Today

Iran states it has more missiles now than it had during the 12 Day War with Israel. While the accuracy of that claim is questionable, experts who follow Tehran’s missile program say that the country has ramped up production in an effort to have its arsenal ready to overwhelm Israeli missile defenses, which were degraded during the war. All this comes amid growing concerns about a new conflict over Iran’s nuclear program.

“Our missile power today far surpasses that of the 12-Day War,” Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi recently proclaimed. “The enemy in the recent 12-day war failed to achieve all its objectives and was defeated.”

“Iran’s defense production has improved both in quantity and quality compared to before the 12-day Israeli-imposed war in June,” Brig. Gen. Aziz Nasirzadeh, the country’s defense minister, said on Monday.

Meanwhile, Iranian officials have told Ali Vaez, the Iran project director at the International Crisis Group, that “missile factories are working 24 hours a day,” The New York Times reported. Vaez added that if there is another war, “they hope to fire 2,000 at once to overwhelm Israeli defenses, not 500 over 12 days” as they did in June. “Israel feels the job is unfinished and sees no reason not to resume the conflict, so Iran is doubling down preparedness for the next round.”

While “it’s not clear exactly how many missiles in a larger volley the Islamic Republic may choose to fire, there is no doubt that they may still try to find a way to overwhelm either interceptors or dependent sites with a greater number of projectiles fired at once,” Vaez added.

In addition to increasing the number of missiles it is producing, Iran is also applying lessons learned from the 12-Day War to improve their effectiveness, Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) think tank, told TWZ.

“The Islamic Republic also learned how to fire less and get more bang for your buck based on the targets and based on the location and based on the firing sequence, or the launch formula, that the regime employed when it fired for some bases that were further east in Iran during the 12-Day War,” he explained. “There is no doubt the regime wants to improve the lethality of its missile force. It certainly has learned a lot between Operation True Promise One, True Promise Two and True Promise Three.”

During the conflict, Iran claimed it used what it calls the Fattah-1 medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM). Authorities in Iran explicitly touted those, the Haj Qassem and Kheibar Shekan, as offering high terminal maneuverability and/or high speeds specifically intended to reduce their vulnerability to missile defense interceptors. You can see videos claiming to show Fattah-1 missiles hitting Israel.

While it is unclear exactly what mix of new missiles Iran is building, increasing the production of higher-speed, more survivable ones would be a problem for Israel, given their increased ability to pierce missile defenses.

Improving the overall effectiveness of their ballistic missile barrages is clearly a top priority for Tehran, just as defending against future attacks is for Israel. As we previously noted, Iran launched 631 missiles during the 12-Day War, of which 500 reached Israel, according to assertions made by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). Of those missiles that did land on Israeli soil, 243 hit open areas, requiring no air defense response. A total of 36 missiles hit populated areas, while 221 missiles were intercepted. That represented an 86% success rate, the Israeli analysis claimed. We cannot independently verify the details provided by Israel.

Still, having to fire so many interceptors placed a huge strain on Israel’s vaunted integrated air and missile defense system (IADS), according to several published reports, which the IDF denied. The U.S. expended many advanced interceptors during the onslaught, as well.

“U.S. and Israeli defenses were stretched thin and vast numbers of interceptors were needed to defend against Iran’s ragged retaliation,” the Foreign Policy Research Institute concluded.

Beyond interceptions, Israel managed to destroy a significant number of Iran’s launchers during its aerial interdiction campaign over Iran, as well as temporarily blocking or destroying missile storage sites, and disrupting command and control of Iranian missile forces during the war, greatly reducing Tehran’s ability to get off shots. It is unknown how many missiles were destroyed on the ground during the war and how many were left untouched.

“Iran also has learned about its vulnerabilities, and it is seeking to build back better, as safely as possible,” Taleblu suggested. “But the rate and the speed at which it rebuilds, probably in the short term, may outpace the rate and the speed at which Israel is rearming to defend itself.”

We detailed the overall battle of attrition between Iranian standoff weapons and Israeli (and U.S.) air defenses during the war. What is happening after the conflict is part of a broader issue with missile defense — the enemy can, and usually does, seek to outproduce the defensive capacity of the missile shield, and usually can at a lower comparative cost.

You can read more about Israel’s IADS in our deep dive here.

Iranian officials say concerns about their missiles, as well as their nuclear energy program, are being used as a pretext for possible future attacks.

“What does this issue have to do with the West that it feels entitled to comment on the range of Iran’s missiles?” Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani rhetorically asked on Monday. “No country has the right to interfere in the independent defensive capabilities of another nation.”

As it works to rebuild its missile arsenal, Iran is getting help from China.

“European intelligence sources say several shipments of sodium perchlorate, the main precursor in the production of the solid propellant that powers Iran’s mid-range conventional missiles, have arrived from China to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas,” CNN reported late last month. 

The shipments, containing some 2,000 tons of sodium perchlorate, began arriving on Sept. 29, the cable network explained. They were bought by Iran from Chinese suppliers in the wake of the war.

“The purchases are believed to be part of a determined effort to rebuild the Islamic Republic’s depleted missile stocks,” the news outlet added. “Several of the cargo ships and Chinese entities involved are under sanctions from the United States.”

“China is appearing to play a key role here by providing precursor chemicals that do go into solid propellant, rocket fuel, and oxidizer,” Taleblu observed.

Beyond assisting Iran’s offensive missile capabilities, China is reportedly considering a deal to give Tehran advanced HQ-9 air defense systems to help make up for those destroyed by Israel during the 12-Day War. While Iran’s long-range weapons arsenal are often the focus, rebuilding the country’s air defenses is also clearly a top priority after Israel quickly obtained air supremacy over the country.

The issue of new Iranian missile production comes against the backdrop of concerns that Tehran has developed a new facility to continue what U.S. officials claim is its nuclear weapons ambitions. The U.S. says it destroyed a great deal of Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons during June’s Operation Midnight Hammer, in which U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit stealth bombers dropped 14 30,000-pound GBU-57/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bunker buster bombs on Iran’s Fordow and Natanz nuclear facilities. A U.S. nuclear-powered, guided missile (SSGN) submarine in the Central Command Area of Responsibility launched more than two dozen Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles against key surface infrastructure targets at Isfahan, officials added.

However, as The New York Times noted, Iran “appears to be continuing to work on a new enrichment site known as Pickaxe Mountain. It has refused to give international inspectors access to that site or any other suspected nuclear sites other than those already declared.”

The result “is a dangerous stalemate — with no negotiations, no certainty over Iran’s stockpile, no independent oversight,” the newspaper explained. “And many in the Gulf believe that makes another Israeli attack on Iran almost inevitable, given Israeli officials’ long-held view that Iran’s nuclear program is an existential threat.”

The pace of Iran’s missile development could be a large factor for the timing of any future conflict with Israel, Taleblu told us.

“There is a race to build back better. For Israel, it’s interceptors. For the Islamic Republic of Iran, it’s medium-range ballistic missiles,” Taleblu posited. “The fuzzy math between the two may determine the time when the next round between Israel and Iran takes place.”

Contact the author: [email protected]

This article discusses the important issues underlying the #MeToo movement that has spread across the globe. On the one hand, the #MeToo movement has succeeded in gaining cross-border support for victims of sexual harassment, so that victims do not feel alone and have the courage to speak out. However, the #MeToo movement has not yet fully succeeded in reaching all groups. This article will explore why this massive online campaign has not truly reached those who need it most: victims without internet access, without digital devices, or who are technologically illiterate. As a result, they remain unable to voice their experiences of abuse and receive the support they need.

The #MeToo movement has indeed succeeded in changing the way we view, understand, and even produce new regulations in many countries.  This demonstrates the power of the internet.  However, the reality is that millions of victims living in villages, remote areas, or from poor families still feel alone. This is why this article will discuss the three main obstacles that have prevented #MeToo from being fully successful: limited digital access, inequality in technological capabilities and security, and weak direct activism in the field.

In my opinion, #MeToo is still far from successful. Success in changing laws has not been followed by success in helping those with proven limitations.  These three main reasons will be discussed in more detail in this article. #MeToo was initially successful because it spread quickly on the internet.  Platforms such as Twitter can connect people from all over the world. That’s amazing! However, this initial success mainly occurred in developed countries that have cheap and fast internet. This means that the movement reached more wealthy, educated people living in big cities. This shows that the movement was biased from the start because it only focused on issues faced by internet-savvy people. This was also evident when #MeToo, which had been around since 2006, only went viral and spread worldwide when Hollywood actresses started using #MeToo on social media in 2017.

Access barriers directly undermine the success of #MeToo. The movement fails to reach all those affected by abuse who live in villages, in conflict areas, and those who are technologically illiterate and lack financial resources. It is not only these disparities that set them apart, but also the lack of support and justice that is part of this difference.  Victims without a signal, without a cell phone, or without data do not have the tools to know their rights. This situation is a very common problem for many people.

This failure results in “solidarity poverty.” According to a study by Amalia, A. R., Raodah, P., & Wardani, N. K. (2024), “In low- and middle-income countries, 300 million fewer women than men use mobile internet.” This shows that the issue of access is not only a geographical problem but also an economic and gender issue.  Because they lack the ability to speak out, the #MeToo movement does not truly represent all victims, but only those who have the privilege of being connected.

In addition, there is also a gap in digital literacy and security that will become a second barrier preventing victims from successfully participating in the #MeToo movement. Victims who are technologically illiterate do not know how to use social media safely and anonymously. Furthermore, they lack knowledge about how to store digital evidence so that it is not lost. They do not understand privacy regulations, the dangers of doxing (spreading personal data), or cyber attacks. This ignorance causes them to fear speaking out even more than they fear the perpetrators.

In many countries, this issue is made more difficult by the threat of retaliation through legislation (e.g., defamation laws/cybercrime laws) that can be used against victims and lead to revictimization (ICJ, 2023). When victims speak without legal representation or digital literacy, they risk being perceived as lying. Victims in large cities have better digital safety nets than those in remote areas. This is why “Solidarity with Quotas” emerged. Only those who are digitally literate and financially secure can speak up, while others remain silent out of fear.

Due to these limitations, the #MeToo movement around the world has been dominated by issues occurring in large offices, elite campuses, or among public figures.  In line with the criticism expressed by PUSAD Paramadina, the #MeToo movement in Indonesia is considered to have not yet reached a wider audience, as the discussion is still limited to those who are literate in social media and come from the middle to upper classes (Kartika, 2019). This criticism is not only relevant in Indonesia, but also in many other countries.

However, the problems with the #MeToo movement are not limited to the internet.  The failure of activism to change offline behavior is also a weakness. Solidarity on the internet can indeed raise donations and spread information, but it often fails to translate this momentum into equitable direct assistance.  The digital resources and extraordinary public attention received by this movement have not been wisely allocated to the areas most in need. This shows that digital activism often focuses only on the most popular topics but has no real impact on the most vulnerable victims.

Despite the large number of new laws passed as a result of #MeToo, integrated service centers, shelters, and legal services are still concentrated in capital cities or large cities.  Victims who are not within reach of these services must face significant distances and costs to obtain justice. This situation shows that inequality in access to protection is still deeply rooted.  This is in line with research published by Jurnal Perempuan (2024), which states that Online Gender-Based Violence (KBGO) is not an anomaly, but a continuation of gender-based violence that has been entrenched for centuries in patriarchal systems. Therefore, gender inequality will only persist in the real world if the struggle is only carried out in the online realm and is not balanced with the provision of real services for victims.

Three major issues hindering the success of the #MeToo movement are limited access, limited digital capabilities, and a lack of direct participation in the field. This shows that a digital struggle without real interaction risks losing sight of its main goal: justice for all victims, not just those connected to the virtual world.

The world has been changed by the #MeToo movement. However, the world it has changed is one that is connected to the internet.  Millions of other women continue to struggle in silence, in places where there is no signal and no courage.  Meanwhile, some people still cannot access it. This movement has raised awareness around the world, but there are still people who are left behind, hindered by digital poverty and the gap between those who have access to technology and those who do not.  Digital justice should not be limited to viral hashtags or phone screens. In truth, solidarity is not just about thousands of posts or supportive comments. Rather, it comes from the courage to step into the real world, listen to those who are unheard, and ensure that protection is available for both those who can reach the network and those left behind. Because true justice does not require popularity to be seen, and true solidarity is measured by how far we collaborate with those who are most silent, not by how much we speak.

About 50,000 people are expected to attend the 12-day climate summit in the Brazilian city of Belem.

The 30th annual United Nations climate change conference (COP30) has started in the Brazilian city of Belem, with leaders calling for countries to take a united approach against global warming.

“In this arena of COP30, your job here is not to fight one another – your job here is to fight this climate crisis, together,” the UN’s climate chief, Simon Stiell, told delegates on Monday.

Some 50,000 people from more than 190 countries are expected to attend the 12-day event, which is being held at the edge of the Brazilian Amazon rainforest.

Addressing the conference, Stiell said that previous climate talks had helped, but that there was “much more work to do”.

The UN climate boss noted that countries would have to move “much, much faster” in driving down greenhouse gas emissions. “Lamenting is not a strategy. We need solutions,” he said.

His comments came as a new UN analysis of countries’ climate plans found that the pledged reductions fall far short of the drop needed by 2035 to limit temperatures to 1.5C (2.7F) above pre-industrial temperatures.

If this threshold is breached, the world will experience far more severe impacts than it has so far, experts say.

“Climate change is no longer a threat of the future. It is a tragedy of the present,” Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva stressed at the start of COP30.

Brazil’s leader condemned those seeking to undermine efforts to combat the climate crisis.

“They attack institutions, they attack science and universities,” he said. “It’s time to inflict a new defeat on the deniers.”

The United States is not sending any delegates to COP30 in keeping with President Donald Trump’s anti-climate change stance.

“It’s a good thing that they are not sending anyone. It wasn’t going to be constructive if they did,” the US’s former special envoy for climate, Todd Stern, said of the Trump administration’s decision.

COP30 President Andre Correa do Lago said the US’s absence “has opened some space for the world to see what developing countries are doing”.

Pablo Inuma Flores, an Indigenous leader from Peru, urged world leaders to do more than simply give pledges at this year’s conference.

“We want to make sure that they don’t keep promising, that they will start protecting, because we as Indigenous people are the ones who suffer from these impacts of climate change,” he said.

In a letter to COP30 that was published on Monday, dozens of scientists expressed their fears about the melting of glaciers, ice sheets and other frozen parts of the planet.

“The cryosphere is destabilising at an alarming pace,” they wrote. “Geopolitical tensions or short-term national interests must not overshadow COP30. Climate change is the defining security and stability challenge of our time.”

Ninety-seven percent of Muslim respondents in a CAIR survey say they voted for New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani.

Muslim voters in the United States overwhelmingly favoured Democratic candidates in last week’s elections, amid mounting anger at President Donald Trump’s policies, a new exit poll suggests.

The survey, released by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) on Monday, shows 97 percent of Muslim voters in New York backed democratic socialist Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani.

Virginia’s Democratic Muslim American Senator Ghazala Hashmi also received 95 percent of the Muslim vote in the state in her successful bid for lieutenant governor, according to the poll.

Non-Muslim, more centrist Democratic candidates received strong backing from Muslim voters as well, the CAIR study showed.

Virginia’s Abigail Spanberger and New Jersey’s Mikie Sherrill – Democratic congresswomen who won the gubernatorial races – both received about 85 percent support from Muslim voters, according to the survey.

California’s Proposition 50, which approved a congressional map that favours Democrats, won 90 percent support from Muslim voters, the poll suggested.

CAIR said it interviewed 1,626 self-identified Muslim respondents for the survey.

The group said the results showed high turnout from Muslim voters.

“These exit poll results highlight an encouraging truth: American Muslims are showing up, speaking out, and shaping the future of our democracy,” the group said in a statement.

“Across four states, Muslim voters demonstrated remarkable engagement and commitment to the civic process, casting ballots that reflect their growing role as active participants in American life.”

The November 4 election, one year ahead of the 2026 midterm elections that will determine control of Congress, offered a boost for Democrats.

But the race for New York, which saw Trump endorse former Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo, saw a spike of Islamophobic rhetoric, particularly from Republican lawmakers and commentators.

CAIR said Muslim voters showed that they are rising up in “the face of anti-Muslim bigotry” to “build a better future for themselves and their neighbors, proving that participation, not prejudice, defines our nation’s strength”.

The survey’s results show that the Democrats are recovering the support of some Muslim voters who deserted the party in last year’s presidential election due to former President Joe Biden’s uncompromising support for Israel amid the brutal assault on Gaza.

CAIR said it recorded 76 Muslim candidates in last week’s election, 38 of whom won.

In Michigan, the Detroit suburbs of Hamtramck, Dearborn and Dearborn Heights elected Muslim mayors in the polls.

Several Muslim candidates are vying for seats in Congress in next year’s election, including Abdul el-Sayed, who is seeking a US Senate seat in Michigan.

Speaking at this year’s COP30 in Brazil, UN chief Antonio Guterres called the inability to limit global warming to 1.5C (2.7F) a “deadly moral failure”.

But does the same apply when it comes to protecting the environment in conflict?

Israel’s two-year war on Gaza has created 61 million tonnes of rubble, with nearly a quarter contaminated with asbestos and other hazardous materials.

And scientists warn that Israel’s use of water, food and energy as weapons of war in Gaza has left farmland and ecosystems facing irreversible collapse.

In Syria, President Ahmed al-Sharaa has cited his country’s worst drought in more than six decades as evidence of accelerating climate change and warned that it could hinder Syria’s post-war recovery.

So, why isn’t conflict seen as a climate issue? And why is the environmental toll of war so often ignored?

Presenter: Adrian Finighan

Guests: Kate Mackintosh – deputy chair of the Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide

Elaine Donderer – disaster risk specialist

Farai Maguwu – director of the Zimbabwe-based Centre for Natural Resource Governance

I don’t like the word unprecedented. But I’ve used it twice in less than 24 hours.

The first time was on Sunday night, after the resignations of Tim Davie and Deborah Turness. That, in fact, might have involved a bit of overreach.

After all, this has happened before at the BBC. Back in 2004, two senior figures departed – admittedly not on the same day, but on subsequent days.

The then BBC chairman, Gavyn Davies, and the director general, Greg Dyke, resigned in light of the Hutton report.

That was the inquiry into the death of government scientist Dr David Kelly which found that the BBC’s reporting on the Iraq “sexed-up dossier” was flawed.

But my use of unprecedented on Monday feels entirely appropriate.

A US president threatening to sue the BBC for $1bn is completely new territory for the corporation.

We’ve seen a succession of US media operations previously cave in as Donald Trump launched lawsuits.

Paramount Global paid him $16m to settle a dispute over an interview broadcast on CBS with former vice-president Kamala Harris.

ABC News paid him $15m to settle a defamation lawsuit after its anchor falsely claimed he had been found “liable for rape”.

Now the president has the BBC in his sights. He wants a full retraction of the Panorama documentary, an apology for the “false, defamatory, disparaging, misleading and inflammatory statements” made about him in it, and appropriate compensation “for the harm caused”.

If he doesn’t get them by Friday, he’s put the BBC “on notice” that he will be looking for damages of “no less than $1,000,000,000”.

Whether you are a supporter or a detractor of the BBC, I think everyone would agree these are incredibly testing times for the corporation.

Events have developed rapidly over a week.

First we got the series of claims about the Panorama documentary and also wider systemic bias first made in the Telegraph.

Six days later came the resignations of director general Tim Davie and news CEO Deborah Turness.

Quickly some were voicing concerns about a politically orchestrated campaign against the BBC from the right. Others said this was all about accountability in the face of gross failures.

Now the BBC faces a potentially very costly legal battle with Donald Trump.

It should be basking in the success of Celebrity Traitors with the programme’s hugely popular finale broadcast just last Thursday. Instead the BBC is plunged into a crisis some would argue of its own making.

It’s taken until Monday to apologise for the Panorama edit and to push back on the notion that the corporation suffers from institutional bias.

The interview I did with BBC chair Samir Shah should have been done much earlier – with the DG or Deborah Turness last week, as the headlines ramped up.

The apology should have come then. Now the BBC is on the back foot.

It will take robust leadership to steer a course through. But two of the leaders most likely to have been able to steady the ship are now on the way out.

The midday sun blazed over Bare village, but the heat that lingered in the air was nothing compared to the heaviness in people’s hearts. Two days had passed since three young farmers were killed in a violent attack by armed men, yet the air still pulsed with grief and fear.

Men sat in groups, deep in deliberation, while children lingered quietly around their mothers in front of their homes. The quiet was not peace—it was mourning.

A few nights earlier, the rice fields on the outskirts of Bare, a rural community in Numan Local Government Area of Adamawa State, northeastern Nigeria, had turned into a killing ground.

The night the harvest turned deadly

A few days earlier, Peter James, 24, secured a job harvesting rice on a commercial farm. He invited his friend, Cyprian, 20, and ten others to join him. It is the height of the harvest season in Bare, when labourers often camp overnight in the fields, working by moonlight. It’s a source of livelihood for many young people in the community.

But that Tuesday night, Nov. 4, the serenity of the farmland was shattered around 9 p.m.

“We were gathering the rice into bags when we heard gunshots,” Peter recalled, his voice unsteady as he spoke from a mat in his father’s compound. “The people appeared out of nowhere. When they came closer, we realised that they were herders. They didn’t say anything or take anything. They just opened fire on us.” 

Peter said he recognised them as herders because some have grazed their cattle within the community for years.

In the chaos that followed, Cyprian was hit in the neck and collapsed beside him. Peter felt a burning pain in his cheek and arm—gunshot wounds. Somehow, he fled into the darkness and staggered home, bloodied and half-conscious, arriving close to midnight.

“I heard a scream outside, and when I went out, I saw my son staggering. His face and his shirt were covered in blood,” 49-year-old Gloria James, Peter’s mother, told HumAngle. 

The farm lay an hour’s walk from the village, but Peter’s injuries slowed him to a crawl, taking him two hours. Gloria raised an alarm after she saw her son, and villagers mobilised a rescue team. By the time they arrived at the farm, the gunmen had vanished. Cyprian was dead. Two others were critically wounded. 

They carried the injured back to the village and buried Cyprian the next morning. Both wounded men died later that day.

There are currently no security operatives stationed in the community. After the incident, members of Bare reached out to the police station in Numan town; officers came, assessed the situation, and left, promising to follow up.

When contacted, Suleiman Yahaya Nguroje, the Spokesperson for the Adamawa State Police Command, told HumAngle that he had not yet been briefed on the incident. “I will let you know if I have any information,” he said. 

No arrests in connection with the attack have been made yet, according to residents and local leaders who spoke to HumAngle. 

A pattern of violence

The attack is the first reported in Bare this year and is part of a long, bitter struggle between farmers and herders in the area—a conflict that residents say has festered for nearly a decade. Bare and neighbouring communities like Mararaban Bare have seen repeated cycles of bloodshed, often triggered by disputes over land and water. 

When HumAngle visited Bare, the District Head was away in Yola, the state capital, attending a meeting convened by the Adamawa State government over the recent violence, so we spoke with his representative, Anthony Duwaro.

Anthony said that the locals lived peacefully with the herders who settled in their communities for generations. One herder we met during a trip to the area in October is 40 years old and has lived there all his life.

The herders have their settlement about half an hour away from Bare. Anthony said they traded and used resources together. But things changed in 2017, during the harvest. 

“We went to the farm and realised that they led their cattle into it. We confronted them, and that’s when the problem began,” he recalled. 

Since then, clashes have become almost predictable. “It happens every harvest season,” Anthony said, lifting his shirt to reveal scars from a previous attack. “We report to the authorities, but the cycle continues. Now, people are afraid to return to their farms.”

Despite several reconciliation meetings between both sides, he said the latest attack on the young men proved that the conflict was far from over. “One time, the clash was so brutal that people lost their lives, farms and properties were also destroyed. Most of us were rushed to the General Hospital in Numan,” he recounted. 

With no police station nearby, only one in Numan town, several kilometres away, villagers rely on local vigilantes for protection. The community’s police outpost was burnt down during a similar incident in 2018 and has not been restored. 

Anthony described the conflict as a “battle of survival”. “We depend on farming to feed our families. They depend on grazing for their cattle. But when the cattle destroy our crops, we can’t just fold our arms. If we confront them peacefully, they retaliate with attacks.”

Several peace talks have been held between the host community and the herders, yet tensions remain unresolved. Just a week before the latest attack, locals accused herders of grazing on their farms, further heightening the conflict.

While the herders have not claimed responsibility for the killings, they say worsening environmental pressures are making it harder for their cattle to find feed. “We do not wish to provoke anyone; we are only after the welfare of the cattle,” Alhaji Ngala, the chairperson of the local herders’ community, told HumAngle in an interview before the recent attack.

He blamed the clashes on the loss of “traditional grazing routes”. “If we can have access to routes and enough water supply, then our minds will be at peace,” he said. 

Another herder, Muza Alhaji Shenya, who has lived in the Bare area for two decades, said industrialisation and farmland expansion have pushed them onto the highways as they go in search of water and greener pastures.

HumAngle recently reported how nearby Mararaban Bare has faced its own crisis due to the contamination of the only local water source by cattle waste. An uneasy arrangement now exists: locals use the river in the morning, and herders use the water in the afternoon. Still, residents say they need to treat the water before drinking or cooking with it. 

“There has never been a time when we confronted the herders except when they led their cattle to our farms,” Anthony said. “We don’t have a problem with them.”

A national crisis 

The struggle in Bare mirrors a broader crisis playing out across Nigeria’s rural and urban communities. In July, a HumAngle analysis showed how pastoral life is collapsing due to climate change, farmland expansion, and urbanisation in Nigeria. This situation is forcing some herders to cross to neighbouring countries in search of food and water for their cattle. 

Authorities have attempted various interventions, but with little success. In recent years, several state governments have enacted anti-open grazing laws, requiring herders to rent land for ranching, which has been protested by some associations of cattle breeders.

Although the Adamawa State has not passed such legislation, officials announced in December 2024 plans to establish grazing reserves “as a measure to bring an end to farmers and herders clashes in the state”.  

The idea is not new. In 2019, the Nigerian government introduced the Rural Grazing Area (RUGA) scheme to establish designated settlements for herders nationwide. But the initiative was derailed by mistrust and controversy, and later suspended by the former President Muhammad Buhari’s administration.

A few months later, another intervention, the National Livestock Transformation Plan (NLTP) was inaugurated to “create a peaceful environment for the transformation of the livestock sector that will lead to peaceful coexistence, economic development, and food security…” The Plan, whose first phase execution was budgeted at ₦120 billion, has not been actualised. 

“If implemented properly, [the NLTP] could resolve many of these issues,” said Malik Samuel, a Senior Researcher at Good Governance Africa, who researches armed violence in the country. “Ranching is the most effective alternative. Moving cattle around will always spark conflict.” 

Grief remains

Back in Bare, the national debate feels distant.

Chrisantus Bong sits under a tree surrounded by relatives murmuring words of comfort. A few metres away, beside a silo, lies the grave of his son, Cyprian.

The sixty-one-year-old told HumAngle he is still struggling to accept the loss. He said if he could turn back the hands of time, he would have prevented him from going to the farm that night.

While he struggles with his grief, he fears that more tragedy lies ahead. “They have taken others before. They took my son this time. They might take someone else tomorrow,” Chrisantus said.

Residents say the killings have left the community paralysed by fear and anger.

“We have reported this issue countless times to the authorities,” Chrisantus added. “The perpetrators are not strangers. They live around us and should be interrogated.”

Peter is healing from his gunshot wounds, but the emotional scars remain. Cyprian was his closest friend, and he watched him die. “I saw the bullet pierce his neck,” he whispered. Peter’s mother said he has hardly left his room since the attack.

A resurfaced video of BBC News Online’s Middle East editor Raffi Berg, who has launched legal action against journalist Owen Jones over allegations of pro-Israel bias, is seen expressing deep admiration for Mossad. Speaking about the Israeli spy agency, Berg said it makes him “tremendously proud.” The comments have drawn fresh scrutiny as Berg faces allegations of pro-Israel bias, first detailed in a widely shared article by Jones titled The BBC’s Civil War Over Gaza.

Jones’ article, published in December 2024 on DropSite News, accused the BBC, and Berg in particular, of downplaying Israeli actions in Gaza and sidelining critical voices. Now, nearly a year later, Berg has initiated legal proceedings, claiming reputational damage. He is reported to have hired the former director of the notorious UK Lawyers for Israel to sue Jones.

BBC editor hires former director of UK Lawyers for Israel to sue Owen Jones for alleging his pro-Israel bias. You couldn’t make it up! pic.twitter.com/6LGBVwL3dr

— Rivkah Brown (@rivkahbrown) January 14, 2025

Jones detailed accusations from 13 current and former BBC staffers who alleged that coverage of Israel and Palestine was being distorted under Berg’s editorial direction. Sources accused him of “aggressively pushing” pro-Israel framing, marginalising Palestinian perspectives, and undermining colleagues who tried to challenge editorial lines. The article suggested Berg exerted “wild” control over headlines and content related to Gaza.

The BBC’s surrender to pro-Israel lobbying: a history of censorship and bias

Claims of Berg’s pro-Israel bias was further compounded by revelations in Mint Press News, which uncovered Berg’s close ties to Israeli intelligence institutions. Berg is reported to have previously worked with the Foreign Broadcast Information Service — an entity long linked to the CIA — and authored a book (Red Sea Spies) about a Mossad operation, written in collaboration with senior Mossad operatives, including Dani Limor. The book has been praised by Mossad leadership and has been promoted as a success story of Israeli intelligence.

BBC’s online Middle East editor, Raffi Berg, seems to have a framed letter from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a framed picture with former Israeli ambassador to the UK, Mark Regev, proudly displayed on his wall at home.

Here is the editor behind THOSE headlines. pic.twitter.com/eXbfImwbNA

— Lowkey (@Lowkey0nline) December 31, 2024

In the MintPress report, investigative journalist Alan MacLeod outlines how Berg has received support from top Israeli officials and prominently displayed memorabilia tied to Mossad and Israel in his BBC office. MacLeod argues this undermines any claim of neutrality, especially in the context of the BBC’s coverage of the Israeli genocide in Gaza.

Despite mounting questions about conflicts of interest, the BBC has remained largely silent on Berg’s affiliations. Meanwhile, the legal case against Jones is viewed by many observers as an attempt to silence journalistic scrutiny of the broadcaster’s internal dynamics.

The timing of the lawsuit, as global scrutiny of Israel’s actions in Gaza intensifies, has only added to concerns that critical voices are being targeted. Jones has defended his reporting, insisting that it was based on documented testimonies and internal sources, and called the legal action an attack on press freedom.

Imagery has been published providing a rare look inside the weapons bays of one of the prototypes of Russia’s Su-57 Felon fighter, an aircraft you can read about in more detail here. While internal weapons carriage is a key design feature of the Sukhoi jet, the main weapons bays, at least, haven’t been seen in such detail, with weapons loaded. The footage comes as Moscow embarks on another export drive for the Su-57, which has reportedly so far only been ordered by Algeria.

A recent promotional video from the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), Russia’s aviation manufacturing conglomerate, shows the prototype T-50-9 being put through its paces ahead of its planned appearance at the Dubai Airshow. The event takes place in the United Arab Emirates next week. In the footage, the T-50-9 performs a variety of maneuvers, but of greatest interest is the forward main weapons bay, opened to reveal a pair of Kh-58UShK anti-radiation missiles.

While we have previously seen imagery of weapons being released from the aircraft’s main weapons bays, we. The plan to display the T-50-9 at Dubai, with internal weapons exposed, is also new — this hasn’t been done since the aircraft was first flown in prototype form 15 years ago.

The Felon carries its main weaponry in a pair of notably large internal weapons bays that are arranged in tandem between the engines. Each of the bays is sized for the carriage of two missiles with a maximum length of just under 14 feet and a cross-section of around 16 by 16 inches.

For reasons that aren’t entirely clear, it was a long time before Sukhoi began to conduct tests of internal weapons from the Felon. Such trials only began in 2016, six years after the initial prototype T-50 had first taken to the air. In March of 2016, a Felon first launched an undisclosed type of missile from one of its main internal weapons bays.

For the air-to-air role, the large tandem weapons bays are intended to carry two types of beyond-visual-range missiles that were specially adapted for internal carriage. These are the medium-range R-77M (izdeliye 180) and the very-long-range izdeliye 810. You can read more about them here.

For offensive missions, the Kh-69 long-range air-to-surface missile was designed specifically for the Felon, again for internal carriage. The Kh-69 is a weapon we have discussed in detail in the past.

Meanwhile, the Kh-58UShK supersonic anti-radiation missile seen in the recent UAC video is a further evolution of the older Kh-58 (known to NATO as the AS-11 Kilter).

Weighing around 1,400 pounds per piece, the Kh-58UShK (in which the K suffix stands for Kompaktnaya, compact) has a missile body that is approximately 24 inches shorter than the baseline weapon. It also has folding fins to fit in the internal bays. The weapon has a reported range of 150 miles when launched from higher altitudes, although this is significantly reduced when launched from lower levels.

Other offensive munitions that the fighter can carry internally include the ‘universal’ Kh-38M air-to-ground missile with a range of different guidance types, the Grom (thunder) missile that adds a range-extending wing kit to the Kh-38M, and the 551-pound KAB-250L electro-optically guided bomb.

The UAC footage also shows the aircraft’s ability to carry two additional air-to-air missiles inside the two so-called ‘quick-launch’ bays — these have previously been seen in some detail, unlike the main bays. The quick-launch bays are located in distinctive underwing fairings, and the design ensures the missile can be extended into the slipstream so it can lock onto its target. Each can be located with a single R-74M2 (izdeliye 760) short-range air-to-air missile. This is another weapon that was developed specifically for internal carriage, derived from the well-established R-73 (AA-11 Archer).

The missile launch clip begins at approximately 1:19 in the runtime of the video below:

Carrying internal ordnance is a prerequisite if it’s paramount that the Su-57 retains its reduced radar signiture characteristics. However, for missions not requiring such a degree of low-observability, the aircraft can carry a heavier weapons load, making use of four pylons under the wing and two under the air intakes. The underwing pylons can also accomodate drop tanks for additional fuel.

Finally, for close-range combat, the aircraft is armed with a 30-millimeter single-barrel cannon within in starboard wing root and provided with 150 rounds of ammunition. You can see it in action here.

Showing off the Su-57’s relatively impressive capability to accommodate larger internal weapons will, UAC surely hopes, help to drum up more export interest in its product.

Apart from the announcement from Algeria’s state-run media earlier this year that the country was buying the Su-57, the aircraft hasn’t seen any export uptake. The sales fortunes of the Su-57 have so far suffered from a failed partnership with India as well as limited Russian orders and deliveries.

Algerian TV confirms Su-57 fighter jet deal with Russia.

“Algerian pilots are training in Russia, and deliveries are expected this year.”

Algeria becomes the first Su-57 customer. pic.twitter.com/UGEgFvY92m

— Clash Report (@clashreport) February 12, 2025

Combat employment in Russian hands has also been less than impressive, with only questionable capabilities demonstrated in Syria, and little in the way of hard evidence about its service in the war in Ukraine — aside from the reported shooting down of a Russian S-70 Okhotnik-B flying-wing uncrewed combat air vehicle (UCAV), in circumstances that remain somewhat unclear.

Overall, the Su-57 program has made only very slow progress, hampered by a lack of investment in the form of foreign orders. A significant blow was struck by India’s withdrawal from the program, with that country’s investment having been considered vital to speed development. The same had been true in the late 1990s when India’s purchase of the Su-30MKI Flanker essentially secured the development of the multirole version of this fighter, which was only later acquired by Russia.

In terms of domestic orders, the Russian Aerospace Forces only began to receive series-built Su-57s in 2022, part of an order for 76 aircraft — a notably small production run.

While at least six aircraft were delivered to the Russian Aerospace Forces in 2022, more than 10 were handed over in 2023 before numbers tailed off again in 2024, when likely only two or three more were received. It’s unclear if any examples of the Su-57 have been delivered to Russia this year.

The full-scale invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent international sanctions against Russia have had the combined effect of slowing down the pace of Su-57 deliveries and limiting export prospects to all but the staunchest Kremlin allies. After all, any country that receives Russian weapons can expect to be on the receiving end of U.S. sanctions. In an effort to counter this, Russia has also offered a degree of local production of the Su-57, specifically with the hope of securing sales from India and the United Arab Emirates. The Dubai Airshow appearance is almost certainly calculated to try and reinvigorate interest from these two nations in particular.

At the same time, while demonstrating the Su-57’s already celebrated agility and its gradually expanding weapons options, the long-promised advanced Su-57M version has made little progress. The Su-57M is powered by the new AL-51F1 (izdeliye 30) turbofan engine, replacing the current AL-41F-1. It promises increased thrust, lighter weight, and lower operating costs. However, a lack of interest from Russia has done little to help the Su-57Ms’ chances on the export market.

Recent reports based on an apparent leaked official document relating to Su-57 (and other Sukhoi) exports also pointed to official interest in the Felon from Algeria. This document, the leak of which was attributed to the Black Mirror hacktivist group, was, however, several years old and appears to have described possible export orders, rather than reflecting any kind of firm deals. It is also notable that most of the possible export deals in the document related to the Su-35 Flanker, rather than the more advanced Su-57.

This table has generated a lot of buzz lately, but remember that this is a summary of plans as of April 2022, over three years ago.

Su-57 to Algeria,
Su-35 to Iran, Bangladesh, Vietnam, and Ethiopia
Su-34 to Algeria pic.twitter.com/yQKgPvJSMY

— Piotr Butowski (@piotr_butowski) October 5, 2025

Regardless, the UAC is clearly aiming to make a big splash with the Felon at the Dubai Airshow, where it seems that the planned Su-57 flying display will demonstrate a high level of maneuverability coupled with a heavy missile load — a common sales tactic for multirole fighters. It’s also possible that more previously secretive aspects of the design could be revealed in more detail, as the campaign to secure lucrative export sales is ramped up.

Contact the author: [email protected]

As companies focused on buying bitcoin and major cryptocurrencies face challenges from market oversaturation and negative sentiment, new players are exploring less popular, riskier tokens, raising concerns about volatility. Following U. S. President Donald Trump’s supportive stance on cryptocurrencies and the success of Michael Saylor’s investment strategy, the number of public companies investing in cryptocurrencies has surged. By September, there were over 200 digital asset treasury (DAT) companies, primarily invested in bitcoin, with a total value of around $150 billion, tripling from the previous year according to DLA Piper.

Many new companies, often penny stocks looking for profit increases, are emerging daily. As bitcoin prices decline, these companies are turning to more volatile tokens to enhance returns, with firms like Greenlane, OceanPal, and Tharimmune announcing plans to invest in assets such as BERA, NEAR, and Canton Coin. This shift indicates a growing connection between the cryptocurrency market and traditional sectors, which could pose risks for investors. Moody’s analyst Cristiano Ventricelli warns that the move toward less stable cryptocurrencies could lead to higher risks, especially when markets decline.

Since April, many DAT companies have raised funds for token purchases through private placements (PIPEs), selling shares to private investors at discounted prices. Between April and November, more than 40 DATs collectively raised over $15 billion through these PIPEs, with only a handful focusing on bitcoin. Bitcoin itself saw its first monthly loss since 2018 in October. Notable crypto investors involved in these deals include Winklevoss Capital and Kraken. While some institutional investors can directly buy tokens, DATs provide regulated exposure to cryptocurrencies for more cautious investors. However, reliance on PIPEs can cause stock price fluctuations, particularly during market downturns.

This vulnerability was highlighted on October 10, when tensions between the U. S. and China caused market declines, leading to significant drops in share prices for companies like BitMine and Forward Industries. Peter Chung from Presto Research noted that while initial hype around DATs has decreased, there is potential for a rebound. Some companies, such as OceanPal, are promoting their token acquisitions for their technological advantages, while Greenlane chose not to comment.

Earlier this year, many DAT companies traded at higher prices than their crypto holdings, as investors believed they could leverage credit for more purchases. However, as bitcoin prices have diminished and competition from similar strategies has risen, some companies are struggling, with at least 15 trading below their assets’ net value. Retail investors incurred losses of about $17 billion from investments in these companies, while others face pressure to repurchase shares to support stock prices.

Overall, DATs hold 4% of all bitcoin, 3.1% of all ether, and 0.8% of all solana, which could significantly influence coin values. Analysts project further consolidation in the sector. Company executives emphasize the importance of making prudent investment choices to ensure long-term success. Companies like SUI Group are also diversifying by launching stablecoins to boost shareholder value, warning that merely acquiring tokens without strategic actions could lead to failures in the long run.

With information from Reuters

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth says attacks take place in international waters amid mounting criticism against US campaign.

The United States has carried out another set of military strikes against what it says are drug boats in international waters headed to the country.

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth said on Monday that the US military targeted two vessels in the eastern Pacific Ocean on Sunday, killing six people.

“These vessels were known by our intelligence to be associated with illicit narcotics smuggling, were carrying narcotics, and were transiting along a known narco-trafficking transit route in the Eastern Pacific,” he wrote in a social media post.

“Both strikes were conducted in international waters, and three male narco-terrorists were aboard each vessel. All six were killed. No US forces were harmed.”

The administration of President Donald Trump has faced mounting criticism over such attacks, including accusations of violating domestic and international law.

But Washington appears to be stepping up the campaign. Sunday’s deadly double attack was the fourth this month. Previous strikes in the Pacific and Caribbean Sea killed at least eight people, according to US authorities.

The Trump administration started targeting boats in the Caribbean in September and later expanded its military push to the Pacific Ocean.

The US has carried out 18 strikes on vessels so far, killing dozens of people.

Last month, United Nations rights chief Volker Turk said the US attacks have no justification under international law.

“These attacks – and their mounting human cost – are unacceptable,” Turk said. “The US must halt such attacks and take all measures necessary to prevent the extrajudicial killing of people aboard these boats, whatever the criminal conduct alleged against them.”

The US has described the attacks as “counterterrorism” operations after having designated drug cartels as “terrorists”.

“Under President Trump, we are protecting the homeland and killing these cartel terrorists who wish to harm our country and its people,” Hegseth said on Monday.

Other than grainy footage showing the strikes, the Trump administration has not provided concrete proof that the vessels targeted were carrying drugs.

Trump himself has previously joked that fishermen are now afraid to operate in the Caribbean off the coast of Venezuela.

Critics have questioned why US authorities would not monitor the boats and intercept them when they enter the country’s territorial waters instead of extrajudicially executing the suspects.

The strikes have sparked regional tensions, particularly with Venezuela, with Trump accusing its president, Nicolas Maduro, of links to “narcoterrorists”.

The ramped-up US military campaign near Venezuela has raised speculation that Washington may be preparing for conflict in the oil-rich South American country.

This month, Trump suggested that war with Venezuela is unlikely but said Maduro’s days are numbered.

An explosion near New Delhi’s Red Fort reportedly has killed at least eight people. Footage from the scene showed a smouldering vehicle frames and scattered wreckage.

When e-commerce company Jumia wanted to go public in 2019, Africa’s most celebrated start-up didn’t list in Lagos, Nairobi, Kigali or Johannesburg. It went to New York instead. That tells you everything about Africa’s start-up problem: It’s not a money problem; it’s an exit problem.

African entrepreneurs can build world-class businesses, but investors hesitate because they cannot see how or when they will get their money back. Initial public offerings (IPOs) remain extremely rare, and most exits take the form of trade sales – often unpredictable and slow to clear. Our stock exchanges offer little comfort either with liquidity outside the largest firms still limited.

Start-ups here can remain “start-ups” for decades with no clear path to maturity.

By contrast, Silicon Valley hums along because everyone knows the playbook: build fast, scale up and within five to seven years either list on an exchange or get acquired. Investors know they will not be stuck forever. That certainty, not just the capital, drives the flow of billions.

If Africa wants its tech ecosystems to thrive, we need a parallel play alongside any new funds. Yes, let’s mobilise sovereign wealth, pensions, banks and guarantees. But equally, let’s change the rules of the game. Let’s build an exit clarity framework that gives investors confidence.

That means fast-track “growth IPO lanes” on our exchanges with lighter costs and simpler disclosures. It means standardised merger templates that guarantee regulatory reviews within clear time limits.

It means regulated secondary markets where early investors and employees can sell shares before an IPO.

It means modernising employee stock ownership rules so talent can build wealth too.

And it means creating anchor-exit facilities where big domestic players like South Africa’s Public Investments Corporation or IDC commit to buy into IPOs with risk-sharing from development partners.

The evidence shows why these matter. More than 80 percent of startup funding in Africa comes from abroad. African unicorns are overwhelmingly funded by foreign venture capital, with several having foreign co-founders or being incorporated outside the continent. This means exits and wealth creation largely flow offshore. When global shocks hit, whether interest rate hikes in Washington or political turmoil in Europe, our ventures shake.

On the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, small-cap boards make up only a sliver of daily trading activity, underscoring how limited liquidity is outside the blue chips.

In Kenya, the Growth Enterprise Market Segment, set up to serve fast-growing firms, has struggled to gain traction with only five companies currently listed as of 2024 – more than a decade after its 2013 launch.

To be sure, there are those who will argue that exits already exist: Trade sales are happening, holding periods in Africa are shorter than in many markets and capital is trickling in regardless.

That is true, but partial. Trade sales can be an option, but they are often unpredictable. Regulatory approvals take time, and deal terms are not always transparent enough for investors to build them confidently into their models.

This is not a system that inspires confidence from our own pension funds or sovereign wealth managers.

The response, then, is not to simply wait for more money to arrive but to fix the structures that govern its movement. If we could walk into investor meetings and say, “Here’s the pipeline of companies. Here’s the capital vehicle, and here is a clear five-year exit pathway,” we could shift the conversation entirely.

We could make African innovation not only attractive to foreign investors but also bankable for African ones. South Africa is uniquely positioned to lead this change. It has deep capital markets, capable regulators and institutional pools of capital looking for new growth opportunities.

The ask is not just to invest in start-ups but to invest in a new rulebook that makes exits real. If we succeed, we will have built more than another fund. We will have built a system that recycles African savings into African innovation, creating African wealth.

For too long, the debate has been framed around scarcity of money. But the truth is less about scarcity and more about certainty. Investors do not only chase returns. They chase predictable exits. Without exits, funds hesitate. With exits, funds multiply.

So, yes, let us mobilise capital and launch new funds. But let us also do the harder, braver thing: change the rules, not just the money. That is how we ensure our unicorns aren’t built on foreign capital alone. That is how we give our own savers and pensioners a stake in Africa’s growth.

And that is how we finally write a new playbook under which African innovation, African capital and African ownership all run on the same page because, in the end, the real lesson of Jumia is not that Africa cannot produce billion-dollar start-ups. It is that until we change the rules of exit, we risk exporting the wealth that should be owned and grown at home.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

New Zealand’s Laurel Hubbard became the first openly transgender women to compete at an Olympics after being selected for the women’s weightlifting team at Tokyo 2020.

Hubbard, who failed to record a successful lift in the women’s +87kg category, had competed in men’s events before coming out as transgender in 2013.

At Paris 2024 Algeria’s Imane Khelif won the women’s welterweight boxing gold medal, a year after being disqualified from the World Championships for reportedly failing a gender eligibility test.

The IOC cleared the 25-year-old to compete – along with Taiwan’s Lin Yu-ting, who was also banned by the suspended International Boxing Association (IBA).

The IOC said competitors were eligible for the women’s division if their passports said they were female.

Both fighters said they were women, had always competed in the women’s division, and there was no suggestion they were transgender.

Some reports took the IBA saying Khelif has XY chromosomes to speculate that the fighter might have differences of sexual development (DSD), like runner Caster Semenya. However, the BBC was not able to confirm whether this is or is not the case.

VOV 130: The Long Walk to Survival | RSS.com

You are nine months pregnant, barefoot, and running through thorns, dust, and fear. For nearly a decade, Ya Busam Ali has lived in displacement, walking miles each season to farm land controlled by terrorists, just to keep her and her children alive.

This episode of VOV follows the story of her survival, resilience, and the loud strength that keeps her moving forward.

Reported and scripted by Sabiqah Bello

Voice acting by Azara Tswanya

Multimedia editor is Anthony Asemota

Executive producer is Ahmad Salkida

FBI Director Kash Patel visited Beijing last week to hold talks with Chinese officials on fentanyl and law enforcement issues, according to sources familiar with the trip. The visit came after a summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, where both leaders highlighted a new “consensus” on controlling the flow of the deadly synthetic opioid.

Patel’s stay in Beijing lasted about a day and was not officially announced by either government. The trip coincided with China’s announcement that it would adjust its catalogue of drug-related precursor chemicals and require export licenses for shipments to the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.

Why It Matters

Fentanyl continues to be the leading cause of overdose deaths in the United States, making international cooperation on its regulation a critical security concern. The trip signals a shift in U.S. policy from punitive measures to bilateral collaboration with China on law enforcement issues.

It also has broader implications for trade relations, as President Trump had already halved tariffs on Chinese goods following the summit, linking law enforcement cooperation with broader economic negotiations.

The key stakeholders include the U.S. government, led by FBI Director Kash Patel and President Trump, as well as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who is overseeing the implementation of mechanisms to curb fentanyl exports. Chinese authorities, including the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Commerce Ministry, are responsible for regulating precursor chemicals and managing export controls.

North American countries such as the U.S., Canada, and Mexico are also involved, as they are primary recipients of controlled chemical exports and partners in enforcement.

What’s Next

The details of the Trump-Xi consensus are expected to be finalized through a new bilateral working group. China will continue to regulate and monitor precursor chemical exports more strictly, while U.S. and Chinese law enforcement agencies may deepen their cooperation. The visit may also influence broader trade dynamics, including the resumption of U.S. soybean purchases by China and the suspension of previously announced rare-earth export curbs.

With information from Reuters.

Climate-related disasters and conflict have displaced millions of people across the globe, the United Nations has warned before the opening of its annual climate change conference.

The UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) said in a report, published on Monday to coincide with the launch of the 30th annual UN Climate Change conference (COP) in Brazil, that weather-related disasters caused about 250 million people to flee their homes over the past decade.

The migration agency issued its second major report on the effect of climate change on refugees – No Escape II: The Way Forward – in the run-up to COP 30, as it appears that the enthusiasm of countries to agree action to curb climate change continues to ebb.

“Over the past decade, weather-related disasters have caused some 250 million internal displacements – equivalent to over 67,000 displacements per day,” the report said. 

The UNHCR added that climate change is also increasing the difficulties faced by those displaced by conflict and other driving forces.

“Climate change is compounding and multiplying the challenges faced by those who have already been displaced, as well as their hosts, particularly in fragile and conflict-affected settings,” it continued.

Floods in South Sudan and Brazil, record heat in Kenya and Pakistan, and water shortages in Chad and Ethiopia are among the disasters noted in the report.

The number of countries facing extreme exposure to climate-related hazards is projected to rise from three to 65 by 2040.

Those 65 countries host more than 45 percent of all people currently displaced by conflict, it added.

“Extreme weather is … destroying homes and livelihoods, and forcing families – many who have already fled violence – to flee once more,” UN refugees chief Filippo Grandi said in a statement.

“These are people who have already endured immense loss, and now they face the same hardships and devastation again. They are among the hardest hit by severe droughts, deadly floods and record-breaking heatwaves, yet they have the fewest resources to recover,” he said.

By 2050, the report reads, the hottest 15 refugee camps in the world – in The Gambia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Senegal and Mali – are projected to experience nearly 200 days of hazardous heat stress per year.

Weakening commitment

The refugee agency’s report emphasised that while the effect of climate change is growing, the commitment towards dealing with it has been weakening.

The UNHCR hopes to reawaken efforts to fight the effects at the conference in Brazil.

Under President Donald Trump, the United States, traditionally the world’s top donor, has slashed foreign aid.

Washington previously accounted for more than 40 percent of the UNHCR’s budget. Other major donor countries have also been tightening their belts.

“Funding cuts are severely limiting our ability to protect refugees and displaced families from the effects of extreme weather,” Grandi said.

“To prevent further displacement, climate financing needs to reach the communities already living on the edge,” he said. “This COP must deliver real action, not empty promises.”

About 50,000 participants from more than 190 countries will meet in Belem, in the Amazon rainforest, to discuss curbing the climate crisis.

One topic on the agenda exposing the difficulties of agreeing on global action is the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).

The policy is designed to prevent “carbon leakage” by requiring importers of carbon-intensive goods like steel and cement to pay the same price for embedded emissions that EU producers face domestically.

While the EU promotes CBAM as a necessary environmental tool to encourage greener practices, critics of the policy, including major trading partners like the US and China, view it as a veiled act of protectionism.

Developing nations, meanwhile, are concerned that it unfairly shifts the financial burden of climate action onto them.

A suffocating blanket of smog has engulfed India’s capital, permeating the air with an acrid smell as pollution levels soar, intensifying a public health emergency that has driven residents to demand governmental action.

By Monday morning, New Delhi’s air quality index had reached 344, categorised as “severe” and hazardous to breathe according to the World Health Organization’s recommended exposure thresholds.

In a compelling demonstration of public concern, dozens of protesters assembled in New Delhi on Sunday, calling for government intervention to combat the capital’s toxic air crisis as dangerous haze shrouded the city.

Children joined their parents at the demonstration, wearing protective masks and carrying placards, including one that starkly declared: “I miss breathing.”

New Delhi, home to a metropolitan population of 30 million people, persistently ranks among the world’s most polluted capital cities.

Every winter, a toxic smog obscures the skyline when cooler temperatures trap pollutants close to ground level, creating a deadly combination of emissions from agricultural burning, industrial operations, and vehicle exhaust.

Levels of PM2.5 – carcinogenic particles small enough to penetrate the bloodstream – regularly surge to concentrations 60 times above the UN’s recommended daily health guidelines.

“Today I am here just as a mother,” said protester Namrata Yadav, who attended the protest with her son. “I am here because I don’t want to become a climate refugee.”

At the protest location near India Gate, the historic war memorial, PM2.5 readings surpassed the World Health Organization’s recommended daily maximum by more than 13 times.

“Year after year, it is the same story, but there is no solution,” said Tanvi Kusum, a lawyer who explained she joined because she was “frustrated”.

“We have to build pressure so that the government at least takes up the issue seriously.”

Government measures to tackle the crisis have proven inadequate, including limited restrictions on fossil fuel vehicles and water trucks spraying mist to suppress airborne particulate matter.

“Pollution is cutting our lives,” declared a young woman who identified herself as “speaking for Delhi” and declined to provide her name.

Research published in The Lancet Planetary Health last year estimated that 3.8 million deaths in India between 2009 and 2019 were attributable to air pollution.

The United Nations children’s agency, UNICEF, cautions that contaminated air dramatically increases children’s susceptibility to acute respiratory infections.

As evening descended on the smog-veiled skyline, the crowd expanded until police stepped in, forcing several activists onto a bus and seizing their protest materials, claiming they lacked proper demonstration permits.

One partially torn sign captured the essence of their plea: “I just want to breathe.”

Crop residue burning, along with emissions from vehicles, industries and construction, engulf the capital in smog.

Crowds have demonstrated in New Delhi as the Indian capital faces another winter engulfed in smog.

Pollution levels in New Delhi surged again on Monday morning as the city was immersed in a thick smog. The annual degradation of air quality in the capital to harmful levels has led to rare protests.

On Sunday, demonstrators mounted a rally at the city’s India Gate monument to demand action over the lethal pollution that envelops the area each year.

Crowds held up banners and chanted slogans while some disrupted traffic. Police officers detained some of the protesters by putting them on buses and dispersed others.

By Monday morning, the city’s air pollution index had surpassed 350, squarely landing in the range classified as “very poor” by India’s Central Pollution Control Board.

Anything below 100 is considered good or satisfactory, while an index of more than 400 is classified as “severe”.

Some areas of the Indian capital experienced an index of more than 400 early on Monday morning as a thick blanket of smog was trapped over the city amid falling temperatures.

The right to clean air is a basic human right.

The right to peaceful protest is guaranteed by our Constitution.

Why are citizens who have been peacefully demanding clean air being treated like criminals?

Air pollution is affecting crores of Indians, harming our children and… https://t.co/ViPZiO16lT

— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) November 9, 2025

India has six of the 10 most polluted cities globally and 13 of the top 20. New Delhi is the most polluted capital city in the world, according to the Switzerland-based air quality monitor IQAir.

Air quality dramatically deteriorates in the city every year as the cold season approaches.

The smoke created by farmers burning crop residue in nearby states blows into the capital and is trapped by the cooler temperatures.

As it mixes with vehicle and industrial emissions, the resulting smog causes respiratory illnesses and has become a key factor in thousands of deaths each year.

Efforts to prevent the annual envelopment have struggled to have a significant effect.

The authorities have launched a tiered emergency system that restricts construction, bans diesel generators, and limits vehicle entry when pollution hits severe levels.

The government has also introduced crop-burning control subsidies with limited success.

A cloud seeding effort last month failed to trigger artificial rain and cut pollution levels.

“The right to clean air is a basic human right,” Rahul Gandhi, leader of the opposition Congress party, wrote in a post on X, criticising how the protesters were treated.

Manjinder Singh Sirsa, environment minister in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s governing Bharatiya Janata Party, said the government “will continue every possible effort” to prevent pollution.