作者: admin

  • In Kfarchouba, life is ‘a big prison’ under Israeli occupation of south Lebanon

    In Kfarchouba, life is ‘a big prison’ under Israeli occupation of south Lebanon

    Tucked along Lebanon’s eastern border with Israel, inside the Israeli-occupied zone of southern Lebanon, the small Sunni-majority village of Kfarchouba carries a rare and painful distinction: unlike hundreds of thousands of neighboring residents who have been forcibly displaced from their homes, Israeli military authorities have allowed its population to remain on their ancestral land. But this permission to stay has come at a devastating cost, leaving the village’s people trapped in a permanent state of isolation, fear and economic collapse under harsh occupation rule.

    In an interview with Middle East Eye, Kfarchouba’s 80-year-old mayor Qassem al-Adiri laid bare the brutal conditions imposed by Israeli forces on the community. He detailed how officials from Israel’s defense ministry directly contacted local tribal leaders to lay out non-negotiable terms for the village to avoid the mass destruction and expulsion that leveled nearby settlements. The core demand was unambiguous: no armed individuals or groups could be allowed to enter Kfarchouba, and any cooperation, sheltering or tolerance of armed presence would result in immediate expulsion and the total destruction of the village, matching the fate of neighboring communities.

    As one of a small number of non-Shia villages falling inside Israel’s self-declared “yellow line” — a 600-square-kilometer occupied buffer zone stretching along the entire Lebanon-Israel border — Kfarchouba has formally distanced itself from Hezbollah, aligning its political and security standing with the official Lebanese government and national army. Even with this compliance, daily life for residents remains defined by systematic repression and pervasive uncertainty.

    Al-Adiri confirmed that the village has maintained its pledge to Israeli forces, stating no armed individuals are present within Kfarchouba. This cooperation has done nothing to ease the occupation’s hardships: residents live under constant surveillance, face regular threats of military raids, arbitrary detention and coercive interrogation, and suffer severe movement restrictions that have cut off access to most of the village’s own agricultural lands.

    “We can’t use our land, they don’t allow us. The mountains, the valleys, the orchards, the farmlands where we cultivate,” al-Adiri said, adding that boundaries for permitted movement are deliberately left unclear, with residents long barred from entering the southern half of the village entirely. In the village’s southeastern outskirts, he added, Israeli forces have seized and occupied evicted civilian homes to establish new temporary military outposts in strategically valuable positions.

    Abductions of local residents by Israeli troops have become a frequent, terrifying occurrence in Kfarchouba and its outskirts. One of the deadliest incidents unfolded during a pre-dawn raid on Halta, a Kfarchouba outskirt, on March 24. Soldiers entered the area and abducted 35-year-old Shadi Karama Abdel Aal, alleging he had ties to Saraya al-Muqawama, a group linked to Hezbollah. During the operation, 15-year-old Mohammed Ali Abdel Aal stepped outside his home after hearing screams, and was fatally shot by an Israeli sniper. Another local resident, Ashraf Khalil al-Qadri, was wounded, and Israeli forces cordoned off the targeted home to block all access, preventing anyone from providing emergency first aid to the wounded.

    Al-Adiri noted that this incident is far from isolated: during separate raids on Halta farm, which falls under Kfarchouba’s jurisdiction, Israeli troops abducted five local residents, three of whom were simply cutting grass for pasture in the nearby Rachaya al-Fakhar area, all of whom were subsequently accused of affiliation with Saraya al-Muqawama.

    Israel’s broader military campaign across southern Lebanon has combined mass forced displacement with systematic large-scale destruction of civilian homes, infrastructure and agricultural land, leaving entire communities uninhabitable and wiping out long-standing local economic productive capacity. One particularly destructive tactic that has directly harmed Kfarchouba is the widespread starting of fires across southern Lebanon, targeting forests, olive groves and active farmland that leave large swathes of scorched, unusable land in their wake.

    According to Lebanon’s National News Agency, Israeli military activity sparked a major fire in a wooded area of Kfarchouba on August 5 that spread rapidly toward Halta. The blaze burned uncontrolled for hours, as Israeli forces blocked Lebanese firefighting teams from reaching the affected area to contain the spread. Hussein Fakih, a firefighter based in nearby Nabatiyeh, told The Guardian that just six days later on August 11, Israeli forces started another fire using incendiary materials near Khiam, a Kfarchouba neighbor. When Lebanese fire crews moved in to extinguish the blaze, an Israeli drone carried out a strike in the immediate area, forcing the team to withdraw and abandon their efforts.

    For Kfarchouba, an agricultural village that draws nearly all of its local income from olive groves and tobacco plantations, the destruction of farmland and restricted access have pushed the local economy to the brink of collapse. Even though the village was not labeled an active military target by Israel, it now faces crippling shortages of basic necessities, worsened by severe damage to core civilian infrastructure, particularly electricity and water networks.

    Al-Adiri explained that the village’s main power grid has been completely cut off by Israeli forces, who have also refused to allow residents to carry out repairs. To access running water, locals are forced to power the village water pump using a private generator, which costs $300 per day in fuel and requires roughly 10 hours of continuous operation just to fill the village’s main water reservoir.

    The village’s forced isolation has forced residents to drastically alter their daily consumption patterns, while severe restrictions on movement and transport have limited consistent access to food, medical supplies and incoming goods. Local shop owner Hasan Amro told Middle East Eye that the flow of people and goods into Kfarchouba has dropped off sharply, forcing residents to risk Israeli interception just to travel to the Bekaa Valley to source essential supplies.

    “People who live outside the village used to come on weekends. Now we are living here but we feel like we are living in a big prison. We can’t come and go as we please,” Amro said. “We can’t go much farther to check on the olive trees. The olive harvest is approaching and we need to harvest the olives. Of course, this year we won’t be able to harvest again. We live surrounded by everything this place has to offer, but we can’t do anything. At this point, we can’t do anything.”

    Amro added that residents have not been able to tend to their olive groves since the 2024 war between Israel and Hezbollah. While local efforts to bring supplies in from the Bekaa Valley have slightly improved access to provisions, this cannot replace the traditional cross-community trade that the village relied on with nearby settlements like Khiam and Kfar Kila, most of which have been completely destroyed by Israeli occupation forces.

    “This war has been harder than the last one. We can’t bring supplies from the neighbouring villages, most of them were completely destroyed. The ones that haven’t been destroyed don’t want to come to us. Now we have someone who delivers supplies to our shop, and this is the first time he has come here since the beginning of the war. Before, we would go to the Bekaa to get supplies. It’s dangerous to travel on the roads at the moment,” Amro said.

    Since ceasefire and border talks between Israel and Lebanon began in April, observers have noted that the Lebanese government holds little to no meaningful bargaining power to force a full Israeli withdrawal from occupied southern Lebanese territory. A US-brokered negotiating framework allows the Israeli military to maintain its presence in occupied south Lebanon until Hezbollah fully disarms and the Lebanese army assumes full control of the border zone — terms that Hezbollah has rejected as a demand for unconditional surrender.

    Regional observers warn that the so-called “pilot zones” Israel has established in previously unoccupied areas, a move that contradicts official Israeli claims of drawing down its presence, have only served as a cover to expand Israeli occupation deeper into southern Lebanon. Recent Lebanese media reports confirm that Israel has already widened its occupied zone to include additional villages including Mansouri, Majdal Zoun, Haddatha and Braasheet, with ground forces advancing further inland toward Tibnin and Beit Yahoun.

    Critics emphasize that the current US-brokered framework provides no meaningful protection for Lebanese civilians, both inside the occupied zone and in surrounding areas, from the ongoing threats and human rights abuses carried out by Israeli forces. Just last weekend, Israel intensified its military escalation in southern Lebanon, carrying out a series of air strikes on Ansar and Deir al-Zahrani that killed 11 people — including three children — and wounded 19 more. The attack marked the deadliest single incident since a June ceasefire agreement meant to reduce cross-border hostilities took effect.

  • How the Meta trial could change social media for young people

    How the Meta trial could change social media for young people

    A landmark legal proceeding against Meta Platforms is unfolding in U.S. courts, carrying the potential to reshape how social media platforms operate for youth users across the country. The trial traces its origins back to 2023, when a coalition of 29 state governments launched a joint lawsuit against the tech giant. In their legal filing, the states allege that Meta has systematically engaged in a pattern of violating both federal and state-level privacy statutes specifically designed to protect children and adolescents online.

    This multi-state action marks one of the most significant regulatory challenges to major social media companies in recent years, centered on the core issue of youth data privacy. The allegations in the suit touch on longstanding public concerns about how platforms collect, use, and share underage users’ personal information, as well as whether companies have taken adequate steps to prevent unauthorized access to children’s data. Legal analysts note that the outcome of this trial could set a powerful precedent for future regulation of social media platforms, influencing industry-wide practices for youth user protection and establishing clearer legal boundaries for privacy compliance when it comes to child users.

    As the legal process moves forward, stakeholders across the tech industry, child advocacy groups, and policymakers are closely monitoring the proceedings. A ruling favoring the states could open the door to more aggressive regulatory action against other major social media platforms, while also pushing companies to implement more robust privacy safeguards for young people by default. Even beyond the immediate legal outcome, the trial has already drawn renewed national attention to the urgent need for stronger protections for youth in the digital social media space.

  • Disney and ABC sue Trump’s media regulator to stop early licence renewal

    Disney and ABC sue Trump’s media regulator to stop early licence renewal

    A high-stakes legal battle over press freedom and government overreach has erupted in the United States, after media conglomerate Disney and its eight ABC owned-and-operated stations filed a lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and its chairman Brendan Carr, challenging an unprecedented order to launch early broadcast license renewal proceedings. The media company alleges the move is a deliberate retaliatory campaign orchestrated by the Trump administration to punish ABC for its critical editorial coverage of the president and his administration.

    In the court filing submitted Tuesday, Disney calls the FCC’s order a historically unprecedented break from decades of regulatory practice. The company notes that the commission has not forced any broadcast network to complete early license renewals in more than 50 years, and this marks the first time the agency has demanded rushed renewal applications for an entire batch of commonly owned stations from a single major network. Ordinarily, preparing license renewal applications takes months of work, but the FCC gave Disney just 30 days to submit the completed paperwork – a timeline Disney describes as unnecessarily burdensome and intentionally punitive.

    The lawsuit lays out a clear paper trail to back up its retaliation claims, pointing directly to public statements and social media posts from President Donald Trump himself. Trump has repeatedly complained that ABC’s coverage of his administration is almost 100% negative, and in one public social media post he openly questioned whether the network’s broadcast licenses should be terminated, answering his own question with a clear “Yes!”. The timing of the FCC’s order has also fueled suspicion: the early renewal notice was issued just one day after ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel delivered a on-air joke about first lady Melania Trump. Prior to that, Disney had already faced scrutiny from the administration over its internal diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practices, as well as content on ABC’s popular daytime talk show *The View*.

    The FCC and its chairman have pushed back against the allegations, framing the early renewal process as a measure focused on upholding the public interest, not political retaliation. “If broadcasters don’t like that, that’s okay,” Carr told CNBC in an earlier July interview. “They can become a cable channel, they can become a podcast, they can stream online. But if you want to uniquely be on the public’s airwaves, you have to comply with those obligations.” The BBC has reached out to the FCC for additional comment on the ongoing lawsuit, but has not yet received an official response.

    This confrontation is the latest escalation of a long-running tense standoff between the Trump administration and ABC that stretches back months. Carr, who President Trump once publicly praised as a “warrior for free speech”, has long positioned himself at the center of the administration’s combative approach to critical media outlets, and has made clear since before taking the chairman role that he intends to interpret the FCC’s regulatory authority broadly. As early as September 2025, Carr openly threatened regulatory action against Disney after Kimmel made public remarks about the murder of conservative activist and prominent Trump ally Charlie Kirk. Speaking to conservative podcaster Benny Johnson, Carr issued a blunt ultimatum: “We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find a way to change conduct and take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or you know there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”

    Under immediate pressure from Carr, Disney temporarily pulled Kimmel off the air, but the decision sparked massive public backlash over accusations of violating free speech principles – even from prominent Republican Senator Ted Cruz – leading Disney to reverse course and restore Kimmel to his hosting role just a short time later. This is not the first legal clash between Trump and ABC: earlier this year, Trump successfully sued ABC News and anchor George Stephanopoulos for defamation after Stephanopoulos incorrectly stated that Trump had been found “liable for rape” in the E. Jean Carroll civil case, when the jury had actually found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation. ABC ultimately settled the suit, agreeing to pay $15 million to Trump’s presidential foundation and museum, plus an additional $1 million to cover his legal fees.

    In their current lawsuit, Disney and ABC are asking the court for a speedy hearing on the dispute, as well as a temporary restraining order to block the FCC’s early renewal requirement. At its core, the suit argues that the administration’s pressure campaign through the FCC amounts to unconstitutional government censorship, writing in its filing, “Government censorship is deeply un-American. This case concerns the Administration’s sustained effort to do just that.”

  • UAE-backed Chinese company acquires stake in Ethiopian gold mine near Sudan war zone

    UAE-backed Chinese company acquires stake in Ethiopian gold mine near Sudan war zone

    After a year of stalled negotiations and two collapsed acquisition attempts, Canadian mining firm Allied Gold has finalized a nearly $300 million strategic investment deal that gives China’s Zijin Gold International a 9.2% minority stake in the company’s global mining assets. The agreement marks the conclusion of a high-stakes corporate saga that has intertwined global mining interests, geopolitical competition, and the ongoing civil conflict in Sudan, raising urgent questions about unregulated gold financing of armed groups.

    Under the terms of the deal, Zijin Gold, which counts three major Chinese state-owned entities among its top shareholders and counts the United Arab Emirates’ sovereign wealth fund Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA) as a top 10 shareholder since 2022, gains partial ownership of Allied Gold’s portfolio spanning Mali, Côte d’Ivoire, and the contentious 1,600-square-kilometer Kurmuk mining concession in western Ethiopia’s Benishangul-Gumuz region.

    The timing and location of the deal have drawn sharp scrutiny: the agreement was announced the same day last week that mass graves attributed to killings by Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF) were discovered in the Sudanese town of Kurmuk, located just 20 kilometers from the concession border. The Benishangul-Gumuz region has long grappled with internal displacement, low-intensity conflict, and widespread unregulated informal gold mining, and it already hosts Ethiopian military bases that the UN and independent investigators confirm are used to support the RSF, the paramilitary group that has been at war with Sudan’s legitimate national armed forces since April 2023. The concession is also just 100 kilometers from Ethiopia’s strategically critical Grand Renaissance Dam on the Nile, and roughly 60 kilometers from a documented UAE-Ethiopian logistics hub in Asosa that is used to train and arm RSF fighters.

    The deal closes a turbulent 12-month period for Allied Gold, which saw two prior acquisition attempts fall through. First, a $500 million deal to sell a 50% stake in its assets to Ambrosia, a little-known Emirati firm linked to prominent Abu Dhabi business leader Ahmed Amer al-Amry, collapsed earlier this year after the deal failed to meet required conditions amid a surge in global gold prices. Then, a planned $4 billion full acquisition of Allied Gold by Zijin was scrapped earlier this year after the transaction failed to secure required regulatory approval from Chinese authorities. Negotiators pivoted to a minority stake transaction after the full buyout fell apart, and Allied Gold CEO Peter Marrone has publicly left the door open to additional stake sales to outside investors if offers meet the company’s valuation expectations.

    Allied Gold has expressed optimism about its expansion plans, announcing that it expects to launch commercial mining operations at the Kurmuk site in August, with projected annual output of 240,000 to 270,000 ounces of gold by 2027 — a volume valued at roughly $1 billion at current market prices. The company says it will use the proceeds from the latest stake sale to fund operational expansion and ramp-up activities across all three of its core mining projects, including the Kurmuk concession.

    However, the transaction has sparked significant controversy over potential links to RSF financing and the worsening humanitarian crisis in Sudan. For years, independent researchers and United Nations investigators have documented that the UAE, a key backer of the RSF, is the primary global transit hub for illegally smuggled conflict gold from Sudan. The RSF operates its own gold trading firm, al-Junaid, and generates hundreds of millions of dollars in annual revenue by smuggling gold out of Sudanese territory under its control to Dubai, money that is then used to fund weapons purchases and military operations. Industry experts confirm that roughly 85% to 90% of Sudan’s gold production comes from small-scale artisanal miners, and most of this gold is ultimately smuggled to the UAE via private traders.

    Ethiopia, which hosts the Kurmuk concession, is also the UAE’s main source of official gold exports, and both Addis Ababa and Abu Dhabi have repeatedly denied accusations that they support the RSF and fuel the Sudan conflict. The UN has documented that the RSF has carried out widespread massacres, sexual violence, and ethnic cleansing against non-Arab civilian communities, acts that UN independent investigators have classified as genocide. More than three years of conflict have displaced over 9 million people and created what UN officials describe as the worst humanitarian catastrophe on the globe.

    China officially maintains a stance of neutrality in the Sudan civil war, but investigators have documented that the UAE has transferred sophisticated Chinese-made weapons including heavy artillery, machine guns, and armed drones to the RSF in violation of a UN arms embargo, and Beijing has taken no concrete action to stop the flow of its weapons to the paramilitary group despite repeated requests from Sudan’s recognized government.

    When Middle East Eye reached out to Allied Gold, Zijin Gold, and relevant government stakeholders to ask whether the companies would take steps to prevent gold from the Kurmuk concession from being diverted to fund RSF activities, none of the parties provided an on-the-record response. Ethiopian Mines Minister has publicly welcomed expanded foreign investment in the country’s gold, critical mineral, petroleum, and fertilizer sectors, framing new mining deals as a boost to national economic development.

    Analysts warn that the joint Chinese-Emirati presence in the strategically located Kurmuk mine could provide a new, formal source of revenue for the RSF, given the site’s proximity to RSF logistics hubs and the Sudanese war front. The development also extends a pattern of controversial foreign mining activity in conflict-affected East Africa: Canadian mining firms have a well-documented history of pursuing extractive projects amid active conflict in the region, including during the 2020–2022 Tigray war in Ethiopia that killed hundreds of thousands of people.

  • Pakistan top court orders ex-PM Imran Khan be moved to hospital from jail

    Pakistan top court orders ex-PM Imran Khan be moved to hospital from jail

    ISLAMABAD – Pakistan’s top judicial body has ordered the urgent transfer of incarcerated former prime minister Imran Khan to a leading public hospital for comprehensive medical evaluation, addressing long-running claims that the 73-year-old opposition leader has been denied adequate specialized care behind bars.

    A three-judge panel of the Supreme Court issued the ruling Tuesday, mandating that Khan be moved to Islamabad’s Shifa International Hospital within 48 hours, with a mandatory eye specialist included as part of his care team. The court also granted Khan new rights to weekly in-person family visits and daily phone contact with his two sons, who currently live outside Pakistan.

    Khan, a world-famous cricket captain who transitioned to politics and held the prime minister’s office from 2018 to 2022, has remained in custody since August 2023. He has been convicted in multiple high-profile cases, including corruption and charges of leaking state secrets, with a combined 17-year prison sentence handed down against him and his wife Bushra Bibi late last year. The former leader has consistently denied all wrongdoing, framing the more than 100 pending cases against him as a coordinated political campaign to remove him from public life.

    His legal team has repeatedly raised alarms over his declining health, particularly his rapidly worsening eyesight. In February, lawyers told the court that Khan retained just 15% vision in his right eye after prison officials failed to approve his request for specialist treatment – a claim government officials previously rejected.

    In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling, Zulfikar Bukhari, a senior advisor to Khan, told Agence France-Presse that while the decision was welcome, it comes too late to stop the permanent deterioration of the former prime minister’s health. “We wish it had happened sooner so his eye and general health would not have deteriorated this much,” Bukhari said.

    In its written order, the three-judge panel emphasized its binding legal responsibility to protect the well-being of all detainees. “We are mindful of the constitutional and legal obligation… to safeguard the life, health, dignity and security of the prisoner,” the order read.

    Both judicial officials and leaders of Khan’s political party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, have issued urgent warnings to supporters against gathering outside Shifa International Hospital when Khan is transferred. Any unapproved public assembly would violate the terms of the court’s order, officials noted.

    The Pakistani federal government has not yet issued any public statement responding to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Khan’s arrest and imprisonment in 2023 sparked massive nationwide protests by his millions of supporters, which were met with a widespread crackdown by federal and provincial authorities. Despite more than a year behind bars, the former prime minister remains one of the most influential and popular political figures in Pakistan, retaining a massive grassroots following across the country.

  • Juventus signs goalie Guglielmo Vicario on loan from Tottenham with option to buy

    Juventus signs goalie Guglielmo Vicario on loan from Tottenham with option to buy

    TURIN, Italy — After months of persistent scouring and negotiation through the entirety of the summer transfer window, Italian Serie A side Juventus has finalized a loan agreement to bring Italian goalkeeper Guglielmo Vicario to Turin from English Premier League club Tottenham Hotspur, the club announced Tuesday.

    The 29-year-old shot-stopper will join Juventus on a cost-free loan through the end of June 2027, with the Turin-based club holding an optional purchase clause that carries no mandatory obligation to trigger the transfer. If Juventus elects to buy Vicario, the base fee is set at 8 million euros ($9.3 million), with an additional 2 million euros ($2.3 million) in performance-based add-ons tied to the achievement of pre-agreed club and individual targets.

    A product of Italy’s domestic development pathway, Vicario rose through the youth ranks at Udinese before earning first-team minutes across loan and permanent stints with a series of Italian clubs: Venezia, Perugia, Cagliari and Empoli. He made the move across the continent to join Tottenham in 2023, where he went on to make 117 first-team appearances for the London club. During his tenure at Tottenham, Vicario was a key part of the squad that lifted the UEFA Europa League trophy in 2025.

    At the international level, Vicario has also earned five senior caps representing the Italian men’s national team, underscoring his quality at the top of the sport.

    The transfer fulfills a key promise made to Juventus head coach Luciano Spalletti ahead of the 2025-26 Serie A campaign. Spalletti had publicly called for a new starting goalkeeper after incumbent Michele Di Gregorio produced a string of high-cost errors that undermined Juventus’ performance throughout the previous season.

    Last term, Juventus finished sixth in the Serie A table, falling short of the club’s usual high ambitions for domestic and continental success. The club will kick off its new season this coming Sunday, with an opening round road match against newly promoted side Frosinone.

  • Trump says no Iran talks planned, claims Hormuz ‘new US territory’

    Trump says no Iran talks planned, claims Hormuz ‘new US territory’

    In a dramatic reversal of comments made by his own senior envoy just 24 hours earlier, U.S. President Donald Trump announced Tuesday that no diplomatic negotiations with Iran are currently ongoing or planned, doubling down on his incendiary threat to claim sovereignty over the strategically critical Strait of Hormuz as new American territory.

    The ongoing conflict between the U.S.-backed coalition and Iran, which erupted nearly six months ago when Trump launched joint military operations alongside Israel in late February, has left the key energy chokepoint locked in a tense stalemate with no clear path to de-escalation. On Monday, White House senior advisor and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner told Fox News that Washington and Tehran were engaged in “very positive and active conversations” aimed at easing tensions. But Trump directly contradicted that claim in a post to his Truth Social platform Tuesday morning.

    “There are no talks or conversations going on, or scheduled, with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Naval Blockade remains in full force and effect,” Trump wrote. He added that “The Hormuz Strait is open and operating. All water mines have been removed or detonated,” a claim that has not been independently verified. Multiple anonymous U.S. sources confirmed to Agence France-Presse that low-level positive discussions had indeed taken place in recent weeks, but noted that Trump has instructed his negotiating team to pause engagement until Iran signals it is prepared to meet U.S. demands for a comprehensive agreement.

    Hours before his post disavowing talks, Trump shared an altered map on Truth Social labeling the Strait of Hormuz as “NEW U.S. Territory,” repeating a provocative claim he first floated to reporters in the Oval Office on Monday, where he argued that seizing the waterway would be “a good idea.” This threat fits a well-documented pattern of the second-term president: when confronted with intractable foreign policy challenges, he has issued outlandish threats to annex sovereign territory, all of which have yet to be acted on. Since returning to the White House in 2025, Trump has publicly threatened to annex Canada as the 51st U.S. state, seize Greenland from Denmark, take control of Cuba, and assert U.S. sovereignty over the Gaza Strip.

    Iran responded to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint through which roughly 20% of the world’s global oil supplies transit daily, as a direct retaliatory measure against the ongoing war. Tehran has stated it will not reopen the waterway until Washington meets a sweeping set of preconditions: ending the U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports, lifting crippling oil sanctions, unfreezing billions of dollars in blocked Iranian state assets, and paying reparations for damage caused by the war.

    “I want to state clearly that the Strait of Hormuz will not be opened until the American commitments stipulated in the memorandum of understanding… are implemented,” Iran’s top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said in a nationally televised speech Tuesday.

    Kushner had framed Trump’s approach as deliberate this week, telling reporters the president “is going to be very patient… he doesn’t want to rush to a deal.” But political analysts note that Tehran has little incentive to rush negotiations: Trump’s domestic approval ratings have slid steadily as his campaign promise to keep the U.S. out of costly “forever wars” has collapsed under the weight of the six-month Iran conflict. The war has also driven sharp increases in energy and consumer prices across the U.S., creating major political headwinds for Trump’s Republican Party ahead of critical November midterm elections that will determine which party controls Congress for the final two years of his term.

    Trump has increasingly showed public frustration with the stalemate in recent days. On Monday, he made an extraordinary threat against U.S. ally Oman, saying he would “bomb the shit” out of the country if it interfered with efforts to reach a deal over the strait. At the same time, Qatar — which has served as a key neutral mediator in the stalled talks — announced Tuesday that a preliminary cooperation agreement between Iran and Oman over transit through the strait has cleared the way for potential resumption of broader negotiations to end the regional conflict.

  • Fighting in southwestern Somalia kills dozens of people, including 4 civilians

    Fighting in southwestern Somalia kills dozens of people, including 4 civilians

    On Tuesday, a senior hospital official in Somalia confirmed that hours of intense combat between government forces and armed militias in the southwestern city of Baidoa has left a devastating trail of casualties, including at least four civilian deaths and 98 injured people.

    The outbreak of violence began just after 5 a.m. local time on Monday, when coordinated attacks targeting government military outposts on Baidoa’s outskirts triggered full-scale fighting across the city. The urban area is currently a refuge for more than 500,000 people who have already been displaced by years of ongoing conflict and widespread drought across the Horn of Africa nation. Initial explosions rocked a military installation east of the city, followed immediately by heavy gun battles around a second base in the Bonkay neighborhood south of Baidoa. Armed fighters soon pushed into the city center, exchanging sustained fire with Somali government troops.

    Regional security analyst Samira Gaid, who works with the Somali research firm Balqiis Insights, outlined the complicated dynamics of the assault. Fighters loyal to Abdiaziz Hassan Mohamed Laftagareen, the former president of Somalia’s South West state, managed to displace forces aligned with the new regional administration from parts of Baidoa for roughly six hours before being pushed out of the city. In a parallel set of attacks, fighters from al-Shabab, the al-Qaida-linked extremist organization that has waged an insurgency in Somalia for more than 15 years, assaulted two additional military positions on Baidoa’s outskirts. The coordinated timing of the two separate offensives has led Somali authorities to allege direct operational collaboration between Laftagareen’s militias and the extremist group, a claim that has not yet been independently verified.

    Official casualty figures remain inconsistent, with no independent confirmation available to date. Somalia’s federal government says at least 30 attacking fighters were killed, while regional South West state authorities have reported a higher death toll of approximately 50 assailants killed. Neither side has released an official casualty count for government troops involved in the fighting. Dr. Abdikafi Omar Mohamud, head of the emergencies department at Baidoa’s Bay Regional Hospital, confirmed the civilian toll: four civilians killed, and 98 injured — among them 28 women and one elderly man who were struck by stray bullets during the urban combat.

    The sudden influx of wounded patients has placed an overwhelming strain on Baidoa’s already fragile healthcare system, which was already struggling to serve both permanent residents and the massive population of displaced people encamped around the city. Baidoa sits roughly 245 kilometers (150 miles) northwest of Somalia’s capital, Mogadishu. Mohamud told reporters that his hospital only had 40 functional beds available when the fighting began, forcing staff to erect an emergency tent to accommodate the surge of wounded people. In addition to overcrowding, medical teams are also grappling with severe shortages of essential life-saving medicines, Mohamud added.

    By Tuesday, calm had gradually returned to Baidoa. Security forces deployed to patrol major thoroughfares, conducting inspections of damaged buildings and vehicles that were caught in the crossfire. Local residents slowly began to emerge from their homes, where they had sheltered throughout the hours of fighting, though government troops maintained a heavy security presence across all key strategic areas of the city.

    The latest eruption of violence is the direct result of months of simmering political tension over leadership of the South West state and its disputed electoral process. In March, Somalia’s federal government rejected Laftagareen’s contested indirect re-election to the regional presidency. Laftagareen, who had led South West state since 2018, announced his resignation after federal troops seized full control of Baidoa on March 30.

    South West Internal Security Minister Isak Mohamed Korsaar reaffirmed the government’s claim of collaboration to reporters on Tuesday. “The militias that attacked us were not alone,” Korsaar said. “We have confirmed that they were accompanied by al-Shabab.” Korsaar added that government forces have recovered the bodies of slain al-Shabab fighters and taken multiple extremist fighters alive as captives.

    Gaid, the regional security analyst, warned that the assault highlights a dangerous pattern that benefits extremist groups in Somalia: internal political disputes that devolve into armed conflict create open opportunities for al-Shabab to expand its influence and stage attacks. “When elite disputes are settled militarily, they create the conditions that the terrorist group exploits,” Gaid explained. “It is Somali civilians who pay for it.”

  • US primaries test Democrat comeback hopes in Trump stronghold

    US primaries test Democrat comeback hopes in Trump stronghold

    On Tuesday, voters across multiple U.S. states headed to polling places for a critical round of primary elections, with all political eyes turning to Florida — a one-time battleground that has emerged as the make-or-break landscape for both parties’ congressional ambitions this November. Once counted among America’s most competitive swing states, Florida has shifted dramatically toward the Republican Party over the last 10 years, with former president and current 2024 Republican nominee Donald Trump carrying the state by a comfortable 13-point margin in last year’s presidential election, and GOP candidates holding every major statewide office.

    For Democrats, who only need a net gain of three congressional seats nationwide to retake control of the U.S. House of Representatives from Republicans’ narrow current majority, Florida has unexpectedly become a high-stakes battleground. A mid-decade redistricting plan spearheaded by outgoing Republican Governor Ron DeSantis redrew congressional maps to create four solid pickup opportunities for the GOP, targeting seats currently held by Democratic incumbents.

    NBC News election analyst Steve Kornacki noted that Democrats already face a favorable national political landscape for flipping the House, but warned that a successful Republican gerrymander in Florida could upend that calculation. “Simply put, they [Republicans] need every additional seat they can get — badly,” Kornacki added. The redrawn district lines have pushed multiple sitting Democratic House members into districts that voted heavily for Trump in 2024, forcing many to scramble to find safer territory to run for reelection. Two incumbents are still seeking reelection in their new, deep-red districts, while another running in a reconfigured conservative seat faces a primary challenge from a democratic socialist candidate who aligns with the party’s progressive insurgent wing, which has notched primary wins in other states this cycle.

    Beyond congressional races, Florida’s primaries will also serve as a key test of whether Democrats can rebuild their ability to compete for statewide offices. Former Republican U.S. Representative David Jolly, who switched parties and has become one of the most prominent Trump critics in the Democratic Party, is widely expected to secure the Democratic nomination for governor. On the Republican side, Trump-backed U.S. Representative Byron Donalds is the clear favorite to win the GOP nomination, putting him on track to become Florida’s first Black governor if he wins in November. Donalds faces a primary challenge from wealthy businessman James Fishback, who has drawn widespread backlash for racially charged attacks, including labeling Donalds a “slave” to political donors and a “DEI Republican.”

    In the open Democratic Senate primary, retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman — who gained national attention as the key witness in Trump’s first impeachment trial in 2020 — is facing off against a progressive state legislator. For Republicans, the congressional primaries have also been fraught with internal tension: GOP House candidates include a sitting lawmaker who denies allegations of assault and revenge porn, a pro-Israel incumbent widely criticized for repeated anti-Muslim rhetoric, and a right-wing social media influencer who has run an explicitly anti-Semitic campaign.

    Florida was not the only state holding primaries on Tuesday. Alaska held its Senate and House primaries, while Wyoming Republicans selected their nominees for governor, U.S. Senate, and an open House seat. In California, a special congressional election to replace Democrat Eric Swalwell — who resigned from the House in April following unproven sexual misconduct allegations he denies — narrowed to a contest between two Democratic candidates, with millions of dollars in outside spending pouring in from groups aligned with the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC.

    In a striking final note, President Trump, who has spent years attacking mail-in voting as a corrupt system that enables widespread fraud and pushed for strict restrictions on the practice, voted by mail in Florida’s Republican primary. The White House defended the choice, arguing there was no contradiction because Trump was currently traveling outside of Florida, making in-person voting impossible for him.

  • Meta in court over child social media addiction

    Meta in court over child social media addiction

    A historic federal trial that could reshape the future of global social media regulation opened on Tuesday, with Meta Platforms standing accused of intentionally designing its flagship products Instagram and Facebook to hook underage users, inflicting widespread mental health harm on children across the United States.

    A coalition of 29 U.S. states, led by legal teams from California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey, first brought the lawsuit against the tech giant in 2023, and is now seeking roughly $200 billion in financial penalties alongside mandatory structural changes to Meta’s platforms to protect minor users. The three core charges against the company include: deceiving the public about the proven harms of its apps for children; engineering algorithmic and interface features specifically designed to encourage compulsive use — even building easily bypassed screen time limits to retain young audiences; and collecting personal data from children under 13 without required parental consent, a direct violation of federal privacy law.

    Legal and public health experts have widely framed the case as social media’s equivalent of the 1990s tobacco industry reckoning, drawing direct parallels between Meta’s alleged practices and the decades-long campaign by big tobacco companies to downplay harms and hook young consumers. Just as states won landmark penalties and mandatory industry changes against tobacco firms 26 years ago, which have cost the industry more than $176 billion in payments to date, this trial could trigger a sweeping reckoning across the entire social media sector.

    Nora Freeman Engstrom, a Stanford Law School professor, told Agence France-Presse that a ruling against Meta could mark “the beginning of a broader reckoning” that forces the company to completely overhaul its two billion-plus user platforms. If the courts side with the states, the coalition is pushing for mandatory changes including enforceable screen time limits for minor users, among other safety protections.

    Meta has forcefully rejected all allegations against the company. A company spokesperson told AFP that Meta “strongly disagrees” with the claims, noting that the firm has collaborated with parents, child safety experts and law enforcement to implement protective safeguards for young users. Meta already suffered two state court convictions on related charges in California and New Mexico earlier this year, both of which it is currently appealing.

    In a pre-trial dispute, Meta attempted to block Arturo Bejar, a former Meta engineer and a key whistleblower for the states, from testifying. Federal Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who is presiding over the case, rejected that motion as a “Hail Mary” effort to “eliminate a strong witness” for the plaintiffs, handing the state coalition an early procedural victory.

    Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s founder and chief executive officer, and Adam Mosseri, the head of Instagram, are listed as star witnesses for the trial, which is scheduled to run for six weeks with a verdict expected by October. An eight-person advisory jury has been selected, though Judge Rogers will issue the final ruling in the case.

    In pre-trial arguments last week, legal counsel for the states clarified that they are seeking approximately $200 billion in penalties, pushing back against Meta’s earlier court filing that claimed the states were seeking more than $1 trillion. The states’ legal team argued Meta inflated the number “for shock value.”

    This trial is the first federal case in what legal analysts predict will be a growing wave of litigation targeting major social media platforms, including TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube. Families, educators and state governments across the country have brought forward claims that major platforms’ business models prioritize user engagement over child safety, contributing to a national youth mental health crisis.

    Vincent Joralemon, director of the University of California Berkeley’s Life Sciences Law and Policy Center, told AFP that the biggest immediate stakes for Meta are reputational damage and the threat of being forced to implement sweeping, costly changes to its core products. “While cases about social media harms revolve around the intersection of technology and addiction, the case against Meta focuses on its business practices, similar to when US regulators sued tobacco companies,” Joralemon explained, echoing the widespread comparison to the 1998 tobacco settlement that transformed that industry forever.