Global Pulse

作者： admin

  • Israel says it will sever all ties to UN’s Guterres after inclusion in sexual violence report

    Israel says it will sever all ties to UN’s Guterres after inclusion in sexual violence report

    A major diplomatic firestorm has erupted after United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres published his annual Conflict-Related Sexual Violence report Friday, formally adding Israel to a global list of actors documented to perpetrate systematic sexual violence against vulnerable populations—prompting an immediate, sweeping retaliation from Jerusalem that includes cutting all official ties with Guterres’ office.

    The escalation did not come out of nowhere. Twelve months earlier, Guterres had placed Israel on formal notice, warning that the country would be added to the report if it continued to block UN investigators from accessing conflict zones and detention facilities to probe allegations of abuse. Long-standing UN documentation has tracked allegations of Israeli institutional sexual violence against Palestinians for years, including a 2025 March report that labeled such abuse “systematic” across the Gaza Strip and occupied West Bank, followed by a July update that highlighted recurring patterns of genital assault and burns against detained Palestinians.

    Israeli officials got an advance look at an internal draft of the new report earlier this week, and moved quickly to announce their break. In a Thursday statement, Israel’s UN mission said it would end all cooperation with Guterres, with Israeli ambassador Danny Danon confronting the secretary-general over the listing in a phone call before posting a blunt public rebuke on X: “WE’RE DONE WITH YOU! @antonioguterres.”

    Speaking to Israeli broadcaster i24, Danon argued that listing Israeli service members alongside Hamas—an group Guterres also cited in the report for failing to address its own alleged sexual violence abuses during the October 7 attacks—crossed an unacceptable red line. “To put our soldiers, my son, my daughter, in the same list with the terrorists of Hamas, who committed the horrible crimes of October 7… There is a line, and we decided that enough is enough,” he said.

    Israel’s Foreign Ministry doubled down on the criticism, dismissing the report’s findings as “shameful and absurd” and framing the UN as a deeply politicized, corrupt body that has abandoned its founding mission to target Israel unfairly. “Israel has decided to sever all ties with the Secretary-General’s Office and will wait until a new UN Secretary-General is appointed,” the ministry’s statement read. Guterres’ current five-year term is set to conclude on December 31.

    The United States echoed Israel’s outrage, with US Ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz calling the UN’s decision to list Israel “ridiculous.” He claimed the move unfairly equates a democratic state with independent rule of law and mechanisms to hold abusive actors accountable with terrorist organizations.

    For its part, the UN has refused to back down or revise the document. When Middle East Eye reached out to Guterres’ office for comment, spokesperson Stephane Dujarric confirmed that the secretary-general stands firmly behind the report’s findings, saying “the report has been issued and is not open for change.” A day prior, Dujarric had told reporters that Guterres’ door remains open to Israeli representatives despite the split.

    The 2025 report, which documents cases of sexual violence occurring from 2023 onward, lists 31 verified instances of sexual abuse used as a tool of torture by Israeli security forces against Palestinians, the vast majority of whom were being held in Israeli detention. Ten of the documented victims are children. The report details a wide range of violations, including rape with objects, gang rape, attempted rape, targeted genital violence including deliberate shootings, unwanted sexual touching, unjustified invasive cavity and strip searches, forced nudity, and explicit threats of sexual assault.

    Guterres found that perpetrators span multiple branches of Israel’s national security apparatus, including regular Israel Defense Forces units, the Israel Prison Service, the elite Keter special operations unit, and the national police Counter-Terrorism Unit, widely known by its Hebrew acronym Yamam. The documented abuses occurred at multiple detention and interrogation sites across Israel and the occupied territories, including military bases such as Sde Teiman, Etzion, and Majnunah, and civilian prisons including Megiddo, Ofer, Ramla, Hasharon, Shatta, Nafha and Damon, as well as Gush Etzion police station.

    Victims include working journalists and human rights defenders, the report notes, with patterns of abuse differing by gender: female detainees primarily face threats of rape, forced nudity, unwanted touching, and dehumanizing unjustified strip searches, while male and minor male detainees are disproportionately targeted with rape, attempted rape, and severe genital violence. The report documents five male victims who suffered extended rectal bleeding and swelling that lasted for days or weeks, in many cases without access to any form of medical treatment.

    Beyond the abuse itself, Guterres highlighted two key ongoing failures: the Israeli government’s persistent refusal to grant UN investigative bodies access to sites and detainees to probe allegations, and Hamas’ refusal to acknowledge or address any claims of sexual violence committed by its members. To date, Guterres added, no Israeli security force member has been indicted in Israel for the sexual assault of Palestinian detainees.

    The UN report follows a high-profile investigative column published earlier this month by New York Times Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Nicholas Kristof, who detailed graphic accounts of abuse including sexual assault with animals, vegetables, and batons that left victims with permanent internal injuries. Kristof drew direct connection to US policy, writing that American tax dollars subsidize the Israeli security establishment, making the United States complicit in the documented abuse. He called on Washington to condition military aid to Israel on an immediate end to the abuse, and pressed US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, an avowed Zionist, to meet with survivors and protect them from retaliation for speaking out.

    Israeli officials swiftly condemned Kristof’s column as a “blood libel,” launching widespread calls for The New York Times to retract the piece and terminate Kristof’s employment. For years, the Israeli government has also blocked the International Committee of the Red Cross from accessing Palestinian detention facilities to inspect conditions, a long-standing restriction that has drawn little international attention until recent months.

  • No deal announced after Trump meeting to make ‘final determination’ on Iran

    No deal announced after Trump meeting to make ‘final determination’ on Iran

    A high-stakes meeting at the White House’s Situation Room, convened for U.S. President Donald Trump to finalize a proposed 60-day ceasefire extension framework with Iran, wrapped up Friday with no clear announcement of next steps, leaving diplomatic efforts between the two longtime adversaries in limbo. The gathering of Trump and top national security aides came one day after U.S. officials confirmed the two sides had reached a preliminary memorandum of understanding, pending formal approval from both Trump and Iran’s supreme leadership.

    Ahead of the meeting, Trump laid out three non-negotiable red lines he said any agreement must meet: Iran must make a permanent commitment to never develop or acquire a nuclear weapon, the Strait of Hormuz — one of the world’s most critical global energy chokepoints — must be fully reopened to unrestricted, two-way commercial shipping, and all naval mines deployed in the waterway must be permanently destroyed. He also added that Iran must grant U.S. teams authorization to remove and destroy the country’s existing stockpiles of enriched uranium, adding that no financial sanctions relief would be exchanged until those conditions are met, noting that less contentious provisions have already been agreed by both negotiating teams. In a social media post earlier Friday, Trump also said he was prepared to lift the U.S. blockade of the strait to allow stranded vessels to begin departing for their home ports.

    But Iranian officials have pushed back sharply on many of Trump’s stated terms, directly contradicting the U.S. version of the draft preliminary agreement. Iran’s state-aligned Fars News Agency reported that no provision requiring the destruction of Iranian nuclear materials was included in the memorandum of understanding, and labeled Trump’s latest comments as “a mixture of truth and lies.” Foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei reiterated Iran’s longstanding position that the country will not enter any negotiations over its sovereign nuclear program, saying Tehran’s sole focus is on ending the ongoing armed conflict that began in February. Iran has repeatedly maintained its nuclear program is entirely for peaceful energy and medical purposes, and denies it has ever pursued a nuclear weapons capability.

    Iran’s chief negotiator Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf added Friday that the country places no trust in U.S. verbal guarantees, only tangible action, saying “No action will be taken before the other side acts” and warning that “The winner of any agreement is the one who is better prepared for war the day after.”

    The current ceasefire between the two nations has been in place since April 8, after a sharp escalation of hostilities that began when the U.S. and Israel launched large-scale coordinated strikes on Iranian military and nuclear infrastructure on February 28. Iran responded with missile attacks on Israel and U.S. military assets across the Persian Gulf, and moved to effectively close the Strait of Hormuz — through which roughly 20% of the world’s daily oil supplies pass — sending global crude prices soaring in the weeks that followed.

    In recent days, both sides have repeatedly accused one another of violating the fragile truce. Just this week, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps launched a missile attack on a U.S. air base in Kuwait, which it said was the staging ground for earlier strikes on Bandar Abbas, a strategic Iranian port city adjacent to the strait. U.S. Central Command condemned the attack as an “egregious ceasefire violation.”

    U.S. Vice President JD Vance told reporters Thursday that negotiators from both sides were still ironing out a handful of remaining sticking points, most notably language related to Uranium enrichment, an issue at the core of decades of tensions between the U.S. and Iran. “We’re not there yet, but we’re very close and we’re going to keep on working at it,” Vance said. A senior White House official confirmed the conclusion of Friday’s meeting to reporters after it adjourned, but declined to share any further details on the internal discussion or a timeline for future talks. For weeks, Trump has repeatedly publicly claimed that Washington and Tehran are close to reaching a historic deal, and that negotiations are progressing smoothly, but as of yet no substantive final agreement has materialized.

  • Iranian opposition news site got $800bn in debt relief: Report

    Iranian opposition news site got $800bn in debt relief: Report

    A recent Financial Times investigation published Thursday has uncovered fresh financial evidence linking Iran International, the London-based Persian-language opposition news outlet, to Saudi Arabian state-backed media interests, challenging years of public denials from the outlet of any official foreign government ties. The revelations emerge against the already volatile backdrop of the February 2025 U.S. military attack on Iran, bringing new scrutiny to the network’s financial backing and editorial role in regional tensions.

    The findings center on a $870 million debt-for-equity restructuring transaction completed by Volant Media UK, Iran International’s parent company, in December 2024, a move designed to stabilize the outlet’s finances after years of heavy operating losses. Internal corporate documents reviewed by the FT show that Volant Media has racked up more than $550 million in cumulative losses over the past five years, with outstanding debts totaling roughly $645 million to connected entities as of the end of the 2024 financial year.

    Founded in 2017 by individuals billed as British-Saudi private investors, Iran International has grown into a large-scale operation with 700 employees, broadcasting into Iran via satellite, radio, and multiple social media platforms. The outlet describes itself as the most popular Persian-language news channel based outside of Iran, but it has long faced accusations from critics that it covertly promotes foreign-backed regime change in Iran and advocates for the return of the Iranian monarchy under Reza Pahlavi, the former shah’s son. For years, the outlet has repeatedly denied any formal or informal ties to either the Saudi or Israeli governments.

    The December 2024 debt restructuring included a major corporate shakeup: Volant Media issued 648 million new shares valued at $870 million to settle outstanding debts, and all 50,000 original founding shares held by Adel Abdulkarim Alabdulkarim — a British-Saudi film executive who serves as Volant’s director and company secretary — were transferred to Info-Cast Cayman Limited, an offshore holding company registered in the Cayman Islands. The FT confirms Alabdulkarim retains significant control over Volant, with the power to appoint or remove a majority of the outlet’s board of directors, though Info-Cast Cayman is formally listed as Volant’s immediate parent company as of the end of 2024.

    Corporate records from the Cayman Islands show Saleh Hussain Aldowais is the sole director of Info-Cast Cayman. A public figure matching that name holds the position of chief operations officer at Saudi Research and Media Group (SRMG), a major state-backed Saudi media corporation publicly traded on the Riyadh stock exchange. SRMG operates more than 30 global media outlets, including prominent publications such as Asharq Al-Awsat, Arab News, and Asharq News, the latter of which maintains a content partnership with Bloomberg News.

    In a statement to the FT, an Iran International spokesperson pushed back on the implications of the corporate restructuring, saying the debt-for-equity swap did not involve any new capital injection into the outlet. The spokesperson repeated the outlet’s longstanding claim that “it has never received funding from any government or state entity – including Saudi Arabia or Israel – whether directly or indirectly.” The spokesperson added that any external professional roles held by individuals connected to the outlet are held in a personal capacity, are entirely separate from Iran International’s operations, and do not impact the network’s editorial, operational, or financial independence.

    The FT’s revelations come amid heightened scrutiny of Iran International’s reporting in the lead-up to the U.S. war on Iran, which began on February 28, 2025. The outlet provided extensive coverage of nationwide anti-government protests that erupted in Iran earlier that year, triggered by a severe cost-of-living crisis exacerbated by long-standing U.S. economic sanctions. In January 2025, Iran International published a claim that more than 36,500 people had been killed in the Iranian government’s crackdown on the demonstrations — a death toll far higher than independent estimates published by Western governments and international human rights organizations. Days before launching military action against Iran, then-U.S. President Donald Trump publicly cited a casualty number nearly identical to that published by Iran International, though he never disclosed the source of his figure. A separate April 2025 New York Times report later confirmed that Israeli officials had lobbied the Trump administration to intervene militarily in Iran, pointing to the ongoing protests as justification. Israeli officials told U.S. leaders that the country’s intelligence service, Mossad, could help foment additional unrest to bring about the collapse of the Islamic Republic government.

  • How US law protects Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge

    How US law protects Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge

    For over half a century, Washington’s commitment to maintaining Israel’s military dominance over all regional rivals has anchored the decades-long alliance between the United States and Israel, shaping power dynamics across the entire Middle East. This core policy, formally known as Qualitative Military Edge (QME), has guided billions of dollars in U.S. military support, restricted arms sales to other regional states, and become a flashpoint for growing political controversy amid Israel’s devastating military campaign in Gaza.

    The QME framework emerged in the aftermath of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, taking root during the Cold War when the U.S. and Soviet Union backed opposing blocs in the region. The first landmark step toward formalizing this commitment came in 1968, when President Lyndon B. Johnson approved the sale of 50 advanced F-4 Phantom fighter jets to Israel — a departure from earlier U.S. arms export restrictions to the country. When the 1973 Arab-Israeli War broke out, with Moscow pouring arms into Arab coalition forces, Washington responded with sweeping logistical and military backing for Israel. By 1977, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, a key architect of Cold War U.S. foreign policy, framed Israeli security as a core moral priority for all democratic nations, cementing the policy’s ideological standing.

    The 1980s marked the first explicit official use of the term “qualitative military edge”. In 1981, Secretary of State Alexander Haig confirmed before Congress that preserving Israel’s military superiority had been a central pillar of U.S. policy since the 1973 war. The policy’s influence extended to all U.S. arms deals in the region: when Washington sold F-15S Strike Eagle warplanes to Saudi Arabia in the 1990s, the jets were fitted with downgraded radar technology, and Riyadh was barred from stationing the aircraft at its Tabuk airbase near the Israeli border to avoid threatening Israel’s advantage.

    QME was formally codified into U.S. federal law in October 2008 under the George W. Bush administration via the Naval Vessel Transfer Act. The legislation legally bound the U.S. government to ensure that any arms exports to other Middle Eastern states do not undermine Israel’s military superiority, formally defining QME as Israel’s ability to defeat any credible conventional military threat — from individual states, coalitions, or non-state actors — with minimal casualties, through superior technology, weaponry, and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities. The law also mandated a quadrennial assessment of Israel’s military edge relative to regional neighbors, a requirement updated in 2013 by the Israel QME Enhancement Act, signed by President Barack Obama, to require assessments every two years.

    Since the end of World War II, cumulative U.S. military aid to Israel has surpassed $240 billion when adjusted for inflation, making Israel the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign military assistance in modern history. The current framework for this support is a 2016 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed by the Obama administration, which allocates a minimum of $3.8 billion in annual military aid to Israel through 2029 — the largest single military aid pledge in U.S. history. The agreement requires Israel to spend the vast majority of these funds on U.S.-manufactured military equipment, ensuring the investment cycles back to the American defense industry. At the time of the signing, Obama emphasized that “America’s commitment to Israel’s security is unshakeable”, noting that access to cutting-edge U.S. weapons technology would guarantee Israel’s ability to defend itself against all threats.

    In the years following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attacks on Israel and the subsequent Israeli military campaign in Gaza that human rights groups have labeled genocide, additional U.S. military support to Israel has surged to record levels. Congressional data shows that annual U.S. military contributions to Israel hit a new high of more than $12.5 billion in 2024.

    At the center of current U.S. arms exports to Israel is the F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter, manufactured by American defense giant Lockheed Martin with components supplied by eight partner nations including the United Kingdom and Germany. As the world’s most technologically advanced stealth jet, prized for its long range, 360-degree integrated sensors and radar evasion, the F-35 is also the most expensive weapons program in history, with total program costs exceeding $2 trillion and a per-unit price of $82.5 million for the standard F-35A variant. As the program’s controlling owner, the U.S. only approves F-35 sales to NATO members or U.S.-designated Major Non-Nato Allies, with just 20 countries currently operating the jet. The U.S. itself operates 1,763 F-35s, more than all other operator nations combined.

    Israel became the first foreign country to purchase the F-35 in 2010, receiving its first deliveries in 2016, and remains the only country in the Middle East and North Africa region to operate the jet. Israel’s custom variant, designated the F-35I Adir (Hebrew for “The Mighty One”), is modified to integrate Israeli-developed electronics and software. In 2018, Israel became the first country to use the F-35 in combat, launching an airstrike in Lebanon. Israeli F-35s have since been used in operations across the region against targets in Iran, Syria, Yemen, Qatar, and Gaza, where the Israeli campaign has killed nearly 73,000 Palestinians, according to local health authorities. During the 2025 Israel-Iran war, Middle East Eye reporting confirmed that the U.S. approved Israeli modifications to its F-35 fleet to add external fuel tanks, allowing non-stop round-trip flights from Israel to Iran without refueling at U.S. bases in the Gulf or Caucasus, where host governments declined permission for Israeli refueling stops. Beyond the F-35, Israel also operates large fleets of U.S.-made F-15 and F-16 fighter jets, and the U.S. has invested billions of dollars into co-developing Israel’s world-renowned layered air defense systems, including Iron Dome, Arrow, and David’s Sling, produced in partnership with U.S. defense firm Raytheon.

    Washington has also long maintained a deliberate policy of ambiguity toward Israel’s status as the Middle East’s only undeclared nuclear power, which developed outside public U.S. oversight and was first publicly exposed by Israeli whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu in 1986.

    In recent years, the massive scale of U.S. military support for Israel has sparked growing political backlash in the U.S., amplified by widespread international condemnation of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. The only Palestinian-American member of Congress, Democratic Representative Rashida Tlaib, argued in September 2025 that the U.S.-backed, U.S.-funded military operation in Gaza is growing more horrific by the day without congressional action to cut off aid. Criticism has also emerged from across the political aisle: in July 2025, Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene introduced an amendment to cut $500 million in funding for Iron Dome, which gained support from Tlaib and progressive Democrat Ilhan Omar but failed by a lopsided 422-6 vote. High-profile conservative commentator and former Fox News host Tucker Carlson has also called for a full end to U.S. aid, telling Israel’s Channel 13 in May 2025 that “I don’t think the United States owes Israel anything. I don’t think the U.S. should give Israel anything. I think we should stop all aid to Israel tomorrow.” The White House dismissed Carlson’s comments as the work of a “low-IQ person who spreads fake news for cheap publicity.”

    The future of the QME policy was thrown into question in November 2025, when President Donald Trump announced during a White House visit by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman that the U.S. would proceed with a plan to sell F-35 stealth fighters to Saudi Arabia, as part of a broader package of bilateral trade and defense deals worth billions of dollars. Trump acknowledged Israeli concerns that selling top-tier F-35s to Riyadh would undermine its military edge, saying “I know they [Israel] would like you to get planes of reduced calibre. I don’t think that makes you too happy… I think they [Saudi Arabia and Israel] are both at a level where they should get top of the line.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pushed back quickly, saying that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to preserving Israel’s QME in all regional arms sales. The proposed sale has not yet received congressional ratification, and its path forward remains uncertain.

    Kristian Ulrichsen, a fellow at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy, told Middle East Eye that the sale’s outcome will depend heavily on whether the Trump administration has enough political capital to advance the deal amid heightened congressional scrutiny, particularly if 2026 midterm elections shift control of one or both congressional chambers to the Democratic Party. This is not the first time a proposed F-35 sale to a Gulf state has run into obstacles: in 2020, during Trump’s first term, the administration announced plans to sell up to 50 F-35A jets to the United Arab Emirates following the Abraham Accords normalization agreement between Israel and the UAE, but President Joe Biden paused the deal after taking office in 2021 over concerns about UAE’s economic and security ties with China. When Washington imposed strict access restrictions on the jets, the UAE pulled out of the deal at the end of 2021 and ruled out reopening talks in 2024. Turkey similarly lost access to the F-35 program in 2019 after purchasing Russian-made S-400 air defense systems, which U.S. officials said posed unacceptable intelligence risks. A NATO member and original F-35 production partner, Turkey has paid roughly $1.4 billion for the jets it ordered, six of which remain undelivered; President Recep Tayyip Erdogan requested that Trump revisit the ban during a March 2025 diplomatic request.

    Despite the proposed Saudi sale, Israel continues to expand its own fleet of advanced U.S. fighter jets. In May 2026, Israel announced plans to purchase 25 additional F-35s alongside a squadron of new F-15IA advanced fighter jets. Combined with a 2023 order for 25 more F-35s, the purchases will bring Israel’s F-35 fleet to roughly 100 jets, giving it one of the largest F-35 squadrons outside the United States. Ulrichsen noted that even with new arms sales to Gulf partners, longstanding U.S. commitment to QME is unlikely to shift. “The US is likely to maintain its commitment to preserving Israel’s QME even as it deepens defence and security ties with the Gulf States,” he said.

  • The clearest sign Father Time is closing in on Djokovic?

    The clearest sign Father Time is closing in on Djokovic?

    The 2026 French Open has delivered one of the most memorable matches in modern tennis history, as 19-year-old Brazilian breakout star Joao Fonseca defeated 39-year-old tennis legend Novak Djokovic in a grueling five-set clash that stretched nearly five hours on Court Philippe Chatrier. A raucous crowd packed with Brazilian supporters watched on as the young contender pulled off an upset that will be remembered for generations, capping a dramatic, momentum-shifting battle with three consecutive aces to seal the victory.

    Entering the match, Djokovic stood as the last remaining Grand Slam champion in the men’s draw. Top contenders Jannik Sinner had already been eliminated, while defending threat Carlos Alcaraz withdrew due to injury, leaving the Serbian star as the overwhelming favorite to claim a record-breaking 25th major singles title. Djokovic looked set to deliver on that expectation early, taking a commanding two-set lead and holding break points while up 4-3 in the fourth set that would have all but closed out the match. But fatigue, compounded by already nearly seven hours of four-set play against French wildcards Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard and Valentin Royer in earlier rounds, ultimately caught up with the 23-time Grand Slam winner.

    As Fonseca raised his level, Djokovic’s energy faded, forcing him to retch on the side of the court as he fought to summon the strength to continue. When the final point landed, the 39-year-old offered a gracious concession, admitting he had simply run out of physical gas. “I just ran out of gas, to be honest. I didn’t feel good at all on the court in the next couple of sets,” Djokovic told reporters post-match, adding, “I don’t think I’ve done too much wrong with my game. It’s just that he was just better.”

    The result marks a coming-of-age moment for Fonseca, who was born the same year Djokovic reached his first French Open quarterfinal in 2006. Long touted as one of the most promising young talents in men’s tennis, Djokovic himself admitted he had been an admirer of the Brazilian’s game since his Grand Slam debut at the 2025 Australian Open. On Sunday, the tennis world got to see exactly why the hype around Fonseca has grown so rapidly. His ferocious forehand has long been his signature weapon, but it was his composure and tactical maturity that won the day: he adjusted his game as Djokovic faded, mixing consistent deep groundstrokes with deft drop shots that kept the legend off-balance, before closing out the win with unflinching nerve on serve.

    Thousands of Brazilian fans, dressed in green and gold and waving national flags, erupted in celebration after the final point. Only two Brazilian players have ever won a Grand Slam singles title – Maria Bueno and three-time French Open champion Gustavo Kuerten, who last took the Coupe des Mousquetaires in 2001. Now, a new generation of Brazilian tennis fans is dreaming that Fonseca can follow in Kuerten’s footsteps and claim the title in Paris.

    For Djokovic, the defeat brings an end to his 2026 French Open campaign, and raises fresh questions about how much longer the all-time great will continue competing against opponents young enough to be his son. While this exit marks the clearest sign yet that age is finally catching up to a player who has defied Father Time for years, the Serb shows no sign of stepping away. He will now turn his attention to Wimbledon, where he is a seven-time champion on a grass surface that has consistently troubled younger contenders, and few will count him out from adding to his major record there. Djokovic’s insatiable hunger for Grand Slam glory remains undimmed, even as his body can no longer always keep up with his legendary competitive drive.

    With Djokovic, Sinner and Alcaraz all out of the men’s draw, the 2026 French Open is guaranteed to crown a first-time Grand Slam singles champion. Remaining contenders in Djokovic’s half of the draw include second seed Alexander Zverev and two-time runner-up Casper Ruud, but after his epic upset win over the sport’s biggest name, no one will be counting out the teenage Brazilian who has already made history in Paris.

  • Mumbai’s famed dabbawalas fed millions for over 100 years – now they are disappearing

    Mumbai’s famed dabbawalas fed millions for over 100 years – now they are disappearing

    Long before food delivery apps, ride-sharing services, and on-demand urban convenience, Mumbai’s dabbawalas built a logistical legend that captured global attention. For more than 130 years, these uniformed delivery workers, recognizable by their signature white caps and shirts, have navigated the chaos of India’s financial capital to deliver thousands of hot, home-cooked lunchboxes (called dabbas) to office workers every single day. Today, however, this centuries-old tradition is on the brink of collapse, devastated by shifting work patterns and new digital competition.

    Every morning, long before the city wakes to its usual frantic pace, dabbawalas cycle through Mumbai’s sprawling suburbs collecting dabbas packed with rice, lentils, curries, rotis, and fresh seasonal dishes, all cooked in family kitchens across the city. They load the stacked boxes onto suburban trains, sort them according to a simple but incredibly precise alphanumeric coding system, and deliver them on foot or by bicycle to office workers across the city by midday. After workers finish their meals, dabbawalas collect the empty boxes and reverse the route, returning them to the original homes by early afternoon. What makes this system remarkable is that it relies on no apps, no GPS, and no advanced technology – just generations of tacit knowledge of Mumbai’s streets and railways, passed down from worker to worker.

    The origins of the dabbawala network stretch back to the late 19th century, when British-ruled Bombay was rapidly expanding as a commercial hub. At the time, restaurants were scarce, and cultural and religious dietary customs made home-cooked meals non-negotiable for many office workers. The model first began when a Parsi banker hired a local man to deliver his home lunch to his workplace, and the concept quickly spread. By 1890, organizer Mahadeo Bachche formalized the modern network with roughly 100 workers. Over the decades, the system grew to its peak, with nearly 4,500 registered dabbawalas delivering 50,000 lunchboxes across the city every single day.

    Its legendary precision earned the dabbawala network global acclaim. Harvard Business School analyzed the system as a world-class case study in low-cost, high-efficiency logistics. Even Britain’s King Charles III, then Prince of Wales, spent time working alongside dabbawalas during a 2003 visit to Mumbai. For decades, the network became a point of civic pride for Mumbai: a reminder that amid the city’s unending noise and chaos, some core institutions still operated with unrivaled reliability.

    But that reputation now offers little protection from the disruptions that have shaken the network in recent years. The turning point came with the Covid-19 pandemic, when widespread office shutdowns forced millions of Mumbai workers into remote work arrangements. Overnight, demand for daily lunchbox deliveries collapsed. Dabbawalas who once served 20 to 25 clients a day were left with just a handful of customers, or none at all. With little in the way of savings, hundreds of workers left the trade permanently.

    Even after offices reopened, the shift to hybrid work models gutted demand. Many office workers now only come into the city two or three days a week, eliminating the need for daily lunch delivery. The Mumbai Tiffin Box Suppliers Association reports that registered dabbawala numbers have plummeted from roughly 4,500 in 2018 to just 1,500 today.

    Competition from the digital economy has compounded the crisis. Today, major food delivery platforms such as Swiggy and Zomato offer on-demand delivery of everything from traditional biryani to fast food at competitive prices, while a booming cloud kitchen industry has expanded affordable restaurant options for city workers. Where dabbawalas once faced almost no competition for home-style lunch delivery, they now struggle to compete with the convenience of a tap on a smartphone screen.

    For workers who have left the trade, the transition has been difficult. Balu Bhagu Shinde, 41, worked as a dabbawala for 20 years, earning roughly 20,000 rupees a month – enough to support his wife and three children in one of India’s most expensive cities. By the end of 2020, he was left with just two regular customers. After waiting in vain for customers to return, he switched to driving a tuktuk, where he earns just 15,000 rupees a month. “There are no customers, no money – what should we do?” Shinde said. “We are struggling to survive. I am cutting down on household expenses, but I have three children whose education matters the most. At times I have had to borrow money.”

    For the dabbawalas who have stayed in the trade, survival now requires working 15-hour days across two separate jobs. Mauli Bachche, a third-generation dabbawala with 20 years of experience, completes his full morning collection, delivery, and empty box return route by 2 p.m. every day, then starts a second job collecting small daily savings deposits for a local finance company, not returning home until 10 p.m. He travels more than 100 kilometers across Mumbai every day, and still only has 15 regular customers left, down from 25 before the pandemic. “Income from dabbawala work is very low,” Bachche said. “Everyone is doing more than one job.”

    Longtime workers say the biggest long-term threat is the lack of interest from younger generations. With Mumbai’s cost of living rising steadily, young people have little incentive to enter a low-wage trade with an uncertain future. “In our time, we managed to survive,” said Baban Kadam, who has worked as a dabbawala for 35 years. “But with today’s cost of living, the younger generation will not come into this work. Everyone wants a better-paying job or business.”

    Industry leaders are now scrambling to implement changes to keep the network alive. The Mumbai Tiffin Box Suppliers Association is considering restructuring work into shift-based schedules, which would allow dabbawalas to take on part-time work or small side businesses alongside their delivery routes. Even with these adjustments, however, the future remains uncertain. “We are continuing for now,” said Ramdas Baban Karvande, the association’s president. “But we cannot say what will happen in the future.”

    For now, the dabbawalas still load their stacks of steel dabbas onto Mumbai’s crowded suburban trains every morning, keeping alive a tradition that has long been woven into the identity of India’s most iconic city. But as the city evolves around it, this legendary logistical institution is at risk of being left behind by the very pace of change it once helped power.

  • US commander meets with Cuban military officials as Trump pressures island nation

    US commander meets with Cuban military officials as Trump pressures island nation

    Amid a sharp escalation of U.S. pressure on Cuba’s socialist government, the highest-ranking U.S. military commander for Latin America has held an in-person meeting with Cuban military leaders near the long-contested U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, marking another high-level encounter between the two adversarial nations amid shifting regional tensions.

    The Friday meeting, described by U.S. Southern Command as a “brief exchange on operational security matters,” comes as the Trump administration ramps up coercive action against Cuban leaders, just weeks after U.S. forces captured Venezuelan autocratic leader Nicolás Maduro in a January raid that reshuffled power dynamics across the Caribbean. Speaking shortly after that operation, Trump issued a stark warning that Cuba would be “next” if its ruling government did not make sweeping concessions to U.S. demands.

    In the months following Maduro’s capture, the Trump administration has layered on escalating punitive measures against Havana. A full oil blockade has cut off the island’s primary source of export revenue and energy supplies, while U.S. warships have maintained a persistent presence in Caribbean waters to underscore Washington’s military leverage. Most recently, federal prosecutors unsealed criminal indictments against a former top Cuban leader on multiple federal charges, a move that further escalated diplomatic friction between the two nations.

    In a marked contradiction to its hard-line public stance, the Trump administration has quietly pursued exploratory diplomatic outreach to Cuban officials in recent months. Top administration figures, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, have both held closed-door talks with Cuban representatives to discuss potential avenues for improved bilateral relations. According to insiders familiar with the discussions, however, U.S. negotiators have left these meetings unsatisfied with the concessions offered by Havana, prompting the White House to approve additional rounds of economic sanctions targeting senior Cuban government officials and state-owned entities.

    Beyond the rare security exchange with Cuban military leaders, U.S. Gen. Francis L. Donovan, the top U.S. commander for the region, also used his visit to the Guantanamo Bay base to conduct a security review of the installation. In a public post on the social platform X, U.S. Southern Command noted that Donovan discussed base security, the well-being of deployed service members and their families, and overall operational readiness with base leadership during his trip.

    The U.S. has maintained a naval presence at Guantanamo Bay for more than a century, a presence that has been a constant source of friction between Washington and Havana ever since Cuba’s 1959 socialist revolution. Trump has repeatedly made clear that one of his core regional policy goals is removing Cuba’s current socialist leadership from power, even as he has kept the base operational amid escalating tensions.

    Currently, the U.S. maintains a small contingent of naval vessels in the Caribbean, including at least one large amphibious assault ship. This force is significantly smaller than the deployment that was in place in the lead-up to the January raid that captured Maduro, reflecting a gradual drawdown of major combat assets in the region following that operation. To maintain a consistent security posture, the Pentagon announced Friday that a new rotation of 1,300 sailors and Marines will deploy to the region to replace the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit, which first deployed to the Caribbean last summer.

  • Blue Origin rocket explosion is bad news for both Bezos and NASA

    Blue Origin rocket explosion is bad news for both Bezos and NASA

    The high-stakes world of commercial space exploration faced a dramatic and costly setback on Thursday night, when Blue Origin’s next-generation New Glenn rocket erupted into a massive fireball during a pre-launch ground test at Florida’s Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. The incident, which occurred at approximately 9:00 pm local time (0100 GMT Friday), left no reported injuries but has sent ripples of concern across the global space industry, threatening timelines for both Jeff Bezos’s private space ambitions and NASA’s flagship Artemis Moon mission program.

    Standing 98 meters (321 feet) tall, New Glenn is the most powerful launch vehicle ever developed by Blue Origin, designed to carry crewed missions, heavy commercial payloads, and key components for NASA’s lunar landing efforts. While routine testing anomalies are not uncommon in rocket development, industry experts note that full-scale explosions of this magnitude remain rare. Post-incident photos released on Friday confirm that the blast caused severe damage to both the rocket itself and the Cape Canaveral launch pad it was testing on. Florida Congressman Mike Haridopolos, whose district encompasses the Cape Canaveral space complex, told Fox News Friday that reconstruction work on the damaged facility will require a significant amount of time, adding further uncertainty to Blue Origin’s operational timeline.

    In the immediate aftermath of the explosion, NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman released a statement via social media platform X acknowledging the incident. He reaffirmed NASA’s commitment to supporting a full, transparent investigation into the root cause of the anomaly, which is being conducted jointly by Blue Origin, NASA, and the U.S. Space Force. The New Glenn rocket will remain grounded indefinitely throughout the course of the investigation, and Blue Origin has declined multiple requests from Agence France-Presse for additional details on the scope of damage, investigation progress, or revised launch timelines.

    The stakes of this setback extend far beyond Blue Origin’s corporate goals. Just days before the explosion, NASA awarded Blue Origin a major contract to develop a second lunar lander for the Artemis program, a move intended to create redundancy for the initiative after SpaceX, NASA’s primary lunar lander contractor, faced repeated delays to its own Starship development. The Artemis program, which aims to return the first American astronauts to the lunar surface since the Apollo program, currently targets a crewed landing by the end of 2028, with a critical in-orbit rendezvous test between lunar landers and a main spacecraft scheduled for 2027. Clatyon Swope, deputy director of the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, notes that any extended delay to New Glenn’s development could throw NASA’s carefully calibrated mission schedule off track.

    The explosion also marks the second major malfunction for Blue Origin in just over a month, following a satellite launch failure caused by a rocket anomaly in March. Beyond the lunar program, the incident also threatens progress on Amazon’s Project Kuiper, a satellite internet constellation designed to compete with SpaceX’s Starlink. Project Kuiper relies heavily on New Glenn rockets to launch hundreds of its broadband satellites into orbit, meaning delays to the rocket program will likely push back the commercial rollout of Bezos’s satellite internet initiative.

    This is not the first time a catastrophic rocket explosion has occurred at Cape Canaveral; a decade ago, a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket exploded during pre-launch ground testing, destroying a $200 million communications satellite that was set to be deployed. While many in the space sector have expressed confidence that Blue Origin will ultimately recover from the setback, the immediate impact of Thursday’s blast is expected to reshape near-term plans for both U.S. commercial space development and NASA’s lunar exploration agenda.

  • After decades risking arrest, South Korea’s tattoo artists step into the limelight

    After decades risking arrest, South Korea’s tattoo artists step into the limelight

    Last Saturday, on a rooftop in Seoul’s trendy Seongsu neighborhood, over 90 South Korean tattoo artists gathered for a celebration decades in the making. For 34 years, tattooing as a profession had been restricted exclusively to licensed medical practitioners in the country, forcing the entire industry to grow in the shadows. But following landmark rulings from the nation’s top court and legislative action from lawmakers, that era of criminalization has finally come to a close. When veteran tattooist Kim Tae-nam took the stage to open the Ink Bomb festival, his relief and joy were palpable to every attendee. “This was only possible because of our effort, all your sweat and tears,” he told the cheering crowd. “Let’s hear it from everyone: Tattoos are art!”

    The path to legalization began decades ago, when South Korea’s Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that tattooing qualified as a medical practice, citing public hygiene and safety concerns. This ruling aligned with long-standing conservative social norms that framed body art as unseemly, reinforcing outdated stereotypes that linked tattoos to organized crime and gang activity. Violations of the restriction carried severe penalties, including heavy fines and even jail time, forcing thousands of artists to operate in secret. When Kim started his career in 2004 under the pseudonym Sunrat Tattoo, he ran his first studio out of an unmarked basement, accepting clients by invitation only. When he launched the Ink Bomb gathering in 2008, every event was shut down by police, who threatened arrest and criminal charges for participants. This year’s open, public festival marks the first time the event has been held legally since 2014.

    The decades-long crackdown did not just push the industry underground—it created dangerous conditions for artists, particularly women. Disgruntled clients often exploited the illegal status of tattooing to blackmail, harass, or threaten artists, who could not turn to police for help without incriminating themselves. According to Kim Do-yoon, founder of the South Korean Tattoo Union who works under the pseudonym Doy, the vast majority of these harassment victims were young women artists. “The shock from these losses is what moved me to found the union and fight for our right to work safely and legally in Korea,” Doy stated, noting that some targeted artists died by suicide as a result of their exploitation. Each year, the union provided legal support to at least 50 prosecuted tattoo artists, with many more facing unreported fines. Despite the constant risk, the industry grew steadily: 2021 government data estimates there are roughly 350,000 tattoo artists working across South Korea today.

    For many artists, the legalization brings an end to a constant state of anxiety. Tattooist Kali, who has never faced criminal charges herself, said she lived with constant hypervigilance from seeing peers prosecuted. “I was constantly working with anxiety. It still feels surreal to me that I no longer have to worry about this,” she said, describing her “ecstatic” reaction to the Supreme Court’s recent decision overturning the 1992 ruling. Just months before the court decision, in September, South Korean lawmakers passed legislation formalizing the legality of tattooing by non-medical professionals, capping off a years-long campaign by artists to end harassment and criminalization.

    Shifting social attitudes laid the groundwork for this policy change, driven by younger generations of Koreans who have embraced body art as a legitimate form of self-expression. Over the 2010s, South Korean tattoo art gained global acclaim, particularly for its distinctive delicate fine-line style, which spread to global audiences via social media. High-profile South Korean celebrities—from K-pop idols like BTS’s Jungkook, Girl’s Generation’s Taeyeon and HyunA, to Olympian diver Woo Ha-ram and actress Han Ye-seul—have also helped normalize tattoos by displaying their body art publicly. Even as the legal framework changes, however, social stigma persists: many workplaces still hold negative biases against tattooed candidates, some public gyms and saunas maintain “no tattoo” policies, and mainstream conformist culture still marginalizes people who choose visible body modification. Still, artists note that younger generations are actively breaking down these long-standing norms.

    While the end of criminalization is a historic win for the industry, uncertainty remains. South Korea’s Ministry of Health has announced plans to roll out a new licensing and testing system for tattooists in 2025 to standardize the profession, and dozens of older criminal cases against artists are still pending. Doy, who was charged under the old Medical Act for tattooing actress Han Ye-seul in 2019 (and has also inked high-profile clients including Brad Pitt and Steven Yeun), expects his charges and those of other artists will be dismissed following the Supreme Court ruling. For Doy, the moment is bittersweet: “Things are finally back where they should be,” he said. “But I can’t help but think of the fellow artists who aren’t here with us.”

    Attendees at Ink Bomb reflected the growing mainstream acceptance of tattoo culture in South Korea, drawing a diverse crowd that included working artists, punk rock fans, and even parents accompanying their teenage children. Though no permanent tattoos were offered at the celebration—given the time and space the practice requires—attendees could pick up free custom sticker art from participating creators. For many in the crowd, the day was far more than a festival: it was a long-overdue recognition of decades of hidden work and cultural contribution. “It makes no sense that tattooing should be seen as a medical act. Nobody is going to medical school to become a tattooist,” said 48-year-old tattoo enthusiast Jay Hur. “Korean tattooists had to take risks to do their job to sustain this beautiful underground culture.”

  • US judge orders Trump’s name be removed from Kennedy Center

    US judge orders Trump’s name be removed from Kennedy Center

    A federal judge in Washington D.C. has delivered a landmark ruling that blocks the controversial addition of former President Donald Trump’s name to the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, ordering the immediate removal of all branding bearing his name within 14 days and halting plans for a two-year closure tied to proposed renovations.

    District Judge Christopher Cooper, an appointee of the Obama administration, laid out a clear legal precedent in his 94-page opinion: Congress established the iconic cultural venue’s original name in 1971, and only the legislative branch holds the authority to alter it. The ruling states that unilateral action by the Kennedy Center’s board of trustees to rebrand the institution violates the center’s founding organic statute, which explicitly reserves naming rights to Congress. The venue was originally opened in 1971 as a permanent memorial to assassinated President John F. Kennedy, and the ruling requires its name to revert fully to its original title: the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts.

    The chain of events that led to the lawsuit began in early 2025, when Trump replaced multiple sitting trustees on the center’s board, secured an appointment as a trustee himself, and was subsequently voted in as the board’s chairman. By December of that year, the newly reconfigured board voted to rename the venue the “Donald J Trump and John F Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts,” and new lettering bearing Trump’s full name was installed on the center’s front portico within 24 hours of the vote.

    The rebranding sparked immediate backlash across the arts and political communities: dozens of scheduled performing artists canceled their upcoming engagements at the venue, and ticket sales dropped sharply in the months following the name change. In February 2026, the board announced a two-year full closure of the center starting on July 4, 2026, framing the renovation project as a tribute to the 250th anniversary of U.S. independence. The project was to be funded with $257 million in congressional funding secured during Trump’s administration.

    The legal challenge was brought by ousted board member Joyce Beatty, a Democratic congresswoman from Ohio, alongside other former trustees, who argued that their voting rights had been unlawfully stripped when Trump replaced sitting board members. The lawsuit was later amended to also challenge the proposed closure and renovation timeline.

    Following Friday’s ruling, Beatty celebrated the decision as a victory for the rule of law and public trust. “The Kennedy Center is an institution that belongs to the American people, not to Donald Trump,” she said in an official statement. “He has desecrated this sacred memorial for his own vanity. I am proud to have fought for the rule of law and to protect this sacred institution.”

    Officials with the Kennedy Center have pushed back against the ruling, announcing plans to immediately appeal the order requiring Trump’s name removal. Roma Daravi, a spokesperson for the center, told CBS News that the board remains confident its actions will be upheld on appeal, noting that the board acted in good faith to recognize what it calls Trump’s historic contributions to the national cultural institution. Daravi also added that the center still faces an urgent need for major renovations, a fact the plaintiff has already acknowledged, and that the $257 million in congressionally approved funding is already in place to complete the work. The center will also review the judge’s ruling on the proposed closure and continue to pursue all legal avenues to advance the restoration project, Daravi added.