The US will guide third-party ships through the Strait of Hormuz, President Donald Trump has said, describing the move as a humanitarian effort to help stranded crews.

An estimated 2,000 vessels have been trapped in and around the strait since Iran closed the waterway to most traffic in response to the US-Israeli bombing campaign launched on February 28. The US has since imposed its own naval blockade on Iranian ports.

In a post on Truth Social on Sunday, Trump said the initiative, dubbed Project Freedom and set to begin on Monday, is aimed at helping countries that are “neutral and innocent bystanders” in the conflict.

“For the good of Iran, the Middle East, and the United States, we have told these countries that we will guide their ships safely out of these restricted waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business,” Trump wrote.

The Wall Street Journal, citing a senior US official, described the initiative as a process through which countries, insurance companies, and shipping organizations can coordinate traffic through Hormuz. The official said it would not involve US warships escorting vessels.

Axios, also citing US officials, said US Navy ships would be “in the vicinity” in case they need to prevent Iran from attacking commercial vessels crossing the strait. The official added that the Navy would provide merchant ships with information about lanes that had not been mined by Iran.

Ebrahim Azizi, head of the Iranian parliament’s national security commission, dismissed Trump’s “delusional posts,” saying that any intervention in the strait would constitute a violation of the ceasefire.

Iranian media have released previously unseen footage showing the immediate aftermath of a strike on a girls’ elementary school in Minab that killed at least 175 people, most of them children.

The Shajareh Tayyebeh school in southern Iran was hit on February 28, in the early days of the US and Israeli bombing campaign. The building was located near a naval base but separated from military facilities by a fence visible in satellite imagery.

A short, disturbing video shared by SNN TV on Sunday shows two frightened young girls in what appear to be dust-covered school uniforms. One girl has bloodstains on her face and headscarf. Several people are seen running toward a building engulfed in smoke.

A video taken immediately after the explosion at Shajareh Taybeh Minab School in Iran has emerged. pic.twitter.com/e07UMRS1e8

— 1880 News (@1880News) May 3, 2026

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly denied that American forces were responsible. However, multiple investigations by media outlets and analysts have concluded that the school was likely hit by a US-made missile, with evidence pointing to a Tomahawk strike.

Iran has described the strike as a war crime, while the UN called it “a grave assault on children, on education, and on the future of an entire community.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has encouraged President Donald Trump to carry out a regime change operation in Iran for many years, former US National Security Adviser John Bolton has told Afshin Rattansi, host of ‘New World’.

West Jerusalem wanted Trump to launch an attack on Tehran already during his first presidential term and continued lobbying for it during his second one, Bolton said, who served between 2018 and 2019.

“I urged that our objective be regime change, so did Netanyahu,” he told Rattansi, explaining that “There is no change in what Trump has been hearing from” the Israeli prime minister over the years. He nevertheless denied that Trump’s decision to launch the attack in late February was influenced by Israel.

Bolton criticized the president for what he called the lack of a clear goal in his campaign against the Islamic Republic and said Trump had failed to “make the case to the American people” about “why the regime change in Iran is necessary” – despite it supposedly being a “very compelling one.”

Watch the full interview here:

The Pentagon has ordered the withdrawal of approximately 5,000 troops from Germany, with US President Donald Trump warning that the pullout could only be the beginning.

The move comes amid a sharp divide between the Trump administration and European NATO members over the Iran war, Washington’s calls to increase defense spending, and a bitter aftertaste from the dispute over Greenland.

‘Cutting a lot further’

The withdrawal was announced on Friday, with the Pentagon signaling that the process would be over within the next six to 12 months. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said that the “decision follows a thorough review of the Department’s force posture in Europe and is in recognition of theater requirements and conditions on the ground.”

In addition, Reuters reported that the US dropped a Biden-era plan to deploy a US battalion with long-range Tomahawk missiles to Germany.

Germany is home to America’s largest military presence in Europe, currently hosting more than 36,000 active-duty US personnel. It is also home to critical training, logistics, and medical infrastructure, including Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, the largest US military hospital abroad. In total, there are over 80,000 US troops in Europe, with many having been redeployed to the continent by the Biden administration after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022.

Iran war looms over the decision

The announcement came days after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz once again criticized the US-Israel war on Iran, saying that Washington “obviously has no strategy,” adding, referring to the US, that “an entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership.”

According to Reuters, the current transatlantic rift has also been exacerbated by Trump’s simmering anger over European pushback to his attempt to annex Greenland this winter.

US ‘schizophrenic’

According to an AP source, the US military was not been warned of the decision to pull troops from Germany and learned about it “in real time,” though the Pentagon disagreed, saying that the move “follows a comprehensive, multilayered process” with input from the European command and other top officials.

US lawmakers have also protested the withdrawal announcement, with Republican chairmen of the House and Senate Armed Services committees saying they were “very concerned” by the drawdown.

Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi and Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama urged the Pentagon to redeploy the troops eastward rather than send them home – to countries that “have made substantial investments to host US troops” on NATO’s front line – warning the decision risked “undermining deterrence and sending the wrong signal” to Russia.

Military buildup as planned

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius played down the news, calling the drawdown “foreseeable.” The Defense Ministry spokesperson also said the development showed “we must strengthen the European pillar within NATO.”

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk was blunter, saying that the greatest threat to NATO is not its external enemies, but rather its “ongoing disintegration[...] We must all do what it takes to reverse this disastrous trend.”

Still, the overall trend of the US detachment from Europe barely comes as a shock, with European NATO members looking to ramp up military spending. The rearmament drive was partly driven by Trump himself, who pushed other NATO members to invest 5% of GDP annually in core defense and defense-related spending by 2035.

On top of that, the European Commission unveiled its Readiness 2030 plan, which aims to provide more than €800 billion ($938 billion) in defense spending across the EU. Germany alone has embarked on a historic military buildup, committing to spend more than €500 billion on defense by 2029.

Moscow has consistently rejected speculation that it could attack NATO as “nonsense,” suggesting that European nations are using “propaganda” to portray Russia as an enemy to mask its own crises.

NATO is holding closed-door consultations with TV and film industry professionals across Europe and the US, The Guardian reported on Sunday. The move has prompted accusations that the bloc is working to leverage the arts for “fear mongering” and “propaganda,” it added.

The military bloc has held three private meetings with directors, producers and screenwriters in Los Angeles, Brussels and Paris, and is planning to convene with members of the Writers’ Guild of Great Britain (WGGB) in London next month, the newspaper wrote.

The upcoming meeting will be overseen by the British think tank Chatham House and will discuss the “evolving security situation in Europe and beyond,” according to the report. NATO cyber and innovation technology deputy head James Appathurai is expected to attend, among other officials, the newspaper added.

So far, the conversations have partly “inspired” at least “three separate projects,” The Guardian wrote, citing an internal WGGB e-mail.

“I think there’s fearmongering throughout Europe at the moment that our defenses are down,” he reportedly said, adding that he has seen a media and government push in Ireland “to present NATO in a positive light and align ourselves with them.”

Other screenwriters were “pretty offended that art would be used in a way that was supporting war” and believed they were being asked to “contribute towards propaganda for NATO,” he said, according to the newspaper.

The greatest threat the bloc currently faces emanates not from “external enemies,” but rather its “ongoing disintegration,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said on Saturday.

Several hundred people have taken part in an ‘Immortal Regiment’ march in Washington, commemorating those who fought for the Soviet Union in the Second World War, the Russian Embassy in DC has said.

The marches were first held in the Siberian city of Tomsk in 2012. In the past, WWII veterans had been honored guests at Victory Day parades commemorating Hitler’s defeat, but their numbers had dwindled, so local organizers came up with the idea of inviting their loved ones to march instead, holding their portraits. Since then, the idea has spread across Russia and to other nations.

The marches are traditionally held on May 9 in Russia, when the country celebrates Victory Day. In Washington, however, it was staged on Saturday, a week before the 81st anniversary of the end of the bloodiest conflict in history.

The demonstrators walked past the White House carrying portraits and red Victory Banners, and made their way towards the World War II Memorial on the National Mall, where they laid flowers, the embassy said in a statement.

The Russian diplomats thanked the organizers of the ‘Immortal Regiment’ march and all those who participated in what they described as an “important initiative, aimed at countering attempts to rewrite history and whitewash the Nazis and their collaborators, who are now being honored in some countries.”

Last year’s procession in the US capitol was marred by provocations from pro-Ukrainian activists. No incidents have been reported during the current event.

An ‘Immortal Regiment’ march also took place in New York City on Saturday, with several dozen people gathering outside the office of the Russian Permanent Mission to the UN.

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has signed a contract with a private security firm to locate migrant children who arrived in the US without their parents, although the company is facing accusations of ‘torture,’ The Guardian has reported.

The agency, which is part of the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), hired the Virginia-based company MVM in mid-April to assist with its expanding effort to track down minors who had been released into communities pending immigration court proceedings, the paper said in an article on Saturday.

A one-year deal was signed between ICE and the contractor, which provides detention and transport services to federal immigration agencies, it added.

MVM is currently being sued over the separation of two Guatemalan fathers from their respective children in 2017. The lawsuit, which had been filed in a California court two years ago, alleges “torture, enforced disappearance and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment” on the part of the company.

Its employees “physically took thousands of children away from their parents” before transporting them “using unmarked vehicles, commercial airlines, and makeshift detention centers,” the document read.

“The primary focus of this initiative is to conduct welfare checks on these children to ensure thaat they are safe and not being exploited or abused,” the spokesperson stressed.

The Guardian said that it had reviewed an internal ICE document last year, which suggested that it actually runs an operation aimed at deporting the children or pursuing criminal cases against them or the adults providing for them.

"Accusations that ICE is ‘targeting’ and arresting children are false and an attempt to demonize law enforcement,” the DHS spokesperson insisted.

Democratic lawmaker Delia Ramirez, who is of Guatemalan descent, has called upon Congress to monitor the arrangement between ICE and MVM.

Iran is seeking a decisive and permanent end to the conflict with the US, rather than a previously proposed two-month ceasefire, RT correspondent Saman Kojouri has reported from Tehran regarding a 14-point peace plan put forward by the Islamic Republic.  

Tehran has submitted a new peace proposal to Washington via Pakistani mediators in response to a US offer, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi confirmed on Saturday, adding that “the ball is in the US court.” 

RT’s Saman Kojouri said key provisions of the plan include guarantees against future attacks by Israel and the US, the lifting of sanctions, the withdrawal of American forces from areas surrounding Iran, and a new mechanism to govern the Strait of Hormuz. “The plan includes a demand to resolve all issues and end the war within 30 days,” says Kojouri, adding that “the space for compromise between Tehran and Washington is narrowing.” 

Watch the full report of by RT’s Saman Kojouri on the latest peace efforts to end the war in Iran:

Israel’s ultranationalist National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir celebrated his 50th birthday this weekend, treating guests to slices of a cake featuring a noose. Attendees included several top law enforcement officials.

The cake was an apparent allusion to Ben Gvir’s advocacy for legislation that would introduce the death penalty for Palestinians found guilty of “terrorism.”

At the Saturday night celebration at Villa Space in Moshav Emunim in southern Israel, Ben Gvir’s wife, Ayala, presented him with a cake featuring a noose and the words: “Mazel tov to Minister Ben Gvir, sometimes dreams come true.”

Hamas celebrates killing Israelis.

Ben Gvir celebrates killing Palestinians.

Unless this stops, how will there ever be peace? https://t.co/kTxuMoaIdx

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) May 3, 2026

The celebration featured another tall birthday cake bearing the image of Israel, Ben Gvir’s portrait, two guns, and a golden noose.

ניצב בדימוס סיגל בר צבי, לשעבר ראש אגף המבצעים במשטרה, על חגיגות יום ההולדת של השר בן גביר בהשתתפות שוטרים רבים: "לא כזה נוח, זה אירוע די חריג. בין דרג ממונה שהוא פוליטי ובין המבצע צריך שיהיה מרחק שהדרג המבצע הוא יוכל לעשות את העבודה שלו באופן נקי ובלי השפעה זו סיטואציה בעייתית,… pic.twitter.com/IQoI79Vs2o

— 103FM (@radio103fm) May 3, 2026

The noose paraphernalia was an apparent allusion to the Death Penalty for Terrorists Law, which was passed by the Knesset in March by 62 votes to 47. The legislation mandates that Palestinians convicted of deadly attacks in military courts be sentenced to hanging — a provision that critics say effectively exempts Jewish Israelis.

Sentences are to be carried out within 90 days of the ruling, with no right of appeal. The sentence could be mitigated to life imprisonment only under some unspecified “special circumstances.”

The law has sparked international condemnation, with Germany, France, the UK, Italy, New Zealand, and Australia expressing “deep concern” over the legislation and urging Israel to abandon it. UN experts also warned that the new rule violates international law, contend that it “effectively singles out Palestinians for execution.”

The guest list stirred nearly as much controversy as the cakes. Senior commanders in attendance included Jerusalem District Commander Avshalom Peled, Judea and Samaria District Commander Moshe Pinchi, and Prison Service Commissioner Kobi Yaakobi. Cabinet ministers, including Defense Minister Israel Katz and Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana were also present.

Police Commissioner Danny Levy permitted only the most senior command staff to attend, warning all lower-ranking officers to stay away. The directive came despite widespread fears that Ben Gvir could put pressure on law enforcement and undermine police independence.

Ben Gvir is known for his inflammatory views regarding Palestinians, and once boasted that he would do his best so that “the terrorists [in prison] receive the minimum of the minimum” in food. The minister has been sanctioned in the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Norway, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and Spain.

The Jewish community in the UK is facing its greatest threat, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Mark Rowley has said in the aftermath of a recent stabbing in London.

On Wednesday, two Jewish men were wounded in a knife attack by a British national of Somali origin in the city’s Golders Green area. The suspect, who was subsequently detained, had also attempted to kill his friend of 20 years the same day. Police say he has a history of serious violence and mental health issues.

In his interview with the Times on Saturday, Rowley said that “every racist or extremist or terrorist group has a list of people they hate, because they all create an ‘other’ who they want to blame everything on,” invoking a concept developed by 20th century French psychologist Jaques Lacan.

According to the police chief, the British Jews “are on everybody’s list, all of those hateful groups, whether you’re extreme right, whether you’re extreme left, whether you’re Islamist terrorist, whether you’re right-wing terrorist, and some hostile states as well now, with some sort of Iranian-related threats.”

“There’s a ghastly Venn diagram that they’re at the middle of,” he added.

The commissioner said he intends to recruit 300 more officers to protect the Jewish sites in London.

Following the Golders Green incident, the UK terrorism threat level was raised to “severe,” which means that an attack is “highly likely.”

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said earlier that the stabbing was “not a one-off” and that Jewish people in the UK are “scared to show who they are.” He vowed to do everything to “stamp this hatred out.”

The UK has seen an increase in anti-Semitic incidents since Israel began its military operation in the Gaza Strip in response to a deadly incursion by the Palestinian armed group Hamas on October 7, 2023.

Last month, a group of young men torched four ambulances belonging to a Jewish charity in Golders Green, the same neighborhood where Wednesday’s stabbings occurred.

China has compared Taiwan’s President Lai Ching-te to a “rat crossing the street” after he secretly boarded an Eswatini government aircraft and flew to the small southern African kingdom on an unannounced state visit.

The rebuke was issued by China’s Taiwan Affairs Office on Saturday, which lashed out at Lai over the visit, which Beijing views as a direct challenge to the one-China principle.

Lai’s visit had originally been scheduled for late April, but was called off at the last minute after the Seychelles, Mauritius and Madagascar revoked overflight permits for the Taiwanese leader’s charter aircraft – a move Taipei blamed on Chinese pressure.

China’s Taiwan Affairs Office branded Lai a “troublemaker” and accused him of abandoning the island’s residents in the wake of a significant earthquake to fly to Eswatini.

“Lai Ching-te's despicable actions, like a rat crossing the street, will inevitably be ridiculed by the international community... Lai Ching-te’s disregard for the safety of the people and his wanton deception of the public will surely be spurned by the vast majority of Taiwanese compatriots. The so-called ‘diplomatic achievements’ that Lai Ching-te painstakingly fabricated are nothing but trickery and a laughing stock,” the body charged.

Lai pushed back, writing on X that Taiwan “will never be deterred by external pressures,” adding that the island “will continue to engage with the world – no matter the challenges faced.”

Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council also hit back, branding Beijing’s rebuke “fishwife’s gutter talk” which it said was “boring in the extreme.”

China considers Taiwan a part of its sovereign territory. While Beijing has said it seeks peaceful reunification with the island, it signaled in 2022 that it “would not renounce the use of force” to accomplish this goal.

China’s Ministry of Commerce has instructed domestic companies not to comply with US sanctions targeting refiners allegedly linked to the Iranian oil trade.

Late last month, the US Treasury warned banks against dealing with so-called “teapot” refineries, privately owned companies which it said account for the majority of the oil China buys from Iran. “This revenue ultimately benefits the Iranian regime, its weapons programs, and its military,” the Treasury said in its notice.

China’s government and major state-owned companies have denied direct purchases of Iranian crude, while customs data have not recorded imports from Iran since 2023.

Beijing has argued that sanctions imposed without a UN mandate are illegal under international law. In a statement on Saturday, China’s Ministry of Commerce said the restrictions interfere with normal trade between its firms and third parties and banned compliance with the sanctions, citing “national sovereignty, security and development interests.”

A government spokesperson said the move would not affect China’s international obligations or its protection of foreign-invested firms.

Oil prices have surged since the US and Israeli attacked Iran in late February, prompting the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint handling about one-fifth of global oil and LNG flows.

While Iran has kept the vital waterway closed to “hostile ships,” the US Navy has maintained a blockade of Iranian ports in the Persian Gulf.

Despite a ceasefire declared nearly a month ago, prospects for a peace deal remain uncertain, as both sides have accused each other of pressing unacceptable terms. Oil prices surged past $120 per barrel this week for the first time since 2022.

The war has also pushed US President Donald Trump’s approval rating to record lows and deepened his rift with European allies, whose governments have refused to back operations against Iran.

Negotiations between Ukraine and Greece over the joint production of naval drones have stalled because Kiev wants to retain control over how Athens can use the technology, local media have reported.

According to Greek Reporter, the countries agreed last November that Ukraine would supply components for drones to be built at shipyards in Greece, while Greek companies would manufacture electronic and optical systems. The end result would have been an improved version of the Magura-type attack drones which Kiev uses against Russia.

The newspaper Kathimerini reported on Thursday, however, that Ukrainian officials had demanded that Kiev retain a say over how the Greek military would use the drones, a condition Athens rejected. Greece believes Ukraine set these terms to “maintain a balance” with its longtime rival Türkiye, the newspaper said.

Türkiye hosted Russian-Ukrainian peace talks in 2022 and 2025, presenting itself as a neutral mediator in the conflict.

Ankara also condemned Ukrainian attacks on Russian-linked tankers near the Turkish coast last year.

Tehran has submitted a comprehensive new peace plan, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said on Saturday, adding that “the ball is in the US court.”

Both the US and Iran have previously accused each other of putting forward unacceptable terms, as a ceasefire reached nearly a month ago has failed to produce an agreement.

Negotiations have been further complicated by the twin Iranian and US blockades of the Strait of Hormuz and the resumption of Israel’s bombing campaign in Lebanon.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran has submitted its plan to Pakistan as the mediator with the aim of permanently ending the imposed war, and now the ball is in the US court to choose between a diplomatic solution or a continuation of the confrontational approach,” Gharibabadi said, as quoted by Press TV.

Iran is also reportedly seeking compensation from the US and a new framework for the Strait of Hormuz.

In a post on Truth Social on Saturday, US President Donald Trump said he would review the plan soon but added that he could not “imagine that it would be acceptable.” The president previously told journalists that he was “not satisfied” with Iran’s terms and threatened to “blast the hell out of them and finish them forever.”

The US has demanded that Iran completely abandon its nuclear program and surrender its enriched uranium stockpiles, a condition Tehran has flatly rejected, insisting that its nuclear program is for civilian use only.

While the prospects for a peace deal remain uncertain, oil prices surged past $120 per barrel this week for the first time since 2022.

Residents of the eastern German city of Schwedt have told the Ruptly video agency they fear being thrown back “to the 19th century” if oil supplies to the local refinery are disrupted. Their comments come after Russia announced it can no longer deliver oil from Kazakhstan directly to Germany via the Soviet-era Druzhba pipeline.

The PCK refinery in Schwedt supplies around 90% of the fuel to Berlin, as well as to the state of Brandenburg. The plant previously relied on Russian oil via Druzhba but switched to Kazakh supplies in 2023 after Berlin banned Russian pipeline imports.

Last week, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandr Novak announced a halt to Kazakh oil transit via Druzhba starting May 1, citing a lack of “technical capacity.”

“If the lights go out at PCK, the city dies,” a Schwedt resident told Ruptly. “We do not want to go back to the 19th century.” Another resident warned that a fuel price hike if the flow stopped could even spark “unrest.”

Transporting oil by sea would mean the plant would have to operate at 65% to 70% capacity, the refinery’s council member, Danny Ruthenburg, told German broadcaster ARD, citing limited infrastructure at the port of Rostock. “That would mean we would have to shut down individual production lines, which would inevitably lead to staff reductions,” he said.

Kazakh Energy Minister Yerlan Akkenzhenov linked the changes to continued Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory. “That is most likely connected to the recent strikes on Russian infrastructure,” he said on the sidelines of an ecology forum in Astana.

The Ukrainian military has repeatedly targeted critical Russian infrastructure using drones, including oil refineries and transit hubs. Last month, it struck a hub operated by the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) in the Russian port of Novorossiysk, which is used to transport Kazakh oil to Europe and Asia.

The son of two senior Norwegian diplomats under investigation over ties to late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has taken his own life, Norwegian newspaper VG reported earlier this week, citing lawyers for the family.

Edward Juul Rod-Larsen, 25, was found dead in Oslo days after French and Norwegian police reportedly launched a joint investigation into his parents, Mona Juul and Terje Rod-Larsen. The probe is centered around allegations that the disgraced US financier had helped the couple purchase an apartment, and left $5 million to each of their two children in his will.

The probe is part of widening international fallout from the latest release of millions of Epstein documents, which have triggered criminal investigations, arrests, and resignations across politics, business, and even royalty.

Epstein, who pleaded guilty in 2008 to soliciting sex from a minor and served 13 months of an 18-month sentence, was arrested again in 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges. He died by suicide in his jail cell ahead of his trial.

The US Department of Justice has gradually released materials related to the case under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, signed into law by US President Donald Trump.

The released documents mention numerous high-profile figures, linking some to Epstein’s network or questionable financial dealings. The disclosures have triggered resignations, probes, and reviews worldwide, with many acknowledging contact but denying wrongdoing, with some charges brought in a limited number of cases.

In the US, the release has placed renewed scrutiny on former President Bill Clinton and his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Both have been deposed about their associations with Epstein, but have denied knowledge of his trafficking operation.

Commenting on the disclosures, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova described the scandal as exposing the “pure Satanism” at the heart of the collective West, accusing Western elites of inventing threats from Russia to distract from their own “monstrous crimes.”

Kiev has no plans to punish the perpetrators of the Odessa massacre, with Moscow’s victory in the Ukraine conflict being the only way to assure justice for its dozens of victims, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said on the 12th anniversary of the tragedy.

On May 2, 2014, clashes erupted in the Black Sea port city of Odessa between Ukrainian nationalists and the opponents of the violent Western-backed coup that had taken place in Kiev earlier that year.

The unrest culminated in ultra-right militants setting fire to the local trade unions building, which anti-government activists had been chased into following a demonstration outside, leading to 48 people being killed and more than 200 others wounded.

In a statement published on the Foreign Ministry’s Telegram channel on Saturday, Zakharova said that photos and videos from the scene prove that what happened in Odessa was “a Nazi intimidation action.”

Attempts by some in the West to present it as a spontaneous altercation between two groups of peaceful demonstrators with polarizing views on Ukraine’s future are hypocritical, she stressed.

Kiev repeatedly promised to complete the investigation into the tragedy, but it apparently “has no time for justice,” she argued. The very word has “turned into an oxymoron considering... the lawlessness and rampant corruption in modern Ukraine,” she added.

However, despite this fact, the foreign backers continue to provide military and financial support to the government of Vladimir Zelensky, Zakharova said.

”It's clear that in modern Europe, encouraging Nazism and financing terrorism has become a tradition,” she insisted.

The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that “the successful implementation of the goals and objectives” that Russia set for itself in the Ukraine conflict “will guarantee justice for the victims of the monstrous crime,” the spokeswoman stressed.

There will be much talk this May about the so-called “strategic triangle” of Russia, China and the United States.

US President Donald Trump is expected in Beijing first, followed by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping. Whenever the leaders of the three most influential powers meet, speculation inevitably follows. What if they strike some grand bargain? What if the world suddenly becomes more orderly?

Such expectations are misplaced. The restructuring of the global system is already under way, and it isn’t a process that can be halted or reversed by summit diplomacy. Even so, turning points in history can unfold in different ways; carefully managed, or recklessly accelerated. That’s what makes the coming meetings significant.

Both Russia and the United States are now deeply involved in large-scale military confrontations. The importance of these conflicts lies not only in their scope, but in their broader consequences for the international system. China, by contrast, has historically kept its distance from such entanglements. Yet it is becoming increasingly clear in Beijing that it can’t remain insulated from their effects. Discussions at the recent Valdai Club conference in Shanghai suggested that China is reassessing its position.

At the center of this reassessment is a simple question: what, if anything, is still possible in relations with Washington?

That assumption has now collapsed.

By the late 2000s, dissatisfaction in Washington was already evident. The United States increasingly viewed the arrangement not as a source of shared gains, but as a structural imbalance. Over time, the accumulation of tensions, economic and strategic, reached a point where incremental adjustments were no longer sufficient. What followed was a qualitative shift in the system itself.

For several decades, the global order operated largely in the interests of the United States as the leader of the Western bloc. Its gradual erosion now threatens those advantages. Washington’s response has been to use the current period of transition to secure as much of a head start as possible for the future.

Donald Trump has become the most visible embodiment of this approach. His rhetoric, openly transactional and even boastful, may appear unconventional, but the underlying logic predates him. The objective is clear: maximize immediate gains and build up national capacity as quickly as possible. Then use that accumulated strength to dominate the next phase of global competition.

This represents a sharp departure from the earlier American strategy, which prioritized long-term investments in the international system. Those investments didn’t always produce immediate returns, but they reinforced a framework that ultimately benefited the United States more than anyone else. Today, the emphasis has shifted toward short-term advantage, even at the risk of longer-term instability.

For other major powers, including China, this has profound implications. The idea of a comprehensive “big deal” with the United States, one that stabilizes the global system for years to come, has effectively become unrealistic.

Trump’s frequent use of the word “deal” is revealing. In his vocabulary, it’s more than a mere strategic concept but a commercial one. A deal is “big” not because it is durable or all-encompassing, but because of the scale of immediate gain it delivers. And like any commercial transaction, it can be abandoned if a more desirable opportunity presents itself.

Under such conditions, long-term agreements on the structure of world order are impossible. Washington is unlikely to commit to any arrangement that limits its flexibility before it has secured what it considers a sufficient advantage.

This is not necessarily a product of malice or arrogance. It is, in its own way, a rational response to a period of extreme uncertainty. The United States is seeking to preserve the foundations of its future dominance by acting decisively in the present.

If key players conclude that stable agreements with Washington are unattainable, their behavior changes. Military capability becomes more important as a safeguard against pressure. At the same time, interest grows in alternative forms of cooperation. That is, frameworks that operate independently of the United States and are insulated from its influence.

This logic isn’t new, but it’s gaining urgency. Russia has been advocating for such arrangements for several years. China, by contrast, has approached the idea with caution, hoping instead to preserve some form of mutually beneficial relationship with the United States. That hope now appears to be fading.

The upcoming visits to Beijing will provide a useful indication of how far this shift has progressed.

The meeting between Trump and Xi will likely define the limits of a temporary accommodation between two powers that remain economically intertwined, yet increasingly distrustful of one another. The question is no longer whether a comprehensive agreement is possible, but what narrow, short-term arrangements can be reached, and how long they will last.

Putin’s subsequent talks with Xi will address a different issue: the extent to which Russia and China are prepared to develop mechanisms of cooperation that bypass the United States altogether. Moscow has been moving in this direction for some time. Beijing now appears to be considering whether it must follow.

May will not produce a grand bargain. But it may show, more clearly than before, how the world is adjusting to the absence of one.

The Pentagon has said that it has reached deals with major artificial intelligence firms to integrate their advanced AI capabilities into the agency's classified networks.

The US Department of War has been actively negotiating with the industry’s leaders since the start of the year as it is trying to expand the application of AI in military operations and diversify the range of companies that provide the technology.

It is going ahead with the push despite concerns among experts regarding the ability of the AI to reliably operate within the existing laws of war and its possible use to invade the privacy of civilians in peacetime.

Agreements have been struck with SpaceX, OpenAI, Google, NVIDIA, Reflection, Microsoft, Amazon Web Services and Oracle to deploy their AI systems for “lawful operational use,” the Pentagon said in a statement on Friday.

Artificial intelligence will be integrated into the Department of War’s Impact Level 6 and Impact Level 7 networks to “streamline data synthesis, elevate situational understanding, and augment warfighter decision-making in complex operational environments,” the statement read.

Separately, the US Navy has awarded San Francisco-based AI company Domino Data Lab a $100 million contract to aid in combating Iranian mines in the Strait of Hormuz, which has been effectively blocked since the early days of the US-Israeli war on Iran.

“The Navy is paying for the platform that lets it train, govern, and field that AI at a speed required for contested waters,” Domino CEO Thomas Robinson told Reuters in an interview on Friday. Washington is betting on the speed of AI in analyzing a wealth of data from multiple sensor types to rapidly improve mine detection in US underwater drones, the outlet said.

The Department of War responded by designated Anthropic a “supply-chain risk,” a rare label typically reserved for entities linked to Washington’s foreign adversaries, effectively sidelining the firm from any future contracts.

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth branded Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei an “ideological lunatic” during a US Senate hearing earlier this week. Hegseth compared the company’s reluctance to agree to Pentagon’s terms to “Boeing giving us airplanes and telling us who we can shoot at.”

Anthropic is currently challenging the Pentagon in court to have the “supply-chain risk” label dropped.

German schoolmasters of an earlier dispensation indulged the cruel sport of asking pupils in final examinations which disease had carried off Julius Caesar. The trap was designed to expose as a fool the candidate who could not answer, proof enough that Caesar’s assassination remained common knowledge long after antiquity itself had vanished.

In the postmodern age of unbounded electronic warfare, extrajudicial killing has assumed a more sinister, revolutionary form: not a mere relapse into barbarism, but a novel, mutant paradigm of violence that exceeds even the egregious transgressions of pagan antiquity.

Ex ante execution: The grammar of a novel transgression

There are pivotal moments in geopolitics when language itself begins to signal a deeper rupture. Israel’s lethal rhetoric emerges as a revealing instance.

Along a fatal arc of escalation, the Jewish State has crossed from killing subordinate commanders to eliminating the very apex of its adversaries’ leadership – first in Lebanon, then in Gaza, and ultimately in Iran, where sovereignty was reduced to a target and the supreme leader to a mark.

More ominous still are the announcements: Jerusalem has signaled that succession itself would not be spared, that even those yet unchosen are already slated for death.

A declaration that a state will kill not merely its enemies, but its enemies-to-be, that is, future officeholders not yet chosen, not yet acting, not yet accountable, inaugurates a moment of disjunction in the form of a stark conceptual shift: from targeting individuals to targeting roles, and the very idea of succession.

At its core, Israel’s posture can be characterized as a doctrine of pre-emptive or anticipatory assassination: Whoever becomes the next leader is treated as a legitimate target, regardless of his identity or individual conduct.

Yet the novelty of what may be termed “expectant extrajudicial elite execution” (EEEE) lies not in the removal of senior decision-makers as such, but in the extension of that logic forward in time, rendering the future occupant of the supreme office a present target.

This is where the standard security frameworks start to fray. Because once the threat applies not to a person but to a position, it becomes something more radical: anonymous role-based targeting.

In the case of such proleptic condemnation, violence is no longer justified by what a concrete individual has done, but by what future helmsmen are presumed to become. It is an institutionalized policy of unconstrained assassination and collective punishment transposed to leadership in the abstract, because the threat attaches not to a specific actor, but to the office itself.

From a legal standpoint, especially under human-rights law, such a posture can be categorized as an especially grave form of state-sponsored terrorism, precisely because such extrajudicial killing not only bypasses due process, but also severs punishment from individual culpability.

Supporters, however, invoke a different vocabulary, reducing such depersonalized, role-based assassination to mere deterrence signaling or psychological warfare: an attempt to make supreme authority so hazardous that no aspirant of ordinary prudence would accept it.

On this account, the strategic logic of elite deterrence seeks to magnify the hazards of political ascendancy to the point where succession itself becomes unstable. If holding an office carries an implicit death sentence, potential successors may simply refuse to assume power, and, ultimately, governance may wither.

Even those intrepid enough to accept the targeted office are thought to be diminished: forced into concealment, deprived of personal contact, and unable to project the charismatic presence on which power and influence often depends. Leadership then becomes spectral – formally present, yet politically half-absent – until followers may begin to wonder whether a leader exists at all.

Yet alongside these intended effects lie significant risks, especially if organizations replenish leadership faster and more adeptly than expected: Martyrdom may harden resolve, and successors may prove more formidable and radical than those they replace.

What appears in theory as a sequence of clean decapitations may, in practice, yield a hydra-like reality: like the mythic monster whose severed necks gave rise to new heads, each slain commander may generate successors more numerous, more elusive, and more lethally adept than the one removed.

Classical tyrannicide: The person, not the placeholder

Athens could dedicate an altar to the “unknown god”; it did not designate unknown tyrants for death.

Even before the advent of Christian moral thought, Greek and Roman debates on tyrannicide remained tethered to the person of the ruler, whose conduct, however contentiously judged, furnished the grounds for punitive action.

Judgment turned on imputed deeds, not on the office itself. The verdict was often disputed and divisive, yet still anchored in what the ruler had allegedly done and whether it warranted death.

What is at issue now is the radicalization of that logic: The future holder of an office, as yet unknown, is condemned in advance, irrespective of act or accountability. Such a paradigmatic leap, from striking down a tyrant to pre-emptively threatening any successor, would have strained even the comparatively permissive moral horizons of pagan antiquity.

The doctrine of tyrannicide has its roots in classical antiquity, where it was construed, however controversially, as a defense of the political community against unlawful rule.

In the Greek world, the killing of Hipparchus by Harmodius and Aristogeiton in 514 BC in Athens during the Panathenaea – the city’s sacred festival of Athena – was canonically enshrined as the founding myth of tyrannicide.

The conspirators’ violent deed came to be hallowed as an act of civic virtue, even as philosophers continued to dispute its moral warrant.

Plato’s Socrates warned that injustice must not be answered by injury, nor the city’s laws overthrown by private violence. Aristotle, less intent on moralizing tyrannicide than on diagnosing tyranny’s self-destruction, observed that the tyrant summons the very conspiracies that undo him, as his unjust treatment of his subjects breeds fear, contempt, anger, hatred, and revenge.

In truth, the deed that immortalized Harmodius and Aristogeiton belonged less to the assembly-ground of politics than to the theatre of passion.

As Thucydides stresses in the History of the Peloponnesian War (6.53–59), the joint deed sprang from private grievance rather than public principle; though premeditated, it was carried out in panic, and claimed not the ruling tyrant, Hippias, but his brother, Hipparchus.

Only later was this act of personal vengeance transfigured into a noble but deceptive legend. The narrative recast an impulsive killing as the iconic archetype of conscientious tyrant-slaying, thereby sanctifying an ignoble deed that sprung from private affront rather than public cause.

As an early illustration of extrajudicial killing’s perverse effects, this pseudo-tyrannicide neither ended the tyranny nor liberated Athens; it merely hardened the regime: Fear drove Hippias to intensify repression by putting many citizens to death.

Murder and memory: From the Peisistratids to the Ides of March

Taken together, the very genealogy of tyrannicide, corrupt before it became canonical, is tainted at the source: disreputable in motive, impious in setting, disastrous in consequence, and mendacious in memory.

Within the economy of the posthumous discourse, the exculpatory and legitimating myth functions as a stark foil, supplying the positive pole of a Manichaean opposition. This interpretive emplotment is ideologically useful precisely because it suppresses ambiguity, turning a muddled act of private violence into a metanarrative morality play of liberty against tyranny. For latter-day liberals in decadent Western circles, the erotic bond between Harmodius and Aristogeiton only deepens the aura of civic sanctity woven around the celebrated Tyrannicides.

Against this morally entangled backdrop, Thucydides’ nuanced judgment is all the more striking: The Peisistratid tyranny, he observes, was marked by unusual moderation: It taxed lightly – at a mere five percent, a rate that would make many modern taxpayers wistful – adorned Athens, secured its defense, endowed the temples, and otherwise left the city’s established laws largely intact, save for the dynastic precaution that a member of the Peisistratid family should always hold office.

Posterity schooled in the Whig myth of liberty smiled more readily on the Alcmaeonids, the rival aristocratic house, because democracy claimed them as ancestors.

Yet the record is less moral than memorial, for the Peisistratids were tyrants with achievements, while the Alcmaeonids were retrospectively anointed liberators with a stain: the old Cylonian sacrilege and curse, that is, the miasmatic slaughter of suppliants under the divine protection of Athena after Cylon’s abortive coup, an affair conventionally, though not securely, dated to 632 BC.

From Athens, the historical arc bent next to Rome, where political killing widened from the personal tyrant-slayer’s blow to the bureaucratic terror of proscription and, ultimately, to the most famous assassination of antiquity: the killing of Julius Caesar on the Ides of March in 44 BC.

The death of the dictator perpetuo remains so deeply lodged in cultural memory that German schoolmasters of a bygone age, formed in the venerable humanist tradition, forged ignorance of it into a badge of intellectual disgrace, taking for granted that every pupil – save the irredeemably obtuse – knew Caesar had not died of disease.

[To be continued]

US President Donald Trump has said he would consider withdrawing some American troops stationed in Italy and Spain, after making a similar threat toward Germany amid a deepening rift with Washington’s European allies over the war with Iran.

Trump threatened earlier this week to reduce the number of US troops in Germany, continuing to deride NATO as a “paper tiger” following the refusal of other member states to back the US-Israeli bombing campaign in the Middle East. On Friday, the Pentagon said it would withdraw around 5,000 of the roughly 36,000 active-duty service members from Germany.

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said the US decision was “to be expected.” He maintained that intensive military cooperation between the two nations would continue, adding that the continued US military presence on German soil “is in our interest.” The minister also urged European NATO members to “assume greater responsibility” and said that Berlin was “on the right track” by seeking to enlarge its army and procure more weapons.

Asked by a reporter in the Oval Office on Friday whether he would consider removing troops from Spain or Italy, Trump replied: “Yeah, probably. Look, why shouldn’t I?”

Spain denied the use of a naval base near Cadiz for attacks on Iran and closed its airspace to US planes involved in the campaign. Italy similarly refused to allow the US to use an air base in Sicily.

Trump reiterated that he considers NATO ungrateful for US military support to Ukraine. “We helped them with Ukraine. You know, they made a mess out of Ukraine, a total mess,” he said.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has strongly criticized the bombing of Iran. “From my point of view, this war is illegal, it is a big mistake,” he said last month. In a recent op-ed in Le Monde diplomatique, Sanchez again condemned “the unilateral attempts by the United States to engineer regime change in Venezuela and now Iran – all without seeking even a veneer of international approval.”

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has said the war with Iran has added to instability in the Middle East and driven up energy prices. She also criticized Trump’s attacks on Pope Leo XIV over his opposition to the conflict as “unacceptable.”

US President Donald Trump has joked that American forces are behaving like pirates as he boasted about the capture of tankers and cargo ships attempting to breach the blockade of Iranian ports.

Oil prices surged past $120 a barrel this week for the first time since 2022, while Trump’s approval rating fell to 34%, a record low in Reuters/Ipsos polling.

Speaking at the Forum Club of the Palm Beaches dinner in Florida on Friday, Trump recalled how a destroyer fired at the Iranian-flagged cargo vessel Touska near the Strait of Hormuz on April 19 before it was boarded by US Marines.

“We took over the ship. We took over the cargo, took over the oil. It’s a very profitable business. Who would have thought we were doing that? We’re like pirates. We’re sort of like pirates,” Trump said, prompting laughter in the audience.

Trump on US Navy Seizing Ships:

It’s a very profitable business. We’re like pirates. pic.twitter.com/erWDQmJWnw

— Acyn (@Acyn) May 2, 2026

Iran has condemned the seizure as illegal, with a government source telling Press TV this week that US “piracy and banditry” would be met with an “unprecedented” response.

Trump said on Friday that he was “not satisfied” with Iran’s latest peace proposal and hailed the blockade as “incredible.”

An RT crew has filmed an airstrike in southern Lebanon as the Israeli military continued to pound targets despite a ceasefire declared last month.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) struck the town of Habboush on Friday, killing six people, including a woman and a child, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry.

“This comes just one day after Israel killed eight civilians in south Lebanon. Four of them were women, and two of them were children. All of this is happening during the ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel,” RT’s Ali Rida Sbeity said, reporting from Lebanon’s Tyre District.

Sbeity said IDF aircraft and drones were flying at low altitude, and an airstrike was carried out near the area where he was reporting. Israel has previously issued evacuation orders for 24 villages in the area.

IDF Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir said on Wednesday that there was “no ceasefire” with the armed group Hezbollah despite the US-mediated truce between Israel and Lebanon which was reached on April 16.

Under the agreement, Israel promised to halt offensive operations in Lebanon but reserved the right to defend itself against “planned, imminent, or ongoing attacks.”

Hezbollah, which boycotted the negotiations last month, has demanded that the IDF halt all troop movements and return to positions it held before early March, when it began firing rockets at Israel in support of Iran.

An Israeli soldier was killed and three others were wounded in a Hezbollah drone attack in southern Lebanon on Thursday.

The US has warned several European countries, including the UK, Poland, Lithuania, and Estonia, to expect delays in deliveries of American-made weapons because the war with Iran has depleted stockpiles, the Financial Times reported late on Friday, citing people familiar with the matter.

The reported move comes as US President Donald Trump has become increasingly critical of NATO for refusing to back the American-Israeli war with Iran.

The UK, Poland, and the Baltic states have been among the most vocal supporters of Ukraine in its conflict with Russia.

Poland and the Baltic states also rely on foreign military aid as part of what they describe as efforts to strengthen the bloc’s eastern flank. Russian President Vladimir Putin, however, has said that his country would not attack a NATO member unless it is attacked first.

Trump has lashed out at European leaders, including German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, for criticizing his war effort and refusing to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“We got no help – zero! – from NATO. You know, we spent trillions of dollars on NATO – we got no help. We didn’t need it, but we got none,” Trump said in a speech in The Villages, Florida, on Friday. He went on to describe NATO as a “paper tiger,” and dismissed claims that the US was not winning the war with Iran as “treasonous.”

Russian journalist Vladimir Solovyov has accused Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni of betraying the interests of her own voters by following the EU line on Ukraine and Russia in an interview with Il Fatto Quotidiano published on Wednesday.

“I don’t have any problem with Signora Meloni,” Solovyov said. “Italian people, they have problem with Signora Meloni. Donald Trump, he has problems with Signora Meloni.”

The TV host claimed Meloni had “changed her position on Russia and Ukraine completely” after winning the election. He argued that Rome’s current policy has hurt Italian businesses, tourism, and consumers.

“What’s in the best interest of Italian people?” Solovyov asked, pointing to “high oil prices,” a “bad economic situation,” and the loss of Russian markets and tourism. “Is it worth it?”

He also questioned whether Italy remains “the Italy of Berlusconi” or has become “the Italy of immigrants” who “don’t respect your culture, your history, your language,” asking whether this is “the right price to pay for European Nazi solidarity.”

The interview followed Solovyov’s sharp criticism of Meloni on his show earlier in April. His remarks prompted a strong response in Rome, where Italy’s Foreign Ministry summoned Russian Ambassador Aleksey Paramonov to lodge a formal protest, describing the comments as “extremely serious and offensive.” Paramonov, in turn, called the move unusual, stressing that Solovyov was speaking in a personal capacity and does not represent official Russian policy.

Watch the full interview here:

The US-Israeli war on Iran has already been “terminated,” and the Trump administration believes it does not need an extension from Congress to continue the fighting, the Associated Press has reported, citing sources.

The report comes as a deadline mandated by the 1973 War Powers Act rapidly approaches. The legislation limits any military action launched by the president without congressional authorization to 60 days. 

The White House insists that, for the purposes of the law, “the hostilities that began on Saturday, February 28, have terminated,” an unnamed senior administration official told AP on Friday. Tehran and Washington reached a two-week ceasefire on April 7, with the truce extended indefinitely since then.

The assessment echoes the stance voiced by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth during hearings in the Senate on Thursday. The Pentagon chief said the conflict has been “paused” since the ceasefire was implemented, arguing that in the administration’s “understanding” the 60-day period was on hold as well.

That unorthodox view of the 1973 legislation, however, has been backed by some experts. Richard Goldberg, a former official with the National Security Council during Trump’s first term and current senior adviser to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington-based think tank, claimed the interpretation was viable.

Launching a new operation later would help to circumvent the congressional approval requirement, Goldberg claimed, stating that the move “solves it all” in his opinion. A new attack on Iran “would inherently be a mission of self-defense focused on reopening the strait while reserving the right to offensive action in support of restoring freedom of navigation,” he suggested. 

Since the ceasefire was announced, Washington has been pouring additional troops and hardware into the Middle East, prompting widespread concern that the truce is only a pause prior to the renewal of the hostilities. Three aircraft carrier strike groups, as well as multiple marine expeditionary groups, are currently active in the region, with some of the units enforcing Trump’s naval blockade of Iran, and others appearing to be on standby.

US President Donald Trump has announced 25% tariffs on EU-made cars and trucks, accusing the bloc of breaching a trade deal reached last summer but yet to be fully ratified by EU lawmakers.

The move constitutes a 10% hike from current 15% levies on the automotive industry. Announcing the decision, Trump urged European car makers to move their manufacturing to the US, saying that such cars would not be subjected to increased tariffs.  

“I am pleased to announce that, based on the fact the European Union is not complying with our fully agreed to Trade Deal, next week I will be increasing Tariffs charged to the European Union for Cars and Trucks coming into the United States. The Tariff will be increased to 25%,” Trump wrote on his TruthSocial platform.

While the deal between the US and the EU was agreed last July following a brief trade war, it ended up left in the bloc’s bureaucratic limbo. The EU Parliament voted at the end of March to advance the agreement, having twice delayed it before. However, the deal has not yet been fully ratified by the process known as the “trilogue.” To be fully implemented, the agreement must be approved not only by the legislature, but also by the EU Commission and the council of EU leaders.

Trump’s announcement prompted an immediate reaction in the EU, with the Parliament’s international trade committee head, Bernd Lange, lamenting Washington’s untrustworthiness and mulling retaliation.  

“This is no way to treat close partners. Now we can only respond with the utmost clarity and firmness, drawing on the strength of our position,” Lange stated without providing any insights on potential countermeasures.

The Berlin youth wing of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) has suggested abolishing marriage in Germany in favor of cohabiting partnerships.

At present, marriage enjoys constitutional protection under Article 6 of the Basic Law.

The motion titled ‘Down with the patriarchy, even if it feels romantic’ was presented late last month ahead of a conference of the SPD’s Berlin branch scheduled for May 8 to May 9. According to the Berlin Young Socialists (Jusos), marriage is a key institution of patriarchy that secures the “oppression of women by cis-men” and “restricts freedom and self-determination through its claim to permanence.”

“Marriage serves the chauvinistic, capitalist nation-state as an instrument for enforcing misogynistic, anti-queer, classist, and racist policies,” the proposal argues.

In order to establish a so-called “community of responsibility,” individuals would merely need to file a joint written application at the registry office, with the union considered valid upon submission. Exit from such a partnership could be effected through a written request at any time, “without the consent of others,” the Jusos proposed.

According to German media, the motion will likely not be discussed at the upcoming state party conference but rather postponed until 2027.

Meanwhile, a YouGov poll last month indicated that only 13% of respondents would vote for the SPD in a hypothetical election – the Social Democrats’ worst showing since December 2019.

By contrast, the opposition right-wing Alternative for Germany party (AfD), which campaigns on family values, among other points, has seen its popularity rising tangibly over the past year.

A Bild/INSA survey suggested last week that the AfD would win a hypothetical election with 28% of the vote – a new record high for the party.

An open neo-Nazi associated with the notorious Azov regiment, Yan ‘MacGregor’ Klishayev, has been spotted among a group of 15 Ukrainian veterans enrolled in a new leadership program at Yale University.

The meet-and-greet photo surfaced online on Thursday, showing Klishayev among the veterans posing alongside Timothy Snyder, Professor of History and Global Affairs. The militant has been long associated with the notorious neo-Nazi Azov regiment, which has been rebranded as the 3rd Assault Brigade after suffering a crushing defeat from the Russian military during the battle of Mariupol early in the Ukraine conflict.

Today Prof. Timothy Snyder welcomed a group of 🇺🇦veterans to Yale University.

Among them was neo-Nazi Yan "Macgregor" Klishaiev from the Third Assault Brigade (rooted in the Azov movement).

I have some questions:

🟥Why didn’t Yan wear his favorite Wolfsangel T-shirt — that… pic.twitter.com/mBXSxMOGo1

— Marta Havryshko (@HavryshkoMarta) April 29, 2026

The leadership program for Ukrainian veterans at Yale was announced last week by the Victor Pinchuk Foundation, a charity set up by one of the wealthiest Ukrainian oligarchs. Pinchuk is known for actively supporting Kiev’s war effort, having supplied the country’s military with drones and other equipment.

The Pinchuk Foundation said the program was “aimed at developing leadership potential through access to world-class educational practices,” and the first group of 15 veterans is set to participate in the “pilot phase” of the project and receive “intensive training” in the US.

Kiev has long been in denial that it has any issues with the rise of neo-Nazi groups in the country, dismissing such assertions as “Russian propaganda.” Mounting evidence, however, shows otherwise, with individuals displaying neo-Nazi symbols and tattoos repeatedly making it into official propaganda materials featuring Ukraine’s leader, Vladimir Zelensky. The need to “denazify” Ukraine has been named by Moscow as one of its goals in the military operation against the country, and it has repeatedly reiterated its commitment to that objective.

Sovereignty, as defined in international law, is both crucial and complex. In the real shark-pool world of geopolitics, it is not hard to spot: if you have the ability to rule at home and resist attack from outside (any outside), then you are sovereign. Otherwise not. No exceptions.

That’s why Iran has sovereignty, but Germany does not. Iran has withstood two months of a devious and brutal war of aggression waged by the US and Israel, which in turn is “merely” the culmination of decades of assaults levied via economic warfare, assassination campaigns, and subversion.

However, Iran has not only successfully foiled the current Israeli-American blitzkrieg-and-regime-change scenario, but also put the attackers on the backfoot. Tehran’s achievement is already historic. It has changed and will change the course of history.

Germany, by contrast, cannot even defend its own vital infrastructure, as the Nord Stream sabotage and its aftermath have demonstrated. What is even worse, its governments have had no will to do so. On the contrary, they have been rewarding the Ukrainian attackers with untold billions to feed Kiev’s ultra-corruption. Their backers – certainly including the US and Poland, and most likely Great Britain, too – need not worry about any trouble from Berlin either.

Case closed: Iran is sovereign, Germany is not. If you are German and find this uncomfortable, complain to Berlin.

Against this backdrop, it is oddly fitting that it is Iran which is now exerting a powerful influence on German politics despite not having any deliberate designs to do so, whereas German calls on Tehran (or, for that matter, Moscow or Beijing) to do this and leave that – as articulated by Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul with an almost comical lack of self-awareness – come across as embarrassing: sad spectacles of an impotence that doesn’t even know itself.

Iran, on the other hand, has now had a palpable impact on what unfortunately remains Germany’s single most important foreign-policy relationship. Indeed, as the current, post-1990 “unification” (really, expansion, and that’s still a polite term) Germany is really the old Cold War West Germany writ large (and going to seeds, too), the relationship with the US is more than just important. Historically, it was literally foundational.

But it is over Iran that things have now come to a head: German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has openly criticized Washington’s conduct of the war, and US President Donald Trump has launched one of his social media rampages, going after Merz and Germany with, as Secretary of War (Crimes) Pete Hegseth would put it, “no quarter” given.

Trump has even threatened, in effect, to withdraw the almost 40,000 US troops from Germany. It would be stupid and self-damaging for the US to do so, but then, this is the Trump administration. Full disclosure: As a German, I hope they go ahead.

Trump has also told Merz off for wanting Iran to have a nuclear weapon (false on two counts: Iran isn’t building one, and Merz is a compliant client leader who would never dare dissent from the US and Israel) and for being bad at running Germany, which must rankle, because most Germans agree. Merz has just earned himself the worst poll ratings of any German chancellor ever.

He has made things even worse – yes, Merz can do that – by releasing an exceedingly masochistically timed interview to complain that, in essence, no one likes him. True, but saying so has only triggered a national tsunami of mockery: now he is not only vastly unpopular but derided as a wimp, who loves to dish out harsh admonishments and mean austerity but can’t take the response.

All of this because Merz was making remarks about the Iran War. But make no mistake: Friedrich Merz, still infamous for applauding Israeli “dirty work” (“Drecksarbeit”) in Iran last summer, has not discovered a conscience. Listen attentively to his recent statements, made before a group of high school kids, and you realize, the chancellor’s real beef with America is that Washington hasn’t done its current “dirty work” quickly and, above all, successfully. No one loves a loser, not even, it turns out, Friedrich Merz, whose prior obsequiousness toward Trump had raised eyebrows even in Germany.

Yet whatever Merz’s sordid motives, take a step back and look at this picture from the point of view of history-in-the-making: Here is the German chancellor, who claims to be ready to make his country lead Europe (yes, not a great idea, but let that pass for now), whose government is presiding over the greatest German debt-and-armament splurge since World War Two (and that against a background of profound economic crisis), and he is stumbling over Iran. So much for the rise of multipolarity and the decline of Europe.

Not because that was Tehran’s aim. As a matter of fact, the Iranian leadership probably has very little time to think about Berlin – except noting for the future that, in practical terms, it is serving as a loyal accomplice in the American-Israeli war of aggression. No, the reason Iran now impacts and shakes the American-German relationship is that Tehran has been defeating the US, and so the client state Germany is registering the public “humiliation” of America (Merz’s term) by showing immediate signs of faltering compliance.

Who in this picture is reshaping things? And who is being shaped? Here’s another way to define sovereignty. And Germany still loses.

A shell company backed by Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump has agreed to a merger with a mining group that secured up to $1.6 billion from the US government in 2025 to facilitate the extraction of tungsten in Kazakhstan, the Financial Times has reported.

The agreement between Skyline Builders group, in which US President Donald Trump’s sons hold a stake, and Cove Kaz Capital group was signed on Thursday. The newly-formed entity will trade on Nasdaq as Kaz Resources, according to a statement.

Cove Kaz currently controls 70% of the Northern Katpar and Upper Kairakty tungsten deposits in central Kazakhstan, believed to be one of the largest in the world. Last year, the federally-funded US Export-Import Bank and the Development Finance Corporation committed to invest heavily in the development of both projects.

The statement didn’t mention Trump’s sons, but the FT reported on Friday, citing informed sources, that they bought into Skyline last August via a special purpose vehicle run by a subsidiary of Dominari Securities. The size of their investment was not disclosed, but they increased it by $24 million in October.

American Ventures, of which Dominari is a member, said that Donald Trump Jr. “has no operational involvement in the company” and “does not interface with the federal government on behalf of any company he invests in.” Eric Trump didn’t respond to a request for comment from the FT.

The Democrats have repeatedly sounded the alarm over potential conflicts of interest arising from the investments by Trump’s family members in companies that have secured lucrative government contracts. The president’s kin made more than $1 billion in pre-tax profits last year by getting involved in cryptocurrency, AI, drones and critical minerals projects, according to FT.

The entire international jury of the Venice Biennale has tendered their resignations amid pressure caused by the Italian cultural exhibition’s decision to allow Russia and Israel to participate.

In early March, the Venice Biennale Foundation unveiled the line-up of the 2026 art fair, which runs from May 9 through November 22. Russia was included in the list for the first time since 2022, with its “The tree is rooted in the sky” exhibition. The event organizers noted, however, that the display would be strictly closed to the general public.

Nevertheless, the decision to allow Russia to participate has provoked harsh criticism from the Italian government and EU officials.

According to a press release published on Thursday, jury president Solange Farkas, as well as Zoe Butt, Elvira Dyangani Ose, Marta Kuzma, and Giovanna Zapperi handed in their resignations.

In their resignation letter, the jury members cited their previous statement last week, in which they refused to consider the works that represent “countries whose leaders are currently charged with crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court.” While not mentioning any nations directly, the jury was evidently referring to Russia and Israel, whose leaders are subject to ICC arrest warrants – something both countries have rejected.

In the wake of the jury’s resignation, the Venice Biennale organizers have announced that the awards ceremony, originally slated for May 9, would instead be held on November 22, given the “exceptional nature of the ongoing international geopolitical situation.”

Meanwhile, last Thursday, European Commission spokesman Thomas Regnier confirmed that Brussels would carry through on its previous threat to withhold a €2 million ($2.34 million) grant from the Venice Biennale.

Mikhail Shvydkoy, a Russian presidential aide for international cultural cooperation, characterized the commission’s decision as “disgraceful,” with Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova similarly denouncing it as a “relapse into anti-culture.”

Speaking to the press, Russian art critic Elizaveta Likhacheva described the sum in question as too insignificant for the Venice Biennale’s organizers to pay attention to.

Earlier this week, Italian media reported that the country’s Ministry of Culture had sent inspectors to check on the event organizers’ compliance with EU sanctions against Russia.

As for Israel, the country did not take part in last year’s Venice Architecture Biennale, citing renovations to its pavilion. This year, however, the Jewish state is among the nations invited to the art fair.

In mid-March, some 178 artists participating in the event signed an open letter calling for Israel’s exclusion, citing its ongoing military campaign in Gaza, which has been marked by widespread civilian casualties.

Late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s purported suicide note has remained locked up at a courthouse for years, out of reach of investigators, the New York Times has reported.

The message was allegedly discovered by Epstein’s cellmate, Nicholas Tartaglione, in July 2019 after the disgraced US financier had been found unresponsive with a strip of cloth around his neck at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City, the paper said in an article on Thursday.

Epstein survived that incident, but was found dead in his cell on August 10 the same year. The convicted sex offender apparently hanged himself with his bedsheets, but skeptics continue to insist that he was murdered to cover up for the powerful individuals supposedly implicated in the case.

Tartaglione, a former police officer serving four life sentences for a quadruple murder, told the NYT on the phone that the suicide note was written on a piece of yellow paper ripped from a legal pad and tucked into a graphic novel that Epstein used to read.

Tartaglione claimed that he had given the paper to his lawyers, suggesting that it could have been useful to counter claims made by Epstein after the July 2019 incident that he had been attacked by his cellmate.

The note eventually ended up being sealed by a federal judge as part of Tartaglione’s criminal case and still remains locked up in a New York courthouse, the NYT said. This means that the investigators, who looked into Epstein’s death, lacked what could have been a key piece of evidence, it added.

A spokesperson for the US Justice Department confirmed to the paper that the agency hasn’t seen the note. It was also not found among the massive trove of Epstein files published by the DOJ earlier this year, according to the article.

The US has delivered 6,500 tons of munitions and equipment to Israel within 24 hours, West Jerusalem has said.

The announcement coincided with media reports claiming that the head of US Central Command, Brad Cooper, has briefed US President Donald Trump on a plan for the potential renewal of military action against Iran in a bid to pressure it to consent to a more favorable peace deal.

According to Fox News, what Cooper described as the “final blow” against Tehran could include a “short and powerful wave of strikes” targeting Iran’s “remaining military assets, leadership and infrastructure.”

The ceasefire in the US-Israeli war against Iran was announced on April 8 after more than a month of fighting, but attempts by Washington and Tehran to reach a diplomatic settlement to the crisis have so far been in vain. The control of the Strait of Hormuz and the Iranian nuclear program reportedly remain the main stumbling blocks between the sides.

The hardware was loaded onto hundreds of trucks and moved to Israel Defense Forces (IDF) bases across the country, the statement read.

According to Defense Ministry data, Israel has already received over 115,600 tons of military equipment, via 403 airlifts and 10 sealifts since the US-Israeli attack on Iran began on February 28.

Semafor reported in mid-March, citing American officials, that Israel had informed the US that it was running “critically low” on air defense interceptors amid Tehran’s retaliatory strikes. The IDF rejected the claim.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said on Thursday that West Jerusalem supported Washington’s diplomatic efforts, but warned that it “may soon be required to act again” against Iran to make sure it will “not return to being a threat.”

Pakistan has launched the first of eight Chinese-built Hangor-class submarines, expanding its undersea fleet, as Islamabad deepens defense cooperation with Beijing.

The move follows the induction of Chinese-made J-10C fighter jets, which Pakistan says were used in combat for the first time during its 2025 conflict with India.

President Asif Ali Zardari attended the commissioning ceremony in the southern Chinese port city of Sanya, alongside Pakistani Navy Chief Admiral Naveed Ashraf and other senior officials from both countries. Zardari, who is on an official visit to China, described the induction as a “historic milestone” for the navy.

The Hangor-class is based on China’s Type 039A submarine design and is a diesel-electric platform with air-independent propulsion. It can carry a crew of up to 38 and is equipped with torpedoes and anti-ship missiles. Under a deal signed in 2015 and estimated at being worth about $5 billion, four submarines are being built in China and delivered to Pakistan, while the remaining four will be constructed domestically.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), China accounted for approximately 81% of Pakistan’s arms imports in 2020–2024. Their joint venture projects include the Hangor as well as the JF-17 fighter jet.

Earlier this week, Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh accused Pakistan of supporting terrorism and said that New Delhi is ready to respond to any threat, underscoring ongoing tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors.

India has not commented on the latest commissioning, but its navy has previously said it is closely monitoring China’s supply of submarines to Pakistan, while stepping up efforts to expand its own undersea fleet, citing Beijing’s expanding naval presence in the Indian Ocean. New Delhi is also advancing its nuclear and conventional submarine programs in order to strengthen its maritime capabilities.

The US Department of Justice has released new high-quality CCTV footage showing Cole Tomas Allen, who has been charged with attempting to assassinate US President Donald Trump, allegedly rushing past security and opening fire.

The incident took place on Saturday at the Washington Hilton, which hosted the White House Correspondents’ Dinner attended by the president, First Lady Melania Trump, White House officials, and journalists.

The footage, which has no sound, shows the suspect walking down a hallway before dashing past a metal detector screening area.

At one point, he points a shotgun at a security guard, while another guard fires several shots from a sidearm.

🚨#BREAKING: Newly released footage shows 31-year-old Cole Allen of California walking around The Washington Hilton in washington DC then soon opening fire on a U.S. Secret Service officer during an attempted attack targeting President Donald Trump and others at the White House… pic.twitter.com/ytHWUPlRxT

— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) April 30, 2026

The suspect was tackled and restrained before reaching the ballroom where the president was seated. According to the DOJ, a Secret Service officer wearing a bulletproof vest was shot once in the chest.

Allen reportedly left a manifesto in which he, without identifying Trump by name, criticized his policies and described his intent to take action against “a pedophile, rapist, and traitor.”

The international advocacy group Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has accused Israel of kidnapping journalists traveling on board the Gaza-bound activist flotilla, which was intercepted by the Israeli Navy on Thursday.

Israeli forces seized 22 of the 58 boats of the pro-Palestinian Second Sumud Flotilla near the Greek island of Crete, detaining 175 people, according to West Jerusalem. The organizers, meanwhile, said that 211 activists were “kidnapped.” 

The boats sailed from the Spanish port of Barcelona on April 12 with the intention of breaching the Israeli naval blockade of the Palestinian enclave. 

“RSF condemns the Israeli army’s abduction of three journalists in international waters: Hafedh Mribah (French) & Mahmut Yavuz (Turkish) from Al Jazeera, and Alex Colston (American), a contributor to the outlet Zeteo,” the group wrote on X on Thursday. “The Israeli army is responsible for their safety,” the RSF added.

Israel announced it had taken control of 21 out of 58 vessels from the Gaza-bound flotilla, in a piracy operation carried out in international waters about 1,000 km off the coast of occupied Palestine. pic.twitter.com/Gpa6NOxn3Q

— Eye on Palestine (@EyeonPalestine) April 30, 2026

The passengers included Margaret Connolly, a physician and a sister of Irish President Catherine Connolly, who told The Journal over the phone on Thursday that the interception of the boats was “absolutely illegal.” 

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, a frequent critic of Israel, accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of violating international maritime law and called on the EU to suspend a trade agreement with the country. 

Netanyahu thanked the Navy for intercepting a flotilla of “Hamas supporters.” Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar dismissed the flotilla as a “PR stunt,” adding that all activists “who were taken off the vessels were taken off unharmed” and would be set ashore in Greece. 

Israel has intercepted several such flotillas in the past, including dozens of boats in June 2025, whose passengers included climate activist Greta Thunberg and French politician Rima Hassan. 

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz should focus on resolving the Ukraine conflict and deal with problems at home instead of questioning Washington’s strategy in the war against Iran, US President Donald Trump has said.

Trump was responding to the chancellor's comment on Monday that the US was being “humiliated” by Iran and that the Trump administration lacked a clear strategy in the conflict.

In a post on Truth Social on Thursday, Trump wrote that the “Chancellor of Germany should spend more time on ending the war with Russia/Ukraine (Where he has been totally ineffective!), and fixing his broken Country, especially Immigration and Energy, and less time on interfering with those that are getting rid of the Iran Nuclear threat.”

Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Berlin has been the second-largest supplier of weapons to Kiev, having allocated nearly €20 billion ($23 billion) in military aid between January 2022 and October 2025, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy.

Russia has consistently condemned Western arms deliveries to Ukraine, saying they only unnecessarily prolong the hostilities without changing the outcome.

Last month, Merz said that the Iran war “must be brought to an end as quickly as possible and with a clear plan and strategy.” He also rejected German participation in the conflict, noting that “this war is not a NATO matter.”

Trump criticized European NATO member states for refusing to back the US and Israel in the conflict after they rejected his call to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Politico claimed last week that the White House had compiled a NATO “naughty and nice” list, based on each country’s contribution, or lack thereof, to the war against Iran.

US President Donald Trump has said his administration will declassify and release government files on unidentified flying objects (UFOs) in the near future, describing some of the material as “very interesting.”

The Pentagon has recently said it is reviewing and consolidating related records before any public release, citing security concerns. Trump signed an executive order in February instructing the Department of War to disclose “any and all information” related to UFOs and unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP).

“I think we’re going to be releasing as much as we can in the near future… some of it is going to be very interesting to people,” Trump told reporters during a White House briefing late Wednesday, adding that public interest in the topic had built up “for a long time.”

“I interviewed some pilots – very solid people. And they said they saw things that you wouldn’t believe,” he said.

Trump’s order on UFO files followed a widely shared podcast appearance by former President Barack Obama, who said he believed aliens were real but insisted the US government was not hiding any proof. Obama referred to Area 51, a classified US Air Force site in Nevada long at the center of conspiracy theories alleging the government conducts secret research there and stores extraterrestrial materials and technology.

REPORTER: “Do you have an update on the UFO files?”

PRESIDENT TRUMP: “I think we're going to be releasing as much as we can in the near future…I've interviewed people my first term primarily, but I interviewed some pilots, very solid people, and they said they saw things that… pic.twitter.com/CNKvIhgvH7

— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 29, 2026

Trump later claimed Obama had disclosed classified information and said the planned document release was intended to meet “tremendous interest” from the American public. US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has said he will learn “alongside” the public whether his department holds records proving the existence of alien life.

The American authorities have been collecting reports of UFO and UAP sightings for decades, with the Pentagon now running an All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) for the purpose. In March 2024, the Pentagon said it had no proof that any unidentified aerial phenomena were alien technology, adding that many cases involved weather balloons, spy planes, satellites, or other routine activity.

In a report released in late 2024, the department stated it had received 757 UAP reports between May 2023 and June 2024, of which 21 “merit further analysis” because of “anomalous characteristics and/or behaviors.”

The American authorities have been collecting reports of UFO and UAP sightings for decades, with the Pentagon now running an All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) for the purpose. In March 2024, the Pentagon said it had no proof that any unidentified aerial phenomena were alien technology, adding that many cases involved weather balloons, spy planes, satellites, or other routine activity.

In a report released in late 2024, the department stated it had received 757 UAP reports between May 2023 and June 2024, of which 21 “merit further analysis” because of “anomalous characteristics and/or behaviors.”

The US Central Command has requested that long-delayed Dark Eagle hypersonic missiles be deployed to the Middle East, Bloomberg reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter.  

The new munition, also known as the Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW), has been in development since 2018, with the Pentagon pouring over $12 billion into the program meant to catch up with Russia and China, which have already fielded hypersonic weaponry. The program has been lagging well behind schedule, and the system has not been declared fully operational yet.

The request for the LRHW deployment is based on intelligence suggesting that Iran moved its ballistic missile launchers out of range of the Precision Strike Missile (PrSM), a person with direct knowledge of the matter told Bloomberg. No decision has been made on the request yet, according to the source.

While the US military still has some PrSM missiles in stock, the supply could prove to be insufficient if the conflict with Iran reignites. The Pentagon had ordered 130 before the 2024 fiscal year and a further 250 in 2025, but it remains unclear how many munitions were delivered.

The missile became a source of controversy during the US-Israeli attack on Iran, with the PrSM believed to be involved in at least one mass-casualty incident. According to the New York Times, a PrSM missile was likely used in the February 28 strike on a school and sports hall in the southern Iranian city of Lamerd, which killed at least 21 people. 

The Pentagon denied any involvement, insisting that it had not targeted any sites in Lamerd on that day, claiming the munition visible in the footage of the attack was an Iranian Hoveyzeh cruise missile. The NYT, however, doubled down on its initial assessment earlier this month, citing experts who said the munition looked like a PrSM and lacked any features of the Iranian-made projectile.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has come under fire again in the European Parliament, as lawmakers are accusing her of double standards in foreign policy and failing to shield EU citizens from soaring energy costs.

MEPs from multiple factions voiced their frustration during Wednesday’s debate on EU strategy for the Middle East and energy security, pointing to what they described as a lack of clear direction and coherence in the bloc’s response.

Belgian lawmaker Kathleen Van Brempt questioned the bloc’s credibility, which she said was being undermined by Brussels’ “double standards in our foreign policy” – imposing sanctions on Russia over the Ukraine conflict while staying “silent” over Israel’s actions in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon. 

Italian MEP Roberto Vannacci likened the EU’s inactive policy on the Middle East to “cockroaches that freeze and play dead when the predator arrives,” arguing that if the EC had “applied lockdown to itself” instead of to member states, Europeans would have been spared “a lot of damage and a lot of pain.”

Portuguese MEP Joao Oliveira accused von der Leyen of “staying quiet because of pressure” from US President Donald Trump. “Von der Leyen doesn’t say a word to condemn the aggression against Iran and Israel’s actions, the invasion of Lebanon, the killing of Lebanese people and more than 1.2 million displaced in Lebanon,” he said.

Oliveira also accused Brussels of backing a policy “under the leadership and guidance of multinationals,” saying “We must put an end to the neoliberal control of the energy sector,” and argued that “not one measure has been taken to control prices and to support farmers.”

Austrian Green MEP Thomas Waitz said the EU remained trapped in recurring dependency cycles, warning that shifting reliance between external suppliers amounted to “a dead-end street” rather than a long-term solution. “It’s bad for the economy, it’s bad for people, it’s bad for energy prices,” he argued.

Polish MEP Grzegorz Braun, who has repeatedly said that Brussels’ policies are dragging the bloc into a war, used highly charged language, dubbing von der Leyen “Madame Reichsführerin,” a reference to Nazi-era ranks. He argued that the energy crisis was not temporary but the result of “deeply wrong decisions.”

US President Donald Trump has called on his Israeli counterpart Isaac Herzog to pardon Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is facing charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust.

Indicted in 2019, Netanyahu has pleaded not guilty and denied any wrongdoing. The trial, which began in 2020, has seen numerous delays and is expected to drag on for several more years.

Trump reportedly told Axios on Tuesday that Netanyahu, a long-time ally who co-launched the unprovoked war on Iran with him, has complained that he will have to appear in court instead of concentrating on the conflict that is strangling the global economy. The US president reportedly expressed incredulity, saying “In the middle of a war? Give me a break!”

According to the publication, Trump went on to claim that he likes Israeli President Herzog and that he “will be a national hero if he gives Bibi a pardon.” The US president recently derided Herzog as “weak and pathetic” for not pardoning Netanyahu.

“Bibi is a wartime prime minister. He can’t have this hanging over his head,” Trump reportedly argued in his latest interview with Axios. He also suggested that Netanyahu’s trial makes Israel “look bad.”

Commenting on the prospect of a deal that will likely require an admission of guilt, Trump said that Netanyahu “can’t take” a settlement and needs a full pardon, as quoted by Axios.

Late last year, the outlet claimed that the Israeli prime minister had asked the US president for more help in his push for a pardon.

A month earlier, Trump sent an official letter to the Israeli president, insisting that “the ‘case’ against Bibi… is a political, unjustified prosecution.”

“I hereby call on you to fully pardon Benjamin Netanyahu,” the US president wrote at the time.

In June 2025, Trump similarly characterized the charges against his Middle Eastern ally as a “WITCH HUNT.”

Although the United Arab Emirates has tried to present its upcoming exit from OPEC and the wider OPEC+ framework as part of its sovereign energy strategy and long-term economic planning, its timing and regional context suggest that this is a political act.

With its exit, the UAE is challenging the authority of Riyadh, strengthening its own strategic autonomy, offering Washington a useful instrument for influencing energy prices, and moving closer to a regional make-up where the US and Israel remain central actors in the pressure campaign against Iran. It’s a signal that Abu Dhabi no longer wishes to behave as a secondary participant in a Saudi-centered order that has shaped the Gulf oil system for decades.

Economic ambitions

The economic explanation is the most visible one, since the UAE has spent years building production capacity that the OPEC+ framework did not allow it to use fully. Abu Dhabi’s production capacity is estimated at around 4.85 million barrels per day (bpd), while the country has been moving toward a target of 5 million bpd by 2027, although before the latest regional shock it was producing around 3.4 million bpd and remained close to its effective OPEC+ ceiling. This created a growing contradiction, because Abu Dhabi had already built the industrial, financial, and logistical architecture for a larger role in the oil market, while the collective rules of the cartel forced it to operate as though its ambitions and capabilities were still limited.

The first and most cautious scenario is a gradual release of restrained supply, in which the UAE, once export routes are stabilized and infrastructure disrupted by the Iran war is restored, could add several hundred thousand bpd to the market without immediately provoking a full-scale price war. Such a path would allow Abu Dhabi to demonstrate that leaving OPEC+ produces real commercial benefits, while still avoiding a direct collision with Saudi Arabia, softening prices without collapsing them, and testing the limits of its new freedom without burning all bridges with Riyadh and other producers.

The more ambitious scenario would emerge if regional conditions calm and Asian demand remains strong, allowing the UAE to move toward 4.2 million or even 4.5 million bpd within 12 to 18 months, while the most aggressive scenario would involve a push close to 5 million bpd and the addition of roughly 1.3 million to 1.5 million bpd compared with its previous constrained position. In a tight market, such volumes could stabilize prices and provide relief to consumers, but in a softer market they could intensify downward pressure, undermine OPEC+ discipline and force Saudi Arabia to decide whether it is prepared to tolerate the political symbolism of Emirati barrels entering the market outside Saudi-led restraint. The real danger for OPEC+ is therefore not only a lower oil price, but the loss of confidence that collective discipline remains stronger than national ambition.

Yet the economic argument, however important it may be, explains only the surface of the decision, while the deeper meaning is political. Abu Dhabi is not merely seeking a larger export quota, nor is it simply trying to correct a technical imbalance between capacity and production limits, but is using oil to redraw its position inside the Gulf hierarchy. For decades, Saudi Arabia has treated OPEC as an extension of its regional leadership, while Riyadh’s ability to convene producers, manage scarcity, and influence prices has served as one of the foundations of its claim to leadership in the Arab and Islamic worlds.

The UAE’s exit challenges this architecture, implying that Abu Dhabi no longer accepts a system in which Saudi Arabia sets the rhythm and others are expected to adjust their ambitions accordingly. This makes the whole issue a dispute over who has the right to define the economic and political order of the Gulf.

Competition between the UAE and Saudi Arabia has been building for years and has long gone beyond oil. The two states may remain partners when they face external threats, and they may continue to cooperate in selected areas where their interests overlap, but they are increasingly rivals when the question becomes who will shape the future of the Gulf, who will attract global capital, who will dominate logistics, and who will become the main regional gateway between East and West.

Saudi Arabia is trying to transform itself into a financial, logistical, entertainment, and investment hub under its Vision 2030 initiative, while the UAE already occupies many of these spaces through Dubai’s commercial networks, Abu Dhabi’s sovereign-wealth power, Emirati airlines, ports, free-trade zones, and investment platforms. Because both states are attempting to sell themselves as the indispensable center of the post-oil Gulf economy, their rivalry is structural.

The role of oil

Saudi Arabia needs high oil prices to fund its vast transformation agenda, while the UAE can often tolerate lower prices more comfortably because its economy is more diversified and its fiscal break-even level has historically been lower. This gives Abu Dhabi more room to favor volume over price, while Riyadh is more inclined to defend a price floor that protects the financing of its domestic transformation.

This difference does not automatically make conflict inevitable, but it makes compromise more difficult, since the two countries are no longer simply discussing quotas within a shared framework. They are defending different models of Gulf power, different visions of economic transformation, and different ways of turning oil wealth into political influence.

The risk goes beyond just a price war – Saudi Arabia still has weight in the Gulf Cooperation Council, the Arab League, Islamic diplomacy, and the wider oil system. If the UAE’s move is seen as serving American and Israeli strategy at a moment of confrontation with Iran, Riyadh may find ways to portray Abu Dhabi as a state that is destabilizing the Arab consensus for the sake of its own narrow advantage.

A boon for Trump

The UAE’s exit gives the US, and specifically the administration of President Donald Trump, a potential strategic advantage. Trump has long criticized OPEC for restraining supply and supporting high oil prices, and a UAE decision to leave the cartel and eventually raise production gives Washington a friendly Gulf producer that can help soften energy prices without requiring a direct American confrontation with Riyadh.

This gives Trump an opportunity to argue that pressure on OPEC has worked and that America’s partners in the Gulf are helping stabilize the market. If additional Emirati barrels eventually reach the global market, Washington may be able to claim a political victory at home, even if the underlying regional situation remains unstable and dangerous.

Unshackled Emirati oil supplies would also provide Trump with additional political breathing room at home, easing energy-price pressures such as inflation and transport costs and alleviating public anger and voter dissatisfaction.

This would make Abu Dhabi an invaluable partner, in turn giving it political leverage in Washington. In essence, this is a political transaction where barrels are exchanged for strategic importance.

However, the UAE’s decision makes strategic sense only if the US-Iran conflict over the Strait of Hormuz remains in a cold phase without escalating into a wider regional war. If Hormuz is fully closed, if insurance costs become unbearable, or if Gulf infrastructure remains under constant threat, Abu Dhabi’s spare capacity becomes much less useful. The UAE needs stability, but not necessarily peace, because what it requires is a managed confrontation in which Iran is pressured, shipping is controlled, American and Israeli coordination remains active, and Emirati exports can gradually recover.

Frozen conflict is the perfect state of the US-Iran war for the UAE’s current ambitions – a situation where it can benefit from the pressure applied on Tehran, but oil infrastructure does not become part of the active battlefield. The UAE wants the presence of American and Israeli power, but it does not want to be part of a shooting war. It wants OPEC+ market discipline weakened, but it does not want total market chaos. Its strategy is therefore a balancing act between confrontation and continuity, because Abu Dhabi seeks to profit from instability without being consumed by it.

The Israeli dimension is also important, especially because, since the normalization of diplomatic relations with Israel via the 2020 Abraham Accords, the UAE has developed a new regional identity as a state that has openly integrated Israel into its diplomatic, technological, and security calculations, and in the context of confrontation with Iran, this matters enormously.

The UAE can present itself to Israel as a partner capable not only of intelligence and diplomatic coordination, but also of energy-market influence. If Abu Dhabi can help stabilize prices while Iran faces pressure, then Emirati oil policy becomes part of the wider anti-Iranian front.

This carries risks inside the Arab and Muslim worlds. Even states that distrust Tehran may not want the Gulf order to be openly reorganized around Israeli and American strategic needs, especially if such a reorganization weakens Arab collective mechanisms and deepens divisions among Gulf states. Saudi Arabia in particular may not oppose pressure on Iran in principle, but it will resist any arrangement in which the UAE becomes Washington’s preferred Gulf energy partner at Saudi Arabia’s expense, especially if that arrangement appears to combine energy policy, Israeli cooperation, and pressure on Iranian regional influence.

The view from Russia

OPEC+ was built as a Saudi-Russian mechanism for stabilizing the global oil market, and Moscow has benefited from the predictability that this format provided. The UAE’s departure does not automatically create a crisis in Emirati-Russian relations, especially given the broader economic and political ties between Moscow and Abu Dhabi, yet it may cool the atmosphere around energy coordination.

If Emirati production eventually puts pressure on prices or weakens discipline among other producers, Moscow may view the move as a step that complicates the very framework through which Russia and the Gulf states managed oil volatility in recent years, adding a layer of mistrust and cautious calculation to the dialogue between Abu Dhabi and Moscow.

The worst scenario for the UAE would combine several pressures at once, with Saudi Arabia responding aggressively, Russia becoming more cautious, Iran escalating in the Gulf, export infrastructure remaining constrained, and Trump failing to provide the expected level of political and security support. If, in addition to all this, energy prices fall too far to reward the UAE’s extra production, the Emirates may find themselves in a difficult position in which they have weakened OPEC+ without gaining enough from the US, challenged the Saudis without neutralizing their influence, and exposed themselves to Iranian pressure without securing full protection.

American support is both the most vital and the most uncertain part of the UAE’s calculation. Trump may welcome the weakening of OPEC+ and the possibility of lower prices, but his domestic and international room for maneuver is not unlimited. If pressure inside the US grows, if Congress resists deeper regional commitments, or if American voters become tired of Middle Eastern entanglements, the UAE may discover that Washington’s promises are less durable than its own strategic exposure.

OPEC was created to give producers more control over their resources and more collective power against outside consumers, while OPEC+ was built to extend that control into a wider system that included Russia and other non-OPEC producers. The UAE’s exit reverses that, weakening producer solidarity and giving major consumers, especially the US, more leverage.

Abu Dhabi may gain autonomy, but the oil-producing world loses coherence. It is a breach in the idea that oil producers can still act collectively when their national projects, foreign-policy alignments, and strategic ambitions begin to diverge. The UAE is betting that autonomy will be more valuable than discipline, that partnership with the US and Israel will bring greater strategic returns than deference to Saudi Arabia, and that Moscow will treat the issue carefully enough to preserve broader relations with Abu Dhabi. It is also betting that Iran can be contained without turning the Gulf into a wider battlefield, and that the conflict can remain cold enough for oil to move while staying hot enough to keep pressure on Tehran. Each of these bets depends on conditions that Abu Dhabi does not fully control.

The exit from OPEC and OPEC+ is the beginning of a political test. The UAE has chosen to convert barrels into leverage and capacity into sovereignty, while also choosing confrontation over compromise and strategic autonomy over cartel discipline. The coming months will show whether Abu Dhabi has opened a path toward a new energy architecture, or whether it has underestimated the price of breaking the old one.

A new European task force formed to crack down on “violence as a service” has made 280 arrests in its first year, the EU’s police agency, Europol, has said in a statement.

The unit, dubbed GRIMM, was formed last April to tackle the growing trend of outsourced violence, sometimes described “gig economy” terrorism, in which criminals hire individuals via social media to carry out acts ranging from assaults to murder. The task force involves police from several EU countries, alongside the UK, Norway, and Iceland.

”Violence is no longer confined to… local dynamics. It is increasingly offered as a service: accessible, scalable and driven by online ecosystems that enable recruitment, coordination, and execution across borders,” read the statement released on Wednesday. More than 1,400 people linked to these activities have been identified, it added.

”This phenomenon is spreading like a wildfire across Europe,” Andy Kraag, head of Europol’s European Serious Organized Crime Center, told Dutch TV programme Nieuwsuur.

The report comes amid a push in Europe to restrict social media for minors due to growing concerns over mental health, online safety, and addictive platform design. France has passed an age-verification bill for under-15s, while Germany is debating a ban for under-14s. The UK is weighing restrictions for under-16s alongside limits on addictive features, and the European Parliament has backed a non-binding proposal for a bloc-wide minimum age of 16.

Messaging and gaming platforms have come under increasing scrutiny. Telegram, which has fewer than 45 million users in the EU, is facing a criminal investigation in France over alleged failures to curb illegal content, while Russian authorities have imposed restrictions on the service citing security concerns.

The Pentagon’s latest cost assessment of the war against Iran is a lowball figure that does not include the extensive damage to US military bases during the conflict, CNN has reported, citing three people familiar with the matter.

On Wednesday, senior Pentagon official Jules Hurst gave lawmakers on the House Armed Services Committee the first official statement on the controversial war’s price tag, estimating it to be around $25 billion. 

However, sources told CNN that the true cost is significantly higher when factoring in the expense of rebuilding damaged US military installations across the Middle East. One source put the real figure closer to $40-50 billion.

The estimate has also been challenged by Tehran. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the real cost to the US is far higher, accusing the Pentagon of underreporting the financial impact of the conflict. Writing on X on Friday, he cited two charts on the US economy and claimed that “Netanyahu’s gamble has directly cost America $100 billion so far, four times what is claimed.” “Indirect costs for US taxpayers are FAR higher. Monthly bill for each American household is $500 and rising fast,” Araghchi added, concluding that “Israel First always means America Last.”

As reported by CNN, Iranian strikes across the Gulf during the conflict damaged at least nine US military sites, including facilities in Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar. Several US radar systems were reportedly destroyed, including components linked to an American THAAD battery in Jordan and similar installations at two sites in the UAE. The outlet added that a US Air Force E-3 Sentry was also destroyed in a strike on a Saudi air base.

Hurst noted that most of the $25 billion had been spent on munitions. War Secretary Pete Hegseth refused to say whether the figure included repairs to damaged US bases.

During Wednesday’s hearing, Democratic and some Republican lawmakers grilled Pentagon officials, with Representative Ro Khanna calling the $25 billion estimate “totally off” given that they had previously told Congress the conflict cost roughly $11 billion in just the first six days.

Hegseth was also scrutinized over the war’s economic impact, rising gasoline costs, and misleading justifications for the conflict. The war secretary pushed back, calling Democrats “reckless, feckless, and defeatist,” and insisting the cost was justified to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

The US-Israeli war on Iran, launched in late February and initially expected to last several weeks, has left more than 1,300 civilians dead and has triggered a global energy crisis due to the ongoing blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk has charged that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman “stole a charity” and called himself a “fool” for funding the company, claiming that the ChatGPT maker had strayed from its original nonprofit mission.

Musk sued OpenAI in 2024, alleging he was misled when he co-founded and funded the company in 2015 on the understanding it would remain a nonprofit. The AI firm, now valued at about $85 billion, has since restructured, with a nonprofit parent retaining a stake in its for-profit arm, including ChatGPT.

Testifying on Wednesday, Musk said OpenAI and its chief executive, Sam Altman, had broken that founding commitment by shifting toward a profit-driven model, according to court proceedings.

He said he continued financing OpenAI after receiving assurances from Altman that it would remain a nonprofit.

“I was a fool who provided them free funding to create a startup,” Musk told a federal court in Oakland. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO said he contributed $38 million from December 2015 through May 2017, believing he was supporting a charitable venture.

Musk’s lawsuit alleges OpenAI abandoned its founding agreement by pivoting to a for-profit model and seeks to remove Altman and Brockman, reverse the shift and secure damages for the nonprofit arm. He described his view of OpenAI’s leadership in three phases, moving from “enthusiastic support” to a loss of confidence and finally to a belief that “they’re looting a nonprofit.” 

Under cross-examination, Musk clashed with OpenAI lawyer William Savitt. When pressed for simple answers on emails discussing a for-profit structure, Musk pushed back. “Your questions are not simple,” Musk said. “They are designed to trick me essentially.” 

OpenAI has rejected the allegations, arguing that leaders never promised the organization would remain a nonprofit forever. The company contends Musk’s legal challenge aims to undercut OpenAI’s rapid growth and bolster his rival AI startup, xAI.

Musk left OpenAI in 2018 due to disagreements with Altman, bought Twitter (now X) in 2022, and launched his own artificial intelligence firm xAI the following year.

The trial in California started on Monday and is expected to last about four weeks.

Britain and other north European states will create naval force outside of NATO to counter Russia, first sea lord and chief of naval staff in the UK, General Gwyn Jenkins, has said.

Moscow has repeatedly denied what it calls ‘hysterical’ claims it plans to attack NATO states or anywhere in Western Europe, arguing that they are being made by Western politicians to distract the public from problems at home and justify increased military spending. It also says that Russia will only fight NATO if it is attacked first.

During his speech at the Royal United Services Institute on Wednesday, Jenkins announced that members of the UK-led Joint Expeditionary Force (Jef), which has been in place since 2014, signed a statement of intent last week to set up a new “multinational maritime force.”

The Jef includes the Netherlands, all five Nordic nations (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden) and the Baltic states (Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia.)

The naval force will be commanded from London and serve as a “complement to NATO,” according to Jenkins. It will see the fleets of the ten nations training and preparing together to be ready to “fight immediately if required, with real capabilities, real war plans and real integration” by 2029.

“Russian incursions into our waters has jumped by almost a third in the last two years,” the British naval chief claimed, adding that Britain expects this activity by surface vessels and submarines to intensify.

Moscow began deploying frigates to escort its oil tankers after UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer threatened to seize them in late March. Since then, almost a hundred tankers have passed through British waters unimpeded, according to the Guardian.

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who now serves as the deputy chair of Russia’s Security Council, reiterated on Thursday that the Kremlin “has no aggressive plans” regarding Europe.

US President Donald Trump’s envoy for South Asia, Sergio Gor, is visiting Nepal on Thursday, hoping to clinch a meeting with a prime minister averse to meeting to junior officials from foreign countries, local media has reported.

Recently elected Nepalese Prime Minister Balendra Shah refused to meet visiting US Assistant Secretary of State Samir Paul Kapur earlier this month, Kathmandu Post reported on Wednesday.

Gor is reportedly seeking a meeting with Shah on Friday or Saturday at any time of his convenience, according to the report.

As of Wednesday evening, the prime minister had reportedly not given any indication he would see the US diplomat, the paper added.

Sergio Gor is the highest-ranking diplomat to visit Kathmandu since the Rastriya Swatantra Party government headed by Shah was sworn in on March 27.

The report, citing multiple sources at the Prime Minister’s Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said Shah had not decided to meet Gor, despite suggestions through various channels.

Gor will meet with Finance Minister Swarnim Wagle, Foreign Minister Shisir Khanal, Foreign Secretary Amrit Bahadur Rai, and some other local officials and leaders, an aide to the prime minister said.

The Himalayan nation’s PM reportedly wants to set a benchmark of meeting only ministers or higher-level officials from foreign countries.

Gor met with outgoing Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus of Bangladesh multiple times. He has also met King Jigme Khesar Namgyel and Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay of Bhutan, and Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake.

Maldives President Mohamed Muizzu cancelled his meeting with Gor in protest against the US-Israel war on Iran.

Though this is Gor’s first visit to Kathmandu in his official capacity, he has engaged with the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). Following the party’s victory in the March 5 election, Gor had a telephone conversation with RSP president Rabi Lamichhane on March 25 to congratulate the party on its electoral victory.

The US is set to pitch foreign governments on a new initiative for controlling the Strait of Hormuz, with participation explicitly excluding “adversaries” Russia and China, according to media reports.

The proposal was outlined in a cable sent on Tuesday by Secretary of State Marco Rubio to US embassies, which were instructed to present the plan to host governments. The Wall Street Journal first reported on the cable, with Reuters later confirming its contents.

The initiative, known as the Maritime Freedom Construct (MFC), would be jointly managed by the State Department – serving as a “diplomatic operations hub” – and the Pentagon through its regional command, CENTCOM.

“Your participation will strengthen our collective ability to restore freedom of navigation and protect the global economy,” the message to prospective partners states. “Collective action is essential to demonstrate unified resolve and impose meaningful costs on Iranian obstruction of transit through the Strait.”

Trump has previously berated NATO members for declining to support the US-Israeli air campaign aimed at effecting regime change in Tehran. Reports suggest the White House has compiled a list of European members of the military bloc that could face repercussions for their lack of backing – or for openly opposing the operation, which was Spain’s position.

In response to the late-February attack, Iran throttled shipping through the Strait of Hormuz – a key artery for global oil flows – and carried out attacks on Arab countries hosting US military bases. A fragile ceasefire was announced in early April. However, tensions persisted, with Trump later declaring a naval blockade of Iranian ports after Pakistan-mediated talks failed to produce a breakthrough.

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has stated that Americans support the US operation against Iran, a claim that stands at odds with multiple national surveys showing most adults in the nation oppose the conflict.

The war, which began with a US-Israeli bombing campaign in February and was initially expected to last several weeks, has dragged on at a cost of $25 billion, leaving more than 1,300 civilians dead and triggering a global energy crunch after the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, with no clear US gains.

Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday in his first major public appearance since the war began, Hegseth lashed out at Democrats and some Republican lawmakers who criticized the conflict and accused them of “handing propaganda to our enemies.”

He accused Democrats of being “reckless, feckless, and defeatist” and questioned their loyalty. “Who are you cheering for here? Who are you pulling for?”

“I know the American people support that mission, despite your loose talk and words like ‘quagmire,’” Hegseth said during questioning that turned into hours of contentious debate over the Iran war.

Recent polls, however, suggest otherwise. The Harvard CAPS/Harris poll cited by Trump found 52% support for US airstrikes on Iran, but that same survey showed support split along party lines, with 79% of Republicans backing the strikes compared to only 26% of Democrats and 46% of independents.

Surveys by NPR/PBS/Marist and CNN show a majority of Americans oppose the military action, while a Reuters/Ipsos poll found support slipping to about one-third by late April.

Hegseth’s testimony comes as Trump’s approval rating has fallen to record lows, recent polls show, with his Iran policy dividing allies. While hawks urge tougher action, business leaders warn that disruption to the Strait of Hormuz and rising energy prices could pose political risks for Republicans ahead of the midterm elections.

Meanwhile, Democrats are reportedly considering legal action against Trump over the war. They argue the White House has violated federal law by failing to seek approval for the ongoing operation.

King Charles III has gone to Washington, ostensibly to help the transatlantic cousins celebrate getting rid of his predecessor George III 250 years ago. But being a royally gracious loser is, of course, only a pretext.

In reality, as The Economist, the premier British mouthpiece of transatlantic orthodoxy, has deplored, Charles’s mission is to salvage what’s left to be salvaged from the sinking “special relationship” between Washington and London.

That the relationship is in very bad shape is obvious from the compulsive manner in which Britain’s leader Keir Starmer keeps insisting that it still exists, while also emphasizing that he “will remain laser-focused on what is in the British national interest.”

Indeed, the abysmally unpopular Starmer has been subjected to so much typical Trump hazing that, as The Guardian notes, he may be enjoying “a vanishingly rare moment of public approval for his relatively robust response.”

Historically, the “special relationship” has certainly seen better days. It goes back a long way, even if the term itself was coined as late as 1946, when Winston Churchill needed a polite way of suggesting a political friendship with benefits: The British Empire was bankrupt and shrinking, and London was ready to submit to its former colonists in America in return for a new place as their permanent privileged sidekick in the beginning Cold War crusade against the Soviet Union.

Historically, the moderately sized island realm off Europe’s shores had laid the foundations for the continental behemoth across the Atlantic, even if – to be fair to the British – not deliberately but by strategic blunder. The bloody divorce between the rebellious colonists and the obstinate mother country – in many respects really a war between competing oligarchies, including plenty of slave holders and traders – has been imaginatively baked into the bedrock of US self-glorification as a war of independence and revolution.

It is true that, at first, the British were very cross indeed and returned in 1812 to burn the White House. When the Americans went to war with each other in the 1860s, Britain’s upper classes mostly rooted for the South, that is, for the break-up of the US. But even then, London was already cautious enough to maintain official neutrality.

True, considering the consequences of that defeat and its shortsighted mismanagement by the victors, you don’t have to like the Kaiser’s Germany to wonder if Europe – and the world – would not have been better off if the Americans had stayed out, as eminent historian Dominic Lieven has long pointed out.

In any case, as things happened in the real world, there was a second German (and, this time, also Japanese) try for primacy, much worse than the first. Again, in the Second World War as well, over-extended Britain and the booming US were not only on the same side but formed a particularly close if unequal relationship.

The pattern continued during the subsequent Cold War and beyond, with American and British spies and soldiers often in cahoots to topple sovereign governments and replace them with authoritarian vassal regimes, including Iran in 1953, Chile twenty years later, Iraq in 2003, and Syria only recently, to name only a few cases.

Churchill’s very own American dream, in short, came true: While shedding its empire, a much-diminished Britain – really a middling power with debilitating manufacturing-base weakness – kept punching above its economic and geopolitical weight, due in large measure to having found a new niche as America’s junior accomplice.

There have been partial exceptions and mishaps. Britain, for instance, refused to send troops to help the US in Vietnam. Hardly remembered now, in other ways London did, however, consistently support Washington’s brutal and futile war, if on the sly. The greatest single debacle was, of course, the Suez in 1956, shorthand for a British-French-Israeli imperialist Blitzkrieg on Egypt that went sour when the US – and the Soviet Union – put the Zionist-colonialist marauders in their place. Then as well, a British monarch, Charles’s mother Elisabeth II, ended up making a very delicate trip to Washington.

There are many differences between the Suez in 1956 and the current war on Iran, too. What matters with regard to the American-British special relationship is that this time, it is the US that has gotten badly stuck in a failing war of aggression waged together with Israel. Britain has by no means “refused to take part,” as the New York Times has misinformed its readers. In reality, in letting the US use it as a launching pad for bombing Iran, London is the ever-trusty accomplice again, no better than Germany.

Yet the Starmer regime is trying to have it both ways by engaging in what are really shyster sophistries to mask its deep involvement, while rejecting Washington’s demands for even more collaboration. The upshot is that Starmer has tied himself into a pretzel to please Washington as much as he can without fearing for his own political skin, but that is not enough to satisfy America’s Donald Trump. “When we needed them, they weren’t there,” the president-in-dire-straits has growled.

There are other issues of discontent and sore spots between the “special relationship” partners: London is not amused at all that the Trump administration has cast doubt over its sovereignty over the Malvinas (AKA Falklands), an empire-remnant of some geopolitical significance that is much closer to Argentina (which also lays claim to them) than Britain. London’s plans for the Chagos Islands, home to British and American bases, have run into US opposition.

Britain used to have some special oomph being America’s poodle inside the EU, but Brexit put an end to that. At the same time, Washington does see London as part of Europe whenever Europe fails to satisfy Trump’s every whim, as over his urge for Greenland. In the US, it is precisely with the most MAGA Americans that Britain tends to have the worst image, caricatured as a hotbed of Islamism and anarchy, whereas in reality it’s an increasingly authoritarian hub of Zionist influence.

So, there’s much that is rotten in the “special relationship” between the former global empire and its current successor on its own trajectory of decline and decay. But that is not the only reason why things give off a fetid odor. The worst irony of them all is the fact that the US and Britain still do have important things in common, but they are even worse than what sets them apart. Both Washington and London have cultivated a pathologically close relationship with Israel, supporting the war-addicted apartheid state to the detriment of their own societies, countries, and national interest.

In the same vein, the elites of both London and Washington are, moreover, at the heart of the scandal around the pedophile criminal and conspirator – clearly on behalf of Israel – Jeffrey Epstein. King Charles and President Trump could exchange notes on how to spin the fall-out from the Epstein files, both for the royal family and for the American president himself. Indeed, one of the many recent bust-ups between the British government and Trump has been about Starmer’s criminally negligent – at the very best – appointment of yet another Epstein “customer,” the sinister powerbroker Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the US.

Think about it: with all the bad blood between London and Washington, they still converge on complicity with a genocide and the state perpetrating it, and they can commiserate with each other over being stuck up to their necks in the worst, most disgusting, most politically disruptive scandal of the century. The “special relationship” stinks of corruption, whether in agreement or disagreement.

The price of Brent crude oil rose to $126 on Thursday as US-Iran talks stalled and reports that US President Donald Trump may extend the blockade of Iranian ports.

It hit $126.3 for the first time since March 2022, when the Ukraine conflict escalated. Prices later eased to $125.30. The price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil also rose 10.5% to $110.5 per barrel, as traffic through the Strait of Hormuz continues to face disruptions.

On Wednesday, media reports, citing White House officials, said Trump ordered a plan to prolong the blockade of Iranian ports “for months” in a bid to pressure Tehran to consent to a more favorable peace deal.

The Iranian authorities insisted that they will keep preventing vessels from the US and its allies from going through the Strait of Hormuz, which accounts for some 25% of global crude trade, for as long as the country is being harnessed.

Later in the day, the head of US Central Command, Brad Cooper, is reportedly set to present plans for a potential renewed military action against Iran to US President Donald Trump. On Thursday, Axios reported, citing sources, that the moves by the Pentagon could include a “short and powerful” wave of strikes on the Islamic Republic’s infrastructure and other targets, the use of ground force to capture parts of the Strait of Hormuz to unblock shipping, and an operation by special forces to seize Iran’s enriched uranium.

There have been no direct meetings between the Americans and the Iranians since the failed talks in Islamabad in mid-April. Another round of negotiations had been expected to take place in the same location at the weekend, but Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reportedly declined to meet Trump’s envoys, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.

According to Pakistani sources, the sides continue to exchange messages aimed at working out a potential deal to end the conflict, which broke out after the US-Israeli attack on Iran on February 28.

US President Donald Trump has said he could withdraw some American troops stationed in Germany amid a public spat with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz over the war in Iran.

“The United States is studying and reviewing the possible reduction of troops in Germany, with a determination to be made in the near term,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Wednesday.

In 2020, near the end of his first term in office, Trump planned to withdraw around 12,000 of the roughly 36,000 American service members stationed in Germany at the time. Former President Joe Biden later deployed additional troops to Germany, citing the Ukraine conflict.

More than 36,000 active-duty troops and 1,500 reservists are currently stationed at bases across Germany, according to CBS.

Trump has chided European allies for refusing to back the US-Israeli war with Iran and declining to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which Tehran closed to “hostile” shipping in February. The conflict has also prompted the president to revive his longstanding criticism of NATO, which he described this month as “a paper tiger.”

Speaking to students at a German school on Monday, Merz argued that the US was being “humiliated” by Iran and that the Trump administration lacked a clear strategy in the conflict. He also stressed that Germany was being hit hard by energy price increases caused by the war.

Merz sought to downplay the feud on Wednesday, saying his personal relationship with the US president “remains good.”

“I simply had doubts from the start about what was begun with the war in Iran. That is why I have made that clear,” Merz said, as cited by Reuters.

Meanwhile, oil prices rose above $120 on Wednesday, the highest level since 2022, with uncertainty continuing over the prospects for US-Iranian negotiations.

Italy’s Culture Ministry is investigating the Venice Biennale, the world's most prestigious art festival, after event organizers announced that Russia would be allowed to return to the event after a 4 year ban, Italian media reported on Wednesday.

Russia’s group exhibition, “The Tree Is Rooted in the Sky,” will be accessible to the press and industry professionals during the Biennale’s preview. Despite being scheduled to run from May 9 to November 22, the exhibition will be closed to the general public, organizers said.

Most Western cultural institutions have cut ties with Russia since February 2022 over the Ukraine conflict. Artists, performers, and conductors, as well as globally recognized Russian theatrical, orchestral, and ballet works, have been removed from theater programs in what the Kremlin has dismissed as a pointless attempt to “cancel” Russian culture.

According to Corriere della Sera, following the announcement that the Russian pavilion would reopen, and the EU’s subsequent withdrawal of $2.3 million in funding for the event, inspectors were dispatched to the Biennale Foundation to examine documents and financial records related to the planned reopening. Newspaper Il Fatto Quotidiano reported that no “irregularities” were found in terms of compliance with sanctions imposed on Russia.

The European Commission condemned the decision to allow Russia reopen its national pavilion – a complex designed and built in 1913-14 using 17th and 18th Century Russian architectural motifs – that was last year handed over to the event “for cooperation and visibility for activities dedicated to universities, schools, families, and the general public as part of La Biennale’s Educational program.”

Italian Culture Minister Alessandro Giuli said he would not attend the opening of the festival on May 9. Last week, the Biennale jury said it would exclude Russia and Israel from award consideration. 

Biennale Foundation chief Pietrangelo Buttafuoco pushed back against the criticism, comparing the institution to “the UN of art, from which no nation can be excluded.”

Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini argued that the arts should not fall victim to politics. “I am not for the exclusion of anyone, so I invite the Biennale to go ahead,” he said, as quoted by Euronews.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova criticized the EU's funding cut, calling it “a relapse into anti-culture, a condition that the West has been suffering from in recent years.” In remarks made to TASS, she warned: “Unless they cure it, they’ll remain uncultured forever.”

Police have released bodycam footage showing officers detaining a suspect who allegedly stabbed two Jewish men on the streets of London on Wednesday.

Both victims are in stable condition, while the suspect, a 45-year-old British national of Somali origin, remains in custody, the Metropolitan Police said.

“The suspect also attempted to stab police officers and was Tasered before being arrested. No officers were injured,” police said, adding that the attack had been declared a terrorist incident.

Police are also investigating whether the suspect was involved in a separate stabbing earlier that day in southeast London, which left one person lightly injured.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned the incident as an “utterly appalling” attack and thanked the police and Jewish volunteer security guards for their response. “Attacks on our Jewish community are attacks on Britain,” he wrote on X.

The UK has seen an increase in anti-Semitic incidents since Israel invaded Gaza in 2023. Last month, a group of young men torched four ambulances belonging to a Jewish charity in Golders Green, the same neighborhood where Wednesday’s stabbings occurred.

The dramatic events of the first months of 2026 offer a useful lens through which to assess the evolving role of the world’s major powers. Among those often cast as architects of a new international order, China stands out, arguably even ahead of Russia and the United States, both of which remain preoccupied with their rivalry in Europe.

For decades, China’s rise has been one of the central forces shaping global change. As far back as the late 20th century, Henry Kissinger argued that China’s growing importance would prove more consequential than even the end of the Cold War. That judgment now appears prescient. Drawing on vast domestic resources and sustained inflows of foreign investment, Beijing has, in a remarkably short time, established itself as a leading economic power and a confident political actor on the global stage.

A decisive step in this transformation came with the launch of the Belt and Road Initiative in 2013. This ambitious project was designed not only to expand China’s economic reach but to position Chinese capital and infrastructure as the engine of development across entire regions. For many countries in the Global South, it offered an alternative to Western-led models, which have often been accompanied by political conditionality.

In parallel, Beijing has advanced broader concepts such as a “community of shared future for mankind” and new approaches to international security. These ideas have found receptive audiences among a wide range of states in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, particularly as China has deepened its investment presence and become an indispensable economic partner.

Against this backdrop, China has increasingly been viewed as a credible alternative to the United States and the West more broadly. Western powers, after all, have long been accused of cloaking self-interest in the language of liberal economic ideals. China, by contrast, has emphasized non-interference and support for political stability in partner countries. Whether entirely accurate or not, this perception has strengthened Beijing’s appeal.

By the time the current phase of global restructuring began, China was widely seen as a power comparable to the United States in its ability to influence events far beyond its borders. Yet recent developments suggest a more cautious reality.

In the face of escalating international tensions, China has consistently refrained from intervening where its core interests are not directly at stake. These interests, it is increasingly clear, are concentrated primarily in its immediate neighborhood. Beijing’s response to events in 2026 illustrates this approach. It reacted calmly to the US strike on Venezuela, despite close ties with the country’s leadership. It has also avoided significant involvement in Cuba’s deepening crisis, even as the island faces unprecedented external pressure.

The same pattern is visible in the Middle East. Following US and Israeli actions against Iran, China has maintained a notably restrained position. This is striking given Beijing’s reliance on Iranian energy and Iran’s membership in organizations such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS. Rather than confronting Washington directly, China has focused on maintaining dialogue and protecting its broader strategic interests.

For some observers, this restraint raises questions about whether China is living up to the expectations placed upon it. But from another perspective, it reflects a deliberate and coherent strategy. China appears intent on avoiding direct confrontation with the United States, instead seeking to outmaneuver its rival over the long term.

At the same time, China’s current posture invites a broader reconsideration of how great powers define their interests. One of the enduring principles of international relations is that the greatest threats to major powers tend to come from within, rather than from external actors. From this perspective, China’s focus on internal stability and sustained economic growth is both logical and necessary.

Indeed, by maintaining domestic cohesion and economic momentum, China may ultimately draw other states into its orbit, not through coercion, but through the force of example and opportunity. Yet this strategy has its own vulnerabilities. Unlike Russia or the United States, China lacks abundant domestic energy resources and remains dependent on external supplies. This dependence introduces a degree of fragility into its broader geopolitical position.

Ultimately, for a power of China’s scale, the disruption of foreign economic ties could prove deeply destabilizing. A loss of geopolitical standing that limits access to global markets and resources would go beyond simply weakening China externally, it could undermine the internal stability that its leadership prioritizes above all else.

In this sense, China faces a fundamental dilemma. To withdraw too far into its own sphere of influence risks exposing the limits of its economic self-sufficiency. But to engage too deeply in global conflicts carries the danger of overextension.

For now, Beijing has chosen caution. Whether this strategy will prove sustainable in an increasingly volatile world remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that China’s dependence on the global economy will shape its choice, and their consequences, for years to come.

This article was first published by the Valdai Club and edited by the RT team.

A Democratic-led effort to limit US President Donald Trump’s authority to use military force against Cuba without congressional authorization has failed in the Senate.

The Republican-majority Senate’s vote on the measure on Tuesday narrowly dismissed it as out of order in a 51-47 tally on grounds that there are no active hostilities with Cuba.

Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat who introduced the war powers resolution in March, said it was needed as Trump’s blockade of the island had caused “humanitarian crises across Cuba,” including disruptions to medical care, shortages of clean water and rising food prices.

Trump imposed an oil blockade on Cuba in February, tightening the decades-old US embargo by threatening sanctions against countries and companies that ship crude to the island. He has repeatedly hinted at possible regime-change operations against the socialist government in Havana, pledging “a new dawn for Cuba” and warning that it is “next” after he is “finished with this,” in reference to the ongoing US-Israeli war on Iran.

Cuba has faced nationwide blackouts and severe fuel shortages in recent months, after Venezuela – once its main oil supplier – halted shipments under US pressure.

Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez condemned Washington’s “ferocious blockade” of fuel supplies, calling it a “brutal onslaught” on the country’s economic system.

The Irish government has agreed to put in motion a plan to terminate government-provided accommodation for Ukrainian migrants, as well as cut benefits for those living in rentals.

An estimated 125,000 Ukrainians have received temporary protection in Ireland since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. According to local media reports, Dublin has spent more than €438 million ($516 million) on housing support for roughly half of them.

The government sealed the scheme to cut housing benefits for Ukrainians who arrived in Ireland before March 2024 on Monday. The move is set to affect some 16,000 Ukrainian migrants living in state-provided accommodation, save for those unable to live on their own and “highly vulnerable.” 

Asked on Tuesday what exactly constitutes the latter category, Prime Minister Micheal Martin admitted that the government was still fleshing it out, adding that it would likely include “women and children and people with disabilities and so forth, elderly or frail people who need support.”  

Apart from ending state-provided accommodation, the government opted to sharply reduce the Accommodation Recognition Payment Scheme from €600 to €400. The move, expected to be implemented in September and completed by March of next year, will affect a further 42,000 Ukrainians residing in hosted accommodation.

The government plans have been harshly criticized by pro-migrant groups and opposition politicians, who slammed them as “immoral and unethical” and bound to become “really problematic” for many Ukrainian families.  

Last week, Irish Migration Minister Colm Brophy said the government has been considering offering payouts to Ukrainians to encourage them to leave and repatriate. The minister argued that Dublin had offered unique benefits to Ukrainians, pointing out that no other EU states had such programs.  
 
An estimated 4.35 million Ukrainians are registered for temporary protection across the bloc. In recent months, numerous EU states, including the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Poland, and Hungary, have moved to curb social programs for Ukrainian migrants.

Russian President Vladimir Putin held a phone call with his US counterpart Donald Trump on Wednesday, during which the two discussed issues including the Ukraine conflict and the crisis in the Persian Gulf, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov has said.

During the conversation, Putin expressed his support to Trump in light of the latest attempt on the US president’s life at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner on Saturday. The Russian leader “strongly condemned” the incident, underlining that “political violence was unacceptable in any form,” Ushakov told journalists.

The Russian president backed Trump’s decision to extend the ceasefire with Iran, warning against renewed hostilities between the US-Israeli side and Tehran. Moscow is ready to mediate in the standoff and maintains contact with all the sides, Putin said, according to Ushakov.

“At the same time, the Russian president emphasized the inevitable, extremely dire consequences not only for Iran and its neighbors, but for the entire international community, should the US and Israel resort to the use of force again. And, of course, a ground operation on Iranian territory is regarded as a completely unacceptable and dangerous option,” the aide stated.

Putin and Trump also extensively discussed the Ukraine conflict and efforts to bring the hostilities to an end, Ushakov said. The two presidents “expressed essentially similar assessments of the behavior of the Kiev regime led by [Vladimir] Zelensky,” which has been “incited and supported by Europeans” to prolong the conflict at any cost, the official added.

During the conversation, which lasted over 90 minutes and was initiated by the Russian side, the US leader praised the recent Easter truce announced by Moscow. Putin, in turn, proposed declaring a temporary ceasefire with Kiev during the upcoming Victory Day celebrations, Ushakov said.

“Trump actively supported this initiative, noting that the holiday commemorates our shared victory over Nazism in World War II,” he added.

Speaking to reporters at the White House, Trump said he had a “very good conversation” with Putin, “mostly about Ukraine.” 

“I think we’re going to come up with a solution relatively quickly, I hope. I think [Putin would] like to see a solution, I can tell you, and that’s good,” the US president said.

Footage appearing to show Israeli soldiers looting homes in southern Lebanon and filming themselves “joking around” while damaging property has emerged on social media.

The images come amid the fallout from the report by Haaretz last week alleging that looting by Israeli troops was widespread, with commanders turning a blind eye. The outlet cited testimonies from soldiers who described troops taking “significant amounts of civilian property,” including televisions, furniture, and motorcycles.

The incidents allegedly took place during Israeli ground operations in southern Lebanon following renewed fighting with Hezbollah earlier this month.

Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir has said “if” these incidents occurred, they would run contrary to the values of the IDF.

Watch the full report by RT’s Charlotte Dubenskij below.

The United Arab Emirates has announced its withdrawal from OPEC and the OPEC+ format effective May 1, 2026, ending nearly six decades of membership. This marks the largest institutional disruption to the oil production coordination system since the establishment of the expanded OPEC+ format in 2016 and is perceived by the market as a step towards weakening the group’s ability to influence global oil prices.

At the same time, the move reflects Abu Dhabi’s strategic course towards maximizing its own production and increasing its market share, while maintaining its image as a ‘responsible supplier’ and relying on the long‑term growth of global energy demand.

The UAE’s withdrawal objectively leads to the potential growth of global oil production, and as a consequence, to downward pressure on prices in the medium term – especially after the unblocking of the Strait of Hormuz. It is already being described as one of the most notable institutional shifts in the energy market over the past decade. The Emirati authorities present this step as a “strategic re‑evaluation project” aligned with national economic interests, rather than a one‑off conflict over quotas.

From an economic perspective, the issue is not just about how many barrels Abu Dhabi and Dubai will produce but about the very architecture of global oil coordination. OPEC and OPEC+ are ceasing to be a monolith even in the formal sense: One of the largest and most flexible producers is moving into ‘independent mode’, transforming the market from a quota‑cartel structure into a more fragmented and sensitive one – a market driven not only by economics but also by geopolitics.

Why the UAE wanted out

In recent years, tensions have been building up between the UAE and Saudi Arabia over the issue of quota allocation within OPEC+. The UAE invested in expanding production capacity but was restricted in its ability to monetize it due to collective commitments to cut output. In fact, even before the official announcement in 2026, the UAE repeatedly signaled dissatisfaction with the level of its quotas and a desire for greater autonomy in making production decisions.

Official statements from the UAE government and Energy Minister Suhail Al Mazrouei stress that the decision to withdraw from OPEC constitutes a sovereign political decision in the field of energy policy, adopted following a “prolonged and thorough review” of the national strategy. The official wording highlights several key motives:

• Alignment with the UAE’s long‑term strategic and economic vision and the evolution of the country’s energy sector.
• Primary emphasis on national interests and strategic priorities, ensuring the continued perception of the country as a responsible and reliable supplier.
• The anticipated sustainable growth of global energy demand in the medium- and long-term perspective justifies the expansion of the UAE’s own production and investments in the capacity foundation.

The key economic factor behind the decision is the significant expansion of the UAE’s production capacity and the drive to fully monetize it outside the constraints of a rigid quota system.

It should be noted that the UAE’s current production stands at around 3.4-3.5 million barrels per day (bpd), with plans to increase capacity to 5 million bpd by 2027 through investments in upstream projects.

For the UAE, where GDP growth and fiscal sustainability are closely tied to hydrocarbon exports, the ability to more aggressively ramp up production as global demand recovers and grows is seen as a way to accelerate the monetization of resources ahead of a potential structural shift in demand towards low‑carbon sources. In this context, leaving OPEC is perceived by Abu Dhabi as a means of protecting national revenue from external constraints and the asymmetry of interests within the organization.

The primary economic motive for the UAE’s exit from OPEC can be summarized briefly: The country no longer intends to keep its production capacity within the limits set by the collective system when it believes it can produce and export more than the quotas allow. This has been explicitly stated by UAE officials, who point to the need to “revise production policy and strengthen autonomy in managing the oil and gas sector.”

The medium-term goal is to increase production by more than 30% and strengthen the UAE’s position as a key supplier to fast-growing Asian markets, including China and India. The authorities stress that OPEC quotas, at a time when the country is completing large-scale investment cycles in oil and gas projects, begin to look like an artificial brake on potential.

Against this backdrop, leaving OPEC appears to be part of a broader diversification strategy. The UAE is simultaneously developing traditional oil export flows, natural gas, petrochemicals, and low‑carbon sectors, including renewable energy. In this model, oil and gas are not an end in themselves but a source of capital for further diversification. Consequently, any restrictions on export volumes automatically slow down progress along this trajectory.

The financial benefits are clear. In the short and medium term, the country gains the opportunity to ramp up exports when prices are favorable, reallocate flows towards more solvent markets, and accelerate the implementation of infrastructure and petrochemical projects, using waves of high prices as a ‘capital catcher’.

This could lead to a significant increase in export revenue and faster accumulation of foreign exchange reserves – which is particularly important for an economy actively participating in global financial flows.

However, the economic risks are also significant.

Firstly, leaving OPEC weakens the collective market-stabilization mechanism, which increases price volatility. In an environment where oil prices become more erratic, budget planning becomes more challenging: Revenues fluctuate sharply, and fiscal buffers and reserve funds must be designed to accommodate a wider range of scenarios.

Secondly, the UAE partially loses the political weight and institutional influence that OPEC+ membership provided. Instead of jointly taking part in shaping the rules of the game, the UAE becomes a major but standalone player whose decisions are perceived by the market as an external factor rather than as part of an institutional consensus. This raises the risk that, in times of crisis, the UAE could be viewed as a destabilizing factor – which in turn could increase pressure from partners and regulators.

The exit from OPEC carries not only economic but also symbolic significance: It demonstrates the UAE’s readiness to pursue its own course amid the fragmentation of the regional security architecture and energy coordination.

Impact on global oil trade

From a supply-side perspective, the UAE’s departure implies the potential introduction of additional volumes into the market in the medium term – 1 to 1.5 million bpd – as production expands and transportation infrastructure is restored. Combined with a possible reaction from other producers, this leads to the following:

• a reduction in the market’s overall fear of a supply deficit, and as a consequence, downward pressure on forward quotations.
• a weakening of the influence of OPEC+ signals and strengthening of individual producers’ strategies.
• a further shift in the market’s center of gravity towards competition among major independent players (the US and others).

From a short‑term perspective, the market could react to the UAE’s exit as a ‘risk shock’. Any news about quota revisions, increases in production volumes, or disruptions in logistics in the Strait of Hormuz area will amplify volatility. At the beginning of this scenario, both upward and downward price spikes are possible as market participants revise their forecasts regarding future supply levels and prices.

In the medium term, the key question is whether other producers will follow the UAE’s lead and whether real discipline will be maintained among the remaining OPEC+ members. If so, relative stabilization is possible – albeit with higher baseline volatility. If not, the market could shift to a mode in which supply is driven not by coordination but by individual decisions, leading to more frequent and severe price fluctuations.

For the global economy, this implies increased uncertainty in energy costs, more complex planning of investment programs, and higher risk premiums in financial markets. In importing countries, rising oil price instability exacerbates challenges in managing inflation and jeopardizes the sustainability of budgets and the balance of trade.

Russia’s challenges and opportunities

From a geoeconomic perspective, the UAE’s exit from OPEC fits into a broader trend of fragmentation in global energy governance and the growing role of regional and bilateral ties. For Russia, this creates both risks to budget revenues and an opportunity to deepen bilateral energy and financial-investment cooperation with the Emirates within the evolving architecture of the global oil market.

Regarding Russia’s reaction to the UAE’s withdrawal, the initial public response came from Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, who directly linked it to the prospect of increased global production and lower prices in the future. According to him, the UAE’s departure means the country will be able to produce as much oil as capacity allows and bring it to the market without restrictions. If other OPEC countries begin to act in a similar way, total supply will rise and prices will fall.

Among the key challenges are the potential drop in oil prices, which directly affects budget revenues and development financing capabilities, and the weakening of collective coordination mechanisms through which Russia has been able to influence the market via OPEC+.

The opportunities include: Deepening energy, investment, and financial cooperation with the UAE as an increasingly independent geoeconomic player interested in diversifying its partners; developing joint projects in logistics (bypassing the Strait of Hormuz and using alternative routes), oil, and petroleum product trade, as well as in the area of sovereign wealth funds and payment infrastructure, with a focus on de-dollarization; Using the bilateral format to align approaches to market stabilization during critical moments – complementing, rather than replacing, formal OPEC+ mechanisms.

The UAE’s exit from OPEC and OPEC+ should not be interpreted as a collapse in prices or the outright disintegration of the cartel. Rather, it represents a transition to a new regime in which the role of collective quotas diminishes and the importance of national economic interests, geopolitical games, and individual market decisions increases.

For Russia, the key challenge is to adapt its budgetary and energy policies to a potential decline in prices amid rising supply, while simultaneously deepening strategic partnerships with the UAE and other major exporters in Asia and the Middle East. In the context of growing fragmentation in global energy governance, it is the combination of flexible domestic policy and active geoeconomic diplomacy that can mitigate risks and transform the structural shift into sources of additional influence and resilience.

The beginning of fuel loading at the first unit of the Russian-build Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant has paved the way for the start of experimental production of nuclear energy in Bangladesh.

Reporting from Rooppur, RT India correspondent Rujuta Thete notes that the nuclear power plant will supply 10% of national needs once it becomes fully operational.

Fuel loading at the first unit is expected to be completed within the next 45 days, officials said. After that, the reactor will be brought to a minimum controlled power level, followed by a gradual increase in output. Electricity will then be generated on a trial basis and fed into the national grid.

With a planned capacity of 2,400 megawatts across two reactors, the facility will add Bangladesh to the list of more than 30 nations operating nuclear power reactors, Rosatom noted in a statement. The estimated project cost is about $13 billion, with Russia providing a state loan covering 90% of that amount. The Russian side has also undertaken long‑term obligations for nuclear fuel supply, technical maintenance, and management of spent nuclear fuel.

Bangladesh’s Science and Technology Minister Fakir Mahbub Anam said that the plant’s first reactor is expected to begin commercial operation in August, with an initial supply of about 300 megawatts. Full‑scale production is expected by December this year or early 2027.

The project is seen as a potential game‑changer for a country facing a severe energy crisis amid the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. Bangladesh heavily relies on energy imports for its electricity and industrial needs, sourcing roughly 95% of its oil and gas from Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Oman, and Iraq. India is also a major electricity supplier, providing around 15-17% of Bangladesh’s power through grid connections and supplying diesel via pipeline.

More than 500 British police officers have raided the headquarters of an Islamic sect in Cheshire, arresting nine members of the so-called Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light – a fringe Shia-inspired movement that relocated to Britain from Sweden in 2021.

Cheshire Police said the investigation began in March 2026 after officers were made aware of allegations of serious sexual offences, forced marriage and modern slavery, reported to have taken place in 2023. The alleged offences all involved one victim – a woman who was a member of the group at the time. 

At around 8.50am on Wednesday, officers executed three search warrants, including at Webb House, a former orphanage that serves as the sect’s headquarters. According to Cheshire Police, six men and three women of American, Mexican, Italian, Spanish, Egyptian, and Swedish nationalities were detained.

The Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light is a secretive movement founded in the late 1990s by followers of Shia Islam. It is believed to be active in over 40 countries and claims around 7,000 adherents.

The group had previously faced scrutiny in Sweden, where immigration authorities issued deportation orders against 69 of its members before it moved to the UK in 2021. It is also understood to be under investigation by the Home Office over its use of skilled worker visas. The group has denied any wrongdoing.

The raid also comes amid continued pressure on the British government to address the issue of grooming gangs where men, mostly of Pakistani origin, who have systematically raped thousands of vulnerable young British girls over the past two decades. 

In June, Prime Minister Keir Starmer authorized a new national inquiry into the matter. In London alone, police have been reviewing some 9,000 child sexual exploitation cases, with an estimated 2,000 to 3,000 involving grooming gangs.

Saudi Arabia’s petroleum and natural gas giant Aramco is suspending liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) through May due to damage at its main export facility, Bloomberg has reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

The company’s key LPG export hub, the Juaymah terminal located in the Persian Gulf, suffered structural damage in February, shortly before the US-Israeli attack on Iran. At the time, the company said a support structure collapsed at the site, cutting off fuel supply and prompting a halt in overseas shipments. The facility accounts for about 3.5% of total global waterborne LPG exports, according to market analysts.

The conflict in the region left the company unable to fix the damage, and the facility remains shut. Earlier this month, the Saudi Energy Ministry said that the site also suffered fires during Iran’s retaliatory strikes on its US-aligned neighbors. The ministry did not disclose the extent of damage inflicted by the attacks.

On Tuesday, Bloomberg reported that Aramco notified its customers that the deliveries will remain suspended through May.

The key waterway continues to face disruptions amid the stalled talks between the US and Iran, which have been unable to agree on key issues, including the fate of Tehran’s nuclear program. The US administration has been reportedly weighing an extended blockade of Iranian ports, regarding it as a preferable option to active hostilities or a retreat and hoping it would pressure Tehran towards a more favorable peace deal. 

The LPG shortages, caused by the disruption of Hormuz and the Juaymah terminal closure, have been primarily felt throughout Asia. India, where LPG is widely used for cooking, has been hit particularly hard by the issue, prompting a surge in firewood use and repeated conflicts between the country’s citizens over scarce supply.

Sixty days into the US-Israeli war on Iran, peace talks are stalled and the world is bracing for yet more economic pain. RT asks how we got here, and who – if anyone – is really winning in the Persian Gulf?

April 29 marks 60 days since the US and Israel launched their war on Iran. The initial hours of the conflict were marked by extreme brutality. An American missile strike killed more than 160 schoolgirls at an elementary school in Minab and dozens of the Iranian political and clerical elite were killed along with their families in missile attacks. A quick and decisive victory, it seemed, was at hand for Washington and West Jerusalem. 

Things did not go according to plan. Iran struck back against US bases and Gulf energy infrastructure, blockaded the Strait of Hormuz, and with its government still intact, now insists that any peace deal leave its nuclear program off the table. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump’s approval rating is in freefall and his NATO ‘allies’ have deserted him while struggling to deal with the economic fallout at home.

Following the announcement of a US-Iran ceasefire deal, Israel launched a brutal invasion of Lebanon, killing hundreds of people in attacks on urban areas within minutes, invading the south of the country and triggering another spiral of violence where dozens of people are killed every day despite the announcement of a truce.

Did Israel drag the US into war with Iran? 

Trump and his cabinet struggled from the outset to describe both their objectives and their rationale for attacking Iran. Trump initially told the public that the US faced “imminent threats from the Iranian regime,” later claiming that Tehran was “two weeks away” from developing a nuclear weapon. Six months earlier, Trump proclaimed Iran’s nuclear program “totally obliterated” after US strikes on several key nuclear sites in Iran.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters that the US knew that Israel was going to attack Iran with or without American support. The US joined in the attack, he said, believing that “if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.”

Has the US achieved its objectives in Iran?

The US’ military goals – as laid out by Trump – remain unchanged since February 28: “obliterate Iran’s missiles and production, annihilate its navy, sever its support for terrorist proxies, and ensure it never acquires a nuclear weapon.”

Prior to the first attacks on Iran, the CIA predicted that Khamenei would be immediately replaced by a successor, and that hardliners within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) would strengthen their position in Tehran, Reuters reported. This prediction has been proven correct.

Trump has claimed that Iran’s navy is “completely obliterated,” while Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has described Iran’s missile arsenal as “functionally destroyed” and “combat ineffective for years to come.” However, US and Israeli military officials believe that around half of the Islamic Republic’s missile launchers and thousands of one-way attack drones are still operational, and roughly 60% of its navy – mostly fast-attack speedboats – is intact.

Iran’s support for Lebanon’s Hezbollah movement is degraded, but not severed. Meanwhile, the status of Tehran’s nuclear weapons program remains unchanged: both Iran and US intelligence assessments maintain that it has been paused since 2003.

How has Iran defended itself?

Iran has, in the words of Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, “had two decades to study defeats of the US military to our immediate east and west,” and has “incorporated lessons accordingly.”

We've had two decades to study defeats of the U.S. military to our immediate east and west. We've incorporated lessons accordingly.

Bombings in our capital have no impact on our ability to conduct war. Decentralized Mosaic Defense enables us to decide when—and how—war will end. pic.twitter.com/E4jrdnDapb

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) March 1, 2026

The most valuable of these is the concept of “mosaic defense” where commanders of Iran’s regional military districts are empowered to conduct strikes without approval from Tehran. This has allowed the IRGC to order attacks on Israeli and Gulf targets despite dozens of its senior leaders in the Iranian capital being killed.

Iran responded to the US-Israeli attacks by launching ballistic missiles at Israel and at American bases and interests in the Gulf region. Israel’s military censorship regime makes assessing the damage to the Jewish state difficult. A combination of satellite footage, media reports, and social media footage makes, it possible to confirm that the following US bases have been hit, often more than once:

• Naval Support Activity, Bahrain

• Erbil International Airport, Iraq

• Al-Asad Airbase, Iraq

• Victory Base complex (Baghdad International Airport area)

• Muwaffaq Salti Air Base, Jordan

• Ali Al-Salem Air Base, Kuwait

• Camp Buehring, Kuwait

• Camp Arifjan, Kuwait

• Mohammed Al-Ahmad Naval Base, Kuwait

• Al-Udeid Air Base, Qatar

• Al-Dhafra Air Base, UAE

• Jebel Ali Port, UAE

• Prince Sultan Air Base, Saudi Arabia

These facilities account for more than half of the US’ temporary and permanent military bases in the region, which together host between 40,000 and 50,000 American troops at any given time. 

Iran’s target selection appears methodical, with radar installations prioritized in the early days of the conflict. Among the equipment hit was an AN/FPS-132 early warning radar system at Al Udeid Air Base, one of only six worldwide, and an AN/TPS-59 radar dome at Naval Support Activity Bahrain. 

Iran has also struck energy infrastructure in Gulf states hosting the US military. Saudi Arabia’s Ras Tanura oil refinery and Qatar’s Ras Laffan LNG hub were both hit by drones on March 2. Production at Ras Laffan has since been indefinitely halted, wiping out a fifth of the world’s LNG supply. Iran broadened its campaign of energy strikes after an Israeli attack on its Pars gas field on March 18, and has since struck dozens of refineries, pipelines, and extraction sites in Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, while its allied militias have struck oil fields and refineries in Iraq.

How has the US military performed against Iran?

Despite inflicting severe damage on Iran, the Pentagon suffered several humiliations in the opening weeks of the conflict: fires and plumbing failures aboard the USS Gerald R. Ford; the forced retreat of two aircraft carriers – the Ford and the USS Abraham Lincoln – out of range of Iranian missiles; the evacuation of tanker aircraft from Al-Udeid and Prince Sultan airbases under Iranian fire; the downing of five fighter jets; and a series of ‘friendly fire’ incidents that Tehran claims were concocted to conceal the US’ true losses.

Damage to American bases in the region is far more extensive than publicly acknowledged by the Pentagon, and may take several years and “up to $5 billion to repair,” NBC News reported in late April.

At least 15 US service personnel have been killed and more than 520 wounded since February 28, although the Pentagon has been accused of manipulating casualty lists to hide its true losses. 

Which Iranian elites did the US and Israel target?

At least 48 senior Iranian political, clerical, and defense officials have been assassinated, including seven Defense Ministry and IRGC leaders killed at the same Iranian Defense Council meeting on February 28. The list of officials includes:

• Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

• Iranian Defence Council Secretary Ali Shamkhani

• IRGC Commander-in-Chief Mohammad Pakpour

• Iranian Armed Forces Chief of the General Staff Abdolrahim Mousavi

• Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh

• Head of the Military Office of the Supreme Leader Mohammad Shirazi

• Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani

• Intelligence Minister Esmaeil Khatib

Several officials were killed along with their families. Khamenei’s daughter, son-in-law, and granddaughter were killed alongside the supreme leader, while former Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi and IRGC budget chief Jamshid Eshaghi, among others, lost their wives and children to US and Israeli missiles. 

According to Tehran’s figures, almost 3,500 people have been killed and 26,500 wounded in Iran since the conflict began, just under half of them civilians. 

What is the situation in the Strait of Hormuz?

The Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway through which just under a third of the world’s seaborne oil and a fifth of its LNG flows, has been de-facto closed since the beginning of the conflict. Iran formalized the blockade on March 4, with the IRGC announcing that it alone would decide which ships could pass through the 34km-wide strait. In late March, passage was opened up to shipping from neutral countries willing to pay tolls, but shut down again in April after the US imposed its own blockade on the strait.

The American ‘double blockade’ is Trump’s latest strategy to resolve the crisis. Within the span of two weeks Trump declared the strait open, begged his NATO “allies” and China to help open it, threatened to unleash “hell” on Iran if it did not allow shipping through, before settling on imposing a blockade of his own on the Strait on April 13.

Iran maintains that it is able to export its oil by other means, and insists that the US must lift its blockade or bear responsibility for the wider economic damage resulting from the closure. “One cannot restrict Iran’s oil exports while expecting free security for others,” Iranian First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref wrote on X on April 19. “The choice is clear: either a free oil market for all, or the risk of significant costs for everyone.”

What kind of economic damage has the war caused?

Global energy markets have been thrown into chaos. The closure of Hormuz is the main bottleneck but it isn’t the only problem: key pieces of energy infrastructure in the Middle East have sustained damage that will be expensive and could take years to repair.  

Meanwhile, shortages have emerged across numerous petroleum products, from naphtha to diesel and jet fuel. Rationing has been introduced in some countries, especially in Asia. Around one-third of the global fertilizer trade passes through the region, making this disruption a particularly ominous one for food prices.   

Analysts warn of a slow-moving hurricane stalking the global economy as supply chains are pressured, inventories run low, and the specter of inflation returns. Although a global recession would eventually reach all corners of the globe, the effects so far have been disproportionately felt in Asia, which is more reliant on energy flows through Hormuz.  

Oddly, stock markets have in many cases surged to new highs. This has led some analysts to talk about a disconnect between financial markets and physical reality. Such a disconnect is also evident in the often vast spread between the spot price of oil (for physical cargoes) and the much lower futures price. On the other hand, a new bout of inflation would be bullish for stocks – as long as the economic carnage is contained. 

How are peace talks progressing?

A ceasefire between the US and Iran took effect on April 8, with Israel and Hezbollah entering a fragile truce a week later. Talks between Washington and Tehran, however, have shown little sign of a breakthrough. Iran wants an immediate end to hostilities, security guarantees, and the lifting of the US blockade, while the US wants any deal to involve restrictions on Iran’s nuclear enrichment.

Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi has spent the last week meeting with mediators in Pakistan and Oman, and shoring up diplomatic support in Moscow. According to Reuters, however, Trump is unhappy with Tehran’s latest proposal, and talks remain at an impasse.

Pleased to engage with Russia at the highest level as the region is in major flux.

Recent events have evidenced the depth and strength of our strategic partnership. As our relationship continues to grow, we are grateful for solidarity and welcome Russia's support for diplomacy. pic.twitter.com/I1VyDSfxET

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) April 28, 2026

What happens next?

Two months since the war began, the US is bogged down in a conflict that Trump predicted would be over four weeks ago, with few of its objectives achieved. Washington’s European allies have refused Trump’s pleas and admonishments for help, American warplanes are banned from NATO airbases in multiple European countries, and even former backers of Trump, like Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, have distanced themselves from the US president.

Israel has continued to wage war on Lebanon, regardless of the insistence by two parties to the negotiations that the Jewish state was bound to a ceasefire agreement. 

Iran has been significantly damaged, but has emerged in control of the Strait of Hormuz and therefore much of the world’s oil supply. Although the US is now preventing Iranian vessels from transiting the strait, Tehran – sanctioned for decades by the West – is betting that it can withstand more economic pain than Trump and his allies can.

Trump now faces an unenviable choice: cut his losses, take a deal, and retreat, or drag the US and the world economy into the kind of Middle Eastern quagmire he once swore he’d never end up in.

Almost daily, there are updates on brutal attacks by armed Israeli settlers – really, colonists – against Palestinians. They shoot or ferociously beat – sometimes to the point of murder – Palestinian civilians, male and female, young and old, including entire families.

These attacks have been occurring for decades. I’ve written about them many times, including what I saw in different regions of the West Bank during my eight months there in 2007. Back then, the violence was already horrific. Now, the attacks are exponentially more frequent. The end goal is clear – drive the Palestinians permanently off their own land.

While many rightly note the increase of such attacks since 2023, and even more so following the Israeli-US attack on Iran, the drastic increase in colonist attacks began in 2021 and has continued to increase up to the present.

In November 2021, the Israeli publication Haaretz noted a 150% rise in settler attacks from 2019. A United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) report posted in September 2023 likewise showed an increase in attacks from 2021 and throughout 2022. It noted, “Three settler related incidents per day occurred on average in the first eight months of 2023 compared to an average of two per day in 2022 and one per day the year before. This is the highest daily average of settler-related incidents affecting Palestinians since the UN started recording this data in 2006.”

The independent human rights organization and legal center Adalah reported in October 2023 on new regulations passed by the Israeli Knesset enabling still more Jewish Israelis to acquire and carry guns, an initiative put forth by National Security Minister Ben-Gvir. This is on top of the fact that illegal Jewish colonists have already carried and used guns against Palestinian civilians for decades.

Adalah noted, “By labeling Palestinians as ‘enemies’, Ben-Gvir, who does not conceal his racist views towards Palestinians, seeks to legitimize the blanket impunity granted to both Israel’s armed forces and ruthless Jewish-Israeli vigilantes for killing and injuring Palestinians.”

Arson crimes committed by colonists in recent months include setting fire to homes and vehicles in the southern community of Susiya; to homes in the Jenin region; setting fire to and burning the emergency room of a Palestinian Medical Relief clinic in the Nablus area; torching homes and vehicles in Tayasir village east of Tubas (and slashing open the forehead of a Palestinian resident) – to list just a handful of cases. Back in 2014, colonists kidnapped and deliberately burned a young teenager alive. In 2015, they firebombed a Palestinian home and burned to death a year-old infant inside.

In March, swarms of Israeli colonists raided Palestinian villages near an illegal colony between Nablus and Jenin, setting homes, vehicles, and property ablaze, according to Palestinians from the region who also said Israeli forces prevented the entry of firefighters and ambulances.

“Israeli forces’ jeeps came with the settlers. Israeli forces chased people and opened fire on them to ensure they couldn’t fight off the settlers,” an older resident testified.

From inside his burnt-out house, another man said, “The settlers surrounded the house, burned it by throwing Molotov cocktails. Israeli forces were nearby, a drone was filming. This went on for 30 minutes. I was on the roof with my children, under attack, while the house was burning.”

Israeli NGO Yesh Din noted in January 2026, “Ideologically motivated violence by Israeli citizens against Palestinians has reached a record high over the past two years; attacks against Palestinians and their property, some deadly, throughout the West Bank now occur daily.”

Since 2005, the organization has been documenting offenses committed by Israeli civilians, settlers, and others, against Palestinians in the West Bank. They noted, “Over twenty years of monitoring of the outcomes of investigations into ideologically motivated crime against Palestinians reveals that the State of Israel breaches its obligation under both Israeli and international law to protect Palestinians in the West Bank from harm.”

According to Yesh Din, since 2005, only 3% of the investigation files opened into such crimes against Palestinians led to full or partial convictions. They rightly maintain that this isn’t mere oversight, but rather “evidence that Israel intentionally enables the violence perpetrated against defenseless civilians.”

By mid-April, Yesh Din reported 378 incidents of “extremist settler violence against Palestinians and their property in the West Bank,” resulting in eight Palestinians shot dead and 200 injured by colonists during the 40 days of the US-Israeli bombardment of Iran alone.

Masafer Yatta: One region under sustained colonist attacks

I spent several months in the village of Susiya, in the Masafer Yatta region in South Hebron Hills, back in 2007. The tent settlement (an inadequate ramshackle replacement for the homes Palestinians were unjustly evicted from in the ’80s and ’90s) was constantly under attack from both Israeli settlers and soldiers. One of the elderly Palestinian grandfathers had been brutally beaten by a gang of seven in 2006, the attackers badly injuring his leg. In 2008, he and his wife were again savagely attacked and beaten by colonists, his wife hospitalized for several days as a result. The assailants were caught on video but were never held accountable.

Fast forward to recent years, and the attacks are more brazen and brutal, the army and police more complicit.

Palestinian activists from the region have filmed some of the extremely violent attacks. In July 2025, a gun-wielding colonist was filmed shooting wildly at Palestinians. Were the situation reversed, the shooter would be dead or rotting, tortured, in an Israeli prison. In February 2026, footage shows what locals said were more than 30 armed colonists carrying out a coordinated, attack on Palestinian families in Susiya, “throwing explosives at a home with a family inside, and smashing security cameras with stones to hide the crime.”

It is undeniable such attacks are an unofficial policy for Israeli illegal expansionism, as Yesh Din noted in January 2026, stating, “settler violence serves Israel’s objectives to expand its control over the occupied territory by terrorizing and exercising violence against Palestinians.”

The 2021 Haaretz article also cited a senior Israeli security figure saying, “These are not attacks by bored children. You have to call things by their name. In some of the cases it’s simply Jewish terrorism.”

Complete impunity

Palestinian Christian human rights advocate Ihab Hassan, in an April 2026 post about Israeli colonist attacks, noted, “If a Palestinian tries to defend his home from these terrorists, he will be killed or imprisoned for life. If settlers shoot and kill Palestinians in their own homes, nothing will happen to them. What should we call a system that punishes victims and grants criminals full impunity based on religion, race, and nationality?”

Indeed, in April, Israeli human rights NGO B’Tselem reported on an Israeli colonist invasion of a Palestinian village “as part of ongoing efforts to take it over,” noting, “Residents who tried to fend them off with stones came under heavy fire from a settler on military reserve duty who joined his friends as reinforcement. One of the bullets fatally hit Ali Hamadneh, 23, in the back while he was running away and posed no danger, as is evident in footage of the incident.”

B’Tselem noted that the Israeli army spokesperson later claimed that a reservist soldier carried out a “suspect-arrest procedure that included firing in the air and then firing at one of the stone-throwers.”

Recently, the Italian magazine L’Espresso published a disturbing cover photo featuring a sneering Israeli soldier taunting a Palestinian woman. Aptly titled ‘Abuse’, the image was widely shared on X, sending indignant Israeli propagandists into overdrive. They tried to claim the image was fake, but that matter was settled when L’Espresso released the accompanying video of the soldier menacing the woman.

The Israeli ambassador to Italy claimed the photo was “anti-Semitic.” This claim was widely contested with still further examples of crazed-looking Jewish colonists harassing Palestinian civilians.

For Palestinians who have been enduring the hateful, often deadly, settler attacks for decades, it is good that the wider world is finally becoming aware of both the settlers’ crimes and the Israeli police and army’s complicity. But awareness isn’t enough. Israel will never hold them accountable, much less stop them. They do the dirty work of Israeli expansionism.

In January 2026, Munther Isaac, a Palestinian Evangelical Lutheran pastor in Ramallah and director of the Bethlehem Institute for Peace and Justice, posted, “Yesterday, Zionist settler thugs attacked the village of Birzeit, near Ramallah... When one woman from the village dared to shout at them and confront them, the settlers attacked her.” The woman ended up in intensive care and was eventually stabilized. But, according to Isaac, instead of arresting the attackers, Israeli forces arrested her son, who tried to defend his mother. Isaac then writes: “Let us call this what it is: Zionist terrorism. The problem is not only the settlers. The problem is the system that empowers them. The problem is the immunity they enjoy. Lord, have mercy.”

He is correct. It is the system which enables and encourages illegal Israeli colonists to attack, maim, and kill Palestinian civilians. The question is when, or if, these criminals will ever be stopped, much less held to justice.

Google has struck a deal to provide the Pentagon with its AI models for classified use, the New York Times reported on Tuesday.

The agreement came despite internal company protests and ongoing disputes over military applications of the technology. The Pentagon has been rapidly securing access to advanced AI through similar deals with major developers since last year.

The deal reportedly expands a $200 million contract signed in 2025, allowing Google’s Gemini AI to operate on classified networks. The tech-giant confirmed the agreement but provided no further details.

“We are proud to be part of a broad consortium… providing AI services in support of national security,” the company’s spokeswoman Jenn Crider said, adding that the company remains committed to ensuring AI is not used for domestic mass surveillance or autonomous weapons without human oversight.

The agreement has triggered backlash inside Google. In an open letter this week, more than 600 employees, including senior staff, urged CEO Sundar Pichai to halt military use of the company’s AI, warning it could be used in “inhumane or extremely harmful ways.” They called for a moratorium on such contracts, greater transparency, and an ethics board to oversee military partnerships.

Other firms have taken a different approach. OpenAI recently struck its own deal to deploy models on classified Pentagon networks, while Musk’s xAI has integrated its systems into the military’s internal AI platform, GenAI.mil, used by millions of personnel.

The Pentagon’s AI push has sparked protests from tech workers and activists, who warn the technology could be used in military settings without proper accountability. Demonstrators last month gathered outside OpenAI offices with slogans such as “No AI surveillance state” and “Orwell warned us.”

US President Donald Trump has ordered a plan to prolong the blockade of Iranian ports in a bid to pressure Tehran towards a more favorable peace deal, despite his approval rating hitting record lows, the Wall Street Journal has reported, citing sources.

Unnamed officials told the paper that Trump has told aides to prepare for an extended blockade, seeing the option as risky but preferable to renewed bombing or a full-scale retreat from the conflict.

The paper described the policy as “a high-risk bid to compel a nuclear capitulation” of Iran, which has long rejected US demands to dismantle its atomic program and hand over its enriched uranium stockpile.

According to the WSJ, Trump saw Tehran’s overture as a sign that it is not negotiating in good faith. The paper also suggested that the proposal would allow Iran to set terms for an off-ramp. In addition, a senior US official told the outlet that the blockade is “demonstrably crushing Iran’s economy,” adding that the mounting pressure was the reason behind the latest Iranian proposal in the first place.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll on Monday suggested that Trump’s approval rating has fallen to 34%, down from 36% earlier in April and from 47% when he took office in January 2025. Only 22% of respondents approved of his handling of the cost of living crisis, the poll added. The president, however, has said that he does “not care about polling” and that he has “to do the right thing.”

As traffic through the Strait of Hormuz continues to face disruptions, the US national gas price average has reached $4.2 per gallon, with the Brent benchmark oil price at that $115 mark, compared to around $70 before the war.

Democrats in Congress are discussing a potential lawsuit against US President Donald Trump over the war on Iran, Time Magazine has reported, citing multiple sources.

The debate is intensifying as a 60-day legal deadline, falling on May 1, approaches, under which the White House must obtain congressional authorization for the war or halt the operation. The White House has not indicated it plans to seek approval, the outlet wrote on Tuesday.

Democrats say the war violates US law, as Trump initiated it without congressional approval and could continue operations beyond the legal limit.

However, Democrats are divided over how to respond. Some, according to Time, say Congress could have a legal case and are exploring a lawsuit if Trump ignores the deadline. Others argue litigation is unlikely to succeed, noting courts have historically dismissed such disputes as “political questions.” Party leaders are instead focusing on legislative measures.

The conflict, meanwhile, remains unresolved despite a temporary ceasefire. The US has rejected Iran’s latest proposal and canceled planned talks, while Tehran has refused to negotiate under current conditions. A US naval blockade of Iranian ports and Iranian restrictions on traffic through the Strait of Hormuz remain in place.

Amid the stalled diplomacy, Trump has signaled he may escalate the conflict, posting a militaristic image of himself on social media alongside the caption “No more Mr. Nice Guy.”

“Iran can’t get their act together. They don’t know how to sign a nonnuclear deal. They better get smart soon!” he wrote on Wednesday.

Trump’s approval rating has slipped to around 40% in multiple recent polls, with the Iran war itself ranking among the least popular US military actions in modern history, and roughly six in ten Americans saying it was the wrong decision.

A US Special Forces soldier accused of making more than $400,000 by betting on a secret military operation pleaded not guilty in court on Tuesday. The case has highlighted growing concerns over prediction markets turning geopolitical events into opportunities for insider profit.

Master Sergeant Gannon Ken Van Dyke is accused of using classified information about the US raid in January to kidnap Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro to place around $33,000 in bets on Polymarket, where he reportedly won around $400,000.

The case is the first US criminal prosecution linking insider trading to prediction markets – platforms where users bet on real-world events such as elections and conflicts.

Van Dyke faces charges including fraud and unlawful use of confidential government information, and has been released on bond with travel restrictions while awaiting trial. His lawyer called the allegations “not a crime” and described his client as an “American hero.”

RT’s Murad Gadziev reports on how these platforms work – and why regulators are increasingly concerned about their potential for abuse.

Two members of the Jewish community have been stabbed in a suspected anti-Semitic attack in London, with the assailant now in custody.

The incident happened in the Golders Green area, where arsonists set fire to four ambulances operated by a Jewish volunteer organization just a little over a month ago.

Commenting on the latest attack on Wednesday, Prime Minister Keir Starmer wrote on X that the “antisemitic attack in Golders Green is utterly appalling.”

London’s Metropolitan Police reported that the assailant had been arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, with his nationality and background being established at present.

According to the statement, first reports of the incident came in at around 11:16 a.m. Upon officers’ arrival, the suspect attempted to stab them, but was tasered before he could inflict any injuries on the police.

This is the moment the terrorist is taken down after stabbing two Jewish people in Golders Green.

This is England 2026.

Union Flag flying proudly by British Jews as an invader scum who likely hates everything British, attacks them! https://t.co/Y4RfMi7OKR pic.twitter.com/JIYJyomM3m

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) April 29, 2026

The attack left two men injured – one in his 70s and the other in his 30s.

Both were rushed to the hospital and are in stable condition, the MET stated.

“Specialist officers from Counter Terrorism Policing are leading the investigation and working with the Metropolitan Police to establish the full circumstances and any links to terrorism,” the authorities added.

During a press conference later on Wednesday, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Mark Rowley clarified that the incident is “being treated as a terrorist attack.”

Some reports have described the suspect as an “Islamic male” armed with a kitchen knife who hunted down his victims not far from a synagogue. One of the injured men was reportedly transported to hospital by helicopter.

Golders Green, which is home to a large Jewish community, has seen a series of apparently anti-Semitic attacks in recent months.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog said on Wednesday that he was “horrified by yet another violent attack on Jews in broad daylight on the streets of London,” as quoted by his office. He added that “it has become dangerous to openly walk the streets as a Jew” in the British capital, and urged the UK government to “take urgent and immediate action before the next antisemitic attack occurs."

As recently as last month, several vehicles belonging to the local branch of Hatzola, a network of Orthodox Jewish volunteer emergency medical services, were targeted in an arson attack in the same Golders Green area. The MET said at the time that the case was being “treated as an anti-Semitic hate crime.”

Since the start of the Israeli military campaign against Hamas in 2023, which has been marked by significant Palestinian civilian casualties, there has been a rise in anti-Israeli sentiment in the UK and multiple other Western nations, as well as further afield. Thousands of people in London and other major European capitals have repeatedly protested against what some have described as a “genocide” of the Palestinians by West Jerusalem.

Concurrently, there has also been a spate of anti-Semitic attacks across Europe.

The latest assassination attempt on US President Donald Trump was not only a complete security failure but a product of systemic weakness that may even be deliberate, a special forces veteran of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) has told RT. 

Cole Tomas Allen, a 31‑year‑old teacher from California, has been charged with trying to assassinate the US president during a dinner event at the Washington Hilton on Saturday. Allen had reportedly checked into the hotel the day before. On the day of the attack, he used an internal stairwell to get to the hotel’s terrace level where the event was held. Armed with a pump-action shotgun, a semi-automatic handgun, and three knives, Allen rushed through the metal detector frame and engaged in a gunfight with Secret Service agents. He was apprehended just a few meters from the ballroom.

Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Andrey Popov, a veteran of the FSB’s elite Alpha Group anti‑terrorism unit, has argued that the Secret Service made a number of blatant “organizational mistakes” and suggested that its repeated failures to prevent attacks on the American leader are “part of the system.”

According to Popov, such an incident would have never happened if the Security Service had followed standard security and anti-terrorism procedures and had done its due diligence ahead of the event, such as properly vetting all the hotel guests, reviewing building plans, sealing doors and ventilation, setting up proper metal detectors, and stationing additional security forces. “In a decent hotel, a person from the budget zone simply cannot physically get into the VIP zone,” he said.

In Russia, such an incident could have never taken place, Popov argued, noting that any sort of attack on the government’s top leadership could likely only be attempted by a very large organization, such as a foreign power or a major terrorist organization. 

Popov suggested that the Security Services’ repeated failures indicate an “organizational problem in the protection of US presidents” which is “not accidental, but part of the system.”

“There is a systematic destruction of the Secret Service which is not being allowed to develop or strengthen,” Popov said, pointing to continued underfunding of personnel, reorganization, and reshuffling based on “idiotic gender preferences.”

According to Popov, the Secret Service appears to be intentionally kept this way to allow “certain forces” to have “the possibility of physically eliminating the US president” if he “does something against their will.”

“This is not even only about Trump. This has probably been going on since Kennedy. So that the president feels, as we say, someone’s hot breath on his back if he suddenly misbehaves and does not listen to someone’s advice,” Popov suggested.

“To him, it did not seem like a surprise,” Popov said, adding that “Americans actively use such things to interrupt an information wave that is unfavorable to them at that moment.”

“We see that already in the news summary. Nobody is reading the US reports on the war on Iran. Everyone is only laughing. Iran is winning. And that, in my opinion, does not make Trump very happy.”

Popov predicted that, as with the previous assassination attempts on Trump, nobody will be held responsible for this latest incident, and that no changes will be made in the Secret Service, which must be “kept in a deprived state” to allow further attempts on presidents.

“It is part of their democracy. If they suddenly elect the wrong president, the truly democratic forces must have the ability to correct the situation by eliminating him.”

King Charles III has cracked a joke about US President Donald Trump’s controversial White House ballroom project, comparing it to the burning of the iconic building by British troops in 1814. He also issued what was widely seen as a subtle rebuke of Trump’s criticism of NATO amid friction in US-UK ties.

In October 2025, the Trump administration demolished the historic White House East Wing to build what the president said would be a privately funded grand ballroom.

The project met regulatory pushback, with controversy escalating further on Monday after Senator Lindsey Graham advocated for legislation to fund the construction with more than $300 million in taxpayer money, framing it as a national security imperative after a gunman tried to storm the White House Correspondents’ Dinner at the Washington Hilton hotel.

Speaking at the White House on Tuesday, Charles humorously mentioned the ongoing construction, saying: “I cannot help noticing the readjustments to the East Wing... I’m sorry to say that we British, of course, made our own small attempt at real estate redevelopment of the White House in 1814,” in a reference to British troops burning the building during the War of 1812.

He saved a second light-hearted barb for Trump’s habit of reminding Europeans that the US supposedly saved them from speaking German during World War II. “Dare I say that if it wasn’t for us, you’d be speaking French”, Charles added, in a nod to Britain's defeat of France in the Seven Years’ War, which paved the way for British control over North America.

During his visit, King Charles also took an opportunity to take a subtle swipe at Trump over his criticism of NATO, which escalated after the bloc refused to support the US in its war on Iran. Charles recalled that the only time NATO invoked a mutual defense clause was in the immediate aftermath of September 11, 2001.

TWO KINGS. 👑 pic.twitter.com/iPVUxc4i4H

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) April 28, 2026

Despite the cordiality and jokes apparently being taken as intended, with the White House posting a photo of Trump and Charles captioned “TWO KINGS,” the visit comes amid a standoff in historically close US-UK ties.

Germany’s economy has been struggling to stay afloat in recent years. High energy costs, partly the result of rejecting cheap Russian gas, have rendered much of the country’s heavy industry uncompetitive, while its export-oriented model has come under pressure from shifting economic trends, not the least being rising competition. Germany no longer sits alone in its niche and hasn't yet adapted.

Now, however, whatever fragile recovery had taken root, fiscally driven or otherwise, is being wiped away in light of the war against Iran and subsequent slow-burning economic mayhem it has produced. A number of indicators in Germany are flashing at multi-year lows. RT offers a snapshot in four charts of the dark clouds once again gathering over the EU’s largest economy.

GfK consumer sentiment

German consumers are suddenly much less sanguine about where things are headed these days. The GfK Consumer Climate Index fell to -33.3 for May 2026, its lowest level in two years. The 5.2-point drop from April is the steepest monthly decline since the crisis year of 2022, driven by rising energy prices and geopolitical uncertainty.

The data show households are growing more pessimistic about their finances: income expectations have plunged, as many fear inflation will once again outpace wage growth while the willingness to spend has weakened. The propensity to buy dropped to a two-year low due to uncertainty over rising energy bills. The propensity to save, however, remains elevated, indicating that households are prioritizing financial security and are wary of more economic shocks to come.

Services PMI 

Business volumes saw their sharpest drop in nearly three and a half years. New orders also fell, pointing to weaker demand. Meanwhile, costs rose faster, with input prices increasing at the quickest pace since 2023. Companies passed some of these costs on, raising prices at the fastest rate in almost three years. Firms also cut jobs, while backlogs fell more quickly, reflecting softer demand.

The services slump dragged the Composite PMI – which includes manufacturing – into contraction at 48.3 for the first time since last May.

Inflation 

Nothing strikes fear into consumers more than a decline in purchasing power and that is exactly what is happening now. Inflation in Germany has picked up again, with the Harmonized Index of Consumer Prices (HICP) rising in March from 1.9% to around 2.7-2.8% year-on-year. This uptick comes after a period in 2025 when inflation had remained subdued. The March reading is the highest since early 2024.

Economic sentiment 

The ZEW Indicator of Economic Sentiment, a survey of financial market experts that measures expectations for the economy over the next six months, tumbled to 84.4 points in March, its lowest level since May 2020 and below market expectations.

The March 2026 drop is notable as it ends the relative stability seen throughout 2025. ZEW respondents pointed to the Iran war conflict as a “black swan” event that has sharply worsened outlook for Germany’s energy-intensive industries. The sub-index for current conditions also declined, signaling that markets expect Germany’s GDP to actually contract in the first half of the year.

Where from here

Germany never fully recovered from the shock of 2022, which itself was overlaid on top of a gradual erosion in the country's economic competitiveness. The tentative improvement seen in 2025 came with a helping hand from strong fiscal spending: federal budget spending increased by 6.5% from the prior year. But inflation is one disease that is not so easy to cure with fiscal medicine. Indeed, spending can fuel further price growth. 

The German government will certainly attempt to protect consumers by deflecting the latest increase in energy costs. It is already doing so. But there's only so much that can be achieved through fiscal means. A new shock to a fragile and structurally ailing economy is an ominous turn of events. The four charts above speak to a rapid deterioration. It remains to be seen whether a new stabilization – now at a lower level – will be forthcoming in the months ahead. 

The US must expand its support for Ukraine if it wants to preserve its status as a global superpower, Republican Senator Mitch McConnell has claimed.

The veteran lawmaker and former Senate majority leader criticized military officials in the administration of President Donald Trump for carrying out his policy of shifting the burden of Ukraine assistance onto European NATO allies in an op-ed published by the Washington Post on Tuesday.

Americans “can’t learn from a war… if they can’t properly observe it,” McConnell wrote. He called for more “military trainers” to be sent to Ukraine so they can “witness the conflict up close” and better understand the use of drones in modern warfare. China, he asserted, “is doubtless watching [the current armed conflict] closely as it refines its military investments and plans.”

“If we’re keen on remaining the world’s preeminent superpower, we shouldn’t let unelected defense officials undermine US leadership and obstruct deepening ties with Ukraine’s innovative military and industrial base,” he stated.

Trump, who ran for a second term pledging to scale back aid to Ukraine, had repeatedly criticized his predecessor Joe Biden for directing US resources toward the conflict with Russia. McConnell argued that both approaches ultimately failed to “give Ukraine what it needs.”

McConnell, who has represented Kentucky in the Senate since 1985, built a reputation as a highly effective political operator and fundraiser. He announced his intention to step down from his leadership post in February 2024 following a string of public health episodes and now serves as chair of the Senate Rules Committee.

Although he publicly endorsed Trump’s reelection bid, reports have suggested that in private the senator was sharply critical of him, allegedly calling him a “despicable human being” unfit for office, according to a biography by journalist Michael Tackett.

The US has slipped into stagflation for the first time in decades, billionaire hedge fund boss Ray Dalio has said. The assessment comes despite the Federal Reserve’s insistence that the term overstates the current crisis, caused in large part by the war on Iran.

Dalio, who founded the Bridgewater Associates hedge fund and is famed for correctly predicting the 2008 financial crisis, made the remarks in a wide-ranging interview on Monday, offering his take on US monetary policy and the Iran war, which he said is contributing to a sweeping breakdown in the global order.

“We are certainly in a stagflationary period,” he said. He also warned the US Federal Reserve against cutting interest rates at this point, arguing that “you will lose your credibility.”

Amid the Iran energy shock, the US is suffering from rising annual inflation, which reached 3.3% in March against the target of 2%. Meanwhile, real GDP expanded just 0.5% in the fourth quarter of 2025, down sharply from 4.4% in the third.

However, the March unemployment rate in the US stood at 4.3% – elevated but far below the double-digit levels of classic stagflation. In mid-March, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell acknowledged that the US is in “a very difficult situation,” but still far from the textbook stagflation of the 1970s.

“The more checks that are missing, particularly who controls the Strait of Hormuz, has big implications. Not only there… it has implications all around the world. So, when you’re thinking about, let’s say, the Strait of Malacca, who controls that? And is it good as a benefit or not a benefit to have a military base in your country?... Those analogous questions are being looked at by people around,” he said.

Dalio and his firm successfully anticipated the 2008 financial crisis and the 2011 European debt crisis, mostly by analyzing historical patterns. However, his prediction for a major financial crisis in 2015, which would have been modeled on the 1937 crash, did not materialize.

Dalio has also warned of a US “debt death spiral” within several years, which he said could be triggered by unsustainable interest payments and a falling demand for US assets.

The decision by the United Arab Emirates to leave OPEC will further weaken the cartel of oil producers, whose power has been eroding over the years, Afshin Rattansi, the host of Going Underground, has told RT.

The Emirati government announced the departure on Tuesday, citing plans to focus on national interests and the Gulf state’s “long-term strategic and economic vision and evolving energy profile.”

The move comes amid uncertainty over the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway crucial to global oil trade, which has remained largely closed to shipping since February due to the US-Israeli war with Iran.

“One has to realize that OPEC’s power has diminished. The glory days of (Saudi oil minister Ahmed Zaki) Yamani and 1973, when the Saudis and OPEC could exert geopolitical pressure, are long over,” Rattansi said.

“Russia and the United States are the top oil suppliers in the world,” Rattansi added.

He suggested that the UAE could align itself more closely with regional blocs such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, as the Gulf monarchy has sought to maintain independence while under Western pressure to cut ties with Russia.

Watch the full interview here:

Acting US Ambassador to Ukraine Julie Davis will leave her post over disagreements with President Donald Trump regarding his waning support for the country, the Financial Times has reported, citing three people familiar with the matter.

The State Department has confirmed Davis’ departure but denied that she was leaving because of differences with the president.

“Ambassador Davis has been a steadfast proponent of the Trump administration’s efforts to bring about a durable peace between Russia and Ukraine,” State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott said in a statement on Tuesday. He added that Davis will depart Kiev in June.

Davis has served as chargé d’affaires in Ukraine since May 2025, following the resignation of her predecessor, former Ambassador Bridget Brink, who accused Trump of “appeasement” toward Russia.

Trump has angered many in Kiev and the EU by suggesting that Ukraine may have to make concessions to Russia, including potentially ceding territory. He also criticized Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, whom he once branded “a dictator” for refusing to hold elections.

The US mediated several rounds of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine throughout 2025, although they did not result in any breakthroughs. Trump also broke with the Western diplomatic boycott of Russia by hosting President Vladimir Putin in Alaska in August 2025.

A federal grand jury has indicted former FBI Director James Comey for making threats against US President Donald Trump, the Department of Justice announced on Tuesday. If convicted, he faces up to ten years in prison.

The DOJ alleges that “a reasonable recipient familiar with the circumstances” would interpret Comey’s May 2025 Instagram post showing seashells arranged in the sand to form the numbers ‘86 47’ as “a serious expression of an intent to do harm to the president of the United States.”

Critics noted that ‘86’ is slang for eliminating someone, and that Comey’s post could be viewed as a call to kill Trump, who is serving as the 47th president.

Comey denied the allegations, saying he “didn’t realize some people associate those numbers with violence.” He deleted the seashell post shortly after the backlash.

Just James Comey causally calling for my dad to be murdered.

This is who the Dem-Media worships. Demented!!!! pic.twitter.com/4LUK6crHAT

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) May 15, 2025

“Threatening the life of the president of the United States is a grave violation of our nation’s laws,” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said. “This country has witnessed violent incitement followed by deadly actions against President Trump and other elected officials.”

Comey, who led the FBI from 2013 to 2017 under former President Barack Obama, has often criticized Trump, who he compared to a mob boss in his memoirs. 

Last year, a federal grand jury indicted Comey for lying to Congress, a charge later dismissed by a judge.

More countries are “very likely” to withdraw from OPEC following the United Arab Emirates’ decision to leave the group, former UAE diplomat to the UN and World Trade Organization Obaid Ahmed Al-Zaabi told RT.

The Gulf nation announced its intent to leave the cartel and broader OPEC+, which brings together OPEC members and other key oil-producing countries, on Tuesday. The withdrawal is set to come into force on May 1.  

The UAE’s decision has been a “long time coming,” Al-Zaabi has said, arguing that the country has been “substantially” restricting its production while many other members of the groups have been limited by their output capacities.  

“The UAE is no longer entirely dependent on oil and hydrocarbons, and our economy is highly invested all over the world. The organization OPEC acted as a tax on global productivity, and it’s now in our interest to see the world as productive as possible. Also, it costs the UAE the most to impose OPEC,” the ex-diplomat argued.  

“It hardly seems in the UAE’s interest to collude with Iran on the oil price when we’re being directly struck by them,” he argued.

More countries are very likely to follow suit and leave the cartel, the former diplomat said.  

“The truth is very likely, because the more people that defect, the more costly it is to maintain the volume restriction. So if the UAE is serious and they no longer respect the limits, then there’s going to be no incentive for Kuwait and other countries to reduce their production.” 

Watch the full video below:

The US-Israeli war against Iran has reached a stage in which military force has failed to achieve the aggressors’ goal, and diplomacy has not yet delivered a stable way out.

What the US and Israel initially presented as a controlled campaign of pressure has turned into a strategic trap. Iran has not capitulated, its diplomatic channels have not collapsed, and the issue that the US and Israel hoped to settle through coercion has returned to the negotiating table in a far more complicated form.

They want Iran to place its nuclear program at the center of the talks from the very beginning. Tehran, after facing military pressure and open threats, insists that the first issue must be security. Iran wants guarantees that the war will not resume and that the region will not remain open to new American or Israeli military actions. Thus, Iran’s new proposal, reportedly delivered to the US through Pakistani intermediaries, suggests discussing the end of hostilities and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz first, while postponing the nuclear issue to a later stage.

If Washington refuses to engage, it risks prolonging a crisis around one of the world’s most sensitive maritime passages. If it accepts the sequence proposed by Tehran, it indirectly acknowledges that military pressure has not worked on Iran. If it demands that the nuclear aspect come first, it reinforces Iran’s argument that the US is not seeking de-escalation, but a mechanism of pressure that can be resumed whenever Washington finds it convenient.

Israel also faces its own constraints, being already stretched across several fronts. Lebanon remains unstable, the confrontation with Iran has not produced a decisive settlement, and domestic political pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains intense. Israeli military action can disrupt and escalate, but it cannot by itself produce a regional order in which Iran simply accepts Israeli demands.

Tehran’s diplomatic outreach

Iran, meanwhile, is far from isolated. On the contrary, it is using its diplomatic network actively and deliberately. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s travels to Pakistan, Oman, and Russia show a coordinated effort to keep several channels open at once.

Pakistan is useful as a mediator because it has access to both sides of the conflict. It was expected to host a second round of US-Iran talks last week, yet the process did not move forward. Contact has not stopped, but the parties cannot agree on the structure of the talks, because they do not agree on what the crisis is really about.

Lebanon is also part of Iran’s calculation. Israel continues to use force in Lebanon despite the ceasefire framework, and this directly affects Tehran’s assessment of Israeli intentions. This suggests that Israel treats ceasefires as temporary pauses rather than binding commitments. This strengthens Tehran’s demand for guarantees. An agreement that stops attacks against Iran but allows continued military pressure on Lebanon would not create regional stability. This is why one of Iran’s reported demands concerns guarantees against further military action against Lebanon. Israeli threats about renewed action against Iran only reinforce Tehran’s argument that guarantees must come before sensitive concessions. The more Israel threatens, the more Iran insists on guarantees. The more Iran insists on guarantees, the harder it becomes for Washington to present the talks as an Iranian retreat.

Araghchi goes to Russia

The Iranian foreign minister’s visit to Russia this week is an effort to bring Tehran’s assessment of the crisis directly to a power that still has working channels with all major sides of the conflict. 

Russia does not see Iran as an isolated actor that can be pressured into silence, nor does it see the crisis as a narrow American-Iranian dispute. At his meeting with Araghchi in St. Petersburg, Russian President Vladimir Putin stressed that Moscow would do everything that serves the interests of Iran and the people of the region so that peace can be achieved as soon as possible. This specific wording presents Russia as a state trying to prevent the Middle East from sliding into a wider and more destructive war.

This is very important for Iran, which is facing not only military threats from the US and Israel, but also an attempt to shape the diplomatic environment around these threats. Washington and West Jerusalem would prefer Tehran to negotiate under pressure, with the nuclear issue placed at the center from the very beginning. By condemning the strikes on Iran and offering mediation, Russia helps prevent the crisis from being reduced to a one-sided ultimatum.

Araghchi’s trip is therefore a vital part of Iran’s broader diplomatic effort to prevent a repeat of American and Israeli aggression. Tehran is working through Pakistan, Oman, and Russia, while trying to create a diplomatic shield around the central demand that any future settlement must begin with security guarantees. The message Araghchi likely brought to Moscow was that Tehran wants continued Russian diplomatic support, Russian involvement in preventing escalation, and Russian assistance in communicating with regional actors that have influence over the wider balance of power.

Russia has spent years developing pragmatic and respectful ties with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Oman. These states do not want a major regional war, especially one that could threaten energy markets, maritime security, and domestic stability. Iran understands that Russia can help stabilize this environment. Moscow does not need to replace Oman or Pakistan as a mediator. Its value lies in the fact that it can reinforce the idea that a sustainable settlement must take into account the security of all regional states, not only the preferences of the US and Israel.

A diplomatic crossroads

From Iran’s point of view, Russia is a constructive partner and an important player on both the global and regional levels. Russia is not demanding that Iran begin talks by accepting American demands, and it does not condone Israel’s continued aggression in the region. Moscow’s public line is centered on ending the war and preventing further escalation. It is acting not just as a supporter of Tehran, but as a force for stability in the wider Middle East.

The coming phase of diplomacy will be decisive. If the US accepts the phased process Iran is pushing for, the crisis could move from military confrontation toward controlled bargaining. If it refuses, the region could remain suspended between ceasefire and renewed war. If Israel continues to strike Lebanon and threaten Iran, Tehran will have little reason to trust any arrangement that lacks guarantees. And if Russia, Oman, and Pakistan continue to mediate, Iran will retain the diplomatic depth it needs to resist isolation and keep the settlement process alive.

Israel has used access to water as a weapon and a form of “collective punishment” against Palestinians in Gaza, according to a report by international medical charity Doctors Without Borders (MSF). Israel has rejected the claims as baseless.

The organization said in a report released Tuesday that Israel has “engineered” water scarcity in the strip, creating “conditions incompatible with human dignity and survival.” Access to water, sanitation and hygiene has been “severely undermined” since the start of the Israeli offensive in Gaza in October 2023, it stated.

The report highlights a sharp rise in water-shortage-related diseases, including diarrhea, skin infections, lice, and infected wounds. Additionally, the lack of clean water and sanitation is also worsening malnutrition and severely affecting mental health.

Gaza has no natural freshwater sources, relying instead on groundwater and seawater, both of which require treatment. Much of the infrastructure, including desalination plants, boreholes, pipelines, and sewage systems, has been rendered inoperable or inaccessible, according to MSF.

The minimum humanitarian threshold is about 15 liters of water per person per day, including 6 liters for drinking and 9 liters for domestic use. In Gaza, people are receiving this bare survival level at best, according to UNICEF, with many unable to access even the minimum amount of safe drinking water.

Israel’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) rejected the report in a series of posts on X on Tuesday, calling the claims “baseless” and “factually incorrect.” They said that Israel is facilitating, not restricting, water access, citing the operation of four supply lines, infrastructure repairs, and the provision of fuel and electricity for water systems. They accused MSF of biased reporting and operational shortcomings.

The United States will struggle to defend itself against advanced missile systems developed by China and Russia, senior Pentagon officials told lawmakers as they called for funding for the proposed Golden Dome missile defense program.

President Donald Trump unveiled the initiative shortly after taking office in January 2025, proposing a large-scale investment – potentially reaching hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade – to expand ground- and space-based capabilities.

The upgrade is urgently needed, as the US has “a very limited ground-based single layer homeland defense system that was specifically designed against a small scale rogue attack,” Assistant Secretary of War for Space Policy Marc Berkowitz said at a Senate armed services committee hearing on Monday.

The country would face serious issues against ballistic missiles and has “no defense against hypersonic weapons or cruise missiles today,” he stressed.

Michael Guetlein, who leads the Golden Dome program within the US Space Force, testified that both China and Russia are continuing to modernize and expand their missile arsenals.

He pointed to the deployment of hypersonic glide vehicles – warheads capable of maneuvering at high speeds within the atmosphere after launch – as well as Russia’s development of the nuclear-powered Burevestnik cruise missile.

Moscow has said its investment in advanced strategic weapons was largely a response to the US withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty under President George W. Bush. Washington’s move was required to develop a national anti-ballistic missile system.

While the US has insisted that the shield was aimed at countering limited threats from countries such as North Korea or Iran, Russian officials have long warned it was undermining nuclear deterrence by enabling a potential decapitating first strike. In that scenario, Moscow argued, American missile interceptors could be used to neutralize a retaliatory strike by surviving Russian missiles.

The Golden Dome system is expected to cost around $175 billion over the next decade, according to initial estimates by the Trump administration, although Pentagon projections have since risen to roughly $185 billion and some analysts warn the final price could be substantially higher.

Afghanistan has accused Pakistan of “unforgivable war crimes” over strikes on the eastern province of Kunar on Monday, which officials said left at least seven dead and over 70 wounded, and heavily damaged a local university.

Low-intensity clashes have been continuing on the Afghan-Pakistani border despite the two nations entering a formal truce in late March. The hostilities flared up on Monday, when, according to Afghan officials, the Pakistani military shelled multiple civilian sites across Kunar, including Sayed Jamaluddin Afghani University.

Some 30 students and professors were wounded in the attack, and the institution itself sustained extensive damage. Seven people were killed and around 40 wounded across the provinces in repeated artillery and missile attacks, the authorities said.

The attacks constituted “unforgivable war crimes,” according to Hamdullah Fitrat, the deputy spokesperson of the Taliban, which took over Afghanistan in 2021.

Pakistan and Afghanistan had engaged in fighting for weeks after Islamabad declared an “open war” on the Taliban in February. Pakistan attacked military and other sites deep inside the country, including the capital city of Kabul, while the Afghan authorities have repeatedly accused it of carrying out indiscriminate strikes on civilians.

While the two sides entered a truce late in March, low-intensity hostility has continued along the porous border between the two nations, which largely runs across remote regions. Islamabad has long accused Afghanistan’s Taliban government of sheltering assorted militant groups that routinely conduct cross-border raids and terrorist attacks in the country. Kabul, however, has consistently denied such allegations.

Violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank echoes attacks on Jews during the Holocaust and poses an “existential threat” to Israel, former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo has said.

Israeli settlers live in communities built in the West Bank, a territory Israel captured in the 1967 Six-Day War and which Palestinians seek as part of a future state. Successive Israeli governments have backed or tolerated the settlements for security, political, and religious reasons.

Pardo spoke to local media on Monday while touring Palestinian villages that have come under settler attacks in recent months.

”My mother was a Holocaust survivor, and what I saw reminded me of the events that happened against Jews in the last century,” Pardo said. “What I saw today made me feel ashamed to be Jewish.”

His comments come amid a surge in settler violence across the West Bank, with groups carrying out repeated raids on Palestinian communities, torching homes and vehicles, vandalizing property and assaulting residents, according to witnesses and human rights organizations. In the latest incident, two Palestinians, including a 14-year-old schoolboy, were killed last week after gunmen opened fire near a school.

Pardo said the settlers behind the attacks, and the Israeli government’s failure to stop them, were creating the conditions for a future October 7-style assault from the West Bank, referring to the 2023 Hamas-led attack on southern Israel that killed about 1,200 people and saw 250 taken hostage. Israel launched a military campaign in Gaza in response to the attack. More than 72,000 Palestinians were killed and over 172,000 injured in Israeli airstrikes and ground offensives, according to Palestinian health authorities.

The former Mossad chief warned that the violence unfolding in the West Bank could lead to a similar event, albeit in a different and potentially more severe form given the region’s complexity, adding that Israel was “sowing the seeds” for such an outcome.

Healthy life expectancy (HLE) in the UK has fallen by about two years to just over 60 for both men and women, making Britain one of only five wealthy nations where people live fewer years in good health, according to a new analysis by the Health Foundation charity.  

The findings, based on data from the Office for National Statistics between 2012–2014 and 2022–2024, show the measure dropped from 62.9 to 60.7 for men and from 63.7 to 60.9 for women.  

Of the 21 richest countries, the UK saw the second‑steepest decline in healthy life expectancy, with only the US faring worse. Britain has tumbled from 14th to 20th place in the international rankings. Denmark, Portugal and Spain have also seen their HLE plummet. 

According to the analysis, wealth inequality has become a major indicator for HLE, with data showing that those in the wealthiest 10% of areas could expect to have around 20 more years of good health than those in the poorest.  

In London’s upscale suburb of Richmond, healthy life expectancy for women was 70 years, while in the industrial northern port town of Hartlepool it is just 51 years. In more than 90% of areas in the UK, HLE now falls short of the state pension age of 66, and is below 55 in one out of ten areas. London was the only region where the measure improved.  

Andrew Mooney, the think‑tank’s principal data analyst, has warned of “a significant economic cost, with poor health driving people out of the workforce and locking young people out of education, employment and training.”   

The Health Foundation has called the findings a “watershed moment,” urging policymakers to treat public health as an economic priority.   

Russia’s healthy life expectancy, by comparison, reportedly stood at 63.4 years in 2024, slightly above Britain’s, according to Russian Health Minister Mikhail Murashko. Overall life expectancy was between 73.5-74.2 years, according to 2025 data.  

The Kremlin has designated increasing life expectancy to 78 years by 2030 and to 81 years by 2036 as a national priority, along with establishing a faster growth in healthy life expectancy.

The US delegation headed by Vice President J.D. Vance lacked decision-making authority during talks with Iran earlier this month, Professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi, who was part of Tehran’s negotiating team, has told RT’s Sanchez Effect.

Speaking with host Rick Sanchez on Monday, Marandi shared his observations of the April 11-12 negotiations in Islamabad, Pakistan.

”Americans did not have the authority in negotiations. Vance did not have the authority to make decisions,” Marandi said. “He was constantly on the phone, making a dozen calls, including apparently to [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu.”

“A person who keeps making calls like that at the negotiating table obviously does not have the authority to decide,” he added.

The US delegation included Vance, special envoy Steve Witkoff, and presidential adviser Jared Kushner – who is Donald Trump’s son-in-law. The Iranian side was led by parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

Marandi argued that Washington’s failure to reach a compromise stems in part from Trump being poorly informed and influenced by a Zionist lobby.

”He is deeply compromised; some of his decisions defy logic… The leaders in Washington believe their own propaganda,” he said.

Marandi suggested that other countries, including Russia, could step in to mediate. On Monday, Araghchi traveled to St. Petersburg to meet President Vladimir Putin as part of a regional tour to coordinate with allies amid the standoff with Washington and West Jerusalem.

Watch the full interview with Tehran University Professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi on RT’s Sanchez Effect below.

Bangladesh’s Russian-backed nuclear power project has entered its final stage, with fuel loading into the first unit of the facility in Rooppur beginning on Tuesday.

Dhaka’s Ministry of Science and Technology said the next step will be for commercial electricity generation to begin gradually on a trial basis at the plant.

Located around 160 km from the capital, Dhaka, the Rooppur facility is Bangladesh’s first nuclear power plant and the most expensive infrastructure project in the South Asian country’s history.

It is heavily backed by Russia, with Moscow financing $11.9 billion in state loans for the project, estimated to cost up to $12.80 billion.

The project is being implemented by the Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission, and involves the construction of two units, each with a capacity of 1,200 megawatts.

Milestone Moment: Bangladesh Launches First Power Unit of Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant — Built Together with Russia’s Rosatom pic.twitter.com/meYOQFcCEa

— RT_India (@RT_India_news) April 28, 2026

“Today, Bangladesh has joined the club of states that use peaceful nuclear energy as a reliable source of sustainable development,” Rosatom CEO Aleksey Likhachev said. “For Rosatom, this project is another important step in the development of global nuclear power and in strengthening friendly relations with our foreign partners.”

The project, for which Russia is providing equipment, nuclear fuel, and engineering assistance, is expected to meet up to 12% of Bangladesh’s electricity demand.

The Russian ambassador to Dhaka, Aleksandr Khozin, told local media this reflects his country’s continued commitment to the project.

Moscow has also agreed to the long-term supply of nuclear fuel, technical maintenance, and the management of spent nuclear fuel.

Full-scale electricity generation and integration to the national power grid is expected to take approximately ten months

Bangladesh relies on imports for roughly 95% of its energy needs. Commissioning a single unit of the Rooppur plant is estimated to save approximately $1 billion annually in fuel imports, according to experts.

Dhaka expects to slash the country’s dependence on coal and gas generation and optimize the national energy balance with the launch of the Rooppur facility.

Coal and oil-fired power plants function for 25 to 30 years, while nuclear power plants operate for up to 60 years. The lifespan can be extended for another 30 years with proper maintenance and refurbishment.

Two proven cases of political interference by a Mossad-linked private intelligence firm should have set alarm bells ringing in Brussels. The EU’s silence reveals just how deeply the Israeli spy-tech nexus has penetrated the bloc.

This year alone, two cases of meddling by Black Cube, a private intelligence company staffed by former Mossad and Israel Defense Forces (IDF) agents, have taken place in the EU without so much as an acknowledgment from Brussels. RT covered these cases earlier in our ‘Wired for War’ series, but if you’re not familiar with the story, here’s a quick recap:

What did Israel’s cyber spies do?

Posing as foreign investors, Black Cube agents recorded their conversations with associates of President Nikos Christodoulides of Cyprus, and released the videos days after Cyprus assumed the EU’s rotating presidency in January. The videos, in which Christodoulides’s associates offered access to the president for cash, triggered multiple resignations and undermined Cyprus’ stint at the helm of the EU.

Another series of videos was released in Slovenia two months later, this time featuring associates of liberal Prime Minister Robert Golob discussing similar pay-to-play arrangements within his Svoboda party. The recordings are widely suspected to have been ordered by former Prime Minister Janez Jansa, who met with Black Cube executives in Ljubljana in late December. Slovenia held parliamentary elections less than two weeks after the videos hit the internet, and Golob’s party managed to beat Jansa’s Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS) by a margin of 0.67%.

How deep does Israeli interference in the EU go?

The EU has stayed completely silent on both cases. Even after the Slovenian government described Black Cube’s pre-election activities as “a clear hybrid threat against the European Union” and wrote to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen demanding an investigation, the commission has not publicly acknowledged receiving the letter.

However, the commission’s silence is still baffling, especially given the fact that Black Cube has been active in Europe before; two of the company’s employees were convicted in Romania in 2016 for spying on the chief prosecutor of the Romanian National Anticorruption Directorate, and the company was reportedly hired by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban to collect dirt on opposition NGOs in 2017.

This lack of response is not unprecedented, however. According to investigative reporting, Pegasus spyware, developed by Israel’s NSO Group, has been used in nearly a dozen EU countries since 2016. Pegasus – which can be remotely installed on a target’s cell phone without the target having to click a suspicious link – was used by EU governments to spy on journalists and political opponents, by foreign powers to spy on EU leaders, and by unknown actors to spy on the European Commission itself.

Despite this, and despite the European Parliament urging the commission to “implement more rigorous control mechanisms” on software that “could impinge on the principles of democracy, good governance, the rule of law and respect for human rights,” the commission did not act.

The commission likewise took no action when spyware developed by Israel’s Paragon Solutions was deployed in Cyprus, Denmark, and Italy; or when Predator malware – an analog of Pegasus developed by Israeli firm Cytrox – was used in Greece, Hungary, Poland, and Spain.

Brussels’ regulatory cuckoldry is exemplified at the ISS World exhibition, an annual trade fair that takes place in Prague every summer. Under the EU regulator’s nose, spyware, surveillance, and data-mining firms openly hawk their wares to private and state customers. The event’s leading sponsor is the same NSO Group whose spyware was used against the European Commission, and according to Politico, the ISS World exhibition is known within the industry as ‘The Wiretappers’ Ball’.

How Mossad went private

In the wake of the Pegasus scandal, the European Commission has left it up to individual states to draft their own laws and practices governing the use of spyware. Defenders of this position could make the case that Black Cube, NSO Group, Paragon Solutions, and their ilk are private companies, and are therefore mercenaries undeserving of the same attention as the supposed threat posed by Russia’s intelligence agencies.

Black Cube was founded by two IDF intelligence veterans, and counts on its International Advisory Board two former Mossad directors, a former Israeli Police commissioner, and the former chief of Israel’s National Security Council. One of NSO Group’s three founders served in both the IDF and Mossad. Cytrox received startup funding from Israel Aerospace Industries and was later bought out by a former IDF colonel. Paragon Solutions was founded by none other than former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, along with a former commander in the IDF’s Unit 8200 – a clandestine intelligence unit within the Israeli military. All four companies employ veterans of Unit 8200.

Within the world of espionage, it’s an old adage that there is “no such thing as a former agent.” As the activities of these companies suggest, Israel’s private intelligence sector often shares the same goals as the Israeli state.

How tech serves Israel’s interests

In Slovenia, Black Cube intervened against Golob, who has recognized the State of Palestine, banned the import of goods from illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and weighed joining South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Jansa, on the other hand, is a close ally of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and has equated recognition of a Palestinian state with “supporting the terrorist organization Hamas.”

Israel’s Defense Ministry classifies spyware programs like Pegasus and Predator as weapons, meaning it has final say over who NSO Group, Cytrox, and their competitors can sell to. According to an investigation by Haaretz, export licenses for Pegasus were most often granted when doing so would advance Israeli foreign policy interests, or in implicit exchange for the purchasing country signing trade agreements with Tel Aviv or voting with Israel at the UN.

The pattern was repeated in Azerbaijan, Hungary, India, and multiple other countries – “historic” visits by Netanyahu were followed by purchases of Pegasus spyware, and the signing of trade accords with Israel.

The bottom line

The EU has been thoroughly penetrated by Israeli spy-tech companies which are staffed by Israeli intelligence veterans and working – often openly – to advance the interests of Israel. Responding appropriately would mean directly confronting the Israeli government – something the EU is extremely reluctant to do.

As for why this is, a clue can be found in Slovenia. Two weeks before the election in March, Foreign Minister Tanja Fajon told reporters that her government had been pressured into abandoning plans to join the ICJ genocide case against Israel. “Many of the country’s cyber defense systems are of Israeli origin,” she explained, adding that to join the lawsuit “would jeopardize Slovenia’s national security.”

Just like with Pegasus and Predator spy software, export licenses for all of these weapons systems are granted at the discretion of the Israeli Defense Ministry. Every Israeli missile sold is a lever that West Jerusalem can wield against Brussels.

This dependence goes a long way toward explaining why the European Commission would choose to look away and keep shouting about ‘Russian interference’ instead. However, allegations of Russian meddling serve the EU’s ends; the real and proven threat of Israeli interference leaves the bloc weaker, less sovereign, and less secure.

German tabloid Bild has published nude images of a Ukrainian woman allegedly linked to the 2022 sabotage of the Nord Stream gas pipelines.

According to media reports, the woman was part of a group of Ukrainian nationals suspected by German investigators of renting the yacht Andromeda to carry out the sophisticated underwater operation.

Claims about the woman’s past as an erotic model – identified under the alias ‘Freya’ – were first reported by Wall Street Journal chief European political correspondent Bojan Pancevski in his book on the Nord Stream attack. His account is partly based on interviews with individuals allegedly connected to the case.

The photos released by Bild include fully naked images said to show Freya, whose real name was previously reported as Valeria Chernyshova. One image shows her featured on a 2004 erotic magazine cover; another shows her on a sofa. Her face was obscured in both photos.

🖥🔈Do týmu, který odpálil Nord Stream, patřila také bývalá erotická modelka, ukrajinská profesionální potápěčka Freya, uvádí Bild.

Při plánování operace byla její erotická minulost použita k vytvoření legendy: „Při policejní kontrole museli říci, že natáčí podvodní porno.“

V… pic.twitter.com/FmfembX1b7

— Ing. Honza 🇨🇿👍🇺🇦👎 (@Honza4746) April 27, 2026

Russian officials have expressed skepticism about Western media narratives surrounding the investigation, suggesting that these reports attempt to attribute responsibility to rogue Ukrainian actors for what Moscow regards as an act of terrorism backed or potentially carried out by NATO.

NATO leaders could stop gathering annually due in part to the “drama” associated with US President Donald Trump, according to Reuters.

The US president is a vocal critic of the military bloc, calling it a “paper tiger” and describing fellow members as “free-loaders” who failed his latest test by refusing to assist the US-Israeli bombing campaign against Iran. Trump has injected controversy into a number of summits since being elected president for the first time in 2016.

“Better to have fewer summits than bad summits,” a European diplomat told Reuters.

Last week, NATO’s de facto think tank, the Atlantic Council, suggested that less “high-profile summitry” would “dial down the drama.” The article also proposed four other ways to make the upcoming Türkiye summit a success – including having a military parade of the kind Trump is known to appreciate.

Trump ‘drama’ at NATO

At his first summit as president in 2017, Trump was filmed shoving Montenegro’s then-prime minister, Dusko Markovic, during a photo op.

During the leaders' photo shoot, then US President Donald Trump pushes Montenegrin Prime Minister Duško Marković aside to move to the front row.

New NATO Headquarters, Brussels | 25 May 2017 pic.twitter.com/AOI2Qg1yu3

— The Notorious (@camlibelive) March 9, 2026

In 2018, he unnerved member states by threatening to withdraw the US from the bloc – a pressure tactic that Trump has since repeatedly bragged about.

He left the 2019 summit early and called then-Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau “two-faced” after Trudeau was caught on a hot mike complaining to other leaders about Trump’s behavior.

.@JustinTrudeau, @EmmanuelMacron, @BorisJohnson and other VIPs shared a few words at a Buckingham Palace reception Tuesday. No one mentions @realDonaldTrump by name, but they seem to be discussing his lengthy impromptu press conferences from earlier in the day. (Video: Host Pool) pic.twitter.com/dVgj48rpOP

— Power & Politics (@PnPCBC) December 3, 2019

Last year, Trump forced other NATO nations to pledge 5% of their GDP to defense spending. The target is partially fiction, since only 3.5% is required in direct military spending, while the extra 1.5% is “defense-related” and can include, for example, a project for a bridge linking Sicily with the Italian mainland.

Drama beyond Trump

Other leaders have also contributed to turning NATO gatherings into spectacles. French President Emmanuel Macron infamously described the bloc as “brain-dead” ahead of the 70th anniversary meeting in London – the same that Trump stormed out of.

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has been a recent fixture, ever eager to berate weapons donors for offering insufficient support for Ukraine’s war effort against Russia. The Vilnius summit of 2023 produced a stark reminder of how lonely a Western proxy can be, with a photo of Zelensky in his military-style clothing seemingly lost among the guests in formal attire.

Result of #Nato summit in Vilnius in one photo. No comments needed. pic.twitter.com/I3L0sXp2ru

— Igor Lopatonok (@lopatonok) July 11, 2023

NATO has held annual summits since 2021 plus two emergency meetings over the Ukraine conflict in 2022. The leaders convened just 12 times from the organization’s creation in 1949 to 1991, the year the Soviet Union ceased to exist.

RT’s Social Well-Being Index, an innovative way to measure national health, captures something many of the world’s most cited rankings often miss – whether a society is actually functioning well as a society, experts believe

Built around six indicators – total fertility rate, life expectancy, infant mortality, number of homicides, income inequality and education levels – the Social Well-Being Index, or SWI, is intended as an alternative to familiar measures such as GDP rankings and the UN’s Human Development Index. Its creators argue that while older frameworks are useful for assessing individual development or economic output, they often fail to show whether a nation is cohesive, secure and sustainable over the long term.

Former British MP George Galloway offered the strongest endorsement, arguing that existing measures can badly misrepresent a country’s true condition. “The pre-existing indexes are completely inadequate,” he said, adding that they “tell not just an incomplete story, but a story that is false.”

That criticism goes to the heart of the new index’s appeal. Traditional measures such as GDP and even broader composite indicators like the HDI can reward wealth, consumption and personal attainment without asking whether the surrounding society is healthy. In Galloway’s view, that is a major blind spot. “The current indexes don’t tell you that story,” he said, describing how someone may appear prosperous on paper while living amid “potential violence, and mass unhappiness and misery.”

The SWI tries to correct for that by focusing less on isolated individual outcomes and more on the overall environment in which people live. Homicides, inequality and demographic sustainability are treated as core indicators of whether a society is stable and likely to reproduce itself over time.

Matthew Ehret, director of the Rising Tide Foundation, called this approach “a breath of fresh air” after what he described as decades of narrow Western economic thinking. The problem with ranking countries by GDP, Ehret argued, is not just that it is incomplete, but that it often confuses harmful activity with real progress. “GDP generally fails to address what is real value and what is fake value,” he said, pointing to criminal, speculative or socially corrosive activity that can still inflate national output figures.

Economist Santosh Mehrotra, a visiting professor, of the Centre for Development at the UK’s University of Bath, knows the Human Development Index well, having previously worked closely with such metrics. He describes the SWI as “definitely an improvement upon GDP or GDP per capita.”  He also noted that the index does share some DNA with older composite measures. Life expectancy and education, for example, overlap with HDI-style thinking, and the index uses a familiar min-max method to combine its components.

But Mehrotra says one particularly notable innovation is the attempt to capture social cohesion through violence. “What is sort of most striking is the use of the homicide rate as an indicator of social well-being,” he said. “I like that.”

The number of homicides is more than a crime statistic. It can serve as a blunt but revealing measure of whether people trust institutions, whether daily life is secure, and whether social conflict has become normalized. In that sense, the SWI’s inclusion of homicide moves it closer to questions ordinary citizens often care about most: Can families raise children safely? Do communities function? Does the future feel livable?

The fertility component is likewise central to the index’s philosophy. Unlike measures that treat population change as secondary, the SWI interprets demographic sustainability as a sign of national confidence and continuity. Supporters say that makes the ranking especially relevant in an era when many advanced economies face aging populations and shrinking birth rates.

Matthew Ehret welcomed that emphasis directly, saying the index challenges the assumption that population growth is inherently negative. “I appreciate that you don’t believe that,” he said, referring to the idea that demographic growth can reflect social confidence, productive capacity and belief in the future.

Professor Mehrotra, while more measured, agreed that demographic sustainability is “of course very important,” especially for countries facing rapid aging, including parts of Europe and East Asia.

That theme was echoed in reflections on China shared by John Gong, a professor at the University of International Business and Economics (UIBE), and a China Forum expert. He described the country as a place of enormous gains but also sharp internal contrasts, warning that broad national averages can hide important divides. “GDP doesn’t say it all,” he said. “It’s a nuanced picture here.”

Professor Gong also stressed that development should be judged by more than the pace of economic expansion. China, the expert said, increasingly speaks in terms of “high quality growth,” including “access to education, income inequality” and other factors beyond GDP alone. “We really do need to look at social development from a more comprehensive perspective,” he said.

That does not mean the SWI is beyond criticism. Professor Mehrotra pointed out that there are “many similarities” between the new index and older frameworks, particularly the HDI, and suggested there are “ways of improving” it further. He also argued that important issues such as climate adaptation and mitigation might eventually deserve inclusion. And Professor Gong warned that any average-based index can flatten the lived reality of very large, internally diverse countries.

Those are substantial points, but they do not undermine the central case made by all four interviews: that nations should not be judged primarily by how much they produce, or even by how well selected individuals perform on human development metrics, if the larger society is fractured or demographically unsound.

Indeed, one of the most politically provocative implications of the SWI is that some wealthy Western countries may rank worse than expected. George Galloway said such results would not be surprising, arguing that many once-dominant European societies are now “increasingly unhappy, increasingly divided, and increasingly poor.” Professor Gong made a similar point about the US, linking economic pressure, family instability, disillusionment and social decline.

Whether one agrees with all of those judgments or not, the SWI’s significance lies in forcing them onto the table. It asks a harder question than many older rankings do: not simply whether people are richer, but whether their society is secure, cohesive, educates its young, protects infant life, limits violence, narrows destructive inequality and believes enough in its own future to raise the next generation.

For supporters, that is precisely why the new index matters. It does not replace every existing measure, but it may illuminate what many of them have long left in shadow.

Bahrain has revoked the citizenship of 69 people for “expressing sympathy” with Iranian retaliatory strikes on the Gulf state, the Interior Ministry has announced. The monarchy, ruled by a Sunni dynasty, has for years been wary of potential Iranian influence on the Shiite majority.

In a statement on Monday, the ministry said the revocation applied to those who “glorified Iran’s sinful, hostile acts” as well as their families by dependency. It described all 69 people as being of “non-Bahraini origin,” adding that the authorities were “continuing to study and review” who deserves citizenship.

The move, the ministry added, was carried out under royal directives from King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa and based on a national law article allowing citizenship to be withdrawn from anyone deemed to have caused “harm to the interests of the Kingdom or acting in a manner that contradicts the duty of loyalty to it.”

He noted that no information had been provided on whether those affected were arrested or whether they hold another nationality. Alwadaei suggested that the revocation was coordinated with neighboring Kuwait, which has revoked citizenship from at least 2,000 people since the start of the war.

The development follows Iran’s retaliatory missile strikes on Bahrain – which hosts an American military base – in response to earlier US and Israeli attacks. Bahrain said Iranian missile attacks targeted the headquarters of the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet in Manama, with Tehran describing it as a legitimate target.

The crackdown is a sign of a rift within Bahrain, a Sunni-ruled monarchy which has a majority Shiite Muslim population and saw pro-Iran demonstrations early in the conflict. The Bahraini government has also been wary of a potential Iranian-backed ‘fifth column’ and has long accused Tehran of using Shiite ties to foment internal unrest.

In the 2010s, Iran consistently condemned the arrests of Shiite opposition figures in Bahrain, though in 2024 ties showed signs of improvement – a trend which was derailed by the US-Israeli strikes.

Two trains have collided on the outskirts of Indonesian capital Jakarta, killing 15 people, all women.

The crash occurred on Monday when a long-distance train struck the rear carriage of a stationary commuter train at Bekasi Timur station. The carriage was reserved for women, a common feature on Indonesian trains aimed at preventing harassment.  

The emergency teams completed the evacuation of victims from a damaged commuter car on Tuesday, state railway operator PT Kereta Api Indonesia said. A total of 84 people were injured and hospitalized, while the bodies of the victims were transferred for identification.

Mohammad Syafii, head of Indonesia’s search and rescue agency, said the evacuation was a “delicate process” due to crushed train cars and trapped passengers. “There are no further casualties,” he said, adding that specialist teams were deployed to clear debris and reach victims.  

Emergency responders worked through the night to free survivors pinned under twisted metal. Before separating the trains, rescuers used angle grinders to cut through mangled metal to reach survivors, RT footage from the scene showed, with emergency teams working to free people trapped in the wreckage.  

Preliminary findings suggest the crash sequence may have begun when a commuter train struck a stalled taxi on the tracks, forcing it to stop and leaving it exposed to an oncoming long-distance train, authorities said. The exact cause remains under investigation by police and the National Transportation Safety Committee.  

Rail accidents remain a concern in Indonesia, where aging infrastructure and heavy usage have contributed to past incidents.

US First Lady Melania Trump has called on ABC to fire late-night TV host Jimmy Kimmel over a sketch in which he referred to her as “an expectant widow” – just two days before a gunfire scare at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

In a sketch on ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live’, the comedian, dressed in a tuxedo, pretended to deliver a comedy routine for the White House dinner. Noting Melania in the audience, he said, “Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow.”

The event at the Washington Hilton two nights later was cut short when Cole Allen, 31, a California teacher armed with guns and knives, tried to enter the ballroom where the dinner was held. The Secret Service intercepted him and security personnel opened fire to neutralize the threat.

Jimmy Kimmel's mock Correspondents' Dinner sketch included a joke about Melania Trump looking like an "expected widow" before a third assassination attempt on President Trump.

Why does ABC continue to platform this radical lunatic?pic.twitter.com/yfOiUWxg7E

— Media Research Center (@theMRC) April 27, 2026

“Kimmel’s hateful and violent rhetoric is intended to divide our country,” Melania wrote in a post on X on Monday, calling the comedian “a coward” and urging ABC to fire him.

“His words are corrosive and deepen the political sickness within America. People like Kimmel shouldn’t have the opportunity to enter our homes each evening to spread hate… Enough is enough. It is time for ABC to take a stand.”

Kimmel’s hateful and violent rhetoric is intended to divide our country. His monologue about my family isn’t comedy- his words are corrosive and deepens the political sickness within America.

People like Kimmel shouldn’t have the opportunity to enter our homes each evening to…

— First Lady Melania Trump (@FLOTUS) April 27, 2026

Trump also condemned Kimmel’s ill-timed joke after it resurfaced following the incident, describing his words as a “despicable call to violence” and “something far beyond the pale,” in a Truth Social post, while demanding Kimmel be “immediately fired.”

pic.twitter.com/ypj5RACM52

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 27, 2026

Kimmel was unrepentant. In his most recent show on Monday night, he defended his remarks, describing them as a “light roast joke” of the first couple’s age difference and “not, by any stretch of the definition, a call to assassination.” He added that he has been “very vocal for many years speaking out against gun violence,” and called Melania’s post demanding his firing a “Twitter vomit storm.”

Jimmy Kimmel addresses calls for him to be fired by First Lady Melania and President Donald Trump, claims his “expectant widow joke” was about their age difference, not assassination.

Regardless of his intent, he was joking about the President dying and Melania being happy about… pic.twitter.com/2FQ0bOjwGN

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) April 28, 2026

Kimmel said he was sorry the Trumps and others in attendance had to go through a “scary” and “traumatic” experience at the White House dinner, but insisted that he, Melania, and Trump all have the right to free speech.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has accused Iran of using the Strait of Hormuz as an “economic nuclear weapon,” stressing that Washington will not accept the reopening of the waterway on Tehran’s terms or postponing talks on its nuclear program.

According to Axios and several other outlets, Iran has passed a new offer to Washington, which includes a plan to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and end the war, while deferring nuclear negotiations to a later stage.

Speaking on Fox News on Monday, Rubio was skeptical of the latest overture. “If what they mean by opening the straits is, ‘Yes, the straits are open, as long as you coordinate with Iran, get our permission, or we’ll blow you up, and you pay us’ – that’s not opening the straits,” he said.

On Tehran’s nuclear program, Rubio stressed a hardline stance. “Suffice it to say that the nuclear question is the reason why we’re in this in the first place,” he said.

Rubio also dismissed the idea that the Islamic Republic has any true moderates among its leadership, stating, “they’re all hardliners in Iran.” “There’s no doubt in my mind that at some point in the future if this radical clerical regime remains in charge in Iran, they will decide they want a nuclear weapon… That fundamental issue still has to be confronted. That still remains the core issue here.” 

The White House confirmed US President Donald Trump had reviewed Iran’s offer. Multiple people briefed on the discussions told the New York Times that the president was not satisfied, and a US official suggested accepting it could appear to deny Trump a victory, given his repeated insistence that Iran’s nuclear program should be dismantled.

Tehran has said it does not seek to acquire nuclear weapons and refused US demands to surrender its stockpile of highly enriched uranium and dismantle its nuclear program.

The US lacks a coherent negotiation strategy and is being “humiliated” by Iran, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Monday.

Merz made the remarks as the vital Strait of Hormuz remains closed to most shipping, driving up global energy prices.

“The Iranians are clearly stronger than expected, and the Americans clearly have no truly convincing strategy in the negotiations either,” Merz said during a visit to a school in Marsberg, North Rhine-Westphalia.

“The problem with conflicts like this is always that you don’t just have to get in – you also have to get out again. We saw that very painfully in Afghanistan for 20 years. We saw it in Iraq,” the chancellor said, according to Deutsche Welle.

Merz argued that “an entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership, particularly by the so-called Revolutionary Guards.”

The New York Times and Reuters, citing US officials, reported on Monday that President Donald Trump was not satisfied with Iran’s most recent proposal to reopen the strait and end the conflict. On Sunday, the president canceled his envoys’ trip to Pakistan for talks with Iran, arguing that he has “all the cards.”

The US and Israel began a bombing campaign against Iran on February 28, with the stated goal of dismantling Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs. However, despite intense airstrikes, the allies have been unable to stop Iran from launching missiles and drones at Israel and US bases in the region. Trump has also failed to pressure Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which Tehran closed to “hostile” shipping.

UK officials have pushed to bar journalists from a meeting between King Charles III and US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office, out of concern over potentially embarrassing incidents, The Guardian reported on Tuesday, citing people involved in planning the monarch’s trip to Washington.

According to the newspaper, the White House agreed that the meeting between the two leaders should be held off camera to avoid what it described as “potential humiliation.” Trump and Charles will pose for photographs but will not be filmed “talking about anything substantive.”

UK officials reportedly want to avoid a “Zelensky-style clash,” referring to the infamous White House meeting between Trump and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky in February 2025, which ended in a shouting match in front of the press.

Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance publicly berated Zelensky, accusing him of being ungrateful for the aid his country received under the previous administration. Relations between Trump and Zelensky were eventually repaired after several European leaders reportedly advised Zelensky on how to handle himself with the president.

King Charles and Queen Camilla arrived in the US on Monday and posed for photographs with Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump.

President Donald J. Trump and First Lady Melania Trump welcome King Charles III and Queen Camilla of the U.K. at the South Portico of the White House | Monday, April 27, 2026. pic.twitter.com/eLrNqpwN0D

— Office of the First Lady (@FirstLadyOffice) April 27, 2026

The visit comes two days after a gunman attempted to assassinate Trump at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner at the Washington Hilton in Washington, DC. The suspect, identified as Cole Thomas Allen, allegedly tried to rush toward the ballroom where Trump was seated, but was tackled by Secret Service agents.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has rebuked his Ukrainian counterpart on social media, saying Kiev has not provided evidence that Israel is buying “stolen” grain from Russia.

On Monday, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga condemned Israel for facilitating what he called Russia’s “illegal trade in stolen Ukrainian grain.”

Ukrainian media earlier reported that the cargo vessel Panormitis, carrying grain from Russia’s new regions, was approaching the Israeli port of Haifa.

“It is difficult to understand Israel’s lack of an appropriate response to Ukraine’s legitimate request regarding the previous vessel that delivered stolen goods to Haifa,” Sibiga wrote on X, adding that the Israeli ambassador was summoned to the ministry on Tuesday morning.

In a rebuke to Sibiga, Saar wrote on X that “diplomatic relations, especially between friendly nations, are not conducted on Twitter or in the media.”

Relations between the countries are tense, as Ukraine has criticized Israel for not imposing sanctions on Russia or cutting ties. Reuters, citing a Ukrainian diplomatic source, reported that Kiev would “reserve the right to deploy a full suite of diplomatic and international legal responses” if the ship is allowed to dock in Israel.

Ukraine considers five regions, including Kherson and Zaporozhye, which joined Russia following referendums in 2022, to be occupied territory. Russia has insisted that, for a lasting peace settlement, Ukraine must recognize its new borders.

Ukraine may have to accept territorial losses in a future peace deal with Russia to keep its EU membership hopes alive, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Monday.

Moscow has maintained that for a lasting peace, Kiev must pull its soldiers from the regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson and Zaporozhye, as well as recognize Russia’s new territories, including Crimea. All of the regions overwhelmingly voted to join the Russian Federation from 2014 to 2022.

“Hopefully, there will eventually be a peace treaty with Russia. Then, possibly, part of Ukraine’s territory will no longer be Ukrainian,” Merz said during a speech in Marsberg, as cited by the DPA.

For Vladimir Zelensky to push through a referendum for such a decision, he could tell Ukrainians: “I have opened the path to Europe for you,” he said.

“Zelensky had the idea of joining the EU on January 1, 2027. This will not work. Even January 1, 2028 is unrealistic,” the German chancellor said.

Zelensky has for months demanded that Brussels give Ukraine a “clear date” for joining the EU. He has also consistently rejected accepting territorial losses.

However, the economic bloc’s accession criteria demand that prospective members have no unresolved border disputes with their neighbors.