Global Pulse

博客

  • US to end funding of South Africa’s HIV programmes over claims of Afrikaner persecution

    US to end funding of South Africa’s HIV programmes over claims of Afrikaner persecution

    Long-strained diplomatic ties between the United States and South Africa have reached a new turning point, with the Trump administration confirming it will begin a phased withdrawal of critical U.S. funding for South Africa’s national HIV and AIDS response, linking the cut to unsubstantiated claims that the South African government has failed to protect the white minority Afrikaner community.

    For years, the U.S. President’s Emergency Fund for AIDS Relief (Pepfar) channeled roughly $400 million (£300 million) annually into South Africa’s HIV programs, covering approximately one-fifth of the country’s total public spending on the epidemic. South Africa carries the world’s heaviest HIV burden, with more than 8 million people living with the virus across the nation. The program received a last-minute temporary extension last October via a short-term bridge plan, but that reprieve has now expired.

    This funding cut marks the culmination of rapidly deteriorating bilateral relations that began shortly after Donald Trump’s second inauguration. Within his first weeks in office, Trump issued an executive order echoing his long-held false claims that South African government policies systematically erode equal rights for white South Africans and fuel violence against white landowners. The order also criticized two other major South African policies: the country’s landmark case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, and its documented diplomatic and economic ties to Iran. In justifying the aid cutoff, the White House framed these policies as “unjust and immoral” that disqualify South Africa from continued U.S. assistance.

    Trump has repeatedly amplified the discredited conspiracy theory of a “white genocide” targeting Afrikaners—descendants of 17th-century European settlers in southern Africa—an allegation that led his administration to launch a specialized refugee program prioritizing Afrikaner resettlement to the U.S. Currently, Afrikaners remain the only refugee group consistently approved for entry under the administration’s restrictive immigration policies. The rift was on public display just over a year ago, during a high-profile White House meeting between Trump and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, where Trump directly confronted his South African counterpart with unproven claims of anti-white persecution. Subsequent efforts to repair bilateral ties have failed to gain traction, and the U.S. went as far as boycotting the G20 heads of state summit hosted by South Africa last November.

    A senior U.S. State Department official confirmed the upcoming drawdown, explaining the decision stems from what the administration calls South Africa’s “failure to make demonstrable progress” on U.S. policy demands. Echoing the administration’s official framing, the official argued that the cut is intended to “foster self-reliance” and reduce South African dependence on American aid, noting that South Africa is classified as a middle-income country with the capacity to fund its own public health initiatives.

    South Africa’s health ministry has responded to the news with cautious calm, noting that it had not received formal advance notification of the decision, but the country has been preparing for this transition for years through a pre-existing national self-reliance plan. Ministry officials clarified that while Pepfar made valuable contributions to broader HIV programming, the procurement of life-saving antiretroviral therapy (ART) for South African patients is funded entirely through separate national government budgets, insulating core treatment services from the funding cut.

    Original reporting for this story was contributed by Pumza Fihlani in Johannesburg, with the original piece published by BBC Africa.

  • Palestine Action ban: Court ruling risks ‘slide into authoritarianism’, warn rights advocates

    Palestine Action ban: Court ruling risks ‘slide into authoritarianism’, warn rights advocates

    A controversial UK Court of Appeal ruling that upheld the government’s ban on the pro-Palestinian protest group Palestine Action has drawn fierce criticism from legal experts and civil society campaigners, who warn the decision dangerously expands the country’s already broad terrorism definition and undermines long-protected rights to peaceful protest.

    The ruling, delivered Monday by a five-judge appellate panel, overturned an earlier February 2025 High Court judgment that had struck down the proscription of Palestine Action as unlawful on three key grounds. The lower court had found that then-Home Secretary Yvette Cooper violated her own government’s proscription policies when she designated the group a terrorist organization, that the ban created an unacceptable chilling effect on freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, and that the measure was fundamentally disproportionate: only three of the 385 direct actions carried out by the group were deemed to meet the UK’s legal threshold for terrorist activity, and existing criminal law was already sufficient to prosecute any illegal activity linked to those actions.

    In overturning that decision, the Court of Appeal rejected the finding that Cooper had violated official proscription policy. The appellate judges ruled that policy guidelines did not limit the home secretary’s ability to consider external factors such as the ban’s potential to disrupt the group’s overall operations, arguing Cooper was owed “appropriate latitude” in her national security decision-making, and that her role granted her both institutional authority and democratic accountability to make such a designation. On the question of proportionality, the court held that Cooper had struck a fair balance between individual civil liberties and the UK’s stated national security interests.

    Critics argue the ruling grants unprecedented and undue deference to executive branch decision-making, creating a template that concentrates near-unchecked power in the hands of government ministers at the expense of judicial oversight. Former government lawyer Tim Crosland told Middle East Eye that the decision creates a pattern where courts are reluctant to challenge executive assessments of what counts as terrorism, clearing the way for unfettered executive authority that he argued is already misaligned with public interest, captured by corporate lobbying from the fossil fuel and arms industries.

    The ruling’s foundation rests in part on the interpretation of the UK’s unusually broad terrorism legislation, which includes “serious damage to property” carried out to influence government or intimidate the public for an ideological cause as a terrorist act. Critically, UK law provides no clear legal standard to define what qualifies as “serious damage”, leaving the determination to executive assessment that can be based on financial cost, potential risk to human life, or ties to national security. While government intelligence confirmed only three Palestine Action actions met the threshold for serious damage, the Court of Appeal took a holistic approach to the group’s activities, concluding the organization as a whole “overtly promotes unlawful violence amounting to terrorism”. The court cited Cooper’s estimate that the three high-profile actions — targeting defence contractor Thales in Glasgow in 2022, Instro Precision in Kent in June 2024, and an Elbit Systems UK facility near Bristol in August 2024 — caused millions of pounds in damage.

    That damage calculation has itself been contested. When sentencing activists for the August 2024 Elbit Systems raid, presiding Justice Johnson relied on an insurance report that underpinned a £1 million payout, which defence lawyers have challenged as being full of hearsay and inaccurate, noting it included damage to areas of the factory activists never entered and was prepared after the insurer had already approved the payout.

    Leading human rights lawyer Michael Mansfield KC argued that even if the damage claims are accepted, they do not justify a terrorist designation. He told Middle East Eye that the ruling overemphasizes the undefined standard of serious damage, a metric that is inherently subjective. Mansfield also rejected the government’s claim that the group’s actions were intended to influence government policy, noting Palestine Action turned to direct action after conventional advocacy failed to shift UK policy on the Israel-Gaza war, with activists acting out of frustration over ongoing civilian harm in Gaza.

    Civil rights organization Liberty warned that the ruling fails to draw any clear line between protected protest activity and terrorism, noting even the appellate court acknowledged it is unusual to designate an organization whose core activity is property-focused direct action as terrorist. The Court of Appeal also justified its overturning of the High Court ruling by arguing the lower court failed to account for an escalation in Palestine Action’s activity in the months leading up to the proscription order in June 2024. The judgment noted that Cooper paused the proscription process in May 2024 to request updated intelligence from Counter Terrorism Policing, which reported 158 additional direct actions, 28 of which caused what was defined as “significant damage” (either costing more than £50,000 in repairs or requiring a large police deployment), including tactics such as lock-ons, occupations, blockades, and vandalism.

    The court also cited an action at Brize Norton air base as evidence of escalation, despite acknowledging the action took place on the same day proscription was announced and that there was significant legal debate over whether it qualified as a terrorist act. Even so, judges ruled the action posed a threat to national security, and that this threat justified granting the home secretary a wide margin of appreciation in her decision to ban the group.

    Mansfield pushed back on the argument that elected politicians deserve automatic judicial deference, arguing that politicians have lost widespread public trust and that the close ties between UK ministers and the Israeli arms industry raise questions about the true motivation for the ban. “I don’t trust ministers to be telling me the absolute truth,” he said. Clive Dolphin, spokesperson for campaign group Defend our Juries, echoed these concerns, noting that the broad deference granted to the home secretary effectively undermines the entire purpose of judicial review, which exists to check executive overreach. “The slide into authoritarianism is not a single step, it’s not that somebody takes over on day one,” Dolphin said. “This is a really, really dangerous ruling.”

  • How Andy Burnham stood up to Starmer over Israel and could now reshape UK foreign policy

    How Andy Burnham stood up to Starmer over Israel and could now reshape UK foreign policy

    Less than two years after securing a landslide general election win, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer finds his grip on the premiership slipping, following a resounding by-election victory that has cleared the path for a major leadership challenge from popular former Manchester mayor Andy Burnham.

    Starmer’s position has been precarious for months. Earlier this year, the Peter Mandelson scandal rocked his administration: sordid connections between the ex-US ambassador, a close Starmer ally, and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein prompted widespread calls for the prime minister to step down. That controversy was followed by devastating losses in May’s local elections, where Labour hemorrhaged support in its traditional northern English and London strongholds. Still, Starmer managed to hold on, with internal Labour sources confirming no party figure was willing to force a leadership change ahead of the local votes.

    The current crisis began in mid-May, when former Health Secretary Wes Streeting resigned from Starmer’s cabinet, citing a loss of confidence in the prime minister’s leadership, warning that “where we need vision, we have a vacuum. Where we need direction, we have drift.” Hours after Streeting’s departure, Labour MP Josh Simons resigned his safe Makerfield seat in northern England, triggering a by-election designed to return Burnham to parliament. Under Labour Party rules, only sitting Members of Parliament can stand for the party leadership, so the by-election was a critical first step for any would-be challenger.

    On Thursday, Burnham secured a decisive win, capturing 55% of the vote in a seat that had seen major defections to Nigel Farage’s far-right Reform UK in recent years. With his return to the Commons confirmed, Burnham now joins Streeting as one of two formal challengers set to oust Starmer.

    The outcome of this looming leadership contest is poised to reshape British foreign policy, most notably on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – an issue that has roiled UK politics for more than two years amid Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. Polling expert John Curtice has confirmed that the Green Party, the most prominent major political voice opposing UK support for Israel, inflicted far greater damage on Labour’s local election vote share than Reform UK, as left-wing and pro-Palestinian voters abandoned the party in droves over its position. To win back these voters and counter the Green insurgency, any new Labour leader will be forced to adopt a harder line on Israel.

    Both challengers have laid out different positions on the conflict, with Burnham boasting a long track record of breaking with Starmer’s approach. Burnham, a popular soft-left figure within the party, has a nuanced political history on the issue: he voted for the 2003 UK invasion of Iraq, joined the pro-Israel group Labour Friends of Israel in 2015, and during his 2015 Labour leadership run described the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement as “spiteful” and called Israel a “democracy that has a long history of protecting minorities.”

    But beyond his pro-Israel credentials, Burnham has a lengthy record of criticizing the Israeli government and advocating for Palestinian statehood. He visited the occupied West Bank in 2012 with the pro-Palestine group Labour Friends of Palestine and the Middle East, called Benjamin Netanyahu’s 2015 re-election “depressing” over his pledge to expand illegal settlements, and publicly backed recognition of Palestinian statehood as a right, not a gift, as early as 2015. He has also called for an end to Israeli occupation and illegal settlement expansion, while condemning Hamas terrorist attacks.

    Burnham’s most significant break from Starmer came in the weeks after the 7 October 2023 Hamas attacks, when Starmer controversially backed Israel’s total blockade of Gaza – a move widely categorized as a war crime. Just two days after Starmer’s statement, Burnham released a statement that carefully distanced himself from the party leader, conditioning Israel’s right to self-defense on compliance with international law and calling for unimpeded humanitarian access to Gaza. By late October 2023, as the Gaza death toll surged, Burnham broke ranks entirely to join London mayor Sadiq Khan and Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar in calling for an immediate ceasefire, directly challenging Starmer’s refusal to back that position. He also publicly criticized Starmer for branding pro-ceasefire MPs disloyal, and used the moment to apologize for his own past vote for the Iraq War, acknowledging that the 2003 invasion had caused massive civilian harm and fueled global terrorism.

    This positioning paid off electorally: while Starmer’s Labour lost a third of its vote share in majority-Muslim areas during the 2024 local elections, Burnham comfortably retained his post as Greater Manchester mayor, where a large Muslim electorate resides. In the years since, he has repeatedly pushed the Labour government to take bolder action, joining a cross-party group in 2025 to urge immediate recognition of Palestinian statehood – a demand the Starmer government ultimately conceded to in September of that year.

    For his part, Streeting has sought to position himself as a secret critic of Starmer’s policy since resignating from cabinet, releasing leaked 2025 text messages in which he claimed Israel was “committing war crimes before our eyes” and engaging in “ethnic cleansing.” However, many voters have not forgotten that Streeting publicly backed Starmer’s line for months after 7 October, and opposed ceasefire calls through that period. Unlike Burnham, Streeting has largely stayed aligned with the party’s official position for most of the conflict, and only recently softened his public stance, under pressure from challengers. In the 2024 general election, Streeting nearly lost his seat to a young British Palestinian independent candidate, who came within 528 votes of unseating him.

    Under the current Starmer administration, London has already taken small steps to distance itself from Israel, imposing a partial arms embargo amid growing public anger, but it has maintained deep military and political cooperation with Israel throughout its campaign in Gaza. Regardless of which challenger prevails, analysts agree that the next Labour leader will almost certainly ramp up criticism of Israel and could take far more concrete action, such as imposing full sanctions on illegal West Bank settlement goods to win back disillusioned left-wing and pro-Palestinian voters.

    For Burnham, the path to the premiership remains littered with obstacles. But if he can overcome them, insiders say he is the most likely candidate to return the Labour Party to its traditional centre-left roots. One thing is certain: all leadership contenders will be forced to take a clear stance on Starmer’s handling of the Gaza crisis, and a fundamental shift in Britain’s approach to the Middle East is likely in the coming months.

  • Kate reflects on Italy tour in essay, as new pictures released

    Kate reflects on Italy tour in essay, as new pictures released

    Marking her first official overseas trip since completing cancer treatment, the Princess of Wales has outlined a bold call to center early childhood development on the global policy agenda, while sounding a sharp warning about the erosion of genuine human connection in an increasingly digitized world.

    The two-day visit to Reggio Emilia, northern Italy, last month forms the backdrop for a newly published reflective essay from Catherine, Princess of Wales, released this week by the Royal Foundation’s Centre for Early Childhood. Titled *Creating the conditions for love to flourish through nature and creativity*, the piece is the most prominent public contribution from the princess since she stepped back from full duties to undergo cancer treatment, and lays out a clear roadmap for her ongoing advocacy work.

    During her time in Reggio Emilia – a region globally renowned for its child-centered, community-focused approach to early years education – the Princess toured local education projects, met with young children and their families, and observed firsthand how low-technology, connection-focused learning shapes childhood development. To accompany the essay, the Royal Foundation has published a series of new candid photos capturing the Princess interacting with local children during the trip.

    In the essay, Catherine recalls a question posed by a fellow parent at her children’s school: If every person could change just one thing to improve the world, what would it be? Her answer, she writes, is simple: to prioritize love. She clarifies that this is not a call for grand, sentimental gestures, but rather a commitment to quiet, unconditional love built through consistent presence, shared time, and intentional patience.

    The Princess’s reflection comes amid growing concern about the impact of pervasive screen use on childhood development and human interaction. She argues that in an era where nearly every part of daily life is mediated through digital devices, the need for unstructured, face-to-face human connection has never been more urgent. Catherine, who has spoken repeatedly about the power of human contact since her cancer diagnosis, expands on this theme in the essay, emphasizing the joy found in unremarkable everyday moments and what she calls the “everyday magic of life itself.”

    “Children always give me hope. Their natural openness, their curiosity about the simplest of things, and their ability to wonder, dream and play remind me of the very best qualities of humanity,” the Princess writes. “The children I met on my recent trip to Reggio Emilia radiated such qualities. Their innate ability to connect and communicate in all sorts of different ways made me feel immediately welcome, as they accepted a complete stranger with confidence and joy.”

    Christian Guy, Executive Director of the Royal Foundation Centre for Early Childhood, explained that the essay reflects the Princess’s long-running goal to elevate early childhood development to the status of a pressing global priority, on par with challenges such as climate change. “This essay gives a real insight into how passionately HRH feels about the unique importance of early childhood and its ability to shape society,” Guy said.

    Sources close to the Princess describe the Italy trip as a key turning point in her gradual return to full public duties, which has been planned and paced carefully following her treatment. The overwhelmingly positive public response to the visit has confirmed that Catherine remains one of the most popular and influential figures in the British royal family, drawing large public interest and support for her advocacy work.

    Following the success of the Reggio Emilia visit, the Princess’s team is now researching other global destinations with innovative, proven approaches to early childhood support, with plans for future study visits. The essay makes clear that supporting young families and nurturing healthy childhood connection will remain the core priority of Catherine’s public work moving forward.

    “By allowing children to feel connected from an early age, we can help them carry that sense of balance into adulthood,” the Princess concludes. “If healing later in life is about rediscovering our most important connections, then perhaps the real task is to ensure that they are never lost in the first place.”

  • World Cup 2026: Why Sahrawis are rallying behind Algeria and not Morocco

    World Cup 2026: Why Sahrawis are rallying behind Algeria and not Morocco

    On a baked-earthen football pitch cut into the arid desert of southwestern Algeria’s Smara refugee camp, fine orange dust hangs thick in the still late-afternoon air, billowing in choking clouds every time a player sprints after a loose ball. Despite the unrelenting desert heat, a group of young men and teenage boys has gathered for their weekly match—one of the few steady rituals in a life defined by displacement. For the fans leaning on makeshift barriers watching the game, conversation drifts quickly from the local play to the World Cup unfolding thousands of miles across North America, and the deep, history-bound loyalty that draws nearly every Sahrawi refugee in Algeria’s camps to cheer for one team: Algeria.

    According to United Nations data, more than 173,000 Sahrawi refugees currently reside in a network of camps near Tindouf, Algeria. Their displacement stretches back 50 years, rooted in a decades-long dispute over their indigenous homeland of Western Sahara, a 266,000-square-kilometer desert expanse in Northwest Africa bordered by the Atlantic Ocean, Morocco, Mauritania and Algeria.

    The conflict’s origins trace to the late 19th century, when Spain colonized the region, then called Spanish Sahara. After Morocco gained independence from colonial rule in 1956, it staked a long-standing territorial claim to Western Sahara. By 1973, the Polisario Front formed to advocate for Sahrawi independence, launching an armed movement after Spain agreed to cede the territory to Morocco and Mauritania in the 1975 Madrid Accords—an agreement negotiated without any input from Sahrawi representatives, following Morocco’s mass Green March of 350,000 civilian supporters into the territory. The resulting war forced thousands of Sahrawis to flee across the border into Algeria, where they established the refugee camps that remain home to generations of displaced people today.

    A 1991 UN-brokered ceasefire established the MINURSO peacekeeping mission to oversee a planned independence referendum for Western Sahara, but the vote has never been held due to disputes over voter eligibility. The ceasefire collapsed entirely in 2020, after Morocco launched military operations in a UN buffer zone, and sporadic fighting has resumed in the years since. Today, Morocco controls most of Western Sahara, incentivizing Moroccan settlers to move to the region, while the Polisario Front holds a smaller eastern stretch of desert and continues to campaign for full Sahrawi independence—with Algeria as its most prominent regional backer.

    That decades-long political and humanitarian partnership has woven deep ties between Sahrawi refugees and their host nation. For generations, Sahrawi refugees have attended Algerian schools and universities, received medical care in Algerian hospitals, and built interwoven family, cultural and political bonds across the border. To many, Algeria is far more than a place of refuge—it is a steadfast ally in their struggle for self-determination.

    “My support for Algeria is unconditional,” Brahim Salem, a long-term camp resident, told Middle East Eye. “For us, Algeria is not just a neighbour. It’s a country that stood against oppression and gave us safety when we needed it most.”

    That loyalty translates directly to the football pitch. Because the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic remains unrecognized by FIFA, Sahrawi players cannot compete as an independent national team in major international tournaments. For displaced Sahrawis, supporting Algeria becomes a way to channel collective pride and national aspiration that cannot be expressed through their own team.

    Algalya, a 60-something refugee who fled Western Sahara as a war refugee decades ago, is among the millions of Sahrawi fans ready to cheer on Algeria. She still vividly remembers the joy of Algeria’s 2019 Africa Cup of Nations victory, when the entire camp erupted in celebration with traditional zaghareet ululations that lasted long into the night. “I remember having nowhere to go, and Algeria welcomed us with open arms,” she said. “I pray Algeria make us happy again.”

    Across the camps, football is woven into the fabric of daily life: children chase balls across dusty dirt streets between tents, families huddle around bulky secondhand televisions to watch major tournaments, and local weekly matches like the one in Smara draw crowds of enthusiastic spectators. For local players Hafdala Mohamed and Khalil, their World Cup plan is already set: they will gather to watch every single one of Algeria’s matches together, no matter how late kickoff falls.

    For Hafdala, like many other Sahrawi refugees, football is far more than just entertainment. It is one of the only unchanging certainties in a life shaped by decades of exile. Even as the conflict over their homeland remains unresolved, and the dream of self-determination stays unfulfilled, the shared joy of supporting Algeria on the world’s biggest football stage offers a rare moment of collective connection and hope.

  • Africa’s greatest World Cup kits – pick your favourite

    Africa’s greatest World Cup kits – pick your favourite

    The FIFA World Cup is globally celebrated for its breathtaking goals, last-minute drama, and raw emotional moments — but it is also a stage where memorable football fashion is born. When it comes to bold, culturally rooted, and instantly recognizable kit designs, African national teams have produced some of the most iconic looks in the tournament’s history. BBC Sport Africa has curated a list of 10 standout designs from the continent, spanning more than 50 years of World Cup participation, inviting fans to weigh in on which they rank as the all-time greatest.

    The oldest entry on the list hails from 1974, when Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo) took to the World Cup stage in a striking yellow and green ensemble that perfectly embodied the fashion sensibilities of its era. Featuring a wide collar and a dramatic deep V-neck, the kit made its biggest statement by emblazoning both the country’s name and the national team’s Leopards nickname and logo directly across the chest. While Zaire’s 1974 tournament ended in disappointment — including a lopsided 9-0 defeat to Yugoslavia — the kit itself has gone down in history as a bold classic. Even contemporary Congolese designers draw inspiration from it: Alvin Junior Mak, who went viral recently for creating the current DRC squad’s viral leopard-print arrival suits, says he looked back to 1974 to ground his work. “When you are in Africa, we say if you want to move forward, you have to see where you come from,” Mak explained to BBC Sport Africa.

    Next on the list is Algeria’s 1982 kit, created for the country’s first ever World Cup appearance. Mirroring Zaire’s 1974 design choice, the kit featured the country’s name printed across the chest, written in elegant Arabic script. Like the Zaire kit, it also boasts a deep neckline and oversized collar that marked it as a product of early 1980s fashion. Produced by Sonitex, Algeria’s defunct state-owned clothing manufacturer, the design is no longer bound by copyright protection — a detail that has made it widely reproduced by small local brands for both domestic fans and the Algerian diaspora. This accessibility has cemented its cult status among Algerian football fans, particularly self-described football hipsters, says Algerian sports journalist Maher Mazahi.

    Cameroon’s 1990 kit is forever tied to one of the most iconic runs in African World Cup history. That year, the Indomitable Lions became the first African nation to reach the tournament’s quarter-finals, stunning defending champions Argentina 1-0 in the opening match and capturing global attention with Roger Milla’s iconic corner flag dance celebration. The 38-year-old striker, who was called out of retirement by Cameroon’s President Paul Biya, scored four unforgettable goals during the run. The kit’s centerpiece was a roaring lion emblazoned across the chest, a symbol that still stands for national pride, courage, and determination for Cameroonians, explains Paul Njie, BBC World Service’s Yaounde correspondent. “Many people believe that was the best ever performance of the Cameroon national team and some of them attribute that to the luck which came with the kit,” Njie says.

    For Nigeria’s 1994 World Cup debut, the Super Eagles debuted an away white kit that would become legendary. In that tournament, Nigeria claimed 3-0 and 2-0 wins over Bulgaria and Greece respectively while wearing the white jersey, dropping only their matches against Argentina and Italy when wearing their traditional green home kit. That coincidence has only added to the kit’s mythos among Nigerian football fans. “We see the legends, the players that made the difference for Nigerian football, and if I close my eyes that’s the first shirt that comes to mind,” former Super Eagles captain William Troost-Ekong told BBC Sport Africa. “Nigeria’s greatest set of Super Eagles have worn that shirt and all of us strive to be able to imitate that.”

    South Africa’s 1998 kit, worn during the country’s first ever World Cup appearance after the end of apartheid, is a geometric-designed classic from Italian sportswear brand Kappa. The design was an updated iteration of the kit Bafana Bafana wore when they won the 1996 Africa Cup of Nations on home soil, a moment that remains a touchstone of national pride. Though South Africa failed to win any of their three group stage matches in their 1998 debut, the kit has endured as a fan favorite. “These days South Africa tend to wear yellow, but back in the 1990s their shirts were much more fun,” said Josh Warwick, co-founder of the Cult Kits website. “In our opinion, Kappa were one of the great brands from that era.”

    One of the most controversial entries on the list is Cameroon’s 2002 sleeveless kit. Originally designed as a basketball-style vest, the Indomitable Lions wore the sleeveless version to win the 2002 Africa Cup of Nations title just months before the World Cup, and it instantly won over players and fans alike. “When we came to the dressing room we said, ‘Wow, this is a new generation of shirt’. When we went on to the pitch the world was watching and it became famous. Everybody in Africa wanted to wear that shirt,” former Cameroon midfielder Eric Djemba-Djemba recalled in a 2023 interview. However, FIFA ruled the sleeveless design violated World Cup competition rules, forcing Cameroon to add awkward black sleeves for the tournament — a decision many fans still see as an unnecessary spoiler.

    Senegal’s 2002 kit is tied to one of the biggest upsets in World Cup history: the Teranga Lions’ 1-0 opening match win over defending champions France, courtesy of a winning goal from the large, imposing midfielder Papa Bouba Diop, nicknamed “The Wardrobe” for his massive frame. The kit’s signature baggy fit even became part of its iconic look, and it remains wildly popular among Senegalese fans decades later. “Of all our kits, 2002 is the best,” said Mamour Insa, a Senegal fan who followed his team at a recent World Cup watch event in New York. “All our generation, they wear just that kit. A lot of young people wear it more than new designs. It is very difficult to find.”

    Ghana’s 2010 red and gold kit is forever linked to one of the most gut-wrenching moments in African World Cup history: Asamoah Gyan’s late penalty miss against Uruguay that would have sent the Black Stars into the tournament semi-finals, the first for any African side. With the match tied 1-1 in the final moments of extra time, Luis Suarez was sent off for a deliberate handball that stopped a sure Ghana goal, but Gyan’s penalty clipped the crossbar and went over; Uruguay went on to win the match in a penalty shootout. Despite the heartbreaking outcome, the kit itself remains a fan favorite. “I think it was a great shirt, the players loved it,” former Ghana midfield legend Michael Essien told BBC Sport Africa, jokingly adding that its tight, figure-hugging cut required a well-built physique to pull off.

    Nigeria’s 2018 neon green kit became a global viral sensation before the tournament even kicked off, with fans queuing for hours outside retailers to get their hands on the popular design. The Nike design pays deliberate homage to Nigeria’s 1994 debut kit, creating a modern classic that circles back to the Super Eagles’ first World Cup moment. “The best football shirt ever,” Troost-Ekong said of the design. “Everyone was trying to get hold of it, I had so many calls and messages.” Despite its massive popularity, the Super Eagles only got to wear it once during the 2018 tournament, in a 2-0 group stage win over Iceland.

    The newest entry on the list is Ghana’s 2026 home kit, which features a striking spiderweb design inspired by Kwaku Ananse, the iconic trickster spider figure from Ghanaian folklore. The bold design has drawn comparisons to Spider-Man’s suit for its bright, web-patterned look, but it may never get its moment on the World Cup stage: FIFA has already ruled that Ghana will not be allowed to wear the home strip for any of its 2026 group stage matches, leaving fans to wonder if this will go down as a would-be classic that never got its spotlight.

  • O’Leary extends Ryanair contract in deal that could net him over £130m

    O’Leary extends Ryanair contract in deal that could net him over £130m

    Michael O’Leary, the iconic chief executive who transformed Ryanair from a minor regional player into Europe’s undisputed leading low-cost airline after taking the role in 1994, has committed to leading the group for another six years, with his new contract now running through to April 2032. The agreement includes a lucrative performance-linked bonus scheme that could see O’Leary take home total compensation exceeding €150m, the Irish airline confirmed in an official statement.

    Under the terms of the new deal, O’Leary will be eligible to exercise options to purchase 10 million Ryanair shares at a fixed strike price of €26.70 per share — a payout that will only activate if the company hits one of two demanding performance milestones. The options unlock if Ryanair achieves an annual group profit of €4 billion, or if its traded share price holds above €42 for 28 consecutive trading days. Ryanair emphasized that meeting these aggressive targets would generate significant long-term value gains for every investor holding shares in the company.

    Group chairman Stan McCarthy revealed that the Ryanair board first opened contract discussions with O’Leary earlier this spring, and the negotiation process included in-depth consultations with the airline’s largest institutional shareholders to align on terms. McCarthy noted in his comment that the process concluded successfully, with O’Leary agreeing to extend his tenure to drive the group’s ongoing growth, a outcome that McCarthy said delivers benefits to all Ryanair stakeholders.

    This latest bonus arrangement marks the second major performance payout O’Leary has been in line for in recent years. Last year, public reports confirmed that O’Leary was set to collect bonuses worth more than €100m after Ryanair shares closed above €21 per share for a 28th consecutive trading day in May 2025, meeting the performance threshold tied to his previous 2010s-era incentive scheme.

  • Brazen attack on Niger’s airport shows jihadis are expanding to cities in Africa’s Sahel

    Brazen attack on Niger’s airport shows jihadis are expanding to cities in Africa’s Sahel

    On Thursday, gunfire and deadly explosions tore through Diori Hamani International Airport, Niger’s primary international gateway in the capital Niamey, leaving 11 soldiers and two civilians dead. The al-Qaeda-affiliated militant group Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), widely recognized as the most powerful extremist faction operating in the Sahel region south of the Sahara, quickly claimed responsibility for the assault. This attack marks the second time this year the strategic airport has been targeted, a site that doubles as a command center for Niger’s ruling military junta, hosts the national air force base housing the bulk of the country’s drone and aircraft fleet, and serves as headquarters for the tripartite military alliance between Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso.

    The first assault on the airport back in January was carried out by motorcycle-riding militants aligned with the Islamic State Group’s Sahel Province (ISSP), with attackers specifically focusing on the facility’s high-value drone assets. Thursday’s attack comes on the heels of a large-scale incursion and an ongoing fuel blockade imposed by al-Qaeda-linked forces inside and around Mali’s capital Bamako, underscoring a rapid expansion of extremist activity across the region.

    Regional security analysts warn this string of high-profile attacks on major urban centers signals a dangerous shift in militant strategy across the Sahel, a region already labeled one of the world’s most active hotspots for terrorist activity. Both al-Qaeda and Islamic State-affiliated factions have ramped up offensive operations over the past 12 months, as the rival groups compete to seize control of territory and expand their regional influence.

    Ibrahim Yahaya Ibrahim, deputy project director for the International Crisis Group, a leading global think tank focused on conflict analysis, explained that where insurgent groups once confined their operations to remote, under-policed border communities, they are now increasingly targeting populated urban hubs to amplify their impact. “JNIM in Niger is trying to mark its territory. This is a message to the government but also to the Islamic State group,” Ibrahim noted, adding that while Thursday’s attack caused less disruption than January’s assault, it carries significant symbolic and strategic weight for the faction.

    Much of this escalating extremist activity is concentrated in three neighboring Sahel states: Niger, Burkina Faso and Mali, all of which are currently ruled by military juntas that seized power via coups driven by widespread public resentment of former democratic governments and longstanding Western security partnerships. After expelling French and American military forces from the region, the three juntas have turned to Russia as their primary security ally, opening the door for Russian military personnel to deploy across the three countries while creating a power vacuum that extremist groups have rushed to fill.

    Niger’s unique geographic position makes it a particularly coveted prize for competing extremist factions. It shares western borders with Mali and Burkina Faso, JNIM’s core strongholds, while its southern and eastern borders abut Nigeria and Chad, where Boko Haram and the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) maintain a heavy presence. To the north, Niger’s territory stretches deep into the Sahara toward Libya and Algeria, creating ungoverned spaces ideal for militant movement and weapons trafficking.

    Analysts warn that ISSP and ISWAP are currently working to connect their respective operations by establishing a contiguous corridor along the Niger-Nigeria border, a move that would unite two of Africa’s deadliest extremist networks across a vast swath of territory. This consolidation effort is fiercely opposed by JNIM, which views the expansion of Islamic State influence in the region as an existential threat to its own dominance.

    “Niger is a territory of competition between them,” explained Wassim Nasr, a senior research fellow at the Soufan Center. “If JNIM loses the upper hand in Niger against the Islamic State, it will jeopardize its upper hand in Mali and Burkina Faso. … You have an open space like the Wild West, where each is looking to mark its territory.”

    This report was compiled with contributions from Associated Press writer Chinedu Asadu based in Abuja, Nigeria.

  • Six-year-old Ebola patient taken from DR Congo hospital found and ‘doing well’

    Six-year-old Ebola patient taken from DR Congo hospital found and ‘doing well’

    An ongoing Ebola outbreak in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) took an unexpected turn earlier this week, when a 6-year-old confirmed Ebola patient—abducted from her treatment ward by armed men alongside her mother—has been located and is reported to be in stable condition. Local health official Dr. Lubambo Maboko Gaston confirmed the update to the BBC on Friday, two days after he first announced the abduction that drew international attention to growing unrest around Ebola response efforts in the region.

    According to Dr. Gaston, the pair were taken by a group of armed, angry men from a hospital in Butembo, a major city in eastern DRC, on Monday. It remains unclear whether the abductors had prior personal connections to the child or her family, but the abduction fits a pattern of rising hostility toward Ebola treatment facilities that has hampered outbreak response for weeks. On Friday, the girl and her mother voluntarily arrived at an alternative Ebola treatment center located roughly 18 kilometers outside Butembo, where medical teams have since assessed the child’s condition as stable and improving. “Her condition is currently considered stable,” Dr. Gaston confirmed in a statement to reporters.

    Hostility toward outbreak response teams is not a new development during this outbreak. To date, the event has killed more than 230 people and recorded 890 confirmed cases across eastern DRC, with treatment centers facing repeated attacks from local communities driven by fear and misinformation. Just last month, police in Mongbwalu were forced to fire warning shots into the air to disperse angry crowds that attempted to seize the bodies of Ebola victims from a local health facility. Days prior, residents of Rwampara, a small town 85 kilometers southeast of Mongbwalu, set fire to hospital isolation tents after officials blocked them from retrieving the body of a man who had died from suspected Ebola.

    Public health experts stress that the bodies of Ebola victims carry extremely high viral loads, and unsanctioned burial preparations are a major driver of new transmission. Safe, regulated burial protocols are one of the most critical tools for containing spread, but deep-rooted misinformation has left many local residents distrustful of these measures. “People are not properly informed or sensitised about what is happening,” local politician Luc Malembe explained to the BBC last month. “For a certain segment of the population, especially in remote areas, Ebola is an invention by outsiders – it does not exist. They believe it is the NGOs and hospitals creating this to make money, and this is tragic.”

    The outbreak was officially declared by DRC authorities on May 15, though public health officials later confirmed that transmission had gone undetected in remote communities for weeks before the declaration. A complicating factor for response teams is that the outbreak is caused by Bundibugyo, a rare strain of Ebola that currently has no approved vaccine. The World Health Organization (WHO) has projected it could take months to develop and deploy an effective vaccine for this strain.

    The scale of the outbreak has already drawn grim projections from global health leaders. This week, the head of the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention warned that the outbreak could become one of the largest Ebola events in recorded history, echoing an earlier assessment from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cross-border spread has already been recorded in neighboring Uganda, which has confirmed 19 cases and two deaths since the outbreak began. However, the WHO reported this week that Uganda has not recorded any new confirmed cases since June 5, a hopeful sign that containment measures there are working.

    In DRC, the national ministry of health has said it is ramping up core response measures, including expanding community surveillance, scaling up contact tracing, and building out dedicated treatment infrastructure across affected towns. The WHO has committed $3.9 million to response efforts, while Africa CDC has approved a $319 million budget to support coordinated action across the region.

    Nearly all confirmed cases are concentrated in three eastern DRC provinces: Ituri, South Kivu and North Kivu—the same region where the 6-year-old patient was abducted. Ituri remains the epicenter of transmission, accounting for more than 90% of all confirmed infections. Ongoing armed conflict in the region has created additional barriers to effective response, the WHO has warned. The M23 rebel group currently controls large swathes of both North and South Kivu, leaving response teams unable to access many remote communities where transmission may be spreading undetected.

  • Italy’s Meloni says Trump ‘made up’ story that she ‘begged’ him for photo at G7

    Italy’s Meloni says Trump ‘made up’ story that she ‘begged’ him for photo at G7

    A high-profile diplomatic dispute between Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and former U.S. President Donald Trump has burst into the open following a baseless anecdote Trump shared in an Italian television interview, triggering swift backlash across Italy’s political landscape and upending once-closed political ties between the two leaders.

    In a phone interview with Italy’s La7 TV network, Trump made the unsubstantiated claim that Meloni had “begged” him for a photograph during their recent meeting at the G7 summit hosted in Evian-les-Bains, France. “She begged me to take a photo with her; I felt sorry for her,” Trump told the outlet, adding that he believed Meloni was happy he had taken the time to speak with her. Multiple video and photo records from the G7 summit show the two leaders holding an extended, cordial-looking conversation on a small sofa, with Meloni smiling throughout the interaction. La7 did not release the original English audio of Trump’s comments, only airing a dubbed Italian translation.

    Meloni issued a sharp, public rebuke of Trump’s claims just hours later, addressing the incident directly to her 7 million Instagram followers. She said she was “frankly stunned” by the fabricated story, questioning why the U.S. president would choose to target a close ally with such falsehoods. “I can only say it is regrettable he does not show the same determination towards the enemies of the West and towards the enemies of the US – [enemies] whose leaders he instead appears to be far more accommodating with,” she wrote. In a striking closing rebuke that emphasized Italian national dignity, she added: “But there is one thing he needs to remember: neither I nor Italy ever beg.”

    In response to the escalating row, Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani has canceled a planned trip to the United States scheduled for early next week. The BBC has reached out to the White House to request official comment on the incident, but no response has been issued as of yet.

    This public confrontation is the latest sign that the once-close political alignment between Trump and Meloni has fractured badly in recent months, rooted in deep disagreements over Trump’s decision to launch a military conflict with Iran. Meloni, who was elected Italy’s prime minister in 2022, made history as the only European leader to attend Trump’s 2025 inauguration, and was widely viewed by European Union officials as a potential diplomatic bridge between Brussels and the new U.S. administration. But the relationship began to unravel after Meloni took a firm public stance opposing the Iran war. In April, Trump hit back at her criticism during an interview with Italian daily Corriere della Sera, saying “I thought she had courage, but I was wrong.” Tensions rose further when Meloni publicly rejected Trump’s critical remarks about Pope Leo XIV, calling his comments labeling the Pope “weak on crime and terrible on foreign policy” completely unacceptable.

    In the wake of Trump’s latest remarks, Meloni has received unified support from across Italy’s political spectrum. Italian President Sergio Mattarella placed an immediate phone call to the prime minister to express his full backing. Filippo Sensi, a left-wing opposition senator from the Democratic Party, said no leader had the right to speak to an Italian prime minister in such an arrogant tone. Giuseppe Conte, leader of the Five Star Movement, added that Italy had been subjected to unnecessary humiliation, arguing that pursuing better relations with Washington should never come at the cost of national dignity or core national interests.

    From Meloni’s own Brothers of Italy party, Senate group leader Lucio Malan framed the incident as part of a wider pattern of offensive remarks Trump has directed at multiple European leaders. He noted that the G7 footage tells a far different story than Trump’s false account, suggesting that the U.S. president’s anger actually stems from Meloni’s willingness to push back against Washington when Italian interests demand it. “Trump’s words damage his own image and authority above all,” Malan added. Matteo Salvini, leader of the League and a key government ally, issued a blunt statement of solidarity: “Whoever attacks Giorgia, attacks all of us.”