作者: admin

  • Russia frees US citizen Stephen Hubbard, state media reports

    Russia frees US citizen Stephen Hubbard, state media reports

    In a high-stakes diplomatic meeting held in St. Petersburg, Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced that Moscow will release 74-year-old detained American citizen Stephen Hubbard, following negotiations with U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff. According to Russian state media, Hubbard has already been transferred to St. Petersburg’s Pulkovo Airport ahead of his departure from Russia, closing a months-long diplomatic standoff over his detention.

    Hubbard, a retired teacher originally from Michigan, was handed a nearly seven-year prison sentence in a Russian penal colony earlier this year. Russian prosecutors leveled charges that he had joined a Ukrainian defense battalion in the eastern Ukrainian city of Izyum, where he was captured by Russian forces shortly after Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The U.S. State Department had long categorized Hubbard as being wrongfully detained, and current U.S. President Donald Trump confirmed earlier this week that he had personally raised Hubbard’s case during discussions with Putin.

    “We have been focused on Hubbard,” Trump told reporters Tuesday, adding “Watch what happens” to tease the impending breakthrough. Multiple U.S. media outlets including CBS News, the BBC’s U.S. distribution partner, have reported that Hubbard has been suffering from serious underlying health issues during his detention, and he is expected to fly to Texas immediately after his release to receive urgent medical care. The BBC has reached out to the White House to request additional comment on the deal, as of publication no formal statement has been released.

    The agreement to release Hubbard was paired with a separate energy deal between Washington and Moscow announced earlier this month, which will resume U.S. imports of Russian diesel. Russian state media reported that Witkoff expressed gratitude to Putin on President Trump’s behalf both for Hubbard’s release and for the new energy agreement. Putin told reporters that the first shipment of Russian diesel under the new deal will depart Russia within two to three days, confirming the timeline in comments carried by Russian state news agency TASS.

    The dual deal has already triggered sharp backlash from Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has publicly condemned the diesel agreement, and the move has further strained already frayed diplomatic ties between Kyiv and Washington. In on-camera remarks made during Wednesday’s St. Petersburg meeting and aired on Russian state television, Witkoff framed the energy agreement as a model for what cooperation between Moscow and Kyiv could achieve. “Your decision to remove export controls on diesel oil from Russia, not just to the U.S. but also to the world at large in the midst of an economic shock, I think that was really important that that happened,” Witkoff said. “I know [President Trump] is deeply grateful for it.”

  • Gambia to pay victims of Yahya Jammeh’s rule from proceeds of his seized US mansion

    Gambia to pay victims of Yahya Jammeh’s rule from proceeds of his seized US mansion

    More than six years after former longtime Gambian dictator Yahya Jammeh was forced out of power, a major step forward has been taken to deliver long-awaited justice to thousands of victims of his authoritarian rule. Gambian authorities confirmed this week that the West African nation has received more than $2.5 million from the U.S. government, funds generated by the forfeiture and sale of one of Jammeh’s illegally acquired overseas assets, and the entire sum will be directed to reparations for survivors and families of those harmed during Jammeh’s 22-year regime.

    The money, which totals exactly $2,573,414.10, comes from the sale of a Maryland mansion Jammeh owned, according to the Gambia’s National Reparations Commission. U.S. authorities first seized the property in 2022, after a court ruled the residence had been purchased using money stolen from the Gambian public through corruption and misappropriation of state funds. This marks one of the first successful cross-border recoveries of assets stolen by the former leader.

    Jammeh seized control of The Gambia in a bloodless military coup in 1994, and went on to consolidate authoritarian power over the country for more than two decades. His tenure was marred by widespread, well-documented human rights violations: independent investigations have confirmed thousands of cases of extrajudicial killing, forced disappearances of political opponents, sexual violence, torture, and systematic corruption that drained the small nation’s public coffers. An official truth and reconciliation commission established after Jammeh’s ouster later confirmed that between 240 and 250 people were killed by state agents under his rule, and he misappropriated more than $300 million in public funds to build a global network of personal assets.

    That network included 281 properties within The Gambia itself, plus additional holdings in the United States and Morocco, and control of more than 100 bank accounts spread across global financial institutions. Investigators have long confirmed Jammeh could never have afforded this sprawling property portfolio on his official presidential salary.

    The 2016 presidential election marked the beginning of the end of Jammeh’s rule. He initially conceded defeat to opposition candidate Adama Barrow, but later backtracked and refused to step down, triggering a constitutional crisis. Intense pressure from the international community and regional bloc ECOWAS followed, with troops from neighboring Senegal and other West African nations deployed to the Gambian border to enforce the election results. In early 2017, Jammeh finally agreed to step down and go into exile in Equatorial Guinea, where he remains today.

    In a public statement this week, the Reparations Commission announced it was pleased to deliver the long-awaited update to victims, survivors, and the general public. The commission emphasized it is committed to managing the recovered funds with full transparency and accountability, prioritizing the rights and needs of those who suffered harm under Jammeh’s regime. This recovery marks a significant milestone in The Gambia’s multi-year effort to seek accountability for past abuses and deliver meaningful reparations to affected communities.

  • Australian MP loses both legs after alleged car attack, husband says

    Australian MP loses both legs after alleged car attack, husband says

    A shocking act of political violence has rocked regional Australia, after independent Member of Parliament Helen Haines was deliberately hit by a car outside her electorate office, leaving her with life-altering injuries that claimed both of her legs. The 53-year-old MP for Indi, first elected in 2019, was attacked on Monday afternoon just outside her office in Wangaratta, a regional town roughly 240 kilometers northeast of Melbourne.

    Haines’ husband, Phil Haines, confirmed the devastating extent of his wife’s injuries during a press conference in Melbourne, where Helen is currently receiving medical care. While the “horrendous incident” left her with severe harm, Phil Haines said that “her heart and her mind are in good shape,” adding that the most important silver lining amid the tragedy is that “she’s alive.” He noted that Helen’s recovery journey will be long and challenging, but emphasized that his wife is a determined fighter with the full support of her family. “She is a determined person who will do her best, with our support and love, to recover. And that is what we hope for,” he said.

    In a gesture that reflected Helen Haines’ long-standing community focus, Phil Haines thanked medical staff and supporters from across Australia and the globe for their outpouring of care, and urged anyone wishing to offer support to donate to the Save the Children fund rather than send gifts or messages directly. “Please keep sending Helen your love,” he added.

    The alleged attacker, 43-year-old Brendan Nugent, a local resident from nearby Tarrawingee with a background as an environmental campaigner, made his first court appearance on Wednesday. He faces three initial charges: dangerous driving causing serious injury, intentionally causing serious injury, and causing harm to a Commonwealth public official. Court documents also reveal additional charges of cultivating and possessing cannabis. Victoria Police have indicated that more severe charges, including attempted murder, could be laid as the investigation progresses.

    During the brief hearing, Nugent did not apply for bail and is scheduled to return to court in February. His defense attorney confirmed that Nugent has a history of mental health concerns and lives with idiopathic transverse myelitis, a rare neurological condition caused by spinal cord inflammation, but no further details were provided. Nugent remained silent and emotionless throughout the appearance.

    Multiple law enforcement agencies, including Victoria Police and the Australian Federal Police, are continuing their investigation into the attack. Victoria Police Commissioner Mike Bush told reporters that establishing a clear motive remains the central focus of the inquiry. “His motivation for this – what we allege is a deliberate attack – is very much a centrepiece of the investigation,” Bush said. “Our people will continue to explore every element, angle and avenue to work that out. It’s something that, when we work towards it, discover it, we will present in court.”

    Investigators are currently probing several possible lines of inquiry, including whether drug use or medication played a role in the attack, and whether any personal connection exists between Nugent and Haines. Police have confirmed that Nugent was not on any law enforcement watchlist prior to the attack, and there was no advance intelligence indicating a threat to Haines. In a surprising twist, Nugent’s own family released a statement saying they have been long-time friends with Haines, and described the attack as “devastating and unfathomable.”

    Witnesses who were first on the scene have described Haines’ remarkable composure even in the immediate aftermath of the crash. Jacob and Jackie Evans, two bystanders who intervened to detain Nugent and provide first aid, told reporters that Haines thanked them for their help even as she lay critically injured. “Thank you, you lovely people,” Haines told the couple, according to local media reports. Jacob Evans used a tourniquet from his car’s first aid kit to stem bleeding from one of Haines’ legs, a step that is widely credited with saving her life before emergency services arrived. Haines underwent emergency surgery following the attack, but surgeons were ultimately unable to save either leg.

    The attack has sent shockwaves through Australia’s political community, where acts of physical violence against elected officials remain extremely rare. Political leaders from across the ideological spectrum have expressed their support for Haines, who is widely respected across party lines. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who has spoken with Phil Haines multiple times since the attack, used the incident to highlight the growing crisis of threats against Australian politicians, particularly women. Albanese noted that female politicians often face a uniquely virulent form of aggression, including rape threats, and police data shows that nearly one person per week is now charged with making threats against high-level public officials.

    The incident has also sparked urgent national debate over the adequacy of security protections for Australia’s 226 federal Members of Parliament. Federal police officials have explained that providing 24/7 personal security to every MP would require an unfeasible level of staffing, so current policy relies on risk assessments based on an MP’s role and known threat levels. Governor-General Sam Mostyn, who joined Phil Haines at his press conference, called on the nation to use this tragedy as a moment for reflection. “This is a moment for us to pause, and to choose to be better,” Mostyn said. “We should do what I imagine Helen would be doing if she was not the victim of this terrible attack – reaching out to those who are terribly distressed by what has happened. Most importantly, that we learn or re-learn to exercise our muscle of decency.”

  • Elon Musk says merging Tesla and SpaceX is a good idea. Why?

    Elon Musk says merging Tesla and SpaceX is a good idea. Why?

    For more than a decade, Elon Musk has built two of the most valuable and ambitious technology companies in modern history: electric vehicle and clean energy leader Tesla, and aerospace innovator SpaceX. Now, the billionaire CEO is actively exploring a combination of the two firms that would reshape the global tech industry and mark the largest corporate merger of all time.

    When asked during a Tuesday appearance whether merging the two companies would be a positive move, Musk gave an unqualified confirmation: “Yes.” What makes the conversation more than just speculative discussion is that special independent committees have already been convened to evaluate the feasibility and terms of a potential deal. Musk has been careful to note that no final agreement is guaranteed, and no binding arrangements have been reached at this stage.

    With Tesla carrying a current market capitalization of approximately $1.5 trillion (£1.1 trillion) and private-market valuations placing SpaceX at roughly $2 trillion (£1.5 trillion), a merged entity would carry a combined valuation of $3.5 trillion, a figure that dwarfs any previous corporate combination. Any final transaction will require formal approval from shareholders of both companies, but Musk argues that the synergies between the two firms create significant value that can only be unlocked by combining operations.

    Industry observers say this move has been foreshadowed for months. Last week’s public unveiling of the next-generation Tesla Roadster, a high-performance electric vehicle equipped with rocket thruster technology licensed from SpaceX, served as a clear symbolic signal that the two companies were moving closer to full integration, according to David Nicholson, Chief Technology Advisor at market research firm The Futurum Group. When asked if the merger will ultimately move forward, Nicholson said: “In my opinion, 100%. It’s just a question of when.”

    Musk has framed the merger as a natural alignment of overlapping technological development. Both companies are currently advancing work in next-generation semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and advanced automation, areas where combined research and development would cut costs and accelerate innovation. The merged firm would combine Tesla’s core portfolios of electric vehicles, humanoid robotics, and autonomous driving software with SpaceX’s existing operations in rocket development, satellite infrastructure, large-scale data centers, and global satellite telecommunications.

    For Musk, the merger is also a major step toward his long-stated, deeply ambitious goal of establishing a permanently self-sustaining human city on Mars. That vision has drawn skepticism from some industry and scientific observers, but it has also attracted fierce support from many of Musk’s loyal backers and investors.

    This potential merger is part of a broader pattern of consolidation across Musk’s business holdings over the past 12 months. In the last year alone, SpaceX absorbed Musk’s artificial intelligence startup xAI and acquired social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, ahead of a planned public listing for those assets later this year.

    Despite broad alignment on long-term benefits, the merger faces a notable procedural hurdle: it must win approval from a majority of disinterested Tesla shareholders, a threshold Musk himself has acknowledged is “quite a high hurdle.” As CEO of both companies, Musk is barred from participating in formal shareholder deliberations to avoid conflicts of interest.

    Even with that challenge, many market analysts expect the deal will ultimately win approval in the next few years. Dan Sheehan, an investment analyst at Telos Wealth Advisors, notes that the core technologies of the two companies are highly complementary, a point that will resonate with shareholders looking for long-term growth. Sheehan added, however, that the deal will leave existing Tesla shareholders holding a smaller proportional stake in a far larger, more complex combined business. “There’s no real precedent for how a public company like Tesla gets priced in this,” he explained.

    News of the potential merger immediately moved markets: SpaceX shares climbed 8% in after-hours trading following the announcement, while Tesla shares posted a 1.5% gain. For consumers, though, experts say even a completed merger will not bring dramatic near-term changes for Tesla vehicle owners. Nicholson noted that consumer vehicles are already becoming an afterthought in the broader strategic vision, with the primary focus shifting to combining the two firms’ advanced technology capabilities.

    Tesla has already been undergoing internal strategic shifts this year. The company has reoriented its production priorities to focus on its top-selling Model 3 and Model Y lines, scaling back development and production targets for slower-selling models. It has also repurposed a portion of its California manufacturing facility to begin production of its Optimus line of humanoid robots.

    Sheehan explained that pairing Tesla’s autonomous driving algorithms and robotics platforms with SpaceX’s advanced AI work and global Starlink satellite network could ultimately produce far more capable connected vehicles over the long term. “The question is how much priority cars get inside a company increasingly driven by AI infrastructure,” he added.

    Tu Le, founder of automotive advisory firm Sino Auto Insights, noted that integrating SpaceX technology into future Tesla vehicle models, as previewed by the Roadster’s rocket thrusters, could help the company stand out in an increasingly crowded global EV market. Tesla is facing growing competitive pressure from Chinese EV maker BYD, which overtook Tesla as the world’s top-selling electric vehicle manufacturer by volume earlier this year.

    While the merger would create value for a range of stakeholders, analysts agree that Musk himself would be the most notable beneficiary. Musk, already the world’s richest person and the first individual to reach a net worth of $1 trillion earlier this year, would gain greater consolidated voting control over the combined entity than he currently holds at Tesla, a key issue that the independent committees evaluating the deal will be required to address. A single combined company would also allow Musk to implement his long-term AI strategy without navigating competing governance structures across separate firms. “The deal itself doesn’t add to Musk’s wealth, but it concentrates it further in one stock,” Sheehan explained.

    That increased concentration and influence has the potential to draw greater regulatory and public scrutiny, Nicholson warned. Musk is already a deeply polarizing figure in U.S. politics and business, and the merger could face heightened regulatory pushback if the Democratic Party, whose members have been broadly critical of Musk’s growing influence, gains additional seats in upcoming U.S. congressional elections next month.

    Historically, Tesla shareholders have supported Musk’s strategic initiatives. Last year, investors approved a record-breaking compensation package for Musk valued at approximately $1tn, a move that gave the CEO further leverage to pursue his long-term goals. Nicholson argues that Musk’s primary motivation for the merger is not personal enrichment, but advancing his core life mission: making human colonization of Mars a reality. “I honestly don’t think Musk will be keeping track of what the merger will do for his wealth,” Nicholson said.

  • Pakistan arrests man hunted by US over $126m postage fraud case

    Pakistan arrests man hunted by US over $126m postage fraud case

    In a cross-border law enforcement win that closes a years-long multimillion-dollar fraud operation, Pakistan’s cybercrime unit has taken into custody Faheem Akram, a 33-year-old resident of Khanewal, Pakistan, accused of masterminding a counterfeit shipping label scam that drained $126 million from the United States Postal Service (USPS).

    The fraudulent scheme, which prosecutors say has been active since 2023, centered on Akram’s platform LabelsBank.com, a fake e-commerce website designed to look like a legitimate discount postage service. According to court documents from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, Akram sold counterfeit US shipping labels for a flat $2 apiece, no matter the weight, size, or final destination of a customer’s package. This pricing let thousands of shippers send parcels for far less than the official USPS rate, leaving the postal service stuck with massive unpaid delivery costs and lost revenue.

    Authorities confirmed that more than 5,200 individual customers bought over 5.1 million fake labels from the website before law enforcement action shut the platform down permanently. Last month, a federal grand jury in Florida formally indicted Akram on multiple criminal charges related to the scam: one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States and produce counterfeit postage, five counts of manufacturing and selling fake postage labels, and four counts of wire fraud.

    The collaboration between U.S. and Pakistani law enforcement accelerated earlier this month, when the U.S. Postal Inspection Service announced a reward of up to $100,000 for any information that would lead to Akram’s arrest. That tip-led effort ultimately led Pakistan’s cybercrime agency to locate and take Akram into custody. Now, the accused fraudster faces severe legal penalties if convicted on all counts: each conspiracy and counterfeit postage charge carries a maximum five-year prison sentence, while each wire fraud count comes with a possible 20-year prison term.

    The case highlights the growing threat of cross-border cyber-enabled fraud targeting major U.S. government agencies, and demonstrates the growing coordination between international law enforcement bodies to disrupt and prosecute large-scale financial scams.

  • Family of prison officer shot dead by IRA to get state apology

    Family of prison officer shot dead by IRA to get state apology

    Four decades after the fatal shooting of one of Ireland’s most senior prison officers at the height of tensions linked to the Northern Ireland Troubles, the Irish government will issue a formal state apology on Wednesday to the victim’s family for repeated failures in official investigations into his killing.

    Brian Stack, a 49-year-old father of three who served as chief prison officer at the high-security Portlaoise Prison, was attacked in March 1983. He had just finished attending a professional boxing match in central Dublin and was crossing a nearby street when an assailant shot him in the back of the neck. The attack left Stack completely paralyzed, and he succumbed to his injuries 18 months later. To date, no individual has ever been convicted or held legally accountable for the murder.

    Over the course of the investigation into Stack’s death, Irish national police (An Garda Síochána) launched three separate probes into the killing, all of which failed to secure a conviction. A subsequent review of the first investigation by Ireland’s serious crime review team uncovered 194 separate errors and omissions in the original investigative work, a detail Austin Stack, the victim’s son, shared publicly in comments to BBC Radio Ulster.

    For years, Stack’s family has waged a persistent public and private campaign to uncover the full truth of his killing and hold official bodies accountable for their missteps. Despite multiple meetings with successive Irish ministers for justice over decades, the family has repeatedly been denied access to the full serious crime review team report, with authorities citing its status as an internal government document.

    On Wednesday, Irish Taoiseach Micheál Martin will deliver the formal state apology during an official sitting of Dáil Éireann, Ireland’s national parliament. Ahead of the plenary proceedings, Martin and current Minister for Justice Jim O’Callaghan will hold a private meeting with the Stack family at Dublin’s government buildings.

    Austin Stack told the BBC that the long-awaited official apology carries profound meaning for his entire family, particularly his 80-plus-year-old mother. “It’s a great sense of comfort to particularly my mother and to myself and my two brothers, because the state is officially owning up to the errors and the omissions that happened,” he said, adding that the apology also serves as long-overdue vindication of his father’s character and service.

    “My dad was doing a very difficult job at a very difficult time in our history,” he said. “He was awarded the Irish Prison Service’s highest bravery award for that work that he was doing. And this is further vindication of him and his good name.”

    The path to Wednesday’s apology has been decades in the making. It was not until 2013, 30 years after the attack, that the Irish Republican Army (IRA) formally admitted responsibility for killing Stack, following years of sustained pressure from the family. That same year, the family met with then-Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams and a former IRA commander, with Adams offering his personal regret over the killing to the family.

    In 2019, then-Garda Commissioner Drew Harris issued a personal apology to the Stack family for the institutional mishandling of the murder investigation. Most recently, in 2023, Gardaí notified the family that the case file, which had been held by the Director of Public Prosecutions for years, would be returned to investigating police to open the door for new investigative work.

    Stack remains the only Irish prison officer killed in an act of political violence linked to the Troubles, decades-long period of sectarian and political conflict centered in Northern Ireland that claimed more than 3,500 lives between the late 1960s and the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.

  • Billionaire Mukesh Ambani’s Jio launches India’s biggest share sale

    Billionaire Mukesh Ambani’s Jio launches India’s biggest share sale

    India’s most anticipated initial public offering has finally opened to public investors, with Jio Platforms — the digital and telecom arm of billionaire Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries Ltd — launching what is projected to become the largest share sale in the country’s history. The offering, which consists entirely of newly issued shares, will run through Wednesday to Friday, with the company targeting total proceeds of roughly 302 billion rupees, equal to $3.2 billion. All funds raised will be allocated toward repaying debt incurred to build and expand Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd, India’s biggest private-sector telecommunications operator.

    This landmark IPO marks the second mega public offering in India within a single month, coming on the heels of the National Stock Exchange’s $2.4 billion issue, and defies broader weakness across the country’s equity markets. India’s benchmark Nifty 50 index has dropped more than 12% since the start of the year, but the IPO segment has remained surprisingly vibrant, according to market analysts. Arun Kejriwal, head of Kejriwal Research and Investment Services, told reporters that institutional and retail investors alike have continued to flock to new offerings, drawn by attractive valuations and strong demand for scalable, innovative technology businesses. Most new IPOs are priced at lower valuation multiples that align with compressed price-to-earnings ratios across the broader listed market, making them far more appealing to value-focused buyers, Kejriwal added.

    Jio Platforms has set a price band of 1,065 rupees to 1,119 rupees per share for the offering. Even before the public issue opened, early indicators pointed to overwhelming investor interest: Reuters reported that institutional investors placed $3.2 billion in pre-IPO bids on Monday, covering 30 times the share quota reserved exclusively for this investor segment. Analysts attribute this strong early demand to Jio’s proven market position, extensive 5G-ready network infrastructure, and established base of hundreds of millions of domestic customers. In a research note, Centrum Institutional Research, a leading Indian brokerage, argued that Jio’s strong network leadership, massive scalable infrastructure, and fast-expanding digital ecosystem put the company in a strong position to maintain industry-leading growth over the medium to long term.

    Despite the enthusiastic investor response, market watchers have highlighted notable risks facing the telecom giant. Intense sector competition remains a key concern, with ongoing price wars threatening margins and raising the risk of customer churn. Most recently, the company has drawn a high-profile challenge from Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, whose Starlink satellite internet venture has been vying for final regulatory approval to launch commercial services in India. Musk has publicly criticized Ambani on social media platform X, pledged to price Starlink services affordably to compete with Jio’s low-cost offerings, and even made the inflammatory claim that Ambani is the “real boss of India.” Neither Ambani nor Reliance has issued a direct response to Musk’s comments.

    Regulatory uncertainty also hangs over the sector. The Indian federal government recently became the largest shareholder in struggling rival Vodafone Idea after converting the operator’s outstanding dues into equity as part of a industry-wide relief package. Analysts note that India’s telecom sector remains subject to extensive government oversight, leaving Jio Platforms exposed to ongoing regulatory shifts that could impact its operating margins and growth trajectory.

    For domestic retail investors, the Jio IPO carries special cultural and historical weight. The Reliance Group, founded by Dhirubhai Ambani, has cultivated a decades-long reputation as a consistent wealth creator for Indian shareholders, with Dhirubhai famously referring to investors as part of the extended “Reliance family” — a tradition that has built a deeply loyal base of retail backers. This offering also marks the Reliance Group’s first public IPO in nearly 20 years, and it signals a clear leadership transition to the next generation of the Ambani family. Pre-offer investor roadshows were led not by Mukesh Ambani, but by his twin children: Akash Ambani, Jio Platforms’ Managing Director, and Isha Ambani, Executive Director of Reliance Retail Ventures, both of whom hold key leadership positions across the group’s core businesses.

  • Why Greece’s alliances failed to prevent eastern Libya’s maritime deal with Turkey

    Why Greece’s alliances failed to prevent eastern Libya’s maritime deal with Turkey

    Weeks before Libya’s east-based House of Representatives approved a divisive maritime boundaries agreement with Turkey, Athens launched intensive diplomatic outreach to its key regional partners – Cairo, Jerusalem, and Abu Dhabi – in a last-ditch effort to block the deal, multiple senior regional officials confirmed to Middle East Eye. Despite Greece’s lobbying, the Benghazi-based parliament voted to ratify the accord on Tuesday, a development that underscores both Turkey’s growing regional influence and a sweeping geopolitical reordering across the Middle East that has undermined Greece’s coordinated effort to counter Ankara. \n\nThe ratification cements Turkey’s outsized role in Libyan politics and confirms a cross-factional Libyan consensus backing Ankara’s expansive claims to Eastern Mediterranean maritime territory, analysts note. “Turkey has entrenched its position in Libya so deeply that any future Libyan leader would struggle to reverse course and strike a deal favorable to Greece,” explained Constantinos Filis, director of the Athens-based Institute of Global Affairs, in an interview with Middle East Eye. “There is now a unified Libyan position that aligns with Turkey’s interests, which is a major strategic shift from just a few years ago.”\n\nFar from being just a bilateral setback for Greece or a routine diplomatic win for Turkey, the accord lays bare how rapidly regional alliances are realigning as the United States reduces its security footprint in the Middle East and new tensions linked to the ongoing Israel-Iran standoff have reshaped national priorities across the region. For Greece, the failure of its closest regional partners to block the deal exposes a gap between its expectations and shifting regional interests, a reality rooted in the ongoing geopolitical reconfiguration of the Middle East.\n\nOver the past decade, the Eastern Mediterranean has emerged as a flashpoint for competing Greek and Turkish claims, a rivalry that predates the 2011 collapse of the Muammar Gaddafi regime that split Libya into rival administrations based in Tripoli and Benghazi. The two NATO allies even came close to open conflict in 1996 over a remote uninhabited Aegean islet, with the United States historically stepping in to de-escalate tensions between its two alliance partners. Today, however, that dynamic has shifted dramatically: Washington has reduced its engagement in Middle Eastern security affairs, and NATO itself is grappling with internal divisions amplified by the war in Ukraine, while Turkey has built a robust domestic defense industry that has reduced its reliance on Western military suppliers. \n\nAgainst this backdrop, Turkey’s regional influence has expanded steadily: it backs a sympathetic government in Syria, and an increasing number of Gulf states now view Ankara as a critical security partner as U.S. influence wanes. Tom Barrack, the U.S. ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria and Iraq, acknowledged this shift in comments Tuesday, noting that the decades-long U.S. “oil for security” framework for Gulf relations is currently in a period of transition.\n\nA senior Libyan source with knowledge of internal negotiations told Middle East Eye that the ratification of the maritime deal is part of a broader, U.S.-backed plan to unify Libya under a single national government, an initiative that Washington has agreed to advance in coordination with Ankara. The source added that the U.S. wants Turkey to broker a power-sharing agreement between the rival Benghazi and Tripoli administrations, a development corroborated by this week’s visit to Tripoli by the head of Turkish intelligence, Ibrahim Kalın.\n\nFor its part, Greece has worked aggressively to build a counter-coalition of regional partners to push back against Turkey’s expanding maritime claims, which Athens says violate Greek sovereign rights over large territorial zones, including around the populous island of Crete, home to more than 600,000 Greek citizens. Greece has deepened its longstanding warm ties with Egypt: when Turkey first signed a maritime demarcation deal with the Tripoli-based government in 2019, Athens responded by signing its own agreement with Cairo to codify its competing claims. Greece has also moved closer to the United Arab Emirates: Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis was among the first foreign leaders to visit Abu Dhabi amid heightened 2020 tensions between the U.S. and Iran, and when Greek-Turkish tensions spiked that same year, the UAE dispatched military aircraft to Crete in a show of support.\n\nMost significantly, Greece has forged a close strategic alliance with Israel, which is itself locked in a regional power struggle with Turkey that plays out across conflict zones from Syria to the Horn of Africa. In August, Athens finalized a $3.5 billion defense deal with Israel – the largest arms sale in Israeli history – a move that cemented the growing military partnership between the two countries. \n\nThe ratification of the Turkish deal by eastern Libya’s parliament is a particularly stinging defeat for Greece because eastern Libya has long been backed by Egypt, the UAE, and Israel – the same three countries that Athens counts as its core regional partners. The territory is controlled by military commander Khalifa Haftar, who for years was seen as a bitter rival of the Turkey-backed Tripoli government, making his failure to block the agreement all the more notable for Athens. Greece had lobbied Cairo heavily in recent months to pressure Haftar to reject the deal, and just five days before the vote, an Egyptian diplomatic delegation traveled to Athens for high-level talks on how to prevent ratification.\n\nIn a striking turn of events, even Khalifa Haftar’s son and likely successor, Saddam Haftar, has recently moved closer to Ankara, despite Turkey’s past intervention to block his father’s attempt to capture Tripoli during Libya’s civil war. Multiple sources confirmed to Middle East Eye that amid pressure from the UAE, Saddam Haftar traveled to Athens for talks earlier this summer, even as he deepened his rapprochement with Turkish officials. \n\n“It was unrealistic for Greece to expect Egypt and the UAE to prioritize Greek interests over their own evolving regional priorities,” Filis noted. “Their positions have shifted dramatically in recent years, and it was unwise to assume they would align with Athens on this issue at the cost of their own improved relations with Turkey.”\n\nJust a few years ago, both Egypt and the UAE were openly at odds with Turkey: Cairo and Abu Dhabi backed the Haftar-led campaign in eastern Libya during the civil war, while Turkey supported the Tripoli government. Today, however, both states have taken significant steps to normalize relations with Ankara. Egyptian officials have repeatedly emphasized to Middle East Eye that Cairo’s rapprochement with Turkey is not directed at Greece, and Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty reaffirmed this position in a call with his Greek counterpart on Tuesday, stressing the ongoing shared interests between Athens and Cairo. \n\nEven so, regional analysts note that Egypt and Turkey now find themselves aligned on more regional issues than they compete on, even if both continue to hold competing maritime interests in the Eastern Mediterranean. “Egypt does not want to see the Eastern Mediterranean dominated by Turkey, but it has bigger fish to fry,” one senior Arab official told Middle East Eye. Both Cairo and Ankara are deeply wary of expanding Israeli territorial ambitions in the wake of the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas and the subsequent Israeli military campaign in Gaza, which has resulted in widespread civilian casualties and the occupation of additional territory in Syria and Lebanon. The two countries also share aligned interests in the Red Sea region: both support Somalia’s territorial integrity and oppose Israel’s recognition of the breakaway Somaliland republic, and both back Sudan’s transitional government against the Rapid Support Forces, a paramilitary group that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has openly acknowledged is sympathetic to Jerusalem. In Libya itself, Egypt has major economic interests at stake, including plans to construct a $1 billion oil pipeline from Tobruk in eastern Libya to the Egyptian port of Alexandria, creating an incentive for Cairo to maintain stable relations with all Libyan factions, regardless of their alignment with Turkey.\n\nThe UAE, while still holding competing interests with Turkey in some regions including Sudan, has also worked to resolve its differences with Ankara in recent years. A notable example of this thaw came in 2022, when Abu Dhabi purchased a fleet of Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 drones, a major signal of improved bilateral relations. \n\nThe most striking development came just this week, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a map labeling much of the Eastern Mediterranean as “friendly territory” for Israel, the UAE, and Greece – only days after eastern Libya’s parliament approved the Turkish maritime deal. A Libyan source confirmed to Middle East Eye that Saddam Haftar met with Netanyahu in the UAE back in September, aligning with previous reporting. One senior European official told Middle East Eye that Israel may actually view the expansion of Turkey’s maritime claims as a net positive for its own strategic interests, as it pushes Greece even deeper into Israel’s orbit.\n\nUltimately, the failure of Greece’s regional allies to mobilize against the ratification of the Turkish-Libyan maritime deal is a clear marker of how dramatically the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East has shifted in recent years, as old rivalries give way to new alignments shaped by shifting U.S. engagement and evolving regional security priorities.

  • Haitian migrants changed this US town – Trump’s deportation drive is reshaping it again

    Haitian migrants changed this US town – Trump’s deportation drive is reshaping it again

    Nestled in the southwest corner of Ohio, the small industrial town of Springfield has been catapulted to the center of America’s bitter national debate over immigration ahead of the 2026 midterm elections — a flashpoint that has come to embody two starkly different visions of the country’s present and future, depending on who describes it.

    For former and current President Donald Trump, Springfield is the perfect illustration of everything that has gone wrong with decades of lax U.S. immigration policy. It was here in 2024 that he amplified a widely debunked, false conspiracy theory claiming Haitian immigrants were stealing and eating local residents’ pets. Today, Trump points to his aggressive mass deportation campaign as proof he is delivering on his promise to give long-time residents “their town back.”

    For critics and analysts, however, Springfield represents a far more familiar, tragic cycle of modern American life: decades of decline for traditional manufacturing industries, followed by a wave of new immigration drawn by affordable housing and a surplus of low-wage jobs that native-born workers often leave unfilled. This pattern has repeated itself across hundreds of small former industrial towns across the U.S. What is unfolding in Springfield is anything but unique.

    The human cost of Trump’s immigration crackdown came to a devastating head this summer with the death of 20-year-old Pierre Damas Bel, a Haitian migrant who built a promising life in Springfield only to lose everything after the Supreme Court upheld the Trump administration’s decision to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for more than 350,000 Haitian migrants living legally in the U.S.

    Bel arrived in Springfield earlier in 2024 to reunite with his father and stepmother, fleeing the brutal gang violence and total political collapse that has convulsed his native Haiti. He entered the U.S. legally through a now-terminated Biden-era program that allowed vulnerable migrants waiting in Mexico to enter the country to pursue their asylum claims. After arriving, he was granted TPS, a humanitarian protection program that allows vetted people from crisis-stricken countries to live and work legally in the U.S. for 18-month periods, which are routinely extended as long as dangerous conditions persist in the migrant’s home country.

    By all accounts, Bel threw himself into building a new life in America. A family friend told the BBC he was an honors student, a gifted athlete, and a cadet in a high school program that trains students to become commissioned officers in the U.S. Armed Forces. But after the Supreme Court’s June ruling, Bel was ordered to report to a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) field office, where he was fitted with a GPS ankle monitor to track him as he awaited deportation.

    Bel documented his despair on social media, writing that the monitor left him feeling overwhelming “shame and humiliation.” On August 31, he parked his car on the side of a highway outside Springfield, walked into oncoming traffic, and was killed instantly. His family has explicitly tied his death to the psychological toll of being forced to wear the tracking device.

    Neither the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) nor ICE has directly responded to BBC inquiries about Bel’s case, but ICE has previously pushed back against any effort to hold the agency responsible for his death. Earlier this year, a spokesperson told U.S. media: “Remaining in the country illegally, while fighting removal, is a choice. Leaving with a free flight home and $2,600 is also a choice.”

    Viles Dorsainvil, co-founder of a local Springfield support center for Haitian migrants facing deportation, told the BBC Bel had done everything possible to keep his legal status intact, and had twice visited ICE facilities to beg officials to remove the ankle monitor before he filed a formal legal motion to have it taken off. “He went twice to the ICE facilities… begging them to remove the ankle monitor,” Dorsainvil said. “He did everything right to be here until they put the tag on him.”

    Bel’s death is just one outcome of a far broader policy shift: the Trump administration has already ended TPS protections for more than one million immigrants from 13 different countries, pushing hundreds of thousands of people who lived and worked legally in the U.S. for years into undocumented status overnight. For the 2026 midterm election campaign, Trump has centered his platform on border security and mass deportation of undocumented migrants. While the policy remains deeply popular with Republican base voters, polling shows overall public support for his harsh enforcement approach has declined over the past year.

    Ohio has emerged as one of the most critical swing states in this year’s midterm elections, where one of two Republican-held U.S. Senate seats is up for grabs. Trump has visited the state twice this campaign season to rally his base and reverse a recent slide in his approval ratings. During an early October rally in Youngstown, he returned again to his talking point on Springfield, telling cheering supporters: “You have a little town, beautiful little town in Ohio where they dropped about 35,000 Haitians. Well, they’re being taken out and they’re almost going to be gone and we’re giving their town back.”

    The Trump administration first announced it would end TPS for Haitians in June 2025, and a two-year legal battle ended this summer when the Supreme Court ruled in the administration’s favor. After the ruling, DHS General Counsel James Percival defended the decision, arguing: “The T in TPS stands for TEMPORARY, yet many of these designations became de facto amnesty. This is a win for the rule of law and common sense.”

    In an August social media post that drew widespread criticism, DHS released a video showing Haitian migrants in chains and white uniforms being led onto a deportation flight, paired with upbeat, jaunty music and a text message ordering Haitians with expired TPS to “LEAVE IMMEDIATELY.” The administration has justified its crackdown by claiming Haiti is now safe enough for migrants to return — a claim that directly contradicts the U.S. State Department’s official travel advisory, which lists Haiti as a Level 4 “Do Not Travel” destination, the highest possible warning for dangerous countries.

    Decades of economic decline are still visible across Springfield’s landscape, in the form of shuttered factory lots and boarded-up, abandoned homes. Like much of the American Midwest, the town was gutted by late 20th century deindustrialization, which left thousands out of work and prompted many native-born residents to move to coastal cities or warmer southern states in search of new opportunities.

    Over the past five years, an estimated 20,000 Haitian migrants have settled in Springfield. The first wave arrived after the devastating 2010 Haiti earthquake, while a larger group came after the 2021 assassination of Haitian President Jovenel Moïse, which plunged the country into the ongoing wave of gang violence that persists today. The influx caused Springfield’s population to grow rapidly, and with TPS protecting their right to work, most Haitian migrants took low-wage jobs in local factories and distribution centers that went unfilled by native-born workers.

    For many long-time Springfield residents, the rapid influx of new arrivals has sparked unease that aligns with Trump’s hardline approach. Rick Johnson, a lifelong Springfield resident and retired Marine whose porch is lined with American and service branch flags, is a vocal supporter of ICE’s deportation campaign. “We love America, we love Americans – any kind of Americans, but you kind of have to be American,” he said. Johnson noted that after decades of industrial decline, most of his old neighbors have moved away, and his only current neighbors are a Haitian family that moved in four years ago, who he says do not bother him personally. His concern, he says, is purely about the scale and speed of the change. “Really it’s the amount of them,” he said. “If you come here you [should] come here legally. The Temporary Protected Status is done… it’s time to go.”

    Many local residents share a common perception that traffic safety has worsened since the Haitian community arrived, a concern amplified by a 2023 crash that killed 11-year-old Aiden Clark when his school bus overturned after a collision with a minivan driven by a Haitian migrant who did not have a valid U.S. driver’s license. The driver was sentenced to jail, but in a surprising rebuke to anti-immigrant politicians, Aiden’s father Nathan Clark spoke out at a city commission meeting to denounce leaders who used his son’s accidental death as a “political tool” to stoke anti-immigrant sentiment.

    For Haitian residents of Springfield who have lost TPS, daily life has become defined by fear and uncertainty. At a local grocery store run by Paschur Castelly, a Haitian migrant who arrived in the U.S. 20 years ago, most shelves sit empty. Business has collapsed as migrants avoid leaving their homes or spending money over fears of ICE raids. “I can’t purchase new merchandise because I don’t have people coming in,” Castelly said. He added that most Haitian migrants in Springfield are hardworking people who fled chaos to build a better life: “our communities, we have doctors, we have engineers… we came here to get a better life, to help our family in Haiti, you know? Our country doesn’t offer us security.”

    During a 20-minute interview with the BBC, only one customer entered the store. The customer, a warehouse worker who asked to remain anonymous for his own safety, pulled up his right pant leg to reveal the large ankle monitor ICE ordered him to wear. Like thousands of other Haitians in Springfield, he was given a stark choice: wear the monitor and check in with ICE every two weeks, or sign his own deportation order immediately. As the interview ended, Castelly locked the store’s front door — a routine precaution now that neighbors regularly fear unexpected ICE raids. When a local woman spotted the BBC crew, she shouted across the street to check that Castelly was safe, a small reflection of the pervasive anxiety that hangs over the town’s Haitian community.

    Weeks before Americans head to the polls to decide control of Congress for the final two years of Trump’s second term, Springfield remains what it became when Trump first threw it into the national spotlight: a symbol of two irreconcilable visions of America, split along the lines of immigration, identity, and who gets to call this country home.

  • Shifting role of US in Middle East is like ‘raising a teenager’, ambassador says

    Shifting role of US in Middle East is like ‘raising a teenager’, ambassador says

    A top senior advisor to former US President Donald Trump has announced a historic reorientation of Washington’s approach to the Arabian Gulf, bringing an end to an 80-year-old foundational arrangement that traded US security guarantees for access to Gulf oil supplies. Speaking Tuesday at the Doha-based Global Security Forum, Tom Barrack — the current US ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria and Iraq — made clear that the long-standing global order where the United States served as the sole security guarantor across the Middle East is now a thing of the past.

    Barrack, a figure long known for his critical views of colonial-era divide-and-rule policies in the Middle East and his vocal praise for the Ottoman Empire’s governance of the region, argued that Western powers for decades intentionally benefited from regional instability. “Conflict and controversy was actually to the western favour,” he explained. “The more off-base the region was, the more [the West] could manipulate fossil fuels for its own benefit. That’s not in existence anymore.” He emphasized the core new direction of US policy: Washington no longer seeks to exercise direct ownership or control over the Gulf region.

    The policy shift comes in the aftermath of a tense diplomatic rift earlier this year, when Gulf states lobbied the US to reject plans for a joint US-Israeli attack on Iran, only to see their appeals ignored by Washington. Following the February 28 strike, Iran launched retaliatory waves of drone and missile attacks targeting the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain, leaving the region to grapple with the fallout of the aggression.

    When pressed on whether Gulf states could continue to depend on the post-WWII US security umbrella that has anchored regional security for generations, Barrack gave a blunt answer: no. “In the region, everybody is saying if we have America and we are selling oil and gas in dollars and we buy weapons in dollars and we have bases of Americans… we are going to have free seas, and we are going to have a security guaranty. All of a sudden, that doesn’t happen,” he noted. Barrack traced this dramatic reassessment of US commitments directly to the fallout of the joint US-Israeli campaign against Iran.

    Crucially, Barrack stressed that the policy shift does not amount to a full US withdrawal from the region. “The bargain is not to own, not to control, but not to leave. We’re not leaving,” he clarified. Describing the transition to a new regional framework as a awkward, challenging process, he compared it to raising a teenager: “What’s happening in this administration is not an abandonment. It’s a message for realignment. And that message is like raising a teenager. It’s not easy.”

    Under the new approach, Washington will back regional efforts to build local security architectures to replace the old US-led framework, including the Mecca Pact. Barrack pointed to Saudi Arabia’s activation of joint defence pacts with Pakistan and Turkey to counter Houthi aggression as an example of the new, region-led order taking shape. “Everybody’s got to be on their own regional alliances, which is what’s happening,” he said.

    Barrack’s landmark remarks arrive as the entire Middle East braces for the possibility of a new, full-scale war against Iran. In recent weeks, leaders from Qatar and Egypt have issued repeated warnings that the region is on the brink of a major new conflict. While large-scale kinetic attacks have calmed in recent weeks, with Iran continuing targeted strikes on commercial shipping in the strategic Strait of Hormuz and the US maintaining its strict economic blockade of the country, tensions have been reignited by former President Trump’s recent escalation.

    Ahead of Israel’s upcoming general elections this month, Trump openly endorsed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and raised the stakes for new military action. In comments Sunday, Trump said he wanted Netanyahu to remain in office to help “finish the job” against Iran unless the Iranian government quickly alters its policy trajectory.

    The center of current regional hostilities has shifted to Yemen, where the Iran-aligned Houthi movement has carried out crippling attacks on Saudi civilian airports and critical energy infrastructure. Saudi Arabia backs Yemen’s internationally recognized government, but deep internal divisions within the administration have prevented any successful large-scale counter-offensive against Houthi positions. Though Riyadh and its Yemeni allies have repeatedly pledged to retake all occupied territory from the group, Barrack cast serious doubt on the likelihood of a military victory.

    “These kinetic reactions have never worked. It doesn’t work. It’s probably not likely that it’s going to work,” he said when asked about Saudi prospects for defeating the Houthis militarily. He added that while Trump remains committed to providing logistical support to Saudi Arabia, the US will not commit ground troops to another Middle Eastern conflict: “The president has been clear that he supports Saudi Arabia, and the backing they need logistically he will supply, but America getting involved in a ground kinetic battle somewhere else sounds fruitless.”

    Barrack is the second high-profile Western leader to publicly rule out a military solution to the Houthi conflict. Earlier this week at the same Doha forum, former MI6 director John Sawers made similar remarks, stating plainly that “the Houthis are here to stay.”