Polish officials from the ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party have urged the Ukrainian city of Vinnytsia to rename a street honoring Stepan Bandera, the nationalist leader whose movement was responsible for the massacre of more than 100,000 Poles during World War II.

Relations between Poland and Ukraine have soured since late May, when Vladimir Zelensky named a commando unit after the “Heroes of the UPA,” the military wing of Bandera’s Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN).

On Thursday, council members in the Polish city of Kielce urged their chairman to formally ask Vinnytsia to remove Bandera’s name from the street, describing it as a “blemish” on Polish-Ukrainian relations. The street, formerly named after Leo Tolstoy, was renamed in 2022 as part of Ukraine’s broader campaign to eliminate Russian-linked place names.

“In Poland, Stepan Bandera and the legacy of the OUN-UPA are unequivocally associated with mass crimes against defenseless civilians,” the officials wrote in a letter published on the broadcaster Telewizja Swietokrzyska’s website.

Polish historians and public consider the OUN leader to be “unequivocally responsible for the genocide of Polish civilians, including in Volhynia,” they added.

On Wednesday, Kielce mayor Agata Wojda announced that Vinnytsia had withdrawn its request for 15 used buses from the Polish city following criticism from local officials and residents. The proposed transfer was intended to support Vinnytsia’s largely electric public transport network, which has faced disruptions due to Russian strikes on Ukraine’s power grid and military-industrial facilities.

The latest dispute comes amid worsening ties between Poland and Ukraine following the “Heroes of the UPA” controversy. Despite the backlash, Kiev has no plans to rename the military unit, Liga.net reported on Thursday, citing a government source.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk last week placed full responsibility for the row on Ukraine, warning that Warsaw could take a more transactional approach toward Kiev and increasingly prioritize its own “hard business interests” if Ukraine does not change course.

Moscow has long maintained that the current government in Kiev glorifies Nazis at the state level. Russia has repeatedly stated that the “denazification” of Ukraine remains one of its key objectives and conditions for a peace settlement in the conflict.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei has denied US President Donald Trump’s claim that the country’s leadership had approved a preliminary peace deal.

The remarks came after Trump said on Thursday that a settlement could be signed as early as this weekend, likely in Europe, and that Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei had approved the terms. The president said he had called off “scheduled” strikes on Iran after two consecutive days of bombardment, which marked the biggest escalation since a truce was announced in April.

Speaking to Iranian media on Thursday, Baghaei described recent reports as “speculation,” adding that “the relevant authorities must review every detail of the text.”

“The text has almost been finalized in its major parts. The problem is that the contradictory positions of the United States have always caused turbulence and disruption in this process,” Baghaei said. He stressed that Iran would not compromise on “its red lines.”

The agreement discussed by negotiators would reportedly extend the truce, reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and outline a framework for further talks on Iran’s nuclear program. Tehran has repeatedly rejected Trump’s demand that it hand over its enriched uranium stockpile and has insisted that its nuclear program is entirely peaceful.

This week’s resumption of hostilities triggered another spike in global oil prices as the US continues to grapple with high inflation and the war with Iran remains unpopular with the American public. Trump has repeatedly claimed in recent weeks that his team was close to reaching a deal with the Iranians, but no breakthrough materialized.

Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, warned on Thursday that Washington’s “wrong strategies and impulsive decisions” were creating “an endless quagmire” in the region.

The EU appears to be willing to sacrifice both the well-being of its people and its own fiscal stability for the sake of military buildup justified by an alleged Russian threat. The bloc’s members push forward with their defense budget increase plans despite record debt levels, with some of them also implementing major social spending cuts.

French President Emmanuel Macron vowed last year to double the nation’s military budget by 2027, accelerating the original plan to do so by 2030. Paris is implementing the scheme despite its government’s debt reaching 115.6% of its GDP, according to the European Commission data. The nation has the third-worst debt-to-GDP ratio in the euro zone, behind only Greece and Italy.

The cumulative debt-to-GDP ratio of the euro zone is also projected to surpass 90% next year, according to a report by the European Fiscal Board this week.

Germany has an economy that is reeling from the two-year-long recession of 2023-2024 and is projected to grow by a mere 0.5% in 2026. It is still clinging to Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s vision of making its army the “strongest” conventional force on the continent to allegedly stand up to a looming Russian threat – something that ordinary Germans appear to be increasingly skeptical about.

The nation’s defense spending is expected to surpass €500 billion ($579 billion) by 2029, even as Berlin plans to implement cuts that will save nearly €40 billion on social expenditures by 2030. Yet, even those steps might not be enough to cover the budget deficit, according to German media reports.

Watch the full report here:

There was never a chance that Washington’s man in FIFA, football’s world governing body, was going to do the right thing and postpone the World Cup. Nor that he would strip the US and Canada of hosting rights after their attack on Iran. The FIFA president, Lebanese-Swiss Gianni Infantino, is doing what’s right for his sport, his ‘shareholders’, and a compliant sports media will assist the most bigly sportswashing psy-op ever. 

Sports media, no fur coat and no underwear

The term “fanboys/girls with laptops” is attributed to our former Capital Sports guest, Irish journalist Paul Kimmage. The ex-pro cyclist ‘spat in the soup’ of the sport he loved by exposing rampant doping in ‘Rough Ride’, to date, the finest sports book ever written. His target: the press pass wearing, goodie bag hungry mob of oddballs so in thrall to the stars they report on, that no crime or offence can be mentioned.

The nub is that the majority of these folks, who exist in every media outlet’s sports department in every country, were the last kids picked for teams in school. Devoid of sports ability (they believed), they vicariously live sporting lives by following their heroes and quietly going weak at the knees when Cristiano Ronaldo, Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, or Maria Sharapova, cast a smile their way.

Some have landed top media management spots in FIFA, from where they dispense largesse [access and goodie bags] to those desperate to be favored. And media organizations, in order to ensure their reporters and commentators are granted permission to cover the World Cup, will ‘play ball’. What FIFA wants, FIFA gets, and the media will give it up happily.

Selling out to avoid missing out

It’s been interesting to witness my peers brag about covering this upcoming ‘show’. From LinkedIn to Instagram, so many decent folk are making sure everyone knows they’re going to the World Cup and their previous posts critiquing US or Israeli military adventures, or indeed FIFA, have either been edited or removed.

I asked one woman, who will work with a European broadcaster, where was her excellent takedown of the awarding of the FIFA Peace Prize to US President Donald Trump? It had garnered hundreds of likes and comments on LinkedIn, yet, had vanished.

“My agent,” she replied, with a smiley face emoji, explaining that they were warned that any social media posts critical of the US or US government could mean a refusal at border control.

I guess I was lucky that I turned down the chance to work at the event, though my decision was formed pre-Iran attacks. I couldn’t morally perform a Men in Black on my brain and scrub my social media, articles, broadcasts, and soul clean.

One football writer I expected to take a stand was Alexander Abnos, a senior sports editor with The Guardian US. With the anti-ICE protests in his nation as a background, he wrote that the US “is not fit to stage soccer’s showpiece event.” He signed off with “it would be hard to argue if the World Cup was moved out of the US entirely.”

Here was a man with backbone, courage, someone I could relate to. Okay, the headline was weak as English tea (Removing the US as World Cup host would be eminently sad – and entirely justified). And then, he turned full fanboy!

– Messi, mascots, tickets and Trump: 48 questions for the 48-team World Cup (April 1)

– Lionel Messi exits Miami game before World Cup with possible injury (May 25)

– World Cup 2025: a visual guide to the stadiums across the trio of host nations (June 1)

And he outdid himself, also on June 1, with a real doozy to show he was chugging the FIFA Kool Aid: “Gathered around a laptop, the USMNT create their World Cup journey’s first memeable moment.”

Alexander is not the worst, he’s just an example of what was already underway before the June 11 kick-off – and what is now in full swing. The media has already gone into overdrive with superlatives for the brand ambassadors of fizzy drinks and sportswear. We are already being encouraged to forget that the US, with the collusion of Canada and a clatter of other countries taking part in the jamboree, are complicit in the ongoing killing of Iranians, Palestinians, Russians, Lebanese, and more. The football is now on, and the brainwashing has already begun.

Straw men (and women) for a straw poll

In the last two weeks, I’ve chatted with 19 fellow sports journalists and commentators, asking if they were off to the World Cup. From 6 different countries, working with a range of outlets from TV to radio to newspapers, they happily engaged.

Only three weren’t going, as they were covering it from home. Of the others, every single person felt “uneasy” or “not at all happy” to be going, telling that it was their job and that they had to “pay the mortgage.”

I asked the travelling 16 if they disagreed with the World Cup going ahead. Fourteen felt it should be postponed, two said it should be removed from the US and Canada, and given solely to Mexico. Those two, I should add, are French. All said they felt nervous about safety and that the fans will be ripped off.

One reporter, from BBC, said the only bonus is no English hooligan violence.

“As the old joke from 1994 goes, they’ll lose on small arms fire alone,” he joked. He was referring to asides made when the English team failed to qualify for the last time a World Cup was held in the US.

Yet the potential for a terrorist attack at a mega-event (World Cup or Olympic Games), has never been higher, or more expected.

Bombs and bedlam

The last successful terrorist attack, pardon the phrasing, at a mega-event  was at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. That was by an anti-abortion activist and resulted in a single death. Atlanta will host seven games this summer, including a semi-final. Although combined intelligence agencies and police forces foiled a reported Osama Bin Laden plot at the 1998 World Cup in France, and Russia’s FSB thwarted several drone attacks in 2018, everyone was caught out on July 18 that year.

On the biggest stage of all, the Final between France and Croatia, with hundreds of millions watching and listening around the world, a rag tag collection of attention seekers dressed up as police officers charged onto the field. In my opinion, causing Croatia to wobble and lose their shape.

From my commentators spot in Moscow’s Luzhniki Stadium, I saw uniformed people leap onto the field and thought, they shouldn’t be here, something’s wrong. A wave of panic hit the media zone and a prominent British commentator took off his headset and stood up to leave. It left a sour taste in the mouths of those there to cover the game.

Later, I was not alone in being infuriated when NPR’s Scott Simon called this dangerous precedent “a conspicious act of bravery.” I hope he’ll be happy if similar idiots or terrorists carry out a copy cat “act” this summer.

Entering end game

There is a real chance that there will be at least 3-5 occurrences like this, though they could be far more dangerous. The clowns who illegally entered the field of play in Moscow in 2018 may have cost Croatia the title, but at this World Cup, lives could be lost.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies gave their usual rundown of threats to the World Cup in regurgitated AI slop, which one FIFA insider told me is “what we all know anyway… and they offer zero insight.” FIFA are so concerned with safety, that they lumped in around $650 million to bolster security in host cities. In Russia and Qatar, this wasn’t needed. The US and their subordinate to the north are actively involved in wars in Palestine, Lebanon, and Iran. A lot of people are ready to make a statement, FIFA know this.

“This is the most dangerous World Cup ever,” the FIFA man told me on on May 29. “Here in the [marketing] department, it’s the first time in my experience where staff are turning down the chance to go.” He’s been with FIFA since 2004.

The sentiment is echoed in fan group WhatsApp group chats, many are truly worried for their safety.

In an Eintracht Frankfurt ‘Nationalmannschaft’ [German National Team] group with over 1,000 followers, a debate has been raging over the wisdom of following their side in North America. One man, from Wiesbaden, made the point that the danger isn’t the German matches in Houston, Texas and East Rutherford, New Jersey, but the middle one against Cote d’Ivoire in Toronto. “It is a soft underbelly and the most dangerous. It could be bombs and bedlam,” he noted.

Yet, for sports media, the genuine fears of fans are hidden. England’s sports media is missing in action. They previously lied about and sneered at Qatar, Russia, Brazil, and South Africa. For the BBC in 2022, the biggest danger for ‘fans’ was not being able to drink beer in Qatar. In Russia, it was being murdered at passport control or disappeared to a gulag. It’s crickets for this World Cup.

The flash has already gone off, and most of the sports media seems happy to forget what came before. The biggest ever sportswashing event kicks off on June 11 and all we can hope for is no terrorist attacks, and some good football. I’m already halfway there.

US President Donald Trump has cancelled planned strikes on Iran, saying talks with the Islamic Republic are moving forward with the country’s top leadership. The announcement came just hours after he again threatened to hit Iran “very hard.” 

Tensions between Washington and Tehran have surged in recent days despite a nominal ceasefire agreed in April. The US launched strikes on Iran on Wednesday after a US AH‑64 Apache helicopter was lost near the Strait of Hormuz – an incident Washington blamed on Tehran. Iran denied responsibility and responded with a missile barrage targeting American bases in the region.

In a post on Truth Social on Thursday, Trump said the “scheduled strikes and bombings” had been canceled because of negotiations “brought to the highest level of Iranian leadership and approved.” He said “discussions and final points” had been agreed by all sides involved, including the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia and several other regional states.

🚨 President Donald J. Trump on cancelled scheduled strikes against Iran. pic.twitter.com/iIijh6j5m2

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) June 11, 2026

The US‑led naval blockade of Iranian ports in the Strait of Hormuz “will remain in full force,” Trump added. 

Earlier in the day, the US president had vowed to hit Iran “very hard tonight” and “at some point” seek to take control of Kharg Island and other oil infrastructure, stating that Washington could “assume total control of their oil and gas markets.”

Tehran has not confirmed or commented on any deal. Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf warned earlier that “wrong strategies and impulsive decisions” would damage global energy markets and “create an endless quagmire that you will be stuck in for years.” 

Negotiations had stalled for weeks, with both sides accusing each other of bad faith and ceasefire violations. Last week, Iran threatened to suspend the talks in response to continued Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon.

Tehran’s conditions for a peace agreement include the cessation of hostilities “on all fronts,” including Lebanon, where Israel has been waging a war against Hezbollah since early March.

Israel and Iran exchanged strikes on Monday. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reiterated that Iran must never obtain a nuclear weapon and defended military action against the country. Tehran maintains its nuclear program is peaceful.

The ambassadors of Britain, France, and Germany visited the Russian Foreign Ministry on Thursday to present their governments’ Ukraine “peace” position, despite Moscow’s insistence that the three countries are not mediators but direct backers of Kiev.

The conference with Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin reportedly lasted around 90 minutes. French Ambassador Nicolas de Riviere said afterwards that the conversation had gone well, while the British and German envoys declined to comment.

The meeting comes as Kiev's European backers have been trying to force their way back into Ukraine diplomacy after Washington signaled it could step back from mediation efforts. Moscow has dismissed the move as hollow, arguing that the EU and the E3 (Britain, France, and Germany) are arming, funding and politically shielding Kiev while posing as peace brokers.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said that during the meeting, Galuzin accused the three governments of pursuing a “destructive policy” aimed at pushing Kiev to keep fighting Russia “on behalf of, at the expense of and with the direct assistance” of the Western “coalition of the willing.”

The British Embassy in Moscow said the ambassadors had condemned Russia’s alleged “escalation and intensified disinformation campaigns” and outlined a recent E3 declaration backing Vladimir Zelensky’s call for direct ceasefire talks with Russia involving the US and Europe.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said ahead of the meeting that he consented to the envoys’ talks with his deputy largely out of curiosity. Russia has “never refused dialogue,” he said, but doubted the ambassadors would say anything new after their leaders’ recent statement with Zelensky.

Moscow has rejected that statement as a demand for Russia’s “capitulation.” Lavrov said Britain, France, and Germany have repeatedly undermined earlier settlement efforts, including the 2014-2015 Minsk accords and the 2022 Istanbul draft deal.

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has also dismissed the latest E3 proposal as a repackaged version of Zelensky’s “peace formula,” which Russia rejects as unacceptable. She said the plan is aimed not at peace, but at further militarizing Ukraine and Europe.

Moscow has repeatedly said that any lasting settlement must address the root causes of the conflict, including by requiring Ukraine’s neutrality, demilitarization, protection of Russian speakers and recognition of territorial changes.

The European Commission should have revealed the details of its Covid-19 vaccine contracts with drugmakers to the public, an adviser to the EU’s highest court has declared. Among the contracts was a deal with Pfizer that commission President Ursula von der Leyen negotiated via text message.

In an opinion published on Thursday, Advocate General Athanasios Rantos argued that the commission’s insistence on secrecy made it impossible to know whether its vaccine negotiators had any conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical companies that they procured the shots from.

The commission signed six advance purchase agreements with pharmaceutical companies – including Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Moderna – between 2020 and 2021. The contracts were worth a combined €71 billion ($82 billion).

When Green MEPs and more than 3,000 members of the public demanded information about the negotiation process, the commission redacted the names of all of its negotiators and many of the contract clauses. The commission’s lawyers have argued that these redactions were made to protect the negotiators from “conspiracy theorists.”

The commission lost a legal battle to keep these details secret in 2024, but appealed the decision up to the Court of Justice of the European Union. Rantos’ opinion is not legally binding, but will inform the court’s final ruling.

Last year, the court ruled against von der Leyen in the ‘Pfizergate’ case, which centered around her negotiations with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla. In 2021, von der Leyen told the New York Times that she had been negotiating a €35 billion deal for 900 million Covid vaccine doses with Bourla via sms messages.

The newspaper sued for access to the messages, arguing that von der Leyen could have used sms messaging to bypass EU transparency laws. The commission claimed that the messages had been lost, but the court ruled last May that the EU’s executive body failed to provide “credible explanations enabling the public and the Court to understand why those documents cannot be found.”

Von der Leyen survived a no-confidence vote initiated by right-wing parties in the European Parliament over the scandal last July.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has ruled out mixed-gender tank crews in a pilot program that would allow women to serve in frontline armored units, following objections from influential rabbis, according to media reports. 

Several Religious Zionist rabbis have reportedly opposed the initiative on religious grounds, warning they would discourage enlistment if it proceeds. 

In response to the criticism, the IDF said on Wednesday that tank crews would remain single sex, while insisting it “needs every male and female combat soldier,” according to the Times of Israel. 

The IDF added that more than two years of fighting on multiple fronts had placed a “significant burden” on reserve forces. 

Since the October 2023 Hamas attack, the IDF has been fighting in Gaza while also carrying out military operations in southern Lebanon, exchanging direct strikes with Iran, and trading missile and drone attacks with Yemen’s Houthis. 

The military has publicly acknowledged a shortage of troops and reportedly said it urgently needs around 12,000 additional recruits, mostly to fill combat roles. 

The dispute comes after Israel’s High Court of Justice ruled in April that the military must move ahead with a long-delayed trial aimed at expanding women’s access to combat positions. The test was originally expected to begin in 2024, but was postponed twice during the war and is currently scheduled to start in the latter part of this year. 

The rabbis’ opposition was outlined in an open letter criticizing the court’s decision. They argued that integrating women into armored formations would conflict with religious norms and called on the military to assign religiously observant recruits to alternative army jobs. 

Many members of the Religious Zionist community serve in the Armored Corps and other frontline units through the so-called Hesder program, which combines religious studies with military service. 

Despite the IDF’s statement, Israeli media reported on Thursday that additional religious institutions had joined the campaign against the integration of units.

The final results of Armenia’s parliamentary elections are due to be announced this weekend. Vaagn Hovakimyan, head of the country’s Central Election Commission, has said ballots will be recounted until Friday, after which complaints and appeals will be considered. The official results are expected on Sunday and those who reject the outcome will then have one day, June 19, to appeal to the Constitutional Court. “Further action will then be dictated by the court,” Hovakimyan said.

Narek Karapetyan, leader of the Strong Armenia electoral list, has said his movement will decide on its next steps once it is clear whether another opposition force, Prosperous Armenia, led by businessman Gagik Tsarukyan, has entered parliament. At present, it appears to have fallen short of the 4% threshold. The opposition Armenia bloc has already said it is ready to challenge the result.

The vote brought to a close a peculiar election campaign. Its oddity didn’t lie in the use of administrative resources, including pressure on opponents, nor in the visible influence of external factors, because such things are now common almost everywhere. The unusual feature was the central narrative of the political struggle, where the campaign was presented as a choice between Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union on one side, and the West and the European Union on the other.

However, this is a phantom choice.

As far as Russia is concerned, it is, of course, for the Armenian people and their elected authorities to decide what kind of relationship they want with Moscow. Friendship cannot be imposed, and if a country wishes to go its own way, then so be it. This time, however, Moscow has made clear from the outset what Yerevan stands to lose if it chooses that path and the intention is obvious: Armenia should make its decision with full knowledge of the consequences.

The EU side of the equation is less clear because the problem is simple: no one has invited Armenia to join the bloc. At least, not in any serious form.

In the case of Ukraine and Moldova, the prospect of eventual membership has at least hovered in the background since the 2010s, even if it has only recently become a formal process and still comes without guarantees. With Armenia, there has been nothing comparable, so to mistake Emmanuel Macron’s warm embraces, or even the gradual expansion of military-technical cooperation, for an EU membership invitation would be extremely rash.

Nevertheless, the question of “EAEU or EU” became the central theme of the current dispute. Russia contributed to this, in part, by putting future relations in the stark terms of choose now. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has been much more evasive, and his line is that Armenia is not leaving anything, remains involved in Eurasian integration, and will continue to do so until there is clarity on EU prospects. In other words, as soon as Brussels gives the signal, Armenia will move in that direction, but until then, everything should remain as it is, because the current arrangement remains useful.

Pashinyan’s tactics, and those of his party, deserve a separate analysis, but the more interesting question is broader. How does the EU, now burdened by enormous internal problems and drawn into a large military-political crisis, remain such a powerful magnet for neighboring societies?

After the end of the Cold War, EU integration became one of the most successful political projects in modern European history. It came to be seen, if not as a blueprint for the whole world, then at least as a model to be extended across neighboring regions of Europe and Eurasia. The EU’s achievements were obvious, in that if offered economic and political stability, high living standards, social protections, and an attractive image of the future.

The idea of non-violent expansion through the spread of rules and norms believed to be universally beneficial gave people in neighboring countries hope for change at home. This mattered greatly in Central and Eastern Europe, and across Eurasia, where public trust in domestic authorities has historically been low.

That perception has proved remarkably durable even though the European Union of the late 2020s bears little resemblance to the idealized image of a quarter-century ago: that image continues to work. For Brussels, the reputation of the EU as a successful, attractive and forward-looking union is not merely a pleasant accessory, it’s an instrument of influence. It has helped the EU pursue its own development goals and shape the political choices of states around it.

Today, amid growing internal and external crises, this instrument is even more important. But the question for countries drawn into Brussel’s orbit is whether the old assumptions still apply.

The successes of European integration in the second half of the twentieth century and in the early years of this century weren’t simply the result of the wisdom and talent of the project’s architects. Above all, they were the product of a unique historical moment, the aftermath of the Second World War, the structure of the Cold War, American patronage, the Soviet threat, and then the unexpected gift of the Soviet collapse, which produced an enormous political and economic “peace dividend.”

But that era is over and the EU is now trying, with very mixed results, to adapt its integration model to a changed international environment. Confrontation with Russia has become the cornerstone of this process and, through it, the EU is attempting to define a new strategic role and strengthen internal unity. Whether this will succeed is a separate matter, but Eurasian countries looking toward the European Union cannot ignore the fact that the choice now being offered is openly anti-Russian.

Competition for the post-Soviet space existed before, but for a time it could be disguised with the language of shared development and common interests. That camouflage has gone and the situation is now harsh and largely unambiguous.

The previous logic was based on the assumption that by sheltering under the umbrella of European integration, a country could protect itself from geopolitical turbulence. But first, that umbrella is becoming increasingly symbolic as the EU can no longer offer firm guarantees to anyone. Second, the opposite may now be true, because by entering this game, a country can be certain of becoming a target for the hard actions of opposing sides.

For countries such as Armenia, the question is therefore not whether the EU remains attractive, because it obviously does. Nor is it whether Russia can compel affection, because it can’t. The question, instead, is whether the European path being imagined by political elites and voters actually exists in the form they suppose, and whether the price of pursuing it has been honestly understood.

If a nation looks at the risks and decides they don’t matter, then so be it. After all, as the old line goes, “we sing a song to the madness of the brave.”

This article was first published by Rossiyskaya Gazeta, and was translated and edited by the RT team 

Some councils in England have advised residents not to attach the national flag, St. George’s Cross, to public property, citing safety rules, community-cohesion concerns, and the need to maintain a welcoming environment, local media have reported.

The warning comes ahead of the World Cup, which kicks off on Thursday. England is set to play its first match, against Croatia, on June 17.

The debate widened on Wednesday when the Independent Monitoring Boards (IMB), which oversees prisons and immigration detention facilities, published a report warning that England flag badges worn by staff at detention centers could be perceived by detainees as a sign of “bias or even intimidation,” particularly in the light of recent anti-immigration protests in which flag displays were prominent.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage seized on the debate, writing on Facebook: “Do you wear an England badge? Do you fly an England flag outside your home? According to our political class, you are now intimidating migrants!”

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp also criticized the councils’ approach, telling the Daily Mail: “Woke councils should stop being ashamed of our national identity and culture, and start celebrating it instead.”

The controversy has its roots in the ‘Operation Raise the Colours’ campaign, which is believed to have emerged in Birmingham in August 2025 before spreading across England. Supporters said the initiative was intended to promote patriotism and national pride by attaching St. George’s Cross and Union flags to lampposts, bridges, and other public spaces, while critics argued it was linked to anti-immigration sentiment and attempts to mark territory in communities with large migrant populations.

The UK has seen major anti-immigration protests and riots in recent years, with right-wing politicians and activists accusing authorities of failing to control illegal migration and adequately address crimes committed by migrants and other ethnic minorities.

Anti-migrant protests and riots erupted in Belfast this week after a Sudanese asylum seeker was charged with the stabbing death of a local, while demonstrations have also been held outside hotels housing asylum seekers in Scotland and England.

Ground-level footage from around the globe which millions of Pokemon Go users gathered over the years was likely fed to the US military, augmenting its satellite mapping for potential use in warfare, Google whistleblower Zach Vorhies has told RT.

Released in 2016 by San Francisco-based firm Niantic, Pokemon Go became one of the gaming industry’s first successful forays into augmented reality, using players’ smartphone cameras and GPS to overlay digital creatures onto real-world locations.

“I don’t think that anybody that was playing Pokemon Go had any vision that their data was going to be used in order to kill people. But that’s what it’s being used for today,” Vorhies told RT on Thursday, arguing that user data was exploited “to play a more deadly game, that of warfare.”

The game’s technology traces its roots to Keyhole, a mapping startup which was later acquired by Google, he said.

“There’s been a lot of reports that a lot of these Pokemon Go players were snooping around foreign military bases, because there was some sort of very valuable creature that they had to take a snapshot of,” Vorhies said.

Google likely shared this data with the US military to help it build “ground level information” that augments satellite imagery, he said. Two-dimensional pictures can be used to help reconstruct 3D terrain, adding details that would be obscured to photographs taken from space, he added.

With this, they’re able to get a more complete picture of the battlefield.

The whistleblower argued that artificial intelligence giants like OpenAI are getting rid of their internal transparency mechanisms in order to better aid what he called the US “deep state.” The top US AI companies have signed deals with the US War Department, the Pentagon said last month.

“They’re fighting Russia on the eastern front. They’re fighting Iran in the southern front,” he said. “They don’t want to have any red tape that stops them from being able to get the maximum military advantage.”

Watch the full interview here:

The congressional inquest into Jeffrey Epstein’s network of influential associates has heard testimony from Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and Epstein’s longtime executive assistant, Lesley Groff, as House investigators examine how the convicted sex offender maintained ties to prominent figures after his 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor.

In his closed-door testimony on Wednesday, Gates told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee he had not understood the full extent of Epstein’s crimes. He said he had agreed to meet him in 2011 because he believed the financier could help connect him with wealthy donors and advance his philanthropic initiatives. Those fundraising opportunities never materialized, he said, describing his association with Epstein as a “grave error in judgment.” He claimed after he ended contact in 2014, Epstein tried to use knowledge of his extramarital affairs to pressure him to re-engage.

While no public evidence has linked Gates to Epstein’s criminal conduct or placed him on the latter’s private island, critics have questioned his decision to associate with the convicted sex offender. Released correspondence suggests the two men met repeatedly over several years, while Gates’ ex-wife Melinda reportedly viewed Epstein as a serious concern and cited her former husband’s dealings with the financier among the factors behind their 2021 divorce.

A day earlier, investigators heard from Groff, who worked as Epstein’s executive assistant from 2001 until his death in jail in 2019. She told House investigators on Tuesday that Epstein was a “master manipulator” who kept different parts of his life compartmentalized.

Groff said she had considered resigning after Epstein’s 2008 conviction but decided to stay after he convinced her that he had been falsely accused and manipulated her sense of loyalty.

Her account was met with skepticism. During her testimony, lawmakers questioned whether a senior aide who managed Epstein’s schedule, travel, and daily affairs for nearly two decades could plausibly have been unaware of the misconduct. Groff acknowledged arranging massages for Epstein as part of her duties but said she had never met the women involved and was unaware that some were minors. Prosecutors believe that the massages served as a mechanism for recruiting and exploiting young women.

The House inquiry has so far included testimony from other high-profile figures, including former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and former Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Many Germans want their politicians to be stripped of the special protection against defamation and insults they enjoy under current laws, a recent survey conducted by the INSA polling agency has shown. The issue has come into the spotlight following dozens of criminal cases opened against people calling Chancellor Friedrich Merz names online, with some of them facing thousands of euros in fines as a result.

A person can face up to a year behind bars or a fine for insulting someone under the German Criminal Code. In case of politicians, though, the punishment is tripled if the insult is related to their public position and is “likely to significantly impede their public activities” as stipulated in a separate article.

According to INSA, 43% of Germans would like to see this article, known as Paragraph 188, scrapped. Only 32% wanted to leave it as is, with the rest not giving a specific answer.

The support for the move is particularly strong among the backers of opposition parties, with 67% of Free Democrats’ supporters and 64% of Alternative for Germany (AfD) voters wanting it gone. Supporters of Merz’s Christian Democratic Union were the only ones overwhelmingly supportive of keeping the controversial article in place, with 55% of them opposing any changes, the poll suggested.

The INSA survey was conducted between June 5 and 8 and involved 2,009 German nationals aged 18 or above. Another poll conducted by the Forsa Institute last week, which involved 1,007 respondents, painted a different picture, as it showed that 58% of Germans wanted to keep the legislation while 38% wanted it abolished.

Several German news media outlets reported in early June that the police had opened nearly 40 criminal cases over a string of angry comments under a post on Facebook about the chancellor’s visit to a southwestern German city of Heilbronn. Although 15 cases were eventually dropped, others were brought to court, which one man recieving a fine exceeding €2,000 ($2,322) for calling Merz “lying Fritz.”

The chancellor’s office said at the time that Merz himself did not file any charges but maintained that criminal prosecution of those insulting public officials was a “normal” legal procedure that “must be protected.”

Merz, who is known for telling Germans to work more while claiming the welfare state is obsolete and unviable, was ranked the world’s most unpopular leader in April. In May, the German media reported his own party was mulling replacing him because of a record low rating.

Relatives of the deceased Indian sailors killed in a US missile strike on a merchant ship off the coast of Oman on Wednesday are demanding to know why the civilian vessel was targeted.

The Palau-flagged MT Settebello had a crew of 28: 24 Indians, two Pakistanis, one Russian, and one Ukrainian. The US military fired at it with a precision munition for allegedly trying to run the blockade of Iran.

On Thursday, New Delhi confirmed that three sailors had lost their lives, the others were rescued. 

Rajesh Sharma, the father of Aditya Sharma, a deck cadet on the Settebello, was inconsolable when he spoke to RT India.

“It was a commercial ship and it was a cargo carrier or oil tanker and there was no dangerous or hazardous material in it so that it could be used to help Iran,” he argued. “But they hit it with a missile, and that was not a way to control the cargo ship. You can send your navy person [nel] to the ship. You can arrest the crew members. There are a lot of ways, but hitting a cargo ship with a missile is foolishness and madness.”

Sharma told RT that he had spoken with his son after hearing about the strike on another vessel, the MT Marivex, on Monday, and that the family was worried for Aditya’s safety. “In my family it was me, my wife, and my only son… our only son who has left us now,” his father said.

Sharma urged the government to direct all shipping companies “to not move [ships] toward the Strait of Hormuz or the Gulf.”

RT India also spoke to Panna Lal Chaurasia, a relative of another deceased sailor. Speaking from Deoria in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, he said that his brother-in-law, Shivanand Chaurasia, who was killed in the strike, had two young children. Chaurasia added that the family is demanding that the authorities hand over his mortal remains “at the earliest.”

India’s shipping minister has promised to ensure the swift repatriation of the rescued crew and the return of the remains of the dead.

The Settebello was the second commercial vessel to be struck by US forces near the Strait of Hormuz in less than three days. Earlier, on Monday, US forces hit the MT Marivex, which had an all-Indian crew. All of the sailors were rescued following the attack.

A petrochemical tanker reported a fire off the coast of Oman on Thursday after US forces struck it, marking the third such incident this week.

The American and British right want you to believe that the Belfast riots are a violent Irish uprising against mass immigration. In reality, the riots are steeped in the complex sectarianism of Northern Ireland, and the riot leaders don’t even consider themselves Irish.

The attempted beheading of an Irish man by a Sudanese migrant set off a wave of unrest in Belfast this week. Less than 24 hours after the attack, gangs of masked men torched more than 60 buildings and vehicles, sweeping door-to-door through the city’s northern neighborhoods in a deliberate attempt to “get the foreigners out,” according to the BBC.

The violence continued on Wednesday, with more loosely organized mobs of rioters hurling stones and petrol bombs at police, and reports of masked vigilantes hunting down black bystanders, seemingly at random.

To the British government, the riots were a base display of “racist thuggery,” per Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn. To the right-wing commentariat in the US and UK, they were an act of resistance against a system responsible for flooding Irish towns and cities with third-world migrants. American radio host Alex Jones described the riots as the beginning of “the war for the West,” while podcaster Nick Fuentes proclaimed the Irish “the spiritual vanguard of Europe,” and sent “my energy to the rioters in Belfast.”

In the UK, right-wing activist Tommy Robinson celebrated Northern Ireland’s Catholic republicans (who want unification with the Republic of Ireland) and Protestant loyalists (who see themselves as British and wish to remain in the United Kingdom) coming together to oppose mass immigration.

Nick Fuentes says he has Celtic DNA.

"It's Celtic Pride, World Wide.. Those are my people, I'm proud of my people."

"So, I'm sending my energy to the Rioters in Belfast." pic.twitter.com/d2nsTT5IYd

— KaizerRev (@Kaizerrev) June 11, 2026

The only problem is that this didn’t happen.

Why didn’t Catholics riot?

The attempted beheading took place in a Catholic neighborhood of Belfast, and initial online reports suggest that the victim, Stephen Ogilvie, was Catholic. Despite the attack seemingly targeting one of their own, Northern Ireland’s Catholic leaders were most emphatic in squashing any potential unrest within their community. Belfast’s Catholic mayor, Rois Maire Donnelly, instead called on locals to stand with immigrants “now in their time of need.” 

Former Sinn Fein leader, IRA mastermind, and potential double agent Gerry Adams did not issue a statement on the attempted beheading, instead warning his supporters that there “is no excuse for…racist attacks.” On the street level, republican enforcers reportedly broke up protests in Catholic neighborhoods.

At first glance, this stand-down points to a massive disconnect between Sinn Fein and its voters. Across all Ireland, Sinn Fein voters are the most anti-immigration demographic, with 72% favoring policies that “reduce the numbers coming here.” In the Republic of Ireland, the Sinn Fein strongholds of East Wall and North Strand in Dublin have been the epicenter of anti-immigration protests and riots in recent years, including the blockade of an asylum center in East Wall in 2022. 

Northern Ireland is different

By all available accounts, the riots in Belfast were organized and carried out by Protestant loyalists. Setting aside the pro-immigrant sentiment of Sinn Fein’s leaders, the party’s Catholic republican base was reluctant to join riots organized by loyalists, given that their own communities are often targeted by loyalist mobs. 

Eight months before the attack on Ogilvie, loyalist Ulster Defence Association (UDA) paramilitaries burned Catholics out of their homes in Belfast’s Old Park neighborhood, less than a kilometer from the scene of the stabbing. No matter their views on immigration, few republicans would be willing to join forces with the same paramilitaries who torched their houses less than a year ago, and killed more than 1,000 of their relatives and friends during the Troubles.

WATCH: Multiple cars on fire in Belfast as protests spread after attempted beheading by migrant pic.twitter.com/qcP8qnF2qB

— Rapid Report (@RapidReport2025) June 9, 2026

By taking to the streets with loyalists, republicans would also be lending visible support to broader loyalist political goals, which include the reimposition of a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Barricaded and manned by British troops until the signing of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, the border was a stark symbol of British occupation and an obstacle to the republicans’ goal of Irish reunification.

Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) leader Gavin Robinson has already called for the closing of “the open, porous border between our country and the Irish Republic,” after it emerged that the Sudanese attacker, Hadi Alodid, had entered Northern Ireland via the Republic.

Why did the Protestants riot?

Unlike the 2023 Dublin riots – which took place after an Algerian immigrant stabbed three children outside a school – and the unrest in Southampton earlier this month after bodycam footage showing the murder of teenager Henry Nowak by a Sikh man was released, the Belfast riots were not spontaneous.

In the hours before the riots, flyers were circulated on social media announcing which roads would be closed, and warning businesses in these areas that they must shut by 5:30 PM with “no excuses.” Masked men set up road checkpoints leading into these zones, and enforced a prohibition on phones and cameras within. Reporting from the Newtownards Road, where dozens of buildings housing migrants were burned out, journalist Aris Roussinos recalled being told to “f**k away off and get on home before you get kneecapped.”

Belfast’s loyalists have both the motive and the means to target immigrants. After centuries in the majority, Protestants are losing the demographic battle to Catholics in Northern Ireland. According to a 2021 census, Catholics now outnumber Protestants by 45.7% to 43.48%, a significant shift from the 48% to 45% Protestant majority in 2011. With Sinn Fein winning its first ever majority in the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2022, the influx of migrants threatens to further erode the loyalists’ already waning power.

Belfast’s paramilitary infrastructure

The loyalists have the infrastructure in place to organize and carry out street level violence. The UDA and Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) operated as British proxies during the Troubles, carrying out deniable attacks against IRA members and Catholic civilians alike. The 2012 De Silva Review revealed “shocking levels of state collusion” between the UDA and the British military and intelligence apparatus, concluding that 85% of the group’s targeting intelligence was supplied by British security agencies. Loyalist paramilitaries were spared the internment without trial that alleged IRA members were subjected to, and British military commanders were instructed to take “a moderate stance” toward the UDA, according to Defense Ministry documents from 1972.

The UDA and UVF are now illegal organizations in the UK, but much of their British-built command infrastructure is still in place. According to leaked MI5 documents obtained by the BBC in 2020, the combined membership of both paramilitaries is estimated at around 12,500. These groups regularly meet with loyalist politicians in Northern Ireland, according to the BBC.

Loyalist paramilitaries have officially denied organizing this week’s riots, but are widely believed to be overseeing the violence. Loyalists issued similar denials during race riots in Ballymena last year – a response to the alleged rape of a minor by a gang of Roma teenagers – but were later confirmed to have taken part in, and according to some analysts, exerted “significant control” over the mayhem.

Lethal consequences

While the Belfast riots are steeped in Northern Ireland’s endemic sectarianism, they did not take place in a vacuum. Whether in Belfast, Dublin, or Southampton, violent riots are now all but guaranteed after serious incidences of migrant crime. 

The government response in Ireland and the UK follows the same pattern every time: appeals for calm, a harsh crackdown on rioters, and a reframing of the right’s response – and not the crime itself – as the real problem.

This policy is unsustainable. Mass migration is roundly despised by the British and Irish public, Protestants and Catholics alike, and as long as the governments of Ireland and the UK – and the mainstream media dependent upon them – continue to emphasise the reaction over the action, the danger posed to society by migrant crime will magnify. 

However, in Northern Ireland, where the British government’s former loyalist attack dogs are turning on their masters, the intersection of deeply rooted sectarianism and fresh public outrage is creating a dangerous powder keg, which if ignited, could cause an explosion of violence unseen since the darkest days of the Troubles.

The European Union is considering sanctions against Kremlin adviser and historian Vladimir Medinsky, who led the Russian delegation in the latest rounds of US-mediated peace talks with Kiev, EUobserver has reported, citing a draft of the bloc’s 21st sanctions package.

Brussels has been mostly left out of diplomatic efforts initiated by US President Donald Trump following his return to office last year, as most EU member states have opted to back Kiev with weapons and impose sanctions on Russia instead of seeking a resolution to the conflict.

Medinsky, also known for co-authoring a new series of history textbooks introduced in Russian schools and leading an extensive online course on Russian history, has reportedly been described by Brussels as a key figure in what they call Russia’s state propaganda efforts.

The measures proposed in a draft leaked on Wednesday would also target Patriarch Kirill, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, and International Chess Federation (FIDE) president Arkady Dvorkovich, over alleged support for Russia’s military campaign, according to the report.

Russian Sports Minister Mikhail Degtyarev, Russian Wrestling Federation President Mikhail Mamiashvili and acting head of the Russian Olympic Committee Stanislav Pozdnyakov are reportedly included in the draft sanctions list as well. Musician Aleksander Marshal is also set to face sanctions over performances for Russian servicemen in Donbass.

Earlier this week, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said the bloc was preparing its largest sanctions package in more than two years, targeting over 170 Russian individuals and entities, on top of 81 listings set for approval the following week.

On Tuesday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the new sanctions package would target Russia’s energy, financial, crypto, trade, and fisheries sectors and bar entry to Russians who have served in the military since the conflict in Ukraine escalated in February 2022.

As the West continues to impose restrictions against Russia over the Ukraine conflict, the pool of new possible targets is becoming increasingly limited.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated that the ultimate goal of Western sanctions is to weaken and contain Russia’s long-term development.

Earlier this year, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that although the sanctions have had an overall “negative impact” on the Russian economy, the country has “gained significant experience in minimizing their effects.”

Peskov has also said that sanctions are a double-edged sword, causing damage not only to those they target but also to those who impose them, and contributing to economic stagnation in Europe.

Germany and the EU risk “sleepwalking” into a direct confrontation with Russia by becoming parties to the Ukraine conflict after abandoning diplomatic engagement with Moscow, the former head of the German Navy has warned in an interview with Berliner Zeitung.

Former German Navy chief Kay-Achim Schonbach resigned in early 2022 after triggering a political uproar by arguing that Russia was acting to protect its security interests rather than seeking confrontation with the West.

Looking back, Schonbach said he would not change the substance of his comments, arguing that Europe missed a chance to prevent the escalation of the Ukraine conflict by failing to “respect the Russian Federation’s right to its own vision of a security architecture on its western border.”

Schonbach emphasized that peace and stability in Europe can only be possible “with, and not against, Russia.”

He also raised concerns that given their current trajectory, Germany and the EU could go beyond legitimate support for Ukraine and “sleepwalk into the role of a belligerent.”

“Only in Ukraine is diplomacy categorically rejected,” he noted, arguing that Germany had squandered decades of postwar reconciliation with Moscow through “moralizing and righteous anger.”

Schonbach also said contacts between the German and Russian navies are now “completely severed,” something he said did not happen even at the height of the Cold War.

His warning comes as European NATO members have continued to expand military spending and harden their rhetoric toward Moscow. Czech President Petr Pavel recently urged NATO to “show its teeth” to Russia, while senior Western commanders have called for Europe to prepare for a possible 2030 war with Moscow.

In Germany, opposition figures from both the right-wing AfD and Sahra Wagenknecht’s BSW have also consistently criticized Berlin’s Ukraine policy, calling for renewed dialogue with Russia, an end to weapons deliveries to Kiev, and a rethink of sanctions that they say have decimated Germany’s own economy.

Moscow has repeatedly denied claims that it plans to attack NATO or the EU, with Russian President Vladimir Putin calling them “nonsense” and “provocation” used to justify militarization.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has also stressed that Russia has no intention of attacking Europe unless attacked first, and has accused German and EU leadership of transforming the bloc into “a Fourth Reich.”

Sudan’s poverty rate has risen to 73%, its human resources minister said on Tuesday. 

Speaking during a press conference in Cairo, Sudanese Human Resources Minister Moatassim Ahmed Saleh announced plans to launch 500,000 youth projects and expand support for female-led businesses as part of efforts to create jobs and restore livelihoods.

Authorities have also established 15 partnerships to support female-led businesses.

In November, around 23 million people were living below the World Bank’s poverty threshold of $3.00 per day, Saleh estimated. “The poverty rate in Sudan rose from 21% to 71% due to the war, according to official reports,” he said. 

Saleh said the government has adopted a five-year plan for 2026-2030 aimed at supporting more than three million small businesses, with over 10,000 projects already prepared for beneficiaries. He also called on Sudanese living abroad to return and take advantage of economic opportunities.

The conflict has devastated local economies and forced millions to flee their homes. 

In April, a UN Development Program assessment found that the conflict has set Sudan’s economy back more than three decades, with average incomes falling to levels last seen in 1992. The agency warned that extreme poverty could affect nearly 60% of the population by 2030 if the fighting continues.

The poverty crisis has been exacerbated by the collapse of the Sudanese pound, which recently hit a record low against the US dollar. Banking expert Waleed Dalil told Sudan Tribune the currency’s decline reflects the broader impact of the war, which has crippled key sectors of the economy.

The war has also seen a sharp escalation in drone attacks by both the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) across Darfur and Kordofan. The strikes have repeatedly hit civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, schools and water plants.

In April, Sudan Tribune estimated that direct drone attacks on civilian targets had killed between 480 and 500 people and injured more than 1,200 others since the start of 2026.

US inflation accelerated to a three-year high in May as soaring energy costs linked to the US-Israeli war on Iran pushed prices higher across the economy, according to government data. Food prices also rose sharply.

Consumer prices rose 4.2% from a year earlier and increased 0.5% on a monthly basis, with higher gasoline costs adding pressure on household budgets across the country, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) said on Wednesday. Energy prices accounted for more than 60% of the monthly rise in the Consumer Price Index.

The data comes as the US carried out new strikes on Iran for a second consecutive day in the latest escalation of a bombing campaign launched in late February, as President Donald Trump seeks to pressure Tehran into accepting his peace terms. Brent crude, the international benchmark, rose more than 2% on Thursday to about $95.40 a barrel on fears the conflict could disrupt global energy supplies.

Pump pain deepens

For American drivers, the increase is already showing up at the pump. Gasoline prices climbed 40.5% from a year earlier, turning a $40-$50 fill-up into a $60-$70 hit. The war has added an estimated $59 billion to America’s fuel bills since February, according to CNBC, or roughly $750 per household based on Moody’s Analytics estimates.

Rural households have been hit particularly hard, paying an extra $26 per week for gas compared with prewar prices, according to the Center for American Progress. Economists warn the final tally could climb much higher if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed.

The latest rise in energy costs contrasts with Trump’s campaign pledge to curb inflation and cut fuel prices by half within a year of taking office.

Oil industry sounds alarm

Industry executives warn the pain may not be over. “We’re sounding the alarm,” American Petroleum Institute CEO Mike Sommers told Fox Business, citing fuel inventories nearing critical lows.

Some Trump administration officials have dismissed those concerns, industry sources said, noting that oil has yet to approach the $200-a-barrel levels predicted at the start of the war.

With the Strait of Hormuz effectively closed and the conflict showing no sign of easing, executives warn gasoline prices could climb further in the weeks ahead.

From pumps to hot dogs

But the surge extends well beyond the pump. At the breakfast table, coffee prices are up 17.5% from a year ago, according to CBS News analysis of BLS data. Grocery bills have climbed further: tomatoes are up 32%, lettuce nearly 25%, beef 16%, and even hot dogs 11% from a year earlier, the data show.

Disruptions to fertilizer imports and shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz are adding pressure to the food supply chain, with US grocery industry estimates pointing to further increases in produce and meat prices in the coming months.

Trump ‘loves inflation’

Economists say the worst may still be ahead, warning that the data does not yet fully reflect the fallout from the war with Iran.

“What we’ve got is hot, sticky and persistent underlying inflation with the dispersion of price increases broadening again, instead of narrowing,” CNN quoted Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG, as saying.

“We’ve yet to hit the full effects of the war on food prices,” she added.

Trump, however, brushed aside concerns, declaring that “the numbers were great.” Asked about the latest figures, Trump told reporters at the White House: “I love inflation” before predicting that “it’s going to come down like a rock” once oil starts flowing freely through the Strait of Hormuz again.

But the poll suggests most Americans are not buying that promise. According to an Economist/YouGov poll this week, 29% approve of Trump’s handling of the economy while 63% disapprove. His net approval rating on the issue stands at negative 34% - the lowest of either of his presidential terms, the poll shows. In his first term, more Americans approved than disapproved of Trump’s performance with the economy.

One of the fundamental problems in Russia’s relations with the countries of the former Soviet Union is the persistent belief that Moscow has special obligations towards its neighbors: obligations to interpret their behavior generously, to respond with restraint, and to take their domestic political choices as something it must simply accept.

But this assumption is wrong.

The foreign policy course chosen by the Republic of Armenia is, of course, a sovereign matter for its people and leadership. But it would be strange to imagine that Russia has no sovereign right to respond to that choice entirely at its own discretion. Moscow is under no external obligation to behave as others would prefer. It’s constrained only by its own interests and by its own rational assessment of the situation.

In this sense, the dispute around Armenia’s elections, and the broader discussion of the republic’s so-called ‘European choice’, may offer a useful moment to remind Russia’s friends and neighbors that Moscow’s rights are no different from their own. Indeed, in practical terms they are greater, since Russia bears a far heavier responsibility for development and security across Greater Eurasia and, more broadly, the world.

Let’s be clear from the start. Russia’s reaction to the outcome of Armenia’s parliamentary elections, and to the subsequent steps taken by the government in Yerevan, need not be driven by emotion. Nor must it be guided by a desire to keep Armenia within Russia’s sphere of influence at any cost.

As our rather astute adversary George Kennan wrote 80 years ago, Russian foreign policy “is neither schematic nor adventuristic. It doesn’t work by fixed plans. It doesn’t take unnecessary risks.” That remains a useful observation, even if today’s Russia is not the Soviet Union.

When considering the appropriate strategy towards Armenia, and towards all of Russia’s neighbors along its borders, several options are possible. They are not mutually exclusive.

First, Russia is under no obligation to recognize the results of elections in a neighboring country merely because the government in power, or the political force declaring victory, insists that it must. The example of Georgia shows that perfectly healthy trade and economic ties can exist even in the absence of diplomatic relations, let alone recognition of the official results of a popular vote.

This is especially relevant if those results are vigorously contested by local political forces, as appears likely in Armenia.

Second, Russia may apply economic pressure against any state if it believes that state’s behavior could cause harm to Russian interests. Moscow doesn’t need to wait until the damage becomes irreversible, nor does it have to accept another government’s assurances about its intentions.

In Armenia’s case, the question is not only whether a pro-EU course has already harmed Russian interests or undermined the unity of the Eurasian Economic Union. It’s enough that Moscow considers such harm possible in principle, and that alone may provide the justification for action.

Third, Russia’s neighbors, including some of its closest friends and allies, like to speak at length about the multi-vector nature of their foreign policy. Yet they often forget that Russia’s own policy is also multi-vector in that Moscow, too, is free to cooperate with anyone who does not seek to harm it.

Over the past four years, we have not heard any of Russia’s neighbors say that they continued trading with Moscow under Western sanctions out of a desire to help Russia. On the contrary, the word “pragmatism” has become central to the entire foreign policy vocabulary of Russia’s friends and allies in the CIS.

That’s perfectly understandable, that they cooperate with Russia because it is in their interests. But the same principle applies in reverse, and Russia owes nothing to anyone for free.

Fourth, when setting priorities for cooperation with any country, Russia is free to decide what matters most to it. Its neighbors are guided by their own perceptions, interests and political constructions. No one in Moscow is obliged to accept these as the framework for dialogue.

Take Central Asia. No matter how often we discuss economic development with the states of the region, everyone in Russia understands that the main priority there remains security. We have experience because, in January 2022, Russia helped save the Kazakh state from collapse. Before that, we witnessed Islamist uprisings in the Fergana Valley.

This doesn’t mean the economy is unimportant. It’s very important, and it brings real benefits and offers significant promise. But security remains the top priority, especially when it comes to Russia’s neighbors developing relations with major external powers such as the United States or leading Western European states.

Russia can afford to think this way because it’s the most resource-secure country in Eurasia and it’s therefore able to focus less on profit and more on preserving control over the resources and strategic space necessary for its own security because the security of Russian territory is paramount.

None of this means that Russia must now formulate some grand new doctrine towards its neighbors. In reality, Russia’s strategy is often to have no fixed strategy at all. As anyone with even a passing knowledge of Russian foreign policy history understands, Moscow tends to act according to current interests.

Ultimately, those interests all come down to one strategic task: ensuring the survival and development of the multi-ethnic Russian nation.

These interests must be pursued even when tactical circumstances require dialogue with extremely unpleasant partners. In essence, all foreign policy partners are merely instruments for ensuring the security of Russian territory and advancing Russia’s national development goals and nothing more.

There’s only one exception and that’s Belarus, with which Russia is bound by the Union State treaty.

For the rest, including even close and friendly neighbors, their significance depends on Russia’s own priorities. That means Moscow’s policy towards them can be highly flexible and entirely opportunistic and there’s little room here for abstract principles.

If cooperation serves Russia’s current security and economic interests, it should continue, but if the costs begin to outweigh the benefits, then Russia will adjust its behavior. Not in order to punish or humiliate a neighbor, but because a different model has become more advantageous.

It would therefore be a mistake to interpret Moscow’s view of those now proclaiming victory in Armenia’s elections as a simple desire to keep the republic in Russia’s sphere of influence, because the issue is broader than that.

Russia is reminding its neighbors about cause and effect, and it’s also reminding them of an axiom they sometimes prefer not to acknowledge, that Moscow acts according to what it currently sees as its own interests, not according to what others expect from it.

We can’t yet say how relations between Moscow and Yerevan will develop in the wake of Armenia’s parliamentary elections, but no one should doubt that any decision taken by Russia’s top political leadership will be based solely on Russia’s current interests.

Not on fraternal feelings and not on historical sentiment and not on traditional ties, because Russia owes nothing to anyone.

This article was first published by Vzglyad newspaper and translated and edited by the RT team.

A petrochemical tanker reported a fire off the Oman coast on Thursday after US forces fired at it, the third such incident this week around the Strait of Hormuz. 

India’s foreign ministry called the attacks deeply concerning and said all the 20 Indian crew members on board the ship are safe. 

The incident comes after New Delhi lodged a diplomatic protest with the US Charge d’Affairs on Wednesday following the death of three Indians when another tanker was struck.

The US Central Command said it acted against the Guinea-Bissau flagged MT Jalveer as it “attempted to transport oil from Iran through the Gulf of Oman.” 

It said an aircraft fired two Hellfire missiles into the ship’s engine room after the crew “repeatedly failed” to comply with directions from US forces.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs described the incident as a “maritime security incident” and said the all-Indian crew on the Jalveer were safe. “The continuing incidents affecting commercial shipping in the region are deeply concerning,” it added.

❗️All 20 Indian Crew Members Onboard MT Jalveer, Attacked Near Shinas Port In Oman, Are Safe - MEA

Authorities are working with Oman to coordinate their safe evacuation. pic.twitter.com/YKQyW0S53P

— RT_India (@RT_India_news) June 11, 2026

A shipping ministry spokesman said the crew were being evacuated to Shinas port, and that the ministry is monitoring the situation and coordinating with the Indian foreign ministry, diplomatic missions and the Indian Navy. The Omani Navy was helping with the evacuation, India’s embassy in Oman tweeted.

On Wednesday, three Indian crew members of the MV Settebello had died in an attack by US forces in the same area. And on Monday, the MT Marivex was hit but all its Indian crew were safely rescued. All three tankers were allegedly trying to run the US blockade around Iran.

The United States has been enforcing a naval and economic blockade of all Iranian ports since mid-April. Washington says it is in retaliation for Iranian restrictions on the movement of merchant ships through the Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of the world’s energy passed before the conflict began. 

After the death of the crew members on the Settebello, New Delhi also raised its concern at the UN Security Council, pointing out that several Indian nationals had died or gone missing due to attacks in the region.

US President Donald Trump has called on Republicans in Congress to pass a $350 billion military spending package that would also impose sweeping new national voting rules before the midterm elections.

In a Truth Social post on Thursday, Trump urged lawmakers to move “immediately” on what he called “Recon 3.0,” a new budget bill that Republicans hope to pass without Democratic support.

Trump said the money is needed to bring the US military budget to $1.5 trillion and “build the arsenal of freedom.” He said the package would fund the Golden Dome missile shield, the F-47 fighter, the B-21 bomber, drones, space-based military capabilities and new ammunition stockpiles.

The president argued that the spending bill would create hundreds of thousands of high-paying US jobs, rebuild American industry and secure “global dominance” without fueling inflation.

The push comes after the US war on Iran and years of military support for Ukraine have strained American weapons supplies, with the Center for Strategic and International Studies stating it could take three or more years to replace some advanced missiles.

The president also wrote that the bill will include the Save America Act, which would tighten election-security measures and require all voters to show photo identification and proof of US citizenship. It would also largely ban mail-in ballots except in cases of illness, disability, military service or travel.

Unlike in most countries, voting rules in the US vary by state, and some still allow people to cast ballots without showing any photo ID or proof of citizenship. The loose rules have repeatedly raised concerns over possible voter fraud, with Republicans demanding mandatory ID checks nationwide. Democrats argue such requirements would make voting harder for eligible citizens.

The president said the Save America Act would also ban men from women’s sports and prohibit “transgender mutilization” surgery for children.

However, the legislation still faces major hurdles, including inside Trump’s own party. Senior Republicans have questioned whether Congress can pass another big budget bill before the midterms, while Senate Majority Leader John Thune has said the Save America Act lacks the votes needed under normal rules. Fiscal conservatives could also demand spending cuts to offset the $350 billion military boost.

British Secretary of Defense John Healey has tendered his resignation to Prime Minister Keir Starmer, in the latest blow to the embattled Labour government.

Healey complained in an open letter that Starmer has been “unable, and the Treasury has been unwilling to commit the resources” required for sweeping reforms he sought to implement and to raise the spending level to 3% of GDP by 2030 to meet Britain’s obligation to NATO.

The minister cited the US-Israeli attack on Iran in late February and the increasing strain that European members of the American-led bloc are facing amid doubts about Washington’s commitment as factors necessitating more money for the military.

According to Haley, he resigned in protest at the military budget released in full on Monday that he said “falls well short of what is required” by the ministry to field battle-ready armed forces.

Starmer’s leadership has also been rocked by a scandal over the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the US, who was a known associate of disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, as well as the disastrous results of local elections in May in which the ruling party lost dozens of councils and almost 1,500 council seats.

There were rumors that the party could replace its head and vote in a new prime minister, but Starmer’s government has so far survived the turmoil. Britain has seen a string of short-lived prime ministers in recent years. Since the Conservative Party’s Theresa May came to power in 2016, five people have held the position, with Starmer being the first from Labour in the series.

The UK, along with most other members of NATO, committed to boost spending during a leaders’ summit last year. The commitment came in response to pressure from US President Donald Trump, who accused European nations of abusing American protection and failing to pull their weight. The proposed benchmark was set at 5% of GDP, including 3.5% in direct military spending and 1.5% in security-related expenses. The UK said it would reach the milestone by 2035.

The British military has suffered from underfunding for years, with critics arguing that London should not be trying to project power overseas as it is no longer a global empire. Just last week, the aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales, the Royal Navy’s co-flagship, was unable to set sail to join a NATO exercise after a technical issue was discovered. Its sister ship, HMS Queen Elizabeth, was similarly pulled out of NATO maneuvers in 2024.

EU member states could seek to curtail the powers of the bloc’s diplomatic service, headed by Kaja Kallas, amid concerns among officials that the body is “dysfunctional,” the Financial Times has reported.

The European External Action Service (EEAS) was launched in 2010 as a kind of collective foreign ministry for the EU, overseeing international relations, aid programs, and intelligence gathering and analysis.

France has outlined possible reforms of the EEAS for consideration by member states, the FT reported on Thursday.

One option would return some of the service’s functions to the European Commission and national governments, although this would require unanimous approval by member states. Another proposal, which supporters say could be implemented without changing EU treaties, would limit the autonomy of the EEAS chief and loosen her control over more than 140 missions the EU maintains worldwide.

“Capitals are annoyed and want an effective way for us to act in unison externally,” one of five officials cited by the FT said. “It is clear that [the EEAS] doesn’t work the way it should in today’s world. It is dysfunctional,” another said.

Commenting on the report, Russian presidential adviser Kirill Dmitriev said Kallas has “succeeded in annoying everyone.”

Kallas and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have reportedly been locked in a tug of war over who should steer EU foreign policy. The former German defense minister is said to have outmaneuvered the former Estonian prime minister in the bureaucratic battle, taking direct control in key geographic areas and pushing for a new intelligence body that would answer directly to her office.

Kallas accused of going off-script on China

Kallas has on several occasions made remarks on sensitive issues, including relations with China, that appeared to reflect her own views rather than the EU’s agreed position, while also advancing proposals some officials considered unwarranted, the FT said.

Last year, Kallas criticized the administration of US President Donald Trump for arguing that Ukraine could not defeat Russia militarily even with continued Western aid and sanctions. “If you’re saying that we collectively are not able to really pressure Russia…, then how do you say that you’re able to take on China?” she asked. The moderator at the Hudson Institute event joked that the remark would be removed from the recording.

In May, Kallas denounced Beijing for what she described as “coercive economic practices” and claimed that the West’s inability to compete with Chinese companies was a “disease.” She compared government subsidies to increasing a cancer patient’s morphine dosage and urged retaliatory measures – chemotherapy in her metaphor.

EU and China at economic loggerheads

French President Emmanuel Macron made a state visit to China last December, followed by a similar trip by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in February. The leaders of the EU’s two largest economies brought with them major industrial figures, who signed significant deals with Chinese counterparts.

The EU’s stated policy toward China is to “de-risk” economic ties. However, the turbulence that the Trump administration has added to the global economy, along with the doubts it has raised over NATO protections, has pushed European nations to reassess their positions.

In a separate story on Thursday, the FT reported that Beijing has canceled two senior meetings with EU officials on trade issues scheduled for this month. The British newspaper said the gestures were part of Chinese deterrence against measures proposed by Brussels to reduce trade deficit. The gap widened to €1 billion ($1.15 billion) a day in 2025, with EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic calling it “unsustainable.”

EU chose Kallas as a Russia hawk

Kallas stepped down as Estonian prime minister after her popularity at home sank, partly due to a scandal involving her husband’s business interests in Russia. She joined von der Leyen’s second commission in December 2024 as an official who “eats Russians for breakfast,” as some media outlets put it.

The EU is currently debating who should represent the bloc in any direct negotiations with Russia. When asked last month whether she wanted the role, Kallas said the debate itself was a Russian “trap,” adding that her job description is “in the treaties.”

Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, will run for office again in the election later this year, his Likud party has announced.

On Tuesday, ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl claimed that US President Donald Trump told him he was not sure if Netanyahu should seek another term.

“He’s had an amazing career. Does he want to continue?” the president said as cited by Karl.

According to the journalist, Trump described Netanyahu as “a wartime prime minister” and insisted that “we will very shortly win the war [against Iran] one way or the other.” 

Likud responded to the report by issuing a short statement on X on Wednesday, stating that “Prime Minister Netanyahu will run in the upcoming elections – and with God’s help, he will win.” 

Netanyahu, 76, who returned as prime minister in December 2022 after holding office from 1996 to 1999 and from 2009 to 2021, has also previously voiced plans to take part in the election.

The date for the vote has not been officially announced, but according to Israeli laws it should be held before October 27. It will be the first election in the country since it launched its military operation in Gaza in response to a deadly incursion by Palestinian armed group Hamas on October 7, 2023.

A poll published by the Israel Democracy Institute on Tuesday suggested that 61% of Israelis do not want Netanyahu to run for office again. The same number of respondents also said that they were in favor of introducing a two-term limit for future prime ministers.

Netanyahu, who is currently on trial for corruption, has faced harsh criticism recently from his political opponents in Israel over the handling of multiple conflicts under his leadership.

They argue that the prime minister has failed to achieve his goals of eliminating Hamas in Gaza, neutralizing Hezbollah in Lebanon or containing Iran, despite his claims to the contrary.

Relations between Trump and Netanyahu have also apparently soured, with the US president acknowledging that he called the Israeli PM “f***ing crazy” during a heated phone call in early June over his reluctance to end attacks on Lebanon during Washington’s negotiations with Tehran.

The Bundibugyo Ebola outbreak has spread to another health zone in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DR Congo), raising the nationwide total of affected zones to 26, the country’s Public Health Emergency Operations Center (COUSP) reported on Tuesday.

As of June 9, the authorities confirmed two Ebola cases in the Tchomia health zone of Ituri Province. The area is situated on the shores of Lake Albert near the Ugandan border and is roughly 50 kilometers south of Bunia, the capital of Ituri Province.

With the addition of Tchomia, 18 of Ituri’s 36 health zones have now recorded Ebola cases. The affected areas include Aru, Aungba, Bambu, Bunia, Damas, Gety, Kilo, Komanda, Lita, Logo, Mambasa, Mangala, Mongbwalu, Nizi, Nyankunde, Rimba and Rwampara.

According to Health Minister Roger Kamba, DR Congo had registered 635 confirmed Ebola cases as of June 9.

“The number of recoveries is progressing, contact tracing is improving – 61.1% compared to 56.4% yesterday. The response is ramping up. We are monitoring every zone, every alert, every signal. Vigilance does not waver,” Kamba said in a post on X.

In a separate update, the minister announced eight new recoveries, bringing the total number of people who have overcome the virus to 30.

Last week, the Congolese Health Ministry reported that 340 tons of medicine and medical supplies had been delivered to Ituri and North Kivu provinces through a World Bank-funded project, in addition to 150 tons previously transported with UNICEF support.

Russia’s public health watchdog, Rospotrebnadzor, reported on Thursday that Russian and Ugandan specialists are jointly developing a diagnostic kit to detect antibodies to the Bundibugyo strain of Ebola.

The agency's experts were among the first to arrive in Uganda in late May to assist the local authorities. Russian-developed PCR tests for the Bundibugyo strain and mobile laboratories have since been deployed in both Uganda and DR Congo.

BrahMos Aerospace has said it is ready to take on orders for supersonic cruise missiles from either the Russian Navy or land forces.

A potential procurement by Moscow would see the system, partly produced in India, being supplied back to one of its original technology partners, underscoring New Delhi’s growing role in advanced defense manufacturing.

The BrahMos comes in land, air, and sea variants and India has already integrated it into its ground, air, and naval forces.

Such an order by Russia would also boost New Delhi’s push for domestic defense manufacturing under the ‘Make-in-India’ initiative.

Named after the Brahmaputra and Moskva rivers, the BrahMos is among the fastest supersonic cruise missiles in the world. It was used to deadly effect by India last year in its short military clash with Pakistan.

“We are ready to fulfill the order if there is an appeal from the Russian side. Either it will be missiles for the Navy, or for ground forces,” BrahMos Managing Director Alexander Maksichev told TASS on the sidelines of the International Naval Salon ‘Fleet-2026’.

“We have sufficient capacities, and we understand what the Russian side wants,” Maksichev said.

The missile was jointly developed by India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and Russia’s NPO Mashinostroyeniya rocket design bureau, which produces the Oniks anti-ship cruise missiles. In 1995, a joint venture, BrahMos Aerospace, was established to produce the missile.

Originally capped at a range of 180 miles, the weapon has since been upgraded for greater reach.

The Philippines was the first foreign customer of the missiles, signing a $375 million contract in 2022. The first batch of BrahMos missiles was delivered in April 2024 and the second in April 2025.

Manila will get three batteries of the system with a 180-mile range. The agreement also provides for logistics support and training for operators.

Earlier this month, India confirmed it had made a deal with Vietnam to supply the missiles.

A top Indian defense official said at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore that talks with Indonesia are also in the final stage.

The next phase of the BrahMos project could involve the joint development of a missile system based on Russia’s Zircon hypersonic missile.

BrahMos Aerospace posted a record revenue in fiscal year 2025-26, the DRDO has said.

Three civilians have been injured by an overnight Ukrainian drone attack on Russia’s southern Krasnodar Region, Governor Veniamin Kondratyev has said.

Debris from an intercepted UAV sparked a fire at an apartment block in the city of Krasnodar, injuring two people, Kondratyev said in a post on Telegram on Thursday. Several private homes were also damaged and one person injured in the Seversky district of the region, Kondratyev added.  

The Krasnodar regional operational headquarters released footage showing the aftermath of the attack. A video and photos posted on the agency’s Telegram channel show damage to the facade of the residential block, shattered windows, and the aftermath of fires in two apartments.

In total, 330 Ukrainian drones were shot down across Russia overnight as the country came under another large-scale Ukrainian aerial raid, the Defense Ministry reported. The interceptions took place over Moscow, Belgorod, Bryansk, Vladimir, Kaluga, Kursk, Orel, Smolensk, Tver, and Tula regions, as well as over the Crimean Peninsula, the ministry said.

Ukrainian drone raids on Russian territory have intensified over the past year, with Kiev launching hundreds of UAVs targeting residential areas, critical infrastructure, and industrial facilities. Russian officials have described the incursions as terrorist attacks meant to compensate for setbacks the Ukrainian military has been suffering on the battlefield.

In May, Ukraine killed 21 students, mostly young women, in a ‘double-tap’ drone strike on a college dormitory in the Russian town of Starobelsk. Earlier this month, Kiev carried out attacks on a bus and a train carrying passengers from Moscow to Simferopol, killing nine people.

Moscow has responded with “systematic and consistent strikes” targeting dual-use infrastructure, including power grids, military sites, command centers, and drone manufacturing facilities across Ukraine. Russia maintains that it never targets purely civilian sites.

The joint US-Israeli military strikes on Iran and Tehran’s regional retaliation could give the African Union (AU) an opportunity to cement its identity as a defender of the UN charter and international law, but, as African experts argue, it seems to have missed it.

Dr. Wafula Okumu, executive director of The Borders Institute, says the AU’s reaction to the Iran crisis clearly showed that the continental body suffers from what he describes as a “crisis of consistency”.

According to Okumu, the AU Commission chairperson’s “softly-worded” statement on the US-Israeli attack on Iran and its sharp condemnation of Iran’s reaction portrayed Africa as succumbing to “selective Chartersim,” a practice it has long condemned in others.

“The AU appeared not keen on outrightly calling out the US and Israel for attacking Iran. It seemed to be taking a safe and neutral position, but its reaction to Iran’s retaliation lacked the tone of a peacemaker,” Dr. Okumu told RT.

Dr. Okumu notes that the AU’s “unsettling silence” on the breach of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, appeared to be justifying the actions of the aggressors (the US and Israel) against the victim of the aggression (Iran).

“The AU ought to have outrightly called out the US and Israel for violating Article 2(4). It should have questioned whether the conditions stipulated in Article 51 had been met to justify the invasion of Iran,” he said.

He explains that by adopting a posture of neutrality between an aggressor and a victim of that aggression, the AU “inadvertently weakened the very legal norms it purports to uphold.”

“The AU was simply not bold enough to call out the US and Israel for infringing on the sovereignty of Iran,” he said.

‘The current geopolitical settings are confusing for Africa’

Nicodemus Minde, a peace and security governance researcher at the Institute for Security Studies in Nairobi, says Africa is good at the “art of selective application of principle’,’ especially in situations where powerful global players are the aggressors.

Minde argues that it was wrong for the AU to describe Iran’s retaliation as a violation of sovereignty, while failing to apply the same language when condemning the attacks by the US and Israel.

“The AU is a victim of unjustifiable inconsistency. There is nothing wrong with lawfully defending a victim against an aggressor. Africa must move from the periphery and be a bold, universal defender of the rule of law and sovereignty,” said Minde.

According to Minde, as much as it is right for the AU not to take sides in global crises, it is only right for it to side with the law while protecting its interests.

“The current geopolitical settings are complex and confusing for Africa, and the only thing that can shield Africa from being swallowed into the current global conflicts is by defending the law and speaking against violations committed by either the East or the West,” said Minde.

He called for the formulation of a common foreign policy among African Union member states to help the continent navigate shifting geopolitics with principled consistency.

‘A violation is a violation, whether committed by the US or Iran’

Chepkorir Sambu, a peace and security researcher and law lecturer at Kenya’s Kabarak University, explains that for the AU to become an effective foreign policy actor on the global stage, it should firmly ground its actions in international law and consistently defend the UN Charter.

Sambu says the AU and its leadership should stop living under the unspoken fear of the US and other Western power players, and instead openly call them out when they are wrong.

“What the AU needed in the US-Israel versus Iran crisis was not taking a pro-Iran or anti-West stand, but simply being pro-rule-of-law. We cannot appear to be subtly supporting the actions of the aggressor while loudly condemning the victim,” she argues.

She added, “Africa must be explicit in reaffirming Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter on the prohibition on the use of force as the cornerstone of international law. A violation is a violation, whether being committed by the US or Iran.”

Sambu argues that the AU should apply the same legal and moral standard to all breaches of sovereignty, regardless of the actor. Condemning Iran’s retaliation is legitimate, but it is legally and morally incoherent without a prior, and equally strong, condemnation of the initial attack.

‘Africa has the power to be the voice of reason’

Dr. Okumu says the time is ripe for Africa’s voice to dominate the global stage and that it matters now more than ever, especially as the world fragments amid great-power competition.

“Africa must come out as the voice and promoter of the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the non-use of force as the primary shields for less powerful states. The AU has a historic opportunity and a profound responsibility to be the world’s leading champion of these norms,” he told RT.

He says Africa should speak with a clear, principled, and unwavering voice, and be part of the geopolitical shifts and realignments without fear.

“Africa, through the AU, must avoid the trap of political expediency and embrace the disciplined legal consistency that is the true source of its authority. The continent has the power to be the voice of reason on the globe, and that power must be exercised,” Dr. Okumu concluded.

All three missing crew members from a chemical tanker struck by the US military in the Gulf of Oman are confirmed dead, Indian Shipping Minister Sarbananda Sonowal said on Thursday.

The Palau-flagged MT Settebello had on board a 28-member crew – 24 Indians, two Pakistanis, one Russian, and one Ukrainian – when the US military fired at it with a precision munition for allegedly trying to run the blockade of Iran. The incident occurred off the coast of Oman, where authorities rescued 25 crew members, while three were initially reported missing.

This was the second attack on commercial shipping by US forces near the Strait of Hormuz. The MT Marivex – also flying the Palau flag – was struck on Monday. The Marivex carried an all-Indian crew, who were rescued after the attack.

It is deeply unfortunate to learn of the tragic incident aboard the Palau-flagged MT Settebello. Sadly, three Indian seafarers initially reported missing are now confirmed dead after bodies have been located and identified.

This is a profound loss to our maritime family. The…

— Sarbananda Sonowal (@sarbanandsonwal) June 11, 2026

New Delhi summoned US Chargé d’Affaires Jason Meeks and lodged a protest after the attack on the Settebello. “The continuing incidents of attacks on shipping in the region are deeply worrisome and a direct result of the ongoing conflict in the region,” the Indian Foreign Ministry said on Wednesday, calling for an “immediate de-escalation of tensions.”

India also expressed its anger at the United Nations Security Council, pointing out that several Indian nationals had died or gone missing due to attacks in the region.

India’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Harish Parvathaneni, repeated New Delhi’s calls to “exercise restraint, avoid escalation and prioritize the safety of civilians.”

US Marine veteran Graham Platner, who recently covered up a Nazi-style tattoo, has won Maine’s Democratic Senate primary and will face Republican Senator Susan Collins in November.

Platner, a progressive with no previous political experience, won 75% of the vote, garnering support from left-wing Democrats and attracting large crowds with firebrand rhetoric, including promises to “topple the oligarchy” and accusations that his future opponent serves the “Epstein class.” Other Democrats, however, have expressed concerns about whether Platner can defeat Collins in light of his numerous scandals.

Platner, who completed three tours in Iraq with the Marines and another in Afghanistan as a National Guardsman, long had the Totenkopf emblem – the Nazi skull symbol famously referenced in the “Are We the Baddies?” Mitchell and Webb comedy skit – tattooed on his chest.

The candidate said he was unaware of the symbol’s meaning when he got the tattoo in Croatia in 2007 while heavily intoxicated alongside fellow service members. He described it as “a terrifying-looking skull and crossbones,” noting that the National Guard prohibits tattoos that are “extremist, racist, sexist, or otherwise indecent.”

CNN: "[Graham] Platner referred to [his tattoo] as 'my Totenkopf,' which is a reference to the skull and cross bone used by Nazi SS units years before the controversy became public." pic.twitter.com/maQ6FnoEDM

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) June 5, 2026

In October 2025, Platner covered the tattoo with a different design – a Celtic knot featuring a wolf-like creature that some suggested resembled Fenrir, a wolf from Norse mythology. Critics argued that Nordic-inspired imagery is also popular among some far-right and white supremacist groups.

“If I was ever under the impression that it was a symbol associated with that ideology, I would not have gone through life taking photographs of myself,” said Platner, who describes himself as an anti-fascist.

The Democrat faced accusations of anti-Semitism after he made the refusal to take donations from the pro-Israeli lobby group AIPAC a campaign point. Collins, who is openly pro-Israel, collected almost 20% of her war chest from AIPAC, according to media estimates.

Sen. Susan Collins [R-Maine] has now received >$1.8 MILLION from AIPAC and the Israel lobby. #MESEN pic.twitter.com/edZdINfMhS

— AIPAC Tracker (@TrackAIPAC) June 10, 2026

Platner has also been criticized for old online posts in which he used homophobic slurs and argued that victims of sexual assault in the military should “act like an adult” and avoid getting “blacked out f*cked up.” He later apologized and attributed the comments to struggles with PTSD.

Earlier this month, reports surfaced that Platner had sent sexually explicit text messages to multiple women while married.

US President Donald Trump has endorsed Collins and branded Platner a “thug” who was “worse than any human being that has ever run for office.”

Trump’s approval rating remains near the lowest level of his political career as the campaign is dominated by concerns about the cost of living, rising energy prices, and the unpopular war with Iran.

A Texas jury has convicted 19-year-old Karmelo Anthony of first-degree murder and sentenced him to 35 years in prison for fatally stabbing fellow student Austin Metcalf during a high school track meet last April.

Anthony’s supporters argued that the case carried racial overtones and maintained the black teenager acted in self-defense during the confrontation with the 17-year-old Metcalf, who was white.

The unanimous verdict was returned on Tuesday at the Collin County Courthouse in McKinney. Anthony will be eligible for parole after serving at least half of his sentence.

The stabbing occurred on April 2, 2025, at a stadium in the Frisco Independent School District that was hosting a multi-school track and field meet. Witnesses told jurors that after it began to rain, Anthony sought shelter under a team tent belonging to another school, which Metcalf represented.

According to testimony, Metcalf approached Anthony and repeatedly told him to leave. Prosecutors said Anthony replied, “Touch me and see what happens,” while reaching into a bag.

Metcalf then pushed Anthony, after which Anthony allegedly pulled out a folding knife and stabbed the 17-year-old in the chest, inflicting a fatal wound.

During closing arguments, Collin County First Assistant District Attorney Bill Wirskye argued that the stabbing was unjustified and that Anthony had provoked the confrontation.

The defense, meanwhile, sought a reduced sentence under the state’s “sudden passion” provision. Attorney Mike Howard told jurors that Anthony had acted out of “fear and chaos,” arguing that Metcalf had “no legal right” to use force against him.

While the victim’s father, Jeff Metcalf, has repeatedly insisted the case was never about race or politics, some of Anthony’s supporters have continued to view it through that lens.

Emotions ran hot outside the Collin County Courthouse on Tuesday, where supporters of both sides engaged in heated verbal exchanges.

Karmelo Anthony’s grandmother, Toni Hayes shouted “Racist! Bias!” from the passenger side window of the black Acura as it slowly pulled away through the crowd outside the McKinney courthouse.pic.twitter.com/kNx70kbHTn

— Bella (@stockbella) June 10, 2026

Toni Hayes, Anthony’s grandmother, was heard shouting “Racist! Bias!” as she departed the courthouse in a vehicle, according to a video widely shared on social media.

Americans have become less likely to view a range of social behaviors as morally acceptable, according to a new Gallup poll.

Released on Tuesday, the survey found the sharpest year-on-year declines in acceptance of having a child outside marriage, birth control, gambling, sex between teenagers, and animal cloning.

Birth control remained the most widely accepted behavior tracked by Gallup, with 83% of respondents saying it was morally acceptable. However, support fell seven percentage points from 2025, reaching its lowest level since the question was first included in the survey in 2012.

Acceptance of having a baby outside marriage fell nine percentage points to 58%, while support for gambling dropped six points to 57%. The share of Americans who view sex between teenagers as morally acceptable stood at 35%, while acceptance of animal cloning declined to a record low of 27%.

Six behaviors have reached record lows in moral acceptability among Americans: birth control (83%), gambling (57%), the death penalty (52%), medical testing on animals (45%), changing one's gender (38%) and cloning animals (27%).

Birth control remains the most accepted behavior… pic.twitter.com/BsYJefz4QU

— Gallup (@Gallup) June 10, 2026

Despite the declines, majorities of respondents still considered several behaviors morally acceptable, including divorce (74%), sex between unmarried adults (65%), gay or lesbian relations (62%), embryonic stem-cell research (59%), buying and wearing animal fur (57%), and the death penalty (52%).

Opinions on abortion remained divided, with 49% of respondents describing it as morally acceptable and 41% as morally wrong. Americans were also closely split on doctor-assisted suicide and medical testing on animals.

The poll also highlighted sharp partisan divides, with Democrats far more likely than Republicans to view abortion, gender transition, and gay or lesbian relations as morally acceptable, while Republicans were more supportive of the death penalty.

According to Gallup, Americans remain more accepting of most of the behaviors it tracks than they were two decades ago. However, the polling firm said the findings suggest that a decades-long shift toward greater moral permissiveness has largely leveled off and, in some cases, may be beginning to reverse. The survey was conducted among 1,001 adults nationwide between May 1 and May 17.

The absence of China’s top military leadership from this year’s Shangri-La Dialogue – a key annual inter-governmental security conference focused on the Asia-Pacific region – prompted predictable speculation about worsening US-China relations. Yet a more important development took place away from the conference hall.

Just hours earlier, American and Chinese military officials met in Hawaii under the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement to discuss maritime safety, crisis management, and ways to reduce the risk of incidents at sea. This was in line with the trend of Washington and Beijing rebuilding lines of military communication despite their strategic competition.

Rather than pursuing either liberal-globalist ambitions or a new Cold War against China, US President Donald Trump’s second-term administration appears to be advancing a strategy built on realism and balance-of-power politics.

The end of the globalist consensus

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue offered perhaps the clearest articulation of this approach.

Hegseth argued that the US has abandoned what he described as the “old toothless, utopian, and globalist course of foreign policy.” Meaning that appeals to universal values and abstract international norms are giving way to a foreign policy centered on national interests, military strength, and strategic realism.

This represents a marked departure from the assumptions that guided much of Western foreign policy after the Cold War. Stability, in this framework, comes from credible deterrence and sustainable balances of power, not from a supposed ‘values’-based moral high ground. This shift is transforming America’s relationships both with its allies and its rivals.

For decades, many US allies relied heavily on American security guarantees while maintaining relatively modest defense capabilities of their own. Hegseth openly questioned this model, arguing that allies should become genuine security partners rather than long-term dependents.

From protectorates to partners

The Trump administration’s emphasis on burden-sharing is about more than budgetary concerns. It also acknowledges a deeper geopolitical reality. For three decades after the Cold War, the US occupied a uniquely hegemonic position in the Indo-Pacific. Today, however, China’s rise, India’s growing influence, and the increasing strategic weight of other regional powers are contributing to a more multipolar environment.

Rather than attempting to restore the conditions of uncontested primacy, Washington increasingly appears focused on preserving an advantageous position within this changing balance. The US remains, or at least still believes itself to be, the strongest military power in the region, but it is encouraging partners to assume greater responsibility for regional security.

This helps explain continued American support for military modernization among countries such as Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and India. Critics often portray these efforts as evidence of containment directed against China, yet the Trump administration presents them as an effort to preserve a regional balance in which no single power can dominate the Indo-Pacific.

A China strategy without a new Cold War

China remains central to this strategy. Hegseth expressed concern about the country’s growing military capabilities, but his remarks were notably less confrontational than much of the rhetoric that has characterized recent debates in Washington. He emphasized the importance of stable relations, fair trade, and continued military-to-military engagement.

It’s equally important to note what he did not emphasize. Taiwan, one of the most sensitive issues in US-China relations, played little role in his speech. The omission suggested an effort to manage competition without turning every disagreement into a geopolitical crisis.

The recently released US National Defense Strategy identifies four priorities: defending the US and the Western Hemisphere, including Greenland; deterring China in the Indo-Pacific; increasing burden-sharing among allies and partners; and revitalizing the American defense-industrial base.

While identifying China as the primary strategic challenge in the Indo-Pacific, the document also calls for expanded military dialogue, strategic stability, and mechanisms for de-escalation. The US Department of War even acknowledges China’s extraordinary rise and military achievements.

Importantly, the strategy does not seek China’s isolation or humiliation. Instead, it reflects a concern that if any single power were to dominate the Indo-Pacific, it could gain disproportionate influence over the world’s economic center of gravity.

The stated objective is not containment in the Cold War sense, but rather preventing the emergence of a regional hegemon and preserving a balance of power in which no single state can dominate the region.

Such an approach also reflects changing realities within the international order itself. The US is no longer operating in the largely unipolar environment of the 1990s. It is adapting to a world in which multiple major powers coexist and compete. Rather than attempting to preserve its slipping primacy, Washington appears to have shifted to maintaining a favorable balance that protects US interests.

China has a different view of the situation, however. It interprets the military modernization of US allies and partners in the region as evidence of continued containment or encirclement. These tensions are likely to persist. Actions that Washington sees as burden-sharing and balance-building will continue to be viewed in Beijing as militarization directed against China, and the ball is in the Washington’s court to convince Beijing otherwise.

Competition between the United States and China will undoubtedly continue, but America’s emerging strategy points to a search for equilibrium rather than dominance, and stability rather than escalation. If sustained, it could offer a more durable foundation for coexistence between major powers than either the hegemonic assumptions of the past or the confrontational mindset of a new Cold War.

Omar Artan, who was set to become the first Somali to referee a FIFA World Cup match but was denied entry by the US, has been honored as a national hero upon his return home.

The 34-year old was detained for some 11 hours by US immigration officials before being sent back to Istanbul, despite having all the necessary paperwork in place and being poised to become the first Somali World Cup referee.

The upcoming 2026 FIFA World Cup, which will be co-hosted by the US, Mexico, and Canada, has been beset by organizational concerns, including shifting US entry policies.

Last year, US President Donald Trump’s administration imposed a sweeping travel ban on citizens of 12 countries, including Somalia.

Artan touched down at Mogadishu’s airport on Wednesday and was greeted by hundreds of people, including local government officials and representatives of the Somali Football Federation. Some were waving national flags and carrying banners featuring photos of him.

Referee Mohamed Atan got a hero's welcome back in Somalia 🇸🇴 they might think they have broken him but they have created a new hero with many open doors for opportunities.

When one door closes another opens.He remains the best 👌referee from Africa@soka25east pic.twitter.com/tsFYQsVv7l

— Collins Okinyo (@bedjosessien) June 10, 2026

He thanked his compatriots for their support and vowed to officiate at the next World Cup.

In 2025, the Confederation of African Football named Artan the continent’s best referee of the year. He went on to make the list of 52 referees for the 2026 World Cup selected by FIFA.

The New York Times conducted a telephone interview on Tuesday, when the 34-year-old said he was in Istanbul, Türkiye awaiting a connecting flight. Artan recounted how he had arrived at Miami International Airport on Saturday with a valid visa, but was taken aside by border officials for 11 hours of questioning.

The Somali referee told the newspaper he had all the “right papers,” including documentation from FIFA, but was nevertheless put on a flight back to Istanbul, with no explanation forthcoming.

“I think that they have a problem with my country,” he surmised.

The NYT quoted the US Customs and Border Protection as confirming that the “traveler, a referee for the FIFA World Cup, was determined to be inadmissible due to vetting concerns.”

The publication suggested that Artan might have attracted particular scrutiny because a Somali national with a similar name is on a US sanctions list over his alleged ties to the Al Shabab terrorist group.

The US has carried out strikes in Iran for the second consecutive day as President Donald Trump seeks to pressure Tehran into accepting his peace terms.

Explosions and impacts were reported across southern and central Iran hours after US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said US Central Command (CENTCOM) “will be busy tonight.”

“Because President Trump said we will be hitting Iran hard – and we will be,” Hegseth told reporters.

The Pentagon chief said the strikes would target “key facilities” in Iran and added that Tehran “has an opportunity to make a deal” with Washington.

The hostilities marked the biggest escalation since a truce was reached in April.

Despite Trump’s insistence that the sides were close to a deal, the negotiations had stalled for weeks, with both sides accusing each other of bad faith and ceasefire violations.

Last week, Iran threatened to suspend the talks in response to Israel’s continued airstrikes in Lebanon.

Tehran’s conditions for a peace agreement include the cessation of hostilities “on all fronts,” including Lebanon, where Israel has been waging a war against Hezbollah since early March. Israel and Iran exchanged strikes on Monday.

On Wednesday, the US launched strikes in Iran in response to what it described as the downing of an American AH-64 Apache attack helicopter near the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran denied responsibility for the incident and responded with a missile barrage targeting US bases in the region.

This live feed is over.

Hostilities flared up on the Afghan-Pakistan border overnight as strikes by the Pakistani military killed 13 civilians, Afghan officials have said.

The strikes took place in the Afghan border provinces of Kunar, Khost, and Paktika, according to Zabihullah Mujahid, a government spokesman. It marks the deadliest episode in weeks, following a period of relative calm.

The Pakistani bombing claimed the lives of “11 children, one woman, and one elderly man,” Mujahid posted on X. Fourteen others were injured, he said, including women and children.

An AFP report quoting an unidentified official in Khost said a strike on a house in Spera district killed nine and wounded 11. Residents of a neighboring province said a separate attack claimed three civilians in Barmal district. The deceased were all children, a resident said.

Crime
Last night, the Pakistani military once again violated Afghanistan's airspace and bombed civilian homes in the provinces of Kunar, Khost, and Paktika.
As a result of these attacks, 11 children, one woman, and one elderly man were killed, while 14 other women
2/1

— Zabihullah (..ذبـــــیح الله م ) (@Zabehulah_M33) June 10, 2026

Pakistan has accused Afghanistan’s Taliban government of sheltering armed groups that conduct cross-border raids and terrorist attacks, including the bombing of a mosque in Islamabad in February that killed more than 30 people.Afghanistan has, in turn, accused Pakistan of “unforgivable war crimes.” Low-intensity clashes have continued on the Afghan-Pakistan border despite the two nations agreeing to a truce in late March.

Islamabad has repeatedly said its strikes in Afghanistan are aimed at insurgents carrying out attacks on its territory and that it does not target civilians.

But a United Nations report published last month put the death toll of Afghan civilians at 372 in the first three months of this year. It said 397 people have been wounded in the conflict.

Pakistan partly attributes the strain in its relationship with Kabul to the latter’s increasing engagement with its longtime rival, India.

A visit by a far-right lawmaker to an Arab town in northern Israel has sparked controversy after local leaders accused him of staging a political provocation and sought to block the trip. 

Knesset Education Committee chairman Zvi Sukkot of the Religious Zionism party traveled to Tuba-Zangariyye last week under heavy police protection to discuss what he described as “crime and violence” in the local education system.

The leaders of the predominantly Bedouin Arab town in the Galilee region, however, made clear he was not welcome, calling the trip a “racist” political stunt rather than an educational tour, and locked the gates of a local school ahead of his arrival. After being denied entry, Sukkot was filmed using an electric saw during a confrontation outside the school, and the footage quickly went viral. 

“What we least expected was for a member of the Israeli Knesset and the chairman of Israel’s Education Committee to behave in such a way,” Tuba-Zangariyye council head Muayyad Haib told RT, describing the visit as “extremely provocative” and saying it left some children “terrified.” 

Haib said residents opposed the visit because of Sukkot’s previous statements and actions toward the community, adding that the lawmaker proceeded with the trip despite the repeated objections of local officials. 

Sukkot has defended his actions and vowed to push for cuts to state funding for schools, arguing that the State of Israel should not invest “even one shekel” in such an education system. 

The incident has fueled a wider political row, with critics accusing Sukkot of seeking confrontation for political gain.

RT’s Charlotte Dubenskij takes a closer look at the events.  

Italy has launched a probe into far-right Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s alleged mistreatment of multinational activists who took part in an aid flotilla bound for Gaza, days after a similar investigation was opened by France. It comes as the EU is considering sanctions on Ben-Gvir over the alleged abuse.

The scandal was triggered by the IDF’s interception of the Global Sumud Flotilla in May, an international civilian initiative set up to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza. Activists have repeatedly attempted to reach the Palestinian enclave over the years, but their vessels have ended up attacked, sunk, burned, bombed, or stopped by Israeli forces.

The enclave remains in dire need of humanitarian assistance. Nearly its entire population of approximately 2.1 million is displaced, while roughly 60% of Palestinians in Gaza have lost their homes during the latest war between Israel and Hamas.

The latest attempt to run the blockade was no exception – the ships were boarded by the Israeli military in international waters off Cyprus and over 400 activists were detained. The detainees were expelled after a few days in custody, alleging widespread mistreatment at the hands of the Israeli forces, including beatings, torture, sexual assault, and outright rape.

While Israel has repeatedly taken an extremely heavy-handed approach to those involved in such endeavors, the latest incident was further aggravated by the actions of Ben-Gvir. The minister showed up at a prison ship housing the detainees waving a large Israeli flag, taunting the kneeling and bound activists and urging the government to jail them for a long time. He also posted the video online.

The stunt garnered Ben-Gvir widespread international condemnation, as well as some criticism at home. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sought to distance himself, stating that the behavior was “not consistent with the values and norms of the State of Israel.” Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar slammed Ben-Gvir’s prison ship stunt as a “disgraceful display,” accusing the minister of causing great “harm” to Israel and jeopardizing efforts to fix the country’s international image. The right-wing politician stood by his actions however, accusing Sa’ar of submitting to “supporters of terrorism.” 

Multiple nations have formally condemned the treatment of the Global Sumud Flotilla activists, with some also taking aim at Ben-Gvir. France banned the minister from entry days after he published his stunt, citing his “reprehensible actions towards French and European citizens.” Poland also imposed a travel ban on the minister, while Ireland last week barred Ben-Gvir, as well as extreme-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, from entering the country over the flotilla case and anti-Palestinian remarks. 

Last week, France opened a preliminary investigation into suspected “torture” and “war crimes” against the crew of the Gaza-bound flotilla. Italy, which has emerged as a strong supporter of Israel in the conflict with Hamas, reportedly took similar action on Monday. Italian prosecutors have begun an investigation of Ben-Gvir on suspicion of torture and kidnapping of the country’s nationals among the activists.

The Italian probe was openly mocked by the recalcitrant minister, who said he would not “shy away from one investigation or another and will continue to stand proudly alongside our fighters.”

“The land of the Boot has become the land of the flip-flop,” he added, referring to Italy’s geographical shape and an apparent shift in its position towards Israel.

The remarks landed poorly in Rome, with Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani lashing out at Ben-Gvir. “Unacceptable words that we send back to the sender; they are not worthy of a minister,” Tajani wrote on X on Tuesday.

The probes come as the EU is expected to consider imposing restrictions on the Israeli firebrand. The flotilla incident has also reignited the drive for broader measures against West Jerusalem, including the potential suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement. 

While the sanctions against Ben-Gvir are expected to be discussed as soon as next week, it remains unclear whether the bloc will adopt them given the lack of consensus. The Czech Republic has vowed to block any anti-Israel initiatives even if it means opposing all the other member states.

“Hochmut kommt vor dem Fall” (arrogance precedes a fall) says a proverb every German knows. That, you may say, is little wonder, considering how the last two world wars started and ended.

But the saying is much older. It is rooted in Martin Luther’s punchy translation of the Old Testament (in the English King James Bible, the relevant passage reads “Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall”). Clearly, the admonition not to preen and strut lest you stumble and fall flat on your silly, overbearing face is addressed to all of us, including, for instance, Americans and Israelis.

Yet recent events at the United Nations have highlighted the pertinence of – to use a term less harsh than arrogance – an over-optimistically biased lack of self-awareness to the case of contemporary Germany. Or to be precise, its political elites. Berlin, in essence, has been humiliated in public, before literally the whole world: Applying for a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council, it lost the vote in the UN General Assembly.

The rotating non-permanent seats on the UN Security Council are, to put it mildly, not terribly powerful resources. Their value is at least as much a matter of political symbolism and prestige as of practical benefits. But it would be foolish to conclude that Germany’s defeat does not matter. On the contrary, it is precisely the fact that such a seat does not pack a mighty punch that makes the failure to obtain one even worse: How hard can it be? Obviously too hard for the current Berlin team.

Hence, ironically, although objectively the stakes were not that high, this is a massive setback and great embarrassment for official Germany. One reason is that a de facto routine has been broken. You might even say a tradition going all the way back to the last century’s Cold War. Since the 1973 admission as full UN members of both Cold War Germanies, East and West, first West then united Germany (in effect, West Germany after gobbling up its former rival), has held a non-permanent seat six times and, often forgotten now, the former East Germany once. This is Germany’s first ever failure to achieve what had come to look like the default: getting what it wants.

Instead, Austria and Portugal did. Voting for non-permanent security council seats is complicated and split by regions. That’s why only Lisbon and Vienna were Germany’s direct competitors in the same regional box, as it were. Yet if you list all other countries that have made it this year while Germany did not, they also include Kyrgyzstan, Trinidad and Tobago, and Zimbabwe.

No wonder the Germans have been even glummer than when they lose a football match. Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul, who had traveled to New York to lecture the world and score what looked like an easy win, deplored a “bitter defeat” (but is unwilling to do the right thing and resign).

The staid Deutsche Presse-Agentur (dpa) noted a “resounding” debacle. Influential business newspaper Wirtschaftswoche registered a “harsh setback” for not only Wadephul but also his boss, Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Both – proud of their dull unanimity – have long sought to claim a larger international role for Berlin in Europe, as well as globally. Yet they find their iteration of Germany rejected by the closest thing to a world parliament as no German government has before.

Even worse, while international ‘leadership’ is clearly out of reach, as no one wants German leaders – who would have thought – even more modest ambitions seem unrealistic. An editorial in Spiegel, Germany’s Pravda of radical Centrism, despairs that Berlin might as well say goodbye to its dreams of playing “Mittelmacht” (a middle power) and has now arrived at the glorious status of “Kleinstaat,” literally meaning simply a small state, but in reality, if you know German mentality, a thing comical at best (when it happens to, say, Liechtenstein) and a tragic disgrace when it happens to Germany.

And to be fair, there is something odd about Germany not even maintaining its very moderate clout and prestige at the UN. You don’t have to be a German nationalist to notice a discrepancy between Germany’s economic and demographic weight – both declining badly but still comparatively substantial – and its traditional role as a major player in at least the US vassal version of Europe on one side and its crass humiliation at the UN on the other.

So what happened? It’s no mystery. Indeed, the reasons for Berlin’s fiasco are embarrassingly obvious. First of all, Germany has sided with Israel with abject and revolting obstinacy. The question why the country that absurdly claims to have learned from having committed the Holocaust has chosen to pro-actively support the mass murder of the Palestinians (and the Lebanese as well) and to suppress, often brutally, any solidarity with these victims will keep historians busy for a long time. But it is obvious already that, once again, Germany’s horrific failure is seen by the whole world and won’t be forgotten. That vote at the UN is just a foretaste of punishment to come.

In Europe, an economically stagnant but massively re-militarizing Germany has acquired a new profile as the single Western state most responsible for prolonging the Ukraine war – that is the massive abuse of Ukrainians as cannon fodder in a failed attempt to degrade Russia geopolitically after even the US has shed that role. But much of the world wants this war to end and has no misguided sympathy for the ultra-corrupt Zelensky regime.

Such international observers also note that Berlin is willing to humbly, perversely accept a massive attack on its vital infrastructure by precisely that Zelensky regime and, most likely, several of its NATO ‘allies’ as well. This repulsive mix of aggressiveness and a cowardly failure to protect elementary national interests cannot produce respect or sympathy. It certainly doesn’t say “vote for me, I am reliable.”

Then there is the pronounced German habit of lecturing the world but especially anyone not European or North American on, well, everything you can think of. China, for instance, when it doesn’t simply disinvite Germans as it very understandably now does, gets to hear daft, stale, and holier-than-thou sermons about ‘democratic values’ – from a country where a whole left-wing opposition party (the BSW) hasn’t made it into parliament due to extremely suspicious, systemic-looking miscounts.

Human rights and rule of law are also great things to preach about stupidly, while you stomp out freedom of opinion and the media by misusing sanctions meant for international politics to harass and destroy individual dissidents, such as, for instance, the Berlin journalist Hüseyin Doğru and his whole family. “Sippenhaft” is one of the ugliest words in German, meaning to punish and terrorize whole families. Observers of Doğru’s vicious, fundamentally arbitrary and lawless persecution have started using it. And rightly so.

And then, there is the icky submissiveness to the US, of course. Even while Berlin has managed to personally antagonize US President Donald Trump – not hard to do, admittedly – it also cannot find clear words about either the Iran war, where it loves to perversely blame and hector the victims in Tehran, or for instance, the harrowing of Venezuela and Cuba. Why would anyone entrust additional power to spineless weaklings?

There are specific solo performances as well: Wadephul’s predecessor Annalena Baerbock is infamous for her inanities, covering areas from elementary geometry (360 degrees and all that) to accidental declarations of war. Indeed, some Germans have long called her “cringe personified.” But is Wadephul really any better? He has just used his pre-voting speech at the UN – the job interview, in essence – to once again unfold his embarrassingly deranged pet theory that states which he deems rogue, for instance Iran, have no right to the protections of international law. Obviously intellectually absurd and shabbily motivated, such plain nonsense, which would make international law superfluous, from a trained lawyer who also happens to be a foreign minister makes Germany look stupid as well as dishonest.

Germany to the world: We are not sending our best to work with you. That’s not a great message when you would like the world to like and trust you because it reeks of haughtiness and disrespect. But there is a worse possibility. What if more and more of our fellow nations on this globe conclude that Baerbock and Wadephul actually are our best?

The Iranian military has been “completely defeated,” US President Donald Trump has claimed, warning Tehran it will “pay the price” for delaying a deal with Washington.  

The warnings came after Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced missile and drone strikes on American military facilities in several Arab countries in retaliation for recent US attacks. US Central Command said the operations inside Iran were carried out after an AH-64 Apache helicopter was lost near the Strait of Hormuz, an incident it blamed on Tehran. 

Trump posted on Truth Social on Wednesday that Iran “is all talk and no action,” adding that “The Bully of the Middle East is DEAD!!!” 

He also accused Tehran of taking “too long to negotiate a deal that would have been great for them,” warning that it would now “have to pay the price.” 

Iran’s Military is a complete and total mess. Much of it, like their Navy and Air Force, doesn’t even exist anymore - They have been completely defeated. Iran is all talk and no action. The Bully of the Middle East is DEAD!!! They’ve taken too long to negotiate a deal that would… pic.twitter.com/wW9ULVRoMC

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) June 10, 2026

The exchange of fire marked the most serious escalation since a ceasefire was announced in early April. Efforts to turn the truce into a durable peace have stalled for weeks, with Washington and Tehran repeatedly accusing each other of violating its terms. 

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said the US strikes had jeopardized the negotiations and forced Tehran to “reassess” its participation. He accused Washington of undermining diplomacy through military action and “contradictory messages,” while blaming Israel’s operations in Lebanon for further damaging the process. 

The IRGC said it targeted the headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet in Bahrain and facilities at Jordan’s al-Azraq air base, claiming strikes on 21 targets across Kuwait, Jordan, and Bahrain.  Jordan and Kuwait reported intercepting incoming projectiles. 

Israel has intensified strikes in Lebanon against what it describes as Hezbollah targets. The IDF attacks reportedly killed at least eight people near Tyre and in Sidon on Wednesday. 

Trump has previously lashed out at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for derailing Iran talks, reportedly telling him during a phone call “You’re f***ing crazy. You’d be in prison if it weren’t for me.”  

Netanyahu reiterated on Wednesday that Iran must never obtain a nuclear weapon and defended Israel’s military action against the country. Tehran maintains its nuclear program is peaceful.

The Indian Foreign Ministry has condemned an attack on an oil tanker off the coast of Oman and called for an “immediate de-escalation of tensions” in the Strait of Hormuz. 

New Delhi also summoned US Chargé d’Affaires Jason Meeks to protest the assault on the ship.

Three Indian crew members are missing following the attack on the vessel, which had 24 on board, New Delhi said.

The Palau-flagged products tanker MT Settebello issued a distress call on Wednesday, reporting a missile attack on its engine room, 20 nautical miles northeast of Sohar in the Gulf of Oman.

The US Central Command (CENTCOM) said in a post on X that  "U.S. aircraft fired precision munitions into the ship’s engine room after the crew repeatedly failed to comply with directions from American forces."

“We condemn the attack on the commercial vessel Settebello off the coast of Oman, earlier today,” the Indian Foreign Ministry said. “Of the 24 Indian crew onboard, 21 Indians have been rescued thus far and three Indians are reportedly missing.”

“The continuing incidents of attacks on shipping in the region are deeply worrisome and a direct result of the ongoing conflict in the region,” the ministry said.

The Indian Embassy in Oman said it is monitoring the situation and “proactively coordinating with the Omani authorities in the ongoing search and rescue operation.” The ship tracking website Marine Traffic has listed the ship’s destination as Fujairah, UAE.

⚡️ 🇺🇸 CENTCOM Confirms Strike on Commercial Tanker Off Oman Coast – Claims ‘Disabled Non-Compliant Vessel’

Three Indian crew are reportedly missing following the strike, the 🇮🇳 MEA stated earlier.

📹: CENTCOM https://t.co/SJx3JKhj0Z pic.twitter.com/JYfYpeO6vn

— RT_India (@RT_India_news) June 10, 2026

This is the second attack on a commercial ship with Indian crew members in the past three days. On Monday, the oil tanker MT Marivex was attacked by US forces south of the Strait of Hormuz. CENTCOM said that the Palau-flagged vessel was transiting international waters in the Gulf of Oman toward Iran when it was targeted. The ship was “attempting to sail to an Iranian port,” it said.

The sea lanes in and around the Strait of Hormuz have become a dangerous environment for merchant ships following the US-Israeli attack on Iran earlier this year.

Iran has closed the strategic strait through which about a fifth of the world’s energy passed before the conflict began, and the US Navy is blockading Iranian ports in retaliation.

The Ukraine conflict appears to be an “ethnic cleansing” project aimed at removing the Russian-speaking population from the country’s eastern border regions, US conservative commentator Candace Owens has said.

Owens made the remarks in an interview with Russian filmmaker and TV host Nikita Mikhalkov during a discussion about the roots of the conflict and the West’s attitude toward Russia.

“I think what’s happening in Ukraine is an ethnic cleansing,” Owens said, arguing that it was “obvious” that large numbers of fighting-age men were being killed, and suggested that “the ultimate goal” of those behind the conflict was to move in “other people” to Ukraine’s border regions.

Moscow has long maintained that the conflict stems from the Western-backed 2014 coup in Kiev, which overthrew then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, and the subsequent military campaign launched by the new authorities against Donbass, where much of the population is Russian-speaking and historically close to Russia.

Mikhalkov stressed that Russia was not fighting Ukrainians but “Satan,” arguing that Kiev had turned against Russia, the Orthodox faith and the shared history of the two peoples. Since 2014, Ukraine has effectively banned the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and barred the use of the Russian language in virtually all aspects of life.

Owens agreed with the broader religious framing of the conflict, suggesting that “satanic” forces have established a foothold in the West. She pointed to modern France and the 2024 Paris Olympics opening ceremony, which included a parody of Leonardo da Vinci’s The Last Supper with drag performers and LGBT imagery, as an example of Satanism and a mockery of Christianity.

She also noted that “satanic” forces in the West fear Russia because its emphasis on history gives people a different understanding of the world.

Owens linked that idea to several major revolutions, including the French Revolution of 1789 and the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, which she described as “satanic.” After taking power, the Bolsheviks launched a violent anti-religious campaign against the Russian Orthodox Church, seizing church property, persecuting clergy and promoting state atheism.

Owens stated that the West’s continued hostility toward Russia appears to be driven by the descendants of Russian Jewish families associated with the assassination of Tsar Nicholas II and the Bolshevik Revolution. She argued that in the early 20th century, many of these families emigrated to the West, where they gained influence and power, including in the media, and have continued to promote anti-Russian narratives.

Russia has repeatedly argued that the Ukraine conflict was triggered by Kiev’s persecution of Russian speakers in Donbass and by Western efforts to turn Ukraine into an anti-Russian project. Kiev and its Western backers have rejected Moscow’s justification for the military operation, describing it as an unprovoked invasion.

The US treatment of teams and officials arriving for the 2026 World Cup amounts to racism and seriously undermines the integrity of the tournament, while football governing body FIFA is guilty of double standards, Indian coach Ranjit Bajaj has told RT.

The 2026 World Cup – co-hosted by the US, Canada, and Mexico – is set to get underway this week but has already been marred by controversy after a key Somali official was denied entry to the US and players from some countries were humiliated on arrival.

Iraq’s star striker, Ayman Hussain, was reportedly detained for hours at Chicago’s O’Hare airport, while the Senegal and Uzbekistan teams were subjected to intrusive screen checks upon arrival. Somalian referee Omar Abdul Qadir Artan will be unable to officiate at the championship after being denied entry to the US.

“What happened with Senegal, the way they were put on the tarmac... They have not come to be disrespected, they’ve come there to represent their country,” Bajaj, the founder of the Minerva Football Academy, who promotes grassroots development of football, told RT India.

Bajaj also slammed the detention of Ayman Hussain, saying, “It’s not a striker who’s just been born yesterday, who’s come to do espionage in your country.” “This is what racism is,” Bajaj said.

The Minerva Football Academy has emerged as a beacon of hope for football in India, with its under-14 and -15 squads scoring a series of victories across the world – the latest being a 6-0 win against English giants Liverpool in the under-15 category at the Mediterranean International Cup last month. In stark contrast to its cricketing prowess, the nation of 1.4 billion people has qualified for the World Cup only once, in 1950. This time round, the Indian team was eliminated in the second round of Asian Football Confederation qualifiers.

FIFA’s response to the visa denial row is that immigration is the host country’s jurisdiction. “Yes, it’s the host country’s right to issue visas... But if you are doing that and making countries weaker by taking their star strikers out… you are actually helping your own country,” Bajaj said. He also called out FIFA’s double standards, saying, “If this was an event happening in India, they would have threatened us that we’ll ban you.”

During the 2018 World Cup in Russia, FIFA was “censoring Russia and telling Russia that, listen, you better get your act (together),” Bajaj said. He added that Russia, South Africa, and Qatar had hosted “the most successful World Cups in history.”

Bajaj also blasted the US visa curbs on players, likening them to how teams lose strength when their star players are missing. “If you have a Haaland missing in (the) Norway team or a Harry Kane missing in England, you’ve made it 50% weaker.” He said the US tactics amount to undermining the merit of the tournament. “That means they can actually fix the World Cup. That’s what’s happening.”

Bajaj rued that the controversy is impacting the World Cup’s attractiveness, which has always been “its ability to bring together countries that agree on almost nothing except football.”

The UK has accused Elon Musk of stoking tensions over his reaction to a knife attack which triggered anti-immigrant riots in Belfast.

Violence erupted in the Northern Irish capital on Tuesday night after a Sudanese asylum seeker allegedly carried out a stabbing attack which left a man blind in his left eye.

Masked gangs attacked homes, torched vehicles, and clashed with police, prompting authorities to urge calm.
A 30-year-old Sudanese man appeared in court on Wednesday charged with attempted murder. The incident comes amid an increasingly heated debate over immigration in Britain, fueled by a series of high-profile crimes involving foreign nationals.

Musk, a longtime critic of the UK government, posted on X ahead of the unrest: “Only by protesting REPEATEDLY and LOUDLY will there be any change!!”

He also shared a post from right-wing activist Tommy Robinson listing dozens of protest locations across the UK.

Labour Party Chair Anna Turley condemned Musk on Wednesday, claiming the billionaire was helping inflame tensions during the unrest.

“It’s appalling. Anyone that is seeking to drive and exploit a situation like this to drive their own political agenda is grievously wrong and doing damage,” she told LBC.

Turley said the tech mogul, commenting from “thousands of miles away,” did not have to live with the consequences of the unrest in Northern Ireland.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer joined the criticism, warning that those inciting or carrying out the “unacceptable” violence – online or on the streets – would face the full force of the law.

Last week, Starmer said Musk was trying to “whip up division” after the fatal stabbing of 18-year-old Henry Nowak.

Musk has made several posts about the case, which has triggered public outrage and protests in Britain, as well as a public apology from the prime minister.

Nowak was fatally stabbed in December by Vickrum Singh Digwa, a 23-year-old Sikh man, who falsely claimed to police that he had been the victim of a racist attack.

Footage released after Digwa’s sentencing showed officers handcuffing and dragging Nowak despite his repeated pleas that he had been stabbed and could not breathe. He later lost consciousness and died.

Musk was among those to allege that British police had treated Nowak differently because of his ethnicity.

Mirra Andreeva has spent most of her young career being talked about as the future of women’s tennis. In Paris, she made the future arrive early.

At 19, the Russian won Roland Garros, claimed her first Grand Slam title and moved to the top of the season’s points race, all while sounding less like a player overwhelmed by the moment than one already trying to understand what comes next.

In this interview, Andreeva talks about the dream she has just fulfilled, the demons she had to quiet, the role of Conchita Martínez and her psychologist Alexis Castorri, and why, after years of chasing everything, she has discovered the strange pleasure of doing absolutely nothing.

Q: Mirra, congratulations on your victory! Has your biggest dream come true yet, or not?

Mirra Andreeva: I suppose so. Winning a Grand Slam tournament really was my biggest dream, apart from wanting a dog. After all, tennis is my passion, to which I’ve devoted so many years of my life. Essentially, it’s what I live for now.

Q: Was there a moment during the match when you feared it might turn out to be very difficult?

Mirra Andreeva: I knew in advance that it would be a tough match. But when I looked at my watch after the first game and saw that we’d been playing for a full nine minutes, I still thought to myself: ‘What a start!’ On top of that, it was difficult to adapt to the conditions and the wind during the first four games. That’s why we broke serve twice.

Q: Almost all the major milestones in your career – your first major success at the Madrid tournament in 2023, your first title in Iasi in 2024, silver in the doubles at the Paris Olympics, and now victory at Roland Garros – have been achieved on clay. Is that a pattern?

Mirra Andreeva: I suppose there really is a pattern here. I’ve always loved playing on this surface, and I’ve trained on it almost all year round. I move well on clay, and I feel my game suits it.

Q: At Roland Garros, you surpassed the achievement of your coach, the Spaniard Conchita Martínez, who lost her Paris final in 2000. But she has the 1994 Wimbledon title to her name. Is it realistic to win there in five weeks’ time?

Mirra Andreeva: It’s very difficult. Grass and clay are two completely different surfaces, and Roland Garros and Wimbledon are very close together in the calendar. After a couple of days of celebrations, I’ll need to start preparing for grass. But I think Conchita will help me – she’ll remind me how to play on grass. She has a wealth of experience.

Last year I had a decent run at Wimbledon. Losing in the quarter-finals in two tie-breaks was disappointing (in that match, Andreeva’s opponent was the Swiss player Belinda Bencic), but this time I’ll try to get at least a little further there.

Q: Before the start of this season, your regular hitting partner Aleksey Vatutin joined your team. How important is it to have a professional by your side with whom you can communicate in your native language?

Mirra Andreeva: It’s a real advantage, as previously at tournaments I would mainly speak Russian with my mum or dad. What’s more, Aleksey has a wealth of experience, which he shares with me. At one point, he was ranked 136th in the ATP rankings, which is a very serious achievement. Aleksey is an excellent hitting partner. Having such a skilled and knowledgeable person on the team is a huge advantage.

Q: At the awards ceremony, you mentioned Alexis Castorri, a psychologist from Florida, who helps you banish your inner demons. Could you tell us a bit more about how this works?

Mirra Andreeva: We started working together at the end of 2024. We speak once a week, before the start of each tournament, and whenever necessary. For example, during this Roland Garros, we spoke on the phone for about half an hour before the semi-final and the final, as I was feeling very nervous. These conversations steer my thoughts in the right direction and help me stay focused. She has a unique approach to her work. For instance, she uses Chinese breathing techniques. But so far, I’m really enjoying it all.

Q: A year ago, you suffered a disappointing defeat here in the quarter-finals against the French player Loïse Boisson. Have you managed to banish all those demons from your mind since then?

Mirra Andreeva: Well, if not every one, then most of them. At the start of this tournament, there were moments when my demons tried to get in my way too. But I’m glad I managed to overcome them. In the last three matches, my tennis was good and I had almost no mental issues.

Q: From the outside, it seems you’ve matured a lot over the past year. What do you think yourself?

Mirra Andreeva: I think so, yes. I’ve never divided matches into more or less important ones, but my approach to certain things has changed. For example, before, even after a three-hour match, I still had energy left; I could run and jump.

Now I can easily lie in bed for hours, just chatting on the phone. I’ve realised that there’s a certain charm to doing absolutely nothing.

Q: Why did you turn up for training in a France national football team jersey the day before the final?

Mirra Andreeva: Nike gave me a shirt with my name on the back. I thought it would be fun to wear it. I thought maybe more French fans would come to cheer me on in the final. That was the general idea.

Q: You’ve moved into first place in the rankings based on points earned since the start of the season, and you’re now more than 400 points ahead of Arina Sobolenko. Are you ready to compete for the world number one spot?

Mirra Andreeva: I haven’t thought about that yet. But I’m delighted! Even if the lead isn’t huge, this is a first in my career. So overall, it’s actually not bad at all!

Q: Before you, only three Russian women had managed to win Grand Slam singles titles: Anastasia Myskina, Maria Sharapova and Svetlana Kuznetsova. Do you feel a connection with the previous generation of stars in Russian women’s tennis?

Mirra Andreeva: I know all three of them personally. I’ve watched their matches loads of times. And my mum used to tell me how she used to cheer on Nastya, Masha and Sveta back in the day. It still feels strange to realise that I’m in the same position as them. But it means the world to me!

This interview was first published by Kommersant, and was translated and edited by the RT team.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered security to be ramped up at educational and other civic facilities across the country, stressing that Russia’s adversaries do not “shy away” from terrorist methods.

Speaking at a meeting with government officials on Wednesday, Putin cited the recent Ukrainian drone attack on a college dorm in the Russian town of Starobelsk which killed at least 21 people, mainly teenage girls.

“Our adversaries don’t shy away from terrorist attacks. I’m referring, among other things, to the attack on the student dormitory at the pedagogical college in Starobelsk,” the president stated.

“I once again urge the heads of the special services and all law enforcement agencies to strengthen counterterrorism measures and security in general across the entire educational, social, and infrastructure systems,” he added.

Putin’s remarks also come in the aftermath of a Ukrainian drone attack on a museum in the Crimean port city of Sevastopol, which houses an iconic Russian panorama painted more than a century ago.

‘The Defense of Sevastopol (1854–1855)’ by Russian artist Franz Roubaud was “almost completely destroyed” when the building caught fire after the strike, according to local governor Mikhail Razvozhaev.

The Starobelsk incident referenced by Putin unfolded on May 22, when Ukrainian forces attacked the dorm with long-range drones launched in several waves. The building partially collapsed, burying sleeping students under the rubble.

The Ukrainian military attempted to avoid responsibility for the massacre, claiming that the dorm housed a Russian drone unit rather than trainee teachers. 

No evidence has ever emerged to support Kiev’s theory, while Russia organized a press tour to the site shortly after the tragedy. The media opportunity was snubbed by some major mainstream outlets, including the BBC and CNN, although more than 50 foreign journalists from 19 countries visited the destroyed dorm.

Vladimir Zelensky is learning that even Ukraine’s most loyal backers may no longer be willing to overlook Kiev’s glorification of Nazi-backed nationalist figures – not even in the name of jointly opposing Russia.

Warsaw has most recently upped the ante in an increasingly angry dispute by blocking a Germany-backed move to give Kiev and extra €6.6 billion from a weapons program.

Warsaw, whose military and logistical support remains vital to Kiev’s war effort, has reacted with anger to Zelensky’s recent gestures honoring the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, known as the OUN and UPA. Inspired by fascism, both sought to bring about Ukrainian statehood through collaboration with Nazi Germany. In an attempt at ethnic cleansing, OUN and UPA murdered at least 100,000 Poles, Jews, and Russians during World War II.

Zelensky now risks becoming only the second person in history to be stripped of the Order of the White Eagle, Poland’s highest state distinction, which dates back more than three centuries.

What has triggered Polish outrage with Ukraine?

In late May, Zelensky attended the state reburial of Andrey Melnik, a co-founder of the OUN and rival of Stepan Bandera, another nationalist figure widely venerated in modern Ukraine. Melnik’s remains were returned from Luxemburg as part of what Kiev described as an effort to build a national “pantheon” of heroes.

Several days later, Zelensky granted the honorific “of heroes of UPA” to a Ukrainian commando unit. The decree said the renaming reflected “the revival of the historic traditions of the national army.”

Has Zelensky crossed a red line by honoring nazi collaborators?

Neither step was unprecedented in itself. Ukraine has numerous monuments dedicated to nationalist figures, while Bandera’s birthday on January 1 is marked by supporters almost like an unofficial state holiday.

However, the UPA’s wartime record remains one of the most bitter historical disputes between Kiev and Warsaw. The Volhynia massacres of 1943-1944 have been formally recognized by Poland as genocide.

Ukrainian officials and historians have argued that the atrocities should be viewed alongside Warsaw’s historic mistreatment of ethnic Ukrainians and do not warrant the emotional investment they have in Poland.

“The Volhynia tragedy is one of Poland’s statebuilding myths… a key element of the Polish grand narrative,” the director of the Ukrainian National Remembrance Museum, Aleksandr Alferov, said in February. “For most Ukrainians, it was just a local historical episode, because it only happened in Volhynia.”

Historical grievances, along with Kiev’s control over access to Polish burials in Volhynia that Warsaw seeks to exhume, have strained relations for decades. Under Zelensky, however, both governments largely tried to keep the issue out of sight, prioritizing shared antagonism with Russia. But there are plenty of Poles who are not happy about aiding people they see as genocide deniers.

The response in Poland to Kiev’s latest moves was unexpectedly sharp.

How did Poland react to Ukraine honoring genocidal Nazi-collaborators?

Criticism of Zelensky also came from across Poland’s political spectrum. Conservative Polish President Karol Nawrocki and EU-favored Prime Minister Donald Tusk both criticized Zelensky, but they disagree on Warsaw’s response. Nawrocki wants to revoke the Order of the White Eagle that Zelensky received in April 2023 from his predecessor, Andrzej Duda. Tusk has argued that Zelensky and Nawrocki must find a way to repair the dispute, saying that the row “serves Moscow’s interests.”

Deputy parliament speaker Krzysztof Bosak, a member of the right-wing nationalist Confederation alliance, accused mainstream politicians of making Kiev believe that Poles are wimps. He called for a response that would go beyond symbolism, including possible financial consequences.

Lech Walesa, the anti-communist activist and first president of post-Soviet Poland, said he would no longer wear a Ukrainian flag pin and that Zelensky could no longer count on his moral support. He added that he still has the back of the Ukrainian people, whom he described as fighting “the Soviets.”

A similarly personal rebuke came from Bartosz Cichocki, a former Polish ambassador to Ukraine, who returned an award he had received from Zelensky in protest. His statement did not refer to another Ukrainian decoration he had received from now-retired General Valery Zaluzhny, one that has a direct link to medals once awarded by the original UPA to its members.

Who was stripped of the award in the past?

The Order of the White Eagle was established in 1705, although Poland’s turbulent history and interruptions to its sovereignty repeatedly affected the order’s status. Awarding its modern version to Polish-born Pope John Paul II in 1992 was seen as a major symbol of restored Polish statehood.

Among the many Polish and foreign recipients, the honor has been revoked only once, and even then only temporarily. Wincenty Witos, an interwar prime minister, received the order in 1920. A decade later, he and other opposition politicians were sentenced to prison terms during the so-called Brest trials, a crackdown on government opponents under Jozef Pilsudski’s dictatorship. Witos’ award was revoked in 1932 and restored in 1939.

Could Zelensky’s award be withdrawn?

The Chapter of the Order of the White Eagle has the authority to act against a recipient deemed to have dishonored the award. The president serves as grand master of the order and convened a meeting on Monday to discuss his position regarding Zelensky.

Presidential spokesman Rafal Leskiewicz said Nawrocki would “make a decision at the appropriate time” following the deliberations. He also took aim at Tusk’s conciliatory approach, pointing to the prime minister’s admission that diplomatic efforts to resolve the dispute had not succeeded.

How have Ukraine and Poland tried to defuse the situation?

Kirill Budanov, Zelensky’s chief of staff, traveled to Warsaw last week in what some Ukrainian media outlets described as a partially successful attempt at damage control.

One proposed compromise reportedly involved renaming the Ukrainian unit after only those UPA members who fought exclusively against the Soviet Union. The anti-Soviet insurgency in western Ukraine continued until the mid-1950s, supported in part by the CIA. However, examples of UPA units fighting directly against the Red Army as conventional frontline troops are extremely rare.

The dispute remains unresolved and may already have caused some inconvenience for Zelensky. Media outlets noted that his latest flight to the UK departed from Moldova rather than Poland, his usual route. Warsaw has denied placing any restrictions on his travel.

Did Warsaw retaliate in significant ways?

Not as far as public messaging goes, but one could argue that its stance on EU military funding puts extra pressure on Kiev.

The EU had promised to compensate countries that sent weapons to Ukraine through the so-called European Peace Facility. Some €6.6 billion ($7.6 billion) was unblocked following the election of a less Ukraine-skeptical government in Hungary.

Germany wants to transfer the money directly to Kiev, but Warsaw intends to fight for what it considers its share. “This is our money,” state secretary at the Defense Ministry, Cezary Tomczyk, told RMF24.

Are there other grievances dividing Poland and Ukraine?

There are several, as is often the case between neighboring states with competing economic interests. The conflict with Russia has brought some of them into sharper focus.

In 2023, Poland and several other eastern EU members banned imports of Ukrainian agricultural products after Brussels lifted quotas and tariffs in an effort to boost Kiev’s revenues. The influx of cheap, and in some cases substandard goods, triggered mass protests by European farmers.

Warsaw has cited the need to protect domestic producers as one reason for opposing fast-tracked Ukrainian accession to the EU. Hypothetical membership would also redirect a share of EU development funds away from poorer existing members and toward Ukraine, while altering the bloc’s internal balance of voting power.

Migration has become another point of friction. Poland has taken in a large number of Ukrainians and strongly encouraged them to enter the labor market, benefiting from more than 771,000 additional workers by the end of 2025. Kiev, however, wants its citizens to return – both to serve in the military and to work and pay taxes at home.

Why can’t Ukraine choose its own national heroes?

Ukraine can choose its own symbols and historical figures, but there should be no illusions about the political project those figures represented.

Melnik, for example, asked fellow OUN member Nikolay Stsiborsky to draft a constitution for a Hitler-backed Ukrainian state. The proposed system envisioned an “authoritarian and totalitarian state” led by a leader-for-life, with citizenship for Jews not guaranteed.

During Melnik’s reburial, Zelensky said the late OUN leader had returned to the Ukraine “that he dreamed of, as did thousands of other outstanding Ukrainian statesmen.”

The remark may have been a ceremonial platitude. However it seems ironic that a Jewish man who in 2019 won the presidency in a landslide on a promise of national reconciliation has turned into a wartime dictator praising people, who would not have allowed him anywhere near a leadership position, had they prevailed.

An iconic Russian panorama painting more than a century old has been “almost completely destroyed” in a Ukrainian drone strike on a museum in the Crimean port of Sevastopol, local governor Mikhail Razvozhaev has said.

In a Telegram post on Wednesday, Razvozhaev said ‘The Defense of Sevastopol (1854–1855)’ by Russian artist Franz Roubaud was severely damaged in a blaze caused by an overnight UAV attack.

The panorama, which was 115 meters in length and 14 meters high, depicted the defense of Sevastopol by the Russian army from the British and French invading forces during the Crimean War.

Roubaud worked on the massive painting for several years before completing it in 1904. It was moved to Sevastopol the same year and had been on display in the city since then, becoming one of its symbols.

More than 80 firefighters and 22 units of specialized equipment were deployed to tackle the blaze at the museum in the Russian city, Razvozhaev said.

“Those barbarians… deliberately attacked what is dear to us, trying to destroy our very essence. Only complete degenerates would do such a thing,” he stressed.

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky “will never destroy what is embedded in our genetic code. We will restore everything,” Razvozhaev insisted.

The governor recalled that the panorama had already been severely damaged in shelling by Nazi German forces in late June 1942, during the Great Patriotic War.

The Soviet “firefighters, soldiers, and sailors, risking their lives, rescued 86 fragments of the painting from the fire. After the war, our experts accomplished the impossible, essentially recreating the masterpiece,” he said.

Later on Wednesday, a representative of the museum told RT that some fragments of Roubaud’s work have been saved following the Ukrainian attack and will become part of a separate exhibition.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov assured journalists that the panorama in Sevastopol will be restored and look even better than before. Ukrainian attacks on historical heritage sites are more proof of “Russia’s righteousness in the struggle for its regions. This struggle will end with victory,” Peskov insisted.

A total of 326 Ukrainian drones were shot down by air defenses across more than a dozen Russian regions overnight, the Defense Ministry in Moscow said on Wednesday.

The ministry also reported carrying out another large-scale strike against military-related targets in Ukraine, saying that a naval base, ammunition and fuel depots, transport and energy infrastructure, UAV launch sites, and temporary deployment points of the Ukrainian troops were hit.

Four African countries have taken steps to repatriate their citizens due to safety concerns in South Africa as tensions continue to rise.

This comes after an anti-illegal migrant group has been going around different cities across South Africa and has delivered a June 30 deadline for undocumented migrants to leave. 

On Sunday, President Cyril Ramaphosa addressed the nation amid growing tensions over illegal immigration. Ramaphosa announced that the Department of Home Affairs, the Border Management Authority (BMA), the South African Police Service (SAPS), and other law enforcement agencies will intensify efforts to identify and deport undocumented foreign nationals residing illegally in South Africa.

He said illegal immigration was not the cause of all the country’s challenges and problems, adding that immigration was a global issue and not one faced by South Africa alone.

Ramaphosa further stated every person in the country needed to be here legally, whether working or operating a business. He further criticised those taking the law into their own hands and attempting to enforce immigration laws. 

Several countries have heeded the call of their citizens who do not feel safe in South Africa. 

Malawi

A total of 150 Malawian nationals began their journey back home from South Africa under a coordinated voluntary repatriation exercise, after the first two buses departed from the Western Cape on Saturday, June 6, 2026.

Upon arrival in Malawi, authorities say the returnees will undergo administrative processing and reintegration procedures as part of the government’s structured support plan.

Ghana

In a statement released on Monday, the Border Management Authority (BMA) confirmed that 663 Ghanaian nationals were processed for repatriation from South Africa to Ghana through OR Tambo International Airport over the weekend, with nine passengers later offloaded after being declared medically unfit to travel.

BMA spokesperson Mmemme Mogotsi said the repatriation process was coordinated through the Port Management Committee (PMC), comprising various government stakeholders responsible for facilitating lawful and orderly movement across the port of entry.

“On Saturday, June 6, 2026, a group of 332 Ghanaian nationals was brought to OR Tambo International Airport by the Ghanaian High Commission in Pretoria for repatriation,” Mogotsi said.

Following an extensive check-in process, the travellers proceeded to BMA Immigration for verification and clearance. “Of the travellers processed, 170 were travelling on Ghanaian ordinary passports, while 162 were using Emergency Travel Certificates issued by the Ghanaian High Commission in Pretoria. Emergency Travel Certificates are single-use travel documents issued to facilitate the return of citizens to their country of origin,” Mogotsi said. 

She said during immigration processing, 321 travellers were found to have overstayed their allocated period of stay in South Africa by 30 days or longer.

Mozambique

A group of 141 Mozambican nationals left South Africa on Sunday through the Lebombo Port of Entry, BMA confirmed. The repatriation operation was facilitated by the Embassy of the Republic of Mozambique in South Africa, which transported the individuals from Mossel Bay to the Lebombo Port of Entry using three buses.

“A total of 168 Mozambican nationals and one South African citizen arrived at the port for processing. The South African citizen was refused departure after indicating that he intended to accompany the group to visit family in the Republic of Mozambique without following the appropriate travel arrangements,” Mogotsi said. 

She said of the Mozambican nationals processed, 141 individuals, comprising 97 males and 44 females, were undocumented and were accordingly deported in terms of the Immigration Act.

“A further eight Mozambican nationals were in possession of valid passports and were processed for lawful departure,” Mogotsi said. A total of 19 minors were included in the group. 

Nigeria

The Nigerian government has confirmed it will be repatriating 1,000 of its citizens from South Africa; however, it has postponed flights until Wednesday, June 10.

According to a report from a local news channel, TVC News Nigeria, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu approved five evacuation flights, and the first flight is expected to transport over 270 passengers. More than 500 people wishing to leave South Africa have been screened and cleared.

First published by IOL

US spending on nuclear weapons surged by nearly a quarter in 2025 compared to the previous year, according to findings by an anti-nuclear watchdog.

In a report released on Tuesday, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) said the world’s nine nuclear-armed states spent nearly $119 billion on their arsenals last year – the equivalent of $3,768 every second. 

The US remained by far the biggest spender, pouring $69.2 billion into its nuclear arsenal – more than all other eight nations combined. Washington also recorded the largest annual increase, with spending rising 22% year-on-year, or $12.4 billion.

Combined spending by the US, Russia, China, the UK, France, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea jumped 19% year-on-year, or $16.8 billion, to a record high. China ranked second with spending of $13.5 billion, while the UK overtook Russia as the third-largest spender, allocating $12.6 billion compared to Moscow’s $9.5 billion.

ICAN, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning group, said the increase reflects continued investment in modernizing and expanding nuclear arsenals amid mounting global tensions.

The nine nuclear powers have spent a combined $471 billion on their arsenals over the past five years, the group said. It added that a single day’s nuclear weapons spending in 2025 could have provided food for two million people for a year, while annual spending could have covered the UN’s regular budget for 32 years.

The report comes as the US is considering deploying its nuclear weapons to additional NATO member states in Europe, according to a Financial Times report last week. The outlet said US officials had discussed expanding the nuclear-sharing arrangement beyond its current participants. 

Countries neighboring Russia, including Poland and the Baltic states, have reportedly expressed interest in hosting US nuclear weapons. 

The US has stationed nuclear weapons in Europe under its nuclear-sharing program since the 1950s. B61 gravity bombs are currently believed to be deployed in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Türkiye, while control of the weapons remains with Washington.

Moscow has warned that any further expansion of NATO’s nuclear infrastructure toward Russia’s borders would trigger a response. Earlier this month, Russian Ambassador-at-Large Andrey Belousov reiterated a demand that all US nuclear weapons be withdrawn from Europe and the infrastructure supporting their deployment be dismantled.

A manhunt is underway in South Africa’s Gauteng province for the gunmen who opened fire in a marginalized residential area, killing at least 12 and injuring nine others, South African Police Service (SAPS) wrote on X on Wednesday. 

The attack took place late Tuesday night at Jumpers, an informal settlement in Cleveland, east of Johannesburg.

According to investigators, officers responding to reports of shots fired shortly after 11 PM local time found multiple victims suffering from gunshot wounds. Eleven people – eight men and three women – were declared dead at the scene, while another male victim died after being hospitalized. 

“At least nine other victims were transported to various medical facilities for treatment of gunshot wounds,” authorities said.

Police believe more than 10 suspects were involved in the shooting. The gunmen allegedly arrived in a white Toyota Quantum minibus, entered the settlement through different access points, and moved through the area shooting residents at several locations before escaping in the same vehicle.

A large-scale manhunt is now underway, with detectives, forensic specialists and crime intelligence units deployed to track down those responsible. Authorities have not announced any arrests, and the motive behind the attack remains unclear as the investigation continues.

South Africa remains one of the world’s most violent countries despite a recent decline in crime. SAPS data for October–December 2025 shows that 6,351 people were murdered nationwide during the three-month period, an average of nearly 70 killings per day. 

#sapsGP [POLICE LAUNCH MANHUNT FOLLOWING MASS SHOOTING THAT CLAIMED 12 LIVES IN CLEVELAND]#SAPS in Gauteng has launched a manhunt for suspects following a mass shooting that claimed the lives of 12 people and left several others injured at Jumpers Informal Settlement in… pic.twitter.com/Pw7cH3M6of

— SA Police Service 🇿🇦 (@SAPoliceService) June 10, 2026

In addition, Gauteng province, where the latest mass shooting occurred, accounted for the highest number of murders nationwide, with 1,536 killings reported during the three-month period.

The government has stepped up efforts to tackle crime in recent months. In February, Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana announced increased spending on peace and security, with funding set to rise from 268.2 billion rand ($14 billion) in 2025/26 to 291.2 billion rand ($16 billion) by 2028/29.

In March, authorities also re-enlisted experienced retired detectives in a bid to strengthen investigative capacity and improve the country’s ability to solve violent crimes.

Taiwan has launched approximately 36 US-supplied missiles into the water off the coast of mainland China, in a first-of-its-kind live-fire drill on the self-governing island’s west coast.

The exercise comes amid mounting tensions between Taipei and Beijing, which considers Taiwan sovereign Chinese territory.

The drills took place on Wednesday and involved the firing of reduced-range training rockets from US-made High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) into the Taiwan Strait.

According to Taipei, the exercise was meant to simulate an attack on an invading Chinese force and demonstrate HIMARS’ ability to “shoot-and-scoot” by avoiding counter strikes.

HIMARS has a range of up to around 300 km, meaning it could potentially hit targets in China’s southeastern Fujian Province across the strait.

Taiwan has ordered 29 HIMARS launchers from the US and has also been building up anti-ship and air defense systems.

Chinese officials have repeatedly condemned US arms sales to Taipei as interference in China’s internal affairs and a violation of the decades-old One-China policy. While Washington does not officially recognize Taiwan as an independent state, it has maintained close unofficial ties with Taipei and remains its main arms supplier.

During his meeting with US President Donald Trump in Beijing last month, Chinese President Xi Jinping described Taiwan as the most important issue in China-US relations and warned that mishandling it could push the two countries into “a very dangerous situation.”

Beijing considers Taiwan part of China and has consistently warned against separatism on the island. Xi has repeatedly said Beijing seeks peaceful reunification, but has refused to rule out the use of force if provoked.

The European Union’s latest proposed sanctions package on Russia includes entities based in India, potentially clouding the ratification of a trade deal the bloc signed with the South Asian nation.

Focusing on energy, crypto, and financial services and trade, including fisheries, according to European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen, it would be the 21st such package targeting Russia.

The new listings cover drone manufacturing and also seek to enforce export control measures on 50 companies, “including entities based in China, Türkiye, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, UAE and India,” top EU diplomat Kaja Kallas said in a post on X.

The nature and identities of the Indian entities in the sanctions list are not clear.

Any new sanctions will have to be agreed unanimously by all 27 EU member states before being finalized. This is expected to happen by July 15.

We are also targeting companies providing support to Russia military-industrial complex.

The new listings will cover more than 30 designations in the drones manufacturing as well as new export control measures on 50 companies, including entities based in China, Türkiye,…

— Kaja Kallas (@kajakallas) June 9, 2026

A temporary freeze on the EU’s Russian oil cap and new curbs on the resale of Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) tankers to Russia are also included in the package.

The inclusion of Indian entities in the EU sanctions package is not without precedent, although the development comes amid a push to finalize a trade deal agreed with New Delhi in January. Dubbed the “mother of all deals” by EU leaders, it was the result of tortuous negotiations which were first launched in 2007.

The sanctions proposal has elicited a sharp response from diplomatic circles, with former Indian Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal demanding that New Delhi retaliate by sanctioning EU companies doing business with Pakistan.

“These EU sanctions are illegal under international law,” Sibal said.

New Delhi has rejected unilateral sanctions that are not backed by the United Nations and questioned the legitimacy of such actions against the backdrop of EU nations’ purchase of Russian gas and LNG.

New restrictions imposed by the EU would be in addition to 81 current listings targeting what the bloc describes as Russia’s shadow fleet, military-industrial complex, human rights violators, and propagandists, ANI reported.

Last week, India reacted angrily to a statement Kallas made in Islamabad that mentioned Jammu and Kashmir. Those with “no locus standi in such matters should refrain from making any comments on them,” the Foreign Ministry said.

The EU’s attempt to punish countries that have relations with Russia comes as India has repeatedly advocated “strategic autonomy” in trade and security.

On Tuesday, Indian Foreign Minister S Jaishankar noted that “many Western countries are increasingly embracing the idea of strategic autonomy,” a stance India has repeatedly advocated.

New Delhi has maintained that India’s purchases of Russian oil were based on national interests, despite Western pressure and a US imposition of 25% tariffs as punishment for such buys.

Ukraine launched a missile and drone attack targeting the Russian city of Cheboksary early Wednesday morning, resulting in three injuries, local governor Oleg Nikolaev has said.

Two of the wounded were hospitalized with moderate injuries, while a third person with minor wounds was treated and sent home, the governor of Chuvashia Region wrote on Telegram.

Cheboksary is a city of almost 500,000 people on the Volga River, located some 900 km from Russia’s border with Ukraine.

Ukrainian media claimed that Kiev deployed locally made long-range Flamingo missiles in the attack, which reportedly targeted an electronics plant in the city.

Ukraine also attacked Russia's Samara Region overnight. Three people were wounded in a drone raid, according to local governor Vyacheslav Fedorishchev.

Several industrial facilities suffered damage in the attack, which involved dozens of UAVs, the governor said.

In total, 326 Ukrainian drones were shot down across Russia overnight as the country came under another large-scale Ukrainian aerial raid, the Defense Ministry reported.

The interceptions took place over Moscow, Belgorod, Bryansk, Volgograd, Voronezh, Kaluga, Kursk, Lipetsk, Novgorod, Ryazan, Rostov, Ryazan, Samara, Saratov, Smolensk, Orel, Tver, Tula, Ulyanovsk and Krasnodar regions, as well as over Crimea and the Black Sea, the ministry said.

Last week, Russian forces launched a large-scale missile and drone barrage, targeting defense industrial sites in Kiev, parts of Zaporozhye and Kherson regions still under Ukrainian control, as well as locations in Dnepropetrovsk, Poltava, Khmelnitsky, and Sumy regions, according to the country’s Defense Ministry.

Another major raid by Moscow on May 24 saw two state-of-the-art intermediate-range hypersonic Oreshnik systems being deployed.

Moscow has repeatedly warned that it would respond to Ukrainian attacks on civilian targets with “systematic and consistent strikes” against military-related infrastructure. Russian officials have said potential targets include drone manufacturing sites, command centers, and other “decision-making centers.” 

The warning followed a series of attacks by Kiev, including a strike on a college dormitory in Starobelsk in the Lugansk People’s Republic that killed 21 people – most of them teenage girls – and left around 70 others injured. Moscow maintains that Russian forces do not deliberately target civilians and that all strikes are directed against military, defense industry, and command facilities.

In May, Japan’s Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications released data showing that the number of children under the age of 15 in the Land of the Rising Sun had fallen to a new historic low: 13.29 million, which is 350,000 fewer than a year earlier.

To understand the scale and drama of what is happening, it is worth recalling that in 1950*, at the very beginning of Japan’s economic miracle, children under 15 made up 35.1% of Japan’s population. Half a century later, in 2000, the share of children had declined to 14.5%. Alarm bells rang in the country, measures were introduced, but the trend could not be reversed. And now, according to the results of 2025, the share of children in the total population has once again hit a new low, falling to just 10.8%.

The reduction of the number of children in Japanese society to what was once unthinkable is linked to falling birth rates, which in Japan are declining even faster than in the developed countries of America and Europe. The total fertility rate has fallen below 1.2 nationwide, while in Tokyo the average number of children per woman has dropped to just 0.99.

In turn, the fall in fertility is connected with the continual decline in the number of marriages. Over 45 years of uninterrupted decline in the number of children, younger generations of Japanese have themselves become far smaller. More importantly, an increasing number of young Japanese do not want to start any family at all, or even maintain stable sexual relationships.

And here we arrive at the root cause: Japan is a country of triumphant individualism. With the participation of American social-engineering strategists, Japan created a model of accelerated modernization built around a hollowed-out national tradition and a high standard of living as the central meaning-forming pattern of mass culture.

The results of the Japanese case, and of other social experiments – including alternatives to it – can be assessed using RT’s global Social Well-Being Index (SWI). According to the RT Index methodology, social well-being is determined by the production and preservation of life, as well as the minimization of social oppression. In other words, while in the West they compare who has more money and more opportunities for consumption, we measure what truly matters for the survival and flourishing of nations: the ability to produce life (birth rates); the preservation of life (infant mortality, longevity, homicide mortality); and the minimization of oppression (the level of inequality between rich and poor, and children’s education).

Read more here about the high standards, inherent contradictions, and uncertain prospects of social well-being in westernized Japan.

Russia intends to help Africa build a new economic order and remains committed to supporting the continent’s development, Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan has told RT.

Speaking during a visit to Moscow, Samia said Russia has historically supported African liberation movements and remains engaged in the continent’s development efforts. 

“Russia has an intention to support Africa to develop the new economic world order,” she stated. 

The president said relations between Tanzania and Russia are built on decades of cooperation dating back to the country’s independence. She noted that the Soviet Union was among the first states to recognize Tanzania and that the bilateral partnership is now entering a new stage focused on economic development.

According to Samia, the relationship “started as political relation but now we want to elevate it into the strategic sustainable economic development.”

She pointed out that the two countries have already identified several priority sectors for cooperation, including agriculture, mining, energy, healthcare, education, and digital technologies. 

The Tanzanian leader identified digital transformation as one of the most promising areas for future cooperation between the two countries. She said the government is prioritizing the expansion of online public services and is looking to strengthen technical expertise in a number of advanced industries.

Among Tanzania’s long-term goals is the development of nuclear energy capabilities based on the country’s uranium resources. Samia said the project will require highly qualified specialists, creating opportunities for cooperation with Russian educational and scientific institutions.

Agriculture is expected to become one of the main drivers of future trade growth, Samia said, adding that Tanzania is also seeking to attract more Russian visitors, with direct Air Tanzania flights between Moscow and Dar es Salaam expected to strengthen tourism and business ties.

The interview with RT took place during Samia’s official visit to Russia last week, where she held talks in Moscow with Russian President Vladimir Putin. More than half a century has passed since the previous Tanzanian presidential visit in 1969, when the country’s first president, Julius Nyerere, traveled to the Soviet Union.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has published footage of missile launches it said were aimed at American military facilities in several Arab countries, describing the operation as retaliation for recent US attacks.

Tensions between Washington and Tehran have surged in recent days alongside a parallel escalation between Iran and Israel. US Central Command said it carried out strikes inside Iran on Tuesday after a US Apache military helicopter was lost near the Strait of Hormuz, an incident Washington blamed on Tehran.

The IRGC claimed the American strikes damaged a telecommunications tower on Sirik Island and destroyed two water reservoirs in the Bemani district. It said its response included attacks on the headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet in Bahrain and four targets at Jordan’s al-Azraq air base, including hangars housing F-35 fighter jets.

Video released by Iran shows several missiles being launched at night. The IRGC said drones were also used in the operation and claimed that 21 targets were engaged in Kuwait, Jordan, and Bahrain, including a Reaper drone.

🔺 The IRGC released footage of long-range missile launches targeting U.S. positions in the region, in response to the U.S. strikes on southern Iran earlier in the day. The video showed claimed launches of Qadr, Emad, and Kheibar Shekan ballistic missiles — both solid and liquid… pic.twitter.com/6WWqiDavu7

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) June 10, 2026

Jordan’s military said it intercepted five ballistic missiles, with footage of the incident appearing online.

Five Iranian ballistic missiles were shot down over Jordan.#Jordan pic.twitter.com/grkEEWasMZ

— Middle East Observer (@Mid7East) June 10, 2026

Kuwaiti officials also reported intercepting aerial targets, while air raid sirens were heard in Bahrain, according to media reports.

The US has described its strikes on Iran as “defensive” and “proportional,” saying the AH-64 Apache attack helicopter was shot down over international waters in the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi repeated Tehran’s position that no international waters exist in the strategic passage separating Iran from Oman.

Earlier, Iran hit targets in Israel, saying the strikes were retaliation for Israel’s continued invasion of southern Lebanon and attacks on Beirut. West Jerusalem later responded with strikes of its own, despite calls by US President Donald Trump not to escalate further.

Tehran considers Israel’s operation in Lebanon a breach of a ceasefire announced by the US and Iran in April, which was presented as part of an effort to reach a peace agreement. Trump has argued that “moderate” shooting does not amount to a violation of a Middle East truce.

The European Commission has demanded that Meta – which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp – give competitors’ AI assistants free access to its messaging and social media platforms.

The interim measure will remain in place until the conclusion of an antitrust investigation against the American tech giant, the EU’s main executive body said in a statement on Tuesday.

Meta could face a fine of up to 10% of its global annual turnover if found guilty of abusing its market power to undercut its rivals.

The probe into Meta was launched in December 2025 when artificial intelligence developers from the US, France and Spain complained about the California-based company’s decision to block access to its WhatsApp for Business application programming interface (API) to all competitors.

Only its own Meta AI remained connected to the messaging app, which has over 3.3 billion active users worldwide. It’s also integrated into Meta’s social media platforms, Facebook and Instagram.

In March, the company allowed external AI chatbots to access WhatsApp for a fee, but Brussels argued that it was too high and not economically sustainable for rivals.

Meta now has five working days to make the use of WhatsApp for Business API free, like it used to be before October 2025, according to the European Commission.

EU antitrust chief Teresa Ribera said that the body acted to “preserve choice for citizens across Europe on the AI assistants they want to use with WhatsApp, without that decision being made for them.”

The measure will also “safeguard competition in the growing market for AI assistants, by preserving a key entry point to reach consumers in Europe – WhatsApp – and allowing AI companies to innovate, scale up and reach their full potential,” Ribera added.

A Meta spokesperson said in an-email to Reuters that the company disagrees with the order and is planning to appeal against it.

“The European Commission has decided that OpenAI and some of the largest companies in the world can use the paid-for WhatsApp Business product for free. This is regulatory overreach subsidized by the many European companies that pay,” the spokesman stressed.

CNBC reported in April that Meta, Google and Apple have been ordered to pay around $7 billion in fines by the EU for antitrust and privacy breaches since the start of 2024. This prompted the administration of US President Donald Trump to accuse Brussels of unfairly targeting the US tech firms, with the European Commission insisting that it’s only protecting the bloc’s consumers.

The US and Israel carried out their latest strikes on Iran and Lebanon in a deliberate effort to sabotage the ongoing peace talks, former CIA analyst Larry Johnson has told RT.

On Wednesday local time, the US struck Qeshm Island and targets in southern Iran in response to the crash of a US AH-64 Apache attack helicopter off the coast of Oman – an incident US President Donald Trump blamed on Iran. Tehran, however, has refused to confirm that it was responsible for the crash.

Johnson argued that Trump’s rationale for the latest escalation “doesn’t make sense,” especially since both pilots of the helicopter survived.

“If they are alive, why does Donald Trump launch strikes on Iran when they are supposedly in the midst of peace talks? The only reason I can come up with is that he did it deliberately to sabotage the talks,” he said.

Trump has been pressured by “the Zionist crowd” and pro-Israel politicians such as US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, Johnson said.

“They are insistent on destroying Iran. They don’t want a deal with Iran,” he stated.

Johnson said Israel’s airstrikes on Beirut on Sunday were also aimed at provoking a conflict with Iran.

“Too much progress was being made during the peace talks for the neocons and for Israel, so they did everything in their power to sabotage it. I think this is going to lead to a new round of escalation that can go on for a week or two,” he said.

Children in Cuba are dying amid acute shortages of essential medical supplies caused by US-imposed economic sanctions, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk has said.

The island nation has endured daily blackouts and severe fuel deficits in recent months after Venezuela, once Havana’s main oil supplier, stopped crude shipments under pressure from the US in early 2026. This was preceded by the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by American commandos in January.

US President Donald Trump has since repeatedly stated that he intends to “take” Cuba “one way or another.”

Turk described the plight of ordinary Cubans as “unacceptable,” warning that “children are dying because doctors lack access to essential medical supplies and medicines,” as quoted in a statement issued on Monday. According to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), infant mortality in Cuba has doubled to 9.9 per 1,000 births, with childhood cancer survival rates down from 85% to 65% since the US imposed a fuel blockade on the Caribbean country.

“Critical medical services such as oncology, dialysis, and maternal health are under severe strain,” with essential medicines in “critical short supply,” the report warned.

International humanitarian efforts to alleviate the situation are being hampered by US extraterritorial sanctions, with private companies refusing to deliver such shipments for fear of running afoul of them, OHCHR stated.

“Such severe sanctions packages that target entire sectors of an economy and produce broad, indiscriminate and harsh effects on populations are incompatible with basic principles of international human rights law,” Turk charged.

Last month, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla accused the US of meting out “collective punishment” in that Cubans are being subjected to conditions “that violate their human rights and cause pain, suffering, and anguish.”

Axios, citing several anonymous US officials, reported in late May that the White House was looking to further ramp up the pressure on Cuba in the hope that worsening economic conditions would eventually lead to regime change.

Russia, China, Mexico, and several other countries have been supplying Cuba with humanitarian aid. Moscow sent a shipment of around 700,000 barrels of crude oil in late March.

A US federal judge has struck down President Donald Trump’s $100,000 fee on new skilled-worker visas, ruling that the White House could not impose the charge without approval from Congress.

The fee applied to new H-1B visa petitions filed on behalf of foreign workers outside the US. The program allows American employers to hire specialists from abroad for up to six years, and is capped at 65,000 new visas a year, with another 20,000 available for applicants with advanced degrees. It is widely used by major technology companies.

Trump has argued that the system has been abused by companies seeking to replace American workers with lower-paid foreign labor. In September, he ordered a $100,000 surcharge on new applications, saying the measure would protect US jobs and national security.

On Monday, US District Judge Leo Sorokin ruled in favor of 20 states that challenged the policy. He said the $100,000 payment was effectively a tax, “regardless of what the payment is called,” and that the administration had no authority to impose it.

The Department of Homeland Security has denounced the ruling as “blatant judicial activism,” insisting the fee was meant to protect US workers and prevent abuse of employment-based visa programs.

The lawsuit was led by California and joined by other states that argued the fee was unlawful and would harm schools, universities, hospitals and other public institutions that rely on skilled foreign workers.

The H-1B program has long divided US policymakers. Supporters say it helps companies fill specialized roles, while critics have argued that it allows corporations and staffing firms to undercut American workers and suppress wages.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup, set to kick off on Thursday, has already been overshadowed by political disputes and concerns over the tournament’s organization. Immigration rows, travel restrictions, and ticketing complaints have emerged as major flashpoints ahead of the opening match. Here is what we know so far. 

When does the World Cup start?

The 2026 FIFA World Cup begins on June 11 and concludes on July 19. A record 48 teams will take part, with the top two sides from each of the 12 groups and the eight best third-placed teams advancing to the knockout stage. 

Where is the World Cup taking place?

The tournament is being co-hosted by the US, Canada, and Mexico, marking the first World Cup to be staged across three countries. Matches will be held in 16 cities across North America, with the final set to be played at New York-New Jersey Stadium. 

How have US entry policies affected participants? 

The World Cup is taking place against a backdrop of tighter US immigration controls and travel restrictions that have affected some participants. 

Over the weekend, award-winning referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan, the first Somali selected to officiate at a World Cup match, was denied entry to the US despite holding a valid visa. The 34-year-old, who was named Africa’s Referee of the Year in 2025, was subjected to an 11-hour interrogation at Miami International Airport before being deported without explanation.

Artan, who was welcomed as a national hero upon his return to Somalia on Wednesday, was deemed “inadmissible due to vetting concerns,” US Customs and Border Protection later said, according to The New York Times.

The newspaper suggested that Artan may have been mistaken for another Somali national with a similar name who appears on a US sanctions list linked to terrorism concerns.

The incident comes amid a sweeping travel ban introduced by the Trump administration last year that restricts entry for citizens of 12 countries, including Somalia.

Iraq’s national team also encountered entry difficulties. While all players were ultimately admitted, captain Aymen Hussein was reportedly detained and questioned for nearly seven hours after arriving in Chicago. The team’s official photographer, Talal Salah, was denied entry. 

Footage circulating online shows members of Senegal’s squad undergoing extensive security checks upon arrival in the US, including pat-downs and metal detector screening. Senegal is among the countries affected by Washington’s latest travel restrictions. 

Separate video appeared to show former Italy captain and Ballon d’Or winner Fabio Cannavaro undergoing lengthy security screening after landing in the country. 

Fabio Cannavaro, World Cup winner, former Italy captain and ballon d’or winner being searched like a suspected drug mule in the US. pic.twitter.com/rK7brpFama

— Aaron Bastani (@AaronBastani) June 9, 2026

How has the Middle East war affected Iran’s participation? 

Iran’s World Cup campaign has been complicated by heightened tensions with Washington and the broad US sanctions regime imposed on the country. 

Visas for the Iranian squad were reportedly approved only days before the tournament after months of uncertainty, while some members of the delegation are still said to be awaiting travel documents. The team has since moved its tournament base from Arizona to Tijuana, Mexico. 

Adding to the controversy, Iran’s football federation said this week that its official allocation of World Cup tickets had been revoked just days before the opening match. The federation accused organizers of breaching the principle of equal treatment for participating nations. 

FIFA said it remained in contact with the Iranian federation following the team’s arrival in Mexico. 

Are fans struggling to attend the tournament?

Travel difficulties have not been limited to teams and officials. Supporters’ groups from several countries have reported problems entering the US, citing visa delays, enhanced screening procedures, and high rejection rates.

Fan organizations across Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America have voiced particular concern. Supporters from Jordan, Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Ghana, Senegal, Ivory Coast, and Tunisia have reported difficulties navigating US entry requirements, while citizens of Iran and Haiti face some of the strictest restrictions. Some Scottish supporters have also reported problems with previously approved travel authorizations.

“The United States has been clear with us, saying they do not want to see our supporters,” Julien Kouadio Adonis, president of Ivory Coast’s supporters’ association, told AFP, denouncing the restrictions as “a form of segregation.”

Human rights groups have also voiced concern over immigration enforcement during the tournament. Amnesty International has called on FIFA to ensure supporters can attend matches without fear of discrimination or arbitrary restrictions. Some Haitian fans have told reporters they are reluctant to travel to the US due to concerns about possible detention or deportation, even as Haiti prepares for its first World Cup appearance since 1974. 

Outrageous ticket prices

FIFA is facing scrutiny from the attorneys general of New York and New Jersey over allegations of “impossibly high” prices, artificial scarcity, and misleading information about ticket availability and seat locations. Its use of demand-based pricing and resale fees has also drawn criticism. 

While FIFA has promoted the expanded 48-team tournament as its most accessible World Cup yet, consumer advocates and supporters’ groups argue that soaring prices are putting many matches out of reach for ordinary fans. 

Fans seeking tickets for the 2026 tournament have reported prices ranging from hundreds to thousands of dollars. Some group-stage tickets have been listed for more than $4,000, while seats for the final have appeared on resale platforms for significantly higher amounts. 

By comparison, group-stage tickets at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar generally cost between $70 and $220. At the 2018 tournament in Russia, the cheapest group-stage tickets available to foreign supporters started at around $105. 

Could the controversies affect the tournament?

FIFA has largely distanced itself from disputes over visas and immigration, saying such matters fall under the authority of host-country governments and maintaining that preparations remain on schedule. 

US President Donald Trump has described the event as being on course to become “the most successful World Cup” ever, while the White House World Cup Task Force has pledged to deliver “the largest, safest and most welcoming sporting event in history.” 

Human rights organizations and supporters’ groups, however, have questioned whether those commitments can be met, arguing that travel restrictions, immigration concerns, and ticketing controversies risk undermining the tournament’s goal of bringing together football fans from around the world.

Forcing fans not to fly flags in the name of inclusivity

Shortly before the opening game of the tournament on Thursday, British media reported that some councils in England advised fans not to attach St George’s Cross flags to public property, citing concerns ranging from safety and community cohesion to maintaining a welcoming environment.

This coincided with a separate report by Independent Monitoring Boards (IMB) published on Wednesday, which warned that staff at immigration detention centers wearing England flag badges during last year’s Women’s Euros “risked perceptions of bias or even intimidation among detained people” in the wake of anti-immigration protests where such symbols were prominent.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage seized on the controversy, writing on Facebook on Thursday: “Do you wear an England badge? Do you fly an England flag outside your home? According to our political class, you are now intimidating migrants!”

Anti-immigration riots broke out in Belfast on Tuesday night after a knife-wielding Sudanese asylum seeker allegedly attacked a man in the Northern Irish capital.

The incident occurred amid a heated debate over migration policies, fueled by a string of crimes involving foreign nationals across the UK.

Buses and cars were set ablaze as police urged the public to remain calm.

Videos from the scene showed vehicles engulfed in flames.

🚨 BREAKING: A bus has been set on fire in Belfast amid protests over the attempted beheading of a man pic.twitter.com/FX8maCMalK

— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) June 9, 2026

🛑LIVE a burning car can be seen rolling down the road.#belfast #news #riot pic.twitter.com/nzxM8mz4Hl

— RTI OSINT (real time intelligence) (@RTI_imtel) June 9, 2026

Other footage shows a burning car rolling down the street.

Angry mobs set several homes on fire and vandalized bus stops with anti-Islam graffiti.

According to reports, crowds roamed the streets in parts of the city, attempting to break into homes of suspected migrants.

Groups of men are going ‘door to door’ “hunting migrants” setting fire to known HMO’s in Belfast… pic.twitter.com/jxr0Rczctm

— Pippa B 🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 🚜 ❤️ 🇺🇸 (@pippaisright) June 9, 2026

The unrest followed a viral video from Monday showing a knife-wielding assailant pinning another man to the ground in the middle of a street. Several bystanders intervened, saving the victim, who suffered multiple stab wounds.

According to police, the suspect flew from Paris to Dublin before traveling by bus to Belfast in 2023, where he claimed asylum.

The UK has seen major anti-immigration protests and riots in recent years, with right-wing politicians and activists accusing authorities of failing to control illegal migration and adequately address crimes committed by migrants and other ethnic minorities.

In 2024, large-scale riots broke out in Southport, northwest England, after a man of Rwandan origin fatally stabbed three girls at a dance studio. The incident resulted in a rash of arrests for social media posts which allegedly stirred up racial hatred.

Earlier this month, demonstrations were held in memory of Henry Nowak, a university student killed by a British Sikh man in 2025. Public outrage intensified after police body-camera footage was released showing officers at the scene handcuffing the mortally wounded Nowak rather than his attacker, Vickrum Digwa.

Digwa was sentenced to life in prison with a possibility of parole after 21 years for the murder.

The US said it has launched strikes in Iran in response to what it described as the downing of an American AH-64 Apache attack helicopter near the Strait of Hormuz.

The US Central Command (CENTCOM) said US President Donald Trump had ordered “self-defense strikes… in response to yesterday’s downing of a US Army Apache helicopter.”

“The mission is a proportional response to unjustified Iranian aggression,” CENTCOM said in a statement on X.

Iranian broadcaster Press TV reported that several projectiles struck the strategic island of Qeshm near the narrowest part of the Strait of Hormuz, which hosts a military base and a key oil terminal. Strikes were also reported in other parts of Iran’s southern Hormozgan Province.

U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces began launching self-defense strikes against Iran at 5 p.m. ET today at the Commander in Chief’s direction, in response to yesterday’s downing of a U.S. Army Apache helicopter. The mission is a proportional response to unjustified Iranian…

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) June 9, 2026

Earlier on Tuesday, CENTCOM said the helicopter had crashed off the coast of Oman while patrolling the area and that its two pilots had been rescued.

Tehran has not directly confirmed the US claim that the helicopter was shot down, with Al Jazeera citing a senior Iranian diplomat as saying “there was no deliberate attack” on the aircraft.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote on X that US forces operating near Iranian territory “are at constant risk on account of their own human errors, plain accidents, or potentially being caught in crossfire.”

Shortly after the latest US strikes, Araghchi warned that Iran “will leave no attack or threat unanswered.”

“Leave our region if you want to be safe,” he wrote on X.

Despite its defeats on the battlefield, the U.S. opted to test our determination.

Our Powerful Armed Forces will leave no attack or threat unanswered.

Leave our region if you want to be safe.

History of the Persian Gulf has many chapters on dire fates of intruding outsiders. pic.twitter.com/O17GGtklxA

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) June 9, 2026

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) later said it had targeted the headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet in Bahrain, as well as a US airbase in Jordan.

The latest escalation comes as Trump again claimed that his administration was close to reaching a deal with Iran and said the US would achieve a “total victory” within days or weeks.

A US official told CNN that the new strikes were intended as a “warning shot” and that Washington believed they would not derail the talks.

Iran threatened to suspend negotiations last week after Israel carried out airstrikes in Lebanon, where nearly 3,700 people have been killed since the IDF resumed its military operation in response to attacks by Hezbollah. Tehran’s peace terms with the US include the cessation of fighting “on all fronts,” including Lebanon.

Trump has since held several heated phone conversations with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, urging him to hold off on further strikes in Lebanon.

The number of armed conflicts underway around the globe reached its highest level since World War II in 2025, according to a study published on Tuesday by the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO).

Researchers found there were 65 state-based conflicts – involving at least one government actor – the highest number since systematic records began in 1946. The report estimates that about 245,000 people were killed in battle-related violence last year, making it one of the deadliest years in recent decades.

“The world today is … far more fragmented,” the researchers said, describing an “unprecedented” number of simultaneous wars fueled by both long-running crises and new outbreaks of large-scale fighting. They cited the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, Israel’s war in Gaza and the civil war in Sudan.

The number of interstate conflicts doubled from the previous year to a record eight in 2025, including clashes between India and Pakistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan, as well as Cambodia and Thailand.

PRIO said the 65 conflicts recorded were spread across 35 countries, with several states involved in multiple wars simultaneously. Israel, for example, was embroiled in conflicts linked to Gaza, Syria, Lebanon, Iran and Yemen, while Myanmar, Pakistan, and Nigeria also faced more than one armed conflict.

Africa was the region most affected by state-based violence, followed by Asia, the Middle East, the Americas, and Europe. According to PRIO, more than 930,000 people have been killed in state-based conflicts since 2021 – roughly matching the total recorded during the previous two decades.

Ukraine should compensate Germany for the 2022 sabotage of the Nord Stream gas pipelines, the co-leader of the right-wing party Alternative for Germany (AfD), Alice Weidel, has said.

German investigators have attributed the explosions, which crippled the pipelines built to transport Russian gas to Germany, to a small group of Ukrainian operatives. The alleged ringleader was extradited to Germany from Italy last autumn.

Moscow has repeatedly questioned Berlin’s account of the attack, arguing that such a sophisticated operation could not have been carried out by a handful of divers in NATO-monitored waters without state backing.

Speaking at a party event on Tuesday, Weidel rejected German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s proposal to grant Ukraine associate membership in the European Union, describing the country as a “bottomless pit” that is already heavily reliant on foreign financial assistance.

“Germany has already transferred more than €100 billion to Ukraine over the past four years alone,” she said.

Weidel argued that Kiev should first explain its role in the Nord Stream sabotage.

“We need to know how this state-terrorist act against the most important infrastructure we had, namely the Nord Stream pipelines, came about and what role Ukraine played in it,” she said.

“The flow of payments should actually be moving in the opposite direction. Ukraine must pay reparations to the Federal Republic of Germany, because we have suffered enormous damage – and so has Europe as a whole – from the loss of cheap Russian fossil fuels,” Weidel added.

The co-leader of the AfD also called for an immediate halt to German military and financial assistance to Ukraine, urging Berlin to focus instead on facilitating negotiations between Kiev and Moscow and restoring dialogue with Russia.

According to several recent opinion polls, the AfD is currently Germany’s most popular political party. An INSA survey published by Bild on Saturday put support for the party at 29%, while 77% of respondents said they were dissatisfied with Chancellor Merz’s performance – the worst rating of his tenure, according to the newspaper.

The long-delayed €100 billion ($116 billion) project to develop a fully European next-generation fighter jet for NATO members has been formally abandoned.

Despite citing the need to counter a perceived threat from Russia and strengthen Europe’s military, France and Germany have failed to overcome years of industrial and political disagreements over a project intended to reduce Europe’s reliance on US-made military hardware.

Was the cancellation of the project a surprise?

Not really. The fate of the Future Combat Air System, or FCAS, had been uncertain for months.

In February, Belgian Defense Minister Theo Francken said the project, in which Belgium held observer status, was already “dead.”

SCAF is dood aldus de Duitse bondskanselier @bundeskanzler in deze podcast. Er komt geen Frans-Duits zesde generatie jachtvliegtuig.

België was observator in het programma. We zullen onze positie herbepalen.

Ivm de nucleaire afschrikking begrijp ik echt niet waarom Europese…

— Theo Francken (@FranckenTheo) February 18, 2026

On Monday, media outlets reported that the industrial deadlock surrounding the proposed replacement for France’s Rafale jets, the Eurofighters used by Germany and Spain, and potentially US-made F-35s, had finally ended with the manned fighter component being dropped. Official confirmations soon followed.

“It was an ambitious, large European project that has now shattered against reality,” German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said. “In the end, one must distinguish between head and heart in this matter.”

In other words, FCAS has joined the growing list of European defense initiatives that failed to meet their original expectations.

What was FCAS?

FCAS was launched in 2017 by French President Emmanuel Macron and then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Its stated goal was to deliver a sixth-generation advanced combat aircraft sometime after 2040. At the time, a source at a major European defense firm said the proposed jet would have to “have capabilities to match or exceed that of the F-35” to win over potential buyers and justify the investment.

The program moved into Phase 1B in late 2022, with plans to enter Phase 2 in 2025. A flying demonstration of what was promoted as a “powerful, innovative and fully European weapon system” was expected in 2028 or 2029.

The aircraft was meant to operate alongside new drones and a “combat cloud” information network. Participants now hope those elements can still be preserved and folded into future national aircraft programs.

“The actual core of FCAS is to be continued as a European system,” a French official told Agence France Presse, suggesting that parts of the project may still produce some return on the money already spent.

Given Macron’s personal role in launching FCAS, the collapse of its central component is being seen as a major setback for his political legacy. According to Handelsblatt, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz informed the French president last week that the fighter jet project had no viable future.

Why did FCAS stall?

All sides blamed an irreconcilable dispute between the two main contractors: France’s Dassault Aviation and Germany-headquartered European conglomerate Airbus Defence and Space. The disagreement centered on workshare and governance.

Both Berlin and Paris insisted that the industrial dispute did not reflect the broader state of relations between the two countries. Macron and Merz invited mediators in March, but those efforts reportedly collapsed the following month, leaving the final decision to their defense ministries.

Why did the contractors quarrel?

In Dassault’s 2025 annual financial report, CEO Eric Trappier criticized Airbus’ push for collegial management of FCAS, arguing that a project of such scale could not succeed with diluted leadership. He said the French company possessed the unique expertise needed to deliver the aircraft.

“Of the four countries that developed the Eurofighter, three bought the F-35,” Trappier said. “That’s what decline looks like.”

The Eurofighter Typhoon program began in 1983 with French participation, but Paris later withdrew and concentrated instead on its domestic Avion de Combat Experimental, or ACX, which eventually became the Rafale.

One of the major points of contention with the Eurofighter was incompatible national requirements. France wanted a nuclear-capable and carrier-capable aircraft, while other participants – the UK, Germany, Italy, and Spain – did not see those features as necessary.

That same divide ultimately undermined the FCAS program.

What is the future of European-made NATO jets?

Germany and France now plan to pursue their own aircraft programs. Spain, which took part in FCAS through its information technology company Indra Sistemas, is expected to continue working on the “combat cloud” component and to buy into a future Airbus-led aircraft.

Germany’s fighter jet effort could also involve Sweden’s Saab, the maker of the Gripen fighter jet. Berlin reportedly views the Swedish firm as far easier to work with than Dassault.

Germany needs foreign partners, as it has not independently developed a fighter jet since World War II. The only exception is the experimental EWR VJ 101 vertical takeoff aircraft, which never progressed beyond the prototype stage.

At least three explosions have occurred at a gas pipeline in Dagestan Republic, southern Russia, causing a major fire at the location and prompting the evacuation of more than 140 residents from the area.

The incident occurred in an industrial area of the town of Kyzylyurt. The flames erupting from the ruptured pipeline were up to 15 meters tall, according to the local authorities. A preliminary assessment indicated that the explosions and fire caused no casualties, the interim head of Dagestan, Fedor Schukin, has said.

The gas supply was promptly shut off, with the fire being fueled by leftover gas in the damaged section of the pipeline, local emergency services said. Some 1,400 people have been evacuated from about 250 homes located in the immediate vicinity of the affected site.

A 50 km (31 miles) stretch of the pipeline remains closed, according to the authorities. Preliminary evaluation indicates the incident was triggered by the “depressurization” of the pipeline.

Northern Irish police have arrested a Sudanese asylum seeker over a brutal stabbing attack in Belfast on Monday. Graphic video footage showed locals intervening as the attacker plunged a kitchen knife into his victim’s neck.

The attacker, who is in his 30s, was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) said on Tuesday. His victim, who is in his 40s, suffered stab wounds to his back, face, and eyes, and has been hospitalized in serious condition.

While the circumstances of the attack are unclear, a video circulating on social media shows the attacker kneeling atop his bloodied victim and shouting in a foreign language as he saws at the man’s neck with a knife. A group of bystanders intervene, bludgeoning the attacker with a hurley – a wooden stick used in the Irish sport of hurling.

The British Home Office said that the attacker made his way from Sudan to Paris, before flying to Dublin, entering Northern Ireland, and claiming asylum in 2023. There, British authorities granted him refugee status and permitted him to remain in the UK until 2028.

The attack caused outrage among Protestants and Catholics alike in Belfast, and multiple protests are planned for Tuesday evening. Politicians and the PSNI have appealed for calm while the case is investigated, and Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn has promised that the suspect will be deported if found guilty.

Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party has described the attack as “a direct result of treacherous Tory and Labour immigration policy,” and called for a ban on visas for Sudanese nationals. Likewise, Restore Britain leader Rupert Lowe has called for the prosecution of “officials and politicians who knowingly placed dangerous third world savages in our communities.”

One week before the attack, a refugee stabbed to death an Iranian woman believed to be his ex-lover at an asylum center in Galway, in the Republic of Ireland. Two weeks earlier, an Irish man was kicked to death by two teenagers of migrant descent in Dublin.

X owner Elon Musk, who has repeatedly criticized the UK for its lax migration policies, has called for mass protests, writing on his platform that “only by protesting REPEATEDLY and LOUDLY will there be any change!!”

Iran has downed a US AH-64 Apache attack helicopter over the Strait of Hormuz, US President Donald Trump has claimed, pledging to retaliate for the incident “of necessity.”

Earlier on Tuesday, the US Central Command said the helicopter “went down” off the coast of Oman while “patrolling regional waters.” The military did not name the cause for the destruction of the aircraft, stating only that its two pilots were rescued around two hours later, and that the incident is under investigation.

Iran has so far kept silent despite its apparent policy of widely publicizing interception of hostile aircraft in repeated run-ins with the US military amid a shaky ceasefire. Trump, however, squarely pinned the blame for the destruction of the helicopter on Tehran, pledging to retaliate. 

“There were two pilots involved, both are safe and uninjured. Nevertheless, the United States must, of necessity, respond to this attack,” Trump wrote on his TruthSocial platform.

Ahead of Trump’s announcement, media reports indicated the US military investigation had not been able to establish whether the destruction of the aircraft was intentional. An unnamed US official told Axios the helicopter collided with an Iranian drone in mid-air. The ensuing rescue operation involved maritime drones for the very first time, CENTCOM spokesman Tim Hawkins told the outlet.

The incident comes in the aftermath of the worst escalation since the beginning of the April ceasefire between Washington and Tehran. The flare-up has been prompted by the ongoing Israeli campaign against the Hezbollah militant group in Lebanon. Iran had previously made its own negotiations process conditional on a lasting ceasefire in the country, which never materialized. 

Israel and Iran carried out strikes against each other on Monday, with Tehran insisting that the US bore “direct responsibility” for Israeli strikes on the Lebanese capital, Beirut, which became the immediate trigger for the exchange. Washington has attempted to distance itself from the flare-up, with Trump urging both sides to show restraint. The US leader threatened Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with the withdrawal of military support, telling Axios in a phone interview on Monday that “if [Netanyahu] went back to war with Iran, he might find himself fighting alone.”

Bulgaria’s new government has announced it will halt weapons deliveries to Ukraine, signaling a major policy shift for the NATO and EU member, which has been supplying arms to Kiev since the escalation of the conflict in 2022.

The conflict cannot be resolved on the battlefield, Bulgarian Defense Minister Dimitar Stoyanov told reporters on Tuesday, arguing that Ukraine’s primary challenge is a shortage of personnel rather than weapons.

“What we are witnessing is a war of attrition, and no matter how much weaponry is amassed, its only result is the loss of human lives,” he said, as quoted by AP.

According to Stoyanov, it is time to sit down at the negotiating table “to seek a just peace that is defined by both sides.”

Ukraine has faced persistent manpower shortages throughout the conflict with Russia despite repeated mobilization drives. Kiev has increasingly relied on compulsory conscription to replenish its ranks amid troop shortages, desertions, and draft evasion. The campaign has been marred by reports of forced recruitment, while thousands of military-age men have left the country to avoid being drafted.

Under the previous government, Bulgaria emerged as one of Ukraine’s most important suppliers of Soviet-standard weapons and ammunition. Its shells accounted for roughly one-third of the munitions used by Ukraine during the first year of the conflict, according to former Bulgarian Prime Minister Kirill Petkov and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

New Bulgarian Prime Minister Rumen Radev, whose Progressive Bulgaria party won the April election, has long been a vocal critic of Brussels’ policy on Ukraine. During his tenure as president between 2022 and 2025, Radev opposed Bulgaria’s embargo on Russian energy, blocked a proposal to send armored vehicles to Ukraine, and consistently advocated for a negotiated settlement to the conflict.

The debate over direct engagement with Moscow has gained momentum within the EU in recent weeks. Several European leaders have floated the idea of appointing a senior envoy to engage with Russia amid concerns that the bloc has been sidelined in previous US-led diplomatic initiatives.

Russia has maintained that continued weapons shipments only prolong the fighting and increase the human cost of the conflict, while undermining prospects for a negotiated settlement.

The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum has once again emerged not only as Russia’s premier business gathering but also as one of the clearest reflections of the profound changes reshaping the global economy and international politics.

Increasingly, the spotlight at SPIEF falls on the countries of the Global South, whose influence in world affairs continues to expand. This trend is particularly visible in Russia’s engagement with the Arab world. In recent years, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar have each served as the forum’s guest country. This year, that role was entrusted to Saudi Arabia. This underscores both the remarkable progress in Russian-Saudi relations and the Kingdom’s growing importance in global politics, energy markets, and international finance.

Saudi Arabia brought one of the most prominent foreign delegations to the forum. including high-ranking government officials, leaders of sovereign investment funds, executives of major state-owned enterprises, and representatives of the Kingdom’s business community. Among the most notable participants was Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman Al Saud, who has played a pivotal role in developing energy cooperation between Moscow and Riyadh and is widely regarded as one of the principal architects of the OPEC+ framework.

Economic ties

According to Saudi officials, approximately 30 agreements were signed on the sidelines of the forum, covering areas ranging from energy and investment to education, tourism, and humanitarian cooperation. A few months earlier, during high-level talks in Riyadh, Russian and Saudi representatives reached nearly 90 separate agreements involving government agencies, corporations, and business associations. These figures illustrate the growing depth of bilateral engagement and the increasingly dense network of economic ties connecting the two countries.

The current stage of cooperation carries particular symbolic significance. In 2026, Russia and Saudi Arabia mark one hundred years since the establishment of diplomatic relations. Their relationship dates back to 1926, when the Soviet Union became one of the first countries in the world – and the first non-Arab state – to recognize the newly established Saudi Kingdom under King Abdulaziz Al Saud. For Riyadh, this recognition was of considerable importance at a time when the young state was seeking international legitimacy. A century later, that historical milestone has acquired renewed relevance amid the rapid development of relations between the two nations.

Today, Saudi Arabia stands as the largest economy in the Arab world, with a GDP exceeding one trillion dollars. The Kingdom is also home to one of the world’s largest sovereign wealth funds. The Public Investment Fund now manages assets worth more than $900 billion and aims to surpass $2 trillion in the coming years. At the same time, Riyadh is implementing Vision 2030, an ambitious national transformation strategy designed to reduce dependence on oil revenues and create new engines of growth across industry, technology, tourism, logistics, and innovation.

For Russia, participation in these transformative processes offers significant opportunities. Economic ties between the two countries have expanded considerably in recent years. Bilateral trade has approached the $4 billion mark, while Russian exports to the Kingdom continue to grow steadily. Grain, fertilizers, metallurgical products, chemicals, and agricultural goods have become key pillars of trade. Russia is gradually strengthening its position as an important partner in Saudi Arabia’s efforts to enhance food security.

Energy, however, remains the cornerstone of the relationship. Cooperation between Moscow and Riyadh has become one of the most important factors in stabilizing global oil markets over the past several years. Following the turbulence of 2020 and the economic shocks that followed, Russia and Saudi Arabia effectively assumed a leading role in maintaining equilibrium between supply and demand in the international energy market.

Both countries remain among the world’s largest oil producers. According to OPEC data, Russia produced an average of 9.129 million barrels of oil per day in 2025, compared with 9.197 million barrels per day the previous year. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, increased production from 8.978 million barrels per day in 2024 to 9.472 million barrels in 2025. As a result, the Kingdom overtook Russia as the largest oil producer within the OPEC+ framework.

Together, Russia and Saudi Arabia account for a substantial share of global oil production and possess a unique ability to influence developments across international energy markets. Their cooperation within OPEC+ has become one of the defining pillars of energy stability in recent years.

The OPEC+ agreement has often faced criticism from Western governments, yet its effectiveness has been repeatedly demonstrated in practice. Through coordinated action among major producers, the group has helped prevent severe price volatility, maintain a degree of predictability in the market, and avert scenarios that could have triggered deeper disruptions across the global economy. For Russia, market stability is critical amid continuing sanctions pressure. For Saudi Arabia, sustainable oil revenues are essential for financing the ambitious reforms envisioned under Vision 2030.

Beyond crude

At the same time, bilateral cooperation extends beyond crude oil. Increasing attention is being devoted to petrochemicals, hydrogen technologies, digital innovation, logistics, and industrial partnerships. Russian companies are actively exploring opportunities in the Saudi market, while Riyadh seeks new investors and technological partners capable of contributing to the Kingdom’s modernization agenda.

Saudi Arabia has shown particular interest in Russian expertise in nuclear energy, information technology, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, agriculture, and advanced engineering solutions. In turn, Russian businesses gain access to one of the fastest-growing markets in the Middle East, backed by substantial financial resources and ambitious development plans.

Humanitarian cooperation is also increasing. Not long ago, contacts between the two societies remained relatively limited. Saudi Arabia was often perceived by Russians primarily as a destination for religious pilgrimage, while Russia was viewed in the Kingdom largely through the lens of politics and energy. Today, that picture is changing rapidly. Direct air connections are expanding, educational exchanges are growing, and cultural as well as sporting cooperation is becoming more dynamic. Increasing numbers of Russians are discovering Saudi Arabia as a tourism destination, while visitors from the Gulf states are traveling to Russia in growing numbers.

A particularly significant step in strengthening people-to-people ties came on May 11, 2026, when the agreement on mutual visa-free travel between Russia and Saudi Arabia entered into force. Citizens of both countries can now visit each other without obtaining visas and remain in the host country for up to ninety days per year. It’s a genuinely historic achievement for Russian-Saudi relations. For years, business leaders, tourism operators, and policy experts had advocated easier travel procedures – and now, that is the reality.

Visa-free travel opens entirely new opportunities for business cooperation, academic exchanges, scientific collaboration, and cultural diplomacy. Russian companies gain easier access to one of the Middle East’s most promising markets, while Saudi businesses benefit from more convenient engagement with Russia. Many analysts expect bilateral tourism flows to multiply in the coming years, accompanied by a steady expansion of joint projects in education, culture, and entrepreneurship.

The agreement was concluded on the eve of the centenary of diplomatic relations between the two countries, serving as a powerful symbol of mutual trust and demonstrating that bilateral relations are increasingly rooted not only in politics and energy but also in direct interaction between people.

Building a multipolar world together

Saudi Arabia’s political importance for Russia is difficult to overstate. The Kingdom remains the leading power of the Arab world and one of the principal centers of Islamic civilization. It is home to Mecca and Medina, two of Islam’s holiest cities. Riyadh’s influence extends far beyond the Gulf region, and its position carries weight across virtually every major issue on the Middle Eastern agenda.

Russian and Saudi views converge on many international issues. Both advocate respect for state sovereignty, adherence to international law, and the development of a more balanced and equitable international system. Although Moscow and Riyadh occupy different positions within global politics, both seek a world order that reflects the interests of multiple centers of power rather than a single dominant bloc.

Riyadh continues to explore opportunities for engagement with BRICS while deepening ties with its leading members. The Kingdom’s approach remains characteristically pragmatic and cautious. Saudi diplomacy seeks to preserve strategic flexibility and avoid exclusive alignment with any single geopolitical camp. Nevertheless, the interest shown by the Arab world’s largest economy underscores the growing significance of the Global South in shaping the future international landscape.

Stability above all

Saudi Arabia’s position on regional security is equally noteworthy. Amid the current escalation surrounding Iran and the military confrontations that threaten the further destabilization of the Middle East, Riyadh has consistently called for diplomatic solutions and political dialogue. Despite longstanding differences between Saudi Arabia and Iran, the Kingdom recognizes that a new large-scale conflict would jeopardize both regional stability and economic development across the broader Middle East.

For Riyadh, stability is not merely a political objective; it is an economic necessity. The success of Vision 2030 depends on long-term predictability, foreign investment, and a favorable international environment. This reality explains why Saudi diplomacy has increasingly emphasized mediation, dialogue, and compromise. In many respects, this approach aligns with Russia’s own preference for political and diplomatic solutions to regional crises.

The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum is about far more than the participation of a large foreign delegation or the signing of another package of agreements. It reflects the remarkable evolution of Russian-Saudi relations over recent years. Energy, investment, trade, technology, education, tourism, and humanitarian cooperation have together created a solid foundation for deeper engagement between the two countries.

A century ago, Moscow was among the first capitals to recognize the young Saudi state. Today, Russia and Saudi Arabia approach the centenary of diplomatic relations as influential actors in an increasingly multipolar world. The Kingdom’s role as the leading Arab guest at SPIEF reflects concrete projects, multi-billion-dollar investment plans, joint efforts to stabilize global energy markets, and a shared determination to build relations based on mutual respect, pragmatism, and long-term strategic vision.

India has deployed nuclear warheads for the first time, according to a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), indicating a shift in New Delhi’s military posture.

In its annual report, SIPRI Yearbook 2026, the think tank reported that India is estimated to have a growing stockpile of “about 190 nuclear weapons as of January 2026,” up from 180 last year.

The report suggested the development is a shift from the long-held assumption that India stores its nuclear warheads separate from its deployed launchers during peacetime.

SIPRI noted that these weapons were assigned to a maturing nuclear triad of aircraft, land-based missiles and nuclear-powered submarines (SSBNs).

The South Asian nation placing missiles in canisters and conducting sea-based deterrence patrols “suggest that India could be shifting in the direction of mating some of its warheads with their launchers in peacetime,” it said.

SIPRI also noted that more warheads are thought to be in production for additional missiles. As of January, India may have started to deploy a small number of nuclear warheads on a single Ship, Submersible, Ballistic, Nuclear (SSBN) platform, according to SIPRI’s assessment.

It added that New Delhi is also developing hypersonic cruise missiles (HCMs).

The SIPRI report said rival Pakistan’s nuclear warhead stockpile has remained stable at nearly 170 warheads as of January.

India’s nuclear planning has put a greater emphasis on investing more resources in longer-range weapon systems that appear to be focused on China, although New Delhi’s planning remains heavily influenced by its long-standing rivalry with Islamabad, it said.

China had 620 nuclear warheads as of January, 34 of which were in deployed state.

In May 2025, India and Pakistan were engaged in a brief military clash following a terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir that left 26 dead.

New Delhi has blamed Islamabad for backing insurgent groups carrying out terror attacks. Pakistan has denied the accusation.

Israel has struck the historic city of Tyre in Lebanon, targeting the Christian quarter for the first time after ordering a partial evacuation. The attack has heightened local concerns over the fate of the city’s revered Biblical heritage sites.

According to Reuters, eight people were killed in a single strike on Tyre’s eastern edge on Tuesday.

The Christian quarter, located in the city’s northwest, had been excluded from previous Israeli warnings and had sheltered people displaced from elsewhere.

The Israeli military issued the blanket evacuation order after claiming that Hezbollah militants were hiding in the quarter, a claim disputed by its residents, local officials, and the Lebanese army.

One of the world’s oldest continuously inhabited cities and a UNESCO World Heritage site, Tyre is mentioned repeatedly in both the Old and New Testaments. It was a major center of the ancient Phoenician kingdom, which supplied materials for the construction of Solomon’s Temple, believed to have stood on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, the site of the Al-Aqsa compound, one of Islam’s holiest sites.

The development comes amid growing tensions over religious and heritage sites across the region, with critics accusing Israel of expanding its control over locations sacred to Muslims and Christians.

Last month, Israel issued an expropriation order covering the village of Nabi Samwil in the occupied West Bank, home to what is believed to be the tomb of the Prophet Samuel, a figure revered in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

Palestinian officials and religious leaders have condemned the move as an attempt to erase Muslim heritage and strengthen Israeli control over contested holy sites.

Watch RT’s Charlotte Dubenskij report from Nabi Samwil below.

India has pitched collaborative efforts in quantum computing with Russia. Its objective is to achieve its $730 million National Quantum Mission (NQM) targets by 2030-31.

The initiative is aimed at creating a complete national quantum ecosystem, including intermediate-scale quantum computers, communication networks, and quantum materials and components, Indian Ambassador to Russia Vinay Kumar told the BRICS Quantum Technologies forum in Moscow on Monday.

The envoy cited the four technology hubs set up at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) in Madras, IIT Bombay and IIT Delhi as well as in Bengaluru, which connect researchers and institutions as drivers of human resource development, training and international collaboration in the fledgling field.

“A key mandate of these four hubs is international cooperation. India is looking to collaborate in advanced computing technology,” he said.

New Delhi is committed to taking a leadership role in the field, with international collaboration including researcher mobility, startup partnerships and joint innovation efforts, he said.

The NQM, headed by the Department of Atomic Energy, aims to create a vibrant ecosystem in Quantum Technology (QT); the Indian federal government approved the policy in 2023.

India plans to develop its own quantum computers by 2031, as it explores technology that could dramatically boost computing power for applications such as drug discovery, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence and climate modeling.

The NQM aims to build quantum computers with between 50 and 1,000 qubits – the basic units of information in such computers. The more qubits one has, the more powerful it is.

Russia unveiled its first 50-qubit quantum computer prototype developed by the Lomonosov Moscow State University and the Russian Quantum Center in December, 2024.

New Delhi is also planning satellite-based secure quantum communications between ground stations over 1,200 miles away from each other within the country, and long-distance secure quantum communications with other countries.

Last week, a top minister from India’s southern state of Andhra Pradesh called for collaboration with Moscow on artificial intelligence and quantum computing during a visit to the recently concluded St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.

The US and World Cup organizers have withdrawn Iran’s allocation of fan tickets just days before the tournament is set to begin, the country’s football federation has said.
The last-minute decision has left thousands of Iranian supporters who had already made travel arrangements unable to attend their team’s matches.

The World Cup kicks off on Thursday, with Iran set to face New Zealand and Belgium in their opening two Group G matches in Los Angeles on June 15 and June 21 respectively, before taking on Egypt in Seattle on June 26.

“The United States has once again acted to obstruct the presence of Iranian supporters at the stadiums hosting the national team’s three group stage matches,” the Football Federation of the Islamic Republic of Iran (FFIRI) said in a statement on Tuesday.

The federation said its ticket allocation had been withdrawn in an “unexpected move,” leaving it unable to provide “even a single ticket” to supporters of the national team.

Participating federations are typically allocated 8% of the tickets for each of their matches, which they distribute to supporters under their own criteria.

FFIRI described the decision as “contrary to the spirit governing international competitions and the principle of equality among participating countries.” It added that the move raised “serious questions about the interference of non-sporting and political considerations” in the organization of the World Cup.

Iran’s federation called on FIFA and tournament organizers “to uphold the principles of neutrality, fairness, and established regulations” and to ensure Iranian supporters could attend the matches.

The complaint is the latest dispute related to Iran’s World Cup preparations, which have been overshadowed by uncertainty since US and Israel launched air strikes on Iran in late February.

Tehran has said visa issues had prevented around 15 administrative and management staff in its delegation from entering the US, while Iran’s team was forced to abandon plans to base its World Cup training camp in Tucson, Arizona, and instead set up in the Mexican border city of Tijuana.

All Iranian players were granted US visas last week, 10 days before their World Cup opener, although several members of the delegation’s support staff were still denied entry. An unnamed US official told Reuters last week that Washington had issued “the visas necessary for Iran to compete in the World Cup.”

The US Department of War has added dozens of Chinese companies, including tech giant Alibaba, search engine Baidu, and electric vehicle maker BYD, to a blacklist of entities it claims are aiding Beijing’s military.

China has condemned the move, accusing Washington of targeting Chinese businesses.

The Pentagon’s so-called 1260H list, updated on Monday, includes 188 Chinese firms, up from around 130 last year. The list identifies companies that Washington claims are linked or contribute to the Chinese military under Beijing’s “military-civil fusion” strategy.

The designation does not impose full sanctions, but bars listed firms from future US defense contracts and is widely seen as a warning to investors and American companies.

Direct Pentagon contracts with listed firms are set to be prohibited later this month, while restrictions on buying their products or services through third parties are due to take effect in 2027, Reuters reported.

Beijing condemned the decision on Tuesday, with Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian saying China “firmly opposes” the US “overstretching the concept of national security” and using “discriminatory lists” to target Chinese businesses.

“We urge the US to correct its wrongdoings, and stop the unwarranted suppression of Chinese businesses,” Lin said, adding that China would take necessary measures to protect the “legitimate and lawful rights and interests” of its companies.

China has repeatedly accused the US of using national security claims to contain its economic rise and undermine its leading companies.

Several of the targeted firms have also rejected the designation. Alibaba, China’s largest e-commerce company, said there was “no basis” for including it on the list, insisting it is “not a Chinese military company nor part of any military-civil fusion strategy.”

Baidu called the accusation “entirely baseless,” while BYD said it firmly opposed being labeled a military company and would use legal means to defend its interests.

The updated list comes less than a month after US President Donald Trump met Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Beijing for talks aimed at managing tensions between the world’s two largest economies. The summit produced no major breakthrough, but both sides agreed to continue dialogue and manage disputes over trade, technology, and security.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo’s High Military Court has sentenced all 54 defendants to death in a long-running case involving the murder of two UN experts.  

The victims, investigator Michael Sharp, a 34-year-old American, and expert Zaida Catalan, a 36-year-old Swede, were killed in 2017 while investigating violence in the conflict-ridden Kasai region. The Congolese court found that the pair had been lured into an ambush, accused of being traitors, and executed.

The verdict was delivered on Friday at Ndolo military prison in Kinshasa. Among those convicted was former Congolese army officer Colonel Jean de Dieu Mambweni, who previously served on the staff of the 21st Military Region.

Mambweni was initially sentenced to ten years in prison in 2022 for failing to assist people in danger and disobeying orders. However, judges later concluded that he had played a direct role in arranging the operation that led to the deaths of the UN investigators. 

The DR Congo’s National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) argued that the investigation failed to identify and prosecute those who may have ordered and orchestrated the killings. 

Sharp and Catalan were investigating reports of mass killings in Kasai when fighters linked to the Kamuina Nsapu militia stopped them at a bridge near the village of Moyo-Musila on March 12, 2017. They were then led into a remote wooded area, where they were killed. Their remains were found 16 days after the attack.

The death penalty is legal in DR Congo. Although courts continued to hand down death sentences, a de facto moratorium in place since 2003 meant they were routinely commuted to life imprisonment. The government ended the 21-year suspension of executions in March 2024, restoring capital punishment in practice.

Across Africa, more countries have abolished capital punishment in recent decades. Since 2000, nations such as Gabon (2010), the Republic of Congo and Madagascar (2015), Chad (2020), Sierra Leone (2021), and the Central African Republic and Zambia (2022) have ended the death penalty.

India is exploring options to buy coking coal assets and import more nickel from Russia, Reuters reported, as New Delhi tries to secure supplies to boost steel production and speed up its energy transition.

An Indian delegation visited Russia in May for preliminary talks with government and industry executives, the report said, citing unnamed sources.

In January, India, the world’s second-largest producer of crude steel after China, designated coking coal a critical and strategic mineral because of import dependence.

“Both SAIL (Steel Authority of India Limited) and NMDC (India’s largest state-backed iron ore producer) are exploring sourcing of ⁠raw materials and are in talks with Russia,” the report cited a source as saying.

SAIL has set up an internal panel to study the issue, it said.

New Delhi sources more than half of its coking coal from Australia, while much of the rest is procured from Russia and the US.

Coking coal and nickel are used in the production of steel, which is essential in India’s renewable energy and EV push. Nickel is also a critical element used in the clean energy transition, especially battery production.

New Delhi has set a target: it hopes electric vehicles to account for 30% of cars and 80% of its two-wheeled vehicles by 2030, up from about 6% and 9% now.

NMDC has been exploring coking coal asset purchases abroad. It said last year that it was looking for coking coal opportunities in Australia and Indonesia.

India procures nickel mainly from China, Japan, Norway and the US, ‌and only a small amount from Russia.

India and Russia are reportedly also intensifying trade and investment cooperation in the Far East and the Arctic zone, with a program covering energy and mining.

In January, Reuters reported that New Delhi is exploring rare earth mining pacts with Russia, Australia, Argentina, Chile, as well as some African countries as part of its push to secure critical minerals.

The South Asian nation has committed to reaching 500 GW of non fossil electricity capacity by 2030; it was able to reach the 220 GW milestone by 2025, putting it broadly on track to meet this goal.

US President Donald Trump has confirmed media reports of a US Army Apache attack helicopter going down near the Strait of Hormuz amid Washington’s efforts to curb oil shipments by Iran.

The Apache choppers are one of the key aircraft used by the US military to enforce the blockade of Iranian ports, which had been imposed by Washington to pressure Tehran into agreeing a peace deal and restoring traffic through the strait. The key waterway, which the Iranians control, accounts for some 20% of the global crude oil trade.

“The pilots are fine, nobody injured,” Trump told journalists when asked about the incident on his way back from the third game of the NBA finals in New York late on Monday.

The Apache, which has been in service since the mid-1970s, is usually operated by two airmen.

The New York Times first reported the crash earlier on Monday. The newspaper did not say whether the helicopter had been brought down by hostile fire or suffered a technical malfunction.

Last month, the Congressional Research Service issued a report based on open-source materials, claiming that the US had lost at least 42 aircraft, both manned and unmanned, since the start of the American-Israeli attack on Iran on February 28.

In early April, Washington confirmed that two MC-130J Hercules transport planes, four MH-6 Little Bird helicopters, an A-10 Thunderbolt and an MQ-9 Reaper drone had been destroyed during an operation to recover the pilot of an F-15E Strike Eagle that had been downed by Iranian forces. Iranian officials have, at various points during the conflict, claimed that additional US aircraft were shot down, but many of those assertions have not been acknowledged by Washington.

Israel and Iran carried out strikes against each other on Monday in the worst escalation since the start of the April ceasefire between Washington and Tehran. The Iranian authorities claimed that the US bore “direct responsibility” for Israeli strikes on the Lebanese capital, Beirut, which triggered the exchange.

Despite those developments, Trump claimed that “we’re very close to having a very, very good, strong, powerful deal” with Iran that could be signed in “two or three days.” 

Tehran has rejected American demands to give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, while insisting on sanctions relief, the unfreezing of its assets, and an end to Israeli military operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon even before a final agreement is reached.

Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said on Monday that his country’s “goal is to end the war and establish lasting security” through diplomatic and military means, adding that Tehran has “no trust” in the US.

The US will declare “total victory” over Iran within two weeks, President Donald Trump has said, claiming Tehran was “willing to give us everything.”

Trump made the remark on Monday, hours after Iran and Israel agreed to halt their most intense fighting since an April ceasefire. Earlier that day, Iran declared an end to its attacks on Israel but warned it would respond with “crushing” force if Israeli military operations in Lebanon continued.

Tensions had spiked on Sunday after Israel struck Beirut despite a ceasefire, prompting Tehran’s retaliatory missile attacks on northern Israel and a fresh wave of Israeli airstrikes on Iran.

“We’ve been a very tough team, and I think we are winning that battle, but you’re really going to win it over the next two weeks when we declare total victory,” Trump stated during a tele-rally for Republican Senator Lindsey Graham.

“It’ll be a total victory, it will happen very soon, and oil prices will come tumbling down,” he added.

According to Trump, Iranian officials are seeking a “very good deal” and are prepared to give the US “everything,” including a pledge not to pursue a nuclear weapon.

Trump’s latest prediction is far from his first. Since announcing an Iran ceasefire in April and declaring the sides were “very far along” toward an agreement, the US president has repeatedly insisted a deal was imminent. Over the past two months, Trump has said or suggested at least 37 times that a breakthrough was near or that Tehran was eager to strike an accord, according to CNN estimates, yet no deal has materialized.

Trump is also reportedly considering deploying US special forces to Iran if diplomacy fails. Washington is weighing either renewed military action or a continued naval blockade of Iranian ports, with the US president said to favor the latter as a more effective option.

The Iran conflict has also featured in discussions between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

During an April phone call, Putin backed Trump’s decision to extend the ceasefire with Iran, saying it could create an opportunity for negotiations and help stabilize the Middle East.

Putin also warned of “inevitable, extremely harmful consequences” not only for Iran and its neighbors but for the wider international community if the US and Israel resumed military action. A ground operation inside Iran would be “unacceptable and dangerous,” he added.

Vladimir Zelensky has criticized British political party Reform UK for removing Ukrainian flags from public buildings in Britain, warning that such actions can ruin a “big friendship.”

The Ukrainian leader made the comments in an interview with The Guardian during a visit to London on Sunday, where he met Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

Asked about the decision by Reform-controlled councils – 24 out of over 350 in the UK – to remove foreign symbols outside British public buildings in the UK, including the Ukrainian flag, Zelensky urged the party to “put it back.”

“Sometimes little, small mistakes can break a big friendship or huge contacts,” Zelensky warned.

A Reform spokesman has defended the decision, telling GB News that it was “entirely reasonable” to support Ukrainians while also believing that only domestic flags should be flown from public buildings in Britain.

Nigel Farage’s party has insisted that only the St. George’s and Union Flags should be flown outside buildings it controls, noting that displaying foreign flags amounts to nothing more than “virtue signalling,” and that British lawmakers should instead focus on improving life in the UK.

Under Reform there will be no foreign flags flown above our public buildings.

Your reaction to this only demonstrates why you lost in the first place. https://t.co/mi8Je2WF24

— Nigel Farage MP (@Nigel_Farage) May 16, 2026

In his interview, however, Zelensky insisted that continued financial support for Ukraine is “in the interests of the UK,” claiming that it contributes to “security in Europe.”

The UK has provided more than $26.7 billion in military, humanitarian, and economic assistance to Ukraine since the escalation of the conflict with Russia in 2022.

During the same interview, Zelensky also revealed that he had pressed UK Prime Minister Starmer over the frozen proceeds from Russian tycoon Roman Abramovich’s £2.4 billion ($3.2 billion) sale of Chelsea FC. Zelensky insisted that the money, which London had earmarked for humanitarian purposes in Ukraine, should be handed over to Kiev, which would use it to buy anti-ballistic missiles from the US.

The funds remain in limbo amid a long-running dispute over how they should be used. Abramovich, who was sanctioned by London in 2022, has reportedly sought to direct the proceeds toward victims of the conflict on both sides.

Moscow has repeatedly condemned Western military and financial support for Ukraine, arguing that it only prolongs the conflict. Russian officials have singled out London as one of Kiev’s key backers, accusing the UK of pushing for more weapons, sanctions, and aid while obstructing efforts to reach a settlement.

Former Kenyan Chief Justice David Maraga was arrested alongside several activists during a protest against plans affecting Nairobi National Park, local media reported on Monday. 

Demonstrators opposed the proposed excision of a 75-acre section of the park, which is intended to make way for a parking facility capable of accommodating more than 1,000 vehicles, and a separate plan to relocate the Nairobi Animal Orphanage to a site near the Bomas of Kenya complex.

Maraga, who is running for president under the United Green Movement (UGM) next year, joined hundreds of protesters, arguing that protected land should not be altered without clear justification.

“Our national heritage and environment must be safeguarded from greed and unnecessary destruction without public participation,” Maraga wrote on X.

According to The Nation, organizers said the demonstration had been approved by regional police, while protesters alleged that plain-clothes officers later moved in and detained participants. The group had intended to deliver a petition to Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) headquarters before being stopped by anti-riot police.

Reuters reported that riot police fired tear gas to disperse scores of demonstrators. Officers arrested at least nine people, including Maraga.

The dispute centers on Nairobi National Park, Kenya’s oldest national park, which was established in 1946. The protected area is home to lions, rhinos, giraffes and other wildlife, and has repeatedly been at the center of public campaigns against infrastructure and development projects.

The latest rally is not the first protest to hit Kenya in recent weeks. Last week, hundreds of people took to the streets of Nanyuki to oppose a proposed US Ebola quarantine facility at Laikipia Air Base. According to reports, two people were killed during the unrest.

The demonstrations have since continued. On Tuesday, Kenyan police fired tear gas as crowds again gathered to oppose the facility. The NGO Vocal Africa said on X that one person died after police opened fire during the latest protests, marking another fatality in the unrest.

The Indian crew on board a merchant vessel that caught fire after it was struck by the US Navy for allegedly attempting to run the blockade of Iran has been safely evacuated, New Delhi has said. 

The tanker MT Marivex was carrying a crew of 24 Indians when it was reportedly targeted near Oman’s Masirah Island on Monday south of the Strait of Hormuz. SOS calls began at 1:30 local time, according to reports. 

The incident came amid a flare-up of tensions around the strait after Israel and Iran traded missile strikes early on Monday. 

The US Central Command (CENTCOM) said in a post on X that the Palau-flagged vessel was transiting international waters in the Gulf of Oman toward Iran when it was targeted. The ship was “attempting to sail to an Iranian port,” it said. 

The United States has been enforcing a naval and economic blockade of all Iranian ports since mid-April. Washington says it is in retaliation for Iranian restrictions on the movement of merchant ships through the Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of the world’s energy passed before the conflict began. 

An F/A-18 Super Hornet from the USS Abraham ⁠Lincoln fired a precision munition at the Marivex after the crew failed to comply with directions from US forces, CENTCOM said. 

Swift response by #MRCC #Mumbai following missile attack on MT Marivex in #OmanSRR.

On receiving information, MRCC Mumbai immediately coordinated with OMSC Oman, ensuring the safe rescue of 24 #Indian crew by #Oman Navy helicopters.@IndiaCoastGuard remains steadfast in its… pic.twitter.com/ULDjzgEK4g

— Indian Coast Guard (@IndiaCoastGuard) June 9, 2026

An External Affairs Ministry spokesperson said in New Delhi on Tuesday that the crew have been rescued and are safe. He also thanked the Omani government for its assistance.

“We understand there was some exchange of communication between the ship and the US navy before the incident,” he said, adding the Indian mission continues to be in touch with the rescued seafarers.

He said the Indian authorities were coordinating across government agencies to see to the welfare of the evacuees. The Forward Seamen’s Union of India has urged swift action to ensure the safety of the crew. 

The Indian Coast Guard said the Marine Rescue Coordination Centre in Mumbai coordinated with its counterpart in Oman, to ensure the safe rescue of the crew by Omani Navy helicopters. 

The ship was not carrying cargo when it was struck. 

The US had previously sanctioned the Marivex for alleged links to Iran, Reuters reported. The sanctions were imposed in December, according to shipping database Equasis. Ship-tracking website Marine Traffic lists the 135-foot vessel as an oil and chemical tanker. 

The Indian-flagged cargo vessel MSV Haji Ali sank off the coast of Oman following a suspected drone or missile strike last month. 

In March, the US Navy sank an Iranian Navy vessel off the Sri Lankan coast, killing at least 87 sailors on board.  

On May 28, 2026, France’s National Assembly voted unanimously to repeal the Code Noir – the 1685 royal decree that institutionalized slavery across France’s colonies. Tears were shed at the podium, speeches vibrated with hard-won dignity. Then the doors of the Palais Bourbon closed, and nothing changed. It should be noted: The symbolic without the substance is nothing but memorial theater. France owes a debt it has never paid, and a unanimous vote, however moving, does not begin to settle it.

Two hundred and fifty-four deputies repealed a decree that reduced human beings to the legal status of ‘moveable goods’ to be bought, sold, inherited, and mutilated. The vote was unanimous. France rarely finds such unity, and here, that unity served above all to mask the emptiness that follows.

Let us be precise though: This document carried no legal force since the abolition of slavery in 1848. Repealing it in 2026 means removing a legal corpse from the statute books. Symbolically necessary, without question the persistence of these royal edicts in French law was, as Macron himself admitted, “a form of offense.” But presented as a major act of justice, this vote amounts to a political sleight of hand. France has not repaired. France has deleted a line of text.

Acknowledge – and forget?

The question of reparations burns conspicuously on the lips of the bill’s rapporteur, Max Mathiasin, who chose to address it in a “broader framework” – a phrase that, in the vocabulary of French politics, has historically meant ‘not now, not here, perhaps never’. The debate took place, we should note, a few steps from a marble statue of Jean-Baptiste Colbert, the minister of Louis XIV who drafted the Code Noir. He has not been moved.

“What does it mean to repeal the Code Noir in 2026 if the overseas territories continue to be viewed from Paris as distant peripheries?” Emeline K/Bidi, a French lawyer and politician who represents Reunion’s 4th constituency in the assembly, said.

In 2001, the Taubira Law recognized the transatlantic slave trade and slavery as ‘crimes against humanity’. It was a landmark achievement, fought for over years against significant political resistance. Twenty-five years on, what remains of that recognition? An annual commemoration on May 10. Presidential speeches. And a republic that still names streets, schools, and public buildings after the men who organized the deportation and torture of millions of human beings.

Here lies the unbearable paradox of the French Republic: It acknowledges the crime, votes to repeal its founding texts, and in the same breath continues to honor those who designed the system.

The Haitian affair

To understand the full scale of France’s unredeemed debt, one must look at Haiti. In 1825, under direct threat of military bombardment, French King Charles X extorted from the young Haitian Republic of the first free Black nation in the world, born from the only successful slave revolution in history, an “independence debt” of 150 million gold francs.

Some figures: 150 million gold francs imposed on Haiti in 1825 = 16× the country’s GDP.

90 million gold francs was the “renegotiated” amount in 1838, still ruinous.

Over a century of financial subjugation to French creditors – €0 in reparations paid by France to descendants of enslaved people to date.

The enslaved and their descendants were thus forced to compensate their oppressors. France compelled the victims to pay their torturers. This post-colonial extortion locked Haiti into structural financial dependence for more than a century. The Haitian people having already paid with their blood and their freedom were made to pay again with their future.

In 2015, Francois Hollande promised at a slavery memorial in Guadeloupe: “When I visit Haiti, I will in turn settle the debt we owe.” He never came, and the debt was never settled. Macron, for his part, acknowledged that reparations should be “addressed,” while announcing no specific measures.

France remains one of the nine states, along with the UK, to have voted against the 2022 UN Human Rights Council resolution 51/32 calling on states to deliver restorative justice for slavery and colonialism. It is a deliberate political choice.

France also abstained, alongside the UK and EU states, when the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution in March recognizing the transatlantic slave trade and the enslavement of Africans as among the gravest crimes against humanity.

Slavery is not ancient history. It lives on in the poverty rates of Guadeloupe, Martinique, and Reunion, in unemployment figures that systematically exceed those of metropolitan France, in the persistent health and educational disparities that no post-war republic has managed or truly tried to close.

Martinican activist Dieudonnee Boutrin, a descendant of enslaved people, said it plainly after the National Assembly vote: “It changes nothing. Black people are still looked at the same way.” She called for a “real reparations program,” funding for education, the active transmission of history, and the dismantling of systemic racism. Not symbolism, but structural, funded, accountable change.

Serge Letchimy, the former president of Martinique, demanded in an open letter to Macron a law establishing clearly that “the crimes of trafficking and slavery have caused lasting historical, cultural, social, economic and psychological harm.”

As French Green MP Steevy Gustave stated, “No vote alone can repair centuries of shattered lives. We are not descendants of slaves. We are descendants of human beings born free, then reduced to the worst – reduced to slavery.”

What can actually be done

Acknowledging Haiti’s debt can open a negotiated restitution process in direct consultation with Haitian civil society. A national reparations fund should be established for descendants of enslaved people in France’s overseas territories, covering education, economic development, and public health. An independent commission of historians, jurists, and community representatives should be set to quantify the harm and propose binding measures. The statues honoring the architects of slavery beginning with Colbert at the Palais Bourbon, should be removed, while history of slavery and colonization should be integrated into national school curricula as a core chapter of French identity, not a footnote.

The vote of May 28, 2026 was necessary, long overdue, and genuinely moving for those who lived it. But it has already been co-opted, turned into a showcase for a Republic that watches itself perform goodness without ever paying the price of its guilt.

France built a significant portion of its historical wealth on chained bodies and stolen labor. It compensated slave owners at the moment of abolition; it compensated no enslaved person, ever. And today it votes, weeps, and returns to business with Colbert still watching from his pedestal.

Restorative justice is a moral, legal, and political obligation. France should choose whether to remain permanently in the theater of the symbolic or to finally enter the era of repair.

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s open letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin was a publicity stunt rather than a sincere invitation to peace talks, Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, has said.

Zelensky published the message last week after Putin again stated that Moscow remained open to diplomacy with Kiev. In the letter, the Ukrainian leader accused the Russian president of wrongdoing and called for a direct one-on-one meeting, which he claimed could help bring an end to the conflict.

Addressing a UN Security Council meeting on Monday, Nebenzia dismissed the letter as another example of Ukrainian “megaphone diplomacy,” accusing Kiev of having “openly embarked on the path of terrorism.”

According to the Russian envoy, the message “is by no means a peace initiative, but rather a clumsy provocation designed to camouflage Kiev’s desperate attempts to derail any negotiations.” Russia has no intention “of participating in mock negotiations or performances staged for the public.”

‘Several pages of rudeness’

Zelensky has repeatedly called for a face-to-face meeting with Putin. However, he has ruled out traveling to Moscow and refused to consider withdrawing Ukrainian troops from Donbass, which Putin said would be enough for Russia to declare a ceasefire.

Putin, responding to the letter, said the conditions don’t currently exist for such a meeting to take place. His foreign policy aide, Yury Ushakov, characterized Zelensky’s message as “several pages of rudeness,” while Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Moscow viewed it as a sign that “Ukraine does not need negotiations.”

Zelensky later met with the leaders of the UK, Germany and France in London. Their joint statement demanded an immediate ceasefire and reiterated plans to deploy NATO troops to Ukraine after the conflict with Russia is over. Moscow has repeatedly ruled out such an arrangement.

The Zelensky-Putin exchange took place while the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum was underway. During the event, Ukrainian forces launched several drone attacks targeting Russia’s second-largest city.

West funding Zelensky’s ‘terrorism’ – Moscow

Nebenzia pointed to recent Ukrainian attacks on Russian civilians, including a drone strike on a school dormitory in Starobelsk, as well as attacks on a bus and a train carrying passengers from Moscow to Simferopol.

He argued that the West’s refusal to acknowledge victims of Ukrainian attacks reflects a form of political screening, in which “some victims are declared worthy of sympathy, while others are deliberately erased” in order to shield Kiev from scrutiny.

He said that despite Kiev’s criminality and corruption, Ukraine continues to receive unconditional political and financial backing from foreign governments. Nebenzia claimed Western leaders tolerate Zelensky’s policies because they have turned Ukraine into “expendable cannon fodder” in a “senseless crusade” against Russia.

The envoy further alleged that Western officials know Zelensky and his inner circle are profiting from foreign aid, but continue providing “handouts” in order to prolong the conflict.

The Armenian opposition will contest the results of the country’s parliamentary election, the leader of the Armenia Alliance, former President Robert Kocharyan, has vowed.

The Civil Contract party of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who campaigned on a promise to integrate the land-locked post-Soviet nation with the EU, won 49.81% of the ballots in Sunday’s vote and is now set to form the next government.

The Strong Armenia party of Russian-Armenian businessman Samvel Karapetyan came in second with 23.29%, followed by the Armenia Alliance with 9.94%. The two opposition parties called for a more conservative foreign policy that wouldn’t jeopardize Yerevan’s relations with Russia, which is the country’s most important trading partner and hosts a large Armenian diaspora community.

The vote was marred by an unsuccessful attempt by Pashinyan’s government to disqualify the Strong Armenia party as well as the arrests of six of its candidates. Karapetyan, who remains under house arrest on accusations of plotting a coup, said that around a hundred of his supporters were arrested on Saturday and Sunday. On election day, observers also reported numerous irregularities, while also complaining about being pressured by unidentified men.

Kocharyan said in a statement on Monday that the vote “took place amid systematic pressure from the authorities... unprecedented use of administrative resources and violations of the electoral process.”

“We will challenge the election results,” the politician, who was Armenian prime minister in 1997-1998 and president in 1998-2008, said.

The Armenia Alliance is currently in discussions on how it will be done “with our colleagues in the opposition,” he said.

“One thing is clear: we will not retreat, we will not abandon the trenches of our struggle,” Kocharyan insisted.

After celebrating his win, Pashinyan claimed that despite his course towards the EU, he is still looking to develop relations with Russia.

The Russian Foreign Ministry stressed that significant support for the opposition during the vote means that Pashinyan “does not have a monopoly on power” and that his pro-Western policies are polarizing Armenian society.

Moscow previously suggested that Yerevan should hold a referendum on Armenia’s future course, warning that the country can’t have it both ways as the EU free trade zone has standards incompatible with that of the Eurasian Economic Space, to which Russia belongs.

US President Donald Trump threatened to withdraw support for Israel during a tense phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Axios has reported.

Trump has held several heated phone conversations with the Israeli prime minister since Iran announced last week that it was suspending talks with the US over repeated Israeli strikes in Lebanon.

Iran’s conditions for a peace agreement include the cessation of hostilities on “all fronts,” including Lebanon, where nearly 3,700 people have been killed since early March, when Israel resumed strikes in response to attacks by Hezbollah.

Israel and Iran exchanged strikes on Sunday and Monday for the first time since a ceasefire was reached in April, following an Israeli strike in Beirut.

Axios reported on Monday that Trump said in a phone interview with the outlet that he had warned Netanyahu that “if he went back to war with Iran, he might find himself fighting alone.” Trump previously confirmed reports that he had called Netanyahu “f**king crazy” during an earlier conversation.

BBC North America editor Sarah Smith said Trump told her by phone on Monday that he had urged the Israeli leader to “use common sense,” adding that he was “very close to signing a very powerful deal” with Iran.

Multiple reports said Trump tried to persuade Netanyahu not to retaliate after Iran launched 11 missiles, all of which were intercepted. According to Smith, Trump said Netanyahu told him that Israeli missiles “were already on the way” by the time they spoke.

Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said the strikes in Lebanon and the naval blockade of Iranian ports made the US and Israel legitimate targets.

“They are neither committed to a ceasefire nor believe in dialogue,” he wrote on X on Sunday.

Iran has accused the US president of starting the war entirely at Israel’s behest, echoing some of Trump’s domestic critics. Trump, however, has argued that he “calls the shots” and recently said that Israel would have no choice but to accept whatever terms he agreed upon with Iran.

The International Criminal Court has suspended its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, pending further proceedings over allegations of sexual misconduct.

In a statement on Monday, The Hague-based court said Khan had been suspended with immediate effect pending a final decision by the Assembly of States Parties.

The court said the decision was based on a report by the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), the underlying evidence, written submissions, and advice from an ad hoc panel of experts.

While the court said related documents would remain confidential, Reuters, citing a diplomatic source, reported that the bureau of the ICC’s executive body had ruled that Khan committed “serious misconduct” and recommended removing him from office. He had already taken voluntary leave last year.

The allegations first emerged in 2024, when AP reported that Khan was accused of coercing a female aide into a sexual relationship. Khan has denied any wrongdoing. 

According to the New York Times, UN investigators found evidence that Khan had engaged in “non-consensual sexual contact” with a staff member, but judges initially ruled that the findings did not meet the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard. The investigation reportedly continued in April, with both sides allowed to submit additional evidence.

During Khan’s tenure, the ICC issued arrest warrants for the leaders of Russia and Israel, although neither country recognizes the court’s jurisdiction.

In March 2023, the ICC issued warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and the country’s top children’s rights official, Maria Lvova-Belova, on charges of the “unlawful transfer” of children from Ukraine. Russia rejected the allegations, saying it had evacuated children from a war zone and reunited them with their families whenever documentation was available.

In November 2024, the court issued warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on charges of war crimes in Gaza. Netanyahu dismissed the warrants as “absurd and false.”

Last year, the US imposed sanctions on Khan over his role in authorizing an investigation into the conduct of American troops in Afghanistan and issuing what Washington described as “baseless” arrest warrants for Israeli officials.

Moscow must re-evaluate its policies toward longtime ally Armenia after the party of Western-backed Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan won Sunday’s election, Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, has told RT.

According to the official tally, the ruling Civil Contract party received 49.81% of the vote – enough to form a government but not enough to carry out Pashinyan’s proposed constitutional reforms without support from opposition MPs. The election was widely seen as a referendum on whether the small, landlocked post-Soviet nation in the South Caucasus should move closer to the EU at the expense of its historically close ties to Russia.

Opposition parties have accused Pashinyan of “usurping” power through what they described as pressure on election officials and the prosecution of political opponents.

“The turbulent campaign featured pressure on the opposition and apparent attempts at foreign influence from the EU, the US, and Russia,” Lukyanov said on Monday, adding that the ruling party had failed to secure “a blank check.”

“The struggle will continue, with new opposition forces entering the fray. They appear to have more energy and better prospects than their predecessors,” he added.

“The main question for Russia is: What does it want from Armenia going forward? Does it need Armenia as a key partner in the South Caucasus, what exactly makes the country important, and under what conditions is Russia prepared to preserve and develop ties? And is it ready to scale them back completely should domestic and foreign-policy trends in Armenia become unfavorable? For now, Moscow has no answers,” Lukyanov said.

Russia is Armenia’s largest trading partner and supplies more than 80% of the country’s natural gas and around 60% of its oil. Despite not sharing a land border, the two countries have a defense pact, and Armenia hosts a Russian military base. Around 2 million ethnic Armenians live in Russia, compared to roughly 3 million in Armenia itself.

While Pashinyan has pledged to strengthen ties with the EU, he has said that Armenia will, at least for the foreseeable future, remain a member of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).

Russian President Vladimir Putin, however, has warned that it would be impossible to maintain free trade arrangements with both blocs simultaneously. He argued that leaving the EAEU would deprive Armenia of discounted oil and gas supplies, costing the country an estimated 14% of its GDP.

Russia has also condemned the arrest of Pashinyan’s political opponents and criminal cases against them, as well as the treatment of bishops and clerics of the Armenian Apostolic Church who have criticized him.

Putin said Russia wanted to retain friendly ties with Armenia and respects its sovereignty.

“We will maintain normal relations with Armenia regardless of the path it chooses,” he said last week at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.

Putin urged Yerevan to hold a referendum on potential EU membership “as soon as possible.” Pashinyan has said he would call such a vote only after Armenia, which is technically in Asia, formally applies to join the EU.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said Moscow would continue to support “a strong and truly sovereign Armenia,” describing the Armenian people as “a brotherly nation.”

The ministry said the election had revealed “deep polarization” within Armenian society, warning that “unilateral decisions” regarding the country’s future course could “deepen divisions and trigger social and economic unrest.”

Award-winning football referee Omar Artan, the first Somali national to officiate at a FIFA World Cup finals tournament, has been denied entry to the US.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup, which will be co-hosted by the US, Mexico, and Canada, has faced scrutiny well before kickoff over a range of organizational concerns, including shifting US entry policies and strict regulations that have led to lengthy match suspensions due to weather alerts and other disruptions.

The latest controversy emerged on Monday when Artan was refused entry and turned away at Miami International Airport despite holding a valid US visa. The Somali referee was forced to return to Istanbul, Türkiye, where he has been based, according to Ciise Aden Abshir, a senior adviser to Somalia’s Ministry of Youth and Sports and a former national team captain.

“Omar Artan is among Africa’s most respected referees and deserves the support of the entire football community,” Abshir told AFP. “Denying him entry to the United States and preventing him from officiating scheduled matches harms not only him personally but also undermines football’s commitment to fairness, merit, and the spirit of fair play,” he added.

FIFA later confirmed that the referee would be unable to officiate at the tournament after being denied entry to the US.

“FIFA is not involved in host-country immigration processes, including visa adjudications, and has been informed by the authorities that Mr. Artan’s status will not be changed at this time,” a spokesperson for world football’s governing body told AFP.

No clear reason was immediately known for denying entry for the referee, who became the first Somali national to be picked for the World Cup finals. The decision is likely related to the Trump administration’s broad ban on immigration and visa processing imposed on Somali nationals.

The US has taken other hostile steps against the African nation, moving early this year to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for people originating from the country.

In a separate incident, the national team of Senegal was subjected to extensive searching on the runway immediately after they exited their plane. Footage circulating online shows the team’s members being patted down by law enforcement officials and checked with metal detectors. Senegal is another African nation that is on Trump’s travel ban list as well.

Over the weekend, an apparent abrupt policy change in US entry rules affected dozens of Scottish fans days before the start of the tournament, where the Scottish national team will make an appearance for the first time in nearly three decades. Multiple fans found their applications to the US Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) abruptly switching from “approved” to “pending” or “travel not authorized.” An approved ESTA is usually valid for two years and allows multiple entries, while UK nationals are allowed to stay in the US for up to 90 days without a visa.

The current debate in Canada over Indigenous rights, language revitalization, and the restoration of original place names, especially in British Columbia, is deeply rooted in historical truth, constitutional reality, and the lived experience of Indigenous peoples who have survived centuries of systemic efforts to erase our presence.

Over 95% of British Columbia remains unceded territory, land that was never surrendered through treaty. When British Columbia joined Canada in 1871, the provincial government refused to recognize Aboriginal Title or negotiate treaties across most of the province. This is a historical and constitutional fact.

After devastating epidemics of smallpox and other European diseases swept through our communities, colonial governments concluded that Indigenous peoples had been so weakened that we could no longer mount effective resistance.

They believed we were a vanishing race. It was this assumption that led them to seize vast territories by force of arms, without treaties or consent. This was not a lawful process. It was an illegal occupation of sovereign Indigenous lands, enforced by police and military power.

The recent formal recognition of Haida Aboriginal Title across all of Haida Gwaii, 10,180 square kilometers, by British Columbia and Canada stands as powerful confirmation of what Indigenous peoples have always maintained: Our Indigenous titles were never lawfully extinguished, and where we made treaties, they have been broken.

Indigenous oral traditions speak of well over 1 million of our peoples living in what is now British Columbia before European contact. Smallpox and other introduced diseases decimated entire communities, reducing the Indigenous population from more than 1 million to around 40,000.

For instance, the Nuxalk Nation on British Columbia’s central coast saw its population collapse from over 30,000 to around 300. The Tsleil-Waututh Nation near Vancouver was reduced from over 10,000 to fewer than 20 people.

In the Arctic, the Canadian government slaughtered the sled dogs of the Inuit, forcibly relocated families from their traditional territories, and confined them to permanent settlements.

This deliberate destruction of their self-sufficient way of life continues to echo today. The Inuit of Nunavut suffer the second-highest suicide rates in the world, surpassed only by the Inuit of Greenland, with rates approximately ten times the Canadian national average, accompanied by devastating levels of alcohol and drug abuse.

Before colonization, our societies had no alcohol, no drugs, no locked doors, and no prisons. We lived in relative peace and harmony, especially compared to the endless wars raging across much of the rest of the world at the time.

The arrival of colonization introduced cultural genocide, a systematic attempt to destroy our languages, spiritual practices, governance systems, and ways of life.

The church-operated, Canada-funded residential school system formed a central part of this assault. For over a century, more than 150,000 Indigenous children were forcibly removed from their families and communities.

They were punished for speaking their own languages, forbidden from practicing their spiritual traditions, and subjected to widespread physical and sexual abuse. Justice and Senator Murray Sinclair, chairperson of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, estimates that 25,000, and even more, children never made it home.

The discovery of over 200 unmarked graves at the former Kamloops Indian Residential School in 2021, followed by almost 3,000 suspected unmarked graves yet to be excavated at other former school sites across Canada, has forced Canada, as well as the Catholic, Anglican, and United Church of Christ, to confront the true horror of what took place at their hands.

The intergenerational trauma created by these continues to devastate our communities to this day. Indigenous women and girls are vastly overrepresented among Canada’s missing and murdered women. Indigenous people make up around 5% of Canada’s population, yet account for one-third of all adults incarcerated in Canadian prisons.

This is the predictable result of generations of deliberate cultural annihilation.

The return of some original sacred place names has sparked discomfort among some Canadians. Yet it is rarely mentioned that the vast majority of place names in British Columbia were imposed by the colonial authorities to honor British royalty and colonial officials.

British Columbia itself, Vancouver Island, the former Queen Charlotte Islands, the provincial capital of Victoria, and countless cities, rivers, and mountains across the province all bear names given by colonial power.

For Indigenous peoples, restoring sacred, original Indigenous place names is not an attack on Canada. It is a modest but meaningful step toward correcting a long history of cultural erasure and genocide.

The implementation of DRIPA, British Columbia’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, has created significant uncertainty and debate. Many citizens worry that it gives Indigenous peoples excessive influence over land and resource decisions.

For Indigenous peoples, however, DRIPA represents a long-overdue commitment by the province to align its laws with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Canada has endorsed UNDRIP, as have nearly all 193 United Nations member states.

Canada signed 70 historic treaties with Indigenous nations. Like its southern neighbor, which signed and subsequently broke over 370 treaties, Canada has repeatedly failed to honor its own treaty commitments and obligations.

Despite this painful history, Indigenous peoples across Canada and the Americas are rising. We are reclaiming our languages, revitalizing our cultures, reasserting our laws, and stepping forward once again as the rightful caretakers of these lands and waters. This resurgence is not about domination or revenge. It is about healing, justice, reconciliation, and restoring balance.

Reconciliation cannot be built on contempt, sarcasm, or denial of history. It must be grounded in truth, humility, and mutual respect. Indigenous rights are not privileges handed down by the state. Indigenous rights flow from our original, unsurrendered sovereignty and our sacred responsibilities to these lands and waters that have sustained us since time immemorial.

We can and should have honest disagreements about policy and implementation. But we cannot build a shared and truthful future by minimizing or mocking the suffering of the Indigenous Peoples of Canada and the Americas.

Several thousand demonstrators took to the streets of Berlin on Monday, calling for the resignation of German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

The rally drew participants from across Germany, many of whom traveled to the capital in organized car convoys, according to local media. Organizers said they registered 10,000 attendees, while Berlin police estimated the crowd at around 4,000.

Demonstrators marched with German flags and carried placards bearing slogans such as “Not my chancellor” and “Merz must go.”

Local authorities said the protest remained peaceful and concluded without incident.

The rally was organized by the non-partisan group Project M1llion, which says it brings together a broad coalition of disaffected Germans, including farmers, tradespeople, business owners, logistics workers, laborers, pensioners, and mothers – “all the people who realize that something is terribly wrong here.”

On its website, the movement promotes an 11-point platform that includes the “resignation of the current federal government and immediate new elections.” It also calls for an end to financial support for “any kind of warring party.”

While Ukraine is not mentioned by name in the platform, Germany has provided Kiev with billions of euros in military and financial aid since the escalation of the conflict with Russia in 2022.

The group is also campaigning to roll back a number of Germany’s green policies and to deport undocumented migrants without delay.

Public discontent with Merz appears to be deepening. An INSA poll published by Bild on Saturday found that 77% of Germans are dissatisfied with the chancellor’s performance – the worst rating of his tenure, according to the newspaper. His coalition government with the Social Democratic Party is viewed similarly negatively, with 78% of respondents expressing dissatisfaction.

The survey suggests the frustration extends beyond the opposition, with many CDU/CSU and SPD supporters also unhappy with the government’s performance.

“A government that can’t even convince its remaining voters is doomed to fail. The level of dissatisfaction far exceeds what is typical in the second year of a new federal government’s term,” INSA head Hermann Binkert told Bild.

NATO has launched a new experimental unit to test assorted unmanned systems in the Arctic, as the US-led bloc continues to increase its military presence in the region.

The bloc has consistently cited an alleged Russian threat to justify its Arctic buildup. Moscow has rejected the claims, arguing that the region’s militarization has been driven by NATO’s own actions and pledging to respond accordingly to activity in the Arctic, where Russia controls more than half of the coastline.

The latest NATO initiative was unveiled over the weekend as the research vessel Alliance departed La Spezia, Italy, launching Task Force X-Arctic (TFX-Arctic). The experimental unit is set to operate through 2026 and into next year, with the stated aim of demonstrating how uncrewed systems can provide persistent multi-domain situational awareness across the North Atlantic, the Arctic, and the High North. The deployment builds on experience gained from a similar task force launched in the Baltic Sea last year.

“Task Force X-Arctic is about testing and integrating new technology in one of the most demanding operational environments on the planet. It will help Allies define the standards of the future and maintain the fighting edge required to operate, adapt, and prevail in the High North,” Admiral Pierre Vandier said.

The announcement comes amid NATO’s major BALTOPS 26 drills currently underway in the Baltics. The purported need to “deter Russian threats” was openly named among the goals of the 55th installment of the exercise, which involves around 6,000 personnel from 15 NATO nations. This year, the exercise is being led for the first time by an in-house command-and-control structure, Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum, headquartered in the Netherlands, rather than being helmed by the US.

Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, have repeatedly sounded alarm about NATO’s buildup in the Arctic and beyond, saying that the military bloc views the Arctic as a “bridgehead for possible conflicts” and warning that Moscow will respond accordingly. 

Last week, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova suggested the “insane myths about the Russian threat” in the Arctic and elsewhere have been drummed up by the leaders of NATO members to explain to their populations “why they must spend even more on militarization and allocate additional funds to address imaginary problems rather than real challenges and threats related to resolving economic and social problems.”

French prosecutors have been ordered to review all ongoing complaints involving violence against minors after the murder of an 11-year-old girl exposed major failures in the justice system.

Last week, police discovered the body of a girl named Lyhanna in an abandoned grain silo in southwestern France shortly after she disappeared near Fleurance. Authorities have since arrested 41-year-old Jerome B., whose daughter went to the same school as Lyhanna, as the primary suspect.

The case has sparked nationwide outrage after it emerged that Jerome B. had faced multiple allegations of sexual violence, including against minors, but was never convicted, with the cases either dropped, dismissed, or left unresolved.

Following public anger, French Justice Minister Gerald Darmanin announced on Monday that prosecutors have been given until July 14 to examine all 70,000 ongoing formal complaints involving child victims, designating it as an “absolute priority.”

Darmanin has described the case as a “terrible failure” by the state and the justice system, saying in a public apology on Friday that the judiciary had failed Lyhanna’s family and promising an inspection report within 15 days.

The minister has convened France’s chief prosecutors in Paris, stating disciplinary action could follow if failures are identified, ranging from reprimands to dismissals.

French President Emmanuel Macron has also condemned what he called “unacceptable” lapses in the justice system and asked the government to determine what went wrong.

Around 6,000 people joined a silent march in Lyhanna’s hometown of Fleurance on Sunday, while child protection and feminist groups have called for demonstrations outside courts and the Justice Ministry, with some critics calling for Darmanin’s resignation.

Officials, however, have urged against making the judiciary the sole scapegoat for broader institutional failures. Frederic Chevallier, president of France’s National Conference of Public Prosecutors, pointed to chronic staffing problems, noting that the country has roughly three prosecutors per 100,000 inhabitants.

According to the French Interior Ministry, minors accounted for nearly 58% of all sexual violence victims recorded last year.

The world is likely to face further global shocks in the foreseeable future, with no respite in sight, International Monetary Fund Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva has warned.

Appearing on Bloomberg’s podcast ‘Leaders with Francine Lacqua’ on Monday, Georgieva expressed concern that “we are not completely internalizing yet that this is how the world is going to be.”

“We are not going to get to a place where shocks are gone,” she added.

The IMF chief said, “we collectively did not appreciate the backlash against globalization.” She noted that communities around the world have been “hollowed out because their jobs disappeared and there was not enough attention to them,” warning that the rapid introduction of AI into business and production processes could exacerbate these trends.

In its World Economic Outlook released in mid-April, the IMF downgraded its global growth forecast for 2026 from the previous projection of 3.4% to 3.1%, citing the steep rise in oil prices caused by the US-Israeli war against Iran.

The IMF said it expected slower growth in both the US and the Eurozone, with the latter facing the “negative impact of the Middle East conflict” and the “lingering effects” of higher energy prices following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict.

By contrast, the forecast for Russia saw an upward revision of 0.3 percentage points compared to the IMF’s January estimate.

The US-Israeli war against Iran and the country’s retaliatory strikes across the Middle East sent global oil prices sharply higher. Hostilities in the region have disrupted traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a key route for global oil and gas supplies.

Faced with rising energy prices, officials across the EU have suggested restoring energy ties with Russia. Brussels, however, has refused to walk back its plan to completely phase out Russian fossil fuels by 2027.

Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev predicted last month that the EU and UK would be deluged by the “energy crisis tsunami.”

There’s an old treaty that, if you have signed up to it, says that you can’t spread nuclear weapons. So, if you don’t have any nukes and you sign the treaty, you can’t get any. Simple as that. You’d think.

But leave it to the West, with all its ‘values’ and ‘rules-based order’ to, you know, not really break the rules. Just bend them a little. Bend them so much, in fact, that just breaking them would be more honest and less embarrassing.

The agreement we are talking about is, of course, the 1968  Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), according to the International Atomic Energy Agency “the centerpiece” – no less – of much that is good, beautiful, and eminently reasonable. Namely “global efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to further the goal of nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament.” Germany, for instance, is a long-standing signatory.

And yet, Germany and five other NPT signatories who belong to America’s NATO client system have nuclear gravity bombs on their (formally, at least) sovereign territory, and their air forces stand ready to carry them to targets which would be – surprise, surprise – in Russia. The little piece of shyster-level legal sophistry used to cover for this obvious breach of the Non-Proliferation Treaty is called – wait for it – “Nuclear Sharing.” Sweet, isn’t it? The world – or, perhaps, just Europe – may end in a man-made big bang of fire and fallout, but, as they say in kindergarten ‘sharing is caring.’

By the way, it is obvious – and would have been to men such as Clausewitz, York (both with some serious delay, admittedly), or Bismarck – that, for instance, German officers worth their salt would have to prepare secret emergency plans for rapidly seizing those nuclear weapons on German territory from our American ‘allies.’ Without bloodshed, if possible; or with, if necessary.

One very bad day, that may well be the only way to save Germany from getting its very own ‘end of history’ by being burned to irradiated cinders in a ‘limited’ nuclear war waged on behalf of one or another set of madmen – or women or whatever non-binary option then in power, of course – in Washington. A quietly kept drawer with such last-resort plans in one paper copy only would be the bare minimum genuine German national interest requires. If that’s too bold for you as a German soldier, maybe don’t join the military – or just be honest, change your citizenship, and sign up with the US already.

But back to the specific arrangements adding up to this great sharing in anticipated self-annihilation. They are quite complicated; this is modern life, after all. If we go, we go with a bang and a lot of bureaucracy. But their essence is simple: You, sort-of-sovereign country X (say, Germany), station US nukes on your territory, which inevitably makes you a target for retaliation in (nuclear) kind. But while you are making yourself a target, those nukes remain under the full control of Washington (so much for that sovereignty).

Guarded by American troops – whose real mission is, of course, to keep the compliant clients from laying their grubby hands on them – these nukes sit ready for American orders to be used. Yes, formally, there’s some mumbo-jumbo about a ‘dual key,’ but everyone not badly dropped on their head when in their nappies knows that’s BS. As a French officer has just confirmed to Le Figaro, France’s conservative paper of record, in reality, “there’s only one key” and – as in every decent organized-crime outfit – only one man will decide: the US president.

Then, in case the American capo di tutti capi gives his end-of-days order, you, country X, will have the privilege to take these American nukes to Russia. Once your – not American – planes drop American nukes on Russian troop concentrations and bases or, say, Kaliningrad or St. Petersburg, just sit tight and wait for the response. It would come, even if it were the last thing they ever did. Because that’s the way the world works. Also, they have told us so.

There are variations to the ‘nuclear sharing’ shtick: Greece for instance, has a nifty little deal which means it doesn’t host US nuclear bombs but maintains a unit for helping deliver such bombs to Russia. Poland, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, “and two unknown countries” are riding nuclear shotgun, as it were, by participating in the SNOWCAT (Support of Nuclear Operations With Conventional Air Tactics) program. So sneaky!

With things set up so neatly to cheat the NPT, you would think that everybody is hunky-dory, as that old mafiosi Tony Soprano would have said. Yet far from it. In reality, the US is loudly considering expanding the “nuclear sharing” scheme, and several European states – including some for whom mere SNOWCAT-ing clearly is just not good enough – seem eager to get their own local pile of US nukes.

At the same time, as everyone acknowledges frankly, these fresh nukes for Europe are supposed to make up for Washington withdrawing its conventional forces from the old continent. What a message: “Dear Euro vassals, we won’t stay around to fight and die with you, but we are happy to make more of you bases and delivery boys for our nukes. Hope you feel safer now. (Oh, and also, we’d love to sell you more of our overpriced F-35s, US kill switches included, that you’ll need for your bombing runs against Russia when we whistle. Deal?)"

In a normal world – or to be precise, a normal Europe – the answer to such American generosity would have to be a resounding ‘f*ck off’ (in plain American English). But Europe’s elites are not sane and so Europe is very far from normal. There seems to be a real eagerness to keep doing what America wants, European interests be damned.

That’s why the so-called ‘NATO 3.0’ project associated in particular with ‘brain-of-the-Pentagon’ Elbridge Colby is likely to proceed just fine. Its essence is simple: Fewer US troops, key capacities, and conventional arms for Europe, so that Washington can shift its weight against China. Apart from the grandly strategic, there’s the personal: That Colby’s father, while working for the CIA, helped lose the Vietnam War may play a role in shaping his son’s priorities.

Russia, if things ever went that far, is extremely unlikely to play along with this NATO 3.0 strategy, obviously. On the contrary, once US nukes land on its troops, bases, and cities, whether launched from and through European vassals or the American mainland, Moscow is likely to hit back at both.

Yet the real mystery here is not how Washington has arrived at adopting such a transparently fragile strategy. Looked at from the big, group-think blob on the Potomac, it may appear worth a try. What is truly baffling is why anyone in Europe would agree. The catastrophic disadvantages are just too obvious. Painting more targets on Europe’s back, distributing nuclear weapons further east when NATO’s eastward expansion is precisely what caused the Ukraine War, sending yet another antagonizing signal to China that Europe is straining to do what it can just to help the US pressure Beijing, and, last but not least, setting Europe up for a large-scale re-run of what the West has just done to Ukraine: a devastating proxy war.

Europe does not need even more “nuclear sharing” with the unreliable, irrational, and aggressive US. It needs decoupling from its abusive and exploitative masters in Washington. If its leaders wish to share, how about doing some hard thinking about the economic and security interests their countries clearly share with both Russia and China? But then, Europe’s leaders don’t think. And when they do, then not on behalf of their own peoples. What a shared misery.

An oil tanker is sinking off the coast of Oman after being hit by a projectile, according to reports. The merchant vessel MT Marivex was carrying a crew of 24 Indians when it was reportedly targeted near Oman’s Masirah Island.

SOS calls from the crew originated at 1:30 PM local time on Monday, India Today reported.

Some media reports, citing an SOS call by a crew member on board the stricken ship, said the vessel could have been fired upon by the US Navy. RT could not independently verify the reports.

India’s Shipping Ministry confirmed the incident and acknowledged the 24 crew on board were its citizens. The Indian Embassy in Oman said all crew members have been rescued.

“Based on the preliminary information received, all Indian seafarers are presently safe,” the Shipping Ministry said on Monday evening. “They were rescued by the Omani authorities.”

The ministry said it was coordinating with the Ministry of External Affairs, Indian missions abroad, the Indian Navy, and Ministry of Defense to ensure the crew’s safety.

Later on Monday, the US military said it had disabled the Marivex oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman after the vessel “violated the ongoing blockade against Iran by attempting to sail to an Iranian port.”

“An F/A‑18 Super Hornet from USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN‑72) fired a precision munition into the ship’s engineering and steering spaces after the crew failed to comply with directions from US forces. Marivex is no longer sailing to Iran,” US Central Command (CENTCOM) said.

The Palau-flagged vessel, which was heading to Oman’s Duqm from Karwar in India, was not carrying any cargo, NDTV reported. The report said the All India Seafarers Union had received a distress call from a Marivex crew member.

According to ship-tracking website Marine Traffic, the 135-foot vessel is an oil/chemical tanker. The website reported the ship’s latest status as “at anchor” in the Arabian Sea.

In March, the US Navy sank an Iranian Navy ship off Sri Lanka’s coast, killing at least 87 sailors on board.

Armenia’s parliamentary elections have reinforced the country’s existing political trajectory while leaving deep questions about its future unresolved. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party secured 49.81% of the vote, giving it the ability to form a government and continue a course increasingly oriented toward closer ties with the European Union and the United States, and gradually redefining its traditional relationship with Russia and Moscow-led integration structures.

The campaign itself was marked by sharp polarization and controversy. Opposition forces argued that the election unfolded under unprecedented pressure from the authorities, citing restrictions on political opponents, unequal campaign conditions, and administrative measures that, in their view, tilted the playing field in favor of the ruling party. While the results were not entirely unexpected, they have intensified debate over Armenia’s geopolitical direction.

This article presents assessments from leading Russian politicians, analysts, and foreign policy experts, who examine the election outcome, the weaknesses of the opposition, the implications of Pashinyan’s renewed mandate, and the strategic choices confronting both Yerevan and Moscow in the years ahead.

Fyodor Lukyanov, Editor-in-Chief of Russia in Global Affairs:

The outcome of Armenia’s parliamentary elections brought no major surprises; in many ways, it was a fairly predictable result. As always, however, the devil is in the details. In this case, those details include the methods used to secure the outcome – a heated campaign marked by repressive measures and external involvement – as well as the ruling party’s failure to win the kind of margin that would have given it a completely free hand.

Unless the distribution of seats is adjusted in Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s favor, parliament is likely to become a battleground over the country’s most consequential issues. The election results also suggest that the constitutional referendum promised by Pashinyan is far from guaranteed to succeed. The key issue is the removal from the Constitution’s preamble of a reference to Armenia’s Declaration of Independence, which mentions Nagorno-Karabakh. Baku has made this a precondition for signing a peace agreement.

Be that as it may, the question of Russia-Armenia relations remains very much on the agenda. Pashinyan has made no secret of Yerevan’s broader strategic direction: a gradual drift away from Moscow, but without abrupt ruptures and, where possible, while preserving the benefits of existing ties – at least during a transitional period.

Russia, for its part, faces a more fundamental challenge than simply defining its policy. It must first determine its objective. Does Armenia still matter to Russia? If so, in what capacity and under what terms? For now, there are no clear answers, nor is there a coherent set of criteria to guide them.

Farhad Ibragimov, lecturer at the Faculty of Economics at RUDN University:

The Armenian election results largely formalized a political reality that had taken shape well before voters went to the polls. Nikol Pashinyan’s victory was hardly unexpected. Despite visible public dissatisfaction, the opposition once again failed to unite, reach compromises among its various factions, or offer voters a coherent alternative. Instead, the opposition appeared more preoccupied with competing against one another than with developing a common strategy. Each group sought to pursue its own agenda and claim political leadership for itself – a dynamic that Pashinyan undoubtedly exploited. Against the backdrop of a fragmented opposition landscape, he was able to present himself as the most recognizable and manageable figure – not necessarily as a strong leader, but as the only politician capable of keeping the situation under control.

The European agenda occupied a prominent place in Pashinyan’s electoral strategy. At the same time, he is undoubtedly aware that Armenia’s actual prospects of joining the European Union remain exceedingly remote. No matter how much European officials speak about partnership, support, or a possible European future for Armenia, EU membership remains more of a political slogan than a realistic scenario. Yet this rhetoric serves an important domestic purpose. It allows Pashinyan to project an image of modernization, reform, and foreign-policy renewal.

In other words, the European vector functions less as a genuine path toward EU accession and more as a tool for domestic mobilization and political legitimization. Pashinyan proved adept at recognizing this sentiment. For a significant portion of Armenian society, the appeal lies not so much in the prospect of eventual EU membership as in the perception that the country is moving toward a 'new model' of development. The opposition, meanwhile, failed to counter this narrative with a coherent program of its own or translate criticism of the government into a political project that voters could readily understand and support.

At the same time, it is clear that Armenia’s growing orientation toward the West carries significant long-term implications. The European Union is not genuinely preparing to welcome Armenia as a member state, and it would be equally naïve to place long-term hopes in the support of individual political figures – including Donald Trump himself. Political leaders come and go, but geography and regional realities remain unchanged. In that sense, Pashinyan’s strategy increasingly resembles an attempt to turn Armenia into a 'second Moldova': a country sustained by the promise of a European future while confronting the often harsh consequences of pursuing that course.

Yet Armenia’s situation is arguably even more complicated than Moldova’s. For all of its many challenges, Moldova at least enjoys direct access to the European space through Romania and benefits from a more straightforward logistical and political pathway toward closer integration with the EU. Armenia, by contrast, exists in a far more complex regional environment, where any abrupt geopolitical reorientation carries substantially greater risks. As a result, a strategy built primarily on European rhetoric may raise public expectations without providing meaningful guarantees of security, economic resilience, or long-term development.

That is the central risk embedded in Pashinyan’s current course. Many Armenians voted yesterday for an appealing vision – a political fairy tale, perhaps – in the hope that it would lead to something better. The same dynamic was visible in Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova. The pattern is remarkably familiar.

Alexander Bobrov, head of diplomatic studies at RUDN University:

The outcome of Armenia’s elections effectively ensures the continuation of the course charted by the current government: closer alignment with the European Union and the United States, coupled with a gradual reduction of ties to Russia, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).

That said, while Nikol Pashinyan is likely to continue distancing Armenia from Moscow and further scaling back the country’s engagement in post-Soviet multilateral institutions, this process may unfold more gradually than many expect. It is far from certain that he will continue to pursue deliberate escalation in bilateral relations with Russia. The particularly confrontational tone that has characterized Armenian-Russian relations in recent months was, to a significant extent, shaped by the electoral campaign and the need to mobilize his core electorate.

Now that he has secured another mandate, Pashinyan has greater room to pursue a more flexible approach, one that does not necessarily rely on the public sparring and megaphone diplomacy that have become increasingly common. Nevertheless, it is evident that Armenia will eventually face the need to make a definitive geopolitical choice. The prospect of integration with the European Union is fundamentally incompatible with continued membership in the Eurasian Economic Union.

Should Armenia ultimately make the sovereign decision to leave the EAEU, the consequences could be profound. Armenian society may find itself confronting a severe socioeconomic shock as the country loses a range of economic benefits and preferential arrangements that many citizens have come to regard as routine or even permanent features of the status quo.

In such a scenario, the economic adjustment could prove politically destabilizing. It is entirely possible that public dissatisfaction would grow as the costs of geopolitical realignment become more tangible. Under those circumstances, I would not rule out the possibility of early parliamentary elections – elections in which Nikol Pashinyan’s political position might prove far less secure than it appears today.

Konstantin Kosachev, deputy speaker of the Federation Council:

The figures secured by Nikol Pashinyan’s party will, by all appearances, give him the ability to form a government. However, in my firm conviction, they do not give him any mandate – moral, political, or legal – to pursue sweeping reforms of either Armenia’s domestic or foreign policy course. Mr. Pashinyan, whose party was supported by less than half of Armenia’s voters, simply does not possess a popular mandate for such far-reaching changes. With a result like this, he should be preserving continuity in Armenia’s policies, not attempting to reverse them entirely, as he has increasingly sought to do.

Armenia remains a member of the Eurasian Economic Union. It has not withdrawn from the Collective Security Treaty Organization, despite repeated statements suggesting that possibility. Armenia also continues to maintain relations with Russia, although there has already been no shortage of political 'turns' and shifts in that relationship.

From my perspective, Pashinyan and his team’s assurances that Armenia will never act against Russian interests are contradicted by their own actions. One example was the EU summit held in Yerevan in May, to which Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky was invited. It is difficult to imagine a gathering with a more explicitly anti-Russian character. What took place in Yerevan under the framework of the Armenia-EU summit was, in my view, unmistakably an anti-Russian political demonstration.

Accordingly, I do not believe that Mr. Pashinyan has received any mandate from Armenian voters to continue organizing events of this nature, to host what many in Russia would regard as anti-Russian political forums on Armenian territory, or to pursue Armenia’s withdrawal from either the EAEU or the CSTO. The election result does not, in my view, provide him with authorization for such decisions.

Vladimir Zharikhin, Deputy Director of the Institute of CIS Countries:

In his very first post-election remarks, Pashinyan acknowledged that joining the European Union is not a simple matter and that Armenia would first need to undertake significant domestic reforms. My assessment is straightforward: everyone lost.

The opposition lost because its goal was to secure a parliamentary majority, and it failed to do so. Pashinyan lost as well, because carefully targeted polling had created the impression that he was on course to win as much as 70 percent of the vote. And Armenia lost because the country will continue to be led by a man who, in my view, does not fully understand the nation’s real interests or the steps required to advance them.

Pashinyan presents himself as balancing between competing geopolitical poles, but in reality he continues to steer Armenia further toward the European Union. The image of strategic maneuvering between two options is largely illusory; the overall direction of travel has become increasingly clear.

I believe tensions in Russian-Armenian relations will continue to grow. Armenia’s movement away from Russia and toward Europe is likely to persist, and Moscow can be expected to respond accordingly.

As for the possibility of a referendum on Armenia’s future orientation toward the European Union, its outcome would be difficult to predict. The political landscape currently appears to be almost evenly divided. Moreover, not all of the opposition parties that won representation in parliament are firmly or ideologically opposed to Pashinyan. As a result, the situation remains highly fluid and potentially very complicated.

Alexei Chesnakov, Head of the Scientific Council at the Center for Political Conjuncture:

Armenia’s parliamentary elections offer several practical and technical lessons that not only help explain the outcome but may also prove relevant for future political campaigns, both electoral and otherwise.

1. Emotions are counterproductive.

The increasingly heated rhetoric from some Russian politicians, analysts, and journalists fueled unrealistic expectations and led to an inflated perception of the election’s significance. Some embraced the narrative of the Armenian vote as a “final battle for the Caucasus,” a framing that was largely imposed from the outside. Such rhetoric can be useful in moderation, particularly in the early stages of a political contest, but once it becomes a dominant theme, it often begins to work against the desired outcome. The election results turned out to be largely predictable. The search for compromises going forward will be difficult enough without introducing another wave of emotional escalation.

2. Economic arguments have limited political impact.

Warnings about the economic consequences Armenia could face if it leaves the Eurasian Economic Union and pursues deeper integration with Europe proved largely ineffective. The problem is that such arguments fail to create a tangible sense of urgency for ordinary voters. Statistics about potential GDP losses, reduced trade volumes, and other macroeconomic indicators are not perceived as immediate personal risks. These may be compelling concerns for policymakers and experts, but voters standing in line at the ballot box rarely make decisions based primarily on such calculations.

3. Foreign involvement is becoming increasingly overt.

The stream of European political delegations visiting Yerevan in the month leading up to the election, Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s transit visit to Armenia just two weeks before the vote, and the European Commission’s announcement of €50 million in assistance for Armenian farmers are only a few examples of what many would characterize as Western involvement in the electoral process. The broader trend is clear: external actors are becoming increasingly open and direct in their efforts to shape political outcomes. There is little reason to expect this trend to weaken in the future.

4. High disapproval ratings are not a death sentence.

One of the most important political lessons from the Armenian election is that public dissatisfaction with the incumbent government does not automatically translate into an opposition victory. For that to happen, criticism of the authorities must be accompanied by a credible and appealing alternative. Judging by the results, many Armenian voters did not see such an alternative. Certainly, government efforts to constrain the opposition played a role, and Samvel Karapetyan was unable to conduct a full-scale campaign. Yet relying solely on those explanations misses the larger point.

5. Negative mobilization works both ways.

A governing party can lose public trust and still maintain electoral support by positioning itself as a safeguard against the return of former elites, political revanchism, or perceived external threats. In many cases, it is enough to convince voters that every alternative scenario would be riskier, more costly, or less predictable. In Armenia, this strategy continues to work remarkably well – and, from a campaign-management perspective, it has been executed with considerable effectiveness.