博客

  • ‘Few cards to play’: Saudi Arabia faces limited options against Houthis with allies out

    ‘Few cards to play’: Saudi Arabia faces limited options against Houthis with allies out

    For months, Saudi Arabia managed to avoid direct fallout from the escalating regional conflict triggered by the war against Iran, even as smaller neighboring nations became engulfed in rising tensions. The kingdom’s state-owned oil giant, Saudi Aramco, even posted record-breaking profits over the summer, leveraging its strategic East-West Pipeline to route crude exports away from the high-risk Strait of Hormuz, where Iranian-aligned forces had targeted commercial shipping. That safe position has now collapsed entirely.

    The critical East-West Pipeline is now out of commission following a drone strike carried out by Iran-aligned militias based in Iraq. Simultaneously, Houthi forces in Yemen have unleashed a wave of missile and drone attacks targeting population centers across Saudi Arabia, including an incident where a Houthi drone was intercepted over Mecca—Islam’s holiest site, whose stewardship forms a core pillar of legitimacy for the ruling House of Saud. The Houthis have denied intentionally targeting the city. These concurrent attacks have left Saudi Arabia fighting on two separate, high-stakes fronts.

    On one front, the kingdom’s allied Yemeni forces are scrambling to repel a sweeping Houthi ground offensive across Yemen, while on the home front, Saudi Arabia defends its own territory against non-stop aerial attacks. The timing of the Houthi blitz could not be worse for Riyadh: global stockpiles of the U.S.-made interceptor missiles that form the backbone of the kingdom’s air defense network are running critically low.

    Long reliant on the U.S. security umbrella it accepted after World War II, Saudi Arabia now finds Washington unwilling to step up. U.S. President Donald Trump recently confirmed that Houthi representatives had contacted the U.S. to state they have no interest in conflict with America, and Reuters has reported that U.S. officials held secret talks with Houthi delegates mediated by Oman, a major development that sidelines Saudi interests.

    In response to shifting U.S. commitments and regional instability sparked by the U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran, Saudi Arabia moved to expand its own security alliances, most notably through the Mecca Pact with Turkey and Pakistan. But like the U.S., these new partners have shown zero willingness to enter direct conflict with the Houthis, a movement that has already proven its ability to sustain heavy battlefield losses and continue fighting. Today, neither Turkey nor Pakistan have deployed any support to Saudi Arabia, leaving the kingdom isolated.

    “Saudi Arabia is in a huge bind right now. They are pretty alone,” explained Neil Quilliam, a Gulf research expert at London-based Chatham House, in an interview with Middle East Eye. “The U.S. isn’t there. The Mecca Pact states haven’t showed up. They have few cards to play.”

    The Houthi advance along Yemen’s Red Sea coast has already placed the strategically vital Bab el-Mandeb Strait firmly under the group’s control. This waterway is the primary chokepoint for Saudi oil shipments bound for Asian markets. Combined with the disabling of the East-West Pipeline, which fed crude to European markets through the Red Sea, the Houthi advances now threaten both major Saudi export routes. The group is currently advancing on two key Yemeni inland cities, Taiz and Marib; if these fall, the Saudi-backed, internationally recognized Yemeni government faces collapse.

    On the ground, Saudi Arabia—which refuses to deploy its own ground troops into Yemen—has no reliable local partners to back. The National Resistance Forces, a militia previously funded by the United Arab Emirates that held the Red Sea coastline, disintegrated almost immediately during the Houthi advance. The only Yemeni faction with proven combat capability is the Southern Transitional Council (STC), which is committed to restoring an independent state in southern Yemen. The UAE’s open support for the STC earlier this year sparked a major rift between Abu Dhabi and Riyadh, and the STC’s demands for major concessions in exchange for fighting the Houthis run directly counter to Saudi Arabia’s core regional interests.

    “The UAE knows how to fight in Yemen, but they want concessions to come back in. Saudi Arabia views those demands as anathema to its national interest,” a anonymous diplomat familiar with bilateral talks between the two nations told Middle East Eye.

    The economic damage of the recent attacks is already tangible: Saudi Arabia was forced to cancel multiple crude oil shipments to Europe this week, and all loading operations at Yanbu, the Red Sea terminal that serves as the endpoint of the disabled East-West Pipeline, have been suspended. More broadly, the escalating conflict threatens to derail Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s flagship Vision 2030 initiative, which aims to diversify the Saudi economy away from oil dependence. The kingdom is set to host a major global investment conference next month, where it hopes to attract billions in foreign investment for new projects including AI data centers and tourism infrastructure.

    Saudi and allied Yemeni forces have launched limited retaliatory strikes against Houthi targets, but Riyadh has not committed to the large-scale intervention it launched at the start of the Yemen civil war a decade ago. The kingdom spent years working to extricate itself from that protracted conflict, and a 2022 ceasefire between the Houthis and Saudi-aligned forces reduced open fighting. However, Saudi Arabia has maintained a strict blockade on Houthi-controlled Yemeni ports and airports throughout the de facto truce.

    “A return to full-scale ground war offers little that eight years of campaigning failed to deliver,” noted Hesham Alghannam, director general of the Strategic Studies and National Security Programmes at Riyadh’s Naif Arab University for Security Sciences. Western officials based in Riyadh confirm that Saudi leadership has no appetite to re-enter the Yemeni quagmire, mindful of the damage it caused to Saudi Arabia’s international reputation and arms supply chains.

    Analysts widely agree that Saudi Arabia’s hesitation to deploy its own powerful air force to halt the Houthi advance stemmed directly from Riyadh’s reluctance to act without explicit U.S. backing. That indecision, experts say, allowed the Houthis to seize vast swathes of territory in a matter of weeks.

    The dual attacks on Saudi energy infrastructure and regional influence do not exist in a vacuum: the Houthis are a core member of Iran’s “axis of resistance” aligned against U.S. and Gulf interests in the region. While the movement maintains it retains operational independence, Middle East Eye confirmed earlier this summer that Iran has supplied the Houthis with new military equipment and advisory support to ramp up their campaign. This offensive comes as Iran was set to hold talks with Gulf states this week to de-escalate tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, leaving Saudi Arabia as the last major Gulf oil exporter operating at full capacity—now vulnerable on two maritime fronts.

    The current frozen conflict in Yemen dates back to the 2022 UN-brokered ceasefire, which called for lifting the Saudi blockade on Houthi-held territory in exchange for political negotiations. Those talks never gained meaningful momentum, and the Houthis have grown increasingly frustrated under the ongoing economic isolation. Regional diplomats say the current offensive is driven in part by the Houthi goal of imposing shipping tolls in the Red Sea, mirroring the leverage Iran already holds in the Strait of Hormuz. The Houthis have publicly stated their blockade of Saudi shipping will only end when their own ports and airports are allowed to operate without restrictions.

    Military analysts say Saudi Arabia has a range of escalation options available, from calibrated air strikes to a full return to large-scale intervention. The most expedient short-term option would be to pay financial concessions to the Houthis in exchange for a new truce, but experts say that outcome is politically untenable for Riyadh.

    “It would look like complete capitulation. Saudi Arabia sees itself as an emerging middle power. They can’t afford to lose face and just give in to Houthi terms,” Quilliam said.

    This leaves Saudi Arabia with the path of gradually increasing military pressure, though the kingdom is determined to avoid being dragged back into a years-long ground war that would derail its economic transformation plans. Many Saudi security experts argue for a measured approach: incremental military action to raise the cost of Houthi attacks, paired with negotiations that offer the Houthi leadership a face-saving political resolution.

    Other analysts argue a return to large-scale air campaign, modeled on the 2015 Decisive Storm offensive, is the most likely outcome, particularly as no genuine Yemeni political dialogue appears possible in the near term. One key proposal being discussed is an effort to internationalize control of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, to draw greater support from the U.S., European nations, and other Arab partners for Saudi Arabia’s campaign.

    In the end, the future of the conflict and Saudi Arabia’s next move will depend largely on whether its key international and regional allies choose to step in—and for now, that support remains missing in action.

  • US interest rates raised for first time in three years

    US interest rates raised for first time in three years

    In a historic, unanimous policy shift that marks the first increase to U.S. benchmark interest rates in more than three years, the Federal Reserve has raised its key policy rate by a quarter percentage point to a new range of 3.75% to 4%, pushing back against repeated public demands from former President Donald Trump to cut borrowing costs instead.

    The decision, announced Wednesday, comes as U.S. policymakers grapple with persistent, elevated inflation that has pushed household cost-of-living concerns to the top of the political agenda ahead of November’s midterm elections. Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh framed the rate increase as a necessary, measured response to months of above-target price growth. “Inflation is too high and has been for too long,” Warsh told reporters during a post-meeting press conference, describing the move as a “sober” and “responsible” step to stabilize the economy. He emphasized that low-income households, which bear the brunt of rising prices for essentials like food and energy, stand to benefit the most from bringing inflation under control.

    The rate hike comes against a backdrop of soaring global energy prices, triggered by the outbreak of the US-Israel war with Iran that has disrupted energy markets and pushed diesel prices to all-time records in the U.S., with average gasoline prices climbing above $4 per gallon. Warsh acknowledged that the Fed cannot directly control individual price pressures such as oil or grocery costs, but argued that the central bank’s role is to prevent broad-based, sustained inflation from embedding itself across the entire economy.

    The decision puts the independent central bank on a direct collision course with Trump, who has repeatedly lashed out at Fed policy in recent years and made his opposition to the rate hike public ahead of the announcement. Trump argued that U.S. interest rates “should be 1%, or less, because we are the Best Credit in the World – BY FAR.” Following the announcement, he doubled down on his criticism in a post on social media, writing: “LOWER THE INTEREST RATES FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND FAST!”

    White House press secretary Kush Desai told Fox News that the administration has “reiterated our commitment to the independence of the Federal Reserve on numerous occasions,” but added that Trump retains the right to publicly share his views on monetary policy. When pressed by reporters to respond to Trump’s criticism, Warsh deflected all questions about the president’s remarks. “I have got nothing for you on a discussion with the president,” he said, chuckling before repeating the response to follow-up questions. “Part of the independence of the Federal Reserve is we stay in our lane,” Warsh added.

    This rate increase is the first change to Fed policy in any direction since the central bank cut rates in December 2025, with the last previous rate hike occurring in July 2023. Trump had previously criticized Warsh’s predecessor, Jerome Powell, who stepped down at the end of his term earlier this year, for refusing to cut rates as Trump demanded.

    Higher interest rates work to cool inflation by making borrowing more expensive for consumers seeking mortgages, personal loans and credit cards, which discourages discretionary spending and encourages saving. While this eases upward pressure on prices, it also carries risks: higher rates can prompt businesses to pause investment plans, dragging on overall economic growth. For consumers, the rate hike will immediately translate to higher borrowing costs: major U.S. lenders including JPMorgan, KeyCorp and BNY Mellon moved quickly Wednesday to raise their prime lending rates from 6.75% to 7%, a shift that will push up rates for credit cards and consumer loans.

    Mortgage rates, which already climbed over the past year, have also moved higher as a result of the policy change. Current Freddie Mac data puts the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate at 6.76%, with the average 15-year fixed rate at 6.09%, still below the peak rates recorded in 2023. Most existing U.S. homeowners with fixed-rate mortgages will not see any change to their monthly payments, but prospective homebuyers and those seeking to refinance existing home loans will face higher borrowing costs.

    Looking ahead, Warsh declined to offer his personal outlook for future rate moves, but Fed policymakers’ collective projections point to additional rate increases on the horizon. A majority of policymakers expect the Fed will raise rates once more before the end of the year, pushing the benchmark rate into a range of 4% to 4.25%. A small majority of policymakers project rates will climb further to 4.25% to 4.5% in 2027, before the central bank begins cutting rates between 2028 and 2029. Projections also show inflation is expected to steadily decline over the coming years, hitting the Fed’s longstanding 2% target by 2029.

    The U.S. is far from alone in tackling inflation driven by Middle East conflict energy shocks: the European Central Bank raised its own interest rates last week, with the Bank of England set to announce its own monetary policy decision on Thursday.

  • Gaza: One year after ceasefire, killing and displacement of Palestinians persist

    Gaza: One year after ceasefire, killing and displacement of Palestinians persist

    For Palestinians across the Gaza Strip, the ceasefire that was meant to halt large-scale violence and bring a measure of stability last October has failed to deliver on its promises. Instead, repeated Israeli violations of the US-brokered agreement have left millions trapped in a cycle of constant fear, displacement, and hunger that mirrors the worst days of active conflict. The personal toll of this ongoing crisis is vividly captured in the accounts of two Gaza residents, whose stories lay bare the human cost of unrelenting pressure on civilian communities.

    It was just an ordinary evening in early September when Om Siraj al-Muzeini, a widowed mother originally from Gaza City’s eastern Shujaiya neighbourhood, was making soup for her sick child inside her tent in western Gaza City’s al-Abbas block. Suddenly, panicked shouts cut through the quiet of the displacement camp: residents were running between shelters, asking one another frantic questions about how much time they had left to leave. The sound was all too familiar, and Muzeini quietly prayed her worst fears would not be confirmed. They were. A displaced neighbour soon brought word of a mandatory evacuation order for the entire block. With seconds to spare and no time to sort through her few belongings, she grabbed her sick son and fled the tent, with no clear destination in mind.

    “I ran with my son to nowhere. I couldn’t decide where to go. I wasn’t prepared for this, especially since the last evacuation order in my area was issued before the ceasefire,” Muzeini told Middle East Eye in an interview. “The entire neighbourhood fled, including long-term residents and people displaced in tents. Some went to relatives’ homes. I waited with my son in another neighbourhood until the threatened area was bombed.” Shortly after the evacuation order was issued on September 8, an Israeli fighter jet carried out an airstrike on a local building.

    This forced evacuation was not an isolated incident. It is one of dozens of similar expulsion orders the Israeli military has issued across the war-ravaged Gaza Strip in recent weeks, with multiple additional orders for different areas released the same day as al-Abbas block’s evacuation. Under the terms of the October 2024 ceasefire, these mass displacement orders were supposed to end, alongside daily offensive operations, while allowing critical humanitarian aid to flow freely into the enclave. Instead, Israel has breached the agreement repeatedly, conducting near-daily attacks and maintaining strict restrictions on the entry of life-saving aid. Now, nearly a year after the current phase of conflict began, Gaza residents say systematic violence against civilians continues, even as global media attention has faded.

    Evacuation orders have become a key tool of this ongoing pressure, worsening a displacement and shelter crisis created by Israel’s widespread destruction of residential infrastructure over the course of the war. These orders typically give residents no clear timeline for when, or if, they will be able to return to their homes. Civilians often have only minutes or hours to pack and flee, with no warning of how long the evacuation will last. Even areas that receive no advance warning are regularly targeted by airstrikes, leaving civilians dead and injured with no chance to escape.

    “The evacuation orders are meant simply to disrupt our lives and keep us in a constant state of insecurity, even during the ceasefire,” Muzeini said. She has already lost one family member to post-ceasefire violence: “My sister was killed in an Israeli strike near her tent in eastern Deir al-Balah during the ceasefire. So there is really no purpose to these evacuation orders other than keeping the state of war going. Honestly, I feel like we are reliving the war all over again.”

    Just five days before al-Abbas block’s evacuation, on September 3, Israeli forces carried out a sudden incursion past their self-declared “yellow line” boundary into the area around Kamal Adwan Hospital in northern Gaza, forcing a full-scale evacuation amid heavy gunfire. The attack left at least two Palestinians dead, including one child, and dozens more wounded. Official data from Gaza’s Palestinian Ministry of Health underscores the scale of ongoing bloodshed: since the ceasefire took effect, 1,381 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli attacks, an average of roughly four civilian deaths per day, with an additional 4,757 wounded.

    For Ahmed Jendiya, a 31-year-old resident of eastern Gaza City who lost his home to Israeli bombing in the first year of conflict and now lives with his family in a tent on the rubble of his former property, the bombardment is only one of three ongoing horrors facing Gaza’s population. “The other two sides are still ongoing: the constant incursions and forced displacement, and the starvation that continues to haunt us every day,” Jendiya explained.

    Two months ago, Jendiya packed an emergency evacuation bag, bracing for the day when Israeli forces would extend the “yellow line” into his neighbourhood. The unilateral military boundary, established and marked by Israeli forces inside Gaza immediately after the US-brokered ceasefire, creates a de facto no-go zone that bars Palestinian access to large swathes of northern, southern, and eastern Gaza, with civilian intruders met with lethal force. Since the ceasefire was signed, the line has steadily pushed westward into populated civilian neighbourhoods, and now covers roughly 70 percent of the entire Gaza Strip. Each new expansion is marked by the placement of yellow concrete blocks directly in residential areas. When Jendiya and other displaced residents returned to the area from the south after the ceasefire, the yellow line sat roughly one kilometer from his tent. Today, it is just 200 meters away.

    “Every night, it feels like the war has returned. The Israeli occupation forces open intense fire towards our areas, and we barely survive the bullets. The entire area turns into a battlefield, and all we can do is lie on the ground and cover our children’s heads,” he said. The creeping expansion of the yellow line has completely shifted daily life for local residents: where evening community discussions once centered on hopes of rebuilding destroyed homes after the ceasefire, conversations now revolve solely around where people will flee when the boundary reaches their blocks.

    “Every evening, the men in the neighbourhood gather to chat and discuss daily matters. In the first weeks of the ceasefire, our conversations revolved around whether our homes would be rebuilt, and whether we would rebuild them ourselves,” Jendiya said. “For the past six months, our discussions have turned to asking each other whether we have somewhere to go and when we should decide to leave. These are the same discussions we used to have during the genocide before the ceasefire, exactly the same.”

    For Jendiya, the greater fear is not displacement itself—it is the return of mass starvation that already devastated Gaza before the ceasefire. Even with the partial reopening of border crossings for aid and goods after the truce, 1.4 million Gazans—64 percent of the enclave’s total population—still face crisis-level or worse acute food insecurity, according to the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) system. Before the ceasefire, Gaza’s Ministry of Health recorded at least 453 deaths from severe malnutrition, including 150 children. Hundreds more continue to struggle with malnutrition-related chronic health conditions months after the truce took effect.

    Over the past months, Israeli authorities have repeatedly alternated between banning and permitting basic food items, leaving residents in a state of perpetual uncertainty. “Whenever we eat something today, we fear we may not find it tomorrow,” Jendiya said. “Most of the farmland has already been destroyed and there is no livestock left. We are completely dependent on aid and goods permitted by the occupation. We know that if the borders are closed again, we will fall into starvation even faster this time.”

  • US House votes to hold billionaire Epstein associate Leon Black in contempt

    US House votes to hold billionaire Epstein associate Leon Black in contempt

    In a historic bipartisan move that underscores the principle that no individual is above the law, the United States House of Representatives has voted unanimously to hold billionaire financier Leon Black in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with a congressional subpoena tied to the ongoing investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

    Black, who once co-founded the private equity giant Apollo Global Management and maintained documented business ties to Epstein, failed to appear before the House Oversight Committee earlier this month and refused to turn over required documents related to Epstein and their professional dealings. This contempt citation, approved via unanimous consent, now paves the way for the matter to be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice, where federal prosecutors will determine whether to pursue criminal contempt charges against Black.

    Committee Chairman James Comer, a Republican from Kentucky, emphasized after the vote that the chamber’s action reinforces a core tenet of American governance: that even the wealthiest and most powerful individuals are not exempt from congressional oversight. “No one is above the law,” Comer stated, adding that “We will continue to seek transparency for the American people and justice for survivors of Epstein’s crimes.” The top Democratic member of the committee, Congressman Robert Garcia of California, echoed this sentiment, calling the contempt vote “an important step towards justice and accountability.” Garcia added that lawmakers would keep survivors at the center of their work to hold all connected parties responsible for the “horrific crimes” tied to the Epstein scandal.

    The conflict between Black and the Oversight Committee stretches back to June, when Black walked out of a voluntary scheduled appearance before the panel after lawmakers began questioning him about a series of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) he is alleged to have signed in connection with his relationship to Epstein. Following that abrupt departure, the committee issued a formal subpoena ordering Black to produce all relevant NDAs and appear for an on-camera sworn deposition, a order Black has repeatedly refused to obey.

    Black departed Apollo Global Management in 2021, when mounting public and regulatory scrutiny over his ties to Epstein led to his exit. He has consistently denied any wrongdoing in his relationship with Epstein, claiming he had no knowledge of Epstein’s sex trafficking activities until the financier was formally charged in July 2019. Black has acknowledged hiring Epstein as a wealth management advisor and paid him $158 million in fees for legitimate financial services, a claim he reiterated during his partial testimony in June.

    Black’s legal team has pushed back aggressively against the contempt citation, issuing a blistering statement calling the House’s action “outrageous” and arguing that it ignores both factual and legal context. The attorneys noted that the full House approved the contempt holding even as litigation challenging the legality of the committee’s subpoena remains active in federal court, and that there is an ongoing ethics complaint filed against Chairman Comer over his handling of the investigation. Black himself has also filed a legal challenge to the subpoena, arguing it exceeds the committee’s authority and violates his constitutional rights.

    The referral to the Department of Justice now sets up a high-stakes legal showdown over congressional oversight, testing whether federal prosecutors will pursue criminal charges against a prominent billionaire who has refused to comply with a lawful congressional subpoena. The ongoing investigation into Epstein’s network of connections continues to unfold, with lawmakers stressing their commitment to uncovering all details of the financier’s crimes and holding any complicit individuals accountable.

  • Trump’s Chief of Staff Susie Wiles announces she’s cancer-free

    Trump’s Chief of Staff Susie Wiles announces she’s cancer-free

    In a landmark update that blends personal milestone and political relevance, Susie Wiles — the trailblazing first woman to hold the post of White House Chief of Staff, one of the most influential positions in U.S. government — has announced she is now cancer-free, exactly six months after going public with her breast cancer diagnosis.

    Wiles, 69, who stands as one of the closest and most powerful advisors to President Donald Trump in his current administration, shared the news in a social media post on X earlier this week. She confirmed that follow-up pathology tests conducted during a recent visit to the Mayo Clinic returned completely clear results.

    In her announcement, Wiles extended heartfelt gratitude to President Trump for what she described as his unwavering support throughout her treatment course. She also reaffirmed her commitment to continuing her work advancing the administration’s signature America First policy agenda. Remarkably, Wiles continued to fulfill her White House duties remotely throughout the six months of her cancer treatment, stepping back only minimally from her core responsibilities.

    When Wiles first announced her diagnosis in a March public statement, she used the moment to shine a light on the widespread impact of breast cancer, noting that one in eight women globally receive a breast cancer diagnosis during their lifetime. At that time, she framed her own experience as joining the ranks of women who continue to manage family, work, and community service while navigating cancer with extraordinary resilience. Her most recent post did not disclose additional details about the specific treatment protocol she underwent.

    Beyond her historic appointment and cancer journey, Wiles has carved out a central role in the Trump administration. As White House Chief of Staff, her core responsibilities include keeping the president’s legislative and policy agenda on schedule, acting as a primary gatekeeper for access to the commander-in-chief, coordinating cross-departmental policy efforts, and serving as one of Trump’s most trusted political advisors. Prior to taking on the Chief of Staff role, Wiles was a critical architect of Trump’s successful 2024 presidential campaign, helping to secure his return to the Oval Office.

    Wiles’ tenure in the high-profile role has not been without public controversy. In December of last year, Vanity Fair published a controversial set of interviews featuring candid, and at times unflattering, commentary from Wiles about her work in the administration and key figures around the president. Among the most talked-about remarks was her description of Trump — who is famously a teetotaler — as having an “alcoholic’s personality,” though she quickly added that “there’s nothing he can’t do. Nothing, zero, nothing.” She also offered blunt assessments of other prominent figures aligned with the administration, labeling Vice President JD Vance a “conspiracy theorist” and billionaire entrepreneur and Trump ally Elon Musk an “odd, odd duck.”

    President Trump moved quickly to defend Wiles following the publication of the article, and Wiles herself pushed back against the coverage, arguing that Vanity Fair had omitted critical context from her comments in order to manufacture a misleading, chaotic, and overly negative narrative about the administration. As of Wednesday’s announcement of her cancer remission, neither President Trump nor official White House representatives have issued a public comment on the news.

  • Irish politician injured after assault in Dublin

    Irish politician injured after assault in Dublin

    A high-profile incident of violence against an elected Irish politician has shaken the country’s political community, after independent Teachta Dála (TD) Michael Healy-Rae was punched in an unprovoked assault while stuck in urban traffic Wednesday afternoon.

    The attack unfolded shortly after 16:00 local time on Cork Street, a busy thoroughfare in central Dublin. Healy-Rae had just wrapped up a day of parliamentary work at Leinster House, the seat of Ireland’s national legislature, and was traveling home when he stopped his vehicle at a red traffic light. With his car window lowered, an unidentified passerby approached the vehicle and delivered a single punch directly to the politician’s face before the incident was interrupted by bystanders.

    First responders and law enforcement moved quickly to secure the scene and provide care to the injured TD. Healy-Rae received initial emergency medical treatment at Garda Headquarters’ Kevin Street Station before being transferred to St Vincent’s University Hospital for further evaluation and recovery. In a statement released shortly after the incident, Gardaí confirmed that while the politician sustained visible injuries, none are considered life-threatening. Investigators have issued a public appeal for any members of the public who were in the area at the time of the attack and have dashcam, street camera or mobile phone footage of the incident to contact investigators to support their case.

    The assault has drawn widespread condemnation from across Ireland’s political spectrum and from Healy-Rae’s family. His brother Danny Healy-Rae, who also serves as a TD for County Kerry, confirmed details of the attack in an interview, noting that the assault had come as a shock to the entire family. “Them things shouldn’t happen to public representatives,” Danny Healy-Rae said. “We get elected to help the people and not to hurt them.” He added that he shared the widespread concern over the attack and was hoping for a quick and full recovery for his brother.

    Tánaiste and Deputy Prime Minister of Ireland Simon Harris also publicly addressed the incident, issuing a statement via social media expressing his deep concern over the attack. Harris confirmed that he had spoken directly to Michael Healy-Rae following the assault to convey his personal well wishes for a full recovery. “There is absolutely no place for violence or intimidation in our democracy,” Harris said. “Every citizen, including every public representative, has the right to go about their work and their life without fear.” He also offered public praise to the bystanders and first responders who stepped in to assist Healy-Rae immediately after the attack.

    The incident comes amid growing conversation globally about rising rates of violence and intimidation targeting elected public officials, and Irish political leaders have signaled they will be reviewing safety protocols for representatives in the wake of the assault.

  • Senior minister says UK will ‘no longer’ stand by while ‘innocent children are killed in Gaza’

    Senior minister says UK will ‘no longer’ stand by while ‘innocent children are killed in Gaza’

    A sharp shift in the United Kingdom’s policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has emerged in recent days, with top government officials taking an unprecedented critical stance against Israeli actions in Gaza and illegal West Bank settlements, triggering an immediate angry rebuke from Israeli diplomatic authorities.

    The new position was laid out publicly by Louise Haigh, UK First Secretary of State, during a keynote address to the annual Trade Union Congress (TUC) conference held in Brighton on Tuesday. Haigh, whose role includes oversight of the Prime Minister’s Office and cabinet operations, openly acknowledged that the UK had moved far too slowly to address the escalating humanitarian and political crisis unfolding across Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

    “We will no longer stand by while innocent Palestinian families are torn apart, while innocent children are killed in Gaza and while the hope of a two-state solution evaporates before our eyes,” Haigh told assembled union delegates. She noted that since the outbreak of large-scale Israeli military operations in the besieged Gaza Strip in 2023, more than 21,000 Palestinian children have been killed, with an additional 1,400 Palestinian lives lost in the territory since the temporary ceasefire was agreed in October. Even amid the pause in hostilities, Haigh emphasized, the human cost of the conflict continues to mount.

    Her comments came just one week after UK Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband made a landmark announcement that the British government officially recognizes Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory as illegal, and unveiled sweeping new sanctions targeting all illegal Israeli settlements built on occupied Palestinian land. Haigh affirmed during her TUC speech that the new sanctions package represents a deliberate break from the UK’s past approach to the conflict. Crucially, she clarified that the punitive measures are targeted specifically at the infrastructure and operations of illegal settlements, not the Israeli public as a whole. “The Israeli people are not responsible for the actions of their government, so we are purposefully targeting the illegal settlements,” she explained. The ultimate goal of the sanctions, Haigh added, is to ramp up pressure on the Israeli government to reverse course and preserve the fading possibility of a negotiated two-state solution that delivers lasting peace to the Middle East. “We will stand against injustice. We will stand up for peace. We will build a coalition of international partners to speak with one voice and remind the world who we are,” she said.

    Miliband expanded on the details of the new sanctions regime during a parliamentary address last week, outlining that the core measure will be a full import ban on all goods produced in illegal Israeli settlements, preventing these products from entering UK retail channels. “I do not believe the British people want us supporting the occupation by accepting products from settlements in our shops and supermarkets,” Miliband told lawmakers. Beyond the import ban, the UK will implement a comprehensive sanctions framework that includes targeted penalties against specific companies and individuals that provide key services for settlement expansion, including construction, infrastructure financing, and real estate development. “So to those who finance or facilitate illegal settlements, let me say this: you will face the full force of UK sanctions. Settlements are illegal. They should not be promoted in our country,” the foreign secretary stated, adding that the new regime will include narrow, appropriate religious exemptions to avoid unnecessary disruption to religious communities.

    The UK’s policy shift is not an isolated action. Eleven other European and North American nations—including Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Sweden—joined the UK in signing a joint statement affirming their shared commitment to introducing national trade restrictions on illegal settlement goods or supporting broader European Union-level restrictions, with some nations actively evaluating additional measures aligned with their own domestic legislative procedures.

    Israel has responded to the new UK policy with swift and punitive diplomatic measures. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar announced that Israel would shut down the British consulate general in East Jerusalem and bar 11 elected British members of parliament from entering the country, among other retaliatory sanctions. The Israeli Embassy in London also issued a formal public rebuke of the UK government’s statements, posting its criticism to the social platform X. The embassy argued that UK officials have presented a deeply one-sided account of the conflict that centers the Palestinian narrative while entirely ignoring the experiences of Jewish victims of terrorist attacks, including Israeli children who have been killed in violence. “Any serious discussion of the conflict must acknowledge the Israeli victims of Palestinian terrorism, and the ongoing struggle against those who deliberately target civilians. Ignoring these victims does not promote peace or justice; it creates a deeply distorted and one-sided picture of reality,” the embassy’s statement read.

    This unprecedented break from decades of UK policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict marks a major shift in Western diplomatic alignment on the issue, as a growing bloc of Western nations moves to take concrete action against illegal Israeli settlements amid widespread international condemnation of the mounting civilian death toll in Gaza.

  • US dictionary adds 1,400 words, including neckbeard, trash panda and cuffing season

    US dictionary adds 1,400 words, including neckbeard, trash panda and cuffing season

    As one of the most authoritative and longest-running dictionary publishers in the United States, Merriam-Webster has just unveiled its latest round of updates, adding 1,400 fresh words and meanings to its catalog that capture how language evolves alongside modern life, pop culture, technology, and societal shifts. Among the most eye-catching new entries is “trash panda” — the affectionate, viral nickname for raccoons that emerged from online communities, inspired by the animals’ well-known habit of foraging for food in human household trash and their passing resemblance to small pandas.

    The publisher explained in an official blog post that every new entry included in this update has been tracked and vetted over years of widespread use across different contexts, making these additions more than just new spellings — they are a snapshot of how people communicate and what matters to them in the current era.

    The new entries span a wide range of categories, from food and culture to technology, internet slang, and social trends. Food-related terms figure prominently in this update, reflecting growing global culinary exchange and changing eating habits. These include “superfood”, the widely used term for nutrient-dense foods linked to health benefits; “bao”, the fluffy, stuffed steamed bun that has grown popular far beyond its East Asian origins; “cake pop”, the handheld portable treat that combines cake and icing on a lollipop stick; and “chili crisp”, the spicy, crunchy oil-based condiment packed with fried peppers, garlic, and shallots that has become a pantry staple for many home cooks.

    Internet and pop culture slang also makes up a large share of the new additions, capturing decades of viral trends and shared online experiences. Long-time internet users will recognize “Rickroll”, the iconic prank that tricks people into clicking a link leading to Rick Astley’s 1987 hit *Never Gonna Give You Up*. Other widely recognizable terms added include “glow-up”, meaning a dramatic positive transformation in one’s appearance or confidence; “looksmaxxing”, the practice of making intentional changes to maximize one’s physical attractiveness; “meme coin”, the cryptocurrency created as a joke or viral trend rather than as a serious financial investment; and “the Mandela effect”, the widely shared phenomenon where large groups of people collectively hold the same false memory of a past event or detail.

    Terms describing common social and emotional experiences also earned a spot in the dictionary: “cuffing season”, the annual trend of single people seeking a steady romantic partner to spend the colder fall and winter months with; “Sunday scaries”, the anxiety or unease many people feel as the weekend ends and the work week approaches; “parasocial”, describing the one-sided emotional bond audiences form with public figures, influencers, or celebrities; “whack-a-mole”, which now also describes the frustrating pattern of solving one problem only for an identical new issue to pop up immediately elsewhere; and “crashout”, a term referring to a sudden emotional breakdown, a dramatic defeat, or an abrupt collapse of a situation.

    Technology has also left its mark on this update, with “vibe coding” joining the dictionary — defined as the practice of using artificial intelligence tools to generate full blocks of computer code based on informal user prompts. Other notable entries include “Uncanny valley”, the unsettling feeling people get when viewing an artificial creation (such as a robot or CGI character) that is almost indistinguishable from a real human but has subtle off qualities; “neckbeard”, a term that refers both to a specific style of beard covering the chin and neck and is often used as a disparaging label for misogynistic, socially awkward online hobbyists; “California sober”, a distinctly American term describing the practice of abstaining from hard drugs like cocaine or methamphetamine while continuing to use marijuana and/or alcohol; “yacht rock”, the mellow soft rock music genre that originated in Southern California in the 1970s; “shapewear”, tight-fitting clothing designed to smooth and contour the body’s silhouette.

    Following this update, Merriam-Webster is preparing to announce its annual Word of the Year in the coming months. Last year’s pick, “slop”, was selected after its definition was expanded to encompass low-quality digital content mass-produced using artificial intelligence, a reflection of growing conversations around AI-generated media today.

  • Israeli officials leak details of secret US-Israel-Arab military meeting, says report

    Israeli officials leak details of secret US-Israel-Arab military meeting, says report

    A highly confidential gathering of top military commanders from the United States, Israel, and multiple Arab nations took place in Germany last week to coordinate strategy around the ongoing Israel-US military campaign against Iran, details of which have been disclosed by anonymous Israeli sources to journalists. The exclusive report, published by Axios and written by Barak Ravid — a former Israeli intelligence officer who now works as a political and security correspondent — reveals that the closed-door “private retreat” was arranged personally by Admiral Brad Cooper, the head of U.S. Central Command (Centcom).

    According to two unnamed Israeli officials interviewed by Ravid, the meeting included the highest-ranking military chiefs of staff from eight nations: Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan, and Egypt. This gathering marks the first formal collective meeting of these military leaders since the Israel-US war against Iran began more than six months ago.

    While none of the participating regional nations have issued any public confirmation of the meeting, Centcom has released an official, albeit vague, acknowledgment of the event. In a short public statement, the command confirmed it “hosted senior military leaders from eight nations during a scheduled conference in Germany” and added that attendees “discussed opportunities for enhancing security cooperation in the Middle East.”

    Beyond the broad public confirmation, leaked details from the closed-door sessions indicate that Admiral Cooper used the meeting to deliver a key reassurance to regional partner nations. Despite repeated large-scale Iranian strikes on U.S. military installations across the Middle East that have caused extensive damage, Cooper stated that Washington has no intention of withdrawing its military forces from the region.

    Verified open-source satellite analysis conducted by *The Washington Post* has confirmed that Iranian attacks have left their mark on at least 15 separate U.S. military sites spread across the region, including bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman, and Jordan. Hundreds of structures and pieces of military hardware have been destroyed or damaged, with many bases rendered functionally unusable. The most severe impact has been felt at the U.S. Navy Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain, where extensive damage forced Centcom to reroute all regional logistics operations to alternate sites.

    In addition to addressing force posture, Cooper also outlined U.S. plans to increase commercial and military ship traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global chokepoint for oil and gas trade that has become a major flashpoint in tensions with Iran.

    For his part, Israeli Chief of Staff General Eyal Zamir used the gathering to give attendees a full briefing on ongoing Israeli military operations across the Middle East, per one Israeli official quoted in the Axios report. A key structural change also followed the meeting: Israel was officially transferred from the U.S. European Command’s area of responsibility to Centcom, a shift that opens the door to far more direct military cooperation between Israel and the participating Arab states under the U.S. military command structure.

    Not all regional and security observers view the new alignment and Admiral Cooper’s leadership positively, however. Andreas Krieg, an associate professor at King’s College London who specializes in Middle East security, noted that there is widespread underlying distrust of Cooper among Gulf Arab governments. Krieg argued that regional capitals see Cooper as excessively aligned with Israel, overly hawkish toward Iran, and prone to pushing military operational options that carry high risks of strategic disaster for the region.

  • UK Lawyers for Israel calls to proscribe Doctors Without Borders as terror group

    UK Lawyers for Israel calls to proscribe Doctors Without Borders as terror group

    A long-running campaign targeting international humanitarian medical organization Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières, MSF) has escalated dramatically, with British pro-Israel advocacy group UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) formally calling on the British government to designate the Gaza-operating charity as a terrorist organization.

    The push from UKLFI is rooted in a recent report claiming unproven links between MSF employees and Palestinian militant groups, allegations that MSF has forcefully and repeatedly rejected. The core of the claims centers on Fadi Jihad Mohammed al-Wadiya, a physiotherapist on MSF’s payroll who was killed in an Israeli airstrike on June 25, 2024. Israeli officials immediately asserted al-Wadiya was a member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), an armed Palestinian group.

    MSF pushed back on the claim within months of the strike, stating in February that it had found no evidence of any military affiliation by al-Wadiya before his death at the hands of Israeli forces. In an official statement responding to UKLFI’s latest demand last week, the charity doubled down on its denial. “MSF unequivocally refutes the allegations made by the Israeli authorities that we knowingly hired people with ‘ties to terrorism’,” the organization said. “MSF would never knowingly employ anyone involved in military activities, which contradicts our core values and ethics.”

    MSF further noted that Israeli authorities have only made claims of militant links against its staff after those employees have already been killed, with no advance warning or evidence shared while they were alive. “If Israeli authorities had reliable information about any MSF staff involvement in military activity, they never shared it with us before their deaths,” the statement added. The charity also confirmed it has been the target of a sustained disinformation campaign for months, and strongly condemned the deliberate spread of false accusations against its team.

    The tensions come amid a string of recent attacks on MSF operations in Gaza: just this week, an Israeli airstrike damaged an MSF-owned bus carrying 10 humanitarian workers in Gaza City, adding to a long list of incidents that have threatened aid workers delivering critical care to the besieged enclave.

    Financial records show MSF’s UK branch raised £11.3 million in 2023 specifically for its humanitarian work in occupied Palestine. In defending its demand for a ban, a UKLFI spokesperson argued that British donors deserve full transparency and rigorous vetting for any funds sent to Hamas-controlled Gaza. “The evidence we have assembled raises serious questions about people employed by MSF, the organisations with which it works and whether adequate safeguards have been put in place to ensure that charitable resources cannot be exploited by terrorist organisations,” the spokesperson said.

    The UK’s Charity Commission confirmed last week it is now actively reviewing the concerns raised by UKLFI to determine what action, if any, it will take next. The current allegations are not new: they can be traced back to claims from the Israeli government earlier this year that two MSF employees held ties to Hamas and PIJ, another accusation MSF has emphatically denied. In February, Israel moved to ban MSF from operating in both Gaza and the occupied West Bank after the organization refused to turn over a full list of its Palestinian and international staff. MSF said it could not share the data because it could not secure guaranteed assurances that the information would be protected and not misused.

    This is part of a broader pattern: the Israeli government has repeatedly accused international and local aid groups operating in Gaza of ties to Hamas in recent years. Earlier this year, Israel imposed bans on dozens of aid groups working in the enclave, a move that human rights organizations have warned has severely restricted already fragile humanitarian access to Gaza, where more than two million people face widespread food insecurity and collapsing medical infrastructure.

    Founded in 2011, UKLFI has established itself as a leading British advocacy group focused on pressuring and discrediting UK-based individuals and organizations that criticize Israeli government policy, as well as humanitarian groups that provide aid to Palestinians. The group is prominently featured in the European Legal Support Centre’s Britain Index of Repression, a database that documents what the center calls systematic repression of pro-Palestine solidarity activism across the United Kingdom. UKLFI is listed 128 times in the database, and the center found that the group has contributed to a “chilling environment” that pushes people and organizations to pull back from or alter fully lawful pro-Palestine activity out of fear of legal action. The center’s analysis also shows UKLFI frequently acts as an initiating or escalating actor against pro-Palestinian solidarity work, often using formal complaint letters, legal threats, and public pressure to push schools, universities, employers, and public institutions to launch disciplinary investigations or cancel planned events related to Palestine.