Today

US President Donald Trump and his officials are “actively” discussing a potential offer to buy the Danish territory of Greenland, the White House has confirmed.

It is “something that’s currently being actively discussed by the president and his national security team”, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Wednesday.

Both Greenland and Denmark have repeatedly stressed the island was not for sale.

Asked why the Trump administration had previously said it was not ruling out using military force to acquire Greenland, Leavitt replied that all options were always on the table but Trump’s “first option always has been diplomacy”.

Concerns over the future of the territory resurfaced after Trump’s unilateral use of military force against Venezuela on Saturday to seize its President Nicolás Maduro. Denmark, a fellow Nato ally, says an attack on its territory would end the military alliance.

The Trump administration says Greenland is vital to US security.

Despite being the most sparsely populated territory, its location between North America and the Arctic makes it well placed for early warning systems in the event of missile attacks, and for monitoring vessels in the region.

Pituffik Space Base, formerly known as Thule Air Base, has been operated by the US since World War 2.

In recent years, there has also been increased interest in Greenland’s natural resources, including rare earth minerals, uranium and iron that are becoming easier to access as its ice melts due to climate change. Scientists think it could also have significant oil and gas reserves.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Wednesday that he will hold talks with Denmark next week.

Trump previously made an offer to buy the island in 2019, during his first presidential term, only to be told it was not for sale.

“The acquisition of Greenland by the United States is not a new idea,” Leavitt said.

“The president has been very open and clear with all of you and with the world, that he views it in the best interest of the United States to deter Russian and Chinese aggression in the Arctic region, and so that’s why his team is currently talking about what a potential purchase would look like.”

The White House said earlier this week that Trump had been discussing a range of options to acquire Greenland, including using military force.

“All options are always on the table for President Trump as he examines what’s in the best interests of the United States,” Leavitt said.

Earlier in the day, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said Rubio had “ruled out the possibility of an invasion” of Greenland in a phone call with him.

Barrot is due to discuss the Arctic island with his German and Polish counterparts later on Wednesday.

On Tuesday, European leaders issued a joint statement rallying behind Denmark.

“Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations,” the leaders of France, the UK, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and Denmark said in a joint statement.

Stressing they were as keen as the US on Arctic security, the European signatories said this must be achieved by Nato allies, including the US, “collectively”.

They also called for “upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders”.

A day after the US military action in Venezuela, Katie Miller, the wife of one of Trump’s senior aides, posted a map on social media of Greenland in the colours of the US flag, alongside the word “SOON”.

On Monday, her husband, Stephen Miller, said it was “the formal position of the US government that Greenland should be part of the US”.

Aaja Chemnitz, one of two MPs in the Danish parliament representing Greenland, told the BBC that the comments from the Trump administration were “a clear threat”.

“It’s completely disrespectful from the US side to not rule out annexing our country and to annex another Nato ally,” she said.

But Chemnitz said she saw this as unlikely – instead, “what we are going to see is that they will put pressure on us in order to make sure that they will take over Greenland over time”.

Aleqatsiaq Peary, a 42-year-old Inuit hunter living in Greenland’s remote northerly town of Qaanaaq, appeared indifferent to the potential of US ownership.

“It would be switching from one master to another, from one occupier to another,” he told the BBC. “We are a colony under Denmark. We are already losing a lot from being under the Danish government.”

Saying that he did not have “time for Trump”, he added that people were “in need”. Hunters like him, he explained, hunted with dogs on the sea ice and fish “but the sea ice is melting and hunters cannot make a living anymore”.

Additional reporting by Adrienne Murray in Copenhagen

Three schoolchildren have fallen through a window from the top deck of a bus in Greater Manchester, police have said.

A large emergency response attended following the incident on Bolton Road in Ashton-in-Makerfield shortly before 16:00 GMT.

The children have “potentially serious injuries” but they not thought to be life-threatening, Greater Manchester Police said.

An investigation was in the early stages but Inspector Simon Barrie said it “appears to be an unfortunate accident”.

“This is a serious incident that will cause disruption,” he said.

“Our priority is to make sure the children get the treatment they need in hospital. Thankfully we don’t believe their injuries are life-threatening.”

Councillor Danny Fletcher, of Ashton-on-Makerfield South ward, posted on Facebook and said some of the children had suffered potentially life changing injuries.

“I’ve spoken with our policing team this afternoon,” he said.

“As we know, three young people have fallen from a top floor side window of a school bus and have been taken to Manchester Children’s Hospital, some with potentially life changing injuries.

“I’ve contacted the schools involved to ensure they have council support if needed. Sending my thoughts and all my love to the kids and families involved.”

The road has since reopened.

Transport for Greater Manchester said: “Our thoughts are with those injured and we want to wish them a speedy recovery.

“Emergency services remain at the scene, and we are working closely with the bus operator in supporting police with their enquiries into the incident.”

Army chief hits out at foreign ‘rhetoric’ targeting Iran, threatens decisive action to ‘cut off hand of any aggressor’.

Iran’s top judge warned protesters who have taken to the streets during a spiralling economic crisis there will be “no leniency for those who help the enemy against the Islamic Republic”, accusing the US and Israel of sowing chaos.

“Following announcements by Israel and the US president, there is no excuse for those coming to the streets for riots and unrest,” said Chief Justice Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei on Wednesday in comments on the deadly protests carried by Fars news agency.

Amid growing unrest, Iran is under international pressure after US President Donald Trump threatened last week that if Tehran “violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue”.

His threat – accompanied by an assertion that the US is “locked and loaded and ready to go” – came seven months after Israeli and US forces bombed Iranian nuclear sites in a 12-day war.

Additionally, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu backed the protesters on Sunday, telling ministers, “It is quite possible that we are at a moment when the Iranian people are taking their fate into their own hands.”

Following Ejei’s warning, Iran’s army chief threatened preemptive military action over the “rhetoric” targeting Iran.

Speaking to military academy students, Major-General Amir Hatami – who took over as commander-in-chief of Iran’s army after a slew of top military commanders were killed in Israel’s 12-day war – said the country would “cut off the hand of any aggressor”.

“I can say with confidence that today the readiness of Iran’s armed forces is far greater than before the war. If the enemy commits an error, it will face a more decisive response,” said Hatami.

‘Longstanding anger’

The nationwide demonstrations, which have seen dozens of people killed so far, ignited at the end of last month when shopkeepers in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar shuttered their businesses in anger over the collapse of Iran’s rial currency, against a backdrop of deepening economic woes driven by mismanagement and punishing Western sanctions.

The Iranian state has not announced casualty figures. HRANA, a network of human rights activists, reported a death toll of at least 36 people as well as the arrest of at least 2,076 people. Al Jazeera has been unable to verify any figures.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei promised not to “yield to the enemy” following Trump’s comments, which acquired added significance after the US military raid that seized Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, a longtime ally of Tehran, over the weekend.

Seeking to halt the anger, Iran’s government began on Wednesday paying the equivalent of $7 a month to subsidise rising costs for dinner-table essentials such as rice, meat and pasta – a measure widely deemed to be a meagre response.

“More than a week of protests in Iran reflects not only worsening economic conditions, but longstanding anger at government repression and regime policies that have led to Iran’s global isolation,” the New York-based Soufan Center think tank said.

United States President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio say they want to free up the flow of Venezuelan oil to benefit Venezuelans after US forces abducted President Nicolas Maduro from Caracas.

“We’re going to rebuild the oil infrastructure, which requires billions of dollars that will be paid for by the oil companies directly,” Trump said at a media briefing at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida hours after Maduro was seized on Saturday. “They will be reimbursed for what they’re doing, but it’s going to be paid, and we’re going to get the oil flowing.”

Then, on Tuesday, the US president said he wanted to use proceeds from the sale of Venezuelan oil “to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States”. Rubio has echoed Trump in his comments in recent days.

But what has been holding back the flow of Venezuelan oil, preventing the country from attracting investments and driving the country into poverty?

A key reason is one that Trump and Rubio have been silent about: Washington’s own efforts to strangle Venezuela’s oil industry and economy through sanctions, which also have set off a refugee crisis.

What has Trump said about Venezuelan oil?

In a post on his Truth Social platform on Tuesday night, Trump said Venezuela will turn over 30 million to 50 million barrels of sanctioned oil to the US.

Trump wrote: “This Oil will be sold at its Market Price, and that money will be controlled by me, as President of the United States of America, to ensure it is used to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States!”

Trump added that he had directed his energy secretary, Chris Wright, to execute the plan “immediately”.

“It will be taken by storage ships, and brought directly to unloading docks in the United States,” Trump wrote.

During the news conference on Saturday, Trump said US oil companies would fix Venezuela’s “broken infrastructure” and “start making money for the country”.

Earlier Trump had accused Venezuela in a Truth Social post of “stealing” US oil, land and other assets and using that oil to fund crime, “terrorism” and human trafficking. Top Trump adviser Stephen Miller has made similar claims in recent days.

What does it mean for the US to take Venezuelan oil?

Oil is trading at roughly $56 per barrel.

Based on this price, 30 million barrels of oil would be worth $1.68bn and 50 million barrels of oil would be worth $2.8bn.

“Trump’s statement about oil in Venezuela is beyond an act of war; it is an act of colonisation. That is also illegal based on the UN Charter,” Vijay Prashad, the director of the Tricontinental Institute for Social Research based in Argentina, Brazil, India, and South Africa, told Al Jazeera.

Ilias Bantekas, a professor of transnational law at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar, told Al Jazeera that the US involvement in Venezuela was “less about Maduro as it is about access to Venezuela’s oil deposits”.

“This [oil] is the number one target. Trump is not content with just allowing US oil firms to get concessions but to ‘run’ the country, which entails absolute and indefinite control over Venezuela’s resources.”

According to the website of the US Energy Information Administration, the US consumed an average of 20.25 million barrels of petroleum per day in 2023.

What has Rubio said about Venezuelan oil?

In an interview on the NBC TV network’s Meet the Press programme that aired on Sunday, Rubio said: “We are at war against drug trafficking organisations. That’s not a war against Venezuela.”

“No more drug trafficking … and no more using the oil industry to enrich all our adversaries around the world and not benefitting the people of Venezuela or, frankly, benefitting the United States and the region,” Rubio said.

Rubio said in the interview that since 2014, about eight million Venezuelans have fled the country, which he attributed to theft and corruption by Maduro and his allies. According to a report by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees from May, nearly 7.9 million people have indeed left Venezuela.

But he was silent on the US’s own role in creating that crisis.

What are the US sanctions against Venezuela’s oil?

Venezuela nationalised its oil industry in 1976 under then-President Carlos Andres Perez during an oil boom. He established the state-owned Petroleos de Venezuela SA (PDVSA) to control all oil resources.

Venezuela continued to be a major oil exporter to the US for some years, supplying 1.5 million to 2 million barrels per day in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

After President Hugo Chavez took office in 1998, he nationalised all oil assets, seized foreign-owned assets, restructured the PDVSA and prioritised using oil revenue for social programmes in Venezuela.

From 2003 to 2007, Venezuela under Chavez managed to cut its poverty rate in half – from 57 percent to 27.5 percent. Extreme poverty fell even more sharply, by 70 percent.

But exports declined, and government authorities were accused of mismanagement.

The US first imposed sanctions on Venezuela’s oil in retaliation for nationalising US oil assets in 2005.

Under US sanctions, many senior Venezuelan government officials and companies have been barred from accessing any property or financial assets held in the US. They cannot access US bank accounts, sell property or access their money if it passes through the US financial system.

Critically, any US companies or citizens doing business with any sanctioned individual or company will be penalised and risk becoming subject to enforcement actions.

Maduro took over as president in 2013 after Chavez’s death. In 2017, Trump, during his first term in office, imposed more sanctions and tightened them again in 2019. This further restricted sales to the US and access for Venezuelan companies to the global financial system. As a result, oil exports to the US nearly stopped, and Venezuela shifted its trade mainly to China with some sales to India and Cuba.

Last month, the Trump administration imposed yet more sanctions – this time on Maduro family members and Venezuelan tankers carrying sanctioned oil.

Today, the PDVSA controls the petroleum industry in Venezuela, and US involvement in Venezuelan oil drilling is limited. Houston-based Chevron is the only US company that still operates in Venezuela.

How have sanctions hurt Venezuela’s oil flows?

Trump might today be interested in getting Venezuelan oil flowing, but it is US sanctions that blocked that flow in the first place.

Venezuela’s oil reserves are concentrated primarily in the Orinoco Belt, a region in the eastern part of the country stretching across roughly 55,000sq km (21,235sq miles).

While the country is home to the world’s largest proven oil reserves – at an estimated 303 billion barrels – it earns only a fraction of the revenue it once did from exporting crude.

[BELOW: The sentence above promises statistics that will show how much oil exports have dropped, but the next graf doesn’t deliver. We should add that figure]

According to data from the Observatory of Economic Complexity, Venezuela exported $4.05bn of crude oil in 2023. This is far below other major exporters, including Saudi Arabia ($181bn), the US ($125bn) and Russia ($122bn).

How have US sanctions hurt Venezuelans and the country’s oil infrastructure?

The US sanctions on Venezuelan oil prevent US and non-US companies from doing business with the PDVSA. Because the US is a market no one wants to lose, firms, including banks, are wary of taking any steps that could invite Washington’s sanctions.

In effect, that has meant Venezuela’s oil industry has been almost entirely deprived of international financial investment.

The sanctions additionally restrict Venezuela from accessing oilfield equipment, specialised software, drilling services and refinery components from Western companies.

This has resulted in years of underinvestment in the PDVSA’s infrastructure, leading to chronic breakdowns, shutdowns and accidents.

The sanctions have also resulted in broader economic turmoil.

The country’s gross domestic product per capita stood at about $4,200 in 2024, according to World Bank data, down from more than $13,600 in 2010.

From about 2012, the economy went into a sharp decline, driven by domestic economic policies, a slump that was later deepened by US sanctions. The resulting hardships have pushed millions of Venezuelans to leave the country – the same people who Trump and Rubio now argue should benefit from Venezuela’s oil revenues.

Does the US have any claim to Venezuelan oil?

US companies began drilling for oil in Venezuela in the early 1900s.

In 1922, vast petroleum reserves were initially discovered by Royal Dutch Shell in Lake Maracaibo in Zulia state in northwestern Venezuela.

At this point, US companies ramped up their investments in the extraction and development of Venezuelan oil reserves. Companies such as Standard Oil led development under concession agreements, propelling Venezuela to a position as a key global supplier, especially for the US.

Venezuela was a founding member of OPEC, joining at its creation on September 14, 1960. OPEC is a group of major oil-exporting countries that work together to manage supply and influence global oil prices.

But the claims by Trump and Miller that Venezuela somehow “stole” US oil are baseless under international law, experts said.

The principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources, adopted by the UN General Assembly in a resolution in 1962, is clear that sovereign states have the inherent right to control, use and dispose of their resources for their own development.

In other words, Venezuela alone owns its oil.

US President Donald Trump sees Greenland as a United States national security priority to deter Washington’s “adversaries in the Arctic region”, according to a White House statement released on Tuesday.

The statement came days after Trump told reporters that the US needs Greenland from a national security perspective because it is “covered with Russian and Chinese ships”.

Here’s what you need to know about what Trump said, whether Russia and China are present in Greenland, and whether they do pose a threat to American security.

What has Trump recently said about Greenland?

“Right now, Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place. We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on January 4.

The White House statement on Tuesday fleshed out further details on how the US would go about its acquisition of Greenland.

“The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief’s disposal,” the White House statement says.

Over the course of his second term, Trump has talked about wanting Greenland for national security reasons multiple times.

“We need Greenland for international safety and security. We need it. We have to have it,” he said in March.

Since 1979, Greenland has been a self-governing territory of Denmark, and since 2009, it has had the right to declare independence through a referendum.

Trump has repeatedly expressed a desire to take control of the island, which hosts a US military base. He first voiced this desire in 2019, during his first term as US president.

As a response, leaders from Greenland and Denmark have repeatedly said that Greenland is not for sale. They have made it clear that they are especially not interested in becoming part of the US.

On January 4, Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said, “It makes absolutely no sense to talk about the US needing to take over Greenland.”

“The US has no right to annex any of the three countries in the Danish kingdom,” she said, alluding to the Faroe Islands, which, like Greenland, are also a Danish territory.

“I would therefore strongly urge the US to stop the threats against a historically close ally and against another country and another people who have very clearly said that they are not for sale,” Frederiksen said.

US special forces abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro during an operation in the Venezuelan capital, Caracas, on January 3.

Hours later, Katie Miller, the wife of close Trump aide and US Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller, posted a photo on X showing the US flag imposed on the map of Greenland.

Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen hit back in an X post, writing, “Relations between nations and peoples are built on mutual respect and international law – not on symbolic gestures that disregard our status and our rights.”

Why does Trump want Greenland so badly?

The location and natural resources of the Arctic island make it strategically important for Washington.

Greenland is geographically part of North America, located between the Arctic Ocean and the North Atlantic Ocean. It is home to some 56,000 residents, mostly Indigenous Inuit people.

It is the world’s largest island. Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, is closer to New York City  – some 2,900km (1,800 miles) away – than the Danish capital Copenhagen, which is located 3,500km (2,174 miles) to the east.

Greenland, a NATO territory through Denmark, is an EU-associated overseas country and territory whose residents remain European Union citizens, having joined the European Community with Denmark in 1973 but having withdrawn in 1985.

“It’s really tricky if the United States decides to use military power to take over Greenland. Denmark is a member of NATO; the United States is a member as well. It really calls into question what the purpose of the military alliance is, if that happens,” Melinda Haring, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council Eurasia Center, told Al Jazeera.

Greenland offers the shortest route from North America to Europe. This gives the US a strategic upper hand for its military and its ballistic missile early-warning system.

The US has expressed interest in expanding its military presence in Greenland by placing radars in the waters connecting Greenland, Iceland and the United Kingdom. These waters are a gateway for Russian and Chinese vessels, which Washington aims to track.

The island is also incredibly rich in minerals, including rare earth minerals used in the high-tech industry and in the manufacture of batteries.

According to a 2023 survey, 25 of 34 minerals deemed “critical raw materials” by the European Commission were found in Greenland.

Greenland does not carry out the extraction of oil and gas, and its mining sector is opposed by its Indigenous population. The island’s economy is largely reliant on its fishing industry.

Are Chinese and Russian ships swarming Greenland?

However, while Trump has spoken of Russian and Chinese ships around Greenland, currently, facts don’t bear that out.

Vessel tracking data from maritime data and intelligence websites such as MarineTraffic do not show the presence of Chinese or Russian ships near Greenland.

Are Russia and China a threat to Greenland?

The ships’ location aside, Trump’s rhetoric comes amid a heightened scramble for the Arctic.

Amid global warming, the vast untapped resources of the Arctic are becoming more accessible. Countries like the US, Canada, China and Russia are now eyeing these resources.

“Russia has never threatened anyone in the Arctic, but we will closely follow the developments and mount an appropriate response by increasing our military capability and modernising military infrastructure,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said during an address in March 2025 at the International Arctic Forum in the Russian city of Murmansk, the largest city within the Arctic Circle.

During this address, Putin said that he believed Trump was serious about taking Greenland and that the US will continue with efforts to acquire it.

In December 2024, Canada released a policy document detailing plans to ramp up its military and diplomatic presence in the Arctic. Russia is also constructing military installations and power plants in the region.

Meanwhile, Russia and China have been working together to develop Arctic shipping routes as Moscow seeks to deliver more oil and gas to China amid Western sanctions while Beijing seeks an alternative shipping route to reduce its dependence on the Strait of Malacca.

The Northern Sea Route (NSR), a maritime route in the Arctic Ocean, is becoming easier to navigate due to melting ice. The NSR can cut shipping trips significantly short. Russia is hoping to ramp up commerce through the NSR to trade more with Asia than Europe due to Western sanctions. Last year, the number of oil shipments from Russia to China via the NSR rose by a quarter.

China is also probing the region, and has sent 10 scientific expeditions to the Arctic and built research vessels to survey the icy waters north of Russia.

Who: Arsenal vs Liverpool
What: English Premier League
Where: Emirates Stadium in London, United Kingdom
When: Thursday, January 8, at 8pm (20:00 GMT).
How to follow: We will have all the build-up on Al Jazeera Sport from 17:00 GMT in advance of our text commentary stream.

Table-topping Arsenal entertain defending champions Liverpool in a mouth-watering offering in the English Premier League on Thursday, with glory on offer for the former but pride heavily at stake for the latter.

The Gunners are searching for their first league title since 2003, while the Reds are licking their wounds from a season that has almost inexplicably imploded following their runaway success last term.

Al Jazeera Sport takes a closer look at the match in which a home win is fully expected, but nothing can ever be taken for granted in the Premier League.

How have Arsenal fared in the Premier League this season?

The Gunners have stormed to top spot as manager Mikel Arteta looks to go one better than three consecutive second-placed finishes in the English top flight.

Only one defeat in 21 matches to begin the season – the loss coming at Liverpool – has marked Arsenal as the team to stop on all fronts. Free-scoring in front of the goal and miserly at the back, Arteta appears to have finally cracked the code.

How do things stand in the Premier League title race?

The gap with second-placed Manchester City is six points, ahead of Pep Guardiola’s side welcoming Brighton and Hove Albion at the Etihad Stadium on Wednesday.

Aston Villa are level on points with City, and travel to Crystal Palace on Wednesday, but their 4-1 defeat at the hands of Arsenal on December 30 was regarded as a serious dent to their title ambitions.

What has gone wrong for Liverpool in the Premier League this season?

The Reds enjoyed a stunning start to the new campaign, which made their demise this season all the more alarming. Slot’s side won their opening five league matches as part of a seven-game winning run in all competitions.

Liverpool manager Arne Slot insists his reigning champions can still do “special things” this season.

“It is nine games unbeaten but we have definitely had two draws too many,” Slot told a pre-match news conference on Wednesday.

A great deal of the focus for the Reds’ slide, which saw them lose the following four Premier League games on the bounce after their fine start, has focused on the fallout with their iconic forward Mohamed Salah.

Slot has insisted the club have moved on since Salah’s departure for international duty with Egypt at the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations, but questions remain across the park.

“We haven’t had the consistency but we’ve already beaten some very good teams, so that tells you the talent is definitely there but the consistency isn’t,” he said.

Only 41 goals were conceded by Liverpool last season, but 28 have already been let in during their 20 games so far this season.

The massive summer spending spree, which was headlined by Alexander Isak and Florian Wirtz as marquee signings, has seemingly unsettled the balance of a side that stormed to the title last season.

The talent of both, and the rest brought in, is quite clear, but whether Slot can gel them into a side capable of salvaging this season and beyond remains to be seen.

The manager believes his side are still in the reckoning in the league.

“There’s a lot of importance on this match because we still have a lot to play for in the Premier League,” said Slot.

What happened the last time Arsenal played Liverpool?

Liverpool secured a 1-0 win against Arsenal in an early-season encounter between the sides in the Premier League on August 31 at Anfield.

Dominik Szoboszlai scored the only goal of the game with an explosive free-kick in the 83rd minute of an otherwise tight match.

What happened in the corresponding game between Arsenal and Liverpool last season?

The sides could not be separated in last season’s Premier League match at Emirates Stadium, although Liverpool had to twice come from behind – including a late Mohamed Salah leveller – to snare a 2-2 draw.

Bukayo Saka and Mikel Merino had given the Gunners the lead twice in the first half with Virgil van Dijk netting in between.

The Reds, however, had to nervously wait until the 81st minute for Salah to secure a point.

When did Arsenal last beat Liverpool?

Arsenal’s last win against Liverpool came three seasons ago, courtesy of a 3-1 victory at Emirates Stadium in February 2024.

A fiery match saw nine yellow cards shown and Reds defender Ibrahima Konate sent off in the 88th minute when his side were still searching for an equaliser.

Bukayo Saka and Gabriel Martinelli scored in either half to twice give the Gunners the lead, either side of Gabriel Magalhaes’s own goal.

Leandro Trossard rounded off the scoring in the 90th minute.

Stat attack – Arsenal

The Gunners are on a seven-game winning streak, during which they have netted 13 goals and conceded only six – two of which came in the win against Brighton in their last game.

The north Londoners are the only team to retain an unbeaten home record in the Premier League at this stage, winning nine of their 10 matches at Emirates Stadium. The Gunners have fired in 26 goals in front of their own fans in the league this season, and conceded only five.

Bukayo Saka, such a huge part of the Gunners’ form of recent seasons, is aiming to become the first Arsenal player to score in four straight league home games against Liverpool.

Stat attack – Liverpool

Liverpool are unbeaten in nine matches, winning five, but have drawn their last two – both in the league.

The Reds have kept only one clean sheet in their last seven league matches – a 2-0 home victory against Brighton and the 0-0 draw at Leeds two games ago.

Eight goals have been shipped in that time, with 12 scored.

Four of their six defeats this season have come on the road – where they have also won four and drawn two – with 18 goals conceded on their travels and only 17 scored.

Even bottom-of-the-table Wolverhampton Wanderers have not shipped so many goals away from home.

Arsenal vs Liverpool – stat attack

Liverpool are unbeaten in three matches against Arsenal, winning the last match and drawing twice.

That victory for the Reds, however, ended a six-match winless run in the league, during which the Gunners won twice.

The last victory for the Reds prior to that stretch was the last time the Merseysiders won at Emirates Stadium, back in March 2022, with goals from Roberto Firmino and Diogo Jota.

The Gunners have won two of the three league meetings in London since then.

Head-to-head

This is the 246th meeting between the sides, with Liverpool winning 95 of the matches and Arsenal emerging victorious on 81 occasions.

Arsenal team news

Max Dowman and Cristhian Mosquera miss out, with both struggling with ankle problems, while Riccardo Calafiori is a doubt due to an unspecified injury.

Kai Havertz was rested from the squad that was named for the win at Bournemouth and may have to make do with a place on the bench at best as his recovery from a previous injury is managed.

Predicted Arsenal starting lineup

Raya; Timber, Saliba, Gabriel, Hincapie; Odegaard, Zubimendi, Rice; Saka, Gyokeres, Trossard

Liverpool team news

Salah remains at AFCON with Egypt, while Isak is a long-term absentee with a leg injury.

Fellow forward Hugo Ekitike missed the draw with Fulham due to a muscle problem and remains a doubt.

Florian Wirtz is nursing a hamstring problem but is expected to continue to play through the issue.

Giovanni Leoni and Wataru Endo remain longer-term absentees.

Predicted Liverpool starting lineup

Alisson; Bradley, Konate, Van Dijk, Kerkez; Mac Allister, Gravenberch; Szoboszlai, Wirtz, Jones; Gakpo

Arsenal and Liverpool form guides

• Arsenal: W-W-W-W-W
• Liverpool: W-W-W-D-D

The United States military is attempting to seize a Russian-flagged oil tanker with links to Venezuela after a weeks-long pursuit, US and Russian media outlets report.

Two unnamed US officials told the Reuters news agency on Wednesday the operation is being carried out by the Coast Guard and US military.

‌Russian state broadcaster RT reported it appears US forces are trying to board Venezuela-linked oil tanker Marinera from a helicopter, and published ⁠an image of a helicopter ​hovering near the ship.

RT cited an unnamed source as saying a US ​coast guard vessel has been ‌following the tanker and an attempt to seize it during a storm had already been ‌carried out.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has been ‌cited by state media as ⁠saying the ship, which is now flying the Russian flag, is in international waters and ‌acting according to international maritime law.

It called on Western countries to ‍respect the vessel’s right to freedom of navigation.

More to come…

By all accounts so far, the planning and preparations for the operation to capture Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro mirrored, to a degree, that of the raid that led to the death of Al Qaeda founder Osama Bin Laden. However, one asset that featured prominently in the Bin Laden mission looks to have been notably absent in the force that descended on Caracas over the weekend: stealthy Black Hawk helicopters. There are clear reasons why this was not the case, but it also prompts questions about the current status of those helicopters and possible successor platforms.

Videos shot from the ground during the mission to capture Maduro, as well as his wife, dubbed Operation Absolute Resolve, show typical special operations MH-60 Black Hawks and MH-47 Chinooks belonging to the U.S. Army’s 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (SOAR), better known as the Night Stalkers. Some of the MH-60s were in a unique armed configuration, called the Direct Action Penetrator (DAP), which you can read more about here.

The 160th SOAR’s publicly acknowledged helicopter fleets also include AH-6 and MH-6 Little Birds, which do not appear to have been present during the operation. There has been no confirmation of any other helicopters taking part directly in the operation to snatch Maduro this past weekend.

Stealth Hawk Status

The stealthy Black Hawks used during the Bin Laden raid belong to an adjacent highly classified realm of special operations aviation, with units that have been known by various names over the years, like the Flight Concepts Division (FCD) and now the Aviation Technology Office (ATO). The origins of the ‘Stealth Hawk’ concept itself trace back to the 1970s.

Back in 2020, TWZ published what still looks to be the only known picture of a Black Hawk variant in a stealthy configuration, or at least mocked up to reflect one. We will come back to all of this later on.

The current status of the U.S. military’s Stealth Hawk fleet is unknown. The two examples employed during the Bin Laden raid have been described as effectively experimental, exotic in their outward appearance, and as having been pulled out of storage at Area 51 for that operation.

In his 2015 book on the secretive U.S. Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), Relentless Strike, author Sean Naylor wrote:

“The stealth Black Hawk gained almost mythical status, like a unicorn. ‘I remember first hearing about it … in 2000 to 2001,’ said a Delta source. The program quickly gained traction. ‘I remember in 2004 hearing that it was a line item in the budget,’ he said. Knowledge of the special access program was on a strictly need-to-know basis, and hardly anyone needed to know. Shortly thereafter the 160th regimental leadership came looking to 1st Battalion—the core unit of Task Force Brown—for two crews to go down to Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, and start training on the new helicopters. In the end, one crew went after a couple of pilots volunteered. ‘I never saw them again,’ said a 160th source. ‘They’d be permanently assigned out there.’ The program became more formalized. The aircraft were based at Nellis [actually Area 51], but 160th crews trained on them at some of the military’s other vast landholdings in the Southwest: Area 51; China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station in California; and Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona. U.S. Special Operations Command planned to create a fleet of four and make them the centerpiece of a new covered aviation unit in Nevada. By 2011 Special Operations Command had canceled that plan, but the first two stealth helicopters still existed and certain 1st Battalion crews would rotate down to Nellis to train on them.”

TWZ cannot independently confirm the content in Naylor’s book.

Past reports had said the unique features of the versions employed in 2011 made them challenging to fly, to begin with, and that the decision to use them at all was made reluctantly based on other operational considerations. There are claims that then-President Barack Obama was unaware that they even existed before the mission planning was well underway. One of the helicopters was lost during the mission, and it is thought that only two existed prior to it.

Rob O’Neill reveals the story of secret helicopters that even the President didn’t know about

A much improved iteration of the Stealth Hawk concept, sometimes called Ghost Hawks (not to be confused with the Air Force’s unrelated HH-60Us that are also sometimes referred to by that name) or ‘Jedi Rides,’ is said to have emerged after the Bin Laden raid. How many total variations may have been developed is not known.

The extent to which Stealth Hawks of any type have been employed operationally in the past is another unknown. In Relentless Strike, Naylor wrote that newer versions of these helicopters had been used during a failed attempt to rescue American and other hostages from ISIS in Syria in 2014.

Last year, The New York Times reported that unspecified “stealth rotary aircraft” were part of a quick reaction force embarked on U.S. Navy ships positioned somewhere in the vicinity of North Korea during a botched clandestine mission in that country in 2019. The story does not explicitly refer to them as Black Hawk variants or otherwise describe them. None of the backup forces were employed in the end, according to the Times‘ report, which remains very much unconfirmed overall.

There is also the reality that a helicopter matching this description has never been seen. If they existed in any sort of quantities, there would be a decent chance that they would be spotted, even in grainy videos, at some point, as they would need to train with operators. It’s possible that a small handful of more advanced Stealth Hawk types are operational, but are tightly contained to highly secure locales and training areas in order to remain hidden.

Whether or not stealth Black Hawks still exist in U.S. inventory, the underlying requirement for a rotary-wing aircraft able to get in and out of confined and otherwise complex locations, and do so with as low a possibility of detection as possible, would not have gone away, especially for supporting covert and clandestine special operations. TWZ has also previously delved in great detail into what is publicly known about U.S. military efforts to develop larger, stealthy, short and/or vertical takeoff and landing capable transport aircraft to support these same kinds of operations.

The Helicopters Of Absolute Resolve

The full force package used in Absolute Resolve included a large array of crewed and uncrewed fixed-wing aircraft, with a heavy emphasis on stealthy types, as well as naval assets off the coast. Other helicopters were used to support the mission, but we only know of the 160th SOAR MH-60s and MH-47s taking part in missions inside Venezuelan airspace. Approximately 200 special operators, led by the Army’s Delta Force, made up the ground component of the operation.

“As the night began, the helicopters took off with the extraction force, which included law enforcement officers, and began their flight into Venezuela at 100 feet above the water,” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan “Razin” Caine had said during a press conference on Saturday. “Those forces were protected by aircraft from the United States Marines, the United States Navy, the United States Air Force, and the Air National Guard. The force included F-22s, F-35s, F[/A]-18s, EA-18s, E-2s, B-1 bombers, and other support aircraft, as well as numerous remotely piloted drones.”

The drone component of the force is known to have included at least one, and possibly two, stealthy RQ-170 Sentinels. Some of those secretive uncrewed aircraft are also understood to have surveilled Bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, in the lead-up to the raid in 2011, and to have been overhead while it occurred. This is just one of the parallels between that mission and Operation Absolute Resolve.

“Elite U.S. troops, including the Army’s Delta Force, created an exact replica of Maduro’s safe house and practiced how they would enter the strongly fortified residence. The CIA had a small team on the ground starting in August who were able to provide insight into Maduro’s pattern of life that made grabbing him seamless, according to one source familiar with the matter,” according to a report from Reuters. “Two other sources [said] … the intelligence agency also had an asset close to Maduro who would monitor his movements and was poised to pinpoint his exact location as the operation unfolded.”

“Because of the intelligence gathered by the [CIA] team, the United States knew where Mr. Maduro moved, what he ate and even what pets he kept,” The New York Times separately reported. “That information was critical to the ensuing military operation, a pre-dawn raid Saturday by elite Army Delta Force commandos, the riskiest U.S. military operation of its kind since members of the Navy’s SEAL Team 6 killed Osama bin Laden in a safe house in Pakistan in 2011.”

Though largely absent during the operation to capture Maduro, we know that Venezuela’s air defenses were a major factor in the planning. TWZ had previously explored how the Venezuelan military’s air defense capabilities, while limited, could still present real threats.

“As the force began to approach Caracas, the Joint Air Component began dismantling and disabling the air defense systems in Venezuela, employing weapons to ensure the safe passage of the helicopters into the target area,” Gen. Caine had also said on Saturday. “The goal of our air component is, was, and always will be to protect the helicopters and the ground force and get them to the target and get them home.”

Broadly speaking, the extremely high-profile nature of Operation Absolute Resolve and risk calculus would certainly point to an environment where using a highly specialized asset like a Stealth Hawk, designed to be more survivable in higher-threat conditions, would be warranted. This is further underscored by the use of the RQ-170s, as well as stealthy F-22 and F-35 fighters, and EA-18G and EC-130H electronic warfare aircraft, as TWZ has previously noted.

At the same time, there are glaring reasons why the decision would have been made not to employ Stealth Hawks, or any other similar rotary wing platforms, if they even exist, during Operation Absolute Resolve.

For one, these would be extremely low-density assets with highly specialized capabilities. The U.S. government could easily be reluctant to expose them on any level, unless it is absolutely necessary. As already mentioned, the existence of operational stealthy Black Hawks only emerged after one of them went down, and not as a result of enemy fire, something that is always a potential risk. U.S. forces were not able to secure that crash site after the helicopter was partially demolished using explosives on the ground, and Pakistani authorities had custody of the wreckage for more than two weeks afterward. It was reported that China and possibly Russia got to examine the tail section and its radar-absorbent coating. This would have compromised the operational security around the design, at least to a degree.

CNN: Raid glitch reveals secret helicopter

Even more importantly, various specific aspects of Operation Absolute Resolve would have factored into the decision. It’s not surprising at all that larger MH-47s were included in the main body of a force used to bring 200 troops to the objective in Caracas. This is a remarkably large force to have to convey in an aerial assault into a tight area. MH-47s can carry many more operators than an MH-60. Even if the Stealth Hawks exist, there may not be enough of them to even come close to moving this number of troops, and a mixed force is out of the question. It’s all stealth or not, as one non-stealthy helicopter would give away the presence of the whole force just the same as ten of them.

The attack capabilities found on the 160th SOAR’s DAP-configured Black Hawks, which proved to be particularly valuable during Operation Absolute Resolve, would not be directly portable to a stealthy variation of the helicopter, either. The site Delta Force and others had to be delivered to was a full-on top military installation housing a man that the U.S. wanted in a fortress-like facility. It would be defended by regular troops and Maduro’s inner protective cadre, reportedly made up of specially trained Cuban operatives, dozens of whom were killed in the assault. So once again, unless Stealth Hawks could somehow provide the hard-hitting, fast-reacting support that a DAP could, they would be far more vulnerable on arrival than the helicopters that assaulted the Bin Laden residence. While his compound was not far from a major military academy, U.S. forces were not assaulting the military academy itself, nor was a top target for the U.S. housed at the academy during a military standoff. It also wasn’t a military base located in the capital of the country.

The Bin Laden mission focused on a non-military target that was not a point of interest in relation to Pakistan’s air defense network, the attention of which is centered on threats from India, not Afghanistan. That focus on the other direction helped the Stealth Hawks slip deep into the country from the west. Pakistan’s mountainous terrain also offered cover for the helicopters as they ingressed and egressed the area. This was not the case in the operation this past weekend, where Venezuela’s air defenses were heavily focused on threats emanating from the Caribbean across relatively open terrain. It’s still possible, if not likely, that the 160th made their initial assault in a roundabout way, from the south, sweeping behind the mountains that border Caracas in that direction, but they clearly flew over densely populated areas, at least on their way out.

In other words, the final destination in Caracas was a much tougher and more heavily defended objective in a country on high alert for a possible impending attack, and especially on the facility where Maduro slept.

The unique features found on Stealth Hawks could also add weight, and potentially create aerodynamic inefficiency, all of which could reduce their total payload capacity, too. Even during the Bin Laden raid, the accompanying backup quick reaction force rode in MH-47s.

If the 160th SOAR helicopter force required in-flight refueling, even as a contingency, for the Maduro snatch-and-grab mission, such a capability is likely lacking entirely on the Stealth Hawks, or at least it was on those used during the Bin Laden raid. Many MC-130J Commando II special operations tanker-transports were deployed for the operation, seemingly to refuel 160th SOAR, as well as other helicopters that were part of a contingency force.

Using stealthy types would have required more capability tradeoffs, as well. Night Stalker MH-60s are loaded down with sensors and defensive systems that protrude from their noses and other points along their fuselages. These systems, from electronic warfare capabilities to missile approach warning sensors to terrain following radar, give the helicopters every advantage — but stealth — to accomplish their mission. It is highly unlikely a Stealth Hawk would have anywhere near this same installation of capabilities, relying far more heavily on not being detected for survivability.

Top among these modifications, the 160th SOAR’s MH-60 and MH-47 helicopter fleets have openly received improvements to their already extensive self-protection suites in recent years. This includes new directional infrared countermeasures (DIRCM) systems, which have given the helicopters an important additional layer of defense, particularly against shoulder-fired heat-seeking surface-to-air missiles, also known as man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS). There is evidence that Venezuelan forces unsuccessfully employed MANPADS against the raiding force this weekend. The country was known to have thousands of these weapons, and stealth cannot hide from them.

Full video of the Igla missile being fired from Fuerte Tiuna and the response from US helicopters.

After the Igla is fired the launch position is repeatedly hit with both 30mm fire and rockets. #Venezuela pic.twitter.com/haxxyppg2Q

— CNW (@ConflictsW) January 5, 2026

WATCH: Another failed MANPADS/air-defense missile launch at U.S. helicopters over Caracas during Operation Absolute Resolve.

It confirms Venezuelan forces tried limited resistance, but surprise, poor visibility, and weak coordination made it ineffective. pic.twitter.com/45j0ATdSeG

— Clash Report (@clashreport) January 6, 2026

Then there is the matter of it having been a moon-lit night on Saturday in and around Caracas, albeit one that was also partially overcast. The weather conditions did still make it easier to spot the incoming helicopters visually, as evidenced by the video footage captured by bystanders on the ground. This, in turn, would have drastically reduced the expected utility of stealthy features. As a general point, it should be stressed that stealth does not equal invisibility. Also, all of the unique avionics that the MH-60 and MH-47 have for navigating at very low levels in any weather may not exist on a Stealth Hawk for the aforementioned reasons, resulting in far less flexibility when it comes to operating in any weather in a high-threat area. This is especially important if the mission is heavily dictated by real-time intelligence, which the mission into Venezuela clearly was.

The need to employ the Stealth Hawks in the Bin Laden raid also notably reflects considerations that did not have to be taken into account during Operation Absolute Resolve. The mission to Abbottabad was launched without the cognizance or acquiescence of Pakistani authorities, but it was also not targeting that government directly. Pakistan’s air defenses and other military assets were very explicitly left untouched despite clear risks of a confrontation.

In contrast, the U.S. had prepared for dismantling Venezuela’s air defenses for months prior to the operation, and did just that in order to allow the helicopters to get in and out safely. If stealth helicopters were to have been used, the second the shooting starts at their destination, their risk of being taken down would go up exponentially without a major SEAD/DEAD effort, which would have also included targeted cyber and electronic warfare attacks. And such an effort executed preemptively would also give away the possibility of their presence. Once again, it was just a different type of target, and the circumstances surrounding the mission were very different both politically and tactically.

Altogether, there are far more reasons why Stealth Hawks or similar platforms were absent from Operation Absolute Resolve than not. And once again, this is all predicated on the idea that these kinds of aircraft even exist in relevant numbers at all, which we cannot say is a fact conclusively.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Syria and Israel have agreed to set up a joint mechanism after US-mediated talks in Paris on Tuesday, in what they are calling a “dedicated communication cell” aimed at sharing intelligence and coordinating military de-escalation.

The two countries have had a US-backed security agreement in place since 1974. However, when the Assad regime fell on December 8, 2024, Israel began attacking Syrian military infrastructure and pushed their troops into the demilitarised zone that is Syrian territory.

Syria and Israel have been engaging in intermittent negotiations over the last year to find a security agreement that would stop Israel’s repeat aggression against Syrians and Syrian territory.

Here’s everything you need to know about these talks.

What is the mechanism?

“The mechanism will serve as a platform to address any disputes promptly and work to prevent misunderstandings,” a joint statement released by the two countries said after the agreement on Tuesday.

The idea is to have a body that will deal with grievances and resolve disputes between Israel and Syria, ideally in a way that brings Israeli attacks on Syrian land and people to an end. Both sides may also hope it can pave the way to a renewed security agreement.

What does Syria want?

A government source told state media SANA, that the focus for Syria is to reactivate “the 1974 Disengagement Agreement, with the aim of ensuring the withdrawal of Israeli forces to the lines in place prior to Dec. 8, 2024 within a reciprocal security agreement that prioritizes full Syrian sovereignty and guarantees the prevention of any form of interference in Syria’s internal affairs.”

The Syrian government, led by President Ahmed al-Sharaa, will want Israel to respect Syrian sovereignty by pulling back its forces and stopping attacks but also to stop meddling in domestic affairs.

The Washington Post reported that Israel has supported figures opposed to Syria’s new government, including Suwayda’s Hikmat al Hijri. Israel has previously said they want to protect Syria’s minority Druze community.

What does Israel want?

Three things mainly, according to Al Jazeera’s senior correspondent Resul Serdar.

“For Israel, it’s about more land, patronage of minorities, and long term leverage,” he said.

Israel has tried to paint the new government in Syria as extremist and a threat to its security. It has called for the area south of Damascus to be demilitarised, while also trying to build relations with Syrian minorities, particularly the Druze in Suwayda.

Analysts believe this could be part of a strategy by Israel to keep its neighbours weak.

Israel has come to the table at least partially due to US leverage and influence. US President Donald Trump and his Special Envoy Tom Barrack have both built warm relations with al-Sharaa.

But Israel may also want to counter Turkish influence in Syria. Israel has previously accused Turkiye of turning Syria into its protectorate.

What does the US want?

“For Washington the priority is containment,” Serdar said.

The US also sees Damascus as a crucial partner in the fight against ISIL. Stability in Syria, particularly under a central government in Damascus, could mean pulling US troops out of eastern Syria.

But the US also wants a strong Syria to avoid the return of Iranian influence in the country and to avoid any wider regional violence.

For his part, Trump is eager to expand the Abraham Accords that sees Arab and Muslim countries sign normalisation agreements with Israel and has said he hopes Syria will do so. Syria, however, has said they do not intend to sign the Abraham Accords.

Will the mechanism work?

There are doubts.

A Syrian official told Reuters news agency that his country isn’t willing to move forward on “strategic files” without an enforced timeline over Israel’s withdrawal from Syrian territory taken after December 2024.

In addition to moving into Syrian territory, Israel has conducted numerous attacks on Damascus, including on the Syrian Ministry of Defense building.

A similar mechanism between Israel and Lebanon was created after the November 2024 ceasefire there, with France and the United States involved to enforce the deal. However, the mechanism has not stopped near-daily attacks by Israel on Lebanese territory, nor has it led to the withdrawal of Israeli troops from five occupied points in Lebanon.

For the mechanism to work, the United States will have to do something it has rarely done in recent years: hold Israel accountable.

What about the Golan Heights?

Israel has illegally occupied areas of the Syrian Golan Heights since 1967.

Israeli officials have indicated they are not willing to return the Golan Heights to the new Syrian government.

After the fall of the Assad regime, Israel expanded into Syrian territory and seized the strategic outlook of Jabal al-Sheikh, a mountain that lies between Syria, Lebanon and Israel.

For now, Syria appears to be focused on getting Israel out of the areas it occupied since December 2024.

For years, Aidarous al-Zubaidi has been the undisputed strongman of southern Yemen, a former air force officer who transitioned from a rebel leader to a statesman courted by Western diplomats.

But on Wednesday, his political trajectory took a drastic turn.

In a decree that has shaken the country’s fragile power-sharing arrangement, the chairman of the Presidential Leadership Council (PLC), Rashad al-Alimi, removed al-Zubaidi from his post as council member, stripping him of his immunity and referring him to the public prosecutor on charges of “high treason”.

The decree accuses al-Zubaidi of “forming armed gangs”, “harming the Republic’s political and military standing”, and leading a military rebellion.

Simultaneously, the Saudi-led coalition announced that al-Zubaidi had “fled to an unknown destination” after failing to answer a summons to Riyadh—a claim the Southern Transitional Council (STC) vehemently denies, insisting their leader remains in Aden.

So, who is the man at the centre of these rapid developments in Yemen?

The ‘rebel’ officer

Born in 1967 in the Zubayd village of the mountainous Al-Dale governorate, al-Zubaidi’s life has mirrored the turbulent history of southern Yemen.

He graduated from the air force academy in Aden as a second lieutenant in 1988. However, his military career was upended by the 1994 civil war, in which northern forces under then-President Ali Abdullah Saleh crushed the southern separatist movement.

Al-Zubaidi fought on the losing side and was forced into exile in Djibouti.

He returned to Yemen in 1996 to found Haq Taqreer al-Maseer (HTM), which means the Movement of Right to Self-Determination, an armed group that carried out assassinations against northern military officials. A military court sentenced him to death in absentia, a ruling that stood until Saleh pardoned him in 2000.

After years of a low-level rebellion, al-Zubaidi re-emerged during the Arab Spring in 2011, when his movement claimed responsibility for attacks on Yemeni army vehicles in Al-Dale.

From governor to secessionist chief

The Houthi takeover of Sanaa in 2014 and their subsequent push south in 2015 provided al-Zubaidi with his biggest opening.

Leading southern resistance fighters, he played a pivotal role in repelling Houthi forces from Al-Dale and Aden. In recognition of his influence on the ground, President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi appointed him governor of Aden in December 2015.

However, the alliance was short-lived. Tensions between Hadi’s government and southern separatists boiled over, leading to al-Zubaidi’s dismissal in April 2017.

Less than a month later, al-Zubaidi formed the Southern Transitional Council (STC), declaring it the legitimate representative of the southern people. Backed by the United Arab Emirates, the STC built a formidable paramilitary force that frequently clashed with government troops, eventually seizing control of Aden.

In April 2022, in a bid to unify the anti-Houthi front, al-Zubaidi was appointed to the eight-member Presidential Leadership Council (PLC).

A vision of ‘South Arabia’

Despite joining the unity government, al-Zubaidi never abandoned his ultimate goal: the restoration of the pre-1990 southern state.

In interviews with international media, including United Arab Emirates state-run newspaper The National and Al Hurra, al-Zubaidi outlined a vision for a federal “State of South Arabia”. He argued that the “peace process is frozen” and that a two-state solution was the only viable path forward.

He also courted controversy by expressing openness to the Abraham Accords.

“If Palestine regains its rights … when we have our southern state, we will make our own decisions and I believe we will be part of these accords,” he told The National in September 2025.

Most recently, on January 2, 2026, al-Zubaidi issued a “constitutional declaration” announcing a two-year transition period leading to a referendum on independence – a move that appears to have triggered his dismissal.

The final rupture

The events of January 7 mark the collapse of the fragile alliance between the internationally recognised government and the STC.

Brigadier General Turki al-Maliki, spokesperson for the coalition, stated that al-Zubaidi had been distributing weapons in Aden to “cause chaos” and had fled the country after being given a 48-hour ultimatum to report to Riyadh.

Al-Maliki also confirmed “limited preemptive strikes” against STC forces mobilising near the Zind camp in Al-Dale.

The STC has rejected these accounts. In a statement issued on Wednesday morning, the council claimed al-Zubaidi is “continuing his duties from the capital, Aden”.

Instead, the STC raised the alarm about its own delegation in Riyadh, led by Secretary-General Abdulrahman Shaher al-Subaihi, claiming they have lost all contact with them.

“We demand the Saudi authorities … guarantee the safety of our delegation,” the statement read, condemning the air strikes on Al-Dale as “unjustified escalation”.

With “high treason” charges on the table and air strikes reported in the south, al-Zubaidi’s long game for independence appears to have pushed Yemen into a dangerous new phase of conflict.

BCB refutes reports saying ICC had issued an ultimatum over Bangladesh’s refusal to play its World Cup games in India.

Cricket authorities in Bangladesh have agreed to “work closely” with the International Cricket Council (ICC) to resolve security concerns regarding their team’s participation in the upcoming T20 World Cup in India.

The Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) will cooperate with the tournament’s organisers in order to ensure the country’s participation, it said in a statement on Wednesday, three days after saying its men’s team will not travel to the neighbouring country.

“The ICC has conveyed its willingness to work closely with the BCB to address the concerns, and has assured that the board’s inputs will be welcomed and duly considered as part of the detailed security planning for the event,” the BCB’s statement said.

“The BCB will continue constructive engagement with the ICC and relevant event authorities in a cooperative and professional manner to arrive at an affable and practical solution that ensures the smooth and successful participation of the team in the ICC Men’s T20 World Cup 2026,” the statement added.

The sport’s governing body and the BCB reportedly held a virtual meeting on Tuesday in response to Bangladesh’s request for a change of venue for its fixtures.

India and Sri Lanka are co-hosting the 20-team tournament from February 7, but all of Bangladesh’s group matches were allocated to Indian venues.

Bangladesh’s refusal to travel to India stemmed from a recent controversy, when its star fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman was dropped by his Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise Kolkata Knight Riders at the directive of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).

It led to an outcry from cricket fans and administrators in Bangladesh, urging the BCB to take reciprocal action. In turn, the BCB asked the ICC to relocate its games from India to Sri Lanka over security concerns, saying its team will not travel to India.

Following two days of silence, the ICC – led by former BCCI chief Jay Shah – and BCB held a call to discuss the issue, with the tournament’s and Bangladesh’s opening match just more than a month away.

According to a report on ESPNCricinfo, the ICC told the BCB during the meeting that Bangladesh will need to travel to India or risk forfeiting points.

However, the BCB refuted the report and termed its claims as “completely false”.

“The BCB has taken note of certain reports published in a section of the media suggesting that the board has been issued an ultimatum. Such claims are completely false, unfounded and do not reflect the nature or content of the communication received from the ICC,” it said.

Earlier, Bangladesh’s interim government also banned the broadcast ‍of the IPL, saying the unceremonious dumping of a “star player defied logic” and had “hurt people”.

It is the latest flashpoint in a growing dispute with neighbouring India, which has now extended to cricket ties between the two nations.

The ongoing tensions flared in recent weeks after a 25-year-old Hindu man was lynched and burned publicly in Bangladesh following allegations of blasphemy.

A few days later, Hindutva activists tried to storm the Bangladesh High Commission in New Delhi as they rallied against the neighbouring nation for failing to protect its Hindu minorities.

Diplomatic relations between the once-close allies have been sharply tested since August last year, when former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled to New Delhi from Dhaka after an uprising against her rule.

Bangladesh blames India for a number of its troubles, including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s support for Hasina when she was in power.

Caracas, January 6, 2025 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Brazilian government will send medical equipment and medicine to Venezuela in the wake of the January 3 US bombings against military sites and other infrastructure.

Brazilian Health Minister Alexandre Padilha made the announcement Tuesday, invoking humanitarian reasons as well as regional health concerns, after medicine warehouses in Venezuela’s La Guaira state were destroyed by the US attacks.

“We are trying to mobilize, via the public healthcare sector and private companies, dialysis supplies and medicines to support the Venezuelan people after this distribution center was targeted,” Padilha said in a press conference.

The minister recalled Venezuelan solidarity in shipping oxygen to the Brazilian city of Manaus in 2021 during a coronavirus crisis. Venezuela’s eastern neighbor will also deploy healthcare professionals as part of its solidarity efforts.

The offer of assistance follows the Lula da Silva government’s firm condemnation of the US strikes and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores as “unacceptable” and a “dangerous precedent for the international community.”

According to local reports, the warehouses belonging to the Venezuelan Social Security Institute (IVSS) were destroyed during the US bombing of La Guaira port in the early hours of Saturday.

In a statement, the IVSS reported that the lost supplies were destined for renal patients and denounced the “terrorist character of the US government” in targeting healthcare facilities.

Nelare Bermúdez, from La Guaira state’s healthcare authority, said that three-months worth of medicines for renal patients had been lost. Nevertheless, she vowed that authorities will work to ensure that healthcare services are not affected.

Venezuela has an estimated 16,000 patients suffering from chronic kidney conditions. The direct destruction of supplies adds to difficulties chronic patients already face under US sanctions. A 2018 CEPR report found that 300,000 Venezuelans with heart and other conditions were at risk as a consequence of US economic coercive measures.

In recent years, sanctions have also seen Venezuelan authorities face prohibitions, delays and overpricing in acquiring medical equipment and medicines. During the Covid-19 pandemic, Venezuela suffered delays in securing necessary vaccines.

Washington’s January 3 attacks have killed a reported 80 people, with 32 Cuban nationals confirmed dead. Venezuelan authorities have yet to disclose information on damages and casualties from the strikes.

On Tuesday, Acting President Delcy Rodríguez decreed seven days of mourning in honor of the Venezuelans killed in the US military operation.

“Our young martyrs gave their lives to defend our country,” Rodríguez told reporters. “My heart was broken by the images of the fallen bodies but I know they sacrificed themselves for the values of this nation.”

Rodríguez was sworn in on Monday after the Supreme Court declared a “temporary absence” in the Venezuelan presidency. Maduro, as well as First Lady and legislator Cilia Flores, pleaded not guilty to charges including cocaine importation conspiracy during their arraignment hearing on January 5.

The USmilitary operations followed months of buildup and regime-change threats from the Trump administration. The US president has threatened Rodríguez and the Venezuelan government to accept US demands, including favorable oil deals.

[UPDATE: Venezuelan authorities reported the arrival of a shipment with supplies for dialysis patients on Tuesday night at Maiquetía airport but did not specify its origin and contents.]

Leader of Yemen’s Southern Transitional Council removed from government with the Saudi-led coalition saying he ‘fled to unknown location’.

Over the weekend, the United States carried out a large-scale military strike against Venezuela and abducted President Nicolas Maduro in a major escalation that sent shockwaves across Latin America.

On Monday morning, US President Donald Trump doubled down, threatening action against the governments of Colombia, Cuba and Mexico unless they “get their act together”, claiming he is countering drug trafficking and securing US interests in the Western Hemisphere.

The remarks revive deep tensions over US interference in Latin America. Many of the governments targeted by Trump have little appetite for Washington’s involvement, but their armed forces lack the capacity to keep the US at arm’s length.

Latin America’s military capabilities

The US has the strongest military in the world and spends more on its military than the total budgets of the next 10 largest military spenders combined. In 2025, the US defence budget was $895bn, roughly 3.1 percent of its gross domestic product.

According to the 2025 Global Firepower rankings, Brazil has the most powerful military in Latin America and is ranked 11th globally.

Mexico ranks 32nd globally, Colombia 46th, Venezuela 50th and Cuba 67th. All of these countries are significantly below the US military in all metrics, including the number of active personnel, military aircraft, combat tanks, naval assets and their military budgets.

In a standard war involving tanks, planes and naval power, the US maintains overwhelming superiority.

The only notable metric that these countries have over the US is their paramilitary forces, which operate alongside the regular armed forces, often using asymmetrical warfare and unconventional tactics against conventional military strategies.

Paramilitaries across Latin America

Several Latin American countries have long histories of paramilitary and irregular armed groups that have often played a role in the internal security of these countries. These groups are typically armed, organised and politically influential but operate outside the regular military chain of command.

Cuba has the world’s third largest paramilitary force, made up of more than 1.14 million members, as reported by Global Firepower. These groups include state-controlled militias and neighbourhood defence committees. The largest of these, the Territorial Troops Militia, serves as a civilian reserve aimed at assisting the regular army against external threats or during internal crises.

In Venezuela, members of pro-government armed civilian groups known as “colectivos” have been accused of enforcing political control and intimidating opponents. Although not formally part of the armed forces, they are widely seen as operating with state tolerance or support, particularly during periods of unrest under Maduro.

In Colombia, right-wing paramilitary groups emerged in the 1980s to fight left-wing rebels. Although officially demobilised in the mid-2000s, many later re-emerged as criminal or neo-paramilitary organisations, remaining active in rural areas. The earliest groups were organised with the involvement of the Colombian military following guidance from US counterinsurgency advisers during the Cold War.

In Mexico, heavily armed drug cartels function as de facto paramilitary forces. Groups such as the Zetas, originally formed by former soldiers, possess military-grade weapons and exercise territorial control, often outgunning local police and challenging the state’s authority. The Mexican military has increasingly been deployed in law enforcement roles in response.

History of US interference in Latin America

Over the past two centuries, the US has repeatedly interfered in Latin America.

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the so-called Banana Wars saw US forces deployed across Central America to protect corporate interests.

In 1934, President Franklin D Roosevelt introduced the “Good Neighbor Policy”, pledging nonintervention.

Yet during the Cold War, the US financed operations to overthrow elected governments, often coordinated by the CIA, founded in 1947.

Panama is the only Latin American country the US has formally invaded, which occurred in 1989 under President George HW Bush. “Operation Just Cause” ostensibly was aimed at removing President Manuel Noriega, who was later convicted of drug trafficking and other offences.

The U.S. Army has released the first images showing parts of the design of a very early prototype of the next-generation iteration of the Abrams tank, or M1E3. The service had earlier confirmed to TWZ that it had received the tank last month, meeting its previously stated end-of-year delivery goal.

The M1E3 images were first shared today through Army social media accounts. Defense Daily had first reported that the tank had been delivered as planned back in December.

“We’re proud to announce the completion of the first M1E3 early prototype — a cutting-edge technology demonstrator designed to revolutionize the battlefield,” a post on Instagram accompanying the images reads. “Produced by Roush and powered by lessons learned from earlier risk reduction activities, this prototype showcases the Army’s commitment to speed, agility, and Soldier-centric solutions.”

“Key highlights” are said to include “advanced software integration,” “enhanced mobility,” and “unmatched lethality.”

“This milestone proves the Army’s ability to rapidly apply lessons learned and deliver enabling technologies to Soldiers faster than ever before,” the Instagram post continues. “Testing kicks off in early 2026, and we can’t wait to see the results!”

An Army spokesperson also provided an extremely similar statement directly to TWZ back in December.

“The Army has completed the first M1E3 early prototype as a technology demonstrator. The Army-led design was produced by Roush and incorporates lessons learned from earlier risk reduction activities,” they told us. “This activity is about moving with speed – showing that the Army can apply lessons learned and getting key enabling technologies (software, mobility and lethality) into the hands of Soldiers quickly. Testing will begin in early 2026.”

The two M1E3 images available currently, seen earlier in this story and in parts below, only offer limited views of the prototype. One of them is a partial view of the tank from the front. The other looks to offer another view of the front end, but from a forward-facing perspective along the side. It is also possible that both images may show the rear end of the tank with the turret facing backward. Without having a full view, it is not immediately clear.

From what can be seen of the turret, it looks similar in some respects to the ones found on existing M1 tank variants, but may also have at least a slightly lower overall profile. It also has a prominent sensor window to the left of the mantlet that is not found on other Abrams tanks.

The main gun looks to be similar, if not identical, at least externally, to the 120mm M256 that arms current-generation M1s. The possibility had been raised in the past that the newest iteration of the Abrams might come with a larger caliber or otherwise more advanced main gun, and this could still be a potential addition to the M1E3 as development progresses. The Army has confirmed its intent to add an autoloader, something the U.S. military and many other armed forces in the West have historically eschewed in tank designs. The M1E3’s complete armament package might otherwise expand, including with the ability to launch loitering munitions.

When it comes to the hull, what is seen of it looks to be substantially different from existing versions of the Abrams, regardless of whether it is being viewed from the front or the rear, with two prominent hatches. There is also what looks to be a camera that could be associated with a distributed vision system, as well as new LED lights. All M1 variants have a single hatch at the front for the driver, with the rest of the other three members of the crew situated in the turret. The rear end of the tanks is entirely defined by their gas turbine powerpacks.

Altogether, the images show a design that is also notably different from the AbramsX next-generation demonstrator that General Dynamics Land Systems, the current prime contractor for the M1, first unveiled in 2022.

AbramsX Technology Demonstrator on the Move

A lower-profile turret and a significant reorganization of crew positions are among the features that have long been expected to appear on the M1E3 prototype. The addition of an autolader would also allow the total number of crew members to be reduced from four to three. These are all changes that would help truncate the design overall, which, in turn, would help shave off valuable pounds, if not tons. Weight creep has been a major issue for the Abrams family since the original version entered service in the 1980s, with the latest M1A2 System Enhanced Package Version 3 (SEPv3) variant tipping the scales at some 78 tons. The Army has said previously that it is hoping to get that down to 60 tons on the M1E3.

The Army has also confirmed in the past that the M1E3 will have a new hybrid propulsion system and drive train, offering substantially better fuel economy than the gas turbine powerplant used on current Abrams tanks.

“It’ll be hybrid. It will not be fully electric,” Dr. Alex Miller, Chief Technology Officer and Senior Advisor for Science and Technology to the Chief of Staff of the Army, had told TWZ‘s Howard Altman on the sidelines of the Association of the U.S. Army’s (AUSA) main annual conference last October. “We don’t want fully electric, because there’s no place to charge. You need the liquid fuel to actually generate power. But what we’re seeing, and I have not put this to the test, so this is just sort of the math behind it, is the way that they’re going to deliver it, it’ll be about 40 percent more fuel efficient.”

A more integrated active protection system (APS) is also set to be an important feature of the M1E3. A portion of the Army’s Abrams tanks have already received the Israeli-designed and combat-proven Trophy APS, but in an add-on form that has contributed to the aforementioned weight growth. An APS that is more streamlined and otherwise better optimized for the M1E3 could be lighter, as well as offer other benefits, including when it comes to the tank’s physical structure and power generation requirements. An APS with added functionality, especially one that can also be used to provide an extra layer of defense against the growing threat posed by drones, would also be desirable. A new version of Trophy specifically designed to be better capable of engaging uncrewed aerial systems was unveiled in 2024, but there are also other potential options in the growing APS market space.

Trophy® APS – The land maneuver enabler

As TWZ has previously written:

“The M1E3 is expected to feature a host of other advancements, including in terms of targeting capabilities and other onboard sensors, as well as networked communications systems. The Army’s current push to accelerate work on the next-generation tank puts heavy emphasis on modularity and open architectures to make it easier to integrate and refine capabilities during the development process, as well as incorporate improvements down the road.”

Feedback from experimentation with the early prototype the Army now has in hand will help the service refine and evolve those requirements. The service has also said it hopes to eventually acquire a full platoon’s worth of prototypes to further help in this regard.

“The reason we want to get the platoon out earlier is because we want the armor brigades to be able to tell us what works and what doesn’t,” Miller, the Army’s chief technologist, also told TWZ back in October. “And then, rather than wait three or four more years, do [sic] some feedback then, allow GD [General Dynamics] to make those changes, and then get the next iteration out the next year.”

“What we didn’t want to do is the first time that a tanker sees the new tank is [when] it’s done, you can’t change anything, and it’s six years from now,” he continued. We want to “get feedback for the seats. Get feedback for the gunnery. Get feedback for the autoloader.”

It is worth noting here that work on the M1E3 comes at a time when the general utility of tanks and other heavy armored vehicles in future conflicts is being heavily debated, including by the Army itself. The service announced last year that it was cancelling its plans to acquire 500 examples of the M10 Booker, a tracked light tank-like armored fire support vehicle with a 105mm main gun developed by GDLS and intended to support dismounted infantry units.

The Army’s New M10 Booker: Deploy Fast and Carry a Big Gun

More details about the current design and the Army’s future plans are likely to emerge as the service starts experimenting now with its first M1E3 early prototype.

Howard Altman contributed to this story.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

The United States has raised the prospect of using military force to take control of Greenland as leaders in Europe and Canada rallied behind the Arctic territory, saying it belongs to its people.

In a statement on Tuesday, the White House said that US President Donald Trump sees acquiring Greenland, which is part of Denmark, as a national security priority, necessary to “deter our adversaries in the Arctic region”.

“The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the ​US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief’s disposal,” it said.

Any attempt by the US to seize Greenland from longtime ally Denmark would send shockwaves through the NATO alliance and deepen the divide between Trump and European leaders.

The opposition has not deterred Trump, however.

His interest in Greenland, initially aired in 2019 during his first term in office, has been rekindled following the US’s abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in an attack on Caracas.

Emboldened by the operation, Trump has said that “American dominance in the Western Hemisphere will never be questioned again”, and has stepped up pressure on both Colombia and Cuba. He has also argued that controlling Greenland is vital to US national security, claiming the island “is covered with Russian and Chinese ships” and that Denmark lacks the capacity to protect it.

Greenland, the world’s largest island, but with a population of just 57,000 people, has repeatedly said it does not ‍want to be part of the US.

Its strategic location between Europe and North America makes it a critical site for the US ballistic missile defence system, while its mineral wealth aligns with Washington’s ambition to reduce reliance on Chinese exports.

Greenland ‘belongs to its people’

The White House statement on Tuesday came as leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom joined Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen in issuing a statement reaffirming that Greenland “belongs to its people”.

“It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland,” they said.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney also voiced support, announcing that Governor General Mary Simon, who is of Inuit descent, and Minister of Foreign Affairs Anita Anand would visit Greenland early next month.

In a separate statement, Nordic foreign ministers – from Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark – also stressed Greenland’s right to decide its own affairs. They also noted they had increased their investments in Arctic security, and offered to do more in consultation with the US and other NATO allies.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk also warned that threats against a NATO member undermined the alliance’s credibility. “No member should attack or threaten another ‌member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. Otherwise, NATO would lose its meaning,” he said.

Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed the European leaders’ pledge of solidarity and renewed his ‌call to the US for a “respectful dialogue”.

Denmark, meanwhile, rejected Trump’s assertion that it is unable to protect Greenland.

“We do not share this image that Greenland ‍is plastered with Chinese investments… ⁠nor that there are Chinese warships up and down along Greenland,” Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs Lars Lokke Rasmussen said, adding that the US was welcome to invest more on the island.

Greenland’s government said it had asked for an urgent meeting with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, together with Rasmussen, to discuss the situation.

Also on Tuesday, Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry, whom Trump appointed last month as US special envoy to Greenland, said he was not interested in talking to people in Denmark or European diplomats over Greenland.

Instead, he said he wants to have conversations directly with residents of Greenland. “I want to talk to people who want an opportunity to improve the quality of life in Greenland,” the Republican said on a Fox News radio show.

Separately, The Wall Street Journal reported that Rubio had told US lawmakers during a congressional briefing that the recent threats did not signal an imminent invasion of Greenland and that the goal is to ‌buy the island from Denmark.

The White House deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, also dismissed concerns about Danish sovereignty.

“You can ⁠talk all you want about international niceties and everything else,” Miller told CNN. “But we live in a world, in the real world, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that ​is governed by power.”

Members of Congress, including some of Trump’s fellow Republicans, pushed back.

“When Denmark and Greenland make it clear that Greenland is not for sale, the United States must honour its treaty obligations and respect the sovereignty and ‌territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Denmark,” said Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen and Republican Senator Thom Tillis, the co-chairs of the Senate NATO Observer Group.

BREAKINGBREAKING,

US president says oil will be sold at market prices and that he will control resulting revenues.

United States President Donald Trump has announced that Venezuela will turn over between 30 and 50 million barrels of sanctioned oil.

“This Oil will be sold at its Market Price, and that money will be controlled by me, as President of the United States of America, to ensure it is used to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States!” Trump said on his platform Truth Social on Tuesday.

“I have asked Energy Secretary Chris Wright to execute this plan, immediately. It will be taken by storage ships, and brought directly to unloading docks in the United States.”

More to follow…

Tehran, Iran – Bolder protests are being recorded across Iran amid an increasing deployment of armed security officers as the government’s efforts to contain an unravelling economic situation fall flat.

Footage circulating online showed huge protests on Tuesday night in the city of Abdanan, in the central province of Ilam, where several major demonstrations have taken place over the past week.

Thousands of people, from children accompanied by parents to the elderly, were filmed walking and chanting in the streets of the small city while helicopters flew overhead. The protesters appeared to have vastly outnumbered the security personnel deployed to contain them.

In the city of Ilam, the province’s capital, videos showed security forces storming the Imam Khomeini Hospital to root out and arrest protesters, something rights group Amnesty International said violates international law and again shows “how far the Iranian authorities are willing to go to crush dissent”.

The hospital became a target after protests in the county of Malekshahi earlier this week, where multiple demonstrators were shot dead while gathering at the entrance of a military base. Some wounded protesters were taken to the hospital.

Several graphic videos from the scene of the shooting circulating online showed people being sprayed with live fire and falling to the ground as they fled from the gate. The local governor said the shooting is under investigation.

State-linked media confirmed that at least three people were killed. They also announced on Tuesday that a police officer was shot dead after armed clashes took place in the aftermath of funeral processions for the dead protesters.

In Tehran, numerous videos showed traders and business owners at the Grand Bazaar, who closed down their shops, clashing with security forces in riot gear with batons and using tear gas.

People could be heard chanting “freedom” in the bazaar and shouting “dishonourable” at police officers. “Execute me if you want, I’m not a rioter,” one man shouted when pressured by security forces, to cheers and clapping from the crowd.

‘Show no mercy’

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said, in his first reaction to the protests this week, that rioters must be “put in their place”.

Meanwhile, Chief Justice Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei said, “We will show no mercy to rioters this time.”

The situation was similarly tense in adjacent streets and neighbourhoods, where the protests were originally started by shopkeepers on December 28. Multiple other major shopping areas in Tehran saw huge strikes and protests on Tuesday, including Yaftabad, where police were met with shouted slogans, “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon; my life for Iran”.

Iran’s government has been accused of providing support for armed groups in Gaza and Lebanon.

More clashes were recorded around the Sina Hospital in downtown Tehran, but the Tehran University of Medical Science said in a statement that the tear gas canisters filmed inside the hospital compound were not thrown by security forces.

Demonstrations also occurred in Lorestan and Kermanshah in the west; Mashhad in the northeast; Qazvin, south of the capital; the city of Shahrekord in Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari to the southwest; and the city of Hamedan, where a woman was filmed braving a police water cannon in the winter cold.

A foreign-based human rights monitor opposed to the theocratic establishment in Iran claimed at least 35 people have been killed in the protests so far. The Iranian state has not announced casualty figures, and Al Jazeera could not independently verify any.

Cooking oil triples in price

The country continues to have one of the highest inflation rates in the world, especially when it comes to the rampant increases in prices of essential food items.

The government of moderate President Masoud Pezeshkian says it is implementing plans to make sure the economic situation is contained, but a rapid decline continues to unfold.

The country’s embattled currency, the rial, was priced at more than 1.47 million to the US dollar in the open market in Tehran on Tuesday, marking yet another new all-time low that showed a lack of public and investor trust.

The price of cooking oil has experienced by far the sharpest price surge this week, more than tripling and falling further out of reach of the decimated Iranian middle class, which has seen its purchasing power dwindle since 2018, when the US unilaterally abandoned a 2015 nuclear deal and reimposed harsh sanctions.

The development comes after Pezeshkian presented a budget for the upcoming Iranian calendar year, starting in late March, that eliminated a subsidised currency rate used for certain imports, including foodstuffs.

Some economists have welcomed the rationale behind the move, which is to eliminate the rent-distributing subsidised currency rate in an attempt to combat corruption, particularly since the cheaper currency has only been abused and has failed to curb food prices.

The move was expected to lead to increased prices in the short term and face pushback from interest groups within the establishment that have benefitted from the cheap currency for years. But the oil price jump was very sudden, prompting the government to announce official prices of its own, though it remains to be seen whether the market will listen.

Using the resources to be freed from eliminating the cheaper subsidised currency, the government has offered to allocate online credits, each amounting to 10 million rials ($7 at the current exchange rate), to help people buy food.

Two renowned singers, Homayoun Shajarian and Alireza Ghorbani, joined the ranks of many people and celebrities online who said they would stop their professional activities, including scheduled concerts, in solemn observance and support for the protests.

“How can our officials lay down their heads and sleep?” asked Ali Daei, a legend of Iranian football and a respected national figure among the people, in a video interview released on Tuesday that is going viral.

“Perhaps many of them are not even Iranians, since they don’t feel sympathy for the Iranian nation.”

Barcelona begin the defence of their Spanish Super Cup crown against Athletic Bilbao on Wednesday in Saudi Arabia.

Barcelona coach Hansi Flick said that retaining the Spanish Super Cup this week would be a boost for his team’s other ambitions this season.

The record 15-time champions face Athletic Bilbao on Wednesday in a semifinal clash at the King Abdullah Sports City stadium in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Barca won the competition last season as the first part of a domestic treble, the first triumph of Flick’s reign, followed by triumphs in La Liga and the Copa del Rey.

“This tournament is a little bit different [to the equivalent competition] in Germany, but I like it,” said former Bayern Munich coach Flick.

“For us to win the Super Cup [last season] gave us a lot of energy for the rest of the season, and this is also what we want this year.”

Even though significant questions remain about their defending, Barcelona are the favourites to win the Super Cup and lead La Liga after nine consecutive top flight victories.

Despite being outplayed by neighbours Espanyol in a tense derby clash on Saturday, late goals and a sensational performance from stopper Joan Garcia helped the Catalans claim a 2-0 victory.

Flick insisted his team had to perform better at the back if they were to succeed in the sixth edition of the tournament in Saudi Arabia.

“It will not be an easy match [if] we make the same mistakes as on Saturday; it will not be easy, so we have to work on our things,” continued Flick.

“We have to play much better in the defence; we have to play connected as one team, and this is what I missed on Saturday, so we have to make things much better.”

Barcelona target Cancelo could be on the move from Saudi Arabia

Central defender Ronald Araujo could return to action this week after an extended mental health break.

The Uruguayan was granted leave for about a month following a red card in Barcelona’s 3-0 Champions League defeat by Chelsea in November.

“We will see this training [session] today, and I will also want to speak with him, so we have not decided how to do it tomorrow,” said Flick.

“I think it takes time, so if he feels ready for tomorrow, maybe we will change something, but at the moment, it’s not our plan to do this.”

Flick confirmed that Barcelona were close to signing Joao Cancelo from Al-Hilal, who is on loan until the end of the season, but the deal has not been completed.

“With Joao, maybe he can give us more options also as full-back, both sides in the offence, good quality, but [as far as] I know, it’s not done,” said Flick.

Cancelo spent the 2023-24 season on loan at Barcelona from Manchester City.

Athletic, eighth in La Liga, last won the Super Cup in 2021, beating Barcelona in the final, and have lifted the trophy on three occasions.

Only the Catalans and Real Madrid, with 13 triumphs, have a better record. On Thursday, Xabi Alonso’s Real Madrid face city rivals Atletico Madrid in the other Super Cup semifinal.