war

UNRWA’s West Bank director, Roland Friedrich, said the scenes in Hebron carry “alarming echoes” of the mass displacement in the northern occupied West Bank in early 2025, when Israeli military operations emptied the Jenin, Tulkarem and Nur Shams refugee camps.

More than 34,000 Palestinian refugees from the Jenin, Tulkarem and Nur Shams camps remain displaced, according to UNRWA, more than a year after Israel’s “Iron Wall” operation began in January 2025. The operation destroyed more than half of the camps’ residential buildings.

OCHA’s demolition records capture only a fraction of that destruction. Between 2009 and October 2026, the agency recorded 1,399 buildings demolished in the Jenin and Tulkarem governorates, displacing 4,139 people. Those records mainly track demolitions carried out for lack of permits or as punishment, not buildings destroyed during military raids.

An investigation by the research group Forensic Architecture found evidence of deliberate, systematic destruction. Researchers verified more than 200 incidents involving the destruction of buildings and streets across four refugee camps, using armoured bulldozers, controlled demolitions and air attacks. They found that roads were widened through homes and gardens to create routes for military vehicles. The group concluded that Israel was applying tactics in the occupied West Bank similar to those it had used in Gaza.

In February 2025, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said Tulkarem and Jenin would come to resemble Jabalia and Shujayea, two of Gaza’s most devastated areas.

The raids have not stopped. Last week, Israeli forces detained four Palestinians in Tulkarem, and in the village of Burin, south of Nablus, troops converted several homes into military barracks, as they have in Hebron.

Near Jenin, the army has ordered the residents of an entire village to leave permanently. “I have sheep and cows. Our entire lives are tied to this land,” said farmer Jabri Yahya. “Last year they uprooted our olive trees, and this year they want to force us to leave. We don’t know where to go.”

Starved and exhausted residents of Oleshky arrive in Ukraine after months of isolation, but some stay behind.

Starved and exhausted residents of the Russian-occupied Ukrainian town of Oleshky have crossed into Ukraine in a major evacuation operation of civilians, under the first humanitarian truce of its kind in more than four years of Moscow’s war.

The six-day ceasefire covering the town was reached with mediation efforts by US First Lady Melania Trump and help from Pope Leo XIV. It is the longest local pause in fighting since Russia’s full-scale invasion of its neighbour in 2022.

“Ukrainian citizens from Oleshky have crossed the Ukrainian border in the Chernihiv region. All of them will receive the assistance they need,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy wrote on X, thanking the United States and the first lady for mediating.

“Further steps toward de-escalation and real progress toward peace are also needed,” he added.

Evacuees wrapped in blue and yellow Ukrainian flags stepped off buses at the Ukrainian-Belarusian border and reunited with family members.

Ukrainian officials met the evacuees with posters reading “You’re not alone” and “We embrace with our hearts”, while residents from nearby villages lined the highway waving flags and flashlights to greet them.

Forced to eat grass

Supply routes to Oleshky had been disrupted by fighting and drones. According to some residents, food deliveries were stopped in May, pushing hundreds of people into starvation.

One evacuee, an elderly man in a wheelchair, told the Reuters news agency that he had lost 20kg (44lbs) over the past year, becoming so weak he required hospital treatment.

Another evacuee, Svitlana Yermakova, told Reuters they had to eat grass to survive.

“We chopped grass and squash… just to hold on,” she said, adding that she risked riding by bicycle through minefields to a nearby village to get food for herself and her dog.

To reach Ukrainian-held territory, Oleshky residents had to take a complicated route to leave the devastated town just a few kilometres from the front line.

They first crossed Crimea by bus to the Russian town of Anapa before flying to Belarus, from where they crossed into Ukraine.

Ambulances lined the street, and several large military tents were erected, where hot meals, tea and medical aid were provided.

Russian and Ukrainian officials say the ceasefire in Oleshky has held since Tuesday, allowing them to de-mine the roads and bring food, medicines and other supplies into the town again.

The truce is due to end on Sunday evening.

Some stay behind

Some residents have decided to remain in Oleshky, despite the ongoing lack of gas, electricity and running water.

Russian Human Rights Commissioner Yana Lantratova said living conditions in the occupied Oleshky remained difficult, pledging she would continue to work with her Ukrainian counterpart, Dmytro Lubinets, to help those who stayed.

“The mission has come to an end,” she said on Telegram. “We have agreed to carry out regular humanitarian missions, which is a very important step.”

Oleshky had a pre-war population of about 24,000, which plunged to an estimated 1,700 before the evacuation.

Ukrainian officials have not said exactly how many residents were evacuated or how many remained.

Despite the ceasefire in Oleshky, fighting rages on in other parts of the front, with Russia and Ukraine keeping up drone attacks against each other.

Iran’s top diplomat tells Al Jazeera Tehran has reached a plan with Qatari mediators to reopen Hormuz within two days if the US meets its conditions.

EXCLUSIVE

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi tells Al Jazeera Tehran doesn’t rule out attack, is ‘prepared for all scenarios’.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says a United States effort to open dialogue with Tehran is “a positive step”, but that there are currently no plans for meetings with US officials.

Speaking to Al Jazeera on Saturday, Araghchi said Iran had studied a letter sent by US Vice President JD Vance in high-level meetings, and set out Tehran’s conditions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which he said would pave the way for renewed negotiations with Washington.

He added that an Iranian delegation has travelled to Doha, a day after Qatari mediators were in Tehran in an apparent bid to negotiate a revival of the US-Iran ceasefire. Araghchi said one of his aides is in Qatar to continue consultations.

“The American side’s attempt to open the door to dialogue and understanding more broadly is a positive step,” the foreign minister told Al Jazeera.

However, he warned: “If Washington’s goal in sending this letter is to stir up discord, it would be yet another mistake to add to its previous ones.”

‘No need to meet with the Americans’

Araghchi played down talk of upcoming meetings between the two sides.

“What is being circulated in this regard is merely media speculation,” he said.

“We see no need to meet with the Americans at this stage. Our conditions are clear, and mediators are continuing their consultations regarding them,” he added.

He said whether Iran would hold direct or indirect talks with the US depended on Tehran’s conditions being met.

“Mediators have presented proposals concerning the nuclear dossier, which we are currently reviewing as part of the second phase,” he said.

“Qatari and Pakistani mediators are continuing consultations regarding our conditions,” Araghchi said.

Conditions for Hormuz

Araghchi said talks with Qatari mediators had shortened the time needed to implement Iran’s proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“The Qatari side proposed shortening the implementation period of the Iranian proposal to five days. We have reached a proposal at this stage that reduces the implementation period to two days,” he said.

“Our conditions include lifting the sanctions imposed following the Islamabad memorandum and reducing US forces in the region,” he said, adding, “We demand the restoration of oil waivers and the release of all our frozen funds, including those held in Qatar.”

Iran is also demanding recognition of shipping routes through the strait that it had discussed with Oman, and the closure of other routes, he said.

‘Prepared for all scenarios’

Araghchi also said his country does not rule out the possibility of an attack against Iran.

“We are prepared for all scenarios,” he said.

“We have upgraded our weaponry, addressed our vulnerabilities, and tested new arms. Our forces are at the highest level of readiness.”

EXCLUSIVE

Siddiq Ander has accused RSF leader Hemedti of running the paramilitary group like a family business and suppressing dissent.

Senior commander Siddiq Ander says he has defected from Sudan‘s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), according to exclusive video footage obtained by Al Jazeera.

The footage, published on Friday, shows Ander accusing relatives of RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as “Hemedti”, of tightly controlling the group’s finances, weapons, troop movements and military promotions.

Ander’s exit follows a string of high-profile defections this year, with some commanders leaving alongside hundreds of fighters.

“It has become clear to us beyond any doubt that we were serving a purely family-based project controlled by Hemedti’s relatives in every aspect, money, weapons, fighters’ movements and the granting of ranks,” Ander said.

“Anyone who speaks out and tells the whole truth faces expulsion, imprisonment or a hidden death.”

Hemedti’s brother, Abdul Rahim Hamdan Dagalo, serves as the RSF deputy commander.

Senior commanders break ranks

A wave of defections has seen several senior RSF commanders leave the group this year, including Lieutenant Colonel Mohammed Azraq al-Fanjari, who announced on October 8 that he was leaving, along with 300 officers and soldiers and 30 military vehicles.

Al-Fanjari also urged other fighters to abandon the RSF, expressing regret over the suffering caused by the war.

His announcement came after the September 25 defection of Al-Tayeb al-Wahidu, who joined the enemy Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) with 50 fighters in Omdurman, across the Nile from the capital, Khartoum, according to The Sudan Tribune.

Al-Wahidu cited abuses within the RSF as his reason for leaving.

Earlier, in May, Brigadier Ali Rizqallah, known as Savannah, announced his departure.

Yet another senior commander, Major General al-Nour Ahmed Adam, known as al-Qubba, joined the SAF in April and was publicly welcomed by Sudanese leader and military chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan.

Al-Qubba’s departure followed disagreements over military appointments within the RSF leadership, the Tribune reported.

Sudan’s war erupted in April 2023 after a power struggle between the army and the RSF, including disagreements over plans to integrate the paramilitary group into the regular military.

The conflict has since displaced about 13 million people and pushed parts of the country into famine.

The latest defections come as both sides increasingly use drones in attacks that have caused mounting civilian casualties.

On October 26, strikes hit a market and residential area in Nyala, an RSF-controlled city in South Darfur.

Emergency Lawyers, a Sudanese rights group, reported more than 100 deaths, although other medical organisations recorded lower figures.

The United Nations says drone strikes have become the leading cause of civilian deaths in Sudan’s war.

A symbol of independent journalism, Novaya Gazeta has been classed as a ‘foreign agent’ by Moscow.

Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta has announced it will shut down, citing pressure from the authorities.

The independent outlet’s editorial board said in a statement released on Friday that the newspaper has been forced to end its operations.

The Russian media has come under increased scrutiny from the state amid Moscow’s war on Ukraine. The authorities recently searched the home of Novaya Gazeta’s senior editor and arrested the editor-in-chief.

“The newspaper is gone. The Russian authorities and … intelligence services forced the editorial staff to cease operations,” the editorial board said in the statement, which was entitled: “We were killed.”

Viewed as a relative bastion of independent journalism in Russia, Novaya Gazeta has been classed as a “foreign agent” by Moscow, a label used to stifle dissent.

“Novaya Gazeta is ceasing to exist,” editor-in-chief Sergei Sokolov said in a video statement published on YouTube. “On November 9 we will turn off the lights in our home, where we have lived for 30 years. We will shut down the servers and leave.”

Earlier this month, Sokolov was taken in for questioning as Russian authorities searched his home due, they said, to a link to a criminal case involving his colleague Oleg Roldugin.

Roldugin was arrested in April and charged with “unlawful access to computerised information”.

“How far will the Kremlin’s relentless campaign against Novaya Gazeta go?” asked media watchdog Reporters Without Borders in a statement after Sokolov was arrested on October 15.

“Six of its journalists and staff members have been murdered, its newsroom has been raided, its journalists have been prosecuted, and the publication has been designated a ‘foreign agent’,” the press freedom organisation noted.

The forced closure of Novaya Gazeta marks another escalation in Russia’s crackdown on press freedom, with few independent media outlets or journalists left in the country, as censorship levels and arrests of regime critics have skyrocketed since it launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

The newspaper had already trimmed production inside Russia after Moscow invaded Ukraine, as authorities revoked its media licence.

The paper’s then editor-in-chief, Dmitry Muratov, jointly won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2021 for his “efforts to safeguard freedom of expression” at the helm of the paper.

Over the past week, Washington and Tehran have sent mixed signals about whether their eight-month war is heading back to full-scale strikes or towards a peace deal.

On Thursday, the head of United States Central Command (CENTCOM), Admiral Brad Cooper, briefed US President Donald Trump on options for renewed attacks on Iran, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported.

The US and Israel have drawn up joint plans to attack Iran after the November 3 US midterm elections, The New York Times (NYT) reported last week.

Yet on the same day, The Washington Post reported that Vice President JD Vance had offered to meet Mohsen Rezaei, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, in person to negotiate an end to the war.

On Friday, Qatari mediators returned to Tehran for talks coordinated with the US, an official told Reuters.

So is Washington heading back to war, or towards a deal? Here’s what we know:

Why are there conflicting reports?

Essentially, Washington is preparing for war while keeping a diplomatic channel open.

The WSJ reported that the US has boosted air defences and munitions in the region and moved some troops away from bases vulnerable to Iranian retaliation.

Ten US military cargo planes landed at the Ovda and Nevatim air bases in Israel’s Negev region on Thursday, with more sent to Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the Israeli public broadcaster Kan reported.

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, who said he had been briefed on the plans, called them “insane” and warned of a devastating escalation.

Can diplomatic efforts hold off a return to strikes?

Diplomacy has not stopped.

Vance’s letter, delivered to Rezaei through Qatari mediators on Sunday, proposed direct talks led by Vance, with Iran’s nuclear programme on the table from the start, according to the NYT, in a bid to prevent a renewal of strikes.

Whether it might have any influence over what happens next is a matter for debate. Rouzbeh Parsi, an Iran analyst who is an affiliated researcher at Lund University’s Department of History and Human Rights Studies in Sweden, described Vance as the “voice of reason” on Iran within the Trump administration, saying his signals have been “the least volatile and unpredictable”.

But he also told Al Jazeera that Vance’s position has “never proven to be sturdy enough to actually sway Trump”.

“Thus, while the optics with Vance look better than anyone else in the Trump administration, I doubt that they [Iranian officials] give the outreach much credence until Vance proves able to actually deliver something on his own,” he said.

Furthermore, Nader Hashemi, a professor of Middle East politics at Georgetown University, told Al Jazeera that “Rezaei is just one voice among many” adding that the “reality is that decisions are made collectively inside the Islamic republic”.

Wolfgang Pusztai, a security and defence analyst and Austria’s former defence attache to Libya, has a different view, however, telling Al Jazeera, “There is no doubt that the IRGC [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] currently calls the shots in Iran.”

In February, Iran’s then supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed in the initial attacks by Israel and the United States, and his son became the new supreme leader, but Pusztai says he “simply does not have the influence his father did”.

“Without the IRGC’s approval, there will be no agreement with Iran,” Pusztai said, adding it is safe to assume that when Rezaei makes a statement or endorses a proposal, “it reflects the position of the IRGC leadership” and that the US was “absolutely right to negotiate with him”.

Pusztai said it is unclear whether Rezaei is indeed ready to make a serious compromise, but under sustained US pressure, Rezaei, who holds a doctorate in economics, could come to see that “Iran’s interests and the regime’s survival can be better secured without nuclear weapons and through a less aggressive foreign policy”.

“He certainly knows that peak oil is approaching and that time is running out for Iran’s economic recovery through the use of its oil revenues,” he said.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said progress depends on Iran’s seven conditions being met – including the lifting of sanctions, ending the US naval blockade of Iranian ports, guarantees to an end to US-Israeli strikes, and the unfreezing of Iranian assets – adding that the “carrot-and-stick approach has no effect on Iran”, according to the semi-official Tasnim news agency.

Vance, meanwhile, told Fox News on Thursday that Trump would “never” let the conflict become “a forever war”.

Which of all these signals matter most?

The diplomacy may say more than the threats.

Andreas Krieg, an associate professor of security studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera that Vance’s offer of direct talks “suggests that the Americans do have second thoughts” and that they are less ready to strike than they publicly suggest.

But he warned that Cooper, whom he called “quite hawkish”, could give Trump false confidence “that there is a military way out of it, when in reality there isn’t a military way out of it”.

“This idea that there is a short and crisp military operation to solve this issue is obviously an illusion,” he said.

Paul Musgrave, an associate professor of government at Georgetown University in Qatar, told Al Jazeera the White House could be sending signals to coerce Tehran, but that “the better interpretation is the simplest one”.

He believes “the United States is getting ready to carry out substantial attacks relatively soon”. He said he does not expect Washington to accept what he called the unfavourable deal Tehran is offering “without another round of attacks”.

Pusztai said Trump’s main focus is now the midterms, making it “very unlikely that he will order another large-scale attack on Iran before the elections”.

“Starting in mid to late November, there could be a major wave of attacks aimed at advancing the American agenda,” he said, adding that the aim would be to weaken the IRGC enough to push it towards a deal on US terms.

Whatever the vote’s result, “in the short term it will not change much”, Musgrave said.

A strong Republican showing could encourage more aggressive tactics, while a Democratic win could push Trump to show his unilateral powers, including by attacking, he said.

Hasn’t this all happened before?

It has. Iran was attacked by Israel or the US while talks were under way in both 2025 and 2026.

“We’ve seen this pattern of behaviour before from the United States,” Hashemi said, describing it as “talking diplomacy while preparing for war”.

On June 13, 2025, Israel launched major strikes on Iranian nuclear and military sites, two days before a sixth round of US-Iran talks was due in Oman. The US joined on June 22, bombing Iran’s Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan nuclear sites.

This year, the US and Israel attacked on February 28, two days after talks in Geneva that mediator Oman said had made “significant progress”.

A day before the strikes, Oman’s foreign minister said Iran had agreed to reduce its nuclear stockpiles to “the lowest level possible”.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian told Al Jazeera in September that Iran no longer trusts negotiations with Washington because attacks had come during previous rounds of talks.

Hashemi said he suspects “the same pattern is repeating itself”, with the US preparing “a massive bombing campaign in Iran, replete with war crimes like we haven’t seen before”, citing his reading of Murphy’s comments.

What is blocking a deal?

“The issue is mostly around sequencing and the lack of trust on the Iranian side that the Americans will actually follow through with their commitments,” Krieg said.

Tehran wants sanctions and the US naval blockade lifted quickly, fearing that a slow process gives Trump room to backtrack, he said.

Some IRGC hardliners do not necessarily see war as a bad thing if it tightens their grip on the Hormuz strait, he added, and “the Iranians have been prepping for this war for the last three weeks, so they are ready to fight”.

Krieg said he expects “nothing is going to happen until the 3rd of November [the date of the US midterm elections]”. After that, he said, the likelihood of war will “increase exponentially”.

Any new escalation would be worse than in February and March, he said, with Iran readier to strike critical infrastructure in Gulf countries.

He said the threat to the Gulf “will be unprecedented”.

Oil flows out of the Gulf have increased substantially, easing the huge supply disruption caused by the United States/Israel war on Iran.

Crude exports from the Gulf averaged 24.6 million barrels per day (bpd) in the week to October 18, exceeding the pre-war average, according to market intelligence firm Kpler.

Yet, oil prices continue to rise.

Brent crude, the global benchmark, is trading at its highest prices since April, up more than 60 percent compared with before the war.

On Friday, Brent crude front-month futures – contracts for oil deliveries in December – rose more than 2 percent to briefly top $117 a barrel.

The climbing prices reflect anxiety about the possibility of renewed hostilities in the US war on Iran, dwindling oil stocks, and the increased costs of transporting supplies out of the region, according to market analysts.

“The market is doing exactly what it is supposed to do: It is telling us there is plenty of prompt oil, but there is no end to this war in sight – in fact … escalation is very likely,” Adi Imsirovic, a lecturer in energy systems at the University of Oxford, told Al Jazeera.

“Therefore, futures markets reflect that expectation,” Imsirovic, a veteran oil trader, said.

Oil producers have become increasingly adept at responding to the volatile climate in the Middle East to keep supplies flowing.

Facing the threat of Iranian attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, shipping lines have established a shuttle system involving ship-to-ship transfers off Oman and the United Arab Emirates to reduce the distance any one vessel must travel in perilous waters.

Shuttle boats carry the oil through the strait and load it onto waiting tankers once they are out of the danger zone.

In August, more than 70 percent of the crude that crossed the strait did so via ship-to-ship transfers, according to Kpler.

Oil producers have also ramped up exports that bypass the strait altogether via Saudi Arabia’s East-West pipeline, which carries oil supplies from its eastern oil fields to its Yanbu port on the Red Sea in the west, and the United Arab Emirates’ Habshan-Fujairah pipeline.

As of September, 40 percent of exports from the Gulf were bypassing the strait, a conduit for one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies during peacetime, compared with 17 percent before the war, according to Kpler data.

The soaring cost of delivery

Such workarounds have nonetheless come at a cost.

Freight costs have reached as much as $40 per barrel in recent weeks, about 10 times the usual rate, according to data from the London Stock Exchange Group, the surge driven by elevated insurance premiums in addition to logistical challenges.

October has been the deadliest month for attacks on commercial vessels since the start of the war, with 32 incidents logged by the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) as of Friday.

“So barrels are moving, but neither smoothly nor reliably. That should not be read as a sign of normalisation,” Isabel Figuerola-Ferretti, an expert in oil markets at Comillas Pontifical University in Madrid, Spain, told Al Jazeera.

“Delivering a barrel has become far more expensive,” Figuerola-Ferretti said.

While market intelligence data has shown exports reaching pre-war levels at various points in recent weeks, the longer-term supply trend is less clear.

Pavel Molchanov, an investment strategist at Raymond James & Associates, expressed scepticism that supply has returned to the pre-conflict trend.

“The IEA’s most recent production data – for September – shows OPEC Gulf production at 15.8 million bpd, which equates to 75 percent of the pre-war baseline,” Molchanov told Al Jazeera, referring to the International Energy Agency’s latest energy outlook.

“That slightly surpassed July’s 74 percent to reach the highest level since the start of the war, but it’s still a considerable distance from 100 percent.”

Meanwhile, oil stockpiles, a buffer during supply disruptions, are waning.

Observed inventories fell by 10 million barrels in September, taking the global stockpile to 509 million barrels below its pre-war level, according to the IEA.

“The market has moved to a chronic squeeze, driven by concrete supply risks: Hormuz transit, shipping and depleted inventories,” Figuerola-Ferretti said.

No reprieve anytime soon

With no permanent end to the Iran war in sight, few analysts see prices returning to normal anytime soon.

Brent futures for delivery in October 2027 stood at more than $90 a barrel on Friday, in a sign that markets see normality as a long way off, still.

“When could prices return to $70? Not soon,” Figuerola-Ferretti said.

“It would need durable de-escalation, a return to normal transit and shipping conditions through Hormuz, rebuilt inventories and freight costs back to normal,” she added.

Molchanov, the investment strategist, said he did not believe supply could realistically exceed 85 percent of pre-war levels without a permanent diplomatic solution to the war.

“Once the political groundwork is in place, the next steps will be logistical: Demining Hormuz, bringing shipping crews back to work, and resuming production at currently shut-in oilfields,” he said.

The epic war drama is based on a true story and viewers have hailed it an ‘outstanding masterpiece’ that’s ‘as good as Saving Private Ryan’ – it’s leaving Netflix on November 5.

For most film fans when the subject of war films arises a handful of reliable titles dominate the conversation and establish the standard. Movies such as Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down, and The Hurt Locker have long been regarded as masterworks in the genre, with discussions inevitably returning to these films.

However, audiences are now claiming there’s another war movie by a legendary actor and director that rivals, if not surpasses, the Holy Trinity referenced above.

Viewers have just a few more days remaining to watch the ‘masterpiece’ war drama, though, as the film is departing the Netflix library on November 5.

Featuring an outstanding Bradley Cooper in the central role – who has received endless praise for his titular performance in the picture – this 2014 war drama has been helmed by acting icon Clint Eastwood.

American Sniper is presently streaming on Netflix – and audiences simply cannot get enough of the war drama, reports the Express.

The picture’s official synopsis states: “Navy S.E.A.L. sniper Chris Kyle’s pinpoint accuracy saves countless lives on the battlefield and turns him into a legend. Back home with his family after four tours of duty, however, Chris finds that it is the war he can’t leave behind.”

Sienna Miller plays the female lead of the picture alongside Cooper, and the leading duo are supported by Luke Grimes, Jake McDorman, Cory Hardrict, Kevin Lacz, Navid Negahban, and Keir O’Donnell in additional roles. American Sniper draws from the 2012 memoir of the same title written by war veteran Chris Kyle alongside Scott McEwen and Jim DeFelice.

The war drama proved a colossal box office triumph, raking in $547 million against a production budget of roughly $59 million.

Beyond its commercial triumph, the picture garnered critical acclaim, securing six Academy Award nominations including Best Picture, Best Adapted Screenplay, and Best Actor for Cooper, while ultimately claiming an Oscar for Best Sound Editing.

Audiences are completely taken with the war drama, as one fan writes on Rotten Tomatoes: “Powerful, emotional and very gritty. Directed to a tee by Clint Eastwood and Bradley Cooper excels as usual exceptionally well in character. Top class cinematography and writing. Succeeds in gripping you to the point where you can almost experience the settings physically. Outstanding on absolutely every level. Truly a memorable movie about a memorable man.”

Another viewer said of the film: “I can’t remember a movie in the last decade, that was as riveting and captivating as “American Sniper.” I kept seeing the trailer on TV and when I finally went to see it, I was already jacked-up…and it delivered. A+ Script A+ Director A+ Lead Actor A+ Supporting Actors A+ Cinematographer. Eastwood, Cooper and the screenwriter made a great team…which eventually became a great film.”

While another audience review reads: “One of the best war movies of our time. The character is really in focus and has a lot of development which makes it stand out in the sea of meaningless war stories. Really emotional and intense throughout. Amazing performance from Bradley Cooper too.”

Critics have been left equally bowled over, as one writes: “… a mature film of the toll war takes on its warriors, and you should see it, regardless of your politics.”

While another reviewer noted: “What a surprise that rather than an uncritical testament to the might of the armed forces, Eastwood delivers this complex, conflicted and profoundly moving look at the military machine, and the toll it takes on the soldiers.”

A third critic added: “American Sniper is devastating on the emotional level, especially with a very buffed-up Bradley Cooper in the lead role.”

American Sniper is available to stream on Netflix till November 4.

Soon after a federal judge in Los Angeles sharply rejected a Trump administration effort to block 20,000 California ballots from voters it alleged may be noncitizens, the U.S. Justice Department announced it will appeal — leaving attorneys on both sides preparing Thursday for yet another court battle.

That was despite the lower court judge calling the request an unlawful threat to eligible voters in Tuesday’s midterm election and to free and fair American elections moving forward, and the same appellate court having already rejected the same plan days prior.

“Every day, more ballots are processed by election officials. This ongoing emergency disenfranchises American citizens through dilution,” wrote First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, the lead prosecutor in L.A.

Early Thursday, Gov. Gavin Newsom swiped back at the Trump administration, writing, “A warning to Donald Trump: I’m deploying election lawyers to key battleground districts in California to protect every vote. And I just made it a FELONY to illegally seize ballots.”

With just days to go until polls close, the heated election war between California and the Trump administration is showing no signs of slowing down, despite multiple court orders rejecting the administration’s central effort to interfere in the midterms by accusing state and county officials of willfully turning a blind eye to voter fraud.

That’s in part because lawyers within the U.S. Justice Department have been unrelenting in their pursuit of such control, both through court orders and threats to state and county officials. It’s also because those same officials have refused to yield, denouncing the threats in recent letters back to the Justice Department as unconvincing and illegal.

“Be aware that we consider DOJ’s efforts to threaten California election officials with criminal sanctions for following federal and state law to be an effort to unlawfully intimidate both election officials and California voters, which can undermine voters’ faith in the election process,” Susan K. Blitch, counsel for Monterey County, wrote in one.

Several elections experts warned the administration is trying to sow confusion and suspicion around an election in which the Republican Party is poised to lose ground, in part so they can reject the outcome. But they also said the courts have consistently rebuffed the Trump administration, and will continue to do so through Nov. 3 and after — with the recent rulings in the case over the 20,000 flagged ballots a perfect example.

“The federal government lost in every way it could possibly lose. It lost on the law, and it lost on the facts, and it lost on the equities — [or] weighing the harms to the various parties,” said Rick Hasen, director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project at UCLA School of Law.

Appeal, rebuke, appeal

Last week, Trump administration attorneys decided that U.S. District Judge David O. Carter was not ruling quickly enough on their emergency request for a temporary restraining order to block California, Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk Dean Logan from counting the 20,000 ballots it asserted were from “likely noncitizens” — so they appealed straight to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

On Monday, a three-judge panel there — including two appointees of President Trump and one of President Biden — denied the appeal for a lack of jurisdiction, because Carter hadn’t been given a chance to weigh in. However, two of the judges — Mark J. Bennett, one of the Trump appointees, and Gabriel P. Sanchez, the Biden appointee — also wrote separately to make clear that they would have denied the administration’s request on the merits, too, for being likely unconstitutional and in violation of federal law.

On Wednesday, Carter, an appointee of President Clinton, issued his own ruling, in which he wrote that the administration’s allegations about noncitizen voters were “not credible” and that the intervention it sought would violate a host of federal laws, sow chaos in the ongoing midterm election, likely lead to the disenfranchisement of legitimate voters and foster future political meddling in elections.

“This request violates longstanding constitutional principles mandating that states have control over their elections,” Carter wrote. “If [the Trump administration’s] last-minute request for relief were granted, either party could create chaos for their own political purposes to disrupt the election process.”

Carter wrote that never in American history “has the federal government, on the eve of an election, sought to coerce a state and local government to abandon their own Constitutional elections procedures and bend to the will of the Executive Branch,” and that, in bringing its suit, the Trump administration was asking the court to “believe that it reigns as a sole sovereign.”

“But California and its people are sovereign, too,” Carter wrote.

The ruling — forceful, unequivocal and based on several of the same arguments made by Bennett and Sanchez — was cheered by state officials and voting rights groups. Elections experts said it squared directly with their understanding of the law, and was appropriate in the face of the Trump administration’s unprecedented, legally baseless effort to intervene in an ongoing state-run election.

Trump administration officials did not see it that way, and weren’t taking no for an answer. Justice Department lawyers promptly filed notice of appeal back to the 9th Circuit — where the case is likely, though not guaranteed, to land before the same three-judge panel that previously rejected the administration’s demands.

War of words

On Wednesday night, Newsom appeared on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” and predicted Trump will take sweeping steps to “literally suppress the vote, to set the conditions where he will then express doubt in the electoral outcome, and suggest that it was rigged.” But he also said California is fighting back and prepared.

“Right now, I am focused on getting over 1,000 poll workers, folks out there to monitor the DOJ monitors that Trump’s gonna send to try to steal this election,” Newsom said. “We have been running tabletop exercises. We have 1,000 volunteers. We have 134 election law attorneys that we’re sending out.”

On Thursday, Essayli replied to the latter deployment, writing, “You’re going to protect every legal or illegal vote? What about California citizens whose votes are being diluted by ineligible voters. Do their constitutional rights matter.”

Trump, meanwhile, asserted with no evidence that “there are hundreds of thousands of bad ballots, bad votes, in California. Millions, in my opinion.” He said California has “very corrupt elections,” and that if it had honest ones, he “would have won it by a lot.”

The remarks were just the latest in a swirling and highly public war of words between state and federal officials.

In Carter’s courtroom Tuesday, Essayli claimed the federal government has maintained a collaborative “tone” since it first demanded the state set aside ballots, and said he was surprised at how “adversarial” state elections officials had been. But Essayli and other Justice Department officials have been engaged for weeks in an aggressive back and forth with California officials online — which is highly unusual for prosecutors actively litigating related cases.

When Newsom’s office recently wrote that “Trump’s DOJ is so desperate to invent ‘widespread voter fraud,’ it sent California counties lists of people who NEVER voted — and voters from the WRONG COUNTY. Absolute clown show!,” Essayli shot back, “Hey Fraud King,” with a crown emoji. “We’re not waiting for them to vote.”

Also unusual have been the threats Justice Department attorneys have been sending to county elections officials in California, including in a series of Oct. 23 letters in which they asserted varying numbers of “likely aliens” per county, set a 48-hour deadline for the counties to cooperate with federal authorities to prove those voters are citizens.

In one letter to Kristin Connelly, head of the Contra Costa County registrar’s office, U.S. Atty. Craig Missakian flagged 407 potential noncitizens in the county, and said he was writing “to make unmistakably clear the legal implications” of processing any ballots from those voters.

On Wednesday, Thomas L. Geiger, Contra Costa County counsel, responded with his own letter, questioning the accuracy of the noncitizen claims and saying it would be “legally unsound” for Connelly to “disregard both California and federal law” in order to comply with Missakian’s demands.

Other county attorneys hit a sharper tone in their own responses. Tony Lopresti, an attorney for Santa Clara County, wrote that his county “reserves its rights to pursue all legal remedies against DOJ for its unlawful intimidation of election officials and California voters.”

Public anger in Syria has threatened to boil over following disagreements between Amman and Damascus over Jordanian attacks on the southern Syrian regions of Deraa and Suwayda on Monday evening.

Jordan said its air force had killed more than 20 ISIL (ISIS) fighters in retaliatory strikes on what it called “dens of terrorist organisations in southern Syria”, linked to suspects accused of being behind last week’s attack on a Greek Orthodox church in the kingdom, which was claimed by the group.

But the next day, anger mounted in Syria as images spread of a slain grandmother and her three grandchildren.

While Jordan has launched attacks on Syria in the past, including assaults that led to civilian casualties, this latest episode seems to have captured public anger.

“The anger also reflects an expectation that the authorities in Damascus should now be able to protect Syrians and demand answers when they are killed or harmed,” Navvar Saban, a researcher in security and military affairs at the Arab Center for Contemporary Syrian Studies, told Al Jazeera.

“If people feel Damascus is more concerned with protecting the relationship with the Jordanians than accountability, some of the anger could turn inward.”

Contradicting accounts

Monday’s attack reportedly came in response to the assault on a Greek Orthodox church that killed nine people and wounded at least 34 others in the village of Hamoud in the Karak governorate, about 120km (75 miles) southwest of the capital, Amman.

Jordanian authorities said the attack was carried out by “extremist terrorists”.

Jordan’s King Abdullah II promised to respond with an “iron fist”.

“Jordan has absorbed many terrorist attacks before, but this one was especially brazen given the Christian church and the nature of the event being targeted,” Sean Yom, an expert on Jordan at Temple University in the United States, told Al Jazeera.

“Because of its unprecedented nature, explicitly targeting a protected Christian minority in the tribal heartland of Karak, the government instantly felt popular demands to show results from the investigation and arrest of the perpetrators. This pressure to be responsive is especially acute right now, because security and policing remain core strengths of the Jordanian state.”

Jordanian authorities arrested three men connected to the attack on the church on Monday. That evening, Jordan also launched the attack on southern Syria, which it said was carried out in coordination with authorities in Damascus.

But Damascus has contradicted that account.

The Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement that it had informed Jordan of its “complete reservation” over the attacks, and said they took place “without prior coordination or notification with the Syrian side”. An official described the strikes as “treacherous”.

“Both governments have something to defend politically,” Saban said. “Amman wants to show that it acted against a serious threat through legitimate security channels. On the other hand, Damascus cannot afford to appear to have approved an operation that killed Syrian families. The investigation needs to establish who communicated with whom, when, and about which target. Until then, I would avoid either assuming Syria secretly approved everything or treating the coordination as a simple misunderstanding.”

The family’s bodies were recovered after they were killed by the Jordanian strike on a tent in the village of al-Taff, in the Lajat area of northeastern Deraa province. Syria’s civil defence said three other family members were wounded in the attack.

Meanwhile, in the al-Shayah farms near Nassib, in the Deraa countryside, an 80-year-old man named Riyad Karrad was also killed by a strike. Another man named Mutlaq Abu al-Khalil, 60, was killed in Shuhayb, in Suwayda’s northern countryside.

Syrian customs authorities closed the Nassib border crossing with Jordan on Tuesday, before reopening it to passenger and commercial traffic on Wednesday.

Syrian-Jordanian relations

Jordan has launched several air strikes on Syria since 2023. It says those strikes generally target arms or drug smugglers.

Under the regime of former President Bashar al-Assad, southern Syria became the site of cross-border drug smuggling, including the stimulant captagon. Some of those operations are believed to have continued after the fall of the Assad regime. At times, the Jordanian strikes have killed civilians, such as a January 2024 attack that Human Rights Watch said killed women and children.

Since the fall of the regime in December 2024, relations between Amman and Damascus have been lukewarm, though slowly improving. Analysts say this is down to shared interests.

“Syria needs healthy trading and commercial partners like Jordan, and Jordan wants Syria to become more secure and coherent for three reasons,” Yom said.

“A strong and friendly Syria can accept more repatriated refugees from Jordan, where there are still hundreds of thousands. It can also help seal the porous border and prevent arms and drug smuggling activities along their shared frontier. And lastly, a stronger allied Syria helps Jordan resist Israel’s creeping annexation, including the West Bank as well as more parts of Syria and Lebanon. So both have mutual interests tied to their sovereignty in maintaining good relations.”

Amman was also the site of a July 2025 trilateral agreement signing between Syria, the US and Jordan aimed at resolving internal disputes over violence in Suwayda.

“Only days before the strike, the two foreign ministers were discussing a strategic partnership and preparing another meeting of their High Coordination Council that is a significant investment in the relationship,” Saban said. “My expectation is that this is a serious strain rather than a rupture. Both governments have strong reasons to keep cooperation over the border, armed groups smuggling, etc. But this incident raises an uncomfortable question for Damascus.”

For its part, Syria’s Foreign Ministry condemned the strikes as a violation of the country’s sovereignty but seemed to indicate relations with Amman would continue to be strengthened. It said Damascus is coordinating with ⁠Amman to establish a joint security committee to strengthen border security and prevent similar incidents.

In the meantime, Saban said that regardless of coordination with Damascus, accountability is needed to subside public anger.

“Even if an investigation established that Damascus approved some part of the operation, that would not explain why those people were killed or remove the need for accountability,” he said. “Ultimately, the families deserve a specific answer about the strike that killed their relatives, their friends, their family. Syrians need to understand why their families got killed.”

It tells the remarkable true story of a resistance hero and his courage in the face of terror during World War Two

There is no shortage of films about the Second World War, but this “masterpiece”, now streaming on Netflix, tells the long-forgotten tale of one man’s extraordinary bravery in the face of unimaginable terror.

The Norwegian film draws on the real-life experiences of resistance fighter Gunnar Sønsteby during the conflict. Starring Sjur Vatne Brean in the lead role and helmed by director John Andreas Andersen, Number 24 charts Sønsteby’s journey from 1940 through to the end of the Second World War.

Taking its title from Sønsteby’s most frequently used code name, Number 24 delves into how the Oslo Group carried out sabotage operations and assassinations throughout the war. The film is narrated by an elderly Sønsteby as he recounts his remarkable experiences to a group of students.

Both film fans and critics alike are utterly captivated by this raw and gritty war film, which currently holds a perfect score on the film review site Rotten Tomatoes.

One critic wrote: “Based on the real-life story of Norwegian hero Gunnar Sønsteby, director John Andreas Andersen delivers a gripping, often violent thriller that highlights the best and worst of humankind.”, reports Wales Online.

Another said: “This biopic about Gunnar Sønsteby, the most highly decorated citizen in Norway, explores the moral grey areas during war under brutal invading forces. Switching between the past and the present, the film sensitively contrasts justice and necessity.”

Meanwhile a third added: “The director crafts a mostly patriotic picture of a man solely dedicated to duty. It’s an uncompromising approach that often makes for a stirring watch even through a narrow lens.”

Fans were equally effusive in their praise. One wrote: “The lead actor is phenomenal. As a man of laser focus and few words, Gunnar commands the screen through the smallest, most restrained expressions and every one of them lands. It’s a masterclass in subtlety, and he delivers a gripping, believable performance.”

Another said: “Well worth watching! Makes me want to go and learn more about this incredible person. You will need a tissue at the ending. You will also need to use your pause button to read the subtitles at the end – they do contain useful information.”

While a third contributed: “Important WWII story of resistance in Norway. Thought provoking and moving. Different points of view from being in different positions when war comes into your life, your family and your country.”

And another wrote: “WOW! WOW! ! . Fantastic in every way My wife and I loved this. So realistic and well acted, directed,etc. Watch,enjoy and respect the Norwegian patriots.”

Number 24 is streaming now on Netflix.

Khartoum, Sudan – Rasha Abdelaziz Musa works every day for seven hours selling tea. But by the time she finishes for the day at 10pm, she’s still unsure if she has enough to feed her four children.

Musa, 39, is doing her best, but her earnings are increasingly no longer enough to cover soaring food prices in the Sudanese capital.

Her husband, a member of the Sudanese military, has spent more than eight months on the front lines of the country’s war, in which the military has been fighting the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces since 2023. Musa has not heard from him for months, and he has sent no money.

In his absence, Musa has been left to provide for their children, who attend kindergarten, primary and secondary school.

Musa told Al Jazeera that feeding her family costs about 40,000 Sudanese pounds per day ($4 at the parallel-market exchange rate) before accounting for rent, household essentials and other expenses.

Some of the family staples are ful medames, a dish of stewed fava beans, or lentils. When lentils are too expensive, Musa serves taamiya, or falafel, sandwiches.

Prices regularly change, and Musa often ends the day in debt to the traders she gets her food from.

Large families struggle

Musa is not alone in struggling to cover her family’s daily expenses.

Ahmed Youssef, 61, supports a family of 12 through his work in a butcher’s shop and as an occasional intermediary in livestock sales. He can earn 90,000 to 140,000 pounds ($9 to $14) when a deal succeeds, but that income is irregular.

He told Al Jazeera that his household spends more than 100,000 Sudanese pounds ($10) daily and his income is no longer enough to support the family.

“One income is no longer enough to cover the family’s needs, and sometimes my older children have to work to help meet expenses,” Youssef told Al Jazeera.

Ali Fadil supports a family of 10. Without a permanent job, he goes to the market each morning to look for work. Some days, the 57-year-old earns enough to buy food, but on other days, he finds no work at all. And yet his daily expenses still reach about 70,000 pounds ($7), with rising prices adding to the financial pressure he faces.

“Sometimes I skip meals so I can pay for school fees or medical costs,” he said. “I also borrow money to meet other obligations.”

Food prices rise as Sudanese pound weakens

A survey of four local markets in the Khartoum State area by Al Jazeera last week found that prices for several essential foods had risen sharply within days, making it increasingly difficult for families to plan their spending.

A kilogramme (2.2.lb) of sugar cost about 10,000 pounds ($1), up from 9,000 pounds ($0.90) two days earlier. A litre (1 quart) of cooking oil rose to 25,000 pounds ($2.50) from 20,000 pounds ($2) while a loaf of bread costs 500 pounds ($0.05), compared with 300 pounds ($0.03) a week earlier.

Lentils cost about 10,000 pounds ($1) per kilogramme, up from 8,000 pounds ($0.80), and rice was priced at 13,000 pounds ($1.30) per kilogramme, up from 10,000 pounds ($1). Powdered milk reached 70,000 pounds ($7) per kilogramme, up from 60,000 ($6) two days earlier.

The Sudanese pound has also continued to weaken. According to exchange rates monitored by Al Jazeera, $1 was trading at 10,050 Sudanese pounds on the parallel market on Friday, compared with 9,500 the previous day.

Food inflation adds to pressure on households

Official figures offer further evidence of the rising cost of living, particularly in Khartoum and other urban areas.

According to Sudan’s Central Bureau of Statistics, prices across the country were 28 percent higher in September than a year earlier, up from 26 percent in August. Prices rose by 7.5 percent in September alone, more than double the increase recorded the previous month.

Food prices have risen even faster. Across Sudan, food and beverages cost nearly 37 percent more in September than a year earlier, up from an annual increase of about 21 percent in August. In September alone, food prices jumped by more than 17 percent.

The situation was particularly severe in Khartoum State, where prices were nearly 60 percent higher than a year earlier. Prices rose by more than 15 percent in September alone, following an increase of nearly 9 percent in August.

That sharp increase comes as the capital region struggles to recover from widespread destruction caused by the war. Although displaced residents have begun returning and businesses are gradually reopening since the military recaptured the state from the RSF last year, damaged infrastructure and rising transport costs continue to constrain the availability of goods.

The return of residents has also increased demand for essential supplies, further driving up prices. In September, fuel shortages hit the capital as consumption rose faster than supplies could be replenished.

Urban areas have generally been hit harder than rural communities. Food prices in towns and cities were 55 percent higher than a year earlier, up from about 40 percent in August. Overall, prices in urban areas rose by 40 percent over the past year, compared with about 21 percent in rural areas.

The war is the main driver of these increases, disrupting livelihoods and supply chains. According to the World Bank, Sudan’s economy shrank by an estimated 29 percent in 2023 and a further 14 percent in 2024 as the war devastated businesses, disrupted agricultural production and eliminated jobs.

The conflict has also forced millions of people from their homes with nearly 8.9 million people still internally displaced as of April, according to the International Organization for Migration.

War destroys livelihoods

Journalist and economic affairs specialist Khalid Teks said Sudan’s economic deterioration began long before the war. Falling oil production after South Sudan’s secession in 2011 worsened conditions as did the depreciation of the pound, cash shortages, international isolation, political conflict and corruption in the years preceding the removal of President Omar al-Bashir in 2019.

Teks said political instability during the power transition undermined Sudan’s economic performance, and deep reforms were not implemented before war broke out in 2023. The conflict devastated infrastructure and productive sectors, depleted savings and disrupted economic activity. The climate has also been a factor. Strong agricultural production in 2024 was followed by concern over limited rainfall this year and possible food shortages after the harvest begins in November.

Teks told Al Jazeera that families increasingly deplete their savings and sell their possessions to cover everyday expenses.

He also pointed to disruptions to remittance channels, which many Sudanese households rely on for financial support.

Teks called for easier humanitarian access, an end to the war, direct support for vulnerable households and low-interest loans for small businesses and craft enterprises.

“The government needs to provide direct support through dedicated funds and the Zakat Chamber, facilitate humanitarian organisations and offer affordable loans for small businesses and vocational activities,” Teks said. “This could help reopen markets and workshops and expand microfinance.

Gulf countries have stepped up diplomacy with Iran in a bid to de-escalate tensions across the Middle East, amid fears of renewed US strikes on Tehran and intensifying hostilities between Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen and Saudi Arabia.

The three nations that signed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement in August – Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye – and diplomats from Qatar met with high-ranking Iranian officials on Monday in an effort to prevent the resumption of all-out war.

Underscoring the high stakes, the meeting in Tehran was attended by Saudi Minister of Defence Prince Khalid bin Salman Al Saud, just days after Iran-aligned Houthi fighters struck Saudi airports, ports and oil facilities.

Meanwhile, during a diplomatic visit to the United Kingdom’s University of Cambridge on Monday, Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi called for a regional security framework, including a “non-aggression pact”, between the Gulf countries and Iran under which the United States would no longer be the primary provider of security.

While Gulf countries appear determined to avoid another round of conflict – which has already restricted passage through the Strait of Hormuz, disrupted global oil and gas supplies and wreaked havoc on energy facilities and infrastructure in Gulf states – questions remain over whether a regional agreement is possible and where it would leave relations between the US and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).

Regional security or de-escalation?

On Friday, US President Donald Trump repeated warnings that Washington may carry out another military operation against Iran as rising fuel prices weigh on the US midterm elections scheduled for November 3. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said Iran would respond more forcefully to any renewed US military action, stoking fears of an even wider escalation.

While this week’s talks in Tehran mark the first high-level ‌contact between Iran and the Mecca mutual defence pact nations since the US-Israel war on Iran began on February 28, reports suggest they have stopped short of landing an agreement.

Reuters reported that Qatari mediators ⁠presented ⁠Iran with a draft deal on Sunday, which Tehran was expected to respond to by the end of the week. On Wednesday, the news agency quoted Iranian officials as saying Qatar had put ‌forward ideas that were unacceptable and that Tehran would ⁠show ⁠no flexibility regarding the nuclear ‌issue.

Khaled Batarfi, a Saudi political analyst and academic, said the visit to Tehran indicated that Saudi Arabia was willing to give Iran a “last warning” and “submit to the region’s concerns”, but that Iran has so far refused.

“The gap is [wide] and what makes it worse is that there is no trust,” Batarfi told Al Jazeera.

Observers say diverging views are unlikely to turn the current diplomatic efforts into a lasting infrastructure. “It’s really hard to see a regional security framework coming out in the coming months or even years,” Aniseh Bassiri Tabrizi, an associate fellow at Chatham House in London, told Al Jazeera.

“What we are seeing is more small groups, flexible groups of countries that are taking the lead in trying to reach either bilateral or multilateral solutions,” the analyst said. “A regional security framework would need the same vision for the region, which is not necessarily shared… among the GCC countries themselves.”

Challenges ahead

Hamidreza Azizi, a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, said Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye share concerns that a prolonged confrontation between Iran and the US could further destabilise the region.

“The main obstacle remains the fundamental disagreement between Tehran and Washington over the sequence of commitments,” Azizi told Al Jazeera. “The US wants Iranian concessions, particularly on the nuclear issue, while Tehran insists that its conditions for ending the war must be met first.”

“Regional mediation could help bridge this gap, possibly through an interim arrangement, but the willingness of regional actors to facilitate an agreement does not necessarily mean that the two principal parties are prepared to make the necessary compromises,” he added.

As for a new security order, Azizi said regional countries do not share a common understanding of what it should look like and what role the US – which has so far been the GCC’s main security partner – would have left to play.

Iran has long advocated for a regional security architecture that would reduce or eliminate the US military presence. “Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, however, remain deeply integrated into the US security system, and there is little indication that they intend to abandon it,” Azizi said.

“The recent war has certainly raised questions about the reliability of American security guarantees, but this has encouraged these countries to diversify their security partnerships rather than fundamentally redefine their strategic alignments.”

The localised ceasefire, secured by US First Lady Melania Trump, will allow evacuations and aid deliveries to Oleshky.

Russia has suspended strikes on the Ukrainian province of Kherson as a localised ceasefire takes effect ahead of a humanitarian mission led by the United States’ First Lady Melania Trump.

The pause in fighting started at 01:00 GMT on Tuesday, according to the Russian Defence Ministry, to allow for an aid mission into the Russian-occupied town of Oleshky in southern Kherson later this week.

The mission will enable aid deliveries and allow evacuations from the front-line town, which is suffering acute shortages of food, medicine and other basic supplies.

The agreement was announced on October ‌23 and brokered by US First Lady Melania Trump, with the additional involvement of Pope Leo, as Washington seeks to revive peace talks between Moscow and Kyiv after more than four and a half years of fighting.

Up to 2,000 people remain in Oleshky. They have been unable to leave because of explosive mines and drone attacks in the area, according to the United Nations.

The town, which had a pre-war population of 24,000 people, lies on the eastern bank of the Dnipro River in the partially occupied Kherson region, opposite Kherson city, which is held by Ukrainian forces. Russian troops seized Oleshky during the first ⁠days of their February 2022 invasion and have controlled it ever since.

Oleshky has suffered extensive war damage and was hit hard by flooding after the destruction of the nearby Kakhovka Dam in 2023.

The localised ceasefire is due to last through Saturday, or longer, amid deep mistrust between Russia and Ukraine that has thwarted previous attempts at ceasefires.

Negotiators involved in the aid mission said doctors, medicines, food supplies and water would be taken to Oleshky before evacuation corridors are opened.

Authorities say the fire in Brasov in September is part of a broader Russian campaign against European countries that support Ukraine.

Romanian authorities say they have uncovered a network “coordinated” by Russia that they believe was responsible for a fire at an industrial site near a state-owned weapons factory in September.

Romania’s Intelligence Service said on Monday that the blaze in the central city of Brasov on September 14 was “part of a wider campaign of sabotage operations coordinated” by Russia amid its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

The agency said the operations were aimed at arms manufacturers and “other targets of military and industrial interest”.

“These actions are intended to intimidate, undermine defence capabilities and weaken the contribution of the targeted states to European and regional security,” it said in a statement.

There was no immediate comment from Russia on Romania’s claim. Moscow has previously repeatedly denied such accusations.

Romania’s Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism, known as DIICOT, said three people had been involved in the Brasov fire – two Belarusians and a Ukrainian, all living in European Union countries.

Two were “tracked down and remanded in custody in Germany while they were preparing to commit similar offenses”, the directorate said.

The third remains at large in Poland.

According to Romania’s Intelligence Service, recruits for such networks are often found on social media and are first offered money “for a seemingly harmless task”, such as “observing or photographing certain targets”.

Over time, “the tasks become increasingly serious, potentially involving acts of vandalism, arson or even murder”, it said.

‘Hybrid’ war

Romania, a member of the EU and NATO, shares a border of more than 600km with Ukraine.

Its centrist president, Nicusor Dan, has said the country is a target of a hybrid war that Russia is waging to destabilise nations backing Kyiv, citing drone incursions into Romanian airspace, cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns and sabotage.

Foreign Minister Dan Neculaescu said the fire in Brasov was “part of a broader campaign of sabotage across Europe” targeting military production.

“Hybrid attacks will not hold us back from strengthening our resilience and defense,” he wrote on X.

The accusation follows a string of incidents at defence sites across Europe in recent weeks.

In September, explosions and a fire erupted at an ammunition storage site in Bulgaria, weeks after a blaze at another munitions facility in the country. Both sites are operated by the Bulgarian arms maker EMCO, whose munitions are used in Ukraine.

That same month, firebombs were thrown near the offices of a defence company in Munich, and Romanian authorities said they had detained a Russian citizen accused of filming and photographing military sites in preparation for sabotage.

In August, a blast struck an ammunition factory near Rome in Italy operated by the arms maker KNDS.

At sea, at least eight cargo ships have been hit off the coasts of Romania and Bulgaria over the past three weeks, and about 34 sailors have been reported dead or missing.

Dan, the Romanian president, has called the attacks on ships in Romanian waters “a new example of the tragic consequences of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine”.

A year ago, Poland and Romania also detained eight people suspected of taking part in a Russian plot to send exploding parcels to Ukraine.

Doha, Qatar – African countries are feeling the economic fallout from the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, with rising fuel and fertiliser prices threatening to drive up food costs, according to trade ministers from the region and the United Nations’ top trade official.

The crisis around the Strait of Hormuz due to the United States and Israel’s war on Iran needs to be resolved “sooner rather than later”, Luz Maria de la Mora, director of the Division on International Trade and Commodities at UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD), told Al Jazeera at the World Investment Forum on Monday. She warned that soaring fertiliser prices could affect harvests next year.

“Prices of fertilisers have risen dramatically … so many countries have decided to reduce the use of fertilisers, which will have an effect next year in terms of crops,” she said.

“It may have an effect on availability of food and prices of food.”

The US-Israel war on Iran has highlighted the world’s heavy reliance on the strategic waterway, through which one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas trade previously passed.

Against this backdrop, Doha hosted UNCTAD’s World Investment Forum on October 25 and 26, bringing together heads of state, policymakers, CEOs and investors to discuss global investment and sustainable development.

The Strait of Hormuz’s disruption has rippled through African economies. In Zimbabwe, rising fuel and fertiliser prices are a critical concern in a country where more than 70 percent of the population depends on agriculture, Monica Mutsvangwa, the country’s minister of women affairs, community, small and medium enterprise development, told Al Jazeera.

Uganda, another heavily agrarian economy, has also been hit, with fuel prices more than doubling, Sanjay Tanna, the country’s minister of trade, industry and cooperatives, told Al Jazeera.

The impact extends beyond the immediate cost of energy. Rising oil prices have disrupted supply chains, with effects lasting longer than anticipated, according to de la Mora.

“The effects are lasting longer than we would have expected or would have wanted,” she said.

‘Friend to all, enemy to none’

The shock has also exposed differences in how African economies weather global disruption.

Uganda’s reliance on subsistence farming has helped cushion the impact, with domestic food production offering some protection from international market volatility, said Tanna.

But the country has not been insulated from financial pressures: its currency has lost 10 percent of its value against the US dollar, the minister said. The Ugandan shilling has steadily declined since mid-2026.

For Zimbabwe, the crisis has reinforced the importance of attracting investment while maintaining economic ties across geopolitical divides.

Amid the simmering trade war between the US and China, Harare considers itself a potential partner to investors from either side, Mutsvangwa said.

“We are a friend to all and an enemy to none,” she said.

“Money has no color … If we get an investor who comes into our country, follows the rules and regulations of the country, makes his money, and Zimbabwe develops, that’s what we want.”

The official pointed to Zimbabwe’s deposits of more than 60 critical minerals, including lithium and graphite, as well as its tourism potential.

Trade in an unequal system

But attracting foreign capital remains a challenge for developing economies, with investment concentrated in a relatively small number of countries.

That concentration is “very understandable”, de la Mora said, arguing that investors need confidence that their money will generate returns.

“Capital is risk averse. Capital needs to have certainty that its investment is going to yield returns and it’s going to come to fruition,” she said.

Governments can help build that confidence through transparent institutions, the rule of law and investment in infrastructure, including reliable electricity, energy supplies and digital connectivity, she added.

The question of whether the international trading system treats all countries equally prompted a more blunt assessment from Uganda’s trade minister.

“Of course not,” said Tanna. “The world cannot be equal … It’s unfair, but we believe that, within the space that we are in, we are in a good space.”

Uganda was well placed for the future, he argued, because it produces its own food – an advantage at a time when international supply chains are under pressure.

For both Uganda and the Republic of Congo, building resilient economies also means investing in younger generations.

The Republic of Congo’s Deputy Prime Minister for Coordination, Development Infrastructure and Land Planning, Jean-Jacques Bouya, said the country had aligned its national development plan, Vision 2063, with the African Union’s broader development ambitions.

Connectivity – through electricity, digital infrastructure and physical links – is central to that strategy, he told Al Jazeera.

The Republic of Congo also wants to expand local processing so that more value from its natural resources remains within the country.

“Africa can no longer be a reservoir of raw materials, and neither can Congo – a place where raw materials are extracted, taken elsewhere, processed and then sold back to us at a much higher price. We cannot go on like this,” Bouya said.