China renewed its strong opposition to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan ahead of the high profile summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing.
Taiwan is expected to be one of the most sensitive issues discussed during the two day meeting, alongside trade disputes, regional security, and the ongoing Iran conflict.
Beijing considers Taiwan part of its territory, while the United States maintains unofficial relations with Taipei and remains legally committed to helping the island defend itself.
China Repeats Opposition to Arms Sales
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office warned Washington against expanding military cooperation with Taiwan and criticized U.S. weapons sales to the island.
Spokesperson Zhang Han described Taiwan as a core Chinese national interest and called on the United States to honor previous commitments under the One China framework.
Beijing argues that Taiwan is an internal Chinese matter and strongly opposes any foreign military involvement with the island.
Record US Weapons Package Raises Tensions
The Trump administration approved an $11 billion weapons package for Taiwan in December, marking the largest U.S. arms sale to the island to date.
Reports have also suggested that another arms package worth around $14 billion could be approved after Trump’s visit to China, though its current status remains unclear.
The United States says such sales are necessary to ensure Taiwan can defend itself against possible military pressure from China.
Taiwan Defence Budget Faces Scrutiny
The issue gained further attention after Taiwan’s opposition controlled parliament approved only part of a proposed $40 billion defense budget requested by President Lai Ching-te.
The approved funding prioritizes purchases of U.S. weapons while reducing spending on some domestic defense programs, including drones.
American officials reportedly expressed disappointment that the budget fell short of what Washington believes Taiwan needs for adequate defense preparedness.
Taiwanese officials fear Beijing could use the reduced spending as leverage during talks with Trump to argue against further U.S. military support for the island.
Taiwan Rejects Beijing Sovereignty Claims
Speaking at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit, Lai described Taiwan as a sovereign and independent nation that would not yield to external pressure.
China quickly rejected those remarks, reiterating that Taiwan has never been and will never become an independent country.
Beijing also repeated warnings that it retains the option of using force to bring Taiwan under its control, although it continues to publicly favor peaceful reunification.
Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party responded by emphasizing the island’s democratic system, independent government, and military institutions.
Taiwan Remains Central to US China Rivalry
Taiwan has become one of the most dangerous flashpoints in U.S. China relations, with both powers viewing the issue as tied directly to national credibility and regional influence.
For China, Taiwan represents sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national unity. For the United States, support for Taiwan is linked to maintaining regional stability and reassuring allies in the Indo Pacific.
Analysts warn that increasing military activity, arms sales, and political tensions surrounding Taiwan continue to raise the risk of miscalculation between Washington and Beijing.
Analysis
China’s warning ahead of the Trump Xi summit highlights how deeply the Taiwan issue shapes the broader strategic rivalry between the United States and China.
Despite ongoing diplomatic engagement and trade negotiations, Taiwan remains the most sensitive and potentially explosive issue in the bilateral relationship. Both sides see compromise on Taiwan as politically risky and strategically costly.
The large U.S. arms packages demonstrate Washington’s determination to strengthen Taiwan’s defense capabilities, especially as China rapidly expands its military presence around the island.
At the same time, Taiwan’s internal political debates over defense spending reveal concerns within the island about balancing military preparedness with economic and domestic priorities.
For Beijing, any increase in U.S. military support for Taiwan is viewed as interference in China’s internal affairs and a challenge to its sovereignty claims.
The summit between Trump and Xi may help reduce immediate tensions, but the fundamental disagreement over Taiwan is unlikely to ease. As military capabilities expand and political rhetoric hardens on all sides, Taiwan will remain a central test of whether the United States and China can manage strategic competition without drifting toward confrontation.
Global currency markets remained broadly stable on Monday despite escalating geopolitical tensions linked to the ongoing conflict involving the United States and Iran. The limited movement in the US dollar came after President Donald Trump rejected Iran’s response to a United States peace proposal, reinforcing concerns that the conflict in the Middle East may persist for an extended period.
At the center of global financial attention is the interaction between geopolitical risk, energy prices, and monetary policy expectations. Rising oil prices, driven by uncertainty in the Strait of Hormuz and broader regional instability, continue to shape inflation expectations across major economies. However, currency markets have shown relative restraint, suggesting that investors are balancing immediate geopolitical risks against expectations of eventual diplomatic stabilization.
The US dollar index, which measures the currency against a basket of major global currencies, remained largely unchanged. At the same time, oil prices rose sharply, reflecting renewed concerns about supply disruptions and prolonged conflict conditions.
Geopolitical Risk and Market Equilibrium
Financial markets are currently operating in a state of tension between short term geopolitical shocks and longer term expectations of resolution. The stability of the US dollar suggests that investors are not fully pricing in a sustained breakdown in global energy flows, despite elevated uncertainty in the Middle East.
The oil market, by contrast, continues to respond rapidly to political developments. The rise in crude prices reflects concerns that prolonged instability could restrict supply routes and tighten global energy availability. This divergence between currency stability and commodity volatility highlights the uneven transmission of geopolitical risk across financial systems.
Market analysts note that expectations of diplomatic engagement between the United States and China remain a key stabilizing factor. Investors increasingly view high level diplomatic meetings as potential mechanisms for de escalation, particularly given the influence both countries exert over global energy and trade systems.
The Role of the United States and China in Market Sentiment
A major factor influencing market behavior is the anticipated summit between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The meeting is expected to cover a wide range of strategic issues including energy security, artificial intelligence, nuclear policy, and regional conflicts.
Markets are closely monitoring this engagement because both the United States and China possess significant leverage over geopolitical and economic developments in the Middle East. China’s role as a major energy importer and diplomatic stakeholder in the region gives it potential influence over Iranian policy, while the United States remains the dominant military and financial actor in global markets.
This dual influence creates expectations that broader geopolitical tensions may eventually be moderated through strategic dialogue. As a result, investors are partially pricing in the possibility of containment rather than escalation, which helps explain the relative stability of major currencies.
Inflation Expectations and Central Bank Positioning
Energy price movements remain central to global inflation dynamics. Rising oil prices directly influence transportation costs, production expenses, and consumer prices, creating upward pressure on inflation across both advanced and emerging economies.
In the United States, recent economic data has reinforced expectations that the Federal Reserve will maintain a cautious monetary stance. Strong employment figures combined with persistent inflation risks have reduced expectations of near term interest rate cuts. This has contributed to support for the US dollar, as higher interest rate expectations typically attract capital inflows into dollar denominated assets.
The interaction between monetary policy and geopolitical risk is becoming increasingly complex. Central banks are now required to respond not only to domestic economic indicators but also to external shocks originating from energy markets and international conflicts.
In this environment, currency movements reflect not just economic fundamentals but also expectations regarding central bank behavior under conditions of sustained uncertainty.
Diverging Currency Movements and Global Economic Signals
While the US dollar remained stable, other major currencies exhibited modest weakness. The euro, yen, and British pound all recorded slight declines, reflecting broader caution in global markets.
The movement of the Chinese yuan, which briefly strengthened to its highest level in several years, adds another dimension to the global currency landscape. This reflects both domestic economic data and broader expectations regarding China’s role in global trade and energy markets.
China’s economic performance, particularly in exports and industrial activity, continues to be closely linked to global energy prices and supply chain dynamics. Strong export growth suggests resilience in external demand, even amid geopolitical uncertainty and rising production costs.
These currency movements collectively indicate that global markets are navigating a period of uneven economic signals, where regional conditions and geopolitical developments interact in complex ways.
The Interplay Between Markets and Political Uncertainty
One of the defining characteristics of the current financial environment is the speed at which geopolitical developments translate into market expectations. Currency traders and investors are increasingly sensitive to political signals, particularly those involving energy producing regions and major global powers.
However, despite heightened volatility in oil markets, the US dollar’s stability suggests that investors still view the global financial system as structurally resilient. Rather than anticipating systemic disruption, markets appear to be pricing in cyclical instability followed by eventual stabilization.
This reflects a broader pattern in which financial markets absorb geopolitical shocks through short term volatility without fully abandoning long term confidence in global economic integration.
Analysis
The stability of the US dollar amid escalating geopolitical tensions highlights a critical feature of contemporary global markets. While energy prices and regional conflicts generate significant short term volatility, currency markets remain anchored by expectations of monetary policy stability and eventual diplomatic resolution.
The current environment is characterized by three overlapping dynamics. First, geopolitical risk is elevated due to sustained conflict in the Middle East and uncertainty surrounding diplomatic negotiations. Second, energy markets are highly sensitive to supply disruptions, producing rapid price fluctuations. Third, central bank policy expectations continue to play a stabilizing role in currency valuation.
The anticipated meeting between the United States and China represents a key focal point for market sentiment, as investors look for signals of broader strategic coordination or de escalation. However, the underlying structural tensions in the global system remain unresolved.
Ultimately, the current stability of the dollar should not be interpreted as a sign of reduced risk, but rather as evidence that markets are temporarily balancing competing expectations of conflict, diplomacy, and monetary policy. In such an environment, volatility in commodities and geopolitical headlines may continue, even as major currencies appear relatively stable on the surface.
TV bosses of Celebrity Traitors are in fear of leaks of the line-up being exposed they have no taken extra steps to avoid this happening ahead of the upcoming series
23:14, 09 May 2026Updated 23:14, 09 May 2026
Celeb Traitors bosses are keeping show secrets under wraps(Image: CREDIT LINE:BBC/Studio Lambert/Euan Cherry)
TV bosses of Celebrity Traitors are taking no chances when it comes to keeping secrets of the show for the upcoming series under wraps.
According to reports, bosses at Studio Lambert have now put locks on the doors of the editing suite. But that’s not all. Bosses have also “banned” staff from talking about the nature of the BBC programme outside of the studio building.
A TV insider reportedly said: “They’re saying it’s become like The Masked Singer set-up, which is shrouded in secrecy with sealed production rooms.”
The source added to The Sun: “Only a few people are allowed in and out.”
This comes after it was reported that Hollywood actor Tom Hiddleston had signed up for the show but was forced to pull out at the last minute.
Earlier this month, a few names were confirmed for the second series. This included Love Island host Maya Jama, Hollywood actor Richard E. Grant, Jerry Hall, presenter and comedian Romesh Ranganathan and EastEnders star Ross Kemp.
The stars were spotted heading to the Scottish castle.
The celebrities will donate their winnings of £100,000 to their chosen charities. Filming is underway but the show will not air until later this year.
Tom, who is best known for his roles in Steven Spielberg’s War Horse, has been vocal about his love for the show. According to The Sun, his film commitments did not allow him to commit to the reality TV game show.
He recently said in an interview on BBC Radio 2: “I mean the celebrity one would be amazing. I think the whole show, the format is just the most ingenious thing, isn’t it? It’s completely compulsive. Maybe the best television I’ve ever seen.”
He added: “I’d like to be a faithful because then you can play detective, right? And you know that your conscience is clean and your heart is pure, and you’re just watching and trying to figure people out.”
Host Claudia Winkleman recently revealed that she has been told on how to spot a traitor in the mix. In an exclusive chat with The Mirror she said: “Stephen said at the last round table ‘Shall we just look at who is tired?’ because if you are a Traitor you go to bed later than everyone else.”
She added: “At that point, Jonathan’s face was slumped, Alan was yawning and Cat was asleep. And someone went: ‘No, no. You have to come at it from a different way.’ I was like ‘He has just said it’.”
South Korean President Lee Jae-myung engaged in a phone discussion in his
presidential office. Photo by Yonhap / EPA
May 8 (Asia Today) — South Korean President Lee Jae-myung spoke by phone Friday with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney to discuss ways to strengthen cooperation between the two countries, the presidential office said.
The two leaders agreed that South Korea and Canada should work more closely with the international community to support a peaceful resolution to tensions in the Middle East, secure freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz and maintain stable energy supplies.
Kang Yu-jung, senior presidential spokesperson, announced the details in a written briefing.
Lee and Carney also reviewed follow-up measures from their bilateral summit held on the sidelines of last year’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Gyeongju, South Korea, and assessed that the efforts were proceeding smoothly.
The leaders agreed that bilateral relations are expanding beyond security cooperation into the economy, energy, advanced industries and culture. They pledged to deepen strategic cooperation based on that momentum.
“For South Korea, Canada is a key partner,” Lee said. “At a time when the international order is increasingly complex and global energy supply chains remain unstable, I hope South Korea and Canada will further strengthen cooperation in security, the economy, energy, critical minerals and advanced industries.”
Carney expressed agreement and said it was important for middle powers such as Canada and South Korea to strengthen solidarity through a more practical approach.
The two leaders agreed to maintain frequent communication and direct officials at various levels to pursue concrete results across multiple areas of cooperation.
Pope Leo has called on global leaders to reduce international tensions and turn away from violence, delivering an emotional appeal during a visit to Pompei, Italy, on Friday. His remarks came just one day after he met U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the Vatican, where both sides discussed efforts to improve strained relations between Washington and the Holy See.
The meeting took place against a politically sensitive backdrop, with U.S. President Donald Trump having recently criticized the Pope over his comments on the Iran conflict. Pope Leo, the first U.S.-born pontiff and former Cardinal Robert Prevost, has increasingly spoken out on global conflicts in recent weeks after initially maintaining a relatively low public profile following his election in May 2025.
Speaking to worshippers in Pompei, the Pope urged prayers that world leaders would be inspired to “calm rancour and fratricidal hatreds” and to take responsibility for reducing global violence. He also warned against becoming desensitized to images of war, and criticized what he described as an international system that often prioritizes the arms trade over human life.
Why It Matters
The Pope’s intervention highlights the growing moral and diplomatic role of the Vatican at a time of heightened global instability, particularly amid ongoing tensions involving Iran, the United States, and wider geopolitical rivalries. His criticism of the global arms economy directly challenges dominant security-driven foreign policy approaches, especially in Western capitals.
As the spiritual leader of more than 1.4 billion Catholics worldwide, Pope Leo’s statements carry significant symbolic and diplomatic weight. His increasingly vocal stance on war and governance also places him in a rare position of open tension with major political actors, including the U.S. administration.
What’s Next
The Vatican is expected to continue engaging diplomatically with U.S. officials despite emerging tensions, particularly following the Rubio meeting. Pope Leo is likely to maintain his public messaging on peace, conflict prevention, and criticism of the global arms trade, reinforcing the Holy See’s traditional role as a moral voice in international affairs. At the same time, reactions from Washington and other governments may further shape the evolving tone of Vatican–state relations in the coming months.
A Palestinian boy mourns his father, one of three people killed in an Israeli strike on a security post in Gaza. The attack is part of ongoing Israeli violence, despite a fragile ceasefire, which has killed at least 846 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry.
Jedward star John Grimes has revealed that the Celebrity Ex On the Beach was put under security lockdown after the building was stormed by curious fans wondering what was going on
John was reunited with his ex on the series (Image: Paramount Global)
Jedward star John Grimes has revealed that the Celebrity Ex On the Beach villa was put under security lockdown. The former X Factor contestant, who shot to fame alongside his twin brother Edward on the ITV talent show in 2009, can currently be seen taking part in the fourth series of the Paramount+ hit, which began airing in March.
The former Celebrity Big Brother star, 34, filmed the show alongside Coronation Street actress Helen Flanagan as well Toby Aromolaran and Curtis Pritchard, both of Love Island fame, and Towie’s Dani Imbert amongst a host of others, but this is one of the very rare times he has appeared on-screen alongside his twin.
The programme, which sees famous faces staying abroad and beginning relationships only for their former flames to get involved, is all filmed in Tenerife and John has now explained all about the fan intrusion that all took place in the sunny location. He said: “People knew the location of the villa.
Speaking to The Sun, he continued: “Fans and people in the local area were trying to come into the grounds. Things kept happening. It was the only lit up place in a desolate area, so people were like, ‘What’s that? Let’s try to get in…’ Producers were like, ‘We’re trying to film a show.’ Security stopped anyone from getting in!”
John, who alongside his twin, enjoyed hits with tracks like Under Pressure (Ice Ice Baby) and Lipstick after finding fame on The X Factor, recently explained what it was like going solo for the reality show.
He said: “Every now and again there are some pre-judged opinions about me out there, but I think going on this show marks a new chapter because I did it on my own, away from Edward. It’s a different situation.
“I was just talking to [Edward] there on the phone. He was a huge supporter of me doing the show, as was Gemma [Collins]. She was very excited. At first, I was a bit kind of touch-and-go. I thought, “Oh, will I do this?”
The star, who was greeted by his ex-girlfriend Sarah Carragher during his time filming the series, also spoke of how he asked his brother for advice when he was approached to to the show.
“But obviously, I always confide in Edward and he was like, “Oh yeah, you should do it,” because you always end things on a neutral note with your exes. If they wash up on the beach, you possibly rekindle something, maybe start cleaning slates,” he added.
“I think it’s like, obviously, you take that risk going on the show. You don’t know who’s going to pull up, but the one that does pull up may say, “You know what, maybe I’ll give them another chance.” John recently revealed via social media that he and Sarah are back together, but the move was said to have angered bosses behind the scenes.
A source said: “John posting that he’s back with his ex was terrible timing as it makes his whole storyline on the show pointless. Cast were asked to keep a bit of mystery around who got back with their ex and who hooked up with who so people tuned in, but clearly John was so thrilled he just went ahead and posted without thinking.
“Bosses are fuming but it’s not like he did it on purpose. Sarah has been quietly telling her pals, as well as John, that she’s really nervous to be thrust into the spotlight and so John wanted to throw his support behind her all the way.”
Iran has said it will only accept a fair and comprehensive agreement in ongoing negotiations with the United States, as talks continue alongside a fragile ceasefire in the Middle East conflict. Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi made the remarks following discussions with Wang Yi in Beijing.
At the same time, Donald Trump has pointed to what he described as significant progress, announcing a temporary pause in US naval operations linked to the Strait of Hormuz to support negotiations. The strait remains largely restricted, disrupting global oil flows and contributing to an ongoing energy crisis.
What does Iran mean by a comprehensive agreement The key question is what Iran is asking for. A comprehensive agreement suggests Tehran wants more than a temporary ceasefire. It likely includes guarantees on sovereignty, relief from military pressure, and recognition of its rights under international agreements such as nuclear development for peaceful purposes.
This position indicates Iran is negotiating for long term security and political legitimacy rather than short term concessions.
What is the United States offering in response The United States appears to be using a mix of pressure and incentives. Military actions and blockades continue, but the pause in naval escort operations signals willingness to de escalate if progress is made.
Statements from US officials show a firm stance on preventing Iran from controlling key shipping routes, while still leaving room for diplomacy. This creates a dual track approach of negotiation backed by force.
Why is the Strait of Hormuz central to the talks The Strait of Hormuz is critical because it carries a significant share of global oil supply. Its disruption has already triggered sharp movements in energy markets and raised concerns about global economic stability.
Control over this route gives Iran strategic leverage, while reopening it safely is a priority for the United States and global markets. This makes the strait a core bargaining point in negotiations.
Implications for global markets and politics The negotiations are directly influencing oil prices, currency markets, and investor sentiment. Even signals of progress have led to falling oil prices and improved market confidence.
Politically, the situation affects domestic dynamics in the United States, where rising energy costs are a concern ahead of elections. It also shapes regional power balances across the Middle East.
Analysis what are the possible outcomes There are three main paths forward. First, a comprehensive agreement could stabilise the region, reopen energy routes, and reduce global economic pressure. Second, prolonged negotiations without resolution could keep markets volatile and maintain the current fragile ceasefire. Third, a breakdown in talks could lead to renewed escalation, further disrupting oil supply and increasing geopolitical risk.
The most realistic short term outcome appears to be continued negotiations with limited de escalation steps. A full agreement will likely require compromises on both security concerns and economic demands.
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans have added $1 billion in White House security upgrades to legislation that would fund immigration enforcement agencies, a proposed boost for President Trump’s ballroom project after a man was charged with trying to assassinate him at the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner last week.
The GOP bill released late Monday would designate the money for the U.S. Secret Service for “security adjustments and upgrades” related to the ballroom project, which Trump and Republicans have been pushing since Cole Tomas Allen allegedly stormed the April 25 media dinner at the Washington Hilton with guns and knives. The legislation says the money would support enhancements to the ballroom project, “including above-ground and below-ground security features,” but also specifies that the money may not be used for non-security elements.
White House spokesperson Davis Ingle praised Republicans for including the money for the “long overdue” project, saying it would “provide the United States Secret Service with the resources they need to fully and completely harden the White House complex, in addition to the many other critical missions for the USSS.”
The money is part of a larger bill to pay for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol, as Democrats have been blocking funds for both agencies since mid-February. Congress passed bipartisan legislation to fund the rest of the Homeland Security Department on April 30 after a record-long shutdown, but Republicans are using a partisan budget maneuver to push through the ICE and Border Patrol dollars on their own. The House has not released its bill yet, but the Senate is expected to start voting on its version of the legislation next week.
It is unclear exactly how the $1 billion would be used, and the amount far exceeds the proposed $400 million for construction of the ballroom. The White House has said in court documents that the East Wing project would be “heavily fortified,” including bomb shelters, military installations and a medical facility underneath the ballroom. Trump has said it should include bulletproof glass and be able to repel drone attacks.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation has sued to block construction of the project, but a federal appeals court said last month that it can continue in the meantime.
The White House has said that private money would pay for the construction but public money would be used for security measures. Some Republicans have suggested that public money pay for all of it, arguing the security breach at the dinner shows the president needs a secure place to host events.
“It would be insane” to hold the dinner at a hotel again, said Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who introduced a bill to pay for the ballroom’s construction with Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala.
Democrats have said they will oppose any efforts to pay for the ballroom.
“While Americans are struggling to make ends meet as a result of President Trump’s failed policies, Republicans are focused on providing tens of billions of dollars for the President’s vanity ballroom project and cruel mass deportation campaign,” said Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees the U.S. Secret Service.
Jalonick writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Darlene Superville contributed to this report.
Thailand has formally scrapped a 25 year old agreement with Cambodia aimed at jointly exploring offshore energy resources in disputed waters. The decision, announced by Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, marks a significant shift in bilateral relations and raises fresh uncertainty over the future of energy cooperation in the region.
The agreement, known as Memorandum of Understanding 44, was signed in 2001 to create a framework for joint exploration of oil and gas reserves in overlapping maritime claims within the Gulf of Thailand. Despite its ambitious goals, the pact has seen little tangible progress over the past two and a half decades.
A Long Stalled Framework
Memorandum of Understanding 44 was designed as a dual track mechanism. It sought to enable joint resource exploration while allowing both countries to continue negotiations over maritime boundary demarcation. However, repeated political disruptions, competing national interests, and periodic tensions prevented meaningful advancement.
Thai officials have increasingly argued that the agreement failed to deliver results, with no concrete development of hydrocarbon resources despite years of dialogue.
Domestic Politics and Strategic Timing
The cancellation also reflects domestic political dynamics in Thailand. Anutin, who secured reelection following a surge in nationalist sentiment, had pledged to withdraw from the agreement as part of his campaign platform.
Although he has stated that the decision is not directly linked to recent border conflicts, the broader context suggests otherwise. Nationalist pressures and public opinion have played a role in shaping policy, particularly after violent clashes between the two countries last year.
Cambodia’s Response and Regional Implications
Cambodia has previously expressed strong opposition to Thailand’s plan to withdraw, describing it as deeply regrettable and reaffirming its commitment to the agreement. The lack of immediate response following the announcement leaves open questions about Phnom Penh’s next steps.
The termination of the pact could complicate future negotiations, especially in resource rich areas where both nations maintain overlapping claims. It may also delay potential energy development projects that could have benefited both economies.
From Cooperation to Legal Frameworks
Thailand has indicated that it will now rely on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea as the basis for any future discussions. This shift signals a move away from cooperative frameworks toward a more formal and potentially contentious legal approach to resolving maritime disputes.
While UNCLOS provides established mechanisms for dispute resolution, negotiations under its framework can be lengthy and politically sensitive.
Conflict and Fragile Stability
The backdrop to this decision includes two recent rounds of armed conflict along the Thailand Cambodia border, which resulted in significant casualties and large scale displacement. Although a ceasefire has been in place since late December, tensions remain high, and mutual distrust persists.
Each side continues to blame the other for initiating the clashes, underscoring the fragile nature of the current peace.
Analysis
Thailand’s withdrawal from the joint energy agreement reflects a broader shift from cooperative engagement to assertive unilateralism. While the official rationale centers on lack of progress, the timing and political context suggest that strategic and domestic considerations are equally influential.
For Thailand, the move reinforces national sovereignty and responds to domestic expectations. However, it also risks escalating tensions with Cambodia and undermining long term opportunities for shared economic gains.
For Cambodia, the collapse of the agreement represents both a diplomatic setback and a potential loss of access to jointly developed energy resources. It may now seek alternative avenues, including international arbitration or renewed bilateral negotiations under different terms.
At a regional level, the decision highlights the challenges of managing overlapping territorial claims in resource rich areas. Without effective cooperation mechanisms, such disputes are more likely to shift toward legal confrontation or political escalation.
Ultimately, the end of this long standing pact underscores a key reality in international relations. Agreements that lack sustained political commitment and mutual trust are unlikely to endure, particularly in environments shaped by nationalism and unresolved territorial disputes.
Security forces have intensified their presence across parts of Mexico’s Sinaloa, setting up checkpoints as rival factions of the Sinaloa Cartel battle for control. Despite the visible military deployment, more than 3,000 people have been killed in nearly two years. The conflict has deepened amid political instability following investigations and indictments linked to former officials.
The U. S. military announced that two Navy guided-missile destroyers entered the Gulf to counter an Iranian blockade, while two U. S. ships passed through the Strait of Hormuz. This follows Iran’s claim of preventing a U. S. warship from entering the Gulf. U. S. Central Command (CENTCOM) stated that forces are supporting President Trump’s “Project Freedom,” aimed at helping commercial ships stranded due to the U. S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, and are enforcing a blockade on Iranian ports.
The U. S. intervention increases the possibility of direct confrontation with Iran in a crucial waterway that carries a significant portion of the world’s oil and gas, which has been blocked for two months because of the war. CENTCOM reported that two U. S.-flagged vessels successfully transited the strait while destroyers worked in the Gulf. Iran claimed it made a U. S. warship turn back, but CENTCOM denied reports of any missile strikes on the ship. An Iranian official mentioned a warning shot was fired, with uncertainty about any resulting damage to the warship.
Trump detailed a plan to assist ships running low on supplies in the Gulf, stating, “We will guide their Ships safely out of these restricted Waterways. ” In response, Iran warned oil tankers and commercial ships to coordinate movements with its military, asserting that it controls security in the Strait of Hormuz and would attack any foreign armed forces, particularly the U. S. military, attempting to enter. Since the war began, Iran has largely blocked shipping movements, causing oil prices to surge significantly.
CENTCOM plans to support “Project Freedom” with 15,000 troops, over 100 aircraft, warships, and drones, asserting that this mission is vital for regional security and the global economy.
Dealing with emissions could help alleviate effects of Iran crisis on global energy supply, says report.
Published On 4 May 20264 May 2026
Tackling methane emissions in the fossil fuel sector would help efforts to hold back climate change and increase energy security, especially as the Iran crisis threatens global supplies, according to a report by the International Energy Agency (IEA).
The oil, gas and coal industries account for about 35 percent of all methane emissions from human activity, notes the IEA’s Global Methane Tracker 2026, released on Monday. However, there is little progress in reducing them, the report points out.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
“There is still no sign that methane emissions from fossil fuel operations are falling, despite well-known and proven mitigation pathways,” the IEA said.
Methane, the second-biggest contributor to climate change, stays in the atmosphere for far less time than carbon dioxide, but its warming effect is roughly 80 times more potent over a 20-year period.
The IEA estimates that methane emissions from oil, gas and coal total 124 million tonnes a year. Oil is the largest source at 45 million tonnes (Mt), followed by coal at 43 Mt, and natural gas at 36 Mt.
“A further 20 Mt comes from bioenergy production and consumption, largely from the incomplete combustion of traditional biomass used for cooking and heating in developing economies,” the report added.
Oil prices have soared since the United States and Israel launched their war against Iran in late February and Tehran closed the Strait of Hormuz in response. An April ceasefire between the sides is currently holding, but global energy supplies remain limited.
The ongoing crisis is reshaping the global energy system and disrupting about 20 percent of global liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade flows.
Nearly 100 billion cubic metres of natural gas could be made available annually through a global effort to cut methane from oil and gas operations, the IEA said, estimating that nearly 15 billion cubic metres could be made available in a sufficiently short period of time to provide some relief to gas markets.
A further 100 billion cubic metres would be unlocked through the elimination of non-emergency flaring worldwide, it added.
Paris initiative
France, using its role as rotating chair of the Group of Seven (G7) bloc of industrialised powers, convened government officials, industry leaders and experts on Monday to build momentum on cutting methane emissions.
The conference aimed at reducing methane emissions ahead of the United Nations’ November COP31 summit.
“I sincerely hope that the discussions we will have today will enable us to join our forces to accelerate the implementation of effective solutions to reduce methane emissions,” French Ecological Transition Minister Monique Barbut said in a speech.
“Of course, action on methane is not a fight of any single actor and nobody can win it alone,” she added, noting that the world remains “very far” from meeting a pledge to cut methane emissions by 30 percent by 2030 compared with 2020 levels.
“Reducing methane emissions remains one of the best things we can do to slow global warming while cleaning up our air, improving public health, and increasing our energy security,” British Secretary of State for Energy Security Ed Miliband said in a video message.
The latest escalation between Hezbollah and Israel began in early March following strikes linked to a wider regional conflict involving Iran and the United States. Hezbollah entered the conflict shortly after, positioning itself as part of a broader regional confrontation.
Since then, the group has faced significant battlefield losses, territorial setbacks in southern Lebanon, and growing domestic criticism. Israeli forces have established a buffer zone inside Lebanese territory, while large numbers of civilians have been displaced, particularly from Shiite communities that form Hezbollah’s core support base.
The conflict follows an earlier war that severely weakened Hezbollah, including the killing of its long time leader Hassan Nasrallah. Despite rearming and adapting its tactics, the group now faces mounting pressure on both military and political fronts.
Hezbollah’s Strategic Gamble Hezbollah officials suggest the decision to re enter conflict was calculated. By aligning more closely with Tehran during a wider regional war, the group aims to ensure Lebanon becomes part of any future negotiations between Iran and the United States.
The expectation is that Iranian leverage could secure a stronger and more lasting ceasefire than previous agreements. However, this strategy carries high risks, especially as Washington has indicated that any deal with Iran may not include Lebanon.
Rising Human and Material Costs The war has inflicted heavy casualties. Lebanese authorities report thousands killed since March, though the exact number of Hezbollah fighters remains disputed. Reports from within the group suggest losses could be substantial, with some fighters’ bodies still unrecovered in frontline towns.
Entire communities in southern Lebanon have been devastated, with villages destroyed and new graves appearing rapidly after ceasefire periods. Displacement has also intensified sectarian tensions, as affected populations seek refuge in other regions where resentment toward Hezbollah is growing.
Domestic Political Fallout Inside Lebanon, opposition to Hezbollah’s armed status has hardened. Critics argue that its actions continue to expose the country to repeated wars. In a significant shift, the Lebanese government has engaged in direct talks with Israel, a move Hezbollah strongly opposes.
The government has also taken steps to limit Hezbollah’s military role, including banning its armed activities earlier this year. However, enforcing such measures remains difficult given the group’s entrenched influence and the risk of internal conflict.
Continuing Clashes Despite Ceasefire Although a ceasefire announced in mid April reduced large scale fighting, hostilities have not fully stopped. Both sides continue to exchange strikes in southern Lebanon, and Hezbollah has dismissed the truce as ineffective due to ongoing Israeli attacks.
Israel maintains that its operations are necessary to eliminate threats to its northern regions and has indicated that dismantling Hezbollah’s military capacity will be central to any long term agreement.
Analysis Hezbollah’s current position reflects a complex mix of resilience and vulnerability. While it has demonstrated the ability to regroup and continue fighting, this alone does not translate into strategic success. The group is increasingly constrained by battlefield losses, internal Lebanese opposition, and uncertainty over external support.
Its reliance on Iran introduces another layer of risk. If a broader agreement between Tehran and Washington excludes Lebanon, Hezbollah may find itself bearing the costs of a war without securing meaningful political gains.
At the same time, Israel appears determined to reshape the security landscape in southern Lebanon, potentially prolonging the conflict. Without a comprehensive regional settlement, the most likely outcome is a prolonged stalemate marked by intermittent violence and continued suffering on both sides.
China currently boasts one of the lowest rates of homicide, violent crime, and gun and explosive incidents globally. The Chinese-style sense of security is a comprehensive system integrating advanced technology, community engagement, and continuous improvement in living standards. This has positioned China as one of the safest countries in the world, according to the 2025 Global Security Report, with 98.2% of Chinese citizens feeling safe by 2025, further solidifying its status as a globally stable destination. The pillars of this Chinese-style sense of security are built upon advanced digital technologies, relying on smart networks and modern surveillance systems such as facial recognition and artificial intelligence to enhance the security network within China.
The phrase “Chinese-style security” refers to China’s model for achieving social stability and reducing crime rates. This model is based primarily on three pillars: proactive prevention systems, where, rather than simply addressing crime after it occurs, China focuses on prevention and control through extensive security networks and a constant police presence in key areas; the continuation of the community mobilization system (the Fengqiao model), a historical concept (currently revived) that involves citizens and local committees in resolving community disputes before they escalate into crimes or legal cases, thus promoting the idea of self-regulation and public cooperation with Chinese authorities; and the use of digitalization and artificial intelligence technologies, where China has heavily invested in smart city technologies and the Skynet system. Skynet utilizes millions of cameras equipped with facial recognition and big data analytics to predict suspicious activities and track wanted individuals with high precision. This combination aims to create a secure environment that supports economic growth within China, despite the occasional international debates it sparks regarding the balance between public security and individual privacy.
Data and reports confirm exceptional social stability in China, with citizens’ sense of security exceeding 98% for six consecutive years. This security is attributed to effective governance, advanced digital technologies, and a high standard of living, making China a safe destination for investment and a source of stability. Key features of Chinese governance and the sense of security include increased levels of trust and optimism, with the Chinese people ranking among the world’s highest in trust in the government and optimism about the future, according to trust index reports. A robust safety net exists, built on Chinese-style security through crime prevention systems, community mobilization, and enhanced digitalization. These systemic features, along with numerous other advantages, reflect the stability within China and the state’s ability to fulfill its commitments and provide a safe and stable social environment, earning international praise, particularly in light of global geopolitical conflicts. With the continuation of Chinese-style modernization, ongoing modernization has contributed to raising living standards, thus strengthening the sense of security within China.
Accordingly, the Chinese government and the authorities of the ruling Communist Party of China support several pillars and points that support this approach to enhance the sense of security within the country. Based on current developments, focusing on security as the foundation for development in China, the stability of the situation in China is seen as a key element in boosting investor confidence and building a safe and stable living environment for citizens, which contributes to economic growth. With the intensification of the Chinese-style modernization model, modernization in China is not limited to economic growth but also focuses on improving the quality of life, providing employment opportunities, and upgrading social services, which significantly raises living standards. With the stable sense of security, China, through well-considered social policies, has succeeded in maintaining a high level of social security, which enhances public trust in the government and contributes to long-term stability. This has resulted in continued international praise (amidst crises). At a time when several regions around the world are experiencing geopolitical conflicts, China’s stability stands out as a model attracting the attention and scrutiny of international observers, particularly due to the Chinese state’s ability to effectively manage its internal affairs compared to many systems worldwide, including American and Western ones. This strengthens China’s capacity to lead the developing Global South and strongly promote its model of Chinese governance.
Based on the preceding understanding and analysis, we can see how the development for security strategy can form a fundamental pillar within the Chinese governance system. Improving living standards contributes to consolidating social stability and public security within China. This analysis highlights a delicate equation in the contemporary Chinese landscape, where continuous development (Chinese-style modernization) is linked to social stability, creating a secure environment in a turbulent world.
Despite efforts to rebuild ties with Western nations, Syria remains heavily dependent on Russia for its oil supply. Since the fall of Bashar al Assad in late 2024, shipments from Russia have surged, making Moscow the primary supplier of crude to Syria.
This shift comes even as the new government in Damascus seeks closer alignment with Europe and the United States. The contradiction highlights the economic constraints facing a country still recovering from years of war and isolation.
Rising Dependence on Russian Oil Russian oil exports to Syria have increased significantly, now covering a large portion of the country’s energy needs. Domestic production remains far below demand, leaving Syria reliant on imports to sustain basic economic activity.
Before 2025, Iran had been Syria’s main supplier, but that relationship ended following political changes in Damascus. Russia quickly stepped in, becoming the first to resume large scale shipments after the leadership transition.
Limited Alternatives and Structural Weakness Syria’s options remain extremely limited. Years of conflict have weakened its economy, reduced purchasing power, and restricted access to global financial systems. Even after the easing of Western sanctions, integration into international markets remains slow and incomplete.
Efforts to secure alternative suppliers, including potential deals with regional partners such as Turkey, have so far failed. This leaves Russian supply networks as the most accessible and reliable option in the short term.
Sanctions Risk and Diplomatic Tension Reliance on Russian oil poses significant risks for Syria’s foreign relations. Continued trade with Moscow could strain ties with Western governments and expose Syria to renewed sanctions, particularly if geopolitical tensions escalate.
The situation is further complicated by Russia’s ongoing military presence in Syria, including key naval and air bases. These assets give Moscow continued influence over the country’s strategic direction.
Opaque Supply Chains and Sanctioned Networks Much of the oil trade is conducted through complex and opaque shipping networks. Tankers linked to sanctioned entities frequently deliver crude to Syrian ports, often using ship to ship transfers to obscure the origin of cargo.
These methods reflect both necessity and constraint. Syria’s exclusion from conventional shipping and financial systems has pushed it toward alternative networks that carry reputational and legal risks.
Supply Gap and Energy Reality Syria’s domestic oil production remains a fraction of pre war levels, while demand continues to exceed supply. Russian shipments now fill a significant portion of this gap, alongside smaller volumes obtained through informal or regional channels.
This dependency underscores the difficulty of rebuilding an energy sector after prolonged conflict, particularly without strong international investment or infrastructure support.
Analysis Syria’s reliance on Russian oil reveals the limits of political realignment when economic realities remain unchanged. While Damascus may seek closer ties with the West, its immediate survival depends on securing energy supplies, and Russia is currently the only actor able and willing to meet that need at scale.
For Moscow, the relationship offers continued leverage in Syria despite the fall of its former ally. Energy supply becomes a tool of influence, allowing Russia to maintain a strategic foothold even as political dynamics shift.
At the same time, the arrangement creates long term risks for Syria. Dependence on sanctioned networks could undermine efforts to rebuild credibility with international partners and attract investment. It also leaves the country vulnerable to external pressure, particularly if Western governments decide to enforce stricter controls on Russian energy flows.
Ultimately, Syria is caught between geopolitical ambition and economic necessity. Until it diversifies its energy sources and strengthens its economic foundations, its foreign policy choices will remain constrained by the basic need to keep fuel flowing.
WASHINGTON — After weeks of delay, the House voted Thursday to fund much of the Department of Homeland Security, but not its immigration enforcement operations, and send the bipartisan package to President Trump to sign, ending the longest agency shutdown in history.
The White House had warned that temporary funding Trump had tapped to pay Transportation Security Administration and other agency personnel would “soon run out,” and that sparked new threats of airport disruptions.
DHS has been without routine funds since Feb. 14, causing hardship for workers, though much of Trump’s immigration agenda that is central to the dispute is being funded separately.
“It is about damn time,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, who proposed the bill more than 70 days ago.
The House swiftly voted by voice, without a formal roll call, to pass the measure.
The House’s narrow Republican majority has repeatedly stalled out under House Speaker Mike Johnson, with his own party tangled in internal disputes on a range of pending issues, including the homeland security funding. While the Senate unanimously approved the bipartisan package a month ago, the bill languished in the House.
Democrats refused to fund U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol without changes to those operations after the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens by federal agents during protests against an immigration crackdown in Minneapolis. Republicans would no go along with a plan pushed by Democrats to fund TSA and the other parts of DHS without the money for ICE and Border Patrol.
To break the impasse, Republicans in both the House and Senate decided to tackle the immigration enforcement funding on their own through what is called budget reconciliation, a cumbersome weekslong process ahead.
By beginning that budget process Johnson, R-La., was able to unlock a broader bipartisan bill for TSA agents and the rest of DHS. House Republicans late Wednesday adopted budget resolution on a largely party-line vote, 215-211, that is focused on eventually providing $70 billion for immigration enforcement and deportations for the remainder of Trump’s time in office and ensure Democrats can no longer block funding. Trump’s term ends in January 2029.
One key Republican, Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, said isolating the immigration-related money on a separate track is “offensive to the men and women who serve in ICE and Border Patrol, and are serving this country every single day.”
In international politics, the platforms a country sits on often matter as much as what it says. For decades, Somalia was largely the subject of global security discussions, rarely a decisive participant in them. Today, that reality is changing in ways that carry symbolic weight and practical consequences.
Somalia’s recent election to the African Union Peace and Security Council (AU PSC), alongside its membership in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), marks a turning point in its diplomatic trajectory. For quite some time, Somalia was merely being discussed in the world’s most influential security forums. It is now shaping the agenda on the table.
This shift reflects more than a procedural achievement. It signals the maturity of Somalia’s diplomatic and security institutions, and the steady rebuilding of its international credibility after decades of conflict and state fragility.
For much of the past three decades, decisions affecting Somalia’s security were often made in rooms where Somali voices were either absent or marginal. External actors debated intervention strategies, sanctions regimes, peacekeeping mandates, and humanitarian responses, while Somalia struggled with internal instability.
This membership in the UNSC and AU PSC changes that dynamic fundamentally. These bodies are not symbolic; they make binding decisions, adopt resolutions, authorise peacekeeping operations, and shape international legal frameworks. For Somalia, this may seem something simple, but its impact is profound. Somalia is now part of the process that determines policies affecting its own security and development.
That participation strengthens state-building in several ways. It reinforces institutional capacity within Somalia’s foreign policy apparatus, promotes transparency and accountability through engagement with multilateral norms, and aligns Somalia more closely with international legal and diplomatic standards.
Somalia is transitioning from being a recipient of international decisions to becoming a contributor to them. Somalia’s role on these councils also carries representational significance beyond its own borders.
As a member of the UNSC and AU PSC, Somalia now occupies a rare diplomatic position. It simultaneously represents the interests of the African continent, the Arab and Muslim world, and the least developed countries (LDCs). The concerns of these categories of states have often been overshadowed by the priorities of more powerful nations. Somalia now stands for them.
Somalia’s own first experience in rebuilding institutions after conflict, managing complex security transitions, and balancing sovereignty with international cooperation enables it to advocate not only for itself, but also for broader principles: Inclusive peace processes, sustainable development approaches to security, and equitable participation in global decision-making.
Peace in the world, peace at home
President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s 2022 political manifesto, “Somalia at peace with itself, and at peace with the world”, is increasingly reflected in these recent memberships. This vision is proving effective, as Somalia’s participation in global peace decision-making demonstrates a growing alignment between its external engagements and internal stabilisation efforts.
The seats at the UNSC and AU PSC will directly reinforce Somalia’s state-building process. Active involvement in shaping international peace also reflects and supports the way peace and security agendas are being handled domestically.
A defining moment in 2026
The year 2026 represents a rare convergence of opportunity. Somalia’s simultaneous presence at the AU PSC and UNSC provides a diplomatic platform unmatched in its recent history. This dual role should enable it to act as a bridge between regional and global security frameworks. It can ensure that Somalia’s security priorities are reflected in the AU decision, and forwardly, that African priorities are reflected in global resolutions. It can also translate international commitments into regional actions that qualify for alignment with local contexts.
This not only affects diplomacy and policy discussions but offers an opportunity to advocate for real change that directly affects the daily lives of Somalis. Such issues may include counterterrorism, stabilisation support, humanitarian access, development financing, climate security, and mechanisms for inclusive politics. By shaping the content and direction of relevant resolutions, Somalia can help align international commitments more closely with national priorities.
A future shaped by participation
With greater influence comes greater responsibility. Membership in these councils demands consistency and adherence to international norms. Somalia is now ready to navigate these complex diplomatic landscapes, balancing national interests with collective global security obligations. And it is now capable of maintaining credibility through constructive engagement, principled positions, and reliable partnerships.
With Somalia now seemingly committed to momentum on these fronts, its growing international stance will become self-reinforcing. Each diplomatic success will strengthen national institutions, which in turn will enhance future influence.
Somalia’s presence at the highest levels of global and regional security governance marks a significant milestone in its long journey towards recovery and stability. It reflects years of diplomatic effort, institutional rebuilding, and gradual restoration of international trust. It also signals a future in which Somalia is increasingly defined not by crisis, but by stability.
For a country that once stood on the margins of global decision-making, this transformation is both historic and hopeful. It signals a shift from isolation to engagement, from being acted upon to helping shape outcomes.
For young Somali generations who grew up hearing that Somalia could not advance, these diplomatic achievements offer a different narrative. They inspire pride, restore confidence, and help rebuild trust in the nation’s future.
That challenge lies ahead. But after a period of turmoil, Somalia is well positioned to meet it, not as a passive observer, but as an active shaper of its own destiny. This is also part of the broader Somalia policy on defence diplomacy, founded on global collaboration and mutual interdependency.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
WASHINGTON — The White House is warning Congress that funding to pay Department of Homeland Security personnel will “soon run out,” sparking new threats of airport disruptions and national security concerns as the House slow-walks legislation to end what has been the longest-ever lapse in agency funding.
In a memo late Tuesday to lawmakers, the Office of Management and Budget said money that President Trump tapped to pay Transportation Security Administration and other workers through executive actions will be exhausted by May. It called on the House to quickly approve the budget resolution senators approved in an all-night session last week that would pave the way for full funding for the department.
“DHS will soon run out of critical operating funds, placing essential personnel and operations at risk,” the memo said.
The pressure from the Trump administration could help House Speaker Mike Johnson, whose narrow Republican majority has been stalled out, tangled in internal party disputes on a range of pending issues, including the Homeland Security funding. They have left the chamber at a virtual standstill.
The House was expected to vote as soon as Wednesday on the Senate budget resolution that is designed to unlock a multistep process to eventually fund the department. But by midday, House action again screeched to a halt. The administration has warned GOP lawmakers off making changes that could prolong passage.
“Restoring funding for the Department of Homeland Security has never been more urgent, as demonstrated by recent events,” the memo said, a nod to the situation over the weekend when a man armed with guns and knives tried to storm the annual White House correspondents’ dinner that Trump, the vice president and top Cabinet officials were attending.
Homeland Security shutdown is longest ever
Homeland Security has been operating without regular funds for more than two months after Democrats refused to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol without changes to those operations after the deaths of Americans protesting Trump’s deportation agenda.
While immigration enforcement workers have largely been paid through the flush of new cash — some $170 billion — that Congress approved as part of Trump’s tax cuts bill last year, others, including TSA, have had to rely on Trump’s intervention through executive action to ensure their paychecks.
But with salaries topping $1.6 billion every two weeks, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said recently, those funds are drying up.
More than 1,000 TSA officers have quit since the shutdown began, according to Airlines for America, the U.S. airlines trade group that called Wednesday on Congress to fully fund the agency.
“The urgency to provide predictable and stable funding for TSA is growing stronger by the day,” the group said in a statement. “Time and time again, our nation’s aviation workers and customers have been the victim of Congress’ failure to do their jobs.”
Complicated budget strategy ahead
House and Senate Republicans have embarked on a go-it-alone strategy, attempting to approve funds for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol without Democrats. They want to provide $70 billion for those immigration operations for the remainder of Trump’s term to ensure no further interruptions.
It’s a cumbersome process, the same that was used last year to approve Trump’s tax cuts bill, that will play out over several weeks.
The Senate launched the process last week, and is now waiting on the House to act. Once that budget resolution is approved, both the House and Senate are expected to draft the actual funding bill, a process that can take weeks.
In the meantime, Johnson is next expected to quickly turn this week to legislation that would fund the other parts of Homeland Security, including TSA, the Coast Guard and other agencies.
That bipartisan bill has support from Democrats and already passed the Senate a month ago, when Republicans reluctantly agreed to carve out the immigration-related funds that Democrats had opposed. But it has been stalled out in the House, as Republicans in that chamber disagreed with the Senate’s approach.
Mascaro writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Rio Yamat in Las Vegas contributed to this report.
Iran has raised concerns about the vulnerability of submarine cables in the Strait of Hormuz, which are crucial for the region’s digital economy. This narrow waterway, known for its importance in global oil shipments, also supports several fibre-optic cables connecting countries from India and Southeast Asia to Europe via the Gulf states and Egypt.
Submarine cables are essential for transmitting data and power, carrying about 99% of the world’s internet traffic. They play a significant role in telecommunications, cloud services, and online communication. Damage to these cables can lead to internet slowdowns, outages, disrupted e-commerce, and delayed financial transactions, causing economic consequences, according to analyst Masha Kotkin.
Gulf countries, especially the UAE and Saudi Arabia, have invested billions into artificial intelligence and digital infrastructure to reduce dependence on oil, with their national AI companies relying heavily on undersea cables for data transfer. Key submarine cables in the Strait of Hormuz include the Asia-Africa-Europe 1 (AAE-1), the FALCON network, and the Gulf Bridge International Cable System, with additional infrastructures being built.
Despite the growth in submarine cable length, faults have remained stable at around 150–200 incidents yearly, largely due to human activities like fishing and anchor dragging, with state-sponsored sabotage being a potential risk. Other threats include undersea currents, earthquakes, and typhoons. To mitigate these risks, the industry has measures such as burying cables and selecting safer routes.
The ongoing Iran war has caused significant disruption to energy supply and regional infrastructure, though subsea cables have not yet suffered damage. However, military operations increase the risk of unintentional damage from ships inadvertently impacting cables. Historical incidents, like one in 2024, highlight these risks.
Repairing damaged cables in conflict areas presents challenges, including obtaining permits and addressing the dangers of remaining fighting or mines. Once conflicts end, another challenge lies in re-evaluating the sea floor to ensure the cables’ safety.
If subsea cables are damaged, there are alternatives like land-based links, but experts warn that satellite systems cannot replace them due to limited capacity and higher costs. Low-Earth-orbit networks like Starlink are not a scalable solution for millions of users at present.
US authorities said on Sunday that the gunman accused of trying to storm the dinner was targeting Trump and members of his administration.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
The suspect — who was armed with a shotgun, a handgun, and multiple knives — rushed a US Secret Service checkpoint at the Washington Hilton hotel and managed to shoot a law enforcement officer, although the suspect himself was not struck by gunfire.
The incident is seen as a major breach of security by football fans around the globe, millions of whom will follow their teams at the World Cup tournament, which the US will cohost June 11-19 with Canada and Mexico.
Here’s what fans and experts are saying about the incident and how it could affect their safety at the World Cup:
Will the Trump shooting impact World Cup security?
With the US hosting the majority – 78 of 104 – fixtures, it is expected to see an influx of five to 10 million football fans from around the world, many of whom have expressed concerns for their teams’, as well as their own, safety following the targeting of Trump.
“Their [US] own security service allowed a single person with a shotgun into the most secure building in the world, and missed every shot at him. How are the players going to be safe?” a fan wrote in a social media post.
Others questioned how fans and other members of the public will be safe during the tournament if the country’s president has come under attack.
This is not the first time Trump has been involved in an attempted assassination; he was injured in a shooting at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania in July 2024, and in September 2025, a suspect was convicted of plotting to kill Trump while he was playing golf in Florida a year earlier.
However, security analyst Massimiliano Montanari believes the shooting in the US capital will have “no impact” on security preparations for the World Cup.
“It’s undeniable that this shooting creates additional concerns, but with or without this shooting, the US Secret Service is keeping the highest level of attention on the president,” Montanari told Al Jazeera.
“The world is in a moment of immense pressure; several international turmoils are happening at this time, and the shooting will not change the perception of fans coming to the US,” he added.
“The US has very strong security and counterterrorism experience; I’m sure all necessary measures are in place.”
FIFA did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment on World Cup security in the aftermath of the shooting in Washington.
How will Trump’s presence affect security and fan experience at the World Cup?
Fans critical of the US and its lax gun laws, which lead to hundreds of mass shootings across the country each year, say the latest security breach highlights the country’s failure to control gun violence.
Comments on social media ranged from fans questioning the US as a host to calling for the matches in the country to be cancelled altogether due to security risks.
Mass shootings are a common occurrence in the US. In 2026, the country has seen more than 126 incidents which have resulted in more than 3,100 deaths and 5,300 injuries so far, according to Gun Violence Archive, a non-profit research group.
Some critics also wondered if Trump’s likely presence at World Cup games will endanger fans and negatively impact their experience at the tournament.
“I presume Donald Trump will attend the World Cup at some point as the President of the host nation,” Kate Wilton, a social media user, noted in a post on X. “If he’s an assassination risk, surely him attending is a security risk to all those attending?”
US President Trump shares a close relationship with FIFA President Gianni Infantino and was present at the World Cup draw on December 5, 2025.
Later that month, Trump’s attendance at the US Open men’s tennis final delayed the start of the match, as hordes of tennis fans struggled to get through security checkpoints.
[Al Jazeera]
What does ICE presence at World Cup mean for fans?
The White House shooting also invoked a broader conversation regarding national security in the US, which has seen immigration-related crackdowns across various states.
The Trump administration’s push for mass deportation, as well as its efforts to tighten legal immigration pathways, have spurred concerns about whether the World Cup’s international audience might be targeted by US immigration authorities.
In February, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) acting Director Todd Lyons confirmed to a committee in the House of Representatives that his agency would be on the ground for World Cup events. When questioned about visitor concerns, he declined to commit to pausing ICE operations at the matches.
“Fans should be treated as guests and clients of the event, not as a potential threat or as criminals,” Montanari, who heads the International Centre for Sport Security (ICSS), said of the border patrol agents’ presence.
He emphasised that any security officials on the ground must be deployed as discreetly as possible.
“Major global sporting events like the World Cup must remain sporting events and not security events,” he explained, adding that the elements of safety, security and service must work cohesively.
Montanari emphasised that at the previous World Cup in Qatar, where he is currently based, fans were not discriminated against for their nationalities or backgrounds, something that upcoming iterations of the event must emulate.
“I think at any World Cup, the key success factor will be the level of international or regional cooperation; no country can deliver a safe major sporting event without that.
“Securing an event is not just about securing venues, but protecting the overall community, and this involves strong partnership with the government, the business community, and civil society — a holistic effort everyone has to put together.
Last week, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Amnesty International, along with more than 120 civil society groups, issued a “travel advisory” for foreigners attending the 2026 FIFA World Cup in the US due to the “deteriorating human rights situation in the US and the absence of meaningful action and concrete guarantees from FIFA, host cities, or the US government”.
The US Senate has taken the first steps towards reopening the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – which has been partially shut down since mid-February after Democrats demanded immigration-enforcement policy changes following fatal shootings of two protesters by federal agents. The Senate approved a budget framework that would fund immigration enforcement agencies, despite opposition from the Democrats.
