political

A massive explosion tore through the strategic Ali Al-Taher ridge overlooking Nabatiyeh on Thursday night after the Israeli military detonated what it said was a Hezbollah underground complex extending for more than 2 kilometers beneath the heights.

Lebanon’s National News Agency said the blast was felt across Nabatiyeh and surrounding areas. Israel said it had destroyed command centers, weapons stores, living quarters, rockets, missiles, drones and other military infrastructure and had achieved “operational control” of the ridge both above and below ground.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz said the operation completed the consolidation of Israel’s self-declared security zone inside southern Lebanon.

For residents of Nabatiyeh below, the destruction gave dramatic new urgency to a political argument that has been building for weeks: Who can actually protect the south?

When Lebanese Army vehicles appeared in greater numbers on the streets of Nabatiyeh, residents welcomed the soldiers with flowers and handfuls of rice.

The army had not been absent from the southern Lebanese city, as a security source later stressed. But the enhanced deployment — and its unusual public reception — carried unmistakable political weight.

For decades, Nabatiyeh has been synonymous with the influence of Hezbollah and the Amal Movement. Yet the soldiers arrived a day after more than 400 people signed an appeal demanding that the Lebanese state assume responsibility for the city’s security, deploy the army in and around it, and restore decisions of war and peace exclusively to legitimate institutions.

Known as “Nabatiyeh 2,” as the second of such petitions, the appeal may not prove that Hezbollah’s southern heartland is turning decisively against the organization. Its significance lies somewhere subtler; it suggests that some southerners — long-cast as steadfast Hezbollah loyalists — are beginning to question not their hostility toward Israel, but whom they trust to protect them from it.

Bahjat Mirza, a signatory whose family has been rooted in Nabatiyeh for generations, rejected accusations the initiative was politically motivated.

“These appeals are coming from people of the land — people who are not politically inclined in any particular direction,” he told Arab News.

“This appeal is not politically motivated. It is simply a civil appeal by Lebanese citizens to their government to deploy the army and official security forces on the ground. In my opinion, they should have been there since 1948, since 1969, since 1975.”

Dr. Ali Hassan Wehbe, another supporter of the appeal, is a Lebanese dentist, political and social analyst and former parliamentary candidate who ran in the 2022 elections. His dental clinic in Nabatiyeh has been destroyed three times during successive conflicts — in the 2006 war, again in 2024 and most recently in 2026.

He said the campaign was fundamentally about preventing Nabatiyeh from suffering still greater destruction.

“The appeal is, first and foremost, about removing Israel’s pretext and saving Nabatiyeh,” Wehbe told Arab News, stressing that “Israel bears the primary responsibility for this destruction and this barbarity.”

But he rejected suggestions that calling for state security forces amounted to betrayal.

“Has bringing the Lebanese Army and the Lebanese state into Nabatiyeh suddenly become forbidden? Has this become an act of treason against the country?” he said.

“Which is preferable — for the Lebanese Army to enter, or, God forbid, for the Israeli army to enter? Of course, the Lebanese Army should enter. They are our sons.”

The appeal explicitly holds Israel responsible for occupation, killing and destruction. But it also demands accountability from those who controlled security decisions and promised that their weapons could protect southern Lebanon.

Without repeatedly naming Hezbollah, the target of that criticism is clear.

Its most politically charged declaration is that Nabatiyeh must not become “a barricade for any axis” — a challenge to the city’s place in a regional confrontation closely linked to Iran. The appeal also rejects what it describes as the “duality of decision-making” inside Lebanon.

This is not merely a request for more soldiers or better policing. It explicitly demands for the state to become the sole authority responsible for security, and for no armed party outside its institutions to determine when Lebanon goes to war.

“Hezbollah’s position on this is irrelevant,” Mirza said. “Anybody’s position is irrelevant — even if the president of the country disagreed with us. We are asking the Lebanese state to protect its citizens.”

Wehbe put it more starkly.

“We are not a bargaining chip and we are not a negotiating card,” he said. “Nabatiyeh is the artery of the south. It is the heart of Jabal Amel.”

For him, the conclusion is straightforward: “We have no alternative to the state.”

The struggle over Ali Al-Taher

The immediate trigger for the second appeal was the clear and devastating fate of Ali Al-Taher, the strategic heights described as the “gateway to Nabatiyeh.”

The petition argues that an opportunity existed to place the area under Lebanese Army control before Israel claimed operational control of it. For critics, the episode has produced a simple argument: Territory that was not handed to the Lebanese state ultimately fell under Israeli control.

That argument acquired added force on Thursday when Israel detonated the underground complex beneath the ridge, after weeks of bombardment and ground operations. The blast was powerful enough to register as a magnitude-4.1 seismic event about 13 kilometers west-southwest of Nabatiyeh.

The Israeli military said the network contained a central command complex belonging to Hezbollah’s Badr unit as well as weapons storage rooms and facilities that allowed fighters to remain underground for prolonged periods. Israel said its troops would remain in the area to prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its presence there.

Political writer Sateh Noureddine, who comes from the southern town of Arabsalim, said the loss of the heights was not as recent as Israel’s announcement suggested.

“The Ali Al-Taher hills fell some time ago,” he told Arab News. “The information indicated that Hezbollah’s members had evacuated them weeks ago, not now.”

Noureddine said he did not believe a deal had been responsible for the area falling into Israeli hands. He did, however, question the timing of Israel’s announcement.

“What I find strange, and what raises more than one question, is why Israel announced the fall of Ali Al-Taher now,” he said.

“I believe this indicates that Israel will undertake a military operation more significant than Ali Al-Taher, through which Benjamin Netanyahu will seek to make electoral gains in the Oct. 27 election.”

The second appeal is markedly more urgent than the first. Mirza said it was issued after continued Israeli bombardment of Nabatiyeh and its surrounding villages created a growing fear that the city itself was gradually disappearing.

“It became very clear, with Israel’s dominance and the continued bombing of cultural and historical sites in Nabatiyeh and the surrounding villages, that we felt the city was gradually being destroyed,” he said.

For Wehbe, that fear is intensely personal.

“Since I was 10 years old, I have lived through displacement and wars,” he said. “We do not want to keep mourning our children. We do not want to keep living on memories. We want to live in the present and build the future.”

Residents are no longer debating only a theoretical future danger. They have watched destruction reach the approaches to the city and are contemplating what another escalation could mean for their homes, families and livelihoods.

For years, Hezbollah and Iran were associated among their supporters with power, protection and deterrence. Residents are now confronting destroyed villages, lost territory and the possibility of still greater devastation.

That does not necessarily amount to a complete political realignment. But it has shaken some of the assumptions on which Hezbollah’s relationship with its popular base was built.

The political debate was once largely about who represented the south. For some residents, the more urgent question is now whether there will be a south left to represent.

‘Nothing but words and threats’

Ali Al-Amin, editor-in-chief of Janoubia, a news website opposed to Hezbollah, said the party was becoming increasingly defiant as the pressure surrounding it intensified.

“Hezbollah has no options other than to continue attacking the authorities in general, while the circle of protest against the party is expanding in the south amid fears of further Israeli incursions and of the entire south falling under occupation,” he told Arab News.

“Even Hezbollah’s supporters have begun to voice their unease over what the wars in support of Gaza and Iran have produced. Voices are rising even from within Hezbollah’s own constituency because the equation on the ground has become exposed.

“All the evidence has shown that the party says one thing and does another. It has become clear that it possesses nothing but words and threats.”

Al-Amin said Hezbollah’s failure to confront Israeli forces at Ali Al-Taher was particularly damaging because of the importance the organization had previously attached to the area.

“Hezbollah did not resist the Israelis when they advanced toward Ali Al-Taher, even though it had described it as the ‘mother of all battles,’” he said.

He warned that Hezbollah’s response to its growing isolation could eventually transform the purpose of its weapons.

“The danger today is that Hezbollah’s defiance could change the function of its weapons, turning them from weapons intended to resist Israel into weapons used to confront the Lebanese state,” Al-Amin said.

“Hezbollah is trying to find pretexts for not handing over its weapons. But if we observe the trajectory, we find that the party’s argument is weakening and being depleted over time. This is what Israel has done through the escalation of its military operations.

“Today, the testing ground has shifted north of the Litani River, rather than remaining south of it.”

Wehbe, however, framed his challenge to Hezbollah differently. He stressed that many of those behind the appeal had themselves supported or participated in the resistance — Hezbollah’s preferred euphemism — in previous decades.

“My message to Hezbollah’s leadership is this: Deal with this opposition rationally and calmly, because this opposition was itself a stronghold of the resistance,” he said.

He also urged Hezbollah to rein in supporters who had accused the signatories of treason or incited against them.

“Are we no longer allowed to express our pain?” he asked. “Are we no longer allowed to say: Enough displacement?”

Dissent is not new — but its focus may be

Public opposition to Hezbollah and Amal inside Nabatiyeh is not unprecedented.

During Lebanon’s 2019 uprising, protesters in the predominantly Shiite city openly challenged both movements. Those demonstrations broke longstanding taboos and exposed anger over corruption, patronage, economic mismanagement and Lebanon’s sectarian political system.

Some of the people supporting the latest appeal may belong to that established opposition constituency. More than 400 signatures, while notable, cannot be treated as representative of hundreds of thousands of people across southern Lebanon. Nabatiyeh has not suddenly ceased to be a major center of Hezbollah and Amal support.

What may be changing is the nature of the criticism.

In 2019, much of the anger focused on governance and economic failure. “Nabatiyeh 2” strikes much closer to Hezbollah’s foundational claim to legitimacy: that its independent arsenal is necessary because it can defend the south more effectively than the Lebanese state.

The appeal asks whether that claim still holds after the scale of destruction inflicted on southern communities and the loss of territory Hezbollah’s weapons were supposed to protect.

Noureddine argued that the growth of public opposition was evidence that the party’s political structure was beginning to disintegrate.

“Hezbollah is on its way to disappearing — its leadership and political bureau alike,” he said. “It is living through its final phase. The party’s political body has begun to disintegrate, and nothing will remain except scattered cells that carry on its path and may disappear underground.”

“The number of people signing the Nabatiyeh appeal is doubling every day,” he added. “This is an indication of growing opposition to a party that is fading away.”

His assessment is among the most categorical offered by Hezbollah’s critics and remains fiercely disputed by its supporters. There is no evidence that the organization has lost its dominant position within its traditional constituency.

Nevertheless, the willingness to make such arguments openly is itself significant in a region where public criticism of Hezbollah’s security role has historically carried a high political and social cost.

Joelle Abboud, a member of the Lebanese Kataeb Party’s political bureau, said the demand for state sovereignty over southern villages had never belonged to one community or political faction.

“The voices that have recently risen to demand state sovereignty through the army in southern villages reflect what has always been a national demand across all sects,” she told Arab News.

“The emergence of Shiite voices making that demand today is evidence that Hezbollah’s weapons did not deter Israel, and that the war continued to an Iranian rhythm, with Lebanese youth used as fuel for an Iranian project.”

Abboud said the reception given to the army in Nabatiyeh showed that southerners wanted the state to assume the role long claimed by Hezbollah.

“The welcome received by the Lebanese Army in Nabatiyeh is evidence that southerners are eager to see the state become the alternative to militia weapons,” she said.

“Diplomacy is a difficult path, but it is effective in achieving stability. What is required today is the implementation of the Lebanese government’s decisions to confine weapons to the state.”

For now, “Nabatiyeh 2” — with signatories including doctors, engineers, lawyers, bankers, journalists, academics, writers, activists and MP Firas Hamdan — is not proof that southern Lebanon has turned against Hezbollah. It is evidence that a question once difficult to voice publicly is becoming harder to suppress.

After decades in which Hezbollah presented itself as the indispensable defender of the south, some people within its traditional environment are looking toward the Lebanese Army and asking whether only the state can protect them.

Whether this is simply the cry of a frightened city facing another battle, or the beginning of a deeper transformation in Hezbollah’s relationship with the society from which it draws much of its power, remains unanswered.

But after the explosion beneath Ali Al-Taher shook Nabatiyeh on Thursday night, that question is no longer abstract.

It is being asked aloud.

The presidential candidates and the parties are pouring money into campaign advertising at a record-breaking pace, some of it skirting federal laws designed to keep special interests from influencing the election, according to a pair of studies released Tuesday.

Political parties and independent organizations have spent or committed to spending more than $342 million on ads since the 2000 election cycle began in January 1999, already surpassing the entire 1996 cycle, according to the study by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania.

A separate study by the University of Wisconsin and the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law found that the Democratic and Republican parties have combined to spend at least $44.2 million on ads since June. All of the ads featured their presidential candidates and most were paid for with so-called soft money donations.

The party advertising that features presidential candidates has been controversial because federal law prohibits the spending of soft money donations to influence the outcome of the election.

Campaign Finance Laws ‘Are Dead and Buried’

“Looking at these hard facts leaves no room for doubt, the campaign finance [laws] in this country are dead and buried,” said E. Joshua Rosenkrantz, president of the Brennan Center. “The American political parties are engaged in the greatest money-laundering scheme in history.”

The parties interpret the law to mean they can spend soft money on “issue advocacy” ads, which legally aren’t for the purpose of influencing the presidential race.

But according to the Brennan analysis of the largest 75 media markets, the parties have opted to run their ads only in states where the presidential race is competitive.

In fact, the Republican Party has accelerated its ad spending in places such as Florida, a traditional GOP stronghold where Vice President Al Gore has been rising in the polls. The two parties and their candidates are waging their ad war across a battlefield of about 17 states–a field that has essentially left out major media markets such as Los Angeles and New York.

Since the Democrats fired off the first ad in June, the party and Gore have aired their heaviest volume in Flint, Mich., followed by Scranton, Pa., and Pittsburgh. Republicans and the Bush campaign have been running their heaviest volume in Scranton, Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio, according to the Brennan study.

The last two weeks have seen the Bush campaign and Republican Party draw even in spending, pouring in a combined $8.7 million in the two weeks ending Sept. 13, about 18% more than the $7.4 million spent by Gore and the Democrats, the study found.

Data for the study come from the Campaign Media Analysis Group, which tracks ad spending in the top 75 markets.

The Brennan study found that few independent groups have advertised in the presidential race so far.

But the independent groups are deluging congressional and state races with money, according to the Annenberg study. More than 125 different groups are running ads this cycle, more than the last two cycles combined, the study concluded.

The largest segment of the issue ads, about 24%, focuses on health care, followed by the environment and gun control. The independent groups spending the most are backed by major industries–Citizens for Better Medicare, a group founded largely by the pharmaceutical industry, has spent about $34 million on ads, many of them aimed at a half-dozen competitive congressional races.

But there has been an explosion of smaller groups as well. A group called the Republican Ideas Political Committee, for example, said it has raised $70,000 to hit the air in Kansas City, Mo., with a controversial spot in which a harried mother says her son’s public school has “a bit more diversity than he could handle.”

Ads Now Focus on Specific Candidates

More than in the past, the ads are focusing on specific candidates instead of issues. So far this cycle, 52% of the issue ads have mentioned candidates, compared with about 35% at the same period in the 1998 election cycle, the study found.

Since the Annenberg researchers last surveyed issue-ad spending in March, the parties and independent groups have spent or committed an additional $224 million to ads.

Because Annenberg relied on the organizations themselves to provide some spending data, researchers said the numbers may not be precise. But the center has used the same methodology for three elections, so its estimates of the changes in spending should be accurate, officials said.

At this point in the race, “it’s clearer who the targets are,” said Lorie Slass, director of Annenberg’s Washington office. “More groups are entering the fray. They want to get close to election day to spend their money.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Presidential Campaign Ads

Television advertising in the presidential campaign has been almost entirely limited so far to 22 states, with the heaviest concentration focused on four of the most competitive areas. Spending reflected in the map combines all of the advertising purchases made in this calendar year by the Democratic and Republican parties as well as the campaigns for George W. Bush and Al Gore. In the state-by-state list, Republican figures include spending by the party and the Bush presidential campaign while Democratic figures include spending by the party and the Gore campaign.

Where the money was spent

ARKANSAS

Republican: $388,113

Democrat: $499,188

CALIFORNIA

Republican: $1,123,700

Democrat: $100

FLORIDA

Republican: $5,177,434

Democrat: $2,772,544

GEORGIA

Republican: $630,578

Democrat: $303,997

IOWA

Republican: $264,538

Democrat: $368,312

ILLINOIS

Republican: $2,419,731

Democrat: $2,381,482

KENTUCKY

Republican: $733,082

Democrat: $923,948

LOUISIANA

Republican: $387,533

Democrat: $516,408

MASSACHUSETTS

Republican: $95,800

MAINE

Republican: $434,389

Democrat: $570,261

MICHIGAN

Republican: $2,778,915

Democrat: $3,941,715

MISSOURI

Republican: $1,704,376

Democrat: $2,249,209

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Republican: $86,400

Democrat: $32,200

NORTH CAROLINA

Republican: $256,750

NEW MEXICO

Republican: $424,576

Democrat: $841,652

NEVADA

Republican: $326,700

OHIO

Republican: $4,485,212

Democrat: $4,795,589

OREGON

Republican: $800,635

Democrat: $1,054,452

PENNSYLVANIA

Republican: $5,776,120

Democrat: $6,648,116

WASHINGTON

Republican: $2,548,695

Democrat: $2,446,475

WISCONSIN

Republican: $1,137,594

Democrat: $1,691,948

WEST VIRGINIA

Republican: $117,500

Democrat: $41,600

Note: Through Sept. 13

Source: Campaign Media Analysis Group (Based on a survey of the nation’s top 75 media markets).

Members of the high court have exchanged accusations after one justice was accused of involvement in a bank scandal.

Brazil’s Supreme Court has cancelled a second straight day of deliberations as suspicions of corruption, political bias and police interference loom over several of its members.

Cancellations are rare at the high court. But on Thursday, Chief Justice Luiz Edson Fachin nixed a second consecutive session, calling for the court to reconvene on Tuesday instead.

The decision was spurred by an ongoing crisis among the court’s members.

The divisions emerged on September 1, when one justice, Andre Mendonca, unsealed a series of federal police documents that appeared to show a disgraced banker, Daniel Vorcaro, seeking advice from another justice, Alexandre de Moraes.

De Moraes has rocketed to prominence in recent years for his roles in high-profile cases.

He presided over the trial of former President Jair Bolsonaro after prosecutors accused the far-right leader of plotting a coup following his 2022 election defeat. De Moraes also oversaw suspensions of platforms like X and Rumble for failing to abide by court orders, making him a target for Brazil’s right wing.

The document release authorised by Mendonca, a Bolsonaro appointee, contains roughly 30 text messages sent to a phone number associated with de Moraes, allegedly from Vorcaro.

In response, de Moraes has accused Mendonca of abusing his authority on the court for political gains. He requested a probe into whether Mendonca interviewed Vorcaro without the presence of police or prosecutors.

Tuesday’s session will involve the full Supreme Court bench, and 10 of the justices will discuss whether the 11th member, de Moraes, should be investigated over the text messages.

The tit-for-tat on Brazil’s high court is the latest fallout from the Banco Master corruption scandal.

Vorcaro, the head of the Banco Master financial institution, was arrested in November 2025 on accusations he defrauded investors of billions in lost funds, in one of the biggest banking scandals in the country’s history.

The collapse of Banco Master’s private banking arm left behind more than $7bn in debt.

Lawmakers from across the political spectrum have become embroiled in the unfolding scandal as new details emerge.

The turmoil risks affecting October’s general elections, including a pivotal presidential election.

Left-wing incumbent Lula Inacio Lula da Silva is set to compete for the presidency against Jair Bolsonaro’s eldest son, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro.

Both Lula and Senator Bolsonaro have called for investigations into the Supreme Court justices.

The Bolsonaro family itself has been dragged into the Banco Master scandal. In May, the publication Intercept Brasil released a report showing that Senator Bolsonaro petitioned Vorcaro for funds to finance a film about his ex-president father, who is now serving a 27-year prison sentence.

Senator Bolsonaro has denied wrongdoing, claiming he did nothing more than seek private sponsorship for the film, entitled Dark Horse.

But on Thursday, Brazilian police executed dozens of raids related to the Banco Master scandal, including some that targeted two figures involved in the film: Karina Gama, the head of a production company, and Congressman Mario Frias, who served as executive producer.

Senator Bolsonaro has called the probes “attempted political interference” ahead of the elections.

Venezuelan political junkies witnessed an amusing phenomenon in the past few weeks: former presidential hopeful Henrique Capriles embraced a derisive meme about himself that suddenly became popular. Or more precisely, he, too, started joking about his own memefied persona, el manguanguas, the weirdly energetic, repetitive and even creepy politician that appears at your doorstep and, if you let him inside, sits down for hours to hablar de la situación while emptying your family’s coffee reserves. 

Capriles is one of the most memeable characters in our universe and the manguanguas moniker is not a rarity. It comes from a 2019, early Juan Guaidó era livestream where he praises Guaidó and rants at Maduro for virtually terminating political competition a year before: “¡Coño, qué manguangua! ¿Ah?” (an indignant “hell, that’s convenient, huh?”).

The whole thing does say a couple of things about our (still overwhelmingly digital) public sphere and the memefication of Venezuelan politics. First, it seems many people were more eager to have a laugh and scroll down the manguanguas rabbit hole than to learn, say, about the US-Nabep deal and the involvement of bolichico king Alejandro Betancourt, a material architect of the crisis that remains the biggest handicap to the quality of life of Venezuelans. To put it another way, el manguanguas was getting an insane amount of attention while the US overlords faced their biggest reputational crisis in Venezuela since January 3.

The meme emerged because Capriles has been touring Miranda while Venezuelan politics become increasingly defined by what a group of gringos in navy blue suits decide to tweet on a Friday evening.

We’re not making a great discovery here—most people know memes can have spectacular traction when it comes to political messaging and campaigning. The Venezuelan jodita, the national propensity to make jokes about everyone and everything even in the midst of tragedy, can make memes an even stronger weapon in our digital sphere. It seems someone made Capriles aware of that: he first reacted by complaining on X, accusing “those who are paying a millionaire campaign in production and publicity” of attacking him on social media. Then he acknowledged it in a friendlier fashion: “They say I visit your homes to steal your coffee,” he said in a September 1 video in Barlovento. “They mock me because they don’t want to see me coming here.” In a later post, he made a toast with other townspeople raising tiny coffee cups: “Por la manguangua!”

Capriles decided to tag his recent posts with #OperaciónManguangua and the whole thing has been helping him—engagement around his account grew and became more positive as a result, though he still doesn’t dare to open the comments section in his X handle. It’s good news for him after a few years of unpopularity, when he formally joined the faux opposition camp. If not for the events of January 3 and a still dim opening of the political arena, Capriles would be flirting with irrelevance, just a washed-up face in the parliamentary seat Jorge Rodríguez gifted him in 2025, begging Iris Varela or Jorge Arreaza for a chance at the chamber’s microphone. We wrote about his acts and decisions extensively—or his lack of courage and effectiveness—in the late Maduro era. But Capriles is not yet irrelevant, at least in my opinion.

The meme emerged in the first place because Capriles has been touring the state of Miranda this summer—a post-Maduro redemption tour, if you will—while Venezuelan political events again become increasingly defined by what a group of gringos in navy blue suits decide to tweet on a Friday evening. A few years ago, Capriles campaigned strongly about “bringing politics back to the country” in a not-so-slight dig at Guaidó, Leopoldo López, and the Trump-backed interim government they led. He now recognizes María Corina Machado as the rightful opposition leader and criticizes her exclusion from the so-called negotiations, so this is not about a plot against her.

Venezuelan politics started to see some interesting movements a few months ago, but these have become less and less intense as the rest of the opposition waits for Machado’s return or the green flag of an election date.

As weak and isolated as he may look, Capriles is one of the few opposition people with actual freedom to call things what they are when it comes to the United States and Venezuela. That is not the case for Machado, Juan Pablo Guanipa, or other figures who might be playing a role behind the scenes. Capriles didn’t have to wait for Marco Rubio’s explanations five days later to make his case about the US-Nabep deal. He was quick to assert that the oil belonged to the people on the day of Trump’s bombastic announcement, and made some sensible questions: What’s the deal’s scope? What’s its legal basis? What do Venezuelans receive, and under which conditions? Elliott Abrams, the GOP hawk and special envoy in Trump’s first term, noted Capriles’ almost lonely stance as a sign of the country’s worrying lack of politicians who are truly independent from Washington (to make his point, the former operative of Ronald Reagan also quoted the Venezuelan Communist Party in his Washington Post op-ed).

Will the manguanguas joke give him an enhanced platform? Maybe for a bit, though Capriles has a habit of messing things up and making people grow tired of him rather quickly. Right now, he is being noisier than at that time he was supposed to run for the 2023 primaries, only to chicken out in the final stretch, knowing he stood no chance against Machado. However, the videos he has been posting of rural communities in the state he once governed do carve out an accurate picture of how the country looks outside a few big cities. In the Barlovento area, Capriles is seen visiting a ramshackle school where the roof looks about to fall down, with a disgusting pile of books and furniture eaten by heat and dust as a library, its walls and windows looking flimsy when not broken. Another post shows a nearby ghost town, Tacarigua de la Laguna, where Capriles records an empty beach in front of him and an abandoned building behind—the only living thing nearby being a baby cat. Mire, aquí lo único que quedó es el gatico, he says.

In March, we wrote that the political heat map of Venezuela was starting to see some interesting movements, but these have also become less and less intense while the rest of the opposition waits for María Corina’s return or the green flag of an electoral calendar to light up the party. Maybe, if the people are kept waiting, angry or disappointed with the Americans as the opposition watches from the dugout, Capriles will remain the only cat making noise. Mire, pues vamos a ver.

RIYADH: Saudi foreign minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan bin Abdullah received a phone call from Muhammad Ishaq Dar, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Pakistan, official ministry statements said Sunday.

Officials from both countries reviewed the state of bilateral relations and discussed recent regional developments, including the ongoing crisis in the region.

The ministries stated that the conversation addressed efforts to contain the crisis and promote peaceful solutions through dialogue and negotiation, with the aim of reducing tensions and preserving security and stability in the region.

سمو وزير الخارجية الأمير #فيصل_بن_فرحان” rel=”noopener noreferrer”>https://x.com/hashtag/%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%B5%D9%84_%D8%A8%D9%86_%D9%81%D8%B1%D8%AD%D8%A7%D9%86?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>#فيصل_بن_فرحان @FaisalbinFarhan” rel=”noopener noreferrer”>https://x.com/FaisalbinFarhan?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>@FaisalbinFarhan يتلقى اتصالاً هاتفياً من معالي نائب رئيس الوزراء وزير خارجية جمهورية باكستان الإسلامية محمد إسحاق دار. pic.twitter.com/puIUe1VwKg

&mdash” rel=”noopener noreferrer”>https://t.co/puIUe1VwKg”>pic.twitter.com/puIUe1VwKg— وزارة الخارجية (@KSAMOFA) September” rel=”noopener noreferrer”>https://x.com/KSAMOFA/status/2096540134522966457?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>September 6, 2026

SACRAMENTO — California lawmakers on Sunday approved bills aimed at preventing interference in this fall’s midterm elections and requiring more transparency from social media influencers who are paid by political campaigns.

They join a growing pile of bills on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk as the legislature nears the end of its two-year session, which adjourns early this week.

Social media influencers took on a more visible role in California’s 2026 gubernatorial primary. Candidates including Democratic billionaire Tom Steyer paid thousands of dollars to influencers who posted videos endorsing Steyer or talking about him in a positive light. These videos did not always disclose that influencers were paid by a candidate’s campaign.

Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) said his bill would ensure “that voters are not misled by paid content” by requiring a disclosure on paid posts and videos. Campaigns will also be required to report funds spent on social media posts.

If Newsom signs the law, it could result in fines for influencers and campaigns that fail to disclose such payments.

Two other bills sent to Newsom on Sunday would make it a felony to interfere with mail ballots or to seize ballots and other election materials before an election is certified. They come amid concern from Democratic lawmakers that President Trump or his supporters will seek to interfere with the casting and counting of ballots in the Nov. 3 election.

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco drew outrage and legal challenges when he ordered his deputies to take more than 650,000 ballots from the county elections office over unproven claims of fraud. The case was argued before the California Supreme Court last week.

Newsom earlier this year signed a bill preventing local and federal law enforcement agencies from taking ballots without a warrant.

Legislation by Assemblymember Gail Pellerin (D-Santa Cruz) goes even further by making it a felony to take or order the seizure of ballots, election records or voting machines. Such actions would be punishable by up to four years in prison.

“The federal administration and those seeking to spread lies about our democracy continue to call for interference in elections in ways we have never seen before in this country,” Pellerin said Sunday. “AB 282 helps ensure that every lawfully cast vote can be counted, and that the will of the voters of every political party will be respected.”

Republican lawmakers argued in previous hearings that the bill is unnecessary because it is already a crime to steal ballots.

Another bill, SB 259, makes it a crime to interfere with a mail ballot on the way to or from a voter or order the seizure of ballots that are in transit to a local elections office.

Newsom has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto bills.

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche’s fidelity to President Trump nearly cost him his confirmation. Now comes Blanche’s real test.

Trump’s former personal attorney has stepped into the commanding role facing a challenge that other leaders of the Republican president’s Department of Justice could not overcome: threading the needle between Trump’s boundary-busting demands and a prosecutor’s duty to uphold the rule of law. At the same time, Blanche must try to stabilize a workforce shaken by an exodus of experienced lawyers and an erosion of trust in the judicial branch.

In a wide-ranging interview with the Associated Press during a trip to Puerto Rico this week, Blanche promised to lead the department with integrity, dismissing concerns from critics who say his actions so far — including an indictment against longtime Trump foe and former FBI Director James Comey — call into question whether Blanche is still functioning as Trump’s personal lawyer.

A slew of ongoing politically charged investigations under Blanche’s watch could force him to choose between his long-standing loyalty to the president and the foundational principles of the Cabinet agency he leads. At stake is the fate of a department already reeling under a president who has made clear his desire for retribution over the criminal scrutiny he faced.

“My integrity, my commitment to the rule of law is the same today that it was the day I graduated,” Blanche told the AP when asked where he would draw the line on requests from the White House. “I would never do anything unethical or improper or violate my oath, no matter the circumstances.”

Critics disagree.

As acting attorney general, Blanche came under fire from lawmakers, including many Republicans, for signing off on a $1.8 billion fund meant to compensate Trump’s allies who believed they were politically prosecuted. He also greenlit a deal that granted Trump, the Trump Organization, and two of his sons immunity from tax audits. Those moves, unusual steps aimed at granting the president and his allies far-reaching benefits, put Blanche’s confirmation at risk, prompting key senators to express concern.

Blanche, like Trump’s other attorneys general, walks a tightrope

In the AP interview, Blanche addressed criticism of the department under his leadership, his priorities as attorney general and losses the administration has had in high-profile cases. He also depicted the Justice Department as an institution whose independence had eroded long ago — a characterization at odds with decades of fierce autonomy that challenged the highest echelons of power in Washington and beyond.

Blanche, a former federal prosecutor in New York, is walking the same tightrope as Trump’s three other Senate-confirmed attorneys general. They found their pledges to uphold the rule of law and the department’s ethical norms at odds with the president’s demands to bend the institution to his will.

During Trump’s first term, one attorney general infuriated Trump over his withdrawal from an investigation into Trump’s winning White House campaign and was forced out. Another submitted his resignation weeks after breaking with Trump over Trump’s false claims of election fraud. Blanche’s immediate predecessor, Pam Bondi, was ousted in April after failing to deliver successful prosecutions against the president’s political enemies.

Blanche’s narrow confirmation this month over opposition from two Republican senators underscored growing concerns about the dismantling of the Justice Department’s long-standing tradition of independence from the White House, which is meant to protect the impartiality of politically sensitive investigations and prosecutions.

Concerns that the Justice Department is being weaponized

Blanche bristles at the suggestion that the Justice Department should be independent of the president and he has made clear his view that the executive has both the power and the right to shape and control the law enforcement agency.

He has staunchly defended the integrity of cases the administration has brought against the president’s perceived political opponents, often pointing to his own experience representing Trump in criminal cases brought by Democratic President Joe Biden’s Justice Department. Blanche and the president have characterized those cases as politically motivated.

“I think attorneys general and others have said, ‘Oh, we’re independent.’ I don’t think that’s actually true,” Blanche told the AP.

Blanche claimed the Justice Department was not truly independent when he was a federal prosecutor or during the Biden administration. But that characterization ignores the fact that under Biden, the Justice Department investigated Biden himself over his handling of classified documents and secured felony charges in two separate cases against his son Hunter before Biden pardoned him.

The two criminal cases filed by special counsel Jack Smith against Trump were based on allegations, supported by long-running investigations, that Trump had classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and obstructed government efforts to get them back, and conspired to overturn the 2020 election.

Growing distrust of the Justice Department among judges

Blanche has sought to highlight the administration’s focus on tackling illegal immigration, violent crime and drug-trafficking cartels, spotlighting cases such as the takedown of a Puerto Rican gang that he announced during his visit to the U.S. island territory.

But Blanche’s policy priorities are often overshadowed by a growing number of investigations that have drawn criticism that the department is being used as a weapon in the president’s campaign of retribution.

Blanche’s supporters have argued that the close relationship he developed with Trump while serving as his criminal defense lawyer can make him more effective at pushing back on or explaining the legal constraints of the president’s demands. Others wonder whether he will fare any better than Bondi up against the same skeptical court system, and factual and legal hurdles, that impeded efforts to deliver the sought-after results.

Blanche is also confronting growing distrust of the Justice Department among judges, who in multiple cases have accused government lawyers of withholding information or misleading courts. Courts in some cases have quashed subpoenas or ordered the review of grand jury transcripts, and the criminal cases against Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James were dismissed after a judge found the prosecutor who brought them was illegally appointed.

But Blanche played down concerns that the erosion of judicial trust could impede his efforts to advance his agenda.

“The isolated incidents that make the news are not reflective of the way the bench feels in my view, or the way prosecutors are doing their job around the country,” Blanche said.

Richer writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Eric Tucker in Washington contributed to this report.

Sudan’s war is showing signs of a changing dynamic. Sudanese armed forces (SAF) have made a series of gains in North Kordofan state; the paramilitary group Rapid Support Forces (RSF) is facing a new wave of defections; and army chief General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan is opening a political track while insisting the military campaign will continue.

Army advances are putting pressure on RSF supply lines; defections are raising questions about the force’s cohesion; and al-Burhan, who also heads the Transitional Sovereignty Council, is seeking to shape a political process from a position strengthened by developments on the battlefield.

But the wider battlefield remains contested. Together, the military pressure, defections and political outreach point to a potentially important shift: battlefield developments may be starting to affect the political balance.

What has the army gained?

The clearest recent gains have come in North Kordofan, a state in central Sudan that links the capital, Khartoum, with the country’s western regions.

In late July, the army announced that it had retaken Bara, Jabra al-Sheikh and Umm Sayala, along with other positions in the state. Al Jazeera reported that the advances also secured the national Exports Road, a key route linking Khartoum, through Omdurman, with el-Obeid, the capital of North Kordofan.

The gains do not amount to control of the wider Kordofan region. But they have significance beyond the territory captured.

The army’s control of the Exports Road has strengthened its position in North Kordofan and added pressure on RSF supply lines. Al Jazeera reported on August 21 that the army was continuing efforts to cut those supply lines as fighting expanded across Kordofan, Darfur and the Blue Nile region.

What do the RSF defections mean?

The battlefield pressure has coincided with a marked increase in defections from the RSF.

On August 20, the army announced that about 318 people, including four officers, had joined its ranks, arriving in Northern state in about 50 combat vehicles before moving to Omdurman. Al Jazeera also reported separate groups from Kordofan and Khartoum, including 270 people, among them 21 field commanders, as well as 45 fighters and commanders from the Bara area who surrendered to the army.

The numbers alone do not tell the story. The timing does.

Al Jazeera’s August 21 analysis links the growing defections to several factors, including battlefield developments, internal problems within the RSF, social and tribal dynamics, and pressure created by the army’s advances and efforts to disrupt RSF supply lines. It also notes that the trend does not by itself mean the RSF is collapsing.

If the trend continues, it could become increasingly significant, particularly if more commanders and fighters conclude that the battlefield balance is shifting against the RSF.

For now, the more cautious conclusion is that battlefield pressure may be affecting the RSF’s cohesion without yet amounting to a broader breakdown of the organisation.

Why is al-Burhan opening a political track?

The SAF chief’s political initiative is unfolding alongside these military developments.

On August 15, he announced that the state would provide temporary immunity and legal, political and security guarantees to participants in a national dialogue managed by an independent national mechanism. Criminal proceedings against participants facing charges would be suspended during their involvement in the dialogue, without removing the rights of those who had filed complaints.

Al-Burhan said the initiative came from a group of Sudanese who had approached him with a proposal for dialogue. He said the group would independently manage the process and that the state would not determine its agenda or outcomes. He also said he had begun engaging with national forces that had supported the state and its institutions, with the aim of involving them in completing state institutions, including a legislative council.

But this is not a move away from the war.

Al-Burhan said he would not accept what he called a “peace without substance” that would bring RSF commander Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, also known as Hemedti, and his supporters to power. He also said the path to peace begins with the RSF leaving cities and being gathered in designated areas.

On August 21, Al Jazeera reported that al-Burhan said the fighting would continue until what he described as the rebellion was ended, while the army was working to cut RSF supply lines. He also rejected a truce that would allow the RSF to reorganise, while saying he remained open to a just peace and national dialogue that excluded the RSF.

Al-Burhan is therefore not choosing between war and politics. He is pursuing both, maintaining military pressure while opening a political process he says should preserve the state and its institutions.

What does Malik Agar’s position reveal?

Malik Agar, deputy chairman of the Transitional Sovereignty Council, has made the government’s position even clearer.

In an interview with Al Jazeera on August 22, Agar said the current option was military resolution unless serious conditions for negotiations emerged. He said the RSF would have to withdraw from cities and residential areas before negotiations could begin, stressing that the government remained open to initiatives that preserve Sudan’s unity and state institutions.

In a separate Al Jazeera interview published on August 23, Agar said the army would win but that the war would ultimately end through negotiations.

He argued that Sudan’s crisis was rooted in deeper problems, including the weakness of the state and the failure of political elites to manage the country’s ethnic, cultural, religious and geographic diversity.

His position reflects the government’s broader calculation: maintain military pressure while leaving the door open to negotiations from a stronger position on the battlefield.

Can al-Burhan turn battlefield pressure into political leverage?

The army’s gains in North Kordofan have strengthened its position along a strategically important route. The growing defections from the RSF are raising questions about the force’s cohesion. At the same time, the RSF remains active on several fronts, and the wider battlefield remains contested.

That combination gives the recent developments significance beyond individual battles or defections. The changing military balance may now be beginning to shape the terms of Sudan’s next political phase.

For al-Burhan, the potential advantage is not simply territorial. If military pressure continues to produce defections and weaken RSF cohesion, it could give the SAF greater room to shape who participates in a political process and the conditions under which future negotiations take place.

For the RSF, the challenge is therefore not only to hold territory. It is to prevent battlefield pressure from becoming an internal crisis of cohesion.

That has not happened yet. Military setbacks do not automatically translate into political marginalisation.

The army’s recent gains are best understood not as evidence of a decisive victory, but as a shift in the conditions under which the next phase of the war may be fought, and eventually negotiated.

Can the RSF contain the defections and preserve its bargaining position, or will continued military pressure give al-Burhan greater leverage in Sudan’s next political phase?

Community activist Karen Bass achieved a decisive victory in the Democratic primary for the 47th state Assembly district by assembling a coalition that extended beyond the traditional base of African American voters to include Latinos and organized labor.

That broader coalition, which allowed her to trounce two candidates who have long been part of the African American political establishment in the area, may signal a changing of the guard in South Los Angeles. The district extends from Westwood through Culver City to the Crenshaw area.

Bass captured 48% of the vote in the Democratic primary, while Nate Holden, who represented part of the area as a state legislator and city councilman for 20 years, received 21%. Attorney Rickey Ivie finished a distant third, despite support from many of the area’s most prominent black leaders, including current Assemblyman Herb Wesson (D-Culver City), County Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke, City Councilman Bernard C. Parks and state Sen. Kevin Murray (D-Culver City).

Bass and political experts said that her campaign had benefited from demographic shifts, grass-roots organizing and the power of organized labor.

The candidate said people had seemed to appreciate that, before running for office, she had toiled in the community for more than a decade as the executive director of the Community Coalition, a group that led the fight against rebuilding liquor stores in South Los Angeles after the 1992 riots, and championed education reform for schools in poor neighborhoods.

“I think the idea of new leadership resonated,” Bass, 50, said Wednesday. “People wanted a new style of leadership. I think they liked the fact that I was an activist who had been deeply involved in the community for years.”

Working in the community gave Bass a huge base of grass-roots supporters to draw on in one of the most ethnically diverse districts in the state, said Los Angeles City Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa, who, along with Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (D- Los Angeles), formed a powerful group of Latino leaders that backed Bass.

“She has demonstrated that successful candidates in multiracial districts are going to have to build coalitions, and Karen Bass has been building coalitions for 30 years,” Villaraigosa said. Bass benefited from a $250,000 independent campaign by the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, which also flooded the district with 450 volunteers to get out the vote on election day.

“She is part of a new paradigm, of an African American/labor alliance for South Los Angeles,” said Miguel Contreras, head of the labor organization.

The 47th Assembly District was redrawn in 2002 to make it less heavily African American, making it imperative to build alliances beyond a single ethnic group. That’s an increasingly important skill in Los Angeles, where the growing Latino population means there are few areas where someone can be elected with the support of black voters alone.

Assemblyman Mark Ridley-Thomas (D-Los Angeles), a Bass backer, said Bass had done the best job of reaching out to diverse groups. Bass said she had courted Jewish voters in the western end of the district, while organized labor had helped her by targeting Latino voters on her behalf. Ideology also played a role, Ridley-Thomas said, saying that Bass is more liberal than Ivie, Wesson and Burke.

“Ivie is a middle-of-the road, moderate Democrat and Karen is definitely left of center and progressive,” said Jaime Regalado, executive director of the Pat Brown Institute at Cal State L.A..

A Baldwin Vista resident who teaches health communications at the USC School of Medicine, Bass agreed that she was a better ideological match with voters in the predominantly Democratic district.

The 47th Assembly District was one of 100 state Senate and Assembly contests that drew California voters to the polls Tuesday.

Though Tuesday’s winners must still compete in the November general election, most districts have been drawn to strongly favor either Republicans or Democrats. As a result, odds are good that the people who will take seats as new lawmakers in December will include Van Tran, who would become the first Vietnamese American elected to the Legislature, and Lori Saldana, a San Diego community college teacher who shocked the Democratic establishment by spending just $50,000 to beat other Democrats who enjoyed hundreds of thousands of dollars of support from some of the biggest interests trying to influence the Legislature.

Saldana’s clear win over former Gov. Gray Davis aide Vince Hall and Democratic pollster Heidi Von Szeliski was the biggest decided upset in the state, but three races were too close to call Wednesday as counties tallied absentee ballots.

Interest groups, including trial lawyers, business groups and unions, sank nearly $7 million into races, either directly or through independent expenditure campaigns, but no special interest group emerged as a clear winner.

The election allowed some politicians to extend their careers, including Board of Equalization member Carole Migden, who won the Democratic primary in a liberal San Francisco state Senate district, and Assemblyman John Campbell (R-Irvine), who beat fellow Assemblyman Ken Maddox (R-Garden Grove) for the Republican nomination in a conservative Orange County Senate district. Johan Klehs, a Democrat who has served eight years in the Assembly and six years on the Board of Equalization, appears headed back to the Assembly. Unopposed, he won the nomination in a Democratic-leaning district east of San Francisco.

Another former assemblyman seeking a comeback, Democrat Tom Umberg, had a slight lead of 51.2% to 48.8% over opponent Claudia Alvarez in the heavily Latino 69th Assembly District, which includes Santa Ana. Alvarez held out hope Wednesday that the absentee ballot tally could swing the race her way.

Also awaiting absentee ballot results were the trial lawyers who sank hundreds of thousands of dollars into the 21st Assembly District south of San Francisco. A four-way race among Democrats has been narrowed to a neck-and-neck contest between Redwood City Councilman Ira Ruskin, with 37.4% of the precinct vote and attorney Joe Carcione, with 36.6%.