

Sunday’s negotiations are part of a series of meetings between Bessent, He and Greer over the past 16 months aimed at hammering out areas of agreement before Trump and Xi meet face to face.

Fighting is intensifying between Yemen’s Ansarullah Houthis and Saudi Arabia.

For the first time since a ceasefire in 2022, the Houthis fired missiles towards the capital, Riyadh.

The Iran-backed group says it will respond to any escalation with an escalation of its own.

The stand-off highlights the historic enmity between the two sides.

But it also risks dragging the wider region into conflict. What will it take to stop the attacks?

Presenter: Rob Matheson

Guests:

Nawaf Obaid – senior research fellow at King’s College London and former adviser to the Saudi government

Muhanad Seloom – non-resident senior fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs

Ibrahim Jalal – Yemeni affairs analyst who specialises in regional security and armed groups

Embattled German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has vowed to stay on despite exit polls in two local elections suggesting damaging defeats for his centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party.

In the north-eastern state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the party was projected to only just scrape into parliament, while the far-right AfD was on track to win the most votes. Merz called the result “a disaster” for his party.

In Berlin, the ruling CDU was also expected to be beaten by Die Linke (The Left).

Merz is under mounting pressure, with poor approval ratings and rumours he could even be replaced mid-term in a so-called chancellor swap.

Votes took place on Sunday, a fortnight after the CDU saw its vote halved as the Alternative for Germany (AfD) won a major victory in the state of Saxony-Anhalt.

Echoing comments he made after that defeat, Merz told reporters at the party’s Berlin headquarters on Sunday that he would forge ahead with his coalition government’s plans to push through a package of economic, tax and welfare reforms.

“The reforms have to come,” he insisted. “I am taking on this responsibility, because I want to move our country forward”.

“What needs to be done now requires backbone, steadfastness and patience,” Merz said. “I will demonstrate this as CDU party chairman and, above all, as chancellor of our country.”

“I would even go so far as to say that these reforms are the antidote to the authoritarian poison that, with the fascination of authoritarianism, is penetrating ever deeper into our society,” Merz added.

Abbotsford, British Columbia – Every second day, 28,000 litres of raw milk leave Casey Pruim’s farm in Abbotsford in western Canada, entering a distribution system built on the assumption that the milk and the products made from it will have somewhere to go.

While most is consumed in Canada, some had been sold across the border to the United States.

Those sales have largely come to a standstill since US President Donald Trump’s 50 percent tariff on $20bn in Canadian goods, including dairy products, came into effect on August 22.

Pruim, who is also chair of the British Columbia Dairy Association representing about 400 dairy farmers across the province, told Al Jazeera that Canadian farmers do not individually decide which products are exported.

Instead, producers such as Pruim –  whose farm has 330 cows milked three times a day  –  sell into the provincial milk-marketing system, which distributes milk to processors according to demand, including for products exported to the US.

If a processor loses US demand, it may require less milk, with the impact then spread across the provincial pool.

Dylan Kruger, director of public affairs at BC Dairy, told Al Jazeera “there is still considerable uncertainty around the impact of the US tariffs”.

He said it was too early to know how the industry would be impacted or whether milk no longer sold to the US could be sold elsewhere, mitigating financial losses.

But the tariffs and wider trade tensions have already introduced uncertainty and instability for businesses.

“If the processor who’s exporting some of his product to the United States can no longer sell into that market because he’s now priced out of the market with a 50 percent tariff, that’s how it would impact the dairy farm,” Pruim said.

Pruim said if processor demand is squeezed, farmers would be forced to dump the milk. In the worst-case scenario, the herd has to be cut.

“Cows aren’t like a tap; you can’t just turn them on or off,” he said.

His warning captures dairy’s particular vulnerability in a tariff war: Milk is highly perishable, collected on a tight schedule and dependent on processors whose demand can change much faster than farmers can adjust production.

“These tariffs are completely unwarranted,” David Wiens, president of the Dairy Farmers of Canada, told Canada’s CBC News, adding that they would affect “the supply chain, not only in Canada but in the US as well”.

Supply-management system

Dairy trade between Canada and the US has largely operated under a free trade agreement between the US, Mexico and Canada, known as CUSMA in Canada.

Canada manages the supply of dairy, poultry and eggs through a national agricultural policy known as supply management. The system uses production quotas and import controls, including tariffs, to provide farmers with more stable and predictable prices while maintaining domestic supply.

Critics describe the system as protectionist and as a government-backed cartel.

Washington argues that Canada’s supply-management system restricts US dairy exports. Trump posted on Truth Social that “Canada had been ripping off the United States of America for years” and accused it of imposing “ridiculously high tariffs” that made life impossible for US farmers.

Canadian producers reject that argument, saying the existing trade agreement already gives US imports substantial tariff-free access that is not fully utilised.

Canada’s dairy trade deficit with the US has grown significantly since CUSMA came into force on July 1, 2020, according to the Dairy Processors Association of Canada.

In 2020, Canada exported 241.3 million Canadian dollars ($173m) in dairy products to the US and imported 647.4 million Canadian dollars ($462.7m) worth of dairy and dairy products. In 2025, Canadian dairy exports had risen to 308.7 million Canadian dollars ($220.7m) while dairy imports from the US had more than doubled to 1.355 billion Canadian dollars ($968.5m), accounting for 13.8 percent of total value of US dairy exports, according to the association.

Bryan Yu, chief economist at Central 1 credit union, said the immediate shock of losing a major market could be difficult for Canadian producers to absorb because replacement buyers cannot be found quickly.

“There is going to be pain in the near term for a lot of our producers,” Yu told Al Jazeera.

“You really can’t quickly adjust to a 50 percent tariff, because it’s uncharted waters for a lot of industries … and ultimately it shuts [Canadian producers] out, because a lot of them don’t have the margins that they can play with,” he said.

Yu said Canadian consumers might absorb some of the additional supply while exporters search for new markets and higher-value products, but neither adjustment is instantaneous.

“There are global markets as well, especially when you talk about chilled, chilled beef, chilled products and really it’s a question of whether … other types of markets that could be available.”

Canada has also imposed retaliatory tariffs, which came into effect on September 8 and cover $20bn worth of US products.

Dairy products are among the targeted goods. The list includes a 50 percent tariff on milk, cream and whey products and a 25 percent tariff on many cheeses imported from the US.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has framed Ottawa’s response as both retaliation and an attempt to build greater economic resilience.

Announcing the collapse of the latest negotiations, he said Canada would match Washington’s new tariffs “dollar for dollar” to protect workers, farmers, families and businesses.

But retaliatory measures carry risks of their own.

“Canada’s new retaliatory tariffs will help some industries but hurt most and weaken economic growth across the country by raising costs for producers and consumers,” Oxford Economics said in a report.

For now, geography remains important for perishable goods like dairy products that once moved quickly across the US border and cannot be redirected overnight to a distant market without new buyers, logistics and regulatory approvals.

Ottawa’s Trade Commissioner Service is advising affected companies to check their CUSMA compliance, explore available relief and contact trade commissioners about potential new markets.

Yu predicted that the US and Canada could reach a tariff deal in the following months but said the interim period could bring “higher prices, weaker economic activity and deeper mistrust”.

For Pruim, the uncertainty is as destabilising as the tariff threat itself.

“I think, like [for] any Canadian, it’s disappointing to have these trade talks collapse again and just the uncertainty around it.”

The country has battled multiple wildfires amid record-breaking temperatures fueled by El Nino and intense drought conditions.

A massive wildfire has broken out in central Colombia, threatening the popular tourist town of Villa de Leyva, according to local officials.

The forest fire is near the Andean town in the Boyaca department, with flames engulfing the San Marcos hillside above the colonial architecture and cobblestone streets that attract more than a million visitors annually. 

The blaze has already consumed 40 hectares of native forest, sending massive plumes of smoke that are visible from the town’s central square, according to Colombian authorities.

On Saturday night, Colombian President Abelardo de la Espriella posted on X that “Villa de Leyva is not alone”, pledging to mobilise all state resources to fight the fire and protect “this historical jewel” and “beautiful city that is the pride of Colombia”.

To combat the flames, the Boyaca department government said it is dispatching two aircraft. A military helicopter will also join the effort, along with firefighters from the capital, Bogota, Interior Minister Rodrigo Lara said.

The mayor of Bogota, Carlos Fernando Galan, will be sending a team of firefighters to join local crews from Tunja and Boyaca, reinforcing containment efforts and securing the urban centre, Lara said.

In the equatorial Andes, forest fires peak during the dry season, but this year they are fuelled by a severe El Nino weather pattern. Record high temperatures and lack of moisture have turned vast expanses of the Andean vegetation into tinderboxes. That has intensified a crisis that has already started 18 active wildfires across the country, according to the latest official data from Colombia’s National Unit for Disaster Risk Management (UNGRD).

The impacts of El Nino, a natural weather pattern, are felt globally and do not affect the entire South American continent in the same way, inducing extreme droughts in some regions and torrential flooding in others. This year, it comes supercharged by the effects of climate change, which is worrying many scientists, governments and aid workers.

The warming of the adjacent Pacific has triggered catastrophic flash floods and landslides in countries such as Peru and Ecuador.

Unlike in the southern part of the continent, where countries including Argentina, Chile and Uruguay have been expecting unseasonably heavy rainfall, El Nino has the opposite effect in the northern part of the continent. A significant reduction in rainfall leads to severe drought conditions which can suppress cloud formation and displace normal rain patterns, driving average temperatures well above normal.

The soaring heat rapidly evaporates moisture from the ground and water basins, leaving countries such as Colombia with extended periods of drought and critically low precipitation.

“El Nino can bring devastating climate extremes on its own, but it’s unfolding today on a much warmer planet, increasing the likelihood that heat, drought, floods and fires will push communities and ecosystems beyond anything they have experienced before,” said Stephanie Roe, lead climate scientist with the World Wildlife Fund.

The game hinged on Huijsen’s red card early in the second half for pulling down Giuliano Simeone in the box.

Atletico Madrid edged 10-man Real Madrid 2-1 in a La Liga derby clash to leave Jose Mourinho’s side trailing leaders Barcelona by six points.

Dean Huijsen was sent off early in the second half for Los Blancos on Sunday before Alejandro Grimaldo and Jonathan David’s goals earned Diego Simeone’s Atletico victory, with Antonio Rudiger pulling one back late on.

Atletico rose to second, five points behind Barca and one ahead of Real Madrid, who chalked up a second defeat of the campaign.

The game hinged on Huijsen’s red card early in the second half, for pulling down Giuliano Simeone in the box which led to a penalty, tucked away by Grimaldo to set Atletico on their way.

Mourinho started with Aurelien Tchouameni in midfield over Bernardo Silva, opting for defensive clout over creativity.

There was more tension than footballing quality in the first half, with neither side capable of creating any clear chances.

The main talking point was an incident between Jude Bellingham and Atletico defender Cristian Romero.

The England international threw himself into a tackle and Romero trod on his leg, with Bellingham booked initially, but after a VAR review the referee removed the card and issued it to the Atletico man.

Madrid were also unhappy with a heavy tackle by Lee Kang-in on Federico Valverde which went unpunished just before half-time.

It was a scrappy battle, intense but lacking excitement comparative to the star power on the pitch, especially in Madrid’s front line, with Vinicius Junior, Kylian Mbappe and Bellingham kept quiet.

The game burst into life early in the second half when Huijsen pulled back Giuliano Simeone’s arm as the forward ran through on goal and Atletico were awarded a penalty.

Huijsen was dismissed after a VAR review and Grimaldo beat Madrid goalkeeper Thibaut Courtois from the penalty spot.

Mourinho reacted immediately by replacing the underwhelming Vinicius and Arda Guler and sending on club record signing Yan Diomande and Rudiger.

It was Atletico who struck next, though, with Canada international David tucking away Giuliano Simeone’s raking low cross on 59 minutes for his third goal in three matches.

The hosts came close to getting a third but Courtois made an excellent save to deny Julian Alvarez and Ibrahima Konate reacted brilliantly to head Grimaldo’s effort from the rebound off the line.

Atletico goalkeeper Jan Oblak saved from Diomande and Bellingham rowed with Giuliano Simeone as Madrid’s frustrations showed, impotent to change the course of the game.

Madrid pulled a goal back in the final stages with Rudiger heading Bernardo Silva’s cross past Oblak. However, it was too little too late for Mourinho’s side.

Chinese technology giant Huawei is facing a landmark criminal trial in the United States amid Washington’s long-running tech rivalry with Beijing.

The trial began in federal court in Brooklyn, New York, on September 9, with US prosecutors portraying Huawei as a criminal enterprise that spent two decades stealing technology from US companies, deceiving banks and circumventing sanctions on Iran.

Huawei has pleaded not guilty and says the US government is attempting to turn ordinary business disputes and the actions of individual employees into evidence of a company-wide conspiracy.

The trial is expected to last about three months and overlaps with Chinese President Xi Jinping’s September 23-25 visit to Washington, where trade, artificial intelligence, tariffs and access to critical technologies are likely to be on the agenda.

Here is what you need to know:

What are the allegations against Huawei?

US prosecutors have accused the company of racketeering, money laundering, bank and wire fraud, sanctions violations, obstruction and conspiring to steal trade secrets from five US technology companies.

Prosecutors say the alleged wrongdoing stretched from about 1999 to 2020.

“Theft, lies, cover-up,” Justice Department lawyer Taylor Stout said in his opening remarks.

Prosecutors allege Huawei stole technology, including internet-router source code from Cisco and a robotic arm used by T-Mobile to test phones.

They also accuse Huawei of concealing the nature of its operations in Iran to move US dollars through the financial system despite US sanctions.

The government also alleges that Huawei supplied equipment that could help Iranian authorities monitor protesters during demonstrations in 2009.

How has Huawei responded?

Huawei, a major manufacturer of telecommunications equipment, denies any wrongdoing.

The tech giant’s lawyer Brian Heberlig told jurors the case was about “competition, not conspiracy. Innovation, not theft. Ordinary business dealings, not criminal conduct.”

Heberlig accused prosecutors of “cherry-picking isolated events” to construct a conspiracy that did not exist. Huawei’s defence says some incidents involved individual employees whose actions were dealt with internally, rather than reflecting company policy.

He told jurors that prosecutors will describe routine activities by global tech companies “but will twist those ordinary activities to try to make them look criminal”.

Huawei separately described the broader prosecution as an attempt to undermine its competitiveness, saying the US government’s “overarching narrative is demonstrably false” and that it had “the utmost respect for intellectual property”.

The case originated during Donald Trump’s first presidency. His administration placed Huawei on a US trade blacklist in 2019 and pushed allies to exclude the company from 5G networks, arguing its equipment could present national security and espionage risks.

Huawei has repeatedly denied that its technology is used for spying.

What has China’s response been?

Beijing has strongly criticised the prosecution, which has come weeks ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to the US.

On Thursday, a Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson said “the Chinese government firmly opposes the US side’s suppression and containment of Chinese enterprises”, when asked about the case and the American prosecutor’s “criminal enterprise” description.

China “firmly supports Chinese enterprises in safeguarding their legitimate rights and interests”, the spokesperson said at a regular news conference.

What is Huawei, and has the tech giant faced investigations before?

Huawei is one of the world’s largest telecommunications equipment manufacturers. It also produces smartphones and has become increasingly important to China’s semiconductor and AI industries.

Its activities have drawn scrutiny well beyond the current US trial.

Belgian prosecutors launched an investigation in 2025 into suspected bribery involving the European Parliament allegedly for Huawei’s benefit.

The European Parliament subsequently suspended access for Huawei lobbyists. Huawei said it had “zero-tolerance” for corruption and would cooperate with authorities.

Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou made worldwide headlines in 2018 when she was arrested on a US warrant after landing in Vancouver, straining both US-China and China-Canada relations.

The warrant was filed after a sealed indictment accused her and the company of bank fraud for misleading HSBC and other banks about Huawei’s business in Iran.

She returned to China in 2021 under a deferred prosecution agreement, and the charges against her were later dismissed.

Admissions Meng made as part of that agreement can, however, be presented as evidence in Huawei’s current trial after a US judge ruled them admissible in June.

They are legally separate but form part of a much wider economic and technological competition between Washington and Beijing.

Huawei became one of the most prominent targets of US restrictions during Trump’s first term.

Since then, the rivalry has expanded from telecommunications and 5G into semiconductors and AI, with Washington restricting China’s access to advanced US chips and chipmaking technology.

Last week, Dario Amodei, the CEO of Anthropic, warned that a “Chinese lead in AI would pose grave danger for the US and the world” and urged Washington to maintain restrictions on cutting-edge AI tech. He also called for action against alleged “distillation” of US models by Chinese AI laboratories.

China’s Foreign Ministry on September 14 accused the US tech giant of “fearmongering”.

“Fomenting various threats, engaging in confrontation and malicious competition will only disrupt the process of global governance of artificial intelligence and is not in the interests of any party,” said ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun.

The state-backed Global Times newspaper went further, describing Amodei’s proposal as a “Cold War playbook” whose real purpose was to curb Chinese AI development and preserve US technological dominance.

China and the US were engaged in a tit-for-tat tariff war at the beginning of Trump’s presidency in 2025. The trade war ended in a truce, but the world’s two largest economies have failed to strike a trade deal.

Beijing, meanwhile, has used its dominance of critical minerals as leverage and accelerated efforts to build domestic alternatives to American technology.

Currently, China controls most of the world’s rare earth minerals, including metals that are necessary for the manufacture of many technological items, from smartphones to fighter jets. The world’s second-largest economy has 60 percent of these minerals and processes 90 percent of the world’s supply.

In October, Beijing announced plans to require foreign companies to obtain permission to export Chinese rare earth equipment or material.

This meant companies anywhere in the world would need a licence to export rare earth magnets and certain semiconductor materials that contain even trace amounts of minerals sourced from China or produced using Chinese technology.

China’s Ministry of Commerce said its export controls on rare earths, which Trump had labelled “surprising” and “very hostile”, were introduced in response to a series of US measures.

The fourth China-Africa Peace and Security Forum was held in Beijing, China, from September 15 to 17, 2026, coinciding with the 13th Xiangshan Forum and the 70th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and African countries. Military representatives and defense officials from the African Union and 41 African nations participated. This expansion of bilateral military relations between Beijing and African countries comes at a time when Beijing and Washington are vying for influence on the African continent, while African nations seek to diversify their partners and strengthen their security capabilities, particularly in regions facing escalating threats, such as the Horn of Africa. The fourth China-Africa Peace and Security Forum, held in Beijing, represents a pivotal milestone reflecting the growing military and defense cooperation between China and 41 African countries, along with the African Union, as Beijing seeks to solidify its security presence on the African continent.  The most prominent theme of the forum and defense cooperation was the speech by Chinese Defense Minister Admiral Dong Jun, who called for deepening strategic coordination and developing mechanisms for defense exchange and maritime security based on equality and mutual benefit, without political dictates or conditions, between China and African countries. This reflects the growing African interest in partnership with China, driven by a desire to diversify military options and avoid the pressures and conditions associated with Western and American partnerships. The China-Africa Peace and Security Forum witnessed the signing of bilateral memoranda of understanding to enhance military capabilities, training, and the exchange of expertise between China and some participating countries, such as Mauritania.

The fourth session of the China-Africa Peace and Security Forum, held in Beijing, China, witnessed a significant deepening of bilateral military cooperation between China and Africa. On the sidelines of the forum, the Islamic Republic of Mauritania and the People’s Republic of China signed two memoranda of understanding to strengthen and develop military cooperation between the two countries. This signing took place during a meeting between Mauritanian Defense Minister Hanan Ould Sidi and his Chinese counterpart, Admiral Dong Jun.  The most prominent areas of the memoranda of understanding included strengthening military and security capabilities to address challenges in the Sahel region and Africa, particularly combating terrorism and organized crime. They also focused on military education and training for African military personnel and the exchange of expertise, intelligence, and security experiences between the two sides. This move is part of a broader Chinese strategy to enhance defense partnerships with African countries (with representatives from 41 nations participating), emphasizing joint military training and coordination.

In this context, cooperation between the Chinese People’s Liberation Army and African armies is steadily increasing, encompassing training, counter-terrorism exercises, and peacekeeping operations.  The most prominent forms and areas of military cooperation between China and Africa include joint military exercises, where the Chinese army conducts joint drills with African countries, such as the Peace Unit exercises with Tanzania and Mozambique to combat terrorism on land and at sea. This cooperation also encompasses peacekeeping and assistance efforts, with China participating in numerous UN peacekeeping missions in Africa and deploying warships to combat piracy off the coast of Somalia. Simultaneously, there is an increase in military education and training programs, with Chinese military academies hosting African leaders, defense ministers, and officers to enhance professional exchanges and build long-term strategic relationships. To this end, China regularly organizes the China-Africa Peace and Security Forum to strengthen defense coordination and consultation with various countries on the continent. The objectives of the Chinese military presence in Africa include modernizing African military expertise, providing the People’s Liberation Army with field operational experience in diverse and complex security environments, and protecting Chinese interests and securing massive Chinese investments and economic projects related to the Belt and Road Initiative. With increasing practical cooperation between China and Africa, Beijing is bolstering its diplomatic and strategic influence on the African continent in the face of international competition with Washington.

China’s military presence in Africa can be summarized as achieving three major strategic objectives, such as modernizing African military expertise, providing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army with field experience, and protecting the substantial investment interests of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. These three objectives and their shared benefits can be detailed as follows:

1) Modernizing African Military Expertise:

China seeks to present itself as a reliable and alternative security partner for African countries through various modernization mechanisms, including:

– Technology Transfer and Training: By providing advanced training programs for African officers at Chinese military academies and transferring modern tactical and operational knowledge.

– Defense Infrastructure Development: By contributing to the construction of bases, logistics centers, and training facilities for African armies.

– Arms and Equipment Sales: By supplying African countries with modern weapons systems at competitive prices, such as drones, armored vehicles, and communication systems, thereby enhancing the combat effectiveness of these armies.

– Counterterrorism and Counter-Piracy: By building joint capabilities between the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and local African armies to counter unconventional security threats in conflict zones and maritime piracy areas, such as the Gulf of Aden.

2) Gaining Field Operational Experience for the PLA

The diverse and complex African security environment represents an important real-world testing ground for the Chinese military, which lacks modern field combat experience outside its borders. This benefit is achieved through:

– Testing Chinese weapons, military equipment, and armaments: By experiencing the effectiveness and quality of Chinese weapons and military equipment in harsh climatic and geographical environments (desert, tropical).

– Remote Operations Management: Developing the ability to command and control forces across vast geographical distances and testing the effectiveness of cross-border supply and logistics.

– Participation in peacekeeping forces: China’s extensive involvement in UN peacekeeping missions in Africa, such as in Mali, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic, provides Chinese officers with experience interacting with international militaries and managing complex security crises.

– Naval and operational presence: Utilizing the Chinese military base in Djibouti as a launchpad for evacuation operations, counter-piracy efforts, and protecting shipping lanes enhances the flexibility of the Chinese navy.

3) Protecting interests and securing investments under China’s Belt and Road Initiative

Africa is a key pillar of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, and the military role in protecting these massive Chinese investments is complemented by:

– Securing critical infrastructure: Protecting ports, railways, mines, and energy fields financed and operated by Chinese companies against any political instability or terrorist attacks.

– Securing Maritime Routes: Ensuring the safety of vital maritime trade routes for transporting raw materials from Africa to China and Chinese goods to global markets via the Red Sea and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

– Protecting Chinese Communities: Providing security and rapid intervention capabilities to evacuate thousands of Chinese workers and citizens from African conflict zones when necessary.

From the preceding presentation and analysis, we understand the importance of the China-Africa Peace and Security Forum in strengthening defense exchange mechanisms, defining and deepening regional cooperation in maritime security, combating terrorism and extremism, and building defense capabilities in emerging areas to address escalating security risks on the African continent, such as the Sahel region. The Forum provides an opportunity to enhance consultation and exchange views between China and African countries on various peace and security issues and to develop prospects for cooperation between China and African countries in related fields. China-Africa cooperation encompasses military training, naval exercises and patrols, counter-terrorism, mine clearance, and securing shipping lanes, as well as the transfer of expertise and technology and the marketing of Chinese weapons.

The top U.S. Air Force officer in Europe, who also serves as the NATO Allied Air Command leader, said he has been tasked with enacting new alliance plans to defend against cruise missiles and drones. He was responding to questions about a drone that NATO had to shoot down after it entered Lithuanian airspace overnight. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said Tuesday morning that the incident was “part of a broader pattern of Russian aggression and provocation against Europe, testing our readiness and our resolve.”

The drone incursion into Lithuania took place against the backdrop of the ongoing Russian war on Ukraine and amid a spate of so-called ‘hybrid’ or ‘gray zone’ actions Moscow has been accused of carrying out throughout Europe, including a recent attempted drone attack on the Leipzig-Halle airport in Germany.

“I don’t know what’s in the mind of Putin or his fielded forces about those one-way attack drones or even cruise missiles, like we’ve seen enter Polish airspace just a few months ago. In July, we had an AS-23 cruise missile enter Poland,” Lt. Gen. Jason T. Hinds, Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe/U.S. Air Forces Africa (USAFE), and Commander of the Allied Air Command, said in response to a question about the drone shootdown over Lithuania. He was speaking during a media roundtable at the Air & Space Forces Air, Space and Cyber Conference that TWZ is attending.

Hinds added that while he doesn’t “know the why behind” the drone incursion into Lithuania, he has been tasked by U.S. Air Force Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich, who serves as NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), “to fully implement EVA [Enhanced Vigilance Activity] Eastern Sentry and now its Standing Defense Plan 12000, which gives the nations the capabilities that they need to defend their airspace against either one-way attack drones like the one that you described last night, or a cruise missile.”

EVA Eastern Sentry is a mission NATO stood up in September 2025 after “an unprecedented number of Russian drones and planes violated the airspace of several NATO Allies,” according to the alliance. “Allies are contributing additional capabilities and assets to NATO’s deterrence and defense – for instance, more fighter jets, helicopters, transport aircraft, air defense systems, surveillance aircraft and frigates – and improving the coordination of these assets through NATO.”

Is the Kremlin testing Europe’s defenses with drone incursions? | DW News

Standing Defense Plan 12000 is a new plan for integrated air and missile defense across the alliance. Grynkewich introduced the concept during testimony to Congress in March.

Hinds acknowledged that Russia could be testing the alliance.

“It’s not about the small UASs; that’s typically a national responsibility, and it could be probing,” the Air Force general noted. “Regardless of the intent behind it, what we want to be prepared for is the second that a one-way attack drone or a cruise missile is first and foremost detected – hopefully well before it enters NATO territory – we want to know it. We want to know where it’s coming from. We want to have the capability to sense it. We want to be able to have the C2 [command and control] systems to be able to decide what to do about it, and then have the right kit to be able to act.”

Despite an integrated air and missile defense system that includes Patriot surface-to-air missile batteries, NATO currently is primarily “using air power” against drones and cruise missiles “and that’s not putting us on the right side of the cost curve,” Hinds stated. “But we want to get there.”

Using NATO jets to take down drones “is very effective, just like what you saw last night, and many other times,” but not necessarily efficient, Hinds explained. 

Video shows debris after NATO jets shoot down a drone over Lithuania

“I think there’s been at least five other cases of allied nations providing air power to shoot down one-way attack drones,” he proffered. “I want to get to the point where we’re doing it efficiently, using lower-cost interceptors, hopefully ground-based, and in some cases air-based that are cheaper to use, so we’ll see what the intent may be. Intelligence organizations are going to provide us with that intelligence later on, but I just don’t know yet.”

You can see one of those NATO jet engagements with drones in the following video.

It should be noted that Europe is starting to follow the American lead in using less expensive laser-guided, air-to-air rockets as drone-killing weapons. TWZ was the first to report about the use of 70mm Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) rockets by the U.S. The U.K. Royal Air Force announced in May of this year that its Typhoons were now equipped with APKWS rockets while the French recently tested their own 68mm laser-guided rockets from Rafale fighters.

The Defence Procurement Agency has successfully completed integration testing of 68 mm laser-guided rockets on the Rafale fighter jet. The time between the contract being awarded for this new capability and initial operational capability being achieved was less than 8 months. pic.twitter.com/rR2Nij9EzY

— French Aid to Europe 🇨🇵 🇪🇺 (@aidefranceukr) July 13, 2026

As the threats have evolved, NATO has “transitioned away from air policing, and we’ve transitioned to air defense for some specific reasons,” the general pointed out. “One is readiness. Air policing is a readiness decrementing mission that the alliance has done for years. There’s also an assurance mission that we did for 32 nations. That’s transitioned to air defense now. Air defense means we have the right kit, multi-domain, to be able to be put in the right place based on indications, warnings, or real threats, like you saw last night, inside of the Baltic nations, to be able to respond decisively and quickly.”

“There’s also a deterrence value there,” Hinds added. “So if Russia does fly a one-way attack drone or a cruise missile, they know that we’re going to be in the right spot to be able to detect it and then defend against it.”

“These are limited incursions, right? Small numbers. Here’s what I see: hybrid activities may, in fact, only be one of the few levers that Putin has available to him, because he sees that he does not have an advantage in geography, domain, or readiness,” Hinds suggested.

“Think about that,” he urged. “So what are we seeing? We’re not seeing a massing of forces across the opposite side of Finland, a new NATO nation. We’re not seeing a massing of forces whatsoever in any domain opposite of Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, or Estonia. You’re seeing a significant number of one-way attack drones in the Black Sea targeting Ukraine. Some of them are entering Romania. What you’re not seeing is a direct confrontation in geography. We’re not seeing direct competition in domains. And I think Putin knows that we are ready. I know he knows that we’re a defensive alliance. I know he knows that we have an advantage in every domain against them, and I think that’s likely why you’re seeing things like what you’re seeing with hybrid activity.”

Though below the level of armed conflict, these Russian activities raise the potential for something worse, Hinds posited.

“The risk about hybrid activity, from my perspective, is it could lead to escalation, and that’s where I hope that we get back towards deterrence again, and that the nations they’re going to decide to do what they want to do when it comes to these hybrid activities,” the general said. “Some of them are law enforcement. Some of them are military responses, and that’s up to the nations to decide how they’re going to deal with that. Not me.”

“But what I owe General Grynkewich is to ensure that we are demonstrating our deterrence each and every day, and we’re doing that effectively across all domains,” Hinds added. “And to ensure that Putin knows that if he tries something against the alliance, that we will be there, and we’re ready to win decisively if challenged.”

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

Israel’s Rafael and Lockheed Martin are working to accelerate integration of the 1,000-pound-class SPICE standoff weapon with the Israeli Air Force’s F-35I Adir. The development could potentially open the door for the precision-guided munition to be offered to other Joint Strike Fighter operators.

Rafael Advanced Defense Systems announced the effort September 15 during the Air & Space Forces Air, Space and Cyber Symposium that TWZ is attending. The work is being conducted as a joint project with Lockheed Martin at the U.S. contractor’s facilities in the United States and is expected to take several months.

Rafael says the effort could eventually make the weapon available to other F-35 operators. “At a later stage, F-35 operators worldwide will be able to field SPICE 1000,” the company said.

The effort was previously referenced in U.S. government documentation before Rafael’s announcement. Published in August, the Pentagon F-35 Modernized Selected Acquisition Report identified the weapon as the “Israel-unique Smart, Precise Impact, Cost-Effective 1000B,” or SPICE 1000B, and said its integration was progressing “with a strategy to accelerate the implementation via a SPICE Lite process.”

The report does not explain what the “SPICE Lite” process entails.

SPICE — which stands for Smart, Precise Impact, and Cost-Effective — is a family of electro-optically guided standoff weapons developed by Rafael. The family includes SPICE 2000, SPICE 1000, and SPICE 250, with the numbers corresponding broadly to the weight class of the underlying warheads.

SPICE 250, SPICE 1000 & SPICE 2000 Air-to-Surface Missiles

Based around a 1,000-pound-class bomb, SPICE 1000 uses pop-out wings to achieve a manufacturer-stated range of approximately 125 kilometers, or 78 miles. Rafael gives the weapon a claimed circular error probable of around three meters.

The glide bomb combines inertial and satellite-aided navigation with an electro-optical seeker. During the terminal phase, its seeker can compare the observed target area with stored imagery using scene-matching algorithms, allowing the weapon to continue its attack without relying exclusively on GPS. That feature allows it to engage targets autonomously, offering the launch aircraft a true ‘fire and forget’ capability, and provides resilience in GPS-denied or GPS-degraded environments.

SPICE can also be programmed to approach a target from a particular azimuth and impact angle. This provides flexibility in selecting the terminal attack geometry and can support steep attack profiles against targets where penetration from above is desirable.

SPICE 1000 is not a new Israeli capability. It has been operational with the Israel Air Force since 2017 and is already integrated with Israeli F-16I Sufa, F-16C/D Barak, F-15I Ra’am, and F-15 Baz fighters.

“SPICE 1000 has been sold to several countries and is in operational service with a number of air forces worldwide,” Rafael said. “It has served as a primary munition of the Israeli Air Force for several years, including extensive use in recent long-range operations flown from F-15 and F-16 aircraft.”

The Israeli Air Force has released footage showing SPICE weapons being used during recent operations, including imagery from the weapon’s own perspective during its terminal attack.

Israel’s F-35I is already unusual within the international Joint Strike Fighter fleet. The IDF has developed and demonstrated an external Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) carriage capability, and said in March 2025 that the Israeli Adir was the only F-35 to have conducted operational strikes with an external weapons configuration. You can read more about that here.

However, according to The Jerusalem Post, the SPICE weapon is expected to be carried internally by F-35Is equipped with Technology Refresh 3, or TR-3, hardware, which would maintain its low-observable configuration. Neither Rafael nor Lockheed Martin has publicly detailed the specific carriage configuration, aircraft modifications or software associated with the current integration effort.

The long-delayed TR-3 is a major upgrade to the F-35’s computing architecture and provides the processing infrastructure required for subsequent Block 4 capabilities. Israel received its first three F-35Is equipped with TR-3 hardware in January of this year.

Lockheed Martin describes Block 4 as the F-35 program’s “most significant evolution of F-35 capabilities to date,” encompassing more than 70 major upgrades, including increased weapons capacity, advanced electronic warfare capabilities, and improved target recognition.

It remains unclear if the SPICE 1000 integration itself requires the full Block 4 configuration.

The potential significance of the Israeli integration extends beyond the Israel Air Force. If SPICE 1000 ultimately becomes available to other F-35 operators, the completed Israeli integration could provide those countries with another pathway toward fielding a precision standoff weapon rather than requiring them to begin an integration effort entirely from scratch.

Integrating national weapons onto the F-35 can be a lengthy process. It involves not only the weapon itself, but aircraft software, interfaces, weapons-bay compatibility, flight testing, mission-system integration and certification within the U.S.-led F-35 program.

The United Kingdom’s experience with MBDA’s SPEAR 3 provides a good example of the challenges.

In 2022, the U.K. Ministry of Defence said that scheduled delivery dates for SPEAR 3 had been delayed because of “prioritisation in the overall F-35 development programme,” which is managed by the U.S.-led F-35 Joint Program Office.

The program has continued to progress, including F-35B integration work and flight testing. But in June 2026, the U.K. government said that completion of mission-systems integration and jettison trials remained part of a wider weapons-integration program and that SPEAR 3 integration and subsequent release to service would occur in the early 2030s.

The United Kingdom has consequently approved the acquisition of the GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II as an interim standoff weapon for the F-35B until SPEAR 3 enters service.

Nevertheless, another F-35 operator would not be able to adopt the Israeli SPICE integration without additional work. National configurations, software baselines, certification requirements, weapons procurement, and export approvals would still have to be addressed.

Already, however, aided by its uniquely configured test jet, Israel has demonstrated an unusual ability to integrate nationally developed capabilities onto its F-35I. This has been aided by privileged access to the Joint Strike Fighter’s closely guarded software codes.

A U.K. parliamentary report noted delays in integrating British weapons onto the F-35B while contrasting that with Israel’s ability to integrate domestic electronic warfare systems, sensors, and communications technology onto its Adir.

Meanwhile, Rafael and Lockheed Martin already have experience working together on the SPICE family.

The companies signed a teaming agreement in 2019 covering the joint development, marketing and manufacture of SPICE guidance kits for the U.S. market. In 2021, they expanded the agreement to include SPICE 250, including development for potential sales to the United States and Poland. With some unque capabilities, SPICE could be of particular interest to the U.S. military, especially as it seeks to leverage multiple sources of precision munitions.

The SPICE family also extends beyond the 1,000-pound-class weapon now being integrated with the F-35.

At the other end of the family is SPICE 250, a much smaller weapon designed around a 250-pound-class payload. It incorporates a man-in-the-loop capability that allows an operator to redirect the weapon during its flight and abort the attack if necessary.

SPICE 250 – Stand-Off Air-to-Surface Weapon System

Its smaller dimensions also allow substantially greater weapon carriage. Rafael has marketed configurations in which a fighter can carry as many as 16 SPICE 250 weapons.

SPICE 1000, by comparison, is a substantially heavier weapon intended to provide longer-range precision attack capability with a larger warhead.

The SPICE effort is taking place alongside several other Israeli initiatives aimed at extending the F-35I’s range and weapons capabilities.

The Pentagon’s F-35 documentation has referenced ongoing work on extended-range fuel tanks and electronic warfare pods for the Israeli Air Force, although it did not provide fielding dates.

In May 2026, Israel’s defense ministry awarded an extended-range capability development contract for the F-35I to Elbit Systems subsidiary Cyclone. The capability is intended to increase the aircraft’s radius of action and reduce its reliance on aerial refueling during long-range missions.

Israel has also announced a major expansion of its F-35I fleet, with plans to increase the number of aircraft from 50 to 100. The country is simultaneously expanding its forthcoming F-15IA fleet from 25 to 50 aircraft.

For the F-35I, SPICE 1000 adds a long-range strike option that pairs the aircraft’s low observability with substantial standoff range and a relatively heavy warhead. This offers a survivability advantage in increasingly contested environments, allowing attacks from farther outside capable air defense systems and under heavy electronic warfare conditions. This factor will only become more important as integrated air defense systems become more capable and the F-35 more detectable.

Exactly how the weapon will be integrated remains undisclosed. Rafael and Lockheed Martin have not announced the final carriage configuration, aircraft software requirements, flight-test schedule, or expected date for operational clearance.

At the same time, Rafael is explicitly positioning the effort as a potential pathway for SPICE 1000 to become available to the wider F-35 community. This would conceivably give other operators another option at a time when integrating a new standoff weapon onto the fighter can take years.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Israeli settlers have stormed the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem again and performed Jewish prayers in the courtyard.

The weekend witnessed a series of provocative acts by Israeli politicians and settlers in the build-up to Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, and next month’s Israeli election.

On Thursday, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and others again stormed the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound for Yom Kippur. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also visited a labyrinth of tunnels below occupied East Jerusalem on Saturday.

Early on Sunday morning, Netanyahu released videos and photographs on his official Instagram account documenting his participation in Jewish “Selichot” prayers at the Western Wall, known as the al-Buraq Wall to Muslims.

The tunnels lie underneath occupied East Jerusalem’s bustling Old City and the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, making the incursions particularly sensitive for the occupied territory’s Palestinian population.

Translation: Happy New Year and a good final signature to all Israelis from the Western Wall.

Under the protection of security forces, Netanyahu, accompanied by several government ministers and thousands of Israeli settlers, made his way onto the plaza of the wall in occupied East Jerusalem on Saturday evening, ahead of Yom Kippur.

Footage shared by the prime minister showed him performing the rituals from behind bulletproof glass. In another video, Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, passed through one of the excavation tunnels running beneath the Western Wall while Jewish prayers took place.

“Well, we are in the tunnels at the al-Buraq Wall. It is moving to touch the rock of our existence. We are here very close to the Holy of Holies. We are here, and we will always remain here,” Netanyahu stated in the video.

Translation: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife in prayer for the safety of Israeli soldiers tonight at the Western Wall.

Yom Kippur incursions

The prime minister’s subterranean visit unfolded alongside a wave of settler incursions into the holy site above ground.

On its official Facebook page, the Palestinian Jerusalem governorate reported that about 570 settlers had stormed the courtyards of the Al-Aqsa Mosque by 10am local time on Sunday. According to the governorate, the settlers performed Talmudic rituals and “epic prostrations” to mark Yom Kippur.

The Palestinian group Hamas strongly condemned the incursions in a press statement published on its official Telegram channel.

“The storming by Benjamin Netanyahu, against whom an arrest warrant has been issued by the International Criminal Court, of the tunnels and excavations beneath the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque and the al-Buraq Wall, and the provocative statements and false claims accompanying it about the so-called Holy of Holies, represents a blatant attack on the identity of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and its status, and a provocation to the feelings of our Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nations,” the statement in Arabic said.

The group emphasised Al-Aqsa’s exclusively Islamic heritage and rejected Israel’s ongoing excavations under the holy site.

Religious or political?

Israel has been digging beneath occupied East Jerusalem for years, a move that has been condemned by archaeologists and the United Nations. The works are believed to be intended to find proof of the rampart wall of the Second Temple, but experts say there is no proof of this claim. Others view these measures as an attempt by Israel to cement its rule over occupied Palestinian land.

In 2022, Netanyahu led a cabinet meeting in the labyrinth, describing Israel as the “landlords of Jerusalem”. East Jerusalem has been earmarked as the capital of a future Palestinian state by Palestinians.

The timing of Saturday’s visit not only comes on the eve of Yom Kippur but also at a time of huge political significance for the Israeli leader, who trails in the polls against his rival Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the Yashar party.

Ahmed al-Hila, a political analyst specialising in Middle East affairs and the Arab-Israeli conflict, told Al Jazeera that Netanyahu is using religious symbolism to try to secure his political survival ahead of October’s general election.

“Benjamin Netanyahu wanted, through this visit … creating this symbolism for himself as a leader spearheading the right wing to consolidate the Israeli political and religious narrative in the Al-Aqsa Mosque, to attempt to gather the largest possible number of votes to serve as an electoral lever for him,” said al-Hila.

“As for the intense security mobilisation and Benjamin Netanyahu’s appearance behind a bulletproof glass shield [during a speech above ground], this is a direct indication that this city has not, up to this moment, submitted to Israeli security control, despite the repeated and frequent talk that Jerusalem is ‘the capital of the State of Israel’.”

The visit could also be a message to the wider world, amid global criticism of the controversial illegal settlement project E1, which the Israeli government has issued tenders for, and which appears designed to sever East Jerusalem from the occupied West Bank.

“What further confirms this conclusion is that initiating the settlement project called E1 does not only isolate the northern West Bank from its south … but this settlement project completes the isolation of the city of Jerusalem from its Palestinian surroundings,” Al-Hila said. “Therefore, this visit with its political symbolism confirms the idea of Israeli sovereignty over the city of Jerusalem.”

The Labour Party chair has said Sir Jim Ratcliffe loses “the moral high ground” by making statements about the UK while living in tax exile.

Speaking to Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Bridget Phillipson said she would take the billionaire businessman’s comments that the UK was “on the slide” with a “pinch of salt”.

Sir Jim, the founder of petrochemical giant Ineos and Manchester United’s co-owner, told the BBC he has lost confidence in the UK due to a combination of high taxes and high immigration.

He has been a tax resident in Monaco since 2020 and said “things would have to get better” in the UK for him to return.

When questioned over the remarks, Phillipson said Sir Jim loses “the moral high ground” by “making these kinds of pronouncements while choosing to make decisions, that he is within his rights to make, to become a tax exile”.

Pushed on whether it bothers her that people who create jobs and pay a lot of tax were leaving the UK, the minister said she was “optimistic about our country’s prospects”.

Other high profile billionaires have left the UK, including including steel tycoon Lakshmi Mittal and most recently the UK’s third biggest taxpayer, hedge-fund boss Chris Rokos.

But, Philipson argued the country was in a good position ahead of the Budget next month, and Andy Burnham has shown a “sense of hope and optimism whilst recognising that many families are still struggling and there is more to do.”

“Of course, there are challenges, including big international headwinds, but I fundamentally believe that we are in a strong position going into this budget because of the decisions taken over the last two years, and I believe our country’s best days lie ahead of us,” she said.

Philipson declined to speculate over whether there would be tax rises in the Budget on 28 October, and said the government remained committed to being disciplined about its spending rules.

Iran’s security chief Mohsen Rezaei has laid out Tehran’s latest set of conditions to end its war with the United States.

In an exclusive interview with Al Jazeera on Saturday, Rezaei said that Tehran has conveyed its conditions to the US via Qatari mediators, but added that Tehran was more battle-hardened now than in the first 40 days of the war, which began in late February following joint US-Israeli strikes on Iran.

“We will confront America with greater force, and with more numerous and more painful strikes,” said Rezaei.

While full-scale fighting has been paused for months, the two sides are nowhere close to peace. A June 17 memorandum of understanding (MoU) between the US and Iran expired last month. Since then, attacks have risen, especially in and around the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran has effectively closed, while the US maintains a blockade of Iran’s southern ports.

The escalating attacks on oil tankers attempting to pass through the strait and the effective Houthi control of the Red Sea route, which Saudi Arabia used to export oil, have caused oil prices to cross the $100 mark in recent weeks.

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, reporting from Tehran, described Rezaei’s remarks as part of the “two-sided, twofold message” Iran has maintained throughout the conflict – combining openness to diplomacy with continued preparations for war”.

So what are Iran’s latest conditions, and do they differ from the June MoU?

What are the Iranian conditions to end the war?

Here is what Rezaei told Al Jazeera:

• An end to the war on all fronts, including, in particular, Lebanon.
• The release of its frozen funds that run into billions of US dollars.
• An end to the naval blockade on Iranian ports.
• An end to US interference in Iran’s internal affairs.
• An end to US cooperation with “the opponents of our revolution”.
• An end to all US attacks on Iranian territory.

“It is in Washington’s interest to accept these conditions. Trump’s threats will not achieve any results. We are prepared for a decisive war,” said the security chief.

On Sunday morning, Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf reiterated Tehran’s stance on the Strait of Hormuz, saying the critical waterway will remain closed until the US fulfils its commitments.

“Until these conditions are met, the legitimate rights of the Iranian nation are recognised, and American commitments are fulfilled, there will be no opening for a return to the previous state of negotiations or for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz,” said Ghalibaf.

What is different to the June MoU?

Iran’s latest set of conditions bears similarities to its demands under the MoU deal signed in June. That agreement also included an end to the war on all fronts, including in Lebanon; respect for each side’s sovereignty and not meddling in internal affairs; an end to the naval blockade by both sides; and the release of Iran’s frozen funds.

The MoU also called for a $300bn US-backed reconstruction plan, while the two sides also agreed that Iran would not procure or develop nuclear weapons and that Tehran would open the Strait of Hormuz for the safe passage of vessels.

It also required the US to issue waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil and other services, no new sanctions on Iran, and no deployment of additional US forces in the region.

In the interview, Rezaei did not mention war reparations from the US as Tehran has been demanding previously.

While there is little genuinely new in the substance of Iranian demands, what has changed is the timing and the channel through which it was delivered, said Adel Abdel Ghafar, a senior fellow focusing on the Middle East at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

“With the Islamabad MoU dead and … Rezaei delivering the conditions through Qatar, Iran is putting the onus back on Washington and doing it publicly, for maximum effect,” Abdel Ghafar told Al Jazeera.

Both sides are in a stalemate, he explained, with the US able to sustain the naval blockade and hold air superiority but unable to compel capitulation from Iran.

Iran, meanwhile, cannot break the blockade but “keeps enough asymmetric leverage to make things difficult for everyone”, he said.

“Basically Iran is betting [on the] war’s unpopularity and [that the] US midterms [will] shift things in its favour, so it’s going public with demands and putting the ball in Trump’s court.”

Rezaei, in his interview with Al Jazeera, rejected the US accusation that Tehran violated the MoU by striking an oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, stating that Iran’s actions came only after US attacks on Bandar Abbas and an Iranian surveillance platform there.

He said any agreement, including the MoU, required recourse to a dispute-resolution committee agreed between Ghalibaf, Iran’s chief negotiator, and US Vice President JD Vance, which Washington unilaterally withdrew from.

What did Rezaei say on Iran’s nuclear progamme, Yemen and others?

On the nuclear programme, Rezaei said Iran could have withdrawn from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty following attacks by the US and Israel – something that Tehran would not rule out in the future.

“We were indeed threatened, but we have not withdrawn from the treaty to this day,” he said.

For now, however, the country continues to abide by a fatwa (decree) from the former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei prohibiting nuclear weapons, said the security chief.

“But we do not know what will happen in the future,” he said, citing further sanctions or a UN Security Council referral of Iran’s nuclear file as potential future pressure.

On the intensifying war in Yemen, Rezaei denied any Iranian involvement, adding that it could offer mediation between the warring sides. He also said Tehran was not exploiting the conflict “for its own political ends”.

“We are fully prepared to help achieve peace between Yemen and Saudi Arabia,” said Rezaei.

The security chief also dismissed speculation, including inside Iran, that it could close the Bab al-Mandeb Strait to pressure global energy markets, stating the waterway “is a Yemeni matter” relating to the Houthi movement, not Iran.

On the Strait of Hormuz, Rezaei said Tehran came within “a short step” of announcing a deal with Oman to manage it, but it may require regional endorsement before being made public.

What has been the US response?

The US has not yet responded to Iran’s new conditions. Rezaei said Iran is “waiting for the Americans to accept and implement” them.

The US did, however, on Saturday warn its citizens in Iraq, Bahrain, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Qatar, Lebanon, Kuwait and Jordan to exercise “heightened vigilance”, stating that “the security environment remains complex with the potential for unforeseen escalation”.

US President Donald Trump also cut his weekend short from his trip to Camp David, returning to Washington, DC on Saturday from the secluded presidential complex in rural Maryland, the White House said. No explanation was given for the early return, which comes as fighting between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis has escalated.

According to Rob Geist Pinfold, a lecturer at King’s College London, Trump may take Iran’s memo seriously – in an effort to end the war before the US midterm elections in November.

“Trump very much wants a deal to wind up the war before the midterms,” Pinfold told Al Jazeera.

“The US’s Gulf allies will also likely push for a renewal of talks. But it doesn’t mean there still aren’t significant substantive gaps between the parties, which make a comprehensive deal unlikely anytime soon.”

David Des Roches, a former Pentagon director of Arabian Peninsula affairs, however, told Al Jazeera that Washington was unlikely to see Iran’s terms as a serious opening.

“At first glance, probably not serious; they would be viewed as surrender,” Des Roches said.

But he pointed to Iran’s apparent abandonment of war reparations as a sign of movement.

India defeat Bangladesh by 114 runs to book women’s cricket final against Sri Lanka, who beat Pakistan by eight wickets.

Smriti Mandhana has become the highest run-scorer in women’s T20 international cricket, guiding India to a crushing win over Bangladesh in an Asian Games semifinal in Japan.

The recently crowned Asian champions defeated Bangladesh by 114 runs on Sunday as Mandhana’s fellow opener Shafali Verma hit her maiden T20 hundred at the Korogi Athletic Park ground in Nagoya.

Mandhana scored 37 off 19 balls with five fours and two sixes in her side’s 195-4 in 20 overs and, in the process, went past New Zealand all-rounder Suzie Bates’s 4,758 runs at the top of the all-time list to stand on 4,788 runs from 171 innings.

Earlier this month, Mandhana reached the top of overall run-scoring charts in women’s international cricket after smashing a record-breaking 124 off 64 balls in the Women’s Asia Cup in Dubai.

Mandhana overtook former India captain Mithali Raj, who had been the top international scorer with 10,868 international runs, during her match-winning innings against Hong Kong on Thursday.

Verma was the star on the day for India in the Asian Games semifinal, scoring 100 not out off 49 balls with three fours and nine sixes. She reached her hundred off the final ball of the 20-over innings and was clearly emotional as she took off her helmet and raised her bat in celebration towards her applauding teammates on the boundary.

India then restricted Bangladesh to 81 in 15.4 overs.

The 50-over world champions will meet Sri Lanka on Tuesday in the gold medal match, which will be a replay of the Asia Cup final from last Sunday, when India won a record-extending eighth title.

Sri Lanka advanced to the final after their captain Chamari Athapaththu led them to an easy eight-wicket win over Pakistan with more than two overs to spare.

The island nation hunted down the 178-run target with 13 balls to spare as Athapaththu led the scoring with 83 not out.

Earlier, Pakistan were asked to bat first and, with half-centuries from Ayesha Zafar and Shawaal Zulfiqar, they posted a total of 177-4 in 20 overs.

Zafar, who hit the joint third-fastest fifty for Pakistan in WT20Is off 27 balls, shared a record stand of 115 with Zulfiqar, which is the second-highest in the format for Pakistan and the highest for the third wicket.

Pakistan were able to score 27 runs off the last three overs as their all-rounder captain Fatima Sana hit two fours and one six in her 12-ball 20.

In reply, Sana broke Sri Lanka’s 36-run opening stand in the fifth over, bowling out Imesha Dulani for 27. Athapaththu, who hit seven fours and six sixes in her 50-ball knock, joined forces with Hasini Perera (42) to form a match-winning 95-run partnership off 56 balls.

Nashra Sundhu provided Pakistan the breakthrough in the 14th over, with Sri Lanka requiring another 47 runs off the last six overs, but Athapaththu’s quickfire stand of 47 off 23 balls with Harshitha Samrawickrama (17 not out) took their team over the line with 13 balls to spare.

Pakistan will play Bangladesh for the bronze medal, also on Tuesday.

Lisandro Brusco is an Argentine political scientist and Palestine solidarity activist with a track record in geopolitical analysis and journalism focused on Global South struggles. He has contributed as a columnist to international media outlets such as Hispan TV, El Salto, Alma Plus TV, and Huellas del Sur, and is a prominent organizer at Masar Badil. In this exclusive interview, Brusco shares his perspective on the genocide in Palestine, analyzes the expansion of Zionism in Latin America, and outlines the challenges facing anti-imperialist internationalism.

Venezuela recently announced the establishment of consular relations and “technical cooperation” with Israel. The rapprochement began with the arrival of a military-humanitarian contingent days after the June 24 earthquake. How can we explain that an army that destroys hospitals and schools and murders people in Gaza would travel to other countries to portray itself as a lifesaver?

What we saw in Venezuela after the double earthquakes, and in Colombia as well, is part of the Israeli colonial regime’s “humanitarian washing” policy. This involves sending humanitarian contingents to aid the civilian population following a natural disaster. The genocidal state of Israel seeks to restore the image it has lost, especially since October 7. On a global scale, its mask has slipped. People began to see, especially in the West, what the State of Israel was doing to the Palestinian people, even before October 7. After October 7, what we call a “televised genocide” became even more evident. Much credit goes to the press and grassroots journalists, many of whom have been killed, especially in the Gaza Strip.

Israel has lost the legitimacy it once enjoyed in global Western opinion as a democratic state, as a state constantly under attack by neighboring nations, by Arab countries. All those myths are crumbling.

“Humanitarian washing” is an attempt to say, “Here are the good guys coming to show solidarity with this population.”

How is it possible that a regime – which has destroyed more than 70% of the infrastructure in the Gaza Strip,  which blows up hospitals, schools, and mosques, which has destroyed the agricultural production capacity, the very little the Gaza Strip had, which blocks the entry of humanitarian aid, could turn around and send so-called humanitarian contingents to other regions?

Some of these contingents include soldiers who have even been accused of genocide and are wanted for arrest.

How can this happen? Because governments complicit in this genocide allow these troops to enter their territories. Unfortunately, this is happening in Latin America.

This entire whitewashing mechanism is also applied on social media. In 2025, Israel invested $1 billion in PR firms, influencers, digital diplomacy, artificial intelligence, and so on. The settler-colonial regime needs to control search engines to steer information in its favor and create a permanent stranglehold on social media, so that the public consumes fake news it produces.

Israel’s influence in Latin America has been linked to the sale of surveillance technology and “combat-tested” weaponry used against the Palestinian people and on other fronts. As Venezuela normalizes its relationship with Israel, what are the main risks you see?

The Zionist lobby in Latin America operates in tandem with imperialist interests in the region. It is very important to highlight this premise in order to analyze the situation correctly and implement sound political strategies.

This is not a recent development: that organic link already existed between the Israeli colonial entity and the ecclesiastical-civil-military dictatorships that were imposed by blood and fire across Latin America in the 1960s and 1970s.

They were not individual Zionist links with each dictatorship, but with the imperial project being imposed on the region: Operation Condor, the US policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean aimed at quelling the revolutionary movements that were taking shape. Israel sold weapons and provided military training to those dictatorships.

The process continued with the so-called democratic transitions of the 1980s and gained new momentum following the US “War on Terror” offensive beginning in 2001. Today we also see this expressed in a clear strengthening of the ties between the Zionist movement, the State of Israel, and US imperialism.

This is not about particular interests, nor is there any intention to create a situation in Latin America similar to that in Palestine. Israel has no plan to build settlements in the region. Here, Zionism continues to support the capitalist imperialist interests of the United States.

We see this in the trade agreements that various governments have signed with Israeli surveillance, arms, and extractive companies.

For example, the Israeli state-owned water company Mekorot advises various provincial governments in Argentina on water management. Similarly, the Israeli company XtraLit is involved in the extraction of lithium, a strategic mineral for contemporary capitalism. Another example is Navitas Petroleum, an oil company that also extracts resources in Argentina.

The focus of these Israeli companies is the same as that of global capitalism: resources. And to ensure the extraction of resources, they need repression; that is why they have military companies, surveillance software, and so on.

Because what Israel has historically sold to the world is repressive technology tested on the ground. Who can better vouch for military tools than the genocidal regime par excellence?

Obviously, there is a political landscape in the region that facilitates all of this: governments like we have in Argentina, Colombia, Chile, and Ecuador. These are governments subservient to imperialist interests, which even create regional and global political structures such as the Isaac Agreements – signed by the Milei administration – that are set to expand to other nations. All of this goes hand in hand with military initiatives such as the Shield of the Americas.

The presence of Zionism in Latin America is a political concern for anti-imperialist activists: there is a hegemonic bloc that is coming for our resources, our territories, to plunder, pollute, and destroy our land. We must fight this bloc.

Having been on the ground in the West Bank, you describe how the machinery of home demolitions, checkpoints, and the violent expansion of settlements operates on a daily basis. How is the settler-colonial project sustained economically and militarily, and what role does the complicity of the international community play?

Israel is sustained, to a great extent, by the United States, international banks, and European powers such as Germany. Without US support, Israel would not have lasted a week in the recent war against Iran. The US Congress, driven by the Zionist lobby, had to approve emergency funds to support Israel’s military defense.

On the other hand, the settlements in the West Bank are sustained economically by state support from the Israeli regime, through subsidies – largely contributions from multinational corporations, ranging from investment funds to Zionist foundations such as the Jewish National Fund.

And the international community, such as the United Nations, has historically legitimized and normalized this occupation, not only through the resolution that allowed for the establishment of the State of Israel, but also by failing to take action against Jewish settlements in the West Bank, despite declaring them illegal.

It is worth noting that when the Oslo Accords were signed in 1993, there were just over 150,000 settlers in the West Bank. Today there are approximately 700,000. There are entire cities that are illegal settlements, with industries, schools, police stations, and so on.

The UN member states are also doing nothing. They could sever trade and diplomatic ties with this genocidal entity, but even the powers that proclaim themselves anti-hegemonic fail to do so.

The only sovereign state that has no ties to the Israeli regime and whose political goal is the destruction of this colonial entity is the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is the only country that has advocated for the destruction of the Israeli occupation of Palestine since 1948.

In short, there is no political initiative by the international community to at least halt the advance of illegal settlements in Palestine. Recently, although the systematic aggression against Gaza continues, the Zionist entity is making much greater inroads in the West Bank through its settlers.

Settler civilians – the vast majority of whom are armed – set fire to Palestinian homes and fields, kill grazing animals, and prevent Palestinian children from going to school. All of this takes place under the protection of the Israeli occupation army. The situation is desperate, and often – with a few honorable exceptions – Palestinians feel that they are on their own.

In the West Bank, you spent time alongside local families. In the face of Israeli violence, how do the Palestinian people sustain their daily lives, their culture, and their resistance in the face of this ongoing occupation?

It is a question as important as it is difficult to answer, because from our perspective it is hard to understand how the Palestinian people sustain their daily lives, their culture, and their resistance in the face of such genocide and ongoing occupation.

As with all anti-colonial struggles, there is a fundamental factor that the colonizers fail to consider as a variable: the Palestinian people’s deep connection with their land. This goes far beyond a purely utilitarian view; it is an ancestral, cultural, social, and historical bond. That is why, despite the brutal attacks of the Zionist occupation, the Palestinian people have no intention of leaving their territory.

Getting them to leave is the primary objective of the Zionist movement: a project of ethnic cleansing that has failed to do so for over 100 years, despite Western support. As time goes on, the Israeli regime faces increasingly severe crises, while the Palestinian population remains steadfast on its land.

We must bear in mind that there is also a deliberate effort to destroy written historical records, civil registries, libraries, and universities. All of this is part of a very clear mission to erase the written history of the Palestinian people. In the face of this, memory is preserved and expressed through oral history – the stories that refugees pass down to new generations.

Therein lies the idea of return and liberation, symbolized by the key. This goes far beyond the material property that families once owned in what is now the State of Israel. The key embodies the history of a people, of a family, their tradition of struggle, their connection to the land, and their origins. It is not conceived in terms of private property, but rather from a social and historical perspective.

That is why, in every refugee camp – whether in the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, Jordan, or Syria – each family preserves not only the key but also its customs and identity. If we ask a third- or fourth-generation Palestinian refugee, born in Beirut, where they are from, they will immediately name the Palestinian village razed in 1948 from which their family hails. That identity remains extremely strong even several generations later. That is why there is such brutal repression against the refugee camps, because that is where the revolutionary spirit is preserved.

This tradition is sustained in large part by the daily efforts of families and, in a very special way, by the educational role of women. They are the ones who pass down oral history to children and take charge of their education, especially in contexts where children are prevented from attending school due to Israeli checkpoints or settler attacks.

Alongside this collective memory, Palestinian society draws on solidarity and community resilience. Facing daily policies of apartheid, displacement, torture, home demolitions, and mass incarceration, the community responds collectively. Committees of prisoners’ family members are organized, and when a home is slated for demolition, the community mobilizes to ensure that the family is not left homeless.

In the face of apartheid and ethnic cleansing, resistance is practiced in daily life.

In your writings, you address the essence of the Zionist colonial project and the imposition of permanent control structures in Gaza. What plans does the Israeli government have in store, together with Trump’s Board of Peace, for Gaza?

The Board of Peace is yet another of the many tools of the Israeli colonial regime. In this case, it was proposed by the United States, just as others came from the British Empire, just as the UN hatched a plan to create the State of Israel on Palestinian territory.

These are proposals imposed by the West to ensure the expansion of the State of Israel – as a Zionist project – across all Palestinian territory and beyond.

Thus, the Board of Peace is a strategic policy of the Zionist movement, a tool for administering this occupation, denying the genocide, and imposing a supposed stability built upon the total massacre of the Palestinian people.

We’ve seen this story before, even in Oslo in 1993. At that time, there was talk of building a Palestinian state, of economic growth, of foreign investment, of an economy integrated into the region, and of the creation of a so-called Palestinian Authority.

Far from that, the result was a territory that became even more controlled, more occupied, more fragmented, and more bombed. The Palestinian Authority, it is now undeniable, serves the occupation, collaborating in the repression of those who oppose normalization and the recognition of the State of Israel.

So, I’ll say it again: Trump’s Board of Peace has nothing to do with peace. It serves to uphold the policy of exterminating the Palestinian population and destroying homes, farmland, water supply systems, roads, hospitals, schools, markets, refugee camps, and so on. All the infrastructure that supported daily Palestinian life in the Gaza Strip has now been destroyed.

And this Board of Peace proposes the reconstruction of this territory. Reconstruction for what purpose and for whose benefit? Who will manage this reconstruction? Who will control food supplies and productive land? This Board of Peace goes hand in hand with a plan for the total colonization of the Gaza Strip and total control over its territory, with the possible establishment of a Palestinian governing body in the future.

But in reality, just like the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, what it will guarantee is the occupying power’s control over that territory, along with a supply of cheap labor.

For years, progressive governments in Latin America firmly condemned Israel, and in some cases even severed ties. In the current climate, where realpolitik prevails and the normalization of the Zionist regime is advancing, what challenges do solidarity movements face in sustaining support for the Palestinian cause?

From a communications perspective, the role of grassroots solidarity movements with Palestine is central. We saw this beginning on October 7, 2023, when Palestinian journalists and media workers in Gaza and Lebanon became military targets of the Israeli colonial regime, in response to the threat that was beginning to emerge in the battle of ideas, in the battle for the hearts and minds of the people.

Communication work is strategic when it comes to fostering critical thinking and a revolutionary, solidarity-based practice that breaks with the commodified conception of news to uphold the basic principles of informing the public.

On the other hand, the role of international movements – both in the West and in West Asia, as well as in the countries of the Global South – is fundamental. What the Al-Aqsa Flood operation did was precisely to mobilize and awaken many peoples who were dormant and to show that the enemy is not invincible.

We can launch our own political initiatives, including military ones, to create crises in these genocidal, criminal, and occupation projects that exist today in West Asia and throughout the world.

One key question to address from a solidarity perspective is: How do we bring these national liberation resistance movements together? We must approach this from an internationalist perspective. For example, any victory for the movements organized around the Axis of Resistance that directly confront imperialism – the United States and Israel – is a victory for the peoples of Latin America who face the same enemy. This is the Guevarist conception that any defeat of imperialism anywhere in the world is a victory for the peoples.

It seems to me that this solidarity bond must be organic and strategic when considering the building of international fronts that break the capitalist domination that prevails in much of the world.

If revolutionary governments came to power in Latin America and truly severed ties with the Israeli entity, that would weaken all those fronts involved in the sale of arms, technology, etc,. and set a precedent for other peoples around the world.

And that is the way to support the Palestinian cause, which is the cause of liberation and return. We, too, must instill in public opinion and in our discussions with all organizations the conviction that Palestine will be free from the river to the sea. Today, we cannot reconcile the liberation of the Palestinian people and their return with the existence of the State of Israel.

We need to build political, organic, and genuine solidarity that focuses on projects of national liberation and collective emancipation. And it seems to me that the Al-Aqsa Flood has, in a way, established precisely that: that the best way to change the status quo is by dealing real and tangible blows to colonialism and imperialism.