news

On the sidelines of this month’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Shenzhen, China, an unprecedented three-way meeting between United States President Donald Trump, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin could take place.

“China is in communication with relevant parties regarding a meeting between the three heads of state,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters in Beijing on Wednesday.

“Work is under way to coordinate such a meeting,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday, adding: “We hope that it will be finalised in the coming days.”

Trump has said he is open to three-way talks focused on nuclear weapons. “If President Xi wants to have it, I’d have it,” he told reporters last month.

The three leaders have met separately but have never held formal talks together.

So could the meeting, pencilled in for November 18-19, actually happen, and what would it mean for the rest of the world? Here’s what we know:

What would Russia get out of a three-way meeting with the US and China?

At the very least, a photo opportunity.

“It is a big event,” Alexander Bratersky, a Moscow-based journalist and political analyst, told Al Jazeera.

He pointed to Pyotr Tolstoy, chairman of the Russian parliament’s foreign affairs committee, who he said has described the meeting as a path towards a new Yalta – the 1945 conference where the leaders of the Soviet Union, the US and the United Kingdom shaped the post-war order in Europe.

That allows Moscow to “talk big”, Bratersky said, while putting Ukraine on the sidelines.

Simply being at the table would make Putin “first among equals”, he added, giving him a photo opportunity to show the world that he will be among those deciding the future of Europe’s security architecture after the war in Ukraine.

If the meeting produced results, he said, it would reflect China’s influence on Russia.

“We should take into account that we are dealing with a much weaker US leader after elections,” Bratersky said.

Trump remains in charge of foreign policy, he explained, but will have less leverage if Democrats, who won control of both chambers of Congress in this week’s midterm elections, start sending money to Kyiv.

“A meeting by itself will be a success,” he said. “Putin will be able to sell it at home”.

Whether anything comes of it should become clear within a month or so, Bratersky said, and the meeting could lead to another during the Group of 20 (G20) summit in Miami in December.

If nothing is produced before Christmas, he added, “it will be just a photo op.”

What does Trump want?

Optics and leverage.

Trump wants “a personal, high-drama encounter” that lets him claim he is “dealing with” the other two great powers on his own terms, Inderjeet Parmar, a professor of international politics at City St George’s, University of London, told Al Jazeera.

A three-way meeting would allow Trump to present himself as “the indispensable deal-maker”, Parmar said, talking up potential deals on Ukraine, trade, energy or arms control.

“After the midterms the domestic political need for a foreign policy ‘win’ is real,” he said.

Any image of Trump sitting with Xi and Putin could be spun as evidence that American power still commands the table, he said, “even if the substance is limited or largely symbolic”.

“The domestic audience, and his eroding MAGA base, matters at least as much as the diplomatic one,” Parmar said.

What does China want?

Not a summit on Ukraine.

German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier said he raised the idea of discussing Ukraine with Xi when they met in Beijing on October 30, and could see the “surprise” on his face, Germany’s DPA news agency reported.

Steinmeier told public broadcaster ARD that Xi said the three presidents would probably meet in Shenzhen, but not to discuss Ukraine.

He said Xi explicitly pointed out that the Russia-Ukraine war is a European conflict in which the “Europeans must sit at the table”.

Beijing is also likely to swat away Trump’s push for nuclear talks.

Last month, China’s Foreign Ministry said it would be “neither fair, reasonable nor realistic to ask China to join the so-called trilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations at this stage”.

What would a meeting mean for the rest of the world?

Allies could be sidelined.

Parmar said a three-way meeting would mark “a clear break from the post-1945 pattern”, in which Washington coordinated closely with its European and Asian allies before engaging with Moscow or Beijing.

“A free-standing trilateral [meeting] risks treating those allies as secondary players whose interests can be managed after the fact,” he said, adding that those interests could even be traded.

That would be a shift towards “personalised great-power diplomacy”, he said. But the Trump administration still has hopes to drive a wedge between Russia and China, Parmar added.

Fears of a “G3” are “understandable but overstated in institutional terms”, he said, because the three capitals’ interests diverge sharply on Ukraine, Taiwan, technology and the rules of the international economy.

“The real risk is not a formal G3 secretariat, but the normalisation of great-power deals struck with little consultation of those most affected,” he said.

“History offers many examples of such moments. They rarely produce stable order and often leave the excluded feeling the costs,” Parmar said.

As the United States midterm election results landed late on Tuesday night, United States President Donald Trump took a phone call from the news outlet Politico.

A wave for the Democratic Party had sunk Trump’s Republican Party. For the first time in his two stints as president, Trump’s Republican Party no longer controlled either chamber of Congress.

But in the phone interview, Trump put on a brave face — and offered an olive branch: He said that he would be willing to work with Democrats.

“They’ve already called, and they want to work with me. I have the right to veto everything, but I don’t want to be just sitting there for two years just vetoing everything,” he said.

While a handful of seats remain to be counted, the Democrats have won comfortable majorities in both the House of Representatives, where they have secured at least 253 seats out of 435, and in the Senate, where they have won at least 54 out of 100.

Trump has since posted a picture on his Truth Social account using the Make America Great Again red baseball hat to read “VETO”. Despite the Democrats’ success, as president, Trump holds broad executive authority, with Article 1, Section 7 of the US Constitution stipulating that the president has the power to reject legislation passed by Congress through a veto.

Congress can override the veto, but would need to have a two-thirds majority, something that the Democrats do not have in either chamber.

But Trump’s comments to Politico underscore an alternate possibility — the president may pick and choose when to veto, and when to work with Democrats.

Bipartisan negotiations

As it stands, Trump has three options: veto legislation, enforce executive orders or make deals.

Since Trump was inaugurated in January 2025, he has passed 292 executive orders: 67 this year and 225 last year, according to the Federal Register.

But now, according to Andrew Proctor, a lecturer in US politics at University College London, Trump has even less leverage than before with Congress.

“I think the biggest thing is we’re probably going to see a decent amount of gridlock. The Democrats are going to try to pass policies, but he’s got the power to veto them, and Democrats don’t have enough seats in either chamber to overcome any vetoes that he has,” Proctor said.

“So that raises questions about, will he try to work with the Democrats at all on passing legislation? I think recent history says that’s unlikely.”

Still, some Democrats have said that they would work with the president to advance programmes central to their campaign promises.

Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed, the first Muslim elected to the US Senate, has already said he could work with Trump  — even though the US president had used racist and Islamophobic rhetoric to target El-Sayed during the campaign.

El-Sayed told MSNOW on Thursday that if Trump was interested in “getting money out of politics, putting money in pockets and passing Medicare for All, that’s what I ran to do, and I’m looking forward to working with anyone who is willing to do that”.

“He is the president of the United States,” he said. “I’m going to be one United States senator, and if he’s interested in working on issues that I want to work on – getting more people healthcare, ending the Medicare cuts, ending the stupid war, stopping these stupid tariffs with Canada – then let’s talk about doing that and go and deliver for the public.”

Progressive Senator Bernie Sanders has also said, in recent interviews, that he would not rule out Trump signing onto a Medicare for All bill if Democrats pass it in both chambers of Congress. He described Trump as a “politician” who was not “too ideological”.

Proctor argued that Trump could indeed make a deal with the Democrats based on how good it could make him look, but that getting Medicare for All passed in the next two years appeared unlikely.

“I do think that a place where common ground could emerge on healthcare is rolling back, specifically the sort of subsidies that were cut” under Trump’s earlier legislation, he said. “So that would make healthcare more affordable for millions of Americans.”

Proctor pointed out that some Republicans in 2025 had said they were willing to negotiate with Democrats on healthcare reforms.

“That didn’t end up happening, but I could imagine that might be a place for healthcare-specific policy where we could see something emerge,” he said. “I don’t think that a broader healthcare debate on passing Medicare for All, though, is really in the cards.”

Veto or filibuster

Though Trump has said he would be willing to use veto, he has historically not been among the most avid proponents of the practice.

He has so far used the veto twice in this term, and used it 10 times during his first term. Joe Biden used it 12 times in his single term, while Barack Obama used the veto a dozen times over two terms.

Overall, the presidential use of the veto has declined with time: Bill Clinton vetoed legislation 37 times between 1993 and 2001. His predecessor, George HW Bush, used it 44 times in his single term — almost once a month. Ronald Reagan used it 78 times over his two terms.

But Proctor said that Republicans also have a different tool to try and block legislation. That is the filibuster, a tactic that delays a vote on a specific piece of legislation by using an extended debate, which would impact the Democrats’ ability to get something passed.

“This is what they did to [former President Barack] Obama,” Proctor told Al Jazeera. “Senate Republicans will probably try to do the same thing, and it also means that we don’t even get to the point of Trump having the power to veto because the legislation never reaches him in the first place.”

Impeachment

Since the Democrats swept the midterms on Tuesday, calls for investigations against the administration have already emerged.

In his first term, Trump was impeached twice — first for the abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, and the second time for “inciting” the US Capitol riots.

On Tuesday night, US Representative Robert Garcia, who is set to become chairman of the House Oversight Committee, wrote on X: “LAWYER UP.” Senator Ron Wyden, who is expected to lead the Senate Finance Committee, wrote in a post on X: “Subpoenas.”

However, the Trump administration has already denied any wrongdoing.

“If Democrats choose to pursue sham investigations and radical left policies, they are choosing to work against the American people,” said White House spokesperson Lauren Bis on Wednesday.

Reports also suggest that impeachment proceedings against Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth might be imminent, over the Iran war that Trump and other Republicans have blamed for the party’s losses.

Iran has stepped up diplomatic efforts amid suggestions by United States President Donald Trump that the US could resume full-scale strikes on the Islamic republic.

The US news website Axios quoted a US official saying that US Central Command (CENTCOM) was preparing for the resumption of major military operations in Iran, and that it was just waiting on orders from Washington. On Thursday, Trump told reporters the US may have to “destroy” the rest of Iran, adding that people will “know soon enough” if he acts.

Tehran’s intensified diplomatic push comes after Iran downed two US reconnaissance drones near Qeshm island in the Strait of Hormuz, which the US struck earlier this week. Iran says it will retaliate if the US resumes larger strikes.

What diplomatic efforts is Iran engaging in?

On Thursday, Iran offered the US a new nuclear and peace proposal via Qatari mediators, to be discussed only after Washington meets Tehran’s seven demands, a senior Iranian official told Reuters. The US is examining the proposal, Reuters reported.

Iran has made meeting its seven demands a condition for reopening the Strait of Hormuz and restarting peace talks, including on its nuclear programme. The demands include the lifting of sanctions on Iran, the unfreezing of Iranian assets and the end to the US naval blockade of its ports in and around the Strait of Hormuz, among other things.

It has also stepped up ties with Russia, with its top security official, Mohsen Rezaei, travelling to Moscow for talks on Thursday. During that visit, Rezaei said: “On the issue of diplomacy, we have announced seven conditions ⁠to the Americans. As long as they do ⁠not execute our seven conditions, we will neither open the Strait of Hormuz nor have negotiations.”

Meanwhile, the US has insisted a deal on Iran’s nuclear capacity must be part of any ceasefire agreement before wider peace talks can restart.

How is Iran deepening ties with Russia?

On Thursday, Rezaei met with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin to deliver a message from Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei. Iranian state media did not elaborate on ⁠the contents of the message.

Rezaei called it “an extremely important exchange” according to remarks reported by the Iranian embassy, but also did not give further details.

However, The Financial Times reported that Russia previously agreed to supply Iran with 90 helicopter-mounted launchers for precision-guided missiles, despite needing its own weapons for the Ukraine war. The newspaper cited a Russian defence manufacturer’s production schedule for 2024 and 2025, which it has examined, showing an order for helicopter-mounted launchers being assigned a code used to refer to Iran in Russian defence documents.

Relations between Russia and Iran have deepened since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and during the US-Israeli war on Iran that saw the two countries become the most heavily sanctioned in the world. Iran has provided Shahed drones, which Russia has modified and used heavily against Ukraine.

In return, Russia has also reportedly helped Iran develop supersonic cruise missiles, sold it Verba shoulder-launched anti-air missiles and shared information with Tehran potentially relevant to nuclear weapons.

“It is indicative of Russia’s willingness to continue supplying Iran despite its own wartime demands and with far less concern about Western objections than in the past,” Nicole Grajewski, a non-resident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told the FT.

In early October, Putin said Russia was prepared to take part in mediation to bring an end to the war.

Images released by the Kremlin showed its foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov and chief of the Russian military intelligence, Igor Kostyukov, attending a meeting with Iran’s security chief alongside Putin.

The meeting also strengthened Iran’s economic ties with Russia.

“During the meeting with Mr Vladimir Putin, discussions were held regarding the construction of gas pipelines from Russia to Iran,” said Rezaei, Iranian state TV reported.

He said the gas pipelines would address Iran’s gas shortages and facilitate the sale of Russian energy to neighbouring countries.

Tehran said Iran’s natural gas refineries had been hit during the most intense phase of US-Israeli strikes on Iran earlier this year, which lasted 40 days.

Separately, Russia’s Foreign Ministry advised citizens against travel to Iran “In light of the remaining risks of a new escalation around Iran”.

How is Iran negotiating with regional leaders?

During the most intense fighting of the war, Iran struck bases in Gulf countries hosting US military assets, as well as civil and energy facilities and infrastructure.

Senior Iranian officials have repeatedly warned that any state helping the US to target the Islamic republic will be a “legitimate target” should US attacks resume.

On Thursday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held phone calls with several Gulf leaders, including the foreign minister of the UAE, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

They discussed regional developments as well as diplomatic efforts for stability in the region, according to Araghchi’s Telegram channel.

Araghchi spoke with Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud about efforts to improve security and stability in the region, according to the Saudi foreign ministry.

Araghchi also discussed de-escalation efforts with the foreign ministers of Kuwait and Turkiye.

In a separate call, Araghchi talked with Qatar’s Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani about coordinating to reduce tensions, the Qatari foreign ministry said.

Sheikh Mohammed stressed support for efforts to secure freedom of maritime navigation.

In a statement, Oman’s foreign ministry said the safety of passage through the Strait of Hormuz was a main topic of discussions, in a call between Araghchi and Oman’s foreign minister.

Iran continues to tightly control shipping lanes through the strait, where several ships have been damaged in recent days. It has granted exemptions to shipping restrictions to Iraq and Qatar, in the Gulf region, as well as to India and China.

What is Trump saying?

Despite his Republican Party suffering a drubbing in this week’s US midterm elections – largely because of public anger over the war on Iran and the resulting rise in energy prices – US President Donald Trump has refused to rule out further strikes on Iran.

On Thursday, Trump told reporters at the Oval Office that he may have to “destroy the rest” of Iran.

Former Iranian diplomat Hadi Afghahi told Al Jazeera that Tehran can ease the path to a settlement if the US also shows flexibility. He argued that Trump “really does not want to go to war, because war again will cost him more”. However, the US president’s next move is unpredictable, observers say.

Afghahi cautioned that Trump “is still surrounded by a group of hawks”, including the energy and treasury secretaries.

Trump has shown willingness to engage in diplomacy, however. Qatar’s ⁠Emir ⁠Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad ⁠Al Thani discussed diplomatic ⁠efforts to ease regional tensions in a ‌phone call with Trump on Friday, according to the Qatari Emiri Diwan.

The leaders reviewed international diplomatic efforts, including the Doha-led mediation efforts to support negotiations in recent weeks, in a bid to reach “a comprehensive agreement that puts an end to the crisis”, the Diwan said in a statement.

How has Iran responded to Trump’s rhetoric?

Tehran warned it will retaliate on a wider scale than it has done so far if the US resumes the war. It has also said talks will become unfeasible.

Iranian officials said Iran has the capacity to strike further than the Gulf using weapons manufactured in Iran.

On Thursday, a spokesman for the Supreme Advisor to the Commander of the Aerospace Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said: “In the event of a new aggression, any country or force that helps America attack Iran can be a legitimate target of the Islamic Republic.”

Iran’s state media outlet Tasnim News reported: “Our missile bases have a suitable range to target the Zionist regime and American bases,” adding “Iran’s response to the possible new aggression of the enemies will not be geographically limited.”

Iran has also previously warned that cables, data centres and artificial intelligence (AI) facilities across the Gulf region could be attacked if war with the US erupts again.

What strikes have there been in recent days?

In the run-up to the midterm elections, the US said it had conducted “defensive strikes” on Iran’s Qeshm island and Bandar Lengeh in the Strait of Hormuz.

Meanwhile, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps navy says at least seven tankers have caught fire after sailing into mines while attempting to transit through the Strait of Hormuz using “unauthorised routes” near Oman this week.

Two oil ‌tankers caught fire and were brought to a stop after hitting ⁠mines on Friday, the IRGC said. They had been trying to cross the waterway “with the support of the aggressor and terrorist American military”, the IRGC added.

Control over the Strait of Hormuz has been a main stumbling block in negotiations to end the Iran war since it began in February.

Tehran has sought to limit traffic through the strategic waterway, which normally carries about one-fifth of global oil supplies.

The US has also imposed a blockade on Iranian ports and escorted tankers through the strait.

Maritime organisations have not confirmed the latest incidents.

Ten years ago, as parts of Diyarbakir in southeast Turkiye were reduced to rubble in battles between the military and Kurdish fighters, the city’s main football club, Amedspor, became a target.

Diyarbakir is the biggest Kurdish-majority city in Turkiye, and Amedspor, then in the third tier, had become a standard bearer of Kurdish identity.

As fighting raged between the state and groups linked to the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), the club was hit with fines and bans on away supporters and outspoken players. Its premises were raided by antiterrorism police, and its fans, players and officials were attacked by rival supporters. In the years that followed, its survival looked uncertain.

A decade on, a peace process is under way between the government and the PKK, and Amedspor – in their first season in the top-flight after successive promotions – are second in the Super Lig after 10 games. A win at league leaders Galatasaray on Saturday would take them to the top.

“Amedspor have achieved a level of success that nobody expected,” said Vahap Coskun, an academic from Diyarbakir who has written a book about the club.

Coskun told Al Jazeera there are several factors behind the success this season; an experienced and canny coach in Besnik Hasi, and a mostly new squad of players performing above expectations, including the 24-year-old Nigerian striker Gift Orban, who has scored nine goals in 10 games so far.

Then there are the passionate, sellout crowds of more than 30,000 that have helped the side win its six home games so far.

But he also said the “softening political climate” was key as it “affects everything from the treatment Amedspor receive in away matches to the refereeing, and it allows Amedspor to compete in fairer conditions”.

Reha Ruhavioglu, director of the Kurdish Studies Center (KSC) and a former member of the club’s advisory board, told Al Jazeera Amedspor’s matches have become a “weekly barometer” of whether Turkish society and state can accept the club as part of the country “with its own colours, culture, language and identity”.

From obscurity to the Super Lig

Amedspor was formed as Melikahmet Turanspor in 1972 and later passed through various name changes and was taken over by Diyarbakir’s municipality in 1990. They spent much of their history toiling in the lower leagues.

The club gained promotion to the third tier for the first time in 2013, and the following year caused a stir after renaming themselves with the Kurdish word for Diyarbakir – “Amed” – and adopting the red, green and yellow of the Kurdish tricolour.

Expressions of Kurdish culture and language have long been suppressed in Turkiye, especially after the separatist PKK launched an armed uprising against the Turkish state in 1984. But the club were allowed to use the name Amed and their green and red colours at least, if not the full tricolour.

They were clearly on the up. In January 2015, they claimed a 2-0 victory away at Galatasaray in the Turkish Cup. In 2015-16, as conflict raged in Turkiye’s southeast, they reached the quarterfinals of the Turkish Cup, beating Super Lig sides Basaksehir and Bursaspor along the way.

In the following years, the club was bailed out by local businesses after its funding was cut by government appointees to the municipality. It continued to face significant hostility from rival fans, frequent punishment from the federation and verbal attacks from politicians.

But it was becoming increasingly popular among Kurds across the country, not only in Diyarbakir.

Research published by the KSC in March 2026 found that Amedspor’s support had quadrupled to four million among Kurdish adults in Turkiye over four years – even before the promotion to the Super Lig – and that the club had become the best supported among Kurds in the country.

Meanwhile, a new peace process between the state and the PKK had begun in late 2024, and in May 2025 the PKK formally announced its dissolution and the end of its armed struggle.

When Amedspor were promoted to the Super Lig in May, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his ultranationalist ally Devlet Bahceli congratulated the club. Erdogan later received Amedspor officials and players at the presidential palace along with those from other promoted clubs.

Bagis Erten, a sports journalist with Oksijen newspaper, said that now the political winds have shifted, the club is not being held back or excessively punished by footballing authorities.

“Especially when we talk about the football federation and referees, [Amedspor] were always treated very badly in previous years. Their penalties were not given, their red cards were not fair,” he told Al Jazeera.

“But now this system at least is not stopping them.”

‘Fragile progress’

At Amedspor’s Diyarbakir Stadium, the crowd in one stand calls out in Kurdish: “Ki ne em?” (Who are we?). Another stand thunders in response: “Kurd in em!” (We are Kurds!) At a recent game against Istanbul giants Besiktas, which Amedspor won 3-2, a tifo featured the words “EM HATIN” (We are here).

Turkish society is now encountering the Kurdish language and other expressions of Kurdish identity more regularly because of Amedspor’s promotion to the Super Lig.

There has been hostility shown by rival fans this season, with some provocatively displaying yellow body bags and images of F16s in reference to the darkest days of the conflict with the PKK.

But Ruhavioglu says that, despite incidents like this, the “barometer” is generally looking positive and that football can help to “normalise” Kurdish identity in Turkiye, as several teams and their fans have now visited the city without incident.

“When you see the bigger picture, it is going well,” he said.

Ruhavioglu says his centre’s research has also challenged some misconceptions around the club and its fans.

“Amedspor’s stands are really not homogenous,” he said, adding that while many fans support the left-wing, pro-Kurdish DEM Party, others are “close to other parties and ideologies. The Kurdish political movement is [generally] a secular movement, but many fans are praying in the stadium.”

And although the research found that a sense of Kurdishness and speaking Kurdish were strongly tied to fandom of Amedspor, he said the club should not be seen as “a national team for Kurds”, but rather more like “the representative of Kurdish identity” in Turkiye. Indeed, 61 percent of Kurds in the survey said they support the Turkish national team when it plays.

Unlike when the club was playing in the lower tiers, Amedspor now rarely features Kurdish or local players in the starting XI – it is mostly comprised of foreign players and some non-Kurdish Turks.

Coskun denied this undermines the club’s sense of Kurdishness.

“I think the fact that few of the players are Kurdish is not of vital importance to the fans, because it is the club that carries the identity, not the players,” he said. “Of course, fans would like to see many more Kurdish players in the team, but what matters most here is success.”

But Erten says the club may end up seeking to dilute its political identity to pursue footballing success or at least avoid trouble.

“Of course, it’s the symbol of Kurdish movement … [but] they are trying to convince Turkish society that it’s a good football project as well.”

Erten says attitudes towards Amedspor show how Turkiye’s state and society have become more tolerant of prominent expressions of Kurdishness on a national level, something that was unthinkable in previous decades.

“It’s progress, but it depends only on the approach of government,” he said. “It’s very fragile progress.”

Flights across Europe have been diverted, grounded and escorted by fighter jets in response to a wave of bomb threats, marking a second major outbreak of false alerts in less than a week.

On Thursday, planes departing from 16 countries, including Ireland, the United Kingdom, Spain and Denmark, were affected. Flights have either been forced to divert to alternate locations or undergo additional security checks. On Friday, the threats continued.

Authorities have deployed bomb disposal teams and military fighter jets in several countries. So far, security inspections following threats have yielded no evidence of explosives or suspicious materials on board aircraft, and no passenger has reported being harmed.

What happened?

On Friday, a Ryanair flight landed in Lisbon, Portugal at 8am after a bomb threat was made by phone to the authorities, Italian media has reported. A security operation was mounted as soon as the plane landed. Separately, the control tower in Fiumicino, Italy, received an alert about a device aboard a Wizzair flight to Rome from Paris. The Wizzair flight was diverted to Venice where police were clearing the area around the plane.

On Thursday, there were numerous threats, including the following:

• In Poland, authorities received a warning about a potentially dangerous object on board a Polish Airlines flight already taxiing on the runway at Warsaw Chopin Airport. The flight to Paris was prevented from taking off and passengers disembarked, but a search by security services found nothing dangerous on board, an airline spokesman told local media.
• In Warsaw, a LOT flight to Paris was also halted and passengers were transferred to another ‌aircraft.
• A LOT flight from London Heathrow to Warsaw-Chopin Airport was forced to land at the Polish capital’s other airport, Warsaw-Modlin, following a threat. Nothing was found on board.
• The Italian Air Force escorted a Finnair plane into Rome after an anonymous bomb-threat email was sent to Aeroporti di Roma (ADR) and other companies at Fiumicino. The plane arrived safely.
• In Bulgaria, a Ryanair flight from London to Sofia was diverted to make an emergency landing in Plovdiv, the country’s second city, following a bomb threat.
• In the space of just 20 minutes, Spanish authorities reported receiving three emailed bomb threats regarding two Air Europa departures from Madrid to Paris and four inbound Iberia flights from Rome and Milan, Spain’s Guardia Civil said.
• A flight ⁠from Cork in Ireland was delayed for 90 minutes when the airport received a threat, the airport operator said.
• A Ryanair flight from Pescara in Italy to Charleroi in Belgium was subject to a false bomb alarm, state news agency Ansa reported. Local media in Belgium reported that security protocols were triggered after the word “bomb” was found written in one of the aircraft’s restrooms.

What happens when a threat is received?

When an airline is notified of a threat to an aircraft, it is passed to a team of assessors, said Joji Waites, director of flight safety, policy and regulation at BALPA, the British Airlines Pilots’ Association.

“These assessors use standard processes to grade the threat and decide whether the threat is red (credible), amber (partially credible) or green (not credible). Amber is not considered an appropriate assessment if the plane is airborne,” said Waites.

After receiving a threat, an aircraft is directed to an area well away from the airport buildings. Passengers are disembarked and screened while border police with sniffer dogs inspect the plane, according to an airport official.

Is this the first time threats like this have been made?

No.

The incidents follow a series of hoax bomb threats earlier this week. On Monday, a flight from the UK to Bulgaria was diverted after a threat that turned out to be without substance. On Tuesday, seven planes across Europe were searched or diverted because of malicious hoax bomb alerts.

And also this week, there have also been cyberattacks on supermarkets in several European cities, with hackers changing the temperature on refrigeration in an apparent attempt to spoil food.

How unusual is this?

Philip Baum, a visiting professor of aviation security at Coventry University, said the scale and coordinated nature of these latest incidents are unusual.

“There are indeed individual airlines that experience a bomb threat every day, but most of those are very quickly evaluated and determined to be non-specific, and the aircraft do not divert,” said Baum.

What sets the latest incidents apart, he said, is that authorities across several European countries appear to be treating the threats as credible enough to require planes to land and undergo security inspections. Baum noted that each flight disruption could cost airlines as much as $250,000.

The UK’s government called the latest disruption “malicious hoax threats”. London Heathrow, the busiest airport for passenger traffic in Europe, was also targeted. It says it has one of the most robust aviation safety systems in the world, but countries still have to take the threats seriously and figure out how to stop any actors from creating further disruptions to air travel across Europe.

Who is behind this?

The European Commissioner for Transport said it is too early to say who’s behind these attacks or whether the incidents are even connected.

European governments have so far refrained from blaming anyone. But those which have supported Ukraine are wary of hybrid attacks. Germany has directly pointed the finger at Russia for recent drone incursions at Leipzig-Halle Airport. Moscow rejected the accusations.

EU officials are aware of the possibility that Russia would step up its hybrid campaign. In September, the Danish Defence Intelligence Service warned that this could happen to pressure adversaries in the West and NATO.

However, Moscow has denied being involved in the threats to aviation in Europe and there is no evidence of any involvement by Russia, Iran or any proxy groups linked to them.

London Underground drivers are to stage a series of 24-hour strikes in the next few months in a dispute over working arrangements, the RMT union has announced.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on X, external to get the latest alerts.

Ritu Pant always made sure that her merchant navy officer husband told her two things before departing on an assignment.

“I always noted the details and the name of his ship and his emergency contact details in case of a crisis,” says Ritu, who is based in the northern Indian state of Uttarakhand.

That’s what she did on April 25, when her husband Ajay left Paradip Port in the state of Odisha on board the MT Smyrtos, a crude oil tanker. Her husband had been a sailor for 18 years, and spent six or seven months a year at sea. But growing threats to seamen – amid the wars in the Middle East and between Russia and Ukraine, and from pirates roaming the high seas – had increased her jitters in recent years.

Yet it was through a social media post that she learned in mid-June that the ship had been captured. Not by pirates, but by the British armed forces, because the MT Smyrtos is under Western sanctions for allegedly working as part of Russia’s shadow fleet, a network of vessels that help Moscow evade United States and European economic restrictions to continue to sell oil and gas, amid the war on Ukraine.

Now Ajay Pant faces charges of flouting United Kingdom sanctions against Russia by commandeering the ship. It’s the first known instance when a European nation has kept a ship captain under arrest on such grounds, and could set a worrying precedent, say lawyers and groups advocating for the rights of seafarers. “This is a unique case,” said Tony Patten, the UK representative at the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF), an organisation that works for the rights of seafarers.

Other European countries have also taken over ships that they accuse of violating sanctions against Russia, but while they’ve kept the vessels, they have so far let the sailors go. In March this year, a captain of a suspected Russian shadow fleet was prosecuted in absentia by a French court. In another case from Finland, a court dismissed charges against the captain of a Russian oil tanker accused of damaging undersea cables in the Baltic Sea on account of lack of jurisdiction. In other cases, European nations have set commercial sailors free with fines.

By contrast, Ajay faces up to 10 years in prison if convicted.

The case has also underlined a growing tension between maritime traffic through international waters – the Smyrtos was not in British territorial waters when it was captured – and the enforcement by countries of sanctions that are not approved by the United Nations.

‘Situation of the sea was very bad’

The open seas have always been dangerous, but the risks have mounted as wars and piracy have turned ships and their crew into active targets for militaries and mercenaries alike.

At least 24 seafarers have been killed in the Strait of Hormuz since the US and Israel launched their war on Iran in February. More than 120 commercial ships and tankers have been attacked in this period in the waterway, which used to transport a fifth of the world’s energy supplies before the start of the war.

The death toll in the Black Sea is even grimmer: At least 40 sailors have been killed in more than 570 attacks on vessels there. Piracy off the coast of Somalia has resurged, too.

For Ritu Pant, all of that meant increased insecurity each time her husband went on a ship.“I was quite worried,” she said, describing her thoughts while Ajay was at sea. “When I talked to Ajay, I would tell him that you need to keep in touch always; you need to tell me that you’re fine and everything is safe around because the situation of the sea was very bad.”

But it was not uncommon for her to not hear from her husband for days, due to network disruptions at sea. So Ritu would track updates of her husband’s ship online, a practice that has become increasingly common among families of sailors at sea.

On June 14, the MT Smyrtos was chugging through the English Channel when the Royal Marines Commandos intercepted it, in what was a first-of-its-kind operation authorised by then British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

At the time, the ship was in international waters, outside the territorial jurisdiction of the UK. Yet Chinook, Merlin Mk4 and Wildcat helicopters from the Maritime Air Group; a Royal Air Force P-8A Poseidon Maritime Patrol Aircraft; a frigate; and a mine countermeasures ship participated in the military operation to take control of the vessel, according to the British Ministry of Defence.

The ship was carrying oil from Russia and was on track to pass through the Suez Canal on its way to India, its destination.

“This successful operation delivers yet another blow to Russia and reminds those fueling Putin’s war in Ukraine that we will not let them hide,” Starmer said in a post on X.

What followed was equally unprecedented; charges of allegedly breaching Russian sanctions were brought against Ajay, who has since been in detention in the UK. After an initial court hearing, his bail was denied.

‘Criminalisation of seafarers’

Enforcement of maritime sanctions brought against Russia after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has been tenuous at best, which makes the Smyrtos case “very unique”, said David Hammond, a lawyer and founder of Human Rights At Sea, a nonprofit and UN-accredited organisation advocating for the rights of people living, working, transiting and operating at sea.

“It is unique in terms of the interception and the interdiction of a vessel that had been sanctioned, having passed through the English Channel as an international transit corridor. It’s, in my understanding, not happened before,” he said.

On the one hand, Hammond explained, the outcome of the case will determine how coastal states enforce sanctions against vessels. But, he said, it also underscores the risks of “criminalisation of seafarers”.

Hammond said Ajay Pant’s case was part of a broader pattern of “shipping crews finding themselves in a position where they are arrested for many crimes, such as trafficking or movement of drugs that they’re not even aware of having been put on board the ship”.

He cited the example of Ali Albokhari, a Finnish-Syrian chief mate on a cargo ship, who was detained by Turkish authorities in 2023 after 137kg (302lb) of cocaine was found on board.

Patten of the ITF echoed similar sentiments. “Our stance is that seafarers being penalised automatically when something like this happens isn’t fair. We would always uphold the right of the seafarer,” he said.

Hammond said Ajay’s case was especially without parallel. “In the case of the Smyrtos,  it could be argued that Captain Pant is being criminalised for simply doing his job,” he said, adding that the direction in which the British courts rule will set a new precedent for masters’ accountability over movement of sanctioned goods.

The case, Hammond added, “is a perfect storm in a global storm of impunity; who is accountable and who enforces accountability”.

“And the unintended consequences of which are yet to be seen,” he warned.

‘Horrible year at sea’

The case also raises wider concerns, Hammond said, about how shipping companies and the countries vessels traverse often treat seafarers. “Undeniably, seafarers are seen as disposable assets,” he said, “disposable because they can be easily replaced but concurrently, as assets for assuring continuous global movement of goods by sea.”

The killings in the Strait of Hormuz and the Black Sea have underscored that sense among sailors and their families – that the lives of those who keep the global economy moving are seen as disposable by those in power.

In a statement shared with Al Jazeera, the International Maritime Organization confirmed at least 66 sailors were killed in various conflicts this year, and hundreds of others injured. Many sailors are also still missing and feared to be dead. “It has been a horrible year for people at sea,” Patten said. “Problems have always existed, but conflicts and geopolitical change have certainly heightened them.”

Ajay Pant’s case also shines new light on a growing number of instances where navies have gone outside their territorial waters to seize tankers that they claim are violating their domestic sanctions regimes.

Since February, when the US and Israel launched their war on Iran, US forces have intercepted and captured several cargo ships in the Indian Ocean. These vessels were seized not just far from US territorial waters but also far from the theatre of their war, on accusations that they were helping Iran evade US sanctions.

The US and the UK argue that they are acting within the bounds of international law.

The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea permits a warship to visit a cargo ship to verify its flag where there are reasonable grounds to suspect the vessel is without nationality. The British Defence Ministry, in its statement after the seizure of the Smyrtos, said that if a vessel is determined to be stateless, the UK can exercise criminal and maritime enforcement powers under its domestic Policing and Crime Act.

The Smyrtos, like many ships that are accused of belonging to Russia’s “shadow fleet”, has frequently changed its flag. The ship had once previously been registered in The Gambia, and then adopted a Cameroon flag in December 2025. When it departed from a Russian port, it had a Cameroonian flag, but Lloyd’s List Intelligence reported that the ship had been removed from Cameroon’s register earlier, in June. It is owned by a Chinese company.

According to the British Defence Ministry, Russia sells about 75 percent of its oil using such shadow tankers.

But whether militaries have the right to enforce their domestic sanctions and laws in international waters against individuals and vessels that are not registered in their territory remains a contested question in international law.

The capture of such vessels raises “a much bigger issue” of “the freedom of navigation at sea”, said Hammond.

To Ajay’s family and those advocating for him, it also raises a more human question: If a cargo ship captain passing through international waters can be captured and tried by nations for allegedly violating their domestic laws, is any sailor safe?

Anchored with hope

That’s a question that Ritu has lived with in the past few months, forcing the former school principal into advocacy not just for her husband’s release, but for seafarer rights globally.

“Ajay’s case goes beyond just our family, and could be a landmark judgement for seafarers worldwide,” she said. “It raises the fundamental question of whether a master of a ship can be criminalised for decisions that are beyond his authority, knowledge or control.”

The journey has been a difficult one, she said.

“Ajay was the primary breadwinner of his family, and I have also been forced to give up my work to focus on this case,” the mother of an eight-year-old and a one-year-old said.

“He has also been a caregiver to his elderly parents,” she added, saying that for the first few days after the arrest, she kept the news from them, worried for their health. “I wouldn’t allow the daily newspaper in the house and stopped sending my older daughter to school, afraid that someone would say something hurtful to her.”

Eventually, Ritu informed the family and prepared them for the struggles ahead.

“The hardest part is having to do this across continents. We have only spoken to him over short calls, and he has had no personal visitors since I went to meet him in August,” she said. “I don’t want him to feel that he has been forgotten.”

But despite the hardships, she remains hopeful, as support has poured in from the global seafarers community. “When I started posting on social media, I received so many messages from families and wives of sailors,” she said. “Every seafarer’s family I’ve talked to relates to this. So many sailors are getting targeted right now in conflict at sea; they are being made scapegoats.”

Now, she’s preparing for Ajay’s upcoming trial. “I have to bring him back home,” she said. “For his family, but also because no seafarer should be treated in this way.”

Najib transitions to house arrest after his party UMNO raises $12m fine via crowdfunding.

Malaysia’s jailed former Prime Minister Najib Razak has been allowed to transfer to house arrest after his party paid a $12m fine following a royal pardon.

Najib’s lawyer, Farhan Shafee, told reporters on Friday that he has been given the order and will be “delivering that order to the Kajang prison right now”.

Najib, who denies any wrongdoing, has been held in jail since 2022, following his conviction for corruption and embezzlement of billions of dollars connected to 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), a state investment fund he co-founded while in power from 2009-2018.

His house arrest could start on Friday if everything goes to plan, Shafee said.

The order comes after Malaysia’s King Sultan Ibrahim agreed in September to pardon Najib, allowing him to serve the rest of his sentence at home.

Najib’s party, the United Malays National Organisation, has reportedly used crowdfunding to cover Najib’s 50 million ringgit ($12m) fine, as his bank accounts have been frozen.

Al Jazeera’s Rob McBride, reporting from Kuala Lumpur, said this decision could cause a political stir in Malaysia.

“This has an awful lot of political spinoff, potentially impacting the political scene here in Malaysia,” he said. “But also there’s a lot of questions being asked about how the current politics have impacted this pardon.”

He said Anwar Ibrahim, the prime minister of Malaysia, has publicly raised concerns about the pardon within his capacity as the “anticorruption figurehead” in the country. But there has been speculation that he may have, behind the scenes, helped the pardon go through due to pressure from Najib’s party.

Investigators say about $4.5bn was stolen from the 1MDB state fund and more than $1bn of it was linked to Najib.

Najib has said he was solely blamed for a highly complicated global fraud scheme and has denied any wrongdoing.

Separately, he was also convicted in a major 1MBD trial in Malaysia, where he was sentenced to 15 years in prison and a $2.5bn fine for money laundering and the abuse of power.

He has appealed the case and his lawyers requested that the jail term and fines be halted, citing poor health and his inability to pay the fine.

A judge rejected his request in September, saying “the gravity of the offence ⁠is a more important public interest consideration.” Reporting from Kuala Lumpur, Al Jazeera’s McBride said Razak is due to return to jail to serve out this sentence as soon as his house arrest ends in 2028, but it is unclear at this stage if this will happen.

A tech stock rout that began overnight in the United States has persisted in Asian trading.

Market authorities in South Korea paused trading on Friday as prices plunged across the region. Global markets have been rattled by a sharp fall in the trading price of tech stocks, which is driven by fears that the Democrats’ victory in the US midterm elections will increase regulatory scrutiny of AI and slow the country’s data centre build-out.

Japan’s Nikkei index slumped 6 percent, its deepest one-day drop since April 2025. Indices in South Korea and Taiwan plunged more than 8 percent after the opening bell, before cutting losses as authorities scrambled to stem the selling.

Wall Street’s volatility “fear gauge” soared overnight on Thursday and the tech-focused Nasdaq sank 5.5 percent, wiping $3 trillion off S&P 500 firms, as investors fretted that the Democrats could put the brakes on the AI boom being encouraged by President Donald Trump.

“It was a brutal morning for many investors here in Asia. We saw that the AI sell-off continues here across many countries,” Al Jazeera’s Katrina Yu reported from Beijing.

“Some of those major markets have fortunately recovered some of those losses, but all of them are still clearly in the red,” she said.

Analysts say the political jitters are hitting an AI trade already on shaky footing due to worries about returns on massive spending on related infrastructure.

“The selloff shows that AI stock prices had been built on rosy illusions about the future, and now that illusion is gone,” Dong Baozhen, chairman of asset manager Lingtong Shengtai, told the Reuters news agency.

“The US stock market has been the standard-bearer and backbone of the global AI bull run. Now that backbone has snapped. Can AI bull markets elsewhere hold up on their own?”

Authorities step in

Markets cut some of their losses by the time Asian markets closed, as authorities worked to stem the panic.

Trading on South Korea’s Kospi market was temporarily halted amid the sharp slide. Finance Minister Lee Hyoung-il also eased rules on retail investors’ leveraged investments.

In China, state entities stepped in to buy up equities in a bid to stabilise the market, said Al Jazeera’s Yu.

The Taiwan stock market closed down 4.5 percent, recovering somewhat from its early morning slump. For the week, the index clocked a 12.2 percent decline, its biggest since 1991, LSEG data showed.

The government of the island state, a key producer of chips, sought to talk up the prospects for the sector.

Demand ⁠for emerging technologies like AI, ⁠high-performance computing and ⁠cloud services is expected to keep expanding, driving ‌demand for tech companies, the economy ministry said in a statement issued on Friday.

Korean AI chipmakers Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix fell nearly 6 percent and 9.4 percent respectively, cutting steep losses from earlier. TSMC fell as much as 8.5 percent in Taiwan, before closing down 4.7 percent.

In Japan, Kioxia plunged 11 percent while AI investor SoftBank Group slid 11 percent.

New regulations

The selling indicates investors are starting to factor in increased opposition to data centres. Analysts say markets have yet to fully consider the cost such building work has imposed on communities.

Toby Walsh, the chief scientist for the AI Institute at Australia’s University of New South Wales, said he expected new regulations on data centres in many countries, including the US, Australia and the United Kingdom.

“The developers were building them in a way that wasn’t actually getting social licence,” Walsh told Al Jazeera.

“They were building them in places where they didn’t need to build. You don’t have to build data centres in urban areas. You can build them in the middle of nowhere.

“I think it’s actually for the good of the tech industry in the United States that this has happened,” he added. “We’re spending money a bit too quickly. And maybe this is the way to let that bubble deflate in a manageable way.”

BBC Scotland was given access to the strategic co-ordination centre at the police headquarters at Fettes.

A wall of CCTV cameras trained across Edinburgh and Glasgow flickered from empty streets to a packed Celtic stadium as officers watch for signs of disorder.

The atmosphere in the room was calm despite pockets of disorder – the situation seemed to be generally under control.

Information flashed up on screens with updates from Operation Moonbeam. As the evening progressed the screens filled up as public order units were deployed to an increasing number of places.

Teams from Police Scotland, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, the Scottish Ambulance Service, the Scottish government and Edinburgh city council were in attendance.

Officers from as far afield as Avon and Somerset, Hampshire, Hertfordshire and South Wales were ready to be deployed.

Scotland’s Education Secretary Mairi McAllan said any instances of disorder or attacks on the public or on emergency services were “completely unacceptable”.

She told the BBC’s Radio Scotland’s Breakfast programme: “Police Scotland were well prepared. Our emergency services were well prepared. The vast majority of displays went ahead without any problems, and that’s to be welcomed.

“But nonetheless, I would want to be absolutely unequivocal. Totally unacceptable that any disorder related to fireworks should be ongoing.”

Additional reporting by Paul Ward and Patrick Jackson.

Israel’s President Isaac Herzog has said he will name a candidate to form the country’s next government by Sunday, after a majority of lawmakers backed opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Herzog made the announcement on Thursday after holding marathon talks with parties elected to the 120-seat parliament, known as the Knesset.

Some 67 lawmakers endorsed Eisenkot, a former military chief, while 46 backed Netanyahu.

In televised remarks at the end of the talks, Herzog said that although the “results of the consultations may appear clear”, there were “mutual vetoes between the blocs and within the blocs themselves” that make it difficult to say who has the best chance of assembling a governing coalition.

He said he would hold “personal talks with some of the party leaders” over the Israeli weekend, which runs Friday-Saturday, and make a pick on Sunday.

Israel’s October 27 election left neither Netanyahu nor Eisenkot with a clear path to a parliamentary majority, handing Herzog the difficult task of choosing a candidate in a deeply divided country.

Netanyahu’s Likud won the most seats of any single party with 27 in the 120-seat Knesset, ⁠but his wider religious-nationalist coalition garnered only 53 in total.

Eisenkot’s alliance of four Jewish-led parties, which spans the political spectrum from centre-left to right, won 48 seats despite polls that had predicted a close race.

Two parties representing Israel’s Palestinian minority won an unprecedented 19 seats.

Eisenkot, like Netanyahu, has ruled out forming a government with the Arab-led parties. Both of those parties nonetheless recommended him, giving him the support of a comfortable majority of lawmakers.

“We want to do things that we did not do in the past in order to remove this criminal government,” Ahmad Tibi, a senior member of the Joint List, which represents an alliance of Arab parties, told The Associated Press news agency.

Eisenkot’s party, Yashar, said his 67 recommendations were the most any candidate had received since 2015, and urged Herzog to give him the mandate “as soon as possible” so he could form a national emergency government.

Separately, Netanyahu suffered a setback on Thursday when United Torah Judaism, one of the two main ultra-Orthodox parties and a longtime ally, declined to recommend any candidate.

The party broke with Netanyahu over his coalition’s failure to pass legislation exempting ultra-Orthodox men from military service, The Times of Israel reported.

Yariv Oppenheimer, a member of the Democrats, a party in Eisenkot’s alliance, told Al Jazeera that he saw “no reason” Herzog would not choose Eisenkot on Sunday.

He said United Torah Judaism had signalled that its support was available for the right price, meaning that a good enough offer from Eisenkot could give him the numbers he needed.

“It’s very clear that Netanyahu doesn’t have a chance to establish a government at all,” he added.

Once nominated by Herzog, the candidate will have 28 days to try to forge a government, with a possible 14-day extension.

Netanyahu will remain prime minister in a caretaker government until a new coalition is formed, or through another election that must be held if no ⁠candidate succeeds.

Netanyahu, at risk of losing power, has seized on an investigation by election officials into possible vote tampering to cast doubt on the results, accusing Arab-led parties of stealing the vote.

Critics accuse Netanyahu and his partners of trying to undermine the results, which he denies.

Israel’s Central Election Committee said on ‌Wednesday that the election’s integrity had not been compromised. The head of the committee, Supreme Court Justice Noam Sohlberg, has called on Israel’s elected officials to protect public trust rather than shake it.

“This is a real danger. One of the foundations of democracy is the peaceful transfer of power,” Sohlberg ‌told ‌Herzog at his residence on Wednesday. High voter turnout, including among the Arab minority, was a blessing, he said.

Netanyahu’s allies on the far-right, including National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, have called for the immediate arrest and interrogation of Arab party leaders.

Iran has exempted ships from India, China, Iraq and Qatar from its Strait of Hormuz restrictions, a senior Iranian lawmaker said on Tuesday.

“Ships from these countries pass freely, and the Americans do not intercept them either,” Amir Hayat Moqaddam, deputy chairman of the Iranian parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, told the Iranian Students’ News Agency (ISNA).

Iran effectively shut the strait early in the US-Israel war on Iran, which began on February 28, and the United States reimposed a naval blockade on Iran’s southern ports in July.

So why have these four countries been granted passage through the critical strait, and can their ships really sail freely while the blockade remains in place?

What does Iran get in return for letting ships pass?

It will receive medicine from India and political backing from China, according to Hayat Moqaddam. Iran already receives diplomatic support from Qatar, which is leading mediation efforts to end the US-Israel war on Iran.

Hayat Moqaddam said Tehran will also collect transit fees from Indian and Chinese ships, while Qatari vessels pass free. He did not say whether Iraqi ships will pay a toll.

“Whatever the lawmaker says is the rationale – the big question is if it works and, if yes, to what extent?” Rouzbeh Parsi, an Iran analyst and affiliated researcher at Lund University’s Department of History and Human Rights Studies, told Al Jazeera.

“Iran has been under sanctions for a very long time, so bartering and quid pro quos in trade are nothing new,” he said. The difference now, he added, is that “it’s about poking holes in an embargo and getting crucial goods/services in and out”.

Nader Hashemi, an associate professor of Middle East politics at Georgetown University, said that “most likely Iran is charging a transit fee or a percentage of the cargo value to allow those ships to go through without being harassed”.

“It’s a clever move by Tehran for several reasons,” Wolfgang Pusztai, a security and defence analyst and Austria’s former defence attache to Libya, told Al Jazeera.

“If successful, this move will generate significant revenue for Iran, as China is by far the largest purchaser of Iranian crude oil, buying nearly 90 percent of Iran’s total oil exports,” he said.

By including Qatar, with its many liquefied natural gas (LNG) buyers, and India, Iran is also “trying to undermine acceptance” of Washington’s strategy in the conflict, especially as it charges Qatar no tolls, he added.

Why does it matter to these four countries?

All four are highly dependent on the Strait of Hormuz for exports.

Of the 10.23 million barrels a day of Gulf crude that passed through the strait in October, about 42 percent went to China and 13 percent to India, Muyu Xu, a senior crude oil analyst at the analytics firm Kpler, told Al Jazeera.

“China is the country most able to cross US interests. The question is whether Beijing considers it worth the potential political cost,” Parsi said.

Asia is particularly reliant on Gulf oil and gas usually shipped out via Hormuz. Countries there have much to offer in return for allowing ships to pass.

“For India, the shutdown of oil from the Gulf has been a great loss – and it is a big producer of the pharmaceuticals that Iran cannot manufacture itself,” he said.

Qatar, which is mediating between Washington and Tehran, shipped no LNG through the strait in August, but managed 1.8 million tonnes in October, Xu said.

Its crude transits fell over the same period, from 517,000 barrels a day to 193,000, while Iraq’s rose from 1.69 million to 2.65 million.

Kpler has been unable to trace the origin of up to two million barrels a day of Middle Eastern crude, so both countries’ flows may be higher, Xu said.

“India and Qatar have closer relationships with DC they need to maintain – while both of them also feel let down by Trump,” Parsi said, adding, “For Qatar, maintaining a relationship with Iran is also vital since it’s an unavoidable neighbour.”

“So for all of them, there are upsides for these exemptions from Iranian restrictions but also political dangers,” he said.

Is this announcement new?

Not entirely.

Iran began letting some vessels from countries it considers friendly pass within weeks of the war starting. And in April, its military command said “brotherly” Iraq was exempt.

With the Iraqi exemption, Iran “probably intends to support the economic recovery” of its western neighbour, a fellow Shia-majority country, Pusztai said.

Will ships be able to get past the US blockade?

That depends on Washington.

US Central Command (CENTCOM) has said the blockade applies to “all vessels of all nations entering or leaving coastal areas or ports in Iran”, while vessels avoiding Iranian ports are not affected.

It has also said humanitarian shipments, including “food and medical supplies essential for the survival of the civilian populations”, can pass after inspection.

But Hayat Moqaddam did not appear to limit the exemptions to ships trading with other Gulf states, Pusztai noted. “If this is really the case, this would also have a significant impact on the other Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia,” he said.

“This could make the continuation of the American naval blockade more difficult and less effective, assuming Washington accepts this Iranian move,” he said. The main change, he added, is that the exemption “would also cover Chinese/Indian ships from/to Iran”, if the US accepts it.

It is also unclear whether “ships of these countries” means the flag a vessel flies, its owner, its operator or some other link, Pusztai said.

Ending the blockade is one of Tehran’s demands before it will commit to broader peace talks with the US, which will include discussions about Iran’s nuclear programme. Qatar-mediated talks currently centre on an Iranian proposal to reopen the strait if the US meets seven conditions, including this and lifting sanctions.

“It seems to be that Iran tries to separate the questions of free passage through the Strait of Hormuz and oil exports from the nuclear question,” Pusztai said, adding, “The American reaction will show if this is successful.”

Will this make a difference to oil markets?

Not much, for now.

“I think they make only limited difference at present,” Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG Group, told Al Jazeera.

“Markets are back to pricing in a peace deal, but if conflict flares up at full tilt, then Iranian commanders may not have time to distinguish their targets,” he said, adding: “At present, the focus remains squarely on the prospects of a broader deal.”

An exemption has not guaranteed safety. On October 30, the Qatari LNG carrier Al Mayeda was struck by “unidentified objects” in the Gulf, said its owner, Qatar Gas Transport Company.

More than 120 commercial ships have been hit in the region since the war began, with October being the worst month, according to data from the International Maritime Organization and United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations.

Traveling through the Hilario Luna y Luna and Guarico parishes of the Morán municipality in Lara State means connecting with a land full of history, struggle, and resistance. It is also home to thousands of hard-working small-scale coffee-producing families who share a culture of collective work to improve their living conditions. Common problems often call for joint solutions, such as coming together to repair roads, or pooling coffee contributions to rent heavy machinery.

This time of year, everything revolves around the harvest, which holds the key to surviving for another year. For many campesinos, whatever they can get for their quintals [around 46 kilos] of coffee can be their only source of income. It is the basis for planning the daily reproduction needs, including food, clothes, healthcare, and tending to the land, which requires maintenance, fertilizer, fuel, and other inputs for the next sowing cycle.

As such, prices, yields, bean quality, as well as any unforeseen setbacks, will shape campesino lives until the next cycle. Underwhelming revenues can leave producers at the mercy of loans that often entail “paying double.” In other words, for every quintal loaned, or its money equivalent, the campesino must pay back two in the next harvest. This further shrinks the margin of error, in a context where inputs, fertilizers, machinery, etc., in the countryside are fully subjected to the market dictates and the interests of agribusiness corporations.

Therefore, the yearly setting of the quintal price is a matter of life or death for thousands of small and midsize coffee producers, with plots ranging from a few hundred square meters up to 8 hectares.

The prices on paper

On September 12, an agreement on coffee harvest prices by quality was reached at the Land Institute (INTI) headquarters in Caracas. It followed a review of cost structures and several preliminary meetings. The accord was signed by representatives of Venezuelan coffee producers and private processing and roasting companies. The talks were mediated by the Agriculture Ministry and the state-run Venezuelan Coffee Corporation.

As I toured the villages in the aforementioned parishes, there was one common complaint: “the established prices are not being upheld,” in reference to both the coffee-roasting plants and the traditional intermediaries. This has been a recurring issue in recent years.

From October 12 to October 24, prices varied between $205 and $245 per quintal, significantly below the agreed-upon figures. And though there was a slight upward trend, time runs against producers, especially the smaller ones. They must sell in order to settle pending debts or meet other financial commitments from the harvest work. At the same time, according to local sources, buyers are paying $280 or $285 for shipments of 50 quintals or more, volumes that only large-scale producers can meet.

Rural organizations have denounced the low prices in multiple protests in Portuguesa State, another region with a coffee-producing track record and with a concentration of agroindustrial corporations. However, there has been no response from the Venezuelan government. Since mid-October, dozens of producers have demonstrated outside the headquarters of the Botalón and Amanecer corporations, two of the biggest Venezuelan agribusiness corporations. Campesinos hold them directly responsible for disregarding the established prices.

On October 23, Agriculture Minister Vladimir Padrino López visited Guarico, and some expected that he would comment on the price issue. But the only visible outcome of his visit was social media content. There were no meetings with coffee growers, at least no small-scale ones (the videos were recorded in corporate properties), and there were no talks with local authorities.

Thus far, there has been no sign of the set prices being respected. An important factor may be the fact that they were not published in the Official Gazette as usual, which would grant more legal weight to the complaints. In contrast, what was spread on social media and reported on by some private media outlets was just the first of three pages in the document. Unfortunately, neither the Agriculture Ministry nor the Venezuelan Coffee Corporation has issued any press statement on the matter.

Bad harvest

Another recurring theme in conversations with local campesinos was the low yield of this year’s harvest. It is commonly said that good and bad years alternate, that picking the fruits of the good years “hurts the plants,” meaning the next cycle will be used to recover and yield less.

But on this occasion there was a different explanation. Throughout the year, the area has been hit by heavy rain, and coffea plants did not “enjoy summer” in February and March. As a result, flowers did not fully bloom, leading to fewer fruits. Some producers noted that in many cases only half the bean was properly developed.

This phenomenon is more prevalent in varieties that are not robusta, the one that fetches lower prices in the recent agreement. The canephora plants have produced a good harvest. Canephora is a robusta variety, native to central and western sub-Saharan Africa, that has quickly spread throughout this entire region in recent years. In certain ways it resembles the creole coffee that has practically vanished from fields.

It is a plant that carries a big load, with heavy beans. It takes 12 or 13 20-liter cans to reach a quintal, as opposed to as many as 18 for other varieties. It requires little maintenance, though its size makes harvesting more cumbersome. Local families are tempted to ditch all other coffee plants and focus exclusively on canephora, despite the lower price per quintal. But some warn that it would be a mistake. Planting a single variety increases the risk of losing everything to disease.

Between survival and exports

Most debates surrounding coffee identify the need to improve quality, which seems to be a broad consensus. But for small-scale producers, who contribute the bulk of the harvest, doing so requires a comprehensive public policy grounded in their specific circumstances and needs.

One of them, circling back to the original issue, is ensuring that the established prices are adhered to. Failing that, it is impossible for campesinos to sustain their activity and plan long term. If intermediaries and coffee-buying firms simply purchase “in bulk,” with little concern for quality, they reduce the incentive to improve it. If companies are going to mix grade A and grade C washed coffee beans, or mix with robusta, while paying the same low price, then why bother with a better plant?

Nowadays, many producers are drying their coffee with the shell, without depulping, though it reduces the bean quality, to then hull and sell. Very few dry their harvests in the sun, not only because of recent rainfall, but also to make the process faster. They resort to diesel-powered dryers, which generate a heat-producing flame that then needs to be spread with a wheel and an engine. The process also requires electricity, bringing another recurring complaint: blackouts and surges slow down drying. Beans require 24 to 36 hours, depending on the machine, the amount of coffee, and whether it has been depulped.

The local producers I talked to acknowledged that the government’s diesel distribution has been effective. There is a schedule, with a price of $50 per 200-liter drum, far cheaper than the $120 it costs in gas stations, though there are complaints about diesel being diverted to a black market. But all in all, it is considered a positive policy, though tighter oversight is needed to address vulnerabilities.

The policy is also appreciated because it is adapted to a technology that has become widespread in recent years, but runs counter to quality-improving recommendations. The Venezuelan Coffee Corporation is pushing African raised beds, for instance, for sun drying. This method was visible in Padrino’s social media videos.

This is one of the main avenues to improve coffee quality, but mostly geared toward large-scale producers. These are the ones with an entire chain connecting research centers, processing industries, and public institutions, with the main focus on export. The Venezuelan government has identified coffee as an export staple as it searches for new sources of foreign income. Nevertheless, though the export priority has permeated communal initiatives, this policy is mostly geared toward agribusiness corporations, built on their logic of accumulation and profiting from the effort of small and midsize producers.

This does not mean that small-scale campesinos cannot improve bean quality and export their harvests. There are already positive precedents in that regard. However, there is no comprehensive policy to support their efforts and expand grassroots initiatives.

In contrast, land hoarding is on the rise, with ever more huge plantations. These are presented as necessary to improve productivity and quality, so as to yield foreign currency from exports and contribute to “prosperity.” This trend marks a significant shift in the coffee-producing environment and can put small producers, their production techniques, their livelihoods, and shrinking land at risk. Even more so if the established harvest prices are not upheld.

Gerardo Rojas is a Venezuelan activist and photographer based in Barquisimeto, Lara State. He belongs to communications collective Voces Urgentes and was a founding member of the Ataroa Commune in Barquisimeto. He also served as communal economy vice-minister. Rojas has written extensively about popular power in Venezuela, including the book Chávez y la Democracia Socialista (CEDES, 2025).

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Venezuelanalysis editorial staff.

Call comes as Iraq’s foreign minister urges armed groups not to join any Iranian retaliation, warning it would be disastrous for Iraq.

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi has told the United States that Baghdad will not let its territory be used to attack neighbouring countries, as his foreign minister warned that a new war on Iran would be a “disaster” for Iraq.

Al-Zaidi spoke to US President Donald Trump over the phone on Thursday, according to his office, as diplomatic efforts intensify to avert renewed US attacks on Iran.

The two men “discussed the evolving situation in the region, security developments, and prospects for the next phase”, al-Zaidi’s office said.

The prime minister reaffirmed Iraq’s call “for respect for the sovereignty of states and for Iraqi territory not to be used as a launching point for attacks against neighbouring countries”, it added.

He also stressed the need for diplomacy and dialogue to safeguard the region’s security and stability, it said.

Iraq, which neighbours Iran, has struggled to maintain a balancing act between US and Iranian interests since Trump launched the war on Iran in February.

Since taking office in May, al-Zaidi has prioritised the disarmament of all fighter groups in the country, including several powerful pro-Iran groups that have launched attacks in support of Iran across the region during the war.

Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein told Dijlah TV on Thursday that the potential of renewed US military attacks against Iran is “not a secret” and warned Iraqi armed groups against joining in any Iranian retaliation.

“Pushing Iraqi society into the war will lead to a disaster,” he said. “We are not prepared for war. Neither Iraqi society nor the armed forces are prepared for war.”

Hussein said Iraq had been turned into a battlefield after the US struck Iran, with the country coming under attack from both the US and Iran, as well as from armed groups inside Iraq.

“We are not part of any axis, and we do not want to let the Iraqi arena be turned into a battlefield,” he said. “We have good relations with the US and with our neighbour Iran… We need a clear policy that we are not a part of the war, and we do not want to be a part of the war.”

Since the war began, Iraq has lost more than $60bn in oil revenues, as about 90 percent of its oil exports normally pass through the Strait of Hormuz and were largely cut off when Tehran closed the waterway.

Oil accounts for about 90 percent of Iraq’s federal budget.

Since then, Iraq has been one of the few countries that have been granted exemption by Iran to pass freely through the Strait of Hormuz.

Dallas, Texas – Tuesday’s midterms were bruising for Republicans in Texas, a longtime right-wing stronghold.

The state elected its first Democrats to statewide office in 32 years, and the left-wing party held onto four congressional districts that were recently redesigned to favour Republicans.

But Republicans had one redistricting bright spot in a sea of unexpected defeats in Texas this midterm election cycle.

Amid the so-called blue wave, Republican Jace Yarbrough defeated Dan Barrios in Texas’s 32nd congressional district near Dallas, taking control of a heavily redrawn seat previously held by a Democrat.

Yarbrough became the only Republican this year to flip a Texas congressional seat, despite a push under United States President Donald Trump to shake up the state’s map for the right-wing party’s benefit.

So how did Yarbrough buck the trend? He was successful for two reasons, according to Matthew Wilson, a professor at Southern Methodist University who lives in the 32nd district.

“I think he did effectively pivot from a primary strategy to a general election strategy,” Wilson told Al Jazeera.

A constitutional lawyer, Yarbrough had defined his career by litigating progressive policies. But Wilson explained that the cost of living and other economic concerns took an increasingly prominent role in the final months of Yarbrough’s bid.

“In the primaries, the social issues, cultural issues were really important,” Wilson said.

“But then he pivoted very quickly and realised that those were probably not going to have the same resonance in the fall campaign. And so he did talk a lot about lowering prices. He did talk a lot about things that were of concern more to voters in the centre of the electorate.”

Wilson added there was another important factor in Yarbrough’s victory. “It was just the fact that his district was drawn to be so heavily Republican.”

The 32nd district had previously been composed of left-leaning Dallas and its immediate suburbs, but in August 2025, the Texas state legislature voted to reconfigure the congressional boundaries, with the aim of helping Republicans win five extra seats in this year’s midterms.

That push came at the behest of Trump, who called on Republican-led states across the country to follow suit.

Yarbrough’s district was redrawn to include only a portion of Dallas. It now stretches east instead, to encompass several Republican-dominated counties.

The demographics of the district also shifted dramatically.

In 2024, the district encompassed sizeable Latino, Black and Asian communities, accounting for about 60 percent of the population. The new map lowered the share of those demographics, while including several predominantly white areas.

Still, Wilson pointed out that Yarbrough’s victory was far more muted than initially expected. He won 51.5 percent of the vote to Barrios’s 48.5 percent.

“Even in his case, the race was a lot closer than he would have expected,” Wilson said. “So there was a pretty uniform Democratic swing across congressional districts.”

Latino backlash

With the dust settling on the election, Republicans will start the next congressional term in January with 24 representatives from Texas, losing one seat to Democrats this midterm cycle.

Democrats, who will have commanding control of both chambers of Congress, will have 14 House seats filled by Texans.

The four other Democrat-held districts Texas Republicans hoped to gain via redistricting were swept up in the groundswell of opposition to Trump.

In those districts, the party’s redrawn maps largely miscalculated Latino voters, a demographic that makes up 40 percent of the state’s population and swung towards Trump in 2024, according to political experts.

This year, the demographic tilted back towards Democrats with force, fuelled both by affordability concerns and dismay over Trump’s hardline immigration policies, which disproportionately affect Latino communities.

“In political science, there’s a body of literature we call ‘group threat theory’,” Michael Adams, a professor at Texas Southern University, told Al Jazeera. “When a particular group feels that they are threatened, that mobilises them, and we normally see a higher increase in terms of voter turnout.”

One of the most resounding defeats came in the ninth congressional district in Houston, which for years encompassed an area with large Black and Latino populations. Texas’s newly redrawn map cut out some Black communities but left a large population of low-propensity Latino voters.

Democratic candidate Leticia Gutierrez ended up taking nearly 58 percent of the vote against Republican Alex Mealer.

Speaking to Al Jazeera before the election, Gutierrez said her strategy focused on reaching Latino voters through aggressive Spanish-language outreach focused on pocketbook issues.

“I always say that I have a big chunk of family that are citizens registered to vote, but if they don’t hear it in Spanish, they’re probably not going to show up,” said Gutierrez.

“I’m fortunate enough to be able to speak both languages fairly well, and so just again, doing a lot of that targeted getting out the vote, getting in front of voters, door-knocking.”

Latinos make up about 60 percent of the ninth congressional district. The demographic is even more pronounced in South Texas, where Republicans hoped to pick up the 28th, 34th and 35th districts in their redistricting push.

But in a district representing the suburbs of San Antonio, Democrat Johnny Garcia handily defeated Republican Carlos De La Cruz by more than 10 percentage points.

Along the US-Mexico border, incumbent Democrat Henry Cuellar carried his district with nearly 66 percent of the vote over Republican challenger Tano Tijerina, while in the 34th district, Representative Vicente Gonzalez skated to victory by more than 15 percentage points over Republican challenger Eric Flores.

In another border district, Tejano musician Bobby Pulido, a Democrat, unseated Republican incumbent Monica De La Cruz, whose 2022 victory presaged a wider conservative shift among Latinos in the state.

Two years later, Trump carried nearly every Latino-dominated border district in Texas, seizing on unrest over immigration policies under former President Joe Biden. He also leveraged the prevalence of conservative social views among the largely Catholic population.

The area had long been considered a Democratic stronghold.

“Democrats are very conservative here. So I’m not surprised that it went for Trump in 2024,” 37-year-old voter Donato Medina told Al Jazeera from the border city of McAllen before the vote.

“But now it’s like people are kind of waking up, because his policies are affecting them directly.”

Though the US president said a deal was ‘very close’, he gave no specifics and did not meet a visiting Ukrainian delegation.

US President Donald Trump has said that a deal between Russia and Ukraine may be imminent, following a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s special envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, at the White House.

“I think we’re going to be very close to settling Russia-Ukraine,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Thursday, while declining to disclose details of his conversation with Dmitriev.

“There’s going to be an agreement. It’s going to be a big agreement, and it’s going to involve more than Ukraine,” Trump said, adding that the effort could include “all of Europe”.

Trump has frequently predicted that an agreement to end Europe’s deadliest conflict since World War II was close. Negotiations have, however, picked up in recent weeks.

Trump said he did not meet the Ukrainian delegation on Thursday.

The meeting between the US president and Dmitriev came after a diplomatic gathering hosted by First Lady Melania Trump, which brought Russian and Ukrainian representatives together to mark and build on the localised six-day truce she helped broker in the southern Ukrainian city of Oleshky in October. The US president did not attend the event.

The temporary ceasefire ran from October 27 to November 1 and allowed for the evacuation of nearly 800 civilians from the besieged, Russian-occupied city of Oleshky in Ukraine’s Kherson region, as well as the delivery of critical food and medical supplies.

Senior officials from both countries attended on Thursday, including Dmitriev; Yana Lantratova, Russia’s human rights commissioner; David Arakhamia, leader of the Servant of the People party in Ukraine’s parliament; and Dmytro Lubinets, Ukraine’s parliamentary human rights commissioner.

Melania Trump also spoke at the event, which the White House described as “the first time in American history that a First Lady has personally brought representatives of two nations at war to the White House for diplomacy”.

“Together, we can create something more enduring than a temporary ceasefire,” she said, urging both sides to see the humanitarian truce in Oleshky “as a spark in a world of darkness”.

The first lady presented Putin’s and Zelenskyy’s representatives with large white envelopes and asked them to deliver her personal letters to each leader. Dmitriev presented her with a painting by an 11-year-old girl, while Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy sent her the Order of Princess Olga, a Ukrainian award recognising her role in the ceasefire.

Parliament’s approval lays the groundwork for further Turkish involvement in Saudi Arabia’s conflict with the Houthis.

Turkiye’s parliament has ratified a defence pact with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan that includes a collective defence clause, committing NATO’s second-largest military to the group’s aid in case of attack.

The ratification on Thursday comes as Riyadh continues to face attacks by Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthis.

Turkiye first signed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement in August and sent it to parliament for ratification last month.

Article 1 of a bill approving the pact was adopted by the Turkish parliament on Wednesday.

But afterwards, Deputy Parliament Speaker Celal Adan adjourned the session until Thursday afternoon, the Anadolu news agency reported.

After parliament returned to session, lawmakers continued to debate the other articles in the pact.

The agreement ultimately passed with 279 votes in favour and 119 against, with 398 of the chamber’s 592 lawmakers taking part in the vote.

The pact contains 16 articles, according to a document submitted to the Turkish parliament, seen by the Reuters news agency.

In Article 1 of the accord, the signatories shall use “all necessary means” to eliminate threats to one another’s territorial integrity. Article 1 can be invoked in case of an attack on any member state.

Once the first article is invoked, the document lays out provisions for what follows.

“In the event one of the parties is subjected to an armed attack or military aggression by another country or group of countries, the parties shall immediately provide assistance to the party under attack, utilising the full range of mutual assistance measures available to them,” says Article 2 of the pact.

This key clause mirrors Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, the document that established the NATO military alliance. NATO’s Article 5 establishes that an attack on one member is treated as an attack on all.

Given that Turkiye is a member of both NATO and the Mecca pact, critics have raised questions about whether the country’s government might face a conflict of interest in allocating its military resources.

Turkish officials, however, have dismissed such concerns as unfounded.

Other articles in the Mecca pact concern a mutual agreement to increase defence industry cooperation and military coordination, with the aim of deterring threats.

Those articles, in part, commit member states to conducting joint training, pursuing technological innovation and sharing logistics and intelligence resources.

The draft approved by Turkish lawmakers commits member countries to the pact for 10 years, after which point they may withdraw.

It also leaves open the possibility of other countries joining, with the approval of the pact’s existing members. Syria’s government has already expressed interest.

Despite Thursday’s parliamentary ratification, it is not a foregone conclusion that Turkish troops would be deployed to Saudi Arabia amid the Houthi attacks.

Experts say any Turkish troop deployment would also require other legislative processes.

Turkiye’s Defence Minister Yasar Guler said in October that the scope of potential support for Saudi Arabia would be determined after ratification.

“We absolutely do not foresee entering into any conflict with the Houthis,” Turkish media reported Guler as saying. Instead, Turkish support “would be to strengthen deterrence”.

Tensions between Saudi Arabia and Yemen had abated somewhat following a 2022 ceasefire. But the Houthis have escalated their attacks on Saudi Arabia in recent months, notably launching a series of deadly strikes on King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh.

The region also remains embroiled in the US-Israel war on Iran, which has contributed to cross-border tensions.

On Thursday, Saudi Arabia announced it had intercepted a drone in the region of Medina. Riyadh has accused the Houthis several times of targeting Mecca and Medina, two holy cities in Islam, an accusation the Iran-backed group systematically rejects.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has met Iran’s security chief Mohsen Rezaei in Moscow to discuss regional security as diplomatic efforts gather pace to end the United States and Israel’s war on Iran.

During the meeting on Thursday, Rezaei also delivered a letter to Putin from Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, according to the Iranian state broadcaster Press TV.

Speaking after the meeting, Rezaei said the talks had focused on security arrangements in the region, as well as Russia’s support for ending what he called the US’s “aggression” against Iran.

“Important regional issues were discussed with Putin and significant conversations took place regarding the post-war period and regional security arrangements,” he said.

Other topics, he said, included plans to deepen energy cooperation, including building gas pipelines from Russia to Iran.

Rezaei, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said Khamenei had wanted him to deliver the message to Putin as soon as possible. The trip to Moscow had been planned nearly a month earlier, he said, but was postponed due to “daily discussions about the military situation in the region”.

He did not say what the message contained.

Khamenei said in a written statement on Wednesday that there should not be “even the slightest inclination towards submission” to the US. He also called for an “ever stronger” Iran to reach a “point of absolute deterrence”.

Seven conditions

Rezaei’s meeting with Putin came as Qatar steps up diplomatic efforts to end the war on Iran amid fears the US could renew attacks following its midterm elections.

In Tuesday’s vote, US President Donald Trump’s Republican Party lost control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate amid widespread anger over rising prices that many blame on the war on Iran.

Efforts to end the conflict have centred on the future status of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, a US blockade of Iranian ports, sanctions against Iran, and a resumption of negotiations over the country’s nuclear programme.

Rezaei said on Thursday that Tehran would not hold talks with the US on ending the war and reopening the Strait of Hormuz until Washington meets its seven demands.

“On the issue of diplomacy, we have announced seven conditions to the Americans. As long as they do not execute our seven conditions, we will neither open the Strait of Hormuz nor have negotiations,” he said.

According to Rezaei, Putin reiterated that Russia is ready to provide support to end the war. Last month, Putin told Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian that Russia was prepared to “do everything” it could towards that end, Russian news agencies reported.

Rezaei said the discussion at the Kremlin also focused on the construction of a gas pipeline from Russia to Iran, aimed at addressing Iran’s gas shortages and enabling Russia to sell its gas to countries neighbouring Iran.

He added that he had briefed Putin on a meeting held in Tehran in late October among Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan, and that the Russian leader had welcomed it.

“Like our Chinese friends, we believe that there should be regional arrangements and that foreign countries should not interfere in the security of the region,” he said.

The Kremlin did not immediately release its own account of the meeting, which took place in the Senate Palace, according to Russia’s TASS news agency.

Separately, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held phone calls with his counterparts in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, Turkiye and Jordan.

His calls focused on regional developments and ongoing diplomatic efforts to promote peace, Iranian state media reported.

Russia and Iran, both under heavy Western sanctions, have strengthened their diplomatic and military ties in recent years.

In January 2025, they signed a comprehensive strategic partnership treaty covering trade, military cooperation, science, culture and education.

The treaty took effect that October, but unlike Russia’s pact with North Korea, it does not include a mutual defence clause.

On Saturday, Iranian army spokesman Mohammad Akraminia said Iran had bought Russian Su-35 fighter jets and expected to receive them after the war ends.

The planes were originally supposed to arrive before the fighting began, he told the Iranian news site Tabnak, and the necessary preparations and pilot training were complete.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has announced that he will commute the sentences of all 548 people on death row in the state, the largest mass clemency in United States history.

The announcement on Thursday effectively clears out California’s death row, although the state has not executed a prisoner for 20 years. Those on death row will instead serve life sentences without the possibility of parole.

“I take this action because I firmly believe that state-sanctioned killing is incompatible with California’s values, undermines the foundations of our legal system, and diminishes each of us,” Newsom said in an open letter.

Support for the death penalty in the US has largely declined since the 1990s, although it still holds majority backing.

A Pew Research Center poll released in August found that 66 percent of Americans supported the punishment for those convicted of murder. Roughly 73 percent, however, acknowledged there was a risk of executing an innocent person.

Because death penalty cases often involve long and arduous legal appeals, many of those on death row are never executed.

Twenty-three states have banned the practice outright, and others have effectively abandoned it even if the punishment remains on the books.

Still, President Donald Trump, a Republican, has championed the death penalty for serious federal crimes. In April, his administration pledged to expand the use of federal executions, including by employing firing squads.

While proponents of the death penalty have argued that the punishment has a deterrent effect, critics say decades of scholarship indicate otherwise.

They have also pointed to ethical and logistical issues, including the expense.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC), California has spent $6bn on the death penalty since 1978 while carrying out just 13 executions in that time.

Capital punishment has also been criticised for being applied disproportionately to racial minorities and for the frequency of botched executions.

The DPIC says that, since 1973, at least 203 people wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the US have later been exonerated.

Newsom’s decision has been praised by criminal justice groups as a step away from a practice they say is outdated, inefficient and immoral.

“Governor Newsom’s announcement marks a decisive moment in the history of the death penalty in the United States. Though other governors have granted universal clemencies, none have been at this scale,” Robin Maher, the executive director of the DPIC, said in a statement.

“By bookending his time as governor first with a moratorium and now this mass clemency, Governor Newsom has irrevocably changed California’s relationship with the death penalty.”

The DPIC noted that about two-thirds of the commutations must be reviewed by the California Supreme Court, which is required under state law to review clemency for anyone with multiple felony convictions, before they become final.

Despite its left-leaning reputation, California previously served as a laboratory for punitive criminal justice policies in the late 20th century, during the heyday of the US’s tough-on-crime politics.

The states of Washington and California, for instance, were among the first to pass “three strikes” laws in the early 1990s, punishing repeat offenders with high minimum sentences.

The state continues to have the largest death row in the country.

Newsom’s decision will reduce the number of people on death row nationally by nearly 30 percent.

The announcement also comes days after a blockbuster night for the Democratic Party in the US midterm elections, with major wins in formerly right-wing strongholds such as Texas and Kansas.

The so-called “blue wave” during the midterms has set off speculation over potential Democratic candidates for the presidency in 2028.

As governor for nearly eight years, Newsom has reached California’s term limits: His second and final term will end in January 2027.

He will be replaced by former US Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra on January 4.

But Newsom has long been seen as a likely presidential contender, and he has increasingly dedicated time to serving as a proxy to support Democratic candidates in key races nationwide.

He has, however, taken positions on criminal justice issues that have put him at odds with criminal justice groups and the state legislature.

In 2022, Newsom vetoed a bill that would have placed limits in state prisons on the use of solitary confinement, a practice defined as torture by the United Nations after certain lengths of time.

In 2019, he also vetoed a measure that would have limited cooperation between Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and prison authorities, and a similar bill failed in the state Senate in 2022.

Navy and Marine Corps leaders have recently come to the agreement that the Corps needs 40 amphibious ships to meet its goal of keeping three Marine Expeditionary Units (MEU) deployed at the same time. However, at the moment, the Navy has only 31 of these vessels, a minimum mandated by Congress, and now an effort is underway to convince lawmakers to increase the fleet.

MEUs, made up of about 2,200 Marines, are typically embarked on Amphibious Ready Groups (ARGs), which usually consist of an assault ship, two transport docks or dock landing ships. Support vessels, surface combatants and in some cases a nuclear fast attack submarine can make up the larger Expeditionary Strike Group.

Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Eric Smith’s top priority is meeting what is called the 3.0 ARG/MEU presence, said Shon Brodie, director of Maritime Expeditionary Warfare at the Corps’ Combat Development and Integration (CD&I) Directorate tasked with modernizing the Marines. 

Smith “believes that the best thing that we as a service can do for the nation is provide the highly trained Marine Expeditionary Units, one from the East Coast, one from the West Coast, and that one in Japan, persistently,” Brodie told a small group of reporters, including from TWZ, on Wednesday.

To ensure that happens, Vice Chief of Naval Operations (VCNO) Adm. James W. Kilby and the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps (ACMC) Gen. Bradford J. Gering “have worked really close together to try to understand the number of ships it would require to achieve 3.0 based on current readiness,” Brodie noted.

 “The two analytical arms of both services have come to the conclusion that it takes 40 ships. That’s 13 big decks and 27 LPDs,” the Maritime Expeditionary Warfare director explained.

Big decks are the Navy’s Wasp class (LHD) and America class (LHA) amphibious assault ships. Their embarked Aviation Combat Elements (ACEs) can include F-35B Joint Strike Fighters, MV-22 tiltrotor aircraft, UH-1, AH-1 and CH-53 helicopters, as well as Navy Seahawk helicopters. The LPDs are smaller [Amphibious Transport Dock ships], which also embark MV-22s and helicopters.

The capabilities of MEUs have grown over the past decade, allowing them, in limited cases, to take on tasks that once required an aircraft carrier strike group. MV-22 tiltrotors, and, more recently, F-35Bs, which can be embarked in large numbers in the so-called “Lightning carrier” configuration, have boosted the utility of these fighting units.

The amphibious ship requirements, which had been in discussion for a while, were finally hammered out over the past few months by the new Amphibious Force Readiness Board (AFRB), stated Brodie. The AFRB is a joint Navy-Marine Corps effort created to better track the readiness of the amphibious fleet, which has been a huge issue as we have frequently noted.

“Right now, I have 31 amphibious warfare ships,” stated Brodie. The biggest need at the moment, he added, is for additional amphibious assault ships.

The law calls for the service to have 10, but currently it has only nine. That’s because the USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6) was sent to the scrapyard in 2021 after being ravaged by a fire in 2020.

Brodie said the Marines want to increase the number of mandated amphibious assault ships from 10 to 13.

“When I have a problem generating this force, it really revolves around the big deck,” he stated.

The call for a fleet of 40 amphibious ships, and especially 13 big decks, is a sharp departure from the guidance former Commandant Gen. David Berger introduced in 2019 that led to his Force Design 2030 plan. In these documents, Berger called for fewer amphibious assault ships and more smaller vessels. Berger was concerned about the growing array of threats to these large, slow-moving vessels from anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles, and that was before one-way attack drones became such ubiquitous weapons of war. This strategy was seen as better suited for fighting in the Pacific in a modern context, not large scale beach landings of the past.

He also wanted to return the Corps to its naval roots; small, dispersed stand-in forces working inside an adversary’s weapons engagement zone after two decades of ground pounding in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Given how much of a sea-change this new plan represents, reaching a 40 amphibious ship fleet that includes 13 big decks is no small task. 

“I’ve got a sheet sitting right here in front of me that tells me how we get there,” Brodie added. “You can’t get there tomorrow, right? The only way for me to realistically increase that inventory is for me to build new ships and do a service-life extension on some of the selective ships that I currently have in the inventory.”

Brodie said that Kilby and Gering are going to approach Congress later this month to convey the need for more ships.

There is no set timeline to reach the 40-ship goal, the Marines told TWZ.

“We will have to await future congressional funding for these,” Lt. Col. Eric D. Flanagan, a USMC spokesman, told us, adding that there is a multi-ship procurement contract underway for several amphibious vessels. He was referring to HII being awarded a $9.6 billion multi-ship procurement contract in 2024 for the construction of three San Antonio class amphibious ships and a contract modification for the next America class large-deck amphibious ship. 

“This combined procurement — the first of its kind for amphibious ships — begins the journey for the construction of LPDs 33, 34, 35 and LHA 10 for the U.S. Navy,” HII stated at the time.

The request for additional shipbuilding funds will likely face far stiffer headwinds now that the Democrats have won control of both the Senate and the House.

While the Trump administration continues to pursue a roughly $1.5 trillion defense budget for Fiscal Year 2027, which includes some $350 billion that would come from outside normal defense spending streams via the reconciliation process, a letter leaked yesterday from a top Democrat offers a glimpse into the challenges the new amphibious ship plan may face.

The letter from Rep. Adam Smith, a Washington state Democrat who is in line to become chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, makes clear that many programs and policy issues, as well as defense spending writ large, are set to be put under the microscope when the Democrats take control of Congress in the new year. 

“We must thoroughly review our national defense strategy and develop a more realistic and sustainable approach that does not require a defense budget in excess of $1 trillion or paid for through draconian cuts to critical domestic programs,” Smith wrote in his ‘dear colleagues’ letter.

All of this comes at a time when the Navy has been struggling to meet operational demands for surface combatants with its existing fleet. This has been further exacerbated by shakeups in separate plans to acquire new frigates and larger uncrewed surface vessels (USVs), as well as rising costs associated with its workhorse Arleigh Burke class destroyers.

On top of everything, conflicts in the Middle East have taken a toll on the Navy, incurring costs that need to be paid for.

In August, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle estimated as a result of the Operation Epic Fury fight against Iran, the Navy needed between $6 billion and $8 billion more than what was budgeted for in the 2026 fiscal year “to be whole and solvent for [Fiscal Year] 26,” Navy Times reported.

Overall, the U.S. military “has spent over $47 billion so far to prosecute the war in Iran, more than 25% higher than the Defense Department’s estimate in July,” according to Pentagon data obtained by Reuters last month.

In addition to not having enough ships to fulfill the mission, there is a big problem keeping the existing ones available. The Navy’s amphibious ship fleet had just a 47% combat surge readiness rate as of April, according to Kilby’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget request statement. As we have pointed out previously, chronic maintenance delays, competing budget priorities, ill-planned early-retirement efforts that went forward without required congressional approval, scarce spare parts, shoddy contractor oversight and other issues have contributed to these problems.

The Navy and Marines are working to change that and meet the requirements set out by the commandant, Brodie stated. This has involved getting a better handle on how long and how often ships need to be deployed and improving maintenance once underway.

“We’re at the very beginning stage of that, but the indications are, and the models tell us, that we will actually be able to shrink the days in maintenance and improve force generation by some percentage that will be helpful,” Brodie explained. “Without getting into numbers that are probably sensitive, but we’re marginally better than we were before, and the expectation is that we can increase beyond marginally better here over the next couple of maintenance cycles.”

“There’s another factor here that sort of you can’t model in your framework, and that’s extended deployment,” Brodie added. “You’ve got to bring the ship back on time, get it in maintenance on time. If you extend the deployments — and you’ll find that’s true with the whole Navy fleet — if you extend the deployment, and you miss a maintenance cycle, it sort of blows that forecast that you had.”

The problems created by extended deployments are something TWZ frequently highlights.

When regular maintenance doesn’t happen, it creates a cascading series of problems that affect not just the ships and crews, but the facilities that have scheduled repairs and lined up workers to make them happen.

The bottom line is that the longer these vessels stay out on cruise, the longer they have to stay in on deep maintenance, and past a certain point, the magnitude of this relationship skyrockets. Extra days out can turn into extra weeks in the yard, and so on. With yard facilities at a premium, especially those capable of dealing with a supercarrier and big deck amphibious vessels, critical schedules can quickly implode, with work stacking up across multiple vessels, resulting in them being sidelined much longer than planned. This is something we have discussed in great detail when it comes to aircraft carriers.

While the Marines and Navy say they need 40 amphibious ships, whether they reach that level is still an open question that will have to be addressed in future budget cycles. There are a lot of competing needs and only so much money that can be allocated.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com