percent

Switzerland’s glaciers are rapidly receding due to a combination of winters with too little snow and record-high temperatures across Europe this summer, scientists say. In all, one of the world’s top ski destinations has lost nearly one-fifth of its glacial ice in just five years.

In a report (PDF) published by the Swiss Glacier Monitoring Network (GLAMOS) and the Swiss Commission for Cryosphere Observation of the Swiss Academy of Sciences (SCNAT) on Thursday, researchers said Swiss glaciers lost 5.5 percent of their ice volume over the hydrologic year ending September 30, 2026, and nearly 20 percent since 2021.

Why is Switzerland, famed for its Alpine terrain and winter sports, losing its glaciers and what does this mean for the country?

Here’s what we know.

What have scientists discovered?

In September, a GLAMOS team visited 23 glaciers in Switzerland to record end-of-summer measurements of ice melt and snow accumulation.

Visiting one glacier named Scex Rouge in the Western Swiss Alps in early September, GLAMOS chief Matthias Huss, one of the report’s researchers, told the Reuters news agency that a measuring pole, about four metres (13 feet) high, was drilled into the ice in July to provide the team with a point of reference.

“Now when we have come back here, we saw the pole was out by three metres [10ft]. So just in August and September of this year, even excluding the heatwaves of June and July, we have lost three metres of ice at an elevation of almost 3,000 metres [9,843ft],” he explained.

“This clearly indicates these conditions that we had this summer, they are just inconsistent with the survival of these small glaciers in the Alps,” he added.

Why are glaciers in Switzerland losing ice?

According to the report, the total mean thickness of individual glaciers in Switzerland has fallen by between 2.5 and four metres in 2026. At glacier tongues – narrow glacial extensions of a glacier which project from land into a body of water – it had decreased by as much as 10 metres in some places over the summer.

“We can clearly attribute the massive ice loss to the warming, and thus anthropogenic [caused by humans] climate change. The summer has been the hottest on record in Switzerland. In addition, there was little snow in winter, and therefore the glaciers were poorly protected when the heat started,” GLAMOS chief Huss told Al Jazeera.

He noted that while their measurements have indicated that the melting has affected all glaciers in Switzerland equally, the effects were most visible on smaller glaciers.

“Those shrink very quickly and sometimes even completely disappeared. Also, large glaciers lost an enormous quantity of ice, but they remain impressive,” he added.

The report’s scientists warned that the glaciers also lost a total of about 2.2 trillion litres of water (581 billion gallons) between July and September alone.

“This is more than four times the annual drinking water consumption of all Swiss households,” the report’s researchers said and warned this could impact the country’s future water supply.

What does this mean for Switzerland?

Switzerland is a country known for winter sports and Alpine tourism, which depends on the glaciers. About 4 percent of the country’s entire workforce is employed in the tourism sector.

“This affects tourism and also how we perceive the mountains – they are no longer white but increasingly grey and black,” he told Al Jazeera.

He added that the water provided by glaciers is also important for the economy. “It is used to fill up hydropower lakes that produce clean energy, and supplies the biggest streams of Europe,” he said.

“We’re not yet seeing the full consequences as glaciers are still around and they contribute water when we need it. But this potential is soon being lost,” he added.

Harry Zekollari, a glaciologist and associate research professor at the Department of Water and Climate at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, shared a similar view.

He stressed that glaciers are important natural water suppliers, as they provide water when people need it most – in summer, when it is hot and dry.

“With climate change, glaciers initially provide more water during summer as they rapidly melt. However, as glaciers become smaller, there is less ice to be melted, and as such the water supply in summer decreases. This peak in water supply has now been passed for glaciers in the European Alps, meaning that we expect glaciers to provide less and less water in the coming years,” he told Al Jazeera.

“Glacier changes can also cause natural hazards, and since most of the ice lost turns into water that reaches the oceans, the consequences of glacier loss [in Switzerland and elsewhere] will be felt for coastlines all around the globe,” he added.

Is there a solution?

Yes. According to Zekollari, in order to save as much glacier ice as possible in Switzerland, the world needs to stabilise rising temperatures as soon as possible.

“Projections for the European Alps and Swiss glaciers show that if we are able to rapidly stop emissions, we may still be able to save about one-third of their ice mass. However, in a case with strong warming, these glaciers are projected to lose more than 90 percent of their volume by 2100,” he said.

He noted that the situation is less grim globally as some glaciers in other regions are more persistent.

“However, even globally, future emissions play a big role and will decide whether we lose about 25 percent of glacier mass by 2100 – that’s the good case, with limited warming – or rather 50 percent – the bad case, with more warming,” he said.

“The losses in the longer term – past 2100 – are even larger due to the long response of glaciers, but also here it is the future warming that decides how much remains. Every 0.1 degree Celsius warming matters.”

United States Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth plans to cut the number of positions in the US military reserved for generals and admirals by 20 percent, raising concerns about political interference in the military’s leadership amid strained relations with senior Pentagon officials.

An announcement is expected on Wednesday when Hegseth gives his “State of the Force” address to junior officers and enlisted personnel at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia.

The Pentagon has presented previous cuts as a way to reduce bureaucracy. But analysts say Hegseth’s latest changes may be aimed at sidelining experienced commanders, discouraging dissent and appointing more officers loyal to President Donald Trump to the ranks.

So is the US military too top-heavy, and what could the cuts mean? Here’s what we know.

What is Hegseth planning?

Citing Pentagon officials, The Associated Press news agency has reported that Hegseth will double the 10 percent reduction in top-ranking personnel ordered last year, bringing the total decrease to 20 percent by January 1, 2027. The plan affects roughly 800 general and admiral positions across the one- to four-star ranks.

Congress sets statutory limits on the number of generals and admirals. A Congressional Research Service report recorded 848 active-duty generals and admirals in September 2025, below the authorised maximum of 857.

Cutting positions does not necessarily mean immediately dismissing everyone occupying them. An official told the Reuters news agency that some roles would be eliminated, while others would be assigned to lower-ranking officers.

Why are top-ranking military positions being removed?

The argument for reducing senior ranks predates Hegseth’s tenure, with supporters saying fewer layers of command would reduce administrative work and give officers closer to operations greater authority.

Walter Ladwig, a political scientist specialising in US foreign policy at King’s College London, said there is a credible case for reform. “Since the end of the Cold War, the overall size of the force has declined significantly, but we haven’t seen a corresponding reduction in the number of flag officers,” he told Al Jazeera.

“At the same time, we’ve seen headquarters and staffs proliferate.”

Trump and Hegseth have already fired or pushed into retirement more than two dozen military leaders since Trump took office in January 2025.

Those removed include General Randy George, the US Army’s top uniformed officer, in April, and Admiral Lisa Franchetti, the chief of naval operations, in February 2025. The administration also dismissed the only two women serving as four-star officers, alongside other senior female officers.

In February 2025, Trump also fired Air Force General CQ Brown as chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff as part of a wider shake-up of top military leadership.

Other departures have been of civilian leaders. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll resigned in late August after reported disagreements over Hegseth’s handling of senior military personnel.

The dismissals, alongside blocked promotions, have raised questions about how the administration selects commanders and whether professional disagreements could jeopardise careers. Robert Ralston, a lecturer in political science and international studies at the University of Birmingham in the United Kingdom, said the proposed reductions should be weighed alongside these earlier decisions.

“These cuts appear to be part of a broader, sustained effort by Hegseth to fill the ranks based on political, rather than meritocratic, considerations,” he told Al Jazeera.

“Politics is driving these decisions, in my view.”

What political fallout could there be from this?

Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona criticised Hegseth’s changes at the Pentagon. “The US military doesn’t need more testosterone; it needs better leadership at this point,” Kelly told MS NOW’s Morning Joe programme last week.

“The consequences of firing all these admirals and generals are that we’re losing a portion, a good portion, of a generation of great leadership.”

David Galbreath, professor of war and technology at the University of Bath in the UK, told Al Jazeera that resistance from Congress and military leaders could complicate the changes.

He pointed to the opposition that arose to President Jimmy Carter’s plans to withdraw US ground troops from South Korea as an example of how military and congressional pressure can constrain a president.

“I suspect that after the election, we are likely to see a much more confrontational Congress with investigations and impeachments of Hegseth,” he said.

Whether that prediction comes true will likely depend on November’s congressional elections and whether the Republican Party retains control of both chambers of Congress.

What criticisms have been made of Hegseth?

Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon has been marked by controversy and tensions with senior officials. In March 2025, he shared details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen in a Signal chat group which inadvertently included The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief.

A number of US media reports about the dwindling supplies of weapons in the Middle East prompted his department to investigate leaks and restrict journalists’ access earlier this year. The New York Times reported in August that about 50 Joint Staff military and civilian officials had undergone polygraph tests amid growing mistrust inside the Pentagon.

Hegseth has meanwhile made ending what he calls “woke” culture a central priority, introducing new physical fitness requirements and abolishing diversity policies.

Ralston said the combination of dismissals and blocked promotions could damage morale and the military’s future leadership. “His relationship with senior military leaders has been adversarial, his scuttling of promotions has undoubtedly damaged morale, and will have long-term consequences for leadership pipelines within the Department of Defense,” he said.

King’s College’s Ladwig also described Hegseth’s relationship with senior Pentagon leaders as unusually confrontational but cautioned against interpreting every proposed cut as a power struggle.

“When a military is under civilian control, it means that the elected government has the right to determine defence priorities and reorganise the armed forces accordingly,” he said.

But Ladwig warned that the changes could encourage officers to hold back their professional recommendations when advising senior politicians. “That might create incentives for military officers to censor themselves rather than provide candid professional military advice, particularly if being politically aligned with the administration is seen as a path to success,” he said.

“This is a very worrisome pathology, and it’s the kind of thing that produces ineffective militaries in dictatorships.”

Amid the US-Israel war on Iran, the country’s economy has suffered a sharp contraction, with its crucial oil and gas sector taking the biggest hit as the United States tightens its economic and military pressure on Tehran.

Data released by the government-administered Statistical Center of Iran showed gross domestic product (GDP) shrank by 10.1 percent year-on-year between March 21 and June 20, the first quarter of the Persian calendar.

The period covers the opening months of the US-Israel war on Iran, which began on February 28.

The economic downturn has come as Iran struggles to export its oil, one of its most important sources of foreign currency, while also contending with high inflation, a weakening rial, and disruptions to trade and industry.

Here is what you need to know:

What does the economic data say?

The headline GDP number masks an even steeper decline in Iran’s energy industry. Crude oil and natural gas activity contracted by 26.4 percent compared with the same period a year earlier. GDP excluding oil, by comparison, fell by 4.6 percent.

The damage has spread beyond the energy sector. Industry and mining contracted by 14.7 percent, services declined by 4.8 percent, and manufacturing contracted by 2.5 percent. Agriculture was the exception, growing at 2.3 percent.

Those figures come amid an already difficult economic situation in the country. Earlier this month, Iran’s 12-month average inflation reached 69.9 percent, while food, beverage, and tobacco prices rose at nearly twice that rate. Official unemployment climbed to 9.1 percent in the spring.

The rial, meanwhile, fell from about one million to the US dollar a year earlier to more than 2.2 million in early September.

What is the latest with Iran’s oil exports?

Iran’s ability to sell crude has been dramatically curtailed by the US naval blockade, imposed for most of the war.

Iranian crude and condensate loadings collapsed from about two million barrels per day in March to roughly 740,000bpd in July and just 220,000-255,000bpd in August, according to estimates from Kpler and Vortexa.

TankerTrackers.com told the Reuters news agency that 29 tankers, carrying 36.11 million barrels of crude, were trapped in the Strait of Hormuz. Meanwhile, Vortexa estimated total Iranian crude afloat had fallen from 135 million barrels at the end of July to 107 million barrels by late August.

Is Trump winning the economic war on Iran?

By several economic measures, Washington’s pressure campaign is inflicting damage on Iran’s economy.

On September 6, total trade had fallen by 25 to 35 percent, President Masoud Pezeshkian said, with imports hit harder than exports. The US blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has made it hard for ships carrying imports to reach Iranian ports.

Tehran has also explicitly linked the end of the war to economic relief. Iran’s security chief Mohsen Rezaei told Al Jazeera on Saturday that its conditions include “the release of our frozen funds and an end to the naval blockade”.

In addition to the naval blockade, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent last month announced an economic pressure campaign against Iran, pledging to target its financial interests across the world. He said the US would target all of Iran’s sources of revenue, including oil, to prevent other countries and companies from doing business with Tehran.

The US-Israeli attacks and Iran’s retaliations have disrupted Tehran’s trade with one of its main economic partners, the United Arab Emirates.

The UAE last month announced an indefinite trade embargo on Iran after accusing its forces of carrying out several ballistic missile attacks, which Tehran denied, calling it a “false flag operation” by Israel and the US.

Chris Beauchamp, market analyst at IG Group, said, “Most wars are contests of stamina more than anything else.”

“The 10 percent drop in Iranian GDP is a sign that the US is succeeding in putting pressure on its foe. But the question rests, as it has done since March, on whether Iran can weather the fall in economic activity better than the US can stand the surge in energy costs,” he told Al Jazeera.

“For a regime prepared to do anything to stay in power, this news will make little difference, so long as the security forces remain loyal,” he added.

What is the latest with diplomatic efforts to end the war?

While Iran has taken a defiant stance against US economic and military pressure, it has indicated repeatedly that it remains open to diplomatic means to end the nearly seven-month-old war.

On Saturday, Rezaei told Al Jazeera that Iran conveyed a formal set of conditions to Washington through Qatari mediators for ending the war.

Iranian state media outlet IRNA reported on Monday that Pakistani Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi was set to visit Tehran, without specifying the agenda or other details.

Mediators Qatar and Pakistan have been working to re-establish negotiations between the two sides since their memorandum of understanding (MoU) expired last month.

Meanwhile, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will stop briefly in Qatar before going to New York for the UN General Assembly, IRNA reported.

Iran has repeatedly said it remains ready for any new strikes by Washington.

Rezaei said on Saturday Tehran did not rule out a new US strike against Iran, calling the possibility “very much on the cards” based on his country’s military assessments.

Mark Pfeifle, a Republican strategist and former White House and national security official, said Iran and the US are still willing to strike a deal.

“Sometimes in diplomacy it’s what’s taken off the table,” he told Al Jazeera.

Pfeifle said when Rezaei reiterated his demands for talks with the US, he spoke of “ending the blockade, releasing the frozen funds [and] stopping the attacks”.

“But he left off reparations and reconstruction money, which tells me that there’s a concrete sign that amongst all the rhetoric, which is still very strident, that the pressure campaign that the US is putting on Iran is having some effect,” he said.

“And it tells me that both sides are still looking for room to negotiate in the coming weeks.”

BEIJING: Oil prices jumped more than two percent on Monday, after new Houthi strikes on Saudi Arabia and Iranian attacks on ships in the Gulf compounded supply concerns following the closure of a key Saudi oil pipeline.

Brent crude futures rose $2.90, or 2.77 percent, to $107.51 per barrel as of 2313 GMT. WTI futures rose $2.27, or 2.27 percent, to $102.32 per barrel. Prices had initially risen more than ‌3 percent at market ‌open.

Saudi Arabian state media on Sunday released ​video ‌footage of ⁠damage to ​homes ⁠and a mosque from what it said was a Houthi attack on the country’s southern Jazan province. The Houthis said they had also struck a Saudi military base in a neighboring province.

A vessel in the Strait of Hormuz was struck by a projectile, causing a fire and forcing the crew to be evacuated, the British maritime security agency UKMTO said on Sunday.

Iran said one person was killed ⁠and four crew wounded aboard an Iranian commercial vessel struck ‌off its coast.

Oil prices had been ‌expected to rise on Monday amid growing concerns about ​risks to supply from Saudi Arabia, ‌the world’s largest oil exporter, whose East-West oil pipeline was shut on Friday ‌by a drone strike that originated in Iraq.

The loss of the pipeline, which helped Saudi Arabia re-route its exports avoiding the Strait of Hormuz, threatens up to 4 percent of global oil supply.

Meanwhile, Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthis had reached the strategic island of Perim on ‌Friday, moving to tighten their control over the Bab Al-Mandab Strait, another key oil transit lane that has been shipping ⁠4-5 percent of ⁠global supply in recent months.

Oil surged 8 percent higher on the week due to the disruptions, rising above $100 for the first time since July.

“Looking ahead, unless this week’s talks in Oman produce something operational — or the East-West pipeline is brought back online quickly — the risk is that crude oil continues to extend its gains toward the $119.48 high of early March,” IG market analyst Tony Sycamore said in a note on Sunday.

Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said on X later on Sunday, however, that a scheduled Monday meeting in Oman between Gulf countries and Iran to discuss the Strait of Hormuz had been postponed.

No peace talks ​have been held in the ​war, launched six months ago by the United States and Israel, since an interim agreement in June collapsed after a few weeks.