Global Pulse

博客

  • Gaza: ‘She survived the bombing, but not the blockade’

    Gaza: ‘She survived the bombing, but not the blockade’

    For 60-year-old Palestinian Suhaila al-Mabhouh, two years of relentless bombardment and forced displacement amid Israel’s military campaign in Gaza left one all-consuming desire: to return to the family home she had been forced to flee in northern Gaza. When her daughter, based in Italy, arranged an evacuation offer for al-Mabhouh to resettle in Europe, she turned it down immediately, her longing to reclaim her old life outweighing any promise of safety abroad.

    When a nominal ceasefire took effect on 10 October 2025, al-Mabhouh and her 62-year-old husband Sami wasted no time rushing back to their property in Jabalia refugee camp. With quiet determination, she began patching together the severely damaged structure, clinging to the fragile hope that she could piece her life back together after two years of upheaval.

    That hope was cut short almost as quickly as it emerged. Israel’s tight siege on the enclave remained in place, and daily bombardment of Gaza continued even as the ceasefire was formally observed. Within eight months of the couple’s return, al-Mabhouh began feeling unwell. A diagnosis of cancer followed, and she died before she could access life-saving care—blocked from treatment inside Gaza by a crippled health system, and barred from leaving for care abroad by Israeli movement restrictions.

    Al-Mabhouh is far from alone. She is one of thousands of Palestinians continuing to die from entirely preventable causes as Israel’s ongoing military campaign and blockade strip Gaza’s population of the basic resources needed to survive. Now, nearly a year into the formal ceasefire, conditions for Gazan civilians remain just as deadly as they were during the height of active bombardment, with critical aid, building materials, medical supplies and other essential goods still largely barred from entering the enclave.

    “About four months after we returned to our home, her health began to deteriorate rapidly, and we had no idea what was wrong with her,” Sami al-Mabhouh told Middle East Eye in an interview. The couple shuttled between overcrowded, under-resourced hospitals across Gaza City, but facilities overwhelmed by years of damage and shortages could not run the diagnostic tests al-Mabhouh needed. They eventually made the arduous journey to Deir al-Balah in central Gaza, hoping a private hospital could offer the care they needed.

    “The journey was extremely difficult, and transportation was so scarce that by the time we arrived, we were exhausted and unable to go straight to the hospital,” Sami recalled. The pair spent the night at a relative’s home in Bureij refugee camp before they could seek care the next day. “After a lengthy series of examinations, which cost us a great deal of money just to obtain a diagnosis, doctors told us she had liver cancer. By then, her health had deteriorated so severely that she could no longer sit up or walk.”

    Within two weeks, al-Mabhouh received a medical referral for treatment abroad, the formal approval needed to request exit from Gaza. But she joined a backlog of more than 20,000 other patients with referrals, all waiting for Israeli authorities to grant permission to leave. None of Gaza’s 36 hospitals operate at full capacity today, with only around 20 able to offer partial services, leaving tens of thousands of patients cut off from urgent diagnostics and care.

    Under the terms of the 2025 ceasefire agreement, Israeli authorities were required to allow medical supplies, pharmaceuticals and construction materials to repair war-damaged hospitals into Gaza. But the deal has delivered almost no tangible improvement to the enclave’s devastated health sector. Data from Physicians for Human Rights Israel shows that between October 2025 and July 2026, the total number of intensive care unit beds in Gaza increased by just one, rising from 103 to 104. Availability of dialysis units actually worsened over the same period, falling from 17 percent capacity to 12 percent.

    “As we waited for her turn to travel, we contacted doctors in Italy and Egypt and shared her medical records with them. They told us her cancer was treatable but not in Gaza,” Sami said. “We waited for three months. She didn’t survive long enough to receive treatment. The disease progressed, and on 18 June, she died.” His verdict is blunt: “She survived the bombing, but not the blockade.”

    Al-Mabhouh is one of at least 1,570 patients who have died in Gaza while waiting for medical evacuation between October 2023 and July 2026. That figure includes 505 cancer patients and 264 children, with daily evacuation rates remaining a tiny fraction of pre-war levels. Between the October 2025 ceasefire and mid-September 2026, roughly 3,423 patients were evacuated abroad for treatment, an average of just 10 people per day. Before October 2023, between 50 and 100 patients were evacuated daily, per Physicians for Human Rights Israel.

    Preventable deaths from untreated illness are just one layer of the ongoing crisis facing Gaza’s population. For those who survive bombardment and illness, the search for safe shelter carries its own deadly risks. Israeli military operations have damaged or destroyed 92 percent of all homes across Gaza, leaving most of the territory’s 2.2 million residents confined to flimsy makeshift tents or severely damaged, structurally unsound buildings. Exposed to extreme weather and constant collapse risk, these shelters offer little protection from harm.

    Last winter, when temperatures dropped sharply across the enclave, at least eight children—most of them infants living in makeshift tents—died from hypothermia. With another winter approaching, Gaza families are trapped in an impossible choice: face freezing temperatures in tents that provide almost no insulation, or risk being crushed under the rubble of a damaged residential building.

    “I sleep every day doubting that I would wake up alive the next day. I expect the building to collapse on us every single day,” said Muhammed Abujarad, a 44-year-old resident of a heavily damaged building in Tal al-Hawa, a neighbourhood in southwestern Gaza City. “I am not imagining something that would not happen. It happened several times, and I know people who died after their home collapsed on their heads last month.”

    Abujarad was referencing a September 2026 building collapse that killed 21 displaced Palestinians sheltering in the structure, 12 of them children, and injured 14 more. The building had been damaged in a previous Israeli strike, and collapsed shortly before dawn on 21 September. Since October 2023, 61 Palestinians have been killed in similar building collapses across Gaza.

    “We know it’s lethal to stay here, but there are no alternatives. We lost our home in northern Gaza and lost another home belonging to our relatives in Gaza City. We have no other choices left,” Abujarad said. “We cannot return to live in tents. We lived through our most hellish days in tents during the war. Now, as long as we have a ceiling above our heads, it’s better than dying of heat or cold in tents that don’t protect us from anything.”

    Data from the UN Satellite Centre (Unosat) shows that by August 2026, the total number of destroyed structures in Gaza had increased by 9 percent compared to when the ceasefire was declared in October 2025. Despite the ceasefire agreement, Israel continues to block the entry of tents, prefabricated mobile homes and heavy construction equipment into Gaza, leaving residents without adequate shelter and leaving damaged, dangerous buildings standing without any way to repair or demolish them.

    These restrictions have also blocked repairs to Gaza’s crippled water and wastewater infrastructure, 90 percent of which has been damaged or destroyed during the conflict. With critical utility systems in ruins, Palestinians face growing rates of contaminated water exposure and entirely preventable waterborne diseases.

    “When you are living in a damaged home with no walls or a tent in the middle of mud and wastewater, how would you protect your children?” Abujarad said. “Wherever we go to flee death, we find another. There is no refuge from death.”

  • From uneasy partners to open distrust: Aoun and Hezbollah struggle to rebuild ties

    From uneasy partners to open distrust: Aoun and Hezbollah struggle to rebuild ties

    A deep public rift has opened between Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and the powerful political-military movement Hezbollah, centered on competing claims over national weapons authority, sovereign decision-making, and the future of Lebanon’s security architecture. While low-level communication remains open between the two camps, multiple sources from both sides confirm that mutual trust has effectively collapsed after months of escalating disagreement.

    The split represents a sharp reversal from just over a year earlier, when Hezbollah threw its political weight behind Aoun’s 2025 presidential candidacy, ending a years-long deadlock that left Lebanon without a sitting head of state. That initial political compromise, however, never addressed the core ideological and strategic divide that has long divided Lebanese politics: whether Hezbollah should retain its independent military arsenal, or whether the Lebanese state alone holds the exclusive right to manage national security and make war and peace.

    From the earliest days of his presidency, Aoun made his position unambiguous. In his inaugural address, he tied Lebanon’s stability, border security, and compliance with international resolutions to a single non-negotiable principle: the state must hold a monopoly on the use of armed force across the country. He doubled down on this stance in a July 2025 Army Day address, calling explicitly for all armed factions including Hezbollah to cede their weapons to official state security bodies, urging the group to “place your bet solely on the Lebanese state.”

    By January 2026, Aoun went further, arguing that the unique circumstances that Hezbollah had long cited to justify its independent arsenal no longer existed. He framed the continued presence of non-state weapons as a damaging burden not only for Lebanon as a whole, but for the local communities that Hezbollah represents.

    Hezbollah pushed back immediately against the comments, issuing a formal statement of disappointment with the president’s shift in position. Party spokesperson Youssef al-Zein countered that Hezbollah has practiced consistent restraint in the face of repeated Israeli cross-border attacks, insisting that any discussion of disarmament must be conditional on a full Israeli withdrawal from all occupied territories in southern Lebanon.

    The disagreement soon expanded beyond the question of disarmament, spilling into disputes over Lebanon’s role in regional geopolitics. In late January 2026, Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem publicly confirmed the party would not remain neutral in any future conflict between the United States and Iran. Aoun’s office quickly reiterated that all decisions on war and peace fall exclusively to the Lebanese state, highlighting the fundamental clash between Hezbollah’s transregional military alliances and the president’s commitment to centering all national security decision-making in official state institutions.

    The final rupture came on March 2, after Hezbollah launched a rocket barrage against Israel in retaliation for the U.S.-Israeli assassination of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. In response, the Lebanese government moved to ban all of Hezbollah’s military and security activities, ordered the group to surrender its stockpiles, and directed the Lebanese Armed Forces to implement a plan to bring all weapons north of the Litani River under full state control. Aoun personally condemned the rocket attack, cementing the break with the movement that had helped put him in office.

    A source close to Hezbollah told reporters that trust in the presidency has been completely exhausted, accusing Aoun of abandoning the unwritten political agreements that paved the way for his election and backing the government’s hostile crackdown on the group. The source insisted that normal dialogue cannot resume until the March ban is reversed, and also criticized Aoun for overreliance on Washington, noting that the president appeared to believe his meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump had secured a reliable American alliance with Lebanon. In a stark assessment of Aoun’s political shift, the source added: “You could say there is Joseph Aoun 1, the army commander, and a different Joseph Aoun 2, the president. The first is not like the second.”

    The presidency has pushed back against Hezbollah’s characterization of the dispute. A senior source based at the Baabda presidential palace confirmed that diplomatic ties have not been formally severed, but acknowledged that relations are far weaker than the current sensitive moment demands. Established communication channels remain open, the source said, but high-level engagement has not resumed. The source added that the presidency has no objection to direct dialogue, but views Hezbollah’s demand to reverse the March ban as unrealistic under current circumstances. The source also raised questions about internal decision-making within Hezbollah, saying frankly: “To be frank, we do not know who is leading the party today, or whether they themselves even know who actually makes the decisions within Hezbollah.”

    The conflicting accounts from both sides expose a stalemate: each camp insists the other must make the first concession to restart constructive talks. Hezbollah demands the government roll back its March decision before any trust-building can begin, while the presidency refuses to negotiate on the core principle of state authority over weapons and war-and-peace decisions.

    The deeper, unresolved question hanging over Lebanon is whether the two sides can reach a sustainable security agreement that firmly places national security decision-making in the hands of official state institutions, while also addressing Hezbollah’s longstanding argument that its weapons remain a necessary defense against Israeli aggression and occupation.

    While neither side has formally cut ties, the wide policy gap and deep mutual distrust documented by sources on both sides indicate that repairing the relationship will require far more than just reopening communication lines. A lasting resolution will only be possible if the two sides can reach a clear, binding agreement on the limits of Hezbollah’s military role and the exclusive sovereignty of the Lebanese state.

    This report was originally published by Middle East Eye, an outlet that provides independent, in-depth coverage of the Middle East, North Africa, and surrounding regions.

  • UK advises against using any Saudi airport except Medina

    UK advises against using any Saudi airport except Medina

    A sharp escalation of cross-border attacks by Yemen’s Houthi movement targeting key Saudi infrastructure has triggered sweeping new travel warnings from Western governments, as diplomatic efforts emerge to de-escalate spiraling regional violence linked to the broader post-February 28 US-Israeli military campaign against Iran.

    The violence began with a devastating Houthi strike on Riyadh’s King Khalid International Airport Saturday that left at least 13 people dead and more than 300 injured, marking the deadliest attack on a Gulf Cooperation Council nation since the US-Israeli offensive on Iran launched last month. A second assault on the same airport Sunday killed an additional person and wounded 11 more, making it the third attack on the critical air hub in just seven days. Earlier strikes had already claimed four lives and damaged a commercial Saudi passenger plane.

    Officials with Saudi Arabia’s General Authority of Civil Aviation released a full breakdown of the Saturday attack’s fatalities, revealing victims from 11 nations: four Saudi citizens, two Bangladeshis, one American, one Egyptian, one Jordanian, one Syrian, one Palestinian and one Sudanese.

    Within hours of the Sunday attack, the UK Foreign Office updated its official travel guidance to impose sweeping restrictions. The agency now advises British nationals against all non-essential travel to a wide swathe of Saudi territory, including all of the country’s airports with the sole exception of Medina International Airport, as well as Aseer province, Riyadh province, Najran province, Jizan province, and the major cities of Taif, Jeddah and Dammam. A full ban on all travel remains in place for areas within 10 kilometers of the Saudi-Yemen border. In a highly unusual move, British authorities also explicitly warned UK citizens against attempting to depart Saudi Arabia via any domestic airport, instead advising travelers seeking to exit the country to arrange overland travel to neighboring nations and fly out from international hubs there.

    Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree doubled down on the group’s targeting strategy, issuing a direct warning to international travelers, commercial airlines and global shipping companies to avoid using most Saudi airports and airspace. He confirmed Houthi forces carried out the coordinated strikes on King Khalid International Airport Saturday, saying the attacks successfully disrupted air traffic and forced a full closure of the facility. Saree added that King Fahd International Airport in Dammam, an Aramco-operated fuel station and a Saudi Eastern Province refinery were also targeted in the recent wave of operations. Only the airports serving Mecca and Medina were explicitly excluded from Houthi targeting threats.

    The latest wave of attacks represents a major escalation in the long-running conflict between Saudi Arabia and the Iran-aligned Houthi movement, coming amid a renewed Saudi-led military offensive against the group in Yemen. In a statement, UK Defence Secretary Wes Streeting condemned the Saturday airport attack as a “dangerous escalation” and “completely contemptible action.”

    Yemen has also seen a corresponding uptick in airstrikes from the Saudi-led coalition. Local Sanaa-based media outlets report recent air raids targeted the Hamdan district of Yemen’s capital Sanaa, the al-Zurbi Road area of Taiz’s Hayfan district, and the border al-Dhaher district of Saada province. No casualties have been reported from the retaliatory strikes to date.

    Washington has also followed London in issuing urgent warnings for its citizens. The US State Department urged American travelers to exercise “extreme caution” when using any major Saudi airports, noting that US government personnel stationed in Saudi Arabia now require special official authorization to access King Khalid International Airport, Jeddah Airport and Dammam Airport. The agency also warned US citizens to prepare for potential flight cancellations, unexpected airspace closures and widespread travel disruptions across the kingdom.

    Amid the rapidly escalating violence, diplomatic moves to facilitate a political resolution have begun. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held a telephone call with his Saudi counterpart Faisal bin Farhan to discuss the crisis. According to Iranian state media, Araghchi emphasized that Tehran remains prepared to mediate dialogue between Saudi Arabia and Yemeni stakeholders, and expressed deep concern over the rising tensions. “A military approach and ignoring a political solution will only further complicate the current situation,” Araghchi said, adding that “the crises in this region have no military solution” and that Iran stands ready to provide all necessary support to advance a negotiated political settlement.

    This independent report is part of ongoing coverage from Middle East Eye, which specializes in original reporting on the Middle East and North Africa region.

  • Renshaw delivers again as Australia close on win

    Renshaw delivers again as Australia close on win

    The opening Test of Australia’s tour of South Africa in Durban is poised for a dramatic final day, with the visitors on the cusp of a defining victory that would snap the Proteas’ lengthy unbeaten streak under captain Temba Bavuma. Day four of the five-day contest delivered a series of pivotal twists that left South Africa staring down an uphill battle, still requiring 319 runs to secure a win with just six wickets in hand at the close.

    Matt Renshaw, playing just his second Test after a three-year hiatus from international cricket, continued his dream comeback to anchor Australia’s second innings. Fresh off a blistering 190 in the first innings, the 30-year-old batter compiled an 82-run knock that allowed Australian captain Pat Cummins to declare the team’s second innings at 314 for six. In a storybook moment that capped off his extraordinary day, Renshaw, bowling part-time off-spin, claimed his first ever Test wicket in the final hour of play: dismissing Bavuma caught at short leg to put the Proteas further on the back foot.

    Cummins followed Renshaw’s breakthrough with a clinical display of fast bowling to remove Tristan Stubbs, leaving the Proteas reeling at 102 for four at stumps. Set a daunting target of 319 runs to win – which would have broken the record for the highest successful run chase in Test history – South Africa’s only realistic path is to bat out the entire final day to force a draw.

    South Africa’s position is all the more surprising given their dominant record under Bavuma’s leadership: the Proteas have won 11 of their 12 Tests under his captaincy, including a victory over Australia in the 2025 World Test Championship final at Lord’s that booked their place in the decider. This series is the opening fixture of a busy home summer for South Africa, which will see them play two more Tests against Australia, two against Bangladesh, and three against England across the Christmas period.

    Even poor light, which had cut short play on the first three days of the contest, failed to give South Africa a reprieve on the fourth evening. The Proteas’ hopes of forcing a draw now rest almost entirely on the shoulders of opener Aiden Markram, who remained unbeaten on 45 after facing 115 balls by the close. Markram has a proven track record of fourth-inning success against Australia – he scored a match-winning 136 in the WTC final – and his fourth-innings Test average of 45.56 is bettered only by Sri Lanka’s Kusal Mendis among currently active players.

    That said, pulling off a survival draw will require an unprecedented effort from Markram and his remaining batting partners. Over the past 13 years, only two teams have survived 140 overs to save a Test match. While the pitch played calmly during Markram and David Bedingham’s 66-run sixth-wicket stand, the surface started to offer significant spin by the close of play, even allowing part-time bowler Renshaw to generate extravagant turn. One key stat works in Markram’s favor, however: he has faced 313 deliveries from Australia’s star spinner Nathan Lyon in Test cricket without ever being dismissed.

    Australia may be without one of their key assets in the field on the final day, though, after former captain Steve Smith suffered a blow to the helmet from an Anrich Nortje bouncer while scoring 27 on day four. Smith left the field for treatment, casting minor doubt over his availability for the final day’s play.

    The match got off to a quick start for Australia when Ryan Rickelton top-edged a loose pull shot to Josh Hazlewood in the fourth over of South Africa’s second innings, with Hazlewood finishing the day with two wickets for just 20 runs. What remains to be seen is whether the bad light that disrupted the first three days will return on the final day, and if Australia’s decision to bat until the tea break on day four to set a bigger target will pay off.

  • Thousands march to Indian Supreme Court to demand election chief resign

    Thousands march to Indian Supreme Court to demand election chief resign

    A mass protest led by India’s main opposition bloc has converged on the Supreme Court in New Delhi, amplifying weeks of growing unrest over a contentious voter list revision that opposition leaders claim amounts to systemic electoral fraud favoring Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

    Dubbed the “March for Democracy,” Monday’s demonstration marked the latest escalation of a conflict that has already seen thousands of protesters detained, harsh police crackdowns on public assembly, and sharp partisan divisions over the integrity of India’s electoral process. Tens of millions of names have been removed from national electoral rolls during the ongoing revision, a move opposition figures argue deliberately disenfranchises voters unlikely to support the BJP ahead of upcoming elections. Both the Election Commission of India and the ruling BJP have repeatedly denied the allegations of biased roll management.

    Leading the march was Rahul Gandhi, leader of the Indian National Congress, the country’s largest opposition party, who submitted a formal petition to the Supreme Court challenging the voter roll revision process. In a pre-march press conference, Gandhi shared an open letter addressed to Chief Justice Surya Kant co-signed by Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge that detailed claims of misconduct by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. Gandhi also issued a public call for all opposition parties, civil society organizations and pro-democracy activists to join the demonstration, framing the action as a defense of India’s democratic foundations.

    After the petition was filed, Chief Justice Kant confirmed the case was already pending before the court and thus sub judice, meaning no public comment could be provided on the merits of the challenge. He nevertheless offered a formal assurance that the petition would be heard at the earliest possible opportunity in line with Indian law.

    To manage the demonstration, Indian authorities deployed thousands of security personnel across central Delhi, barricaded major roads, implemented traffic restrictions, and temporarily closed entry and exit at several key metro stations along the march route. A bus carrying Gandhi and other senior opposition leaders traveled from Barakamba Road to the Supreme Court complex, with crowds of flag-waving supporters lining the streets to cheer on the procession. When the bus stopped at Mandi House, a central commercial and cultural district, Gandhi and several top allies climbed onto the vehicle’s roof to address the gathered crowd, where thousands of demonstrators joined in anti-government chants accompanied by drums and public cheering. Many protesters climbed onto nearby parked buses to join the demonstration, waving national and party flags as the procession moved forward.

    For weeks, Delhi police have denied opposition and activist groups permission to hold public protests over the voter roll issue, citing broad law and order concerns. The crackdown intensified over the weekend ahead of Monday’s march, when pressure group Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), which previously led a successful summer protest that forced the resignation of India’s federal education minister, attempted to hold a rally at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi’s historic designated protest site. Authorities implemented sweeping movement restrictions: dozens of metro stations were shuttered, local train services were canceled, and tens of thousands of police and paramilitary personnel were deployed to block access to the site. This crackdown resulted in the detention of thousands of would-be protesters across the capital.

    In a dramatic pre-protest move, CJP founders Abhijeet Dipke, Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka were detained directly off a commercial plane after landing in Delhi to attend the weekend demonstration. All three were released within 24 hours: Dipke returned home to attend his grandmother’s funeral, while Das and Ranka reaffirmed in a press conference that protests would continue and confirmed they would apply for a new permitted protest date. Following the weekend crackdown, India’s Home Ministry announced that public demonstrations would no longer be permitted at Jantar Mantar, offering three alternative locations for future protests only if formal permission is granted.

    Footage and eyewitness accounts from the weekend crackdown have sparked additional controversy over excessive use of force by police. Multiple videos show security personnel dragging detained protesters, including women, into detention buses, and the BBC captured on-the-ground footage of an officer slapping a detained protester while in custody. The Delhi Police has not responded to repeated requests for comment on allegations of violence against peaceful demonstrators. Journalists were also targeted in the crackdown: at least 16 reporters covering the protests were detained, prompting a formal condemnation from global press freedom organization Reporters Without Borders. “Covering events of public interest is not a crime. It is their job. The police’s actions against the press are unacceptable,” the organization said in a public statement.

    Gandhi has condemned the police response, saying young Indians who joined the protests peacefully “with love in their hearts, not hatred or anger” were beaten by security forces. Over the past week, Gandhi and other senior opposition leaders have been briefly detained multiple times while leading protests in central Delhi. BJP President Nitin Nabin has pushed back against the opposition, accusing protest organizers and opposition parties of attempting to destabilize India “at the behest of foreign forces,” though he provided no evidence or details to support the claim.

    Many protesters who joined Monday’s march framed the demonstration as an existential defense of the world’s largest democracy. “If they take away our right to vote, what is left with us?” one protester told Agence France-Presse. Another described the action as “a fight to save the very fabric” of India.

  • Tom Cruise film Digger forecast to become one of Hollywood’s biggest flops

    Tom Cruise film Digger forecast to become one of Hollywood’s biggest flops

    Two high-profile Hollywood films have delivered underwhelming box office results this week, with Tom Cruise’s latest satirical black comedy *Digger* on track to become one of the costliest box office flops in the industry’s modern history.

    Leading Hollywood industry analysts project that Warner Bros. Pictures could lose roughly $245 million (£185 million) on the A-list production, which stars Cruise as ruthless oil tycoon Digger Rockwell. Box office momentum collapsed sharply in the movie’s second week of release, with ticket sales plummeting by 60% from its opening weekend. After two weeks in cinemas worldwide, the film has only accumulated $35 million (£26 million) in total gross revenue.

    The combined production and marketing budget for *Digger* clocks in at an estimated $280 million (£211 million). To break even, industry analysts calculate the film would need to gross roughly $350 million to cover all costs, including theater revenue cuts and planned awards season campaign spending. A spokesperson for Warner Bros. has pushed back slightly on that estimate, placing the break-even threshold at $300 million (£227 million) instead. Even that lower target remains far out of reach: entertainment trade publication Variety projects *Digger* will end its full theatrical run with just $50 million (£38 million) in global gross sales.

    This catastrophic performance puts *Digger* in unenviable company alongside some of Hollywood’s biggest all-time flops, which all lost nine-figure sums. That infamous list includes 1995’s *Cutthroat Island*, 2002’s *The Adventures of Pluto Nash*, 2005’s *Sahara*, 2012’s *John Carter*, 2011’s *Mars Needs Moms*, 2022’s *Amsterdam*, 1999’s *The 13th Warrior*, 2023’s *The Marvels* and 2008’s *Speed Racer*.

    Cruise’s latest outing stands in stark contrast to his recent blockbuster success, where his long-running *Top Gun* and *Mission: Impossible* franchises have delivered billions in global box office revenue. Addressing the underperformance last week, Cruise pushed back against short-term box office metrics, saying, “I never thought of movies when I’m making them [in terms of] opening weekend,” adding that he prioritized creating work that “hopefully will translate, last and evolve.”

    Directed by Oscar-winning filmmaker Alejandro G Iñárritu, best known for acclaimed hits *Birdman*, *Babel* and *The Revenant*, *Digger* has also faced overwhelmingly negative critical reception. That poor critical response prompted Warner Bros. to overhaul its marketing strategy late in the film’s rollout, launching a new campaign urging moviegoers to “decide for yourself” whether to see the film.

    Notably, *Digger* marks the last standalone film release from Warner Bros. before the studio’s recent acquisition by Paramount Global.

    In a separate box office disappointment over the same weekend, Aaron Sorkin’s *The Social Reckoning*, the unofficial follow-up to 2010’s Oscar-winning *The Social Network*, also failed to resonate with audiences. The film, which tells the true story of former Facebook engineer Frances Haugan, who leaked internal company documents exposing controversial platform practices, opened to just $5.5 million (£4.1 million) in domestic ticket sales. That figure is a fraction of the $22 million opening weekend gross its predecessor earned back in 2010, before adjusting for inflation. Globally, the film pulled in just $9 million (£6.8 million) across its opening weekend, starring Mikey Madison, Jeremy Strong and Jeremy Allen White in lead roles.

    *The Social Reckoning* landed outside the top four on the U.S. domestic box office chart, outperformed by horror title *Other Mommy*, psychological thriller *Verity*, the video game adaptation *Resident Evil*, and Brad Pitt’s wilderness thriller *Heart of the Beast*.

  • US detains man accused in multi-billion Venezuelan money laundering scheme

    US detains man accused in multi-billion Venezuelan money laundering scheme

    In a major law enforcement operation targeting cross-border corruption tied to Venezuelan public programs, Colombian national Álvaro Pulido — a man long sought by U.S. authorities for mass money laundering linked to Venezuelan government bribery plots — has been taken into custody in the United States.

    The U.S. Department of Justice confirmed that the 62-year-old suspect was arrested on Sunday during an operation carried out by a Homeland Security Task Force. Officials have not yet released additional details surrounding how Pulido came to be in U.S. custody, leaving key procedural questions unanswered for the time being. Prior to this arrest, Pulido had been imprisoned in Venezuela starting in March 2023, where he faced local charges of siphoning profits from the country’s state-owned oil giant, PDVSA.

    For years, U.S. law enforcement has prioritized locating Pulido: both the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the State Department offered a combined $10 million reward for information that would lead to his capture. Per an official statement from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Pulido is scheduled to make his first court appearance on Tuesday.

    Pulido’s apprehension comes just two months after another high-profile Colombian businessman with deep ties to the Venezuelan government, Alex Saab, entered a guilty plea on money laundering charges in a U.S. federal court. According to U.S. federal prosecutors, Pulido faces charges in two separate indictments that together accuse him of laundering more than $2 billion connected to bribery schemes within the Venezuelan government.

    Prosecutors allege that Pulido and four additional co-defendants paid bribes to high-ranking Venezuelan government officials to win public contracts for the delivery of food and medicine to low-income Venezuelans. Once the contracts were secured, the group drastically overcharged the Venezuelan government for the goods, then funneled and laundered the illicit profits through overseas bank accounts, including multiple accounts held within the United States.

    Investigators further claim that Pulido collaborated directly with Saab to launder $350 million from a separate bribery scheme centered on Venezuela’s currency exchange system, with the funds moving through bank accounts based in Florida.

    Until earlier this year, Saab held significant influence within Venezuelan politics, with close personal ties to former Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, who appointed Saab as industry minister in 2024. That position of power collapsed abruptly in January, when Maduro was captured by U.S. forces during a raid on the capital Caracas and transferred to New York to face trial on narcotics trafficking charges.

    Within two weeks of Maduro’s capture, the new U.S.-backed interim government of Venezuela removed Saab from his ministerial post, and extradited him to the United States in May. Just last month, Saab formally pleaded guilty to the money laundering charges against him, setting the stage for the next chapter in the broader federal investigation into corruption tied to former Venezuelan government officials.

  • US Homeland Security chief defends plan to livestream execution

    US Homeland Security chief defends plan to livestream execution

    A fierce national debate over capital punishment and transparency has erupted in Washington after the Trump administration revealed plans to potentially livestream the upcoming execution of Nidal Hasan, the former US Army Major convicted of the 2009 Fort Hood mass shooting that left 13 service members dead and 32 others injured.

    Hasan, who admitted carrying out the attack to claim he was protecting Muslims and the Taliban from US military operations, is scheduled to be executed by firing squad this December. This execution will mark the first military execution carried out by the United States since 1961, and the first military execution by firing squad since the end of World War II. If the livestream plan moves forward, it will be the first public execution broadcast to the American public in nearly 100 years.

    Last week, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed the administration’s livestream proposal, which drew immediate bipartisan condemnation from lawmakers, security experts, and academics who warn the move carries dangerous national security risks and violates core American standards of justice. Critics across the political spectrum argue that broadcasting Hasan’s death would grant him the status of a martyr for extremist causes, create a powerful propaganda tool for terrorist organizations, and fuel radicalization that could put American personnel and civilians overseas in increased danger.

    Alaska’s Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski called the plan “gruesome”, writing on social platform X that public broadcast of an execution is something “I would expect from terrorists and dictators, but not here in America”. She emphasized that the process of carrying out justice matters just as much as the final verdict itself, noting that Hasan does not deserve the additional notoriety he would gain from a public livestream. Virginia Democratic Senator Mark Warner echoed these concerns, adding that beyond deep moral objections, the plan creates avoidable national security threats that put Americans at home and abroad at risk.

    President Donald Trump has already confirmed he signed off on Hasan’s execution and supports the idea of a livestream, though administration officials note a final official decision on the broadcast has not yet been made. Appearing on CBS’s *Face the Nation* on Sunday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin defended the proposal, pushing back against all warnings of elevated national security risk.

    Mullin told host Margaret Brennan that his department had already completed a full assessment of potential risks associated with the livestream, and he saw no reason to block the broadcast. “I don’t see an elevated risk,” Mullin stated. “I think people need to understand that if you attack America, we will come after you, and we will make sure that the punishment fits the crime.” The DHS secretary added that he has no sympathy for Hasan, who killed 13 of his fellow service members, and that he gives no consideration to debates over the manner of Hasan’s death.

  • Daniel Kinahan’s lawyers to apply for bail in due course, court hears

    Daniel Kinahan’s lawyers to apply for bail in due course, court hears

    Ireland’s Special Criminal Court has confirmed that a formal bail application will be submitted on behalf of high-profile alleged organised crime figure Daniel Kinahan in the coming weeks, with the request to be lodged through Dublin’s High Court.

    Kinahan’s solicitor, Darragh Mackin of Belfast-based Phoenix Law, made the confirmation during a court appearance on Monday, outlining next steps for the defence team as the case progresses. The 46-year-old Kinahan faces a single charge of directing the activities of a transnational criminal organisation between October 2015 and April 2017, a charge he denies.

    Mackin told the court that the defence legal team is currently moving forward on two key preparatory fronts: first, it is sourcing a qualified independent digital forensics expert to conduct a full review of all digital evidence held by the prosecution; second, it is seeking full disclosure of details from previous international investigations into Kinahan that ended in his acquittal.

    Representing the Director of Public Prosecutions, the prosecuting barrister told the court that the case against Kinahan rests on what he described as an exceptionally complex factual matrix. He noted that the extradition of Kinahan from Dubai earlier this year was supported by an 189-page detailed statement of facts laying out the prosecution’s core allegations.

    Following Monday’s hearing, Kinahan was remanded in custody, with his next in-person court appearance scheduled for December 21. The prosecution confirmed that the full book of evidence, which compiles all materials and witness statements the prosecution will rely on at trial, is on track to be finalized and served by that date. This marked Kinahan’s third appearance before the Special Criminal Court, and only the second time he has appeared in person at the Dublin venue. Observers at the hearing reported that Kinahan was dressed in a neat grey suit, paired with a black shirt and dark-framed glasses.

    Kinahan’s path to trial in Ireland began in April 2024, when he was arrested by law enforcement authorities in the United Arab Emirates following a coordinated extradition request from Irish authorities. He was ultimately handed over to Irish officials on August 9, and flown back to Dublin on the Irish government’s official jet to face the charge against him.

  • British journalist Secunder Kermani barred from Israel amid widening press crackdown

    British journalist Secunder Kermani barred from Israel amid widening press crackdown

    On Sunday, a high-profile British foreign correspondent became the latest international reporter to face entry restrictions from Israeli authorities, in a trend that press freedom organizations warn is part of a growing clampdown on journalists critical of Israeli policy. Secunder Kermani, foreign affairs correspondent for UK-based Channel 4 News who has reported extensively on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for years, announced the initial ban shortly after landing at Ben Gurion Airport near Tel Aviv in a public post on social media platform X.

    Kermani had traveled to Israel to report ahead of the country’s upcoming national elections when he was notified of the entry denial by border officials. In an update posted shortly after the announcement, he confirmed that Israeli authorities had reversed their original decision following a short period of immigration detention. “Thank you for all the messages of support,” Kermani wrote. “After a very brief stay in immigration detention, the decision has been reversed and I have now been allowed to enter Israel. Grateful to all those who offered their help. Concerned to hear other journalists have faced similar issues in recent weeks.”

    While Israeli officials have not publicly stated a clear reason for the initial ban, the incident comes after Kermani published a series of high-impact investigative reports that have drawn criticism from pro-Israel circles. Last October, he published an investigation into Bnei David academy, a prominent Jewish religious school whose alumni include many of Israel’s most senior military commanders. The investigation exposed how the institution promotes radicalization among future Israeli soldiers, including through religious teachings that justify the killing of Palestinian men, women, children and infants during the ongoing war in Gaza. Kermani also recorded academy leaders openly calling for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip. Beyond the Gaza war, his reporting has also documented escalating violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinian communities in the occupied West Bank, and cases of rape and sexual abuse against Palestinian captives held by Israeli forces.

    Kermani’s case is far from isolated. Press freedom monitors have documented a steady erosion of journalistic safety and access in Israeli-controlled territory over recent years, a crisis that has hit Palestinian journalists hardest of all. According to the Gaza Government Media Office, 263 Palestinian journalists and media workers have been killed by Israeli forces since the start of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza that began in October 2023. Israel has also maintained a near-total ban on foreign journalists entering the besieged enclave to report on the ground, blocking independent coverage of the humanitarian crisis unfolding there.

    Increasingly, even international journalists from Western countries who once counted on diplomatic protection for their work are facing pushback from Israeli authorities for critical reporting. A June 2026 investigation by the Committee to Protect Journalists recorded at least six separate cases of European journalists being denied entry to Israel or having their travel authorization revoked over the preceding 12 months. In multiple instances, Israeli authorities explicitly cited the journalists’ critical reporting or public statements about Israeli policy as the justification for the restrictions.

    Just one day before Kermani’s entry ban incident, press freedom organizations across the globe condemned another attack on a journalist in the occupied Palestinian territories. On October 9, 2026, the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), the Palestinian Journalists’ Syndicate, and four major French journalist unions issued a joint statement condemning an attack on AFP photographer Jaafar Ishtayeh near the West Bank town of Aqraba. IFJ General Secretary Anthony Bellanger condemned what he called “the complicity of Israeli forces in allowing settlers to assault Palestinian journalists with impunity.”